Bo crashes into house in Massachusetts

Weather was low IFR all afternoon. May they rest in peace.
 
I can only hope that the three souls on that airplane are now in a much better place. Every time I see something like this in the news the gut reaction is the same. Definitely not the way any of us who fly would prefer to go out of this life. You have to wonder what the sequence of events were that resulted in no more airspeed , no more altitude and nothing but a 2 story house in front of you. At least nobody in the house was hurt which is a small miracle in itself.
 
Sad to see this. Planning amother flight to norwood and this came up. Another site mentioned the pilots name but not sure its right to post their info.

Not much you can do flying an approach with an engine out. Lancasterr to norwood is 1.5 hrs, so running out of fuel is probably out. (Hopefully)
 
Tough listening to the tape,no engine hard IMC,missed the highway by about a mile
 
Just listened to the LiveATC tape and wished I hadn't. Hard IMC and an engine failure in a small airplane with passengers onboard. You can just imagine how bad those last moments had to be. Don't think I'll sleep too well tonight.
 
Maxed-out said:
Just listened to the LiveATC tape and wished I hadn't. Hard IMC and an engine failure in a small airplane with passengers onboard. You can just imagine how bad those last moments had to be. Don't think I'll sleep too well tonight.
Click to expand...
This is one of the many reasons I am willing to pay a premium for fuel/maintenance/training/insurance to own a twin as my family cross-country hauler.

RIP
 
The calm and discipline displayed by the pilot in the ATC recording is remarkable.

RIP.
 
Woke up to this story on the local news this morning. Absolutely gut-wrenching audio.

I really do hesitate to head down the speculative path, but with all the moisture in the air yesterday, I can't help but wonder if this may have been a carb heat issue. Especially as the problem seems to have occurred during his decent to 3000 per the ATC recording.

I do agree, exceptional composure by the Boston controller and the pilot. Truly is a worst-case scenario in those conditions.
 
Pending checkride this Sunday so not official yet, but I find it amazing how many pilots fly single engine piston planes at night and in minimal IFR. I think it's fine to take that risk by yourself, but I have trouble w non pilot passengers going along and taking that risk. I don't understand the thinking. Seems like every pilot I know has either had major engine problem or knows someone that did lose engine or need emergency landing. It's not as rare as we think.
 
jhoyt said:
Pending checkride this Sunday so not official yet, but I find it amazing how many pilots fly single engine piston planes at night and in minimal IFR. I think it's fine to take that risk by yourself, but I have trouble w non pilot passengers going along and taking that risk. I don't understand the thinking. Seems like every pilot I know has either had major engine problem or knows someone that did lose engine or need emergency landing. It's not as rare as we think.
Click to expand...

Meh, as a newly licensed plot with minimum experience you're much more likely to kill your family than your engine is.
 
My guess is a fractured/departed cylinder head...causing oil starvation....then the engine seized.
 
Last edited:
jhoyt said:
Pending checkride this Sunday so not official yet, but I find it amazing how many pilots fly single engine piston planes at night and in minimal IFR. I think it's fine to take that risk by yourself, but I have trouble w non pilot passengers going along and taking that risk. I don't understand the thinking. Seems like every pilot I know has either had major engine problem or knows someone that did lose engine or need emergency landing. It's not as rare as we think.
Click to expand...

What's your risk tolerance?

The engine doesn't know it's dark or that it's IMC. The engine failure rate is the failure rate.
 
Bob Noel said:
What's your risk tolerance?

The engine doesn't know it's dark or that it's IMC. The engine failure rate is the failure rate.
Click to expand...

I think the argument is - Engine failure on a nice clear day is more survivable than an engine failure in IMC with 300' ceilings. When the airport is 7miles behind you, looking for that field/highway is a little easier without 2000' of clouds in your way.
 
ifly4fun said:
I think the argument is - Engine failure on a nice clear day is more survivable than an engine failure in IMC with 300' ceilings. When the airport is 7miles behind you, looking for that field/highway is a little easier without 2000' of clouds in your way.
Click to expand...

I know why people don't like engine failures at night or in IMC.

My point is to think about the probability of having an engine failure in the first place. For myself, I'd much rather avoid the engine failure regardless of the flying conditions. In other words, if I don't trust my airplane in IMC or at night, why the heck would I fly it during the day/VMC?
 
Bob Noel said:
I know why people don't like engine failures at night or in IMC.

My point is to think about the probability of having an engine failure in the first place. For myself, I'd much rather avoid the engine failure regardless of the flying conditions. In other words, if I don't trust my airplane in IMC or at night, why the heck would I fly it during the day/VMC?
Click to expand...

You say you understand the argument, but the paragraph following seems to indicate you don't really.

It is about risk management. You cannot eliminate all risk of an engine crapping out. No matter who made the engine, who maintains it or how you fly it. No matter what the conditions or time of day. But you can mitigate the follow on risk of, heaven forbid, you draw the short straw.
 
Fearless Tower said:
You say you understand the argument, but the paragraph following seems to indicate you don't really.

It is about risk management. You cannot eliminate all risk of an engine crapping out. No matter who made the engine, who maintains it or how you fly it. No matter what the conditions or time of day. But you can mitigate the follow on risk of, heaven forbid, you draw the short straw.
Click to expand...

<sigh>

No kidding.

At some point the engine is reliable enough that the probability of an engine failure at night in IMC is low enough that I will accept the risk.

I'd prefer to mitigate the risk of the primary cause (engine failure) rather than sweating the details of it occuring at night, etc. In other words, the time and weather conditions are irrelevant if the engine failure doesn't happen.
 
Bob Noel said:
<sigh>

No kidding.

At some point the engine is reliable enough that the probability of an engine failure at night in IMC is low enough that I will accept the risk.

I'd prefer to mitigate the risk of the primary cause (engine failure) rather than sweating the details of it occuring at night, etc. In other words, the time and weather conditions are irrelevant if the engine failure doesn't happen.
Click to expand...
no worries.....+80% of the time it will be you and not the machine the presents the problem. :yes:
 
I fly over a lot of open water in a single. We have a 6 person inflatable life raft plus each person wears an inflatable PFD. Some routes are at 10,500 to stay within gliding distance of shore.

I carry a PLB, plus we have the Spider Tracking system with someone at the office monitoring it, sat phone and of course the planes ELT.

Its all about risk management. I would not hesitate to go single engine at night IFR if conditions are favorable and the plane is equipped well instead of barely basic IFR legal. But I still prefer to have that second engine just in case.

Oh, I also have large size barf bags, can't be too careful.
 
Very sad. Tough to imagine why anyone would have went flying in the Northeast on the day in question. Especially when waiting but 12 hours would have placed the flight in much better weather.

This is the reason I am strongly considering skipping the IFR ticket and going for the commercial license first. IFR should be used to get you out of trouble and not a ticket to get you into trouble... Just because you can does not mean you should!
 
jspilot said:
Very sad. Tough to imagine why anyone would have went flying in the Northeast on the day in question. Especially when waiting but 12 hours would have placed the flight in much better weather.

This is the reason I am strongly considering skipping the IFR ticket and going for the commercial license first. IFR should be used to get you out of trouble and not a ticket to get you into trouble... Just because you can does not mean you should!
Click to expand...

..except, he didn't spatial D. He lost the only engine he had in IMC and presumably couldn't see the ground until very close to it. Having a CPL isn't going to help you on that one.

Now, if you mean to suggest single engine aircraft should never fly at night or above an undercast as a matter of judgement, then feel free to join the single engine playa hata's bandwagon. :D

For contrast, the Lance at PDK killed everyone on board on a CAVU day. When it's not your day, it's not your day. Buy a chute, a second engine, or stay home and watch others live for you. No wrong answer really.
 
jspilot said:
Very sad. Tough to imagine why anyone would have went flying in the Northeast on the day in question. Especially when waiting but 12 hours would have placed the flight in much better weather.



This is the reason I am strongly considering skipping the IFR ticket and going for the commercial license first. IFR should be used to get you out of trouble and not a ticket to get you into trouble... Just because you can does not mean you should!
Click to expand...

You're right. If are unable to make good decisions, you have no business with an Instrument Rating.....but then I would say you probably have no business with a Commercial license as well.
 
I have to wonder if the same happened to me, what I would have done differently. I'm sure a good percentage of pilots on this forum have flown in LIFR weather conditions at one time or the other and can probably relate with what this pilot experienced. After a complete engine failure in IMC, you realize you won't make it to an airport. What are your best options for not hitting something on the way down. I remember an FAA DPE asking me something along those lines years ago and after stumbling my way through an answer he said "your best bet is to find an un-populated area or maybe a large lake, the ocean etc., setup a descent at best glide, secure all systems in the airplane and hope for a controlled descent and crash without hitting anything. He also emphasized that it's always a good idea to carry VFR sectionals with you for any IMC/IFR flight. An accident like this really makes you think about single-engine LIFR or IFR at night. This guy probably broke out of the clouds at 200 or 300 ft. AGL and had little or no time to see and avoid anything. What you see is what you get. Rest in peace sir.
 
over50 said:
I have to wonder if the same happened to me, what I would have done differently . . . He also emphasized that it's always a good idea to carry VFR sectionals with you for any IMC/IFR flight.
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with the utility of a VFR sectional, I can't imagine this guy, having just lost an engine in the soup below 3Kft AGL, rifling through a bag for a folded sectional to try and decipher where he's at and get the aircraft pointed toward a (hopefully) unpopulated area. I think it's fine in theory, but in practice makes little sense unless you lose the engine at 10K feet and have a minute or two to investigate your options. I suppose if he's got his tablet up and ready, he could flip over to the sectional view.

As far as choosing a lake/ocean, you're almost damning yourself and pax do a watery grave in that instance. I'd be asking for a lighted highway at night in the soup and take my chances with the traffic/roadsigns/transmission lines.
 
Jim Logajan said:
Not so:

http://www.equipped.com/ditchingmyths.htm
Click to expand...

You're telling me that if you ditch in the ocean off of the Cali coast without life vests/life raft/cold water gear at night, you expect to be picked up by a boat/CG soon enough not to die of hypothermia? That is assuming you and your pax are able to exit the aircraft once flipped upside down and filling with water?

Sorry, I'm not arguing the survivability of ditching, I'm saying doing so at night in other than warm waters when you weren't remotely prepared for a water landing is probably a poor choice.
 
SoonerAviator said:
You're telling me that if you ditch in the ocean off of the Cali coast without life vests/life raft/cold water gear at night, you expect to be picked up by a boat/CG soon enough not to die of hypothermia? That is assuming you and your pax are able to exit the aircraft once flipped upside down and filling with water?

Sorry, I'm not arguing the survivability of ditching, I'm saying doing so at night in other than warm waters when you weren't remotely prepared for a water landing is probably a poor choice.
Click to expand...

BRS anyone? I mean, we're landing robotics on Mars with parachutes without breaking them, just saying. Time to catch up? People didn't like seatbelts when they came out either.

Doesn't help if you don't have the option.
 
Bah! Admittedly, one of those things would come in handy with an engine lost in hard IMC. But how often does such a scenario occur? Sorry, I'm not taking on $1000/year in expense and loosing useful load just for the 1% of the time I might actually need the fool thing. Most of the IFR pilots here tell me they spend most of their time flying in VMC anyway.
 
steingar said:
Bah! Admittedly, one of those things would come in handy with an engine lost in hard IMC. But how often does such a scenario occur? Sorry, I'm not taking on $1000/year in expense and loosing useful load just for the 1% of the time I might actually need the fool thing. Most of the IFR pilots here tell me they spend most of their time flying in VMC anyway.
Click to expand...

Is that for repack? or inspection? I suppose. You might save a couple more pounds if you take out your seat belts, you shouldn't need those either. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top