No need for gory pictures, whether static or moving, but I've flown business jets as well as turbo-prop and jet airliners and may be able to cast some light upon the loss of the Learjet in Florida this week with all on board.
Firstly, storms over the Florida panhandle are super-sized. The worst visibility that I have ever seen from the windscreen of a car was in the Everglades, and slowed us to a walking pace.
Second, the worst icing I have ever seen in terms of the rate of accretion was at high-level (30,000' plus) due super-cooled water droplets that freeze on impact.
Third, jet airliners rarely need de-iced tailplanes, but any number of turbo-propeller airliners and business jets do. No aircraft though is immune to severe rates of icing, or certified to operate within it for any significant period of time.
Fourthly, aircraft are biased nose-heavy, so that if all else fails they will drop like a dart and recover flying speed. It has to be compensated in level flight by the tail, which like an inverted wing provides a downforce around the pivot-point of lift.
Fifth, those pilots I knew who'd flown highest in the civilian world ~ Concorde pilots excepted ~ had flown Lears upto 54,000 feet, or curvature of the Earth levels. At such altitudes the air is decidedly thinner, and aerodynamic controls altogether less responsive.
All things considered, lose that downforce from the tailplane and any dive is going to be difficult to recover from given the 'startle' factor of an autopilot dropping out, the environment within thunderclouds and icing on windshields and elsewhere. The combination of delays to reducing thrust from engines, of thinner air, and of control surfaces reduced in effectiveness can prove lethal... as it may here.
With speed rapidly increasing beyond those the airframe was designed for, aircraft will begin shedding parts and should they include the tailplane (horizontal stabiliser) then what is left is little different from a missile ~ the Lear here dropping at 600 m.p.h. prior to impact.
If you look at the picture too, regardless of the Learjet's success its tail-surfaces are not the biggest in the business in comparison to practically every current airliner out there. And when you see strakes on aircraft ~ like those beneath the aft fuselage ~ they will generally have been added as afterthoughts that make up for what tail feathers lack.
As indeed happened to the Lear, which lacked such surfaces upon its introduction to service.
Ed. The foregoing penned by the author after several tins of lager, apparently how Shakespeare worked best too.





