Station air down Marlin TX

danhagan said:
I guess he makes youtube money, sad that it's on the backs of survivors pain :(... aviation is very unforgiving for minor errors and memory lapses.
Click to expand...
He may not actually be making much at all. He seems more to believe he’s on a mission.
 
Tantalum said:
I'm torn on DG. The Shamblin stuff was just bazaar and I'm not sure why he went so deep in the paint on that one and some of his stuff is just rude. But tbh I don't mind channels like blancolirio and DG, there's so much speculation out there and often times the NTSB's findings take years, and the probable cause is something akin to "pilot's failure to fly the airplane" without any real deep dive

Both blancolirio and DG take some time to get factual details about the accident, both (for better or worse) are around planes a lot and have experience with them. In the case of DG, and this is where he loses people, he will often cast a blunt judgment on the folks flying. His take on this accident didn't seem in poor taste, at least not by his standards. It's doubtful for this accident the NTSB would give us something beyond "pilot's failure to maintain control of aircraft during landing" <- which doesn't tell us much about how to be better pilots
Click to expand...
He may very will be right on this crash. it does look like a stall/spin. Him deciding she was the pilot and made a mistake because of her low hours is where he crosses a line with me. It may very well be true, but someone higher up decided to put her in that plane and the other pilot in there was more experienced... who made the decision to land there? Was there an emergency that put them in that position? Did the engine quit or sputter on the go around? Was there a control failure? I don't know and neither does he after one week, but he gives his opinion as fact. And, as I said, he may very well be right on this one, but none of us know for sure yet.
 
The problem with DG is similar to that of a con artist. You tell one verifiable truth, and the average clueless listener believes the person is some sort of mystic. It doesn't take a genius to guess that an airplane that pretty much falls from the sky in the pattern is a stall spin...but the average non-pilot doesn't know that at all. Anything past that is a guess based on statistics.

Here, most people have the courtesy, respect, and ego-checks to phrase most theories along the lines of "maybe...". But if you're on a mission, the things you see automatically line up with the facts you have in your head. And...in some cases he might be right. Just like a cold read at a booth at the county fair.

Back to this Station Air, I'd be more likely to bet that the more experienced male pilot was flying. I say that not because of bias, but because if they were flying really slowly, and it was the less experienced pilot was doing it, the non-flying more experienced pilot would seem to be likely to say "hey, you're too slow here"...where if the more experienced pilot was flying, the less experienced pilot may have figured "this guy has been doing this forever, it must be fine". But that's just my guess...
 
My question is this. Assuming a go around was initiated, wouldn't a Cessna 206 be giving tons of signals, to experienced pilots, that it was approaching a stall. Heavy pitch up, stall horn blaring, nose pointing to the sky? Couldn't power be gradually increased in a Cessna 206 to start a go around with 2 people on board and easily continue to fly and even climb? Even in my lowly C150 I seldom firewall the throttle, all at once, in a go around, because I know a pitch up, trim change, flap change is coming. Trying to learn and understand.
Anthony
 
TonyGT said:
My question is this. Assuming a go around was initiated, wouldn't a Cessna 206 be giving tons of signals, to experienced pilots, that it was approaching a stall. Heavy pitch up, stall horn blaring, nose pointing to the sky? Couldn't power be gradually increased in a Cessna 206 to start a go around with 2 people on board and easily continue to fly and even climb? Even in my lowly C150 I seldom firewall the throttle, all at once, in a go around, because I know a pitch up, trim change, flap change is coming. Trying to learn and understand.
Anthony
Click to expand...

Yes. I am assuming this plane was mostly empty, so a full throttle recovery from a near stall really points the nose in the air a lot more than most folks realize, almost scarily nose up.

What works for me in the 206 for a go around I give it about 3/4 throttle, flaps, 2 quick nose down re-trim then full throttle, all in a couple seconds. Otherwise it takes a lot of muscle to hold the nose down.
 
danhagan said:
I guess he makes youtube money, sad that it's on the backs of survivors pain :(...
Click to expand...

He has stated before his channel is non-monetized. True.?.I dunno. We would not be talking about Dan if the NTSB lived by their mission statement. They rarely make recommendations for GA and their reports done by investigators that rarely have pilot backgrounds take way too long. As previous posters have stated the cause most of the time is "pilots failure to maintain blah blah blah". I am onboard with AQP for GA and every weekend flyer should consider it.
 
Blaming the NTSB for DG is like blaming Walter Cronkite for Andrew Dice Clay.

We all agree the NTSB can do better. If we’re going to blame them for DG then I’m going to blame them for the food poisoning I got a couple of days ago.
 
Hengelo said:
Blaming the NTSB for DG is like blaming Walter Cronkite for Andrew Dice Clay.

We all agree the NTSB can do better. If we’re going to blame them for DG then I’m going to blame them for the food poisoning I got a couple of days ago.
Click to expand...
In a world where we want answers immediately it is understandable how DG get the podium. He steps up, had little self awareness and love to hear himself speak. He fills the vacuum of blame quickly which sadly the world craves.
 
NTSB just needs a branch dedicated to GA. We’re a fraction of a percent of commercial air travel; it’s no mystery why we don’t get the attention we need.
 
Albany Tom said:
Yeah, I agree. There aren't a lot of areas where "additional federal attention" has led to a positive outcome.
Click to expand...

for sure. Child labor laws, for instance, emancipation, suffrage, environmental protections - what’s the harm in thalidomide, anyway? Do we even need an FAA or NTSB?

If you ask me, I say we go back to the days of burning rivers and getting “thrown clear”

good times, let’s all raise a glass of mud wet-laden hair tonic to the future, cheers!
 
Lowflynjack said:
He may very will be right on this crash. it does look like a stall/spin. Him deciding she was the pilot and made a mistake because of her low hours is where he crosses a line with me. It may very well be true, but someone higher up decided to put her in that plane and the other pilot in there was more experienced... who made the decision to land there? Was there an emergency that put them in that position? Did the engine quit or sputter on the go around? Was there a control failure? I don't know and neither does he after one week, but he gives his opinion as fact. And, as I said, he may very well be right on this one, but none of us know for sure yet.
Click to expand...
Whether or not he is right, if he gets a handful of pilots to practice go-arounds the next time they go for a burger run its a win, no?
 
Hengelo said:
for sure. Child labor laws, for instance, emancipation, suffrage, environmental protections - what’s the harm in thalidomide, anyway? Do we even need an FAA or NTSB?

If you ask me, I say we go back to the days of burning rivers and getting “thrown clear”

good times, let’s all raise a glass of mud wet-laden hair tonic to the future, cheers!
Click to expand...

Way off topic, but most, if not all of those things are better and more effectively addressed at a State or local level than Federal. I've worked with the EPA, in particular. EPA region 2, that covers NY, is pretty good, but at the federal level they're a bit of a zoo; and NY State does a better job of handling things than they do. The problem we have with pollution, in general and in my view, is we've only moved the problem. I'd be willing to bet that globally we're putting more toxins into the oceans than we did in the 70's. So heavy manufacturing have moved overseas. In some countries - most or maybe all of EU, and Japan, things are as clean as they are here or better. But other countries? Not good. So the Hudson is better, and that's great, but our oceans are not. Federal involvement is typically knee jerk and short sighted. The analogy that comes to mind is a group trying to repair watches with hammers. Again, just my view. Down soapbox.

Bringing it back to Station Air... If some youtube people would be less sensational, then maybe these things could be discussed in a way to improve flying and training at a grass roots, no judgement level. That the means should be in alignment with the end.

And I'm going to make the assumption that both pilots were good at what they did, but they likely let something happen that wasn't right, that led them down a path that they couldn't get out of.
 
exncsurfer said:
Whether or not he is right, if he gets a handful of pilots to practice go-arounds the next time they go for a burger run its a win, no?
Click to expand...
Exactly this. Whether in pretense, or in truth, effective safety methods are preached, and therein I rejoice and will rejoice... to paraphrase a different saying.
 
Hengelo said:
Only if you think the ends justify the means.
Click to expand...
That presumes that his means are wrong, which would require you to make a moral argument. I think sometimes he jumps to conclusions, like who was at the controls, but if anyone was on scene that talked to Dan, maybe he does know. For sure, the FAA guy that I've talked to that did crash investigations gave me some insight into how they can often determine which pilot was flying based on injuries.
 
this is a tragic situation and very sad.

there's a lot I could say about DG but in his video about this accident he shows her full address from the FAA website and that just shows his complete lack of respect and total cluelessness about being a decent human being that really, he can go fk himself. if anyone thinks I'm being a keyboard warrior, I'd be more than happy to tell him to go fk himself straight to his face. that just irks me. take the 10 seconds to black out the address, because it's the right thing to do.
 
I’m curious if DG has ever assessed blame on anyone but the pilot??? A@
 
Too many topics, not enough fingers to type:

state run standards? Makes sense to me: everyone knows that the laws of physics, biochemistry and human nature change when you cross state lines. Better yet let’s let each city or town take care of all governance.

the ends do not justify the means, and I have no problem making moral judgements about DG. Just because he claims to be trying to help people doesn’t absolve him of reprehensible conduct.
 
Hengelo said:
state run standards? Makes sense to me: everyone knows that the laws of physics, biochemistry and human nature change when you cross state lines. Better yet let’s let each city or town take care of all governance.
Click to expand...
How about we just simplify to the Ten basics... and lose the excess.
the ends do not justify the means, and I have no problem making moral judgements about DG. Just because he claims to be trying to help people doesn’t absolve him of reprehensible conduct.
Click to expand...
Agreed about the ends and the means, but that presumes a universal moral standard, like, you know, as absolute as the laws of physics...
 
Ten basics eh? Sure worked out for most of human history; can’t thing of anything bad that happened when we tried that.

Sounds like you want relativism on the one one hand and theocracy on the other.

to quote another a Cohen Brothers classic, “which is it young feller?”
 
Hengelo said:
Ten basics eh? Sure worked out for most of human history; can’t thing of anything bad that happened when we tried that.

Sounds like you want relativism on the one one hand and theocracy on the other.

to quote another a Cohen Brothers classic, “which is it young feller?”
Click to expand...
Not sure where you think I want relativism... but the version of theocracy I'd believe in is the kind of thing that led to the principles Witherspoon would have believe when he was helping with the Consitution.
 
Hengelo said:
Too many topics, not enough fingers to type:

state run standards? Makes sense to me: everyone knows that the laws of physics, biochemistry and human nature change when you cross state lines. Better yet let’s let each city or town take care of all governance.

the ends do not justify the means, and I have no problem making moral judgements about DG. Just because he claims to be trying to help people doesn’t absolve him of reprehensible conduct.
Click to expand...

:) Laws aren't based on science. They're based on money, and power. Sometimes science can play a part, but most of the time they get it wrong. I've known a couple of people in politics, local, state, and federal level that were pretty good, but to me they're the exception; and the process itself is not tilted toward fairness in any way. Politics, like war, should be a tool of last resort. Like using bug spray. It's toxic, harmful, nasty. But sometimes it's needed.

We agree on DG, and reprehensible is a good word.
 
RyanShort1 said:
How about we just simplify to the Ten basics... and lose the excess.

Agreed about the ends and the means, but that presumes a universal moral standard, like, you know, as absolute as the laws of physics...
Click to expand...

"Presumes a moral standard" if you don't think morality is fixed, you're talking relativism, which is just a short skip away from Fascism. This is aviation though, not political theory 101.
 
Albany Tom said:
:) Laws aren't based on science. They're based on money, and power. Sometimes science can play a part, but most of the time they get it wrong. I've known a couple of people in politics, local, state, and federal level that were pretty good, but to me they're the exception; and the process itself is not tilted toward fairness in any way. Politics, like war, should be a tool of last resort. Like using bug spray. It's toxic, harmful, nasty. But sometimes it's needed.

We agree on DG, and reprehensible is a good word.
Click to expand...

Never suggested laws were "based on science"
I do think the idea local governance for many things (like environmental policy) is juvenile. PCB's don't care what state you're in.

This thread has veered pretty far from the tragedy of the original topic - I assume all the passion is misplaced grief that such a bright young life ended so early.
 
Hengelo said:
"Presumes a moral standard" if you don't think morality is fixed, you're talking relativism, which is just a short skip away from Fascism. This is aviation though, not political theory 101.
Click to expand...
Well, you badly, badly missed what I was trying to say. I DO believe in a fixed moral standard. Murder is always wrong, even if a democracy "decides" it isn't. I was just saying that it wasn't clear which absolute standard you were operating off of.
 
Well, the NTSB released their preliminary report. Funny how it says the pilot contacted Waco Approach and “he” was landing at T15.


- NTSB Issues the preliminary report into the fatal accident involving a Cessna TU206F Turbo Stationair, N858JA, that occurred on April 5th, 2022, near Marlin Airport (T15), Marlin, Texas:

On April 5, 2022, about 1231 central daylight time, a Cessna TU206F airplane, N858JA, was substantially damaged when it was involved in an accident near Marlin, Texas. The 2 pilots were fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 aerial observation flight.

The airplane departed the Houston Executive Airport (TME), Houston, Texas, on a pipeline inspection flight with a destination of Waco, Texas. Preliminary radar and Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) data indicated the airplane first appeared at 1038 near TME. The airplane tracked north-northwest toward Waco, Texas, and climbed to 4,000 ft msl. About an hour and a half into the flight, the airplane turned southwest and began a series of maneuvering turns over the area where the pipeline was located. The airplane continued to maneuver southwest and worked its way to a location 20 miles south of Waco. It then turned to the east toward the Marlin Airport (T15), Marlin, Texas. The pilot contacted Waco Approach Control and informed them that he was landing at T15.

The airplane overflew the airport and entered a left downwind traffic pattern for runway 17. The airplane continued to a left base leg and then final. An Armory security camera located on the airport recorded the airplane on final approach. The airplane touched down just past the approach end of the runway and bounced back into the air. It touched down a second time in the grass just right of the runway, struck a runway light, veered back on the runway, crossed the runway, and departed the left side of the runway. The airplane then disappeared behind a building. Mode C position reporting data showed three more airplane positions in close proximity just east of the airport. All track data was lost at 1231. The airplane was about 1,800 ft. southeast of the approach end of runway 17 at T15 when track data was lost.

The accident site was in a treed pasture located on the east side of a gravel road that ran along the east side of T15, and 1 mile northeast of Marlin, Texas. The elevation of the accident site was 410 ft and the terrain was predominately flat.

The airplane impacted in a near vertical attitude and rested upright on its main landing gear and nose on a heading of 281°.

The airplane main wreckage was located about 340 ft east of the runway and consisted of the fuselage, both wings, main landing gear, engine, and empennage. The propeller and nose landing gear were located west of the airplane. A debris field that contained broken pieces of the windscreen, cowling, glareshield, and instrument panel was located between the airplane and the propeller. An additional area of debris that consisted of the left wing tip was located beneath a tree about 90 ft west-northwest of the airplane. A broken tree branch was located among the debris.

The airplane’s propeller was located 33 ft. west of the airplane main wreckage and was embedded about 1 ft into the ground. The propeller was broken torsionally at the flange. All three blades showed S-bending and chordwise scratches. A 4 ft by 4 ft impact crater was located beneath the propeller. Pieces of the windscreen were found in the crater. Two 6 in wide and 15 ft long impressions in the ground extended east and west from the impact crater. At the end of the east impression were pieces of the right wing tip and position light.

A second tree located 15 ft south of the impact crater showed several broken branches, which were found on the ground between the propeller and the tree.

An on-scene examination of the airplane revealed no preaccident malfunctions or failures that would have precluded normal operation.

- Meteorological Information and Flight Plan:

Conditions at Accident Site: VMC
Condition of Light: Day
Observation Facility, Elevation: KACT,498 ft msl
Observation Time: 11:51 Local
Distance from Accident Site: 25 Nautical Miles
Temperature/Dew Point: 30°C /17.8°C
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 15 knots / , 240°
Lowest Ceiling:
Visibility: 10 miles
Altimeter Setting: 29.62 inches Hg
Type of Flight Plan Filed:
Departure Point: Houston, TX (TME)
Destination: Waco, TX
 
Drama in the cockpit? Biological factors? That's a strange crash landing.
 
Not to change the subject again, but why would pipeline patrol use a turbo 206? Seems like way too much airplane for that mission.

Can't fathom how this happened to two experienced pilots.
 
Well, my guess was completely wrong, from the sound of that report. I can't guess as to what it was at all.

As to the 206, from the pic and description above, it sounded to me like they carried quite a bit of photo or other scientific gear. Maybe the weight + wanting a high DA capability led them to that plane.
 
She just got her high performance endorsement March 2nd, in a C-172XP. I congratulated her on it and asked what HP that had, and she said 210.

She'd flown a 206 starting the last half of March, and she was really excited about this new job. I don't know anything about him other than he had 800 hours and was a CFI.

Weird accident...I would really like to know what the heck went on here.
 
Lowflynjack said:
Well, the NTSB released their preliminary report. Funny how it says the pilot contacted Waco Approach and “he” was landing at T15.….
Click to expand...

She was flying, he was working the radios? He was flying right seat?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top