Citation 550 down at SVH

Racerx said:
With the owner/operator literally standing over your shoulder I can see how one can lose that backbone to say no. 121 you tell dispatch to get you another plane. Not so here.
Click to expand...
MauleSkinner said:
What’s interesting to me is that it appears, based on his other type ratings, that he spent the majority of his career in the 121 environment, where this airplane never would have left the gate.

It seems that the 121 environment protected him and his passengers from himself, but he never developed the decision making skills to do it on his own.
Click to expand...

In 2023 a Citation 560 crashed due to pilot incapacitation. Again, a retired airline guy flying for a private owner.

From the NTSB: Based on the accident circumstances, it is likely that all the airplane occupants were incapacitated due to a common environmental condition, such as loss of cabin pressurization. Maintenance records indicated that, at the time of the accident flight, five items were over due for inspection, including the co-pilot oxygen mask. About 4 weeks before the accident flight, maintenance personnel noted 26 discrepancies that the owner declined to address, including several related to the pressurization and environmental control system. Furthermore, 2 days before the accident flight, maintenance personnel noted that the pilot-side oxygen mask was not installed, and the supplementary oxygen was at its minimum serviceable level. At that level, oxygen would not have been available to the airplane occupants and passenger oxygen masks would not have deployed in the event of a loss of pressurization. No evidence was found to indicate that the oxygen system was serviced or that the pilot-side oxygen mask was reinstalled before the accident flight.

In the 121 world this pilot would have never taken a plane with these types of discrepancies. Could it be the owner "Hey, if you don't take it I'll get someone who will"?


 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
That’s part of the protection of the 121 environment.
Click to expand...

Which this fellow no longer had.

One thing I wonder. The owner was obviously very comfortable working in very high risk environment. I wonder if this high risk tolerance had anything to do with the go decision.
 
Biffle himself is to blame for this. He took risks in his career and it carried over into aviation.

He chose poorly in his decisions to play fast and loose with the rules by hiring a pilot who also flaunted the rules, probably a lot before this crash, having his kid in the right seat and continuing on with the flight either by hubris or pressure from Biffle.

This is similar to the Dallas B17 disaster, you know, all those experienced pilots who didn't say no to the idiot air boss who ordered them to perform like monkeys or they would never sit in a warbird again. No one thought anything bad would happen until it didn't. Interesting it was a high-time airline pilot who crashed into the B17.

Another Swiss Cheese disaster: CRJ and Blackhawk. Decades of near misses until it wasn't.

The only innocent are the ones not involved, even the people who have to pick up the body parts.
 
Why they crash? I don’t understand. The aircraft was flying fine? Too sharp a turn to final? Too slow? Throw back to the Thurmon Munson crash. Behind the power curve?
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Biffle himself is to blame for this. He took risks in his career and it carried over into aviation.

He chose poorly in his decisions to play fast and loose with the rules by hiring a pilot who also flaunted the rules, probably a lot before this crash, having his kid in the right seat and continuing on with the flight either by hubris or pressure from Biffle.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I buy into this. For a lot of HNW owners they buy into a jet not really knowing all of the ins and outs. And to an unknowing owner a retired ATP has an impressive resume. Insurance says xxx requirement and guy on resume meets the requirement. There's a good chance the owner didn't understand his insurance policy and the requirements of the right seat guy.

Another common problem is maintenance. To the unknowing maintenance schedules, inspections, etc read like greek. If the aircraft isn't due for an inspection for 6 months, "we'll just fix it then" or they get in the airplane on the ramp, something's broke and there is no maintenance to be found. Pilot doesn't want to cancel the trip, owner says no big deal, etc.

Lots of details left unknown to draw definitive conclusions.

Here's an accident in a Falcon 900EXeasy back in 2021. The pilot was flying for a HNW owner. One would assume that a owner would at least do a background check on someone to fly their multi million dollar jet and be responsible for the safety and lives of the passengers (including him).
 

Attachments

Doc Holliday said:
I'm not sure I buy into this. For a lot of HNW owners they buy into a jet not really knowing all of the ins and outs. And to an unknowing owner a retired ATP has an impressive resume. Insurance says xxx requirement and guy on resume meets the requirement. There's a good chance the owner didn't understand his insurance policy and the requirements of the right seat guy.

Another common problem is maintenance. To the unknowing maintenance schedules, inspections, etc read like greek. If the aircraft isn't due for an inspection for 6 months, "we'll just fix it then" or they get in the airplane on the ramp, something's broke and there is no maintenance to be found. Pilot doesn't want to cancel the trip, owner says no big deal, etc.

Lots of details left unknown to draw definitive conclusions.

Here's an accident in a Falcon 900EXeasy back in 2021. The pilot was flying for a HNW owner. One would assume that a owner would at least do a background check on someone to fly their multi million dollar jet and be responsible for the safety and lives of the passengers (including him).
Click to expand...
Here's the problem; Biffle was a pilot, not some owner totally ignorant of pilot and maintenance responsibilities like you described. Maintenance? He was a race car driver and knew about what it takes to keep a car running along with aircraft-manpower and money.

The two up front were pilots. The PIC knew better. The pilot/passenger kid was ignorant because at that age because they think they are invincible. They are just at fault as Biffle.

I was told by a very wise aviator that a majority of crashes are due to the pilot reacting incorrectly to an emergency that would have been survivable. Biffle chose poorly.
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Here's the problem; Biffle was a pilot, not some owner totally ignorant of pilot and maintenance responsibilities like you described. Maintenance? He was a race car driver and knew about what it takes to keep a car running along with aircraft-manpower and money.

The two up front were pilots. The PIC knew better. The pilot/passenger kid was ignorant because at that age because they think they are invincible. They are just at fault as Biffle.

I was told by a very wise aviator that a majority of crashes are due to the pilot reacting incorrectly to an emergency that would have been survivable. Biffle chose poorly.
Click to expand...
Biffle had pics up on the IG of himself flying this plane right seat. Did pic at the time have the single pilot waiver?

I know lots of owners that don't know their responsibilities regarding ownership. Is your airworthiness certificate displayed so passengers can see it? Or is it tucked away in the glove box or in a folder in the plane somewhere.

Not saying ignorance is acceptable. But just because he was also a pilot doesn't mean he understood his responsibilities of ownership.
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Here's the problem; Biffle was a pilot, not some owner totally ignorant of pilot and maintenance responsibilities like you described.
Click to expand...
He was a GA pilot of small aircraft. At most he had a 61.55 SIC checkout.

FlightmechH3 said:
Maintenance? He was a race car driver and knew about what it takes to keep a car running along with aircraft-manpower and money.
Click to expand...
Big difference maintaining a race car vs complying with a Manufacturers Maintenance Program. Most of these jets go to a service center for maintenance and have their inspection status on CAMP. To the average user it can get very confusing what inspection is due and when. And I have seen aircraft go in for maintenance inspection, the SC finds discrepancies and the owner/aircraft manager tell the shop to button it up and come get the airplane. The Doc Inspection is complete but discrepancies still exist.

www.aopa.org

The maintenance maze

We all know that aircraft have a variety of inspection and maintenance requirements that must be completed at specified intervals to be considered airworthy.
www.aopa.org

FlightmechH3 said:
The two up front were pilots. The PIC knew better.
Click to expand...
Did he? How many times here on this forum have you seen pilots not knowing or understanding regulations? Even on the requirements of SIC there were conflicting opinions until the regulations were explained.

FlightmechH3 said:
The pilot/passenger kid was ignorant because at that age because they think they are invincible.
Click to expand...
Or was it the "kid" was with Dad, and Dad being a retired highly experienced ATP and the kid thought "Gee, Dad knows what's going on"? Maybe he blindly put his trust in his Dad. I don't know and neither do you.
FlightmechH3 said:
They are just at fault as Biffle.
Click to expand...
Kinda early, and they still don't have all the facts yet to be assigning blame. Did the plane have a management company operating it on Biffle's behalf? Was the plane managed by a company in the owner's organization? Or did Biffle manage it himself?
FlightmechH3 said:
I was told by a very wise aviator that a majority of crashes are due to the pilot reacting incorrectly to an emergency that would have been survivable. Biffle chose poorly.
Click to expand...

Maybe he did, my point is we still don't know a lot of what was going on.

I'm not so sure why the rush to blame someone. At this point the blame doesn't change the outcome.
 
Last edited:
Doc Holliday said:
He was a GA pilot of small aircraft. At most he had a 61.55 SIC checkout.


Big difference maintaining a race car vs complying with a Manufacturers Maintenance Program. Most of these jets go to a service center for maintenance and have their inspection status on CAMP. To the average user it can get very confusing what inspection is due and when. And I have seen aircraft go in for maintenance inspection, the SC finds discrepancies and the owner/aircraft manager tell the shop to button it up and come get the airplane. The Doc Inspection is complete but discrepancies still exist.

www.aopa.org

The maintenance maze

We all know that aircraft have a variety of inspection and maintenance requirements that must be completed at specified intervals to be considered airworthy.
www.aopa.org


Did he? How many times here on this forum have you seen pilots not knowing or understanding regulations? Even on the requirements of SIC there were conflicting opinions until the regulations were explained.


Or was it the "kid" was with Dad, and Dad being a retired highly experienced ATP and the kid thought "Gee, Dad knows what's going on"? Maybe he blindly put his trust in his Dad. I don't know and neither do you.

Kinda early, and they still don't have all the facts yet to be assigning blame. Did the plane have a management company operating it on Biffle's behalf? Was the plane managed by a company in the owner's organization? Or did Biffle manage it himself?


Maybe he did, my point is we still don't know a lot of what was going on.

I'm not so sure why the rush to blame someone. At this point the blame doesn't change the outcome.
Click to expand...
It appears that the outcomes still happen. Blame has to be assigned. There is enough information now to determine the cause.

Yes, it's walking like a duck and talking like a duck.

But hey, let's just wait a couple of years for the official report while more people die because of ignorance. Maybe some pilot will take something away from this conversation when he or she faces this situation in the near future.
 
FlightmechH3 said:
It appears that the outcomes still happen. Blame has to be assigned. There is enough information now to determine the cause.
Click to expand...
Is there?

FlightmechH3 said:
Yes, it's walking like a duck and talking like a duck.

But hey, let's just wait a couple of years for the official report while more people die because of ignorance.
Click to expand...
People will continue to die from ignorance. We simply cannot stop it.

FlightmechH3 said:
Maybe some pilot will take something away from this conversation when he or she faces this situation in the near future.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Blame has to be assigned.
There is enough information now to determine the cause.
Click to expand...
“Blame” and “the cause” possibly have little to do with each other, and the only reason to assign blame is so that restitution can be made, and that’s certainly not necessary on this forum.
FlightmechH3 said:
Maybe some pilot will take something away from this conversation when he or she faces this situation in the near future.
Click to expand...
Those takeaways definitely wouldn’t have anything to do with blame, and probable cause is likely a very minor part of the potential takeaways.
 
hindsight2020 said:
*chuckles* I wouldn't go extrapolating edicts about the "prudence writ large" of single pilot flight on the basis of retired vegetarians burning steaks, if you catch my drift. Horses for courses chat. The fact that to a canary a cat is a monster shouldn't be the eagle's burden.
Click to expand...
Dank-memes-16-3.jpg
 
MauleSkinner said:
What’s interesting to me is that it appears, based on his other type ratings, that he spent the majority of his career in the 121 environment, where this airplane never would have left the gate.

It seems that the 121 environment protected him and his passengers from himself, but he never developed the decision making skills to do it on his own.
Click to expand...
I was kinda wondering a similar thing myself. That especially in 121 land it's not just the pilot that keeps things safe. More than in 91, it's a system of people and procedures, developed over years, that makes everything scheduled as safe as it is.

But what if not everyone realized that? If the owner, even as a pilot, figured "hey, he's an airline guy, he'll be bringing all those systems and procedures along with him, we'll be good." And maybe, I have no idea, the pilot just wasn't that good. That he was already one of the holes in the cheese, so to speak.

I'm not excusing the pilot for taking off with known broken equipment or not having someone qualified in the right seat. But I'm wondering if what led him into that was not quite wrapping his head around the higher responsibility level of working 91 rather than 121. That's not just normalization of deviance, that's potentially not understanding what the impact of switching into a different role is, and coasting along. Someone described it as treating like a mini-van drive - maybe implying that it was a simpler and easier gig, when in fact it seems the opposite.

I might be excusing Biffle a bit for not knowing what the pilot did or didn't know, but *I* don't know what he knew about the aircraft or the pilot.
 
Albany Tom said:
But what if not everyone realized that? If the owner, even as a pilot, figured "hey, he's an airline guy, he'll be bringing all those systems and procedures along with him, we'll be good."
Click to expand...

If I were in Biffles' place, I would not have the slightest clue what the rules were for a biz jet, and would totally trust my retired Air Force and airline PIC to do the right thing.
 
In a video on the topic of flying helicopters in the wake of hurricane Helene, Biffle made some comments that struck me as him acknowledging his modest skills as a pilot. He made the comment that the flying some of his peers were doing was over his head and he was not participating. It sounded to me as a healthy attitude towards aviation risks.

Ultimately, I think he’s responsible for the operation of his own jet. That said, hiring a Delta guy sure sounds like the right way to do it.
 
Bill said:
One thing I wonder. The owner was obviously very comfortable working in very high risk environment. I wonder if this high risk tolerance had anything to do with the go decision.
Click to expand...
I've found in this part of the aviation world it doesn't matter what the owner's experiences are even if they are aviation related. It boils down to whether these owners accept "no" as an answer regardless the person telling him that. Unfortunately, there are a multitude of fatal examples of this mindset by owners. Even in operations where there are two professional pilots up front, the owners inability to accept "no" can and has pushed those professional pilots to make an instant career decision whether they fly or not. Fortunately, the averages of similar decisions by owners result in a safe flight, but when they go sideways it usually goes full scale in the opposite direction. My guess, the birthday party they were to attend had a priority and the pilot was accommodating to that priority. What I find most interesting is the aft pax involvement from the beginning of the sequence which makes me curious of the actual relationship between the owner and the pilot.
 
Bell206 said:
I've found in this part of the aviation world it doesn't matter what the owner's experiences are even if they are aviation related. It boils down to whether these owners accept "no" as an answer regardless the person telling him that. Unfortunately, there are a multitude of fatal examples of this mindset by owners. Even in operations where there are two professional pilots up front, the owners inability to accept "no" can and has pushed those professional pilots to make an instant career decision whether they fly or not. Fortunately, the averages of similar decisions by owners result in a safe flight, but when they go sideways it usually goes full scale in the opposite direction. My guess, the birthday party they were to attend had a priority and the pilot was accommodating to that priority. What I find most interesting is the aft pax involvement from the beginning of the sequence which makes me curious of the actual relationship between the owner and the pilot.
Click to expand...
In short, I agree with this.
 
Doc Holliday said:
I'm not sure I buy into this. For a lot of HNW owners they buy into a jet not really knowing all of the ins and outs. And to an unknowing owner a retired ATP has an impressive resume. Insurance says xxx requirement and guy on resume meets the requirement. There's a good chance the owner didn't understand his insurance policy and the requirements of the right seat guy.

Another common problem is maintenance. To the unknowing maintenance schedules, inspections, etc read like greek. If the aircraft isn't due for an inspection for 6 months, "we'll just fix it then" or they get in the airplane on the ramp, something's broke and there is no maintenance to be found. Pilot doesn't want to cancel the trip, owner says no big deal, etc.

Lots of details left unknown to draw definitive conclusions.

Here's an accident in a Falcon 900EXeasy back in 2021. The pilot was flying for a HNW owner. One would assume that a owner would at least do a background check on someone to fly their multi million dollar jet and be responsible for the safety and lives of the passengers (including him).
Click to expand...
Holy hell.

A review of performance data indicated that the flight crew
Click to expand...
attempted to takeoff with the airplane 2,975 lbs over the maximum takeoff weight (MTOW), a
center of gravity (CG) close to the most forward limit, and an incorrect stabilizer trim setting.
The digital flight data recorder (DFDR) data indicated that the captain attempted takeoff at a
rotation speed 23 knots (kts) slower than the calculated rotation speed for the airplane at
maximum weight. Takeoff performance showed the departure runway was 575 ft shorter than
the distance required for takeoff at the airplane’s weight.
Click to expand...
The captain, who was the pilot flying, did not hold any valid pilot certificates at the time of the
accident because they had been revoked 2 years prior due to his falsification of logbook
entries and records. Additionally, he had never held a type rating for the accident airplane and
had started, but not completed, training in the accident airplane model before the accident.
The first officer had accumulated about 16 hours of flight experience in the make and model of
the airplane and was not authorized to operate as pilot-in-command.
Click to expand...
 
MauleSkinner said:
What’s interesting to me is that it appears, based on his other type ratings, that he spent the majority of his career in the 121 environment, where this airplane never would have left the gate.

It seems that the 121 environment protected him and his passengers from himself, but he never developed the decision making skills to do it on his own.
Click to expand...
And where he had a qualified number 2 every flight. Ahem.
 
Doc Holliday said:
I'm not sure I buy into this. For a lot of HNW owners they buy into a jet not really knowing all of the ins and outs. And to an unknowing owner a retired ATP has an impressive resume. Insurance says xxx requirement and guy on resume meets the requirement. There's a good chance the owner didn't understand his insurance policy and the requirements of the right seat guy.

Another common problem is maintenance. To the unknowing maintenance schedules, inspections, etc read like greek. If the aircraft isn't due for an inspection for 6 months, "we'll just fix it then" or they get in the airplane on the ramp, something's broke and there is no maintenance to be found. Pilot doesn't want to cancel the trip, owner says no big deal, etc.

Lots of details left unknown to draw definitive conclusions.

Here's an accident in a Falcon 900EXeasy back in 2021. The pilot was flying for a HNW owner. One would assume that a owner would at least do a background check on someone to fly their multi million dollar jet and be responsible for the safety and lives of the passengers (including him).
Click to expand...
Biffle had 3000+ hours. He knew his way around aircraft.
 
Racerx said:
Biffle had pics up on the IG of himself flying this plane right seat. Did pic at the time have the single pilot waiver?
Click to expand...
Seems to me like he would have fulfilled the SIC requirements of 14 CFR Part 61.55. And given that he was literally the only person with a single halfway decent idea from the time the plane took off until the time it hit the ground killing everyone on board, AND the fact that the kid with 175 hours sitting in the right seat was flying the plane as Biffle had that decent idea, maybe, just maybe it may have helped having a qualified SIC sitting right seat after all.

Maybe!
 
I wonder if Biffle instructed the pilots to land after seeing the incompetence from both of the front seaters ...
 
Ed Haywood said:
If I were in Biffles' place, I would not have the slightest clue what the rules were for a biz jet, and would totally trust my retired Air Force and airline PIC to do the right thing.
Click to expand...
If I were I would and I wouldn’t, and I have round about 10% of Biffle’s flight time. And my understanding of the operation and its requirements would be amplified by orders of magnitude if my family were going to be in the plane.
 
I still don't see that a technically qualified 61.55 would have saved this **** show...

This was a mess from the startup...

And yeah, they probably would have been better off to climb to 10k and figure it out, legal or not...

certainly they would have been better off to dial up a real approach, if anyone could have figured out how...
 
mryan75 said:
Biffle had 3000+ hours. He knew his way around aircraft.
Click to expand...

And how much of that 3000 hours was in a twin jet?

There is a huge difference between having flight time in small GA airplanes and his case helicopters and owning /operating and maintaining a twin engine jet.
 
mryan75 said:
And my understanding of the operation and its requirements would be amplified by orders of magnitude if my family were going to be in the plane.
Click to expand...
One would think that would be a priority especially when one's family is onboard. Yet I can think of 3 fatal accidents where those operational requirements were not followed and in 2 of those the owner himself took out is own family members. Even if you look at this accident its evident as the owner should have been the one in the right seat and not in the back seat if he prioritized the safety of his family.
 
mryan75 said:
Given that an unqualified PPL flying the aircraft in an emergency?
Click to expand...
You also seem to be assuming that a qualified SIC is somehow magically more competent.

Although your terminology that the qualified SIC might be **** in the right seat was pretty apt.
mryan75 said:
And where he had a qualified number 2 every flight.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top