In this instance, it never got anywhere near that airspeed.

ZCR
 

Not clear what maximum speed was reached - take off was at 111 kts and positive rate of climb was maintained until the full left rudder trim created a slip angle that led to a loss of lift being generated as well as an inhibited ability to change heading. Whether control was impossible or just very difficult probably doesn't matter - it seems clear enough that the condition could not be corrected unless the pilot realised what was wrong, and he plainly did not. Why he did not appears from the report to be because three pre-takeoff opportunities to check the rudder trim setting were missed or did not lead to detection of the adverse setting. :(

I don't know why that left rudder trim could not be overcome with sufficient right rudder but the simulator apparently showed that it could not be.

I dont think the report is adequate at all, ie the mentioning of the lack of a checklist when no checklist could be found, is conjecture given the impact damage. If you want to read a report that does fit the bill, on an accident that was very similar try https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.a...30X24112&key=1

More detail https://www.ntsb.gov/about/employmen...15FA034&akey=1

Another B200 with 29 degrees of sideslip!
 

I don't think the NTSB report you cite is "better" than the ATSB report on ZCR. In fact it's scant on the critical detail of why there was so much left rudder, especially if the left engine was thought by the pilot to have failed. The NTSB also appears to more explicitly "blame" the pilot instead of taking the ATSB approach of noting that the checklist for the B200 provides three pre-takeoff opportunities for detecting full left rudder trim and then providing some plausible explanations for why those opportunities may have been missed or not detected the incorrect setting.

Point being from a pilots perspective the trim was not the be all and end all of the incident, note the NTSB investigation covers pilot meds, fuel load, aircraft systems and weather, why didn’t the pilot at Essendon follow the engine out procedure ie go clean? Subsequent civil litigation will no doubt she’d more light on the investigations.

He didn't have an engine out and the real cause eluded him. In the available time he couldn't solve his problem. And the ATSB covers all of the aspects you've mentioned - have you read the entire report in full?

Being a few hundred kilos overweight would make zero to very minimal difference to a King Air.

The B200 can obtain an STC that permits a 1,000lbs increase in MTOW with the only requirement being the addition of a flight data recorder.

Mick

Somewhat similar accident at Dallas overnight, albeit a 350

https://7news.com.au/news/disaster-a...crash-c-192402

It comes a week after another king air loss (BE90) on takeoff in Hawaii