Cessna Down at Los Banos Ca

AV8R_87 said:
Trim mis-configured? A lot of student pilots aren't really taught to trim well.
Click to expand...

Gosh... considering the length of this flight, I'd hope the pilots offering assistance on the radio would have suggested investigating the position / operation of the trim wheel.
 
MarcP said:
Interesting wrinkle. Trade Winds Aviation (who operated the plane) posted this statement:
Click to expand...

Rarely do I want to hunt down someone on the Internet and punch them in the face. But Tradewinds has me there.

They start by urging everyone to wait on the investigation. In the next breath, they offer speculation attempting to deflect blame from themselves to the young pilot. Disgusting. There is a special place in hell for them. Even if it turns out not to be their fault, I hope they go out of business and lose everything.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Rarely do I want to hunt down someone on the Internet and punch them in the face. But Tradewinds has me there.

They start by urging everyone to wait on the investigation. In the next breath, they offer speculation attempting to deflect blame from themselves to the young pilot. Disgusting. There is a special place in hell for them. Even if it turns out not to be their fault, I hope they go out of business and lose everything.
Click to expand...
The CEO that stole the hat from the kid because the kid wasn't fast enough. Then says it's just a hat, threatens lawsuits to those critical, and then calls for good sportsmanship... These guys probably took the top spot from him for me

Seriously. End the statement at the second paragraph.
 
Rick A said:
Cash flow? Maybe a deflection to blame the pilot for a suicide and keep the rentals flying?
Click to expand...
How did you pull "cash flow" out of the statement from Trade Winds. It said nothing about cash flow, life insurance, etc.
 
M20K said:
How did you pull "cash flow" out of the statement from Trade Winds. It said nothing about cash flow, life insurance, etc.
Click to expand...
Uhhhh. He pretty well explains his thinking with the rest of the statement you quoted. Not cash flow for the deceased.

Cash flow for trade winds trying to blame it on something other than them to keep customers from running for the hills.
 
The statement the pilot said the yoke was stuck full forward is interesting to me. Also interesting was the failure wasn't immediate.

Last annual an inspection panel was left with one screw in. It spun around and acted like a 4 inch aileron. Letting go would put the plane in a greater than 30 degree almost immediately.

I don't think anything like that happened here. But I do wonder if the good Samaritan's trying to help might have led him down an incorrect troubleshooting path. In 3 hours I'm sure they tried everything however. I suspect the final spiraling descent was fuel exhaustion.

This is going to be a 2 year report I'm already anxious to see.
 
M20K said:
How did you pull "cash flow" out of the statement from Trade Winds. It said nothing about cash flow, life insurance, etc.
Click to expand...
I didn't.

My statement (not Tradewinds) was: "Cash flow? Maybe a deflection to blame the pilot for a suicide and keep the rentals flying?"

Figured most readers would understand that any reluctance of wary pilots to rent an aircraft from a business that "maybe" offers other planes that "may" require fighting for your life for over three hours before crashing, could possibly create a cash flow problem. Like meeting next month's business (and legal) expenses? Ya think"?

Do I really need to elaborate on the sentence that includes personal life, clues, and life insurance?
 
Ed Haywood said:
Rarely do I want to hunt down someone on the Internet and punch them in the face. But Tradewinds has me there.

They start by urging everyone to wait on the investigation. In the next breath, they offer speculation attempting to deflect blame from themselves to the young pilot. Disgusting. There is a special place in hell for them. Even if it turns out not to be their fault, I hope they go out of business and lose everything.
Click to expand...
What is fascinating is EVERY speculation I’ve read points to a mechanical failure - clearly this business is very worried about fallout.

One interesting note is that this exact plane I believe was in a roll-over incident a few years prior and had significant damage to it but wasn’t totaled (not 100% on this part).
 
Rick A said:
I didn't.
Click to expand...
Umm.... But you did with no reference from the Trade Winds quote, which is why I asked.

Tossing out "Cash flow" on a whim isn't even armchair speculation on what really might have happened. And even if it were a question of Trade Winds being sued down the road, still not a "Cash flow" issue at all. Sounds more like you're trying to creat some spin to just toss out that they're not doing maintenance because they do not have the "Cash flow" to do it. But there are no grounds AT ALL to speculate that based on the quote you posted from them or anything else I've read.

I get we all speculate on what REALLY could have happened. I have my armchair thoughts that something came loose in the tail or behind the panel based on what we know so far. But that is speculation based on what (little) we do actually know and just going thorugh the logical "what ifs" that would create the situation. And again, assuming what we know so far is even accurate. But I'm waiting for the real report to tell us what really happened before going down the rabbit hole and starting to blame the flight school for "Cash flow" issues. Next we'll start saying the CFI shouldn't have signed him off to solo, again, with no proof or documented facts.
 
172 being a generally durable aircraft, what could go that haywire with the flight controls...any other known similar incidents? I'm still going with a tool or other hard object getting stuck somewhere.
 
M20K said:
Umm.... But you did with no reference from the Trade Winds quote, which is why I asked.
Click to expand...
Actually, he quoted the Trade Winds statement in his post. It was pretty obvious reference to them continuing to have cash flow vs any prior acts. There's been zero reference to the pilot having any personal issues and a lot of reference to the plane having control difficulties.
It's pretty cold to blame the pilot for a mechanical issue with the airplane, which seems pretty likely from the 3 hour conversation he had with the other pilot in the area. It's even colder to allege suicide.
 
M20K said:
Tossing out "Cash flow" on a whim isn't even armchair speculation on what really might have happened. And even if it were a question of Trade Winds being sued down the road, still not a "Cash flow" issue at all. Sounds more like you're trying to creat some spin to just toss out that they're not doing maintenance because they do not have the "Cash flow" to do it. But there are no grounds AT ALL to speculate that based on the quote you posted from them or anything else I've read.
Click to expand...

What we have here is a lack of communication and understanding. I never said Trade Winds had shoddy maintenance practices due to a lack of money.

My reference to cash flow was intended to mean if a business that exists to rent airplanes suddenly loses a significant part of its income because people stop renting aircraft from them, they may run out of operating capital (cash) unless the owners (or someone) cough up cash to keep them in business.

I certainly wouldn't rent a Trade Winds aircraft until the reason for the flight control issue was positively determined... but that's just cowardly me. YMMV

The Trade Winds statement seems (to me and others) to be an attempt to keep customers showing up to rent their planes by floating the possibility it's the pilot's fault, and not the aircraft's fault. And at this early stage of the investigation, that's chicken ****.
 
Hang 4 said:
There's been zero reference to the pilot having any personal issues and a lot of reference to the plane having control difficulties.
Click to expand...
Those references to control difficulties are not separate and distinct events, at this point everything seems to be based on the comms, with no substantiation. Until the wreckage is analyzed there really isn't any table to pound on to insist it's control related.

In the interest of full disclosure, I briefly flew with Tradewinds just before leaving the area. I think their statement was in poor taste, but I think speculating on their motives is is also in poor taste. When *facts* present themselves maybe we can have a rational discussion. Until then it's just guessing or what looks a lot like PIDOOMA

Nauga,
whose control continuity has been established
 
nauga said:
I think their statement was in poor taste, but I think speculating on their motives is is also in poor taste.
Click to expand...
I wanted to clarify this - it's not so much questioning their motives that I think is in poor taste, it's attributing their actions to a very specific motive with as yet no basis in fact that I think is in poor taste.

Nauga,
clear
 
wellknow said:
Outrageous. Also, from what I heard the guy was desperately trying to save himself for three hours
Click to expand...

Something just seems off with this one. How could one keep an uncontrollable aircraft in the air for that long or not be able to land it in less than three hours. Sky King comes to mind.
Is Trade winds statement just pulled out of a hat or maybe it has some legs to it?
 
Last edited:
"Born in India and raised in Ohio, Mahesh graduated from Olentangy Orange High School in 2012 and went on to earn his Bachelor of Science in Chemical Engineering from Ohio State University in 2017. He worked at GM and Lucid Motors and he later pursued his career as a Product Integration Engineer at NVIDIA, where his curiosity, brilliance, and dedication to problem-solving shone through.

Mahesh had an endless passion for cars, motorcycles, and planes. An engineer at heart, he loved learning the mechanics behind everything he operated."

I just find it odd that I've never heard of a Cessna 172 losing all flight controls in such a manner as this and flying for so long after flight control loss. Regaining control then losing it again and again.

FAA and NTSB need this figured out fast if indeed a aircraft control issue.
 
Hang 4 said:
Actually, he quoted the Trade Winds statement in his post.
Click to expand...
Okay, maybe I was just oblivious.... But the first part of what he quoated (e.g. the parts in the " ") did NOT say anything about "Cash flow" that I saw. Again, please point it out if I missed it.

The NEXT paragraph HE said "Cash flow" and that's what I had a problem with. There is no grounds for a "Cash flow" comment from what was Trade Winds said. I get we all speculate on possibilties, but trash talking Trade Winds is BS. (And I don't know them at all other than from the quote.)
 
Rick A said:
My reference to cash flow was intended to mean if a business that exists to rent airplanes suddenly loses a significant part of its income because people stop renting aircraft from them, they may run out of operating capital (cash) unless the owners (or someone) cough up cash to keep them in business.
Click to expand...
Not at all how it came across. But I now understand what you were thinking.

IMHO, you still need to be careful how you blurt those things out as your first post did not convey what you apparently were thinking.
 
M20K said:
Not at all how it came across. But I now understand what you were thinking.

IMHO, you still need to be careful how you blurt those things out as your first post did not convey what you apparently were thinking.
Click to expand...

I've been informed (accused) that my written communications are at times too wordy, so I do my best and try to keep them brief. Obviously, in your opinion, my cash flow reference was too brief. We good?
 
Ed Haywood said:
Rarely do I want to hunt down someone on the Internet and punch them in the face. But Tradewinds has me there.

They start by urging everyone to wait on the investigation. In the next breath, they offer speculation attempting to deflect blame from themselves to the young pilot. Disgusting. There is a special place in hell for them. Even if it turns out not to be their fault, I hope they go out of business and lose everything.
Click to expand...
That's rather reactionary, I would say. Gonna guess they know more about it than any of us, so I'll leave it at that.
 
M20K said:
Not at all how it came across. But I now understand what you were thinking.

IMHO, you still need to be careful how you blurt those things out as your first post did not convey what you apparently were thinking.
Click to expand...
I think you're the only one that didn't get it. I don't think he needs to be careful. It was incredibly obvious what was meant and frankly I'm not sure how one would even come to the conclusion you did based on what was said.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Rarely do I want to hunt down someone on the Internet and punch them in the face. But Tradewinds has me there.

They start by urging everyone to wait on the investigation. In the next breath, they offer speculation attempting to deflect blame from themselves to the young pilot. Disgusting. There is a special place in hell for them. Even if it turns out not to be their fault, I hope they go out of business and lose everything.
Click to expand...
Maybe just maybe they know something that we don’t. Your awfully quick to lambast them, Trade Winds.

Just like a bunch of you thought Boeing was responsible for the Air India crash.

Two engines quit on take off how could that possibly happen if not the fault of Boeing.
Well maybe the pilot did it?

The pilot rented the plane. Maybe the flight school knows something about the pilot? You don’t know the history between the pilot and the flight school.

The aircraft crashed all in one piece with no fire. Maybe investigators can find a cause.
 
Last edited:
A couple thoughts - whatever the problem was, the plane was (barely) controllable for a couple hours, before crashing. Was that caused by fuel exhaustion? We'll see.

But, even assuming somehow the yoke got stuck, he still had the rudder (and the doors, in a pinch) for directional control, and the trim tab was probably operational and could've been used as a reverse elevator (trim up to pitch down). Plus power to control the sink rate.

I don't want to Monday morning quarterback this, but I do wonder if they could've given him a few more things to try.
 
bonefishpete said:
Maybe just maybe they know something that we don’t. Your awfully quick to lambast them, Trade Winds.
Click to expand...

Of course they do. They are also not an impartial entity here; they stand to lose the most if there is anything amiss discovered.

They forfeited a fantastic opportunity to hush and wait for the NTSB prelim. Throwing shade at their deceased renter is rotten.
 
Trogdor said:
What is fascinating is EVERY speculation I’ve read points to a mechanical failure - clearly this business is very worried about fallout.

One interesting note is that this exact plane I believe was in a roll-over incident a few years prior and had significant damage to it but wasn’t totaled (not 100% on this part).
Click to expand...
Pure speculation now. If I owned that company I would be worried about going out of business too. All speculation points to airframe control failure. Bet Cessna has their guy present. If the company has information about the pilot I would let the NTSB know.
 
schmookeeg said:
Of course they do. They are also not an impartial entity here; they stand to lose the most if there is anything amiss discovered.

They forfeited a fantastic opportunity to hush and wait for the NTSB prelim. Throwing shade at their deceased renter is rotten.
Click to expand...
Well then they should say what it is.
Waiting on the NTSB they’ll be out of business by then.

Don’t other cessna owners get to know quickly if in fact a aircraft or maintenance defect?
 
bonefishpete said:
Well then they should say what it is.
Waiting on the NTSB they’ll be out of business by then.

Don’t other cessna owners get to know quickly if in fact a aircraft or maintenance defect?
Click to expand...

Out of business? Block rates and goal-oriented renters keep things sticky and moving even when there's aluminum rain outside. I doubt half of the school's renters even knew there was an incident. I bet more than one loudly griped that their booking in this wrecked plane had to be cancelled.

Nobody is shocked that planes occasionally crash. A mature operator should cast thoughts and prayers, act reflective and saddened at the loss of their renter, and wait for the impartial parties to declare the root cause. Even if this was a suicide and it is ruled as such, even THEN they should act bummed by it, not openly relieved, much less thirsty for any evidence it wasn't the flight school.

That press release reeks of nervousness and self-interest.
 
schmookeeg said:
That press release reeks of nervousness and self-interest.
Click to expand...
Self-interest is the only reason to issue a press release.

And I'd be nervous too, if everyone on the Internet was claiming my maintenance practices crashed a plane and killed someone.

As long as the, "we are aware that early indications point to factors unrelated to mechanical malfunction," bit is factually accurate, I really don't see any rational objection to the company's statement.
 
bonefishpete said:
Well then they should say what it is.
Waiting on the NTSB they’ll be out of business by then.

Don’t other cessna owners get to know quickly if in fact a aircraft or maintenance defect?
Click to expand...
They literally said they believe it's NOT an aircraft or maintenance defect.
 
Lindberg said:
As long as the, "we are aware that early indications point to factors unrelated to mechanical malfunction," bit is factually accurate, I really don't see any rational objection to the company's statement.
Click to expand...

In the crashes our flight school was involved in, we would not have been given an "Early indication" nor access to the wreckage, but I hope this school did and that it is factually correct. There are mechanics somewhere wanting to sleep tonight. The problem is, the school has every incentive to bend that "factually" in their favor and if they end up caught, the reputational damage will be much worse than if they had just remained patient and quiet.

The internet says all sorts of dumb things. If a flight school reacted to each one, they'd reimagine themselves as a PR firm and 100X their margin :D
 
schmookeeg said:
In the crashes our flight school was involved in, we would not have been given an "Early indication" nor access to the wreckage, but I hope this school did and that it is factually correct.
Click to expand...
Really? The owners didn't have access to the wreckage in those investigations? I guess they're all different. But I'd bet in this case the owners were on scene before the NTSB since it was near the airport. I'd bet they were there when the NTSB examined the wreckage. And I'd bet they have some knowledge about what other factors might be at play.
 
I have thought could be more to this than a simple "PoOr mAintINancE" issue. There are things that don't add up. Turns to the left and the right, periods of relatively straight flight, power completely shut off allegedly yet controls still making slow uncommanded movements...

Aviation businesses are not Walmart or McDonalds. People picture the owner raking in billions while not servicing the aircraft, when in reality there is probably very little profit if any at the end of the year as is the case with most aviation enterprises of this nature.

It would take something pretty egregious for me to condemn a business that makes GA planes available to folks.
 
schmookeeg said:
There are mechanics somewhere wanting to sleep tonight.
Click to expand...

There is also a mother and a father wanting to sleep. It will be years before they can. I have walked that path. Am walking.

I usually dismiss the "don't hurt the family" argument when applied to random internet discussion. But this is not that. This is a public announcement that will 100% be seen by the family of the pilot. That family is in the middle of the worst week of their life. It is despicable to cast speculative aspersions on the victim at this point in the process. To me the motive appears transparently financial. Again, F••• Tradewinds. I hope this destroys them, even if they turn out to be factually right.
 
Last edited:
Ed Haywood said:
This is a public announcement that will 100% be seen by the family of the pilot. That family is in the middle of the worst week of their life. It is absolutely despicable to cast speculative aspersions at the victim at this point in the process. To me the motive appears transparently financial.
Click to expand...
Like most bad things that happen in modern life, just "follow the money".
 
Ed Haywood said:
There is also a mother and a father wanting to sleep. It will be years before they can. I have walked that path. Am walking.

I usually dismiss the "don't hurt the family" argument when applied to random internet discussion. But this is not that. This is a public announcement that will 100% be seen by the family of the pilot. That family is in the middle of the worst week of their life. It is despicable to cast speculative aspersions on the victim at this point in the process. To me the motive appears transparently financial. Again, F••• Tradewinds. I hope this destroys them, even if they turn out to be factually right.
Click to expand...
You assume it's speculative. But the press release says the opposite. Maybe they're lying or wrong. But that's a bold assumption but anyone with access to even less information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top