Citation into Homes, San Diego, 5/22/25

TV report said 6 people on board. They speculated the passengers were music executive David Shapiro and his crew.
 
Flying Keys said:
It should be noted we don’t know the RNAV capabilities aboard the aircraft. If this was an LNAV-only approach, then it puts the step down at PALOS into play, which is right about where the terminal dive commenced. It would also explain the level off just prior.
Click to expand...
This isn't relevant to the accident, at least not directly but I always wonder why someone who can afford to own/operate something like a Citation or other bizjet wouldn't have upgraded their avionics to be LPV capable. Is it a matter of just being cheap or is there just THAT much more complexity/expense involved in such an upgrade on these types of aircraft?
 
Bill said:
Geez, depart New Jersey at 11:15pm for a cross country flight, what could go wrong?

Why not grab a hotel and fly home fresh the next morning?
Click to expand...

This for sure. I spent many hundreds of thousands of miles driving a truck, and I don’t care if I woke up at 11pm fresh to go trucking from 2am until the sun came were the longest hours of the day
 
KE5BM said:
Reporting from Fox News now reports the aircraft hit a pole, shearing the wing. Fell into a large military housing area.
Click to expand...
Looking at the track again, he was so low that it's quite possible he went under most if not all of the wires. There's that strange anomaly where it appears to pop up about 100' a few seconds after crossing the wires, but then settles right back down - almost as if he tried to pull up or (really stretching here) caught the tail on a wire, which pitched him up briefly. Could just be a data anomaly as well. Appears to subsequently fly just to the left (south) of the left field light pole at that ball diamond before heading right into the neighborhood - maybe caught the (right?) wing on that?
 
cowman said:
This isn't relevant to the accident, at least not directly but I always wonder why someone who can afford to own/operate something like a Citation or other bizjet wouldn't have upgraded their avionics to be LPV capable. Is it a matter of just being cheap or is there just THAT much more complexity/expense involved in such an upgrade on these types of aircraft?
Click to expand...
As far as turbine aircraft go, a 1985 CE-550 is dirt cheap to acquire (cheaper than some piston planes).

But avionics for airplanes flying in Class A airspace can get pricey.
 
Flying Keys said:
Looking at the track again, he was so low that it's quite possible he went under most if not all of the wires. There's that strange anomaly where it appears to pop up about 100' a few seconds after crossing the wires, but then settles right back down - almost as if he tried to pull up or (really stretching here) caught the tail on a wire, which pitched him up briefly. Could just be a data anomaly as well. Appears to subsequently fly just to the left (south) of the left field light pole at that ball diamond before heading right into the neighborhood - maybe caught the (right?) wing on that?
Click to expand...
You are trying to read WAAAAY too much fidelity into internet reported data.
 
Flying Keys said:
It should be noted we don’t know the RNAV capabilities aboard the aircraft. If this was an LNAV-only approach, then it puts the step down at PALOS into play, which is right about where the terminal dive commenced. It would also explain the level off just prior.
Click to expand...

Considering the coastal airports all had low IFR conditions, and assuming the ILS was operational, why would the pilot ask for an RNAV approach?

Not knowing all the details, and not wanting to second guess the chain of events that lead up to this fatal accident, it seems to me that the pilot may have been a little late in the flight to be shopping around for a place to land.

Apparently the fog layer was well established along the coast all night, and wouldn't be expected to burn off under after the sun and ground temps began to rise. At least around here in the damp east, ground fog thickens up before and during sunrise. Higher ceilings with improved visibility isn't going to happen until sometime later in the morning, well after daybreak.
 
Bill said:
Geez, depart New Jersey at 11:15pm for a cross country flight, what could go wrong?

Why not grab a hotel and fly home fresh the next morning?
Click to expand...

I did a good amount of flying with the owner of a CJ2+, and while he was an intelligent, competent pilot, he definitely scoffed at the idea of something like IMSAFE. Some of that might have been a function of knowing I was sitting next to him (and well rested), but as he loved to tell me, "If I let a little fatigue affect my performance, I wouldn't own fifty stores."

Obviously I know nothing about the accident pilot, but I'm guessing those sorts of attitudes aren't exactly uncommon amongst people with the means to own and operate their own jet. I even saw this behavior from my wife, who constantly pushed back on the idea of getting an Uber home after spending 30 straight hours at the hospital. "It's fine - I'll pound a coffee. I've gotten good at powering through." :confused:
 
I have worked a lot of 24 to 30 hour "days", and well know the small hours are the worst for maintaining safe cognitive activity.

Getting out of the substation and running a few blocks helped, the same was done when driving.

That can NOT be done in an airplane.

That Citation should have had a rested professional pilot and let him make the critical decisions.

edited to add....May have had 6 people on board, not all bodies found. Really bad decision to make that flight overnight, no rest.
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
You are trying to read WAAAAY too much fidelity into internet reported data.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, and I allowed for that in my statement. However, there are already several correlations that confirm that thr positional datapoints are already pretty accurate - for a big one, it points like an arrow to the first point of impact *after* the powerlines/light poles. But yes, the outlier at the end is pretty strange for data that’s otherwise lacking them. I haven’t seen any reports as to where any pre-ground contact points are, specifically.
 
SLB said:
Speculation about the altimeter setting.
Click to expand...
Could be. That assumes a non-precision approach (LNAV only), for which the published MDA is still around 300’ above those wires. You’d have to have the altimeter set to 30.22 or higher to produce an error that large on that night.

The correct level off at the FAF and the almost constant, steep rate and angle of descent in the mile or two prior to impact doesn’t really stand out as an incorrect altimeter setting, but still, could be.
 
Could the ILS equipment on board have been unreliable, thus selection of the less precise approach?

A reversal to the east, off the coast to clear air, land and rent a van would have been a low class option, but...

edited to add: Flying to the Gulf coast, that is a common problem. About 50 years ago we were enroute to Panama
city, the controller advised ground fog had arrived there, we reversed to a small airport, and landed. The fog arrived there 15 minutes later. The cab was junky, motel mediocre, but the fog burned off by the time we finished breakfast. Arrived at Panama City by 10 AM.

All 4 on board are now alive. Choices we make have lasting effects. We rarely remember that motel.
 
Last edited:
RyanB said:
Why not? Tell me what difference the ILS would make over the RNAV (LPV).
Click to expand...

Landing at MYF, no difference... assuming the RNAV approach being flown was an LPV.

However, in a quick search (with ATC assistance) for an alternative destination airport while descending into MYF, this pilot likely didn't have the time to check his plates for available approaches and their corresponding category B/C minimums.

As a rule of thumb LPV approaches (including my home field) have at least 50' higher minimums on all the non-ILS runways. I don't know if ILS runways (with lead-in lighting) that share a LPV approach always have minimums as low as the ILS. If they do, please confirm and I'll commit that fact to memory when considering a change in destination.
 
geezer said:
Could the ILS equipment on board have been unreliable, thus selection of the less precise approach?

A reversal to the east, off the coast to clear air, land and rent a van would have been a low class option, but...
Click to expand...
Ramona was VFR and isn’t much farther than Brown, which he had asked for. I understand that ATC and airborne aircraft are looking at different, more “official” sources, but as I posted in my first post, there is a big picture resource available to folks on the ground and anybody in the air that has internet access, in the form of AWC. Sure, it might lag a bit for real-time needs, and again, access while airborne can be a big problem, but a quick, slightly zoomed-out glance could graphically reveal the bigger geographic picture of weather-affected areas rather than trying to remember every suitable airport in the area and asking for weather on an individual basis, while you’re also navigating into the terminal environment.

From there you can drill in and get the latest official report - “looks like the fog is mostly near the coast, but Ramona looks clear - can you give me the latest there?” There seems to be a disconnect with the big picture, and of course a lot of that can be mitigated well earlier into (or even prior to) the flight, before workload goes up.

The point is, the graphic, geographic presentation is a huge benefit, versus simply listening to numbers and orienting to what’s not necessarily being presented in front of you.

Edit to add: yes, EFBs like ForeFlight can aid in this, but even FF doesn’t show as much graphical weather data from reporting stations in a single glance (you have to activate various layers individually to get the full picture).
 
Last edited:
AV8R_87 said:
For SP ops, a lot less buttonology, less stuff to f up, and probably lower minimums?
Click to expand...
Completely dependent on the avionics package. I've flown aircraft that require exactly zero button-ology difference between the two. And my current ride requires more programming and management for an ILS (still only a slight difference). Neither presents any issues - it just comes down to familiarity with your system.
 
I posted this earlier, but being lower in elevation, SAN was above mins but the pilot never asked for SAN weather.
 
One possibility is that he misconfigured the A/P and it didn't capture the GS. Now he's fast and having to hand fly the approach. Easy to get distracted when you are single pilot.
 
Something that just occurred to me.....with the AWOS being down, tower closed and therefore no local altimeter setting (approach plate does not specify an alternate altimeter setting), can you legally fly the approach using the Miramar altimeter?

I don't think you can.
 
Tinstafl said:
Completely dependent on the avionics package. I've flown aircraft that require exactly zero button-ology difference between the two. And my current ride requires more programming and management for an ILS (still only a slight difference). Neither presents any issues - it just comes down to familiarity with your system.
Click to expand...

Button pushing errors and correcting them are the first sign I need to get up for some proficiency practice with the electronics. But I always include some hand-flying as the main backup to screwing up with the buttons which usually happen at the wrong time (i.e., in IMC around the IAF). Hand-flying skills seem to last much longer and (IMO) are easier than the distraction of screwing around with the GPS / Autopilot buttons while trying to correct a programing mistake at a busy time.
 
Rick A said:
Button pushing errors and correcting them are the first sign I need to get up for some proficiency practice with the electronics. But I always include some hand-flying as the main backup to screwing up with the buttons which usually happen at the wrong time (i.e., in IMC around the IAF). Hand-flying skills seem to last much longer and (IMO) are easier than the distraction of screwing around with the GPS / Autopilot buttons while trying to correct a programing mistake at a busy time.
Click to expand...
Agreed, my point is just that there is not necessarily any decrease or increase in workload between RNAV vs ILS.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I posted this earlier, but being lower in elevation, SAN was above mins but the pilot never asked for SAN weather.
Click to expand...

KSAN should have been considered. More than being above reported minimums, having an operating control towner, but also for arranging ground transportation for six people at around 4:00am
 
RyanB said:
Why not? Tell me what difference the ILS would make over the RNAV (LPV).
Click to expand...
The only thing I can think of that might have made a difference is if that airplane was non-WAAS. Max Trescott goes over the accident on his Aviation NewsTalk podcast and pulled the descent profile from one of the ADS-B sites. There are significant excursions from the glidepath that could mean a number of things. One is non-WAAS which then begs the question, why not use the ILS? The other is not flying it very well after a long day and night.
 
midlifeflyer said:
The only thing I can think of that might have made a difference is if that airplane was non-WAAS. Max Trescott goes over the accident on his Aviation NewsTalk podcast and pulled the descent profile from one of the ADS-B sites. There are significant excursions from the glidepath that could mean a number of things. One is non-WAAS which then begs the question, why not use the ILS? The other is not flying it very well after a long day and night.
Click to expand...
I’ve been wondering exactly that since the beginning. The profile really looked like a non-precision approach with no vertical guidance, with dive and drive level-offs right about where you’d expect them, save for the end. Also brings back into question the altimeter setting (even though that’d have to be a pretty egregious error to produce those results).

Pics did seem to indicate he had a GTN750 and a GTN650.
 
Flying Keys said:
Ramona was VFR and isn’t much farther than Brown, which he had asked for.
Click to expand...
I don't know why I didn't think about that myself. I ended up at Ramona a couple years ago as an alternate due to the same kind of marine layer.

Wasn't a great experience. The people were unhelpful, borderline rude.

Their recommended driver never answered calls.

The tie downs were unusable because the rings were embedded in the asphalt. Then I got scolded for using a screwdriver to clear the rings sufficiently to get a rope through.

I called an uber to take me into town and, holy cow did I smell! I had been camping for three weeks and fairly modest opportunity to clean up. I had become totally nose blind. Got to the hotel, showered, went to dinner, came back to my room and had to put those clothes in a plastic bag. Still feel badly for that driver!

Then I went to Mexico for 2-3 months, walking across the border and leaving the plane in Ramona. When I got back I had a flat tire. I was parked right in front of the FBO and they knew my plan. No idea why they didn't bother to, you know, give me a call.

Lastly, I had hundreds of dollars worth of drone batteries ruined by being expose to the heat.

But, you know what didn't happen. I didn't end up CFIT trying to make an unwise approach. I guess I would make the same choice again.
 
rwellner98 said:
I don't know why I didn't think about that myself. I ended up at Ramona a couple years ago as an alternate due to the same kind of marine layer.

Wasn't a great experience. The people were unhelpful, borderline rude.

Their recommended driver never answered calls.

The tie downs were unusable because the rings were embedded in the asphalt. Then I got scolded for using a screwdriver to clear the rings sufficiently to get a rope through.

I called an uber to take me into town and, holy cow did I smell! I had been camping for three weeks and fairly modest opportunity to clean up. I had become totally nose blind. Got to the hotel, showered, went to dinner, came back to my room and had to put those clothes in a plastic bag. Still feel badly for that driver!

Then I went to Mexico for 2-3 months, walking across the border and leaving the plane in Ramona. When I got back I had a flat tire. I was parked right in front of the FBO and they knew my plan. No idea why they didn't bother to, you know, give me a call.

Lastly, I had hundreds of dollars worth of drone batteries ruined by being expose to the heat.

But, you know what didn't happen. I didn't end up CFIT trying to make an unwise approach. I guess I would make the same choice again.
Click to expand...
And to be fair RNM isn’t always out of the muck (it wasn’t this morning), and SAN was also a viable choice that night.

But going back to what I said earlier, there’s a quick way to get the big picture:

IMG_5613.jpeg

Again, understandably there are challenges with connectivity, display standardization, and a little bit of lag, but nothing that can’t be overcome with modern technology, given we already do similar things. Show me something like this and I can quickly see two viable alternatives, weather-wise, in seconds, with a much smaller need for follow-up verification. The instantaneous situational awareness is a lot better than what we currently have in many cases for GA.
 
midlifeflyer said:
That's another piece of the puzzle. Apparently, the AWOS at MYF was out of service.
Click to expand...

I went back and listened to all of his prior handoffs from LA Center and I never heard altimeter mentioned to 6DS specifically.

However, altimeters all over the area were right around 29.92. Departure altimeter in Wichita was 30.05, even TEB was around 29.9-something. None of that would explain an altimeter setting of 30.22 or higher that would cause such a gross error. Nothing near his flightpath, outside of a few locations around a surface high over the Four Corners region, were reporting anything over 30.09, and he’d have been standard in the flight levels at that point, anyway.

But that he made other assigned altitudes and minimum segment altitudes prior isn’t really adding up to an altimeter setting issue. There are so many possibilities on this one.
 
Flying Keys said:
I went back and listened to all of his prior handoffs from LA Center and I never heard altimeter mentioned to 6DS specifically.

However, altimeters all over the area were right around 29.92. Departure altimeter in Wichita was 30.05, even TEB was around 29.9-something. None of that would explain an altimeter setting of 30.22 or higher that would cause such a gross error. Nothing near his flightpath, outside of a few locations around a surface high over the Four Corners region, were reporting anything over 30.09, and he’d have been standard in the flight levels at that point, anyway.

But that he made other assigned altitudes and minimum segment altitudes prior isn’t really adding up to an altimeter setting issue. There are so many possibilities on this one.
Click to expand...
“When the altimeter setting(s) on which the approach is based is not available, the approach is not authorized” AIM 5-4-5.a.4
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top