Epic E1000 CFIT Steamboat 13 Feb 26

MauleSkinner said:
@RussR , do they typically flight check facilities after an accident like this?
Click to expand...

Depends on the circumstances.

From JO 8200.1D, under Types of Flight Inspections:
"After accident. This inspection is performed at the request of the accident coordinator/investigator to verify that system performance is satisfactory and continues to support instrument flight procedures."
 
Ed Haywood said:
NTSB Prelim attached
Click to expand...

No surprises from what has been learned and discussed. The IAF was shared by two RNAV approaches that used TILLI, one authorized for use at night, and the other one (RNAV - E) not. Yet the approach he acknowledged (RVAV 31 Z) and intended to use was the one of two not authorized for night use.

The pilot read back the non-standard and non specific clearance information, and added the clarification that he was flying the RNAV Z RWY 32 approach. Unfortunately the controller didn't receive, or pick up on the error. RIP.

From the report (snip): "According to preliminary air traffic control data, the pilot was given vectors to TILLI, which is the initial approach fix for both the RNAV Z RWY 32 approach and the RNAV – E approach to SBS. The controller cleared the pilot for the RNAV approach to SBS. The pilot acknowledged the clearance but replied, “RNAV 32 to Steamboat Springs.” The controller approved a frequency change to the SBS common traffic advisory frequency to which the pilot acknowledged. No further communications were received from the pilot".
 
Also, the preliminary report indicated there were NOTAMs in effect at the time regarding PAPI and REIL, but the NOTAM history indicate they were issued after the accident. I posted this earlier:

These were the NOTAMs from the FAA archive search in effect at KSBS on 2-13-2026. The accident was a little after 0700Z, midnight local time. The PAPI and runway end light NOTAMs were effective about four hours later, at 1111Z and 1112Z, so were not in effect at the time of the accident.

Archived NOTAMs for Archival search on location 'KSBS' and date '2026-02-13'
Filter(s) used: None
Query ran at UTC: 26 Feb 2026 1452 UTC
!SBS 02/004 SBS RWY 32 PAPI U/S 2602131111-2602142300EST
!SBS 02/005 SBS RWY 32 RWY END ID LGT U/S 2602131112-2602142300EST
-----End of PDF Report.-----
Click to expand...
 
John Collins said:
Also, the preliminary report indicated there were NOTAMs in effect at the time regarding PAPI and REIL, but the NOTAM history indicate they were issued after the accident. I posted this earlier:
Click to expand...
Is there a chance that the NOTAMs were re-issued after the mishap but a previous incarnation of them was in effect at the time of the crash? I have had an experience where a runway closure NOTAM did not show up on my G3X Touch panel and the reason turned out to be that it was over 30 days old. Some facilities have figured that out and reissue NOTAMs regularly to avoid their becoming stale and not getting through to pilots.
 
iamtheari said:
Is there a chance that the NOTAMs were re-issued after the mishap but a previous incarnation of them was in effect at the time of the crash? I have had an experience where a runway closure NOTAM did not show up on my G3X Touch panel and the reason turned out to be that it was over 30 days old. Some facilities have figured that out and reissue NOTAMs regularly to avoid their becoming stale and not getting through to pilots.
Click to expand...
That’s what I was trying to clarify earlier - the public NOTAM archive viewer we use doesn’t seem to be very clear on the history and validity and reissuance at specific times, just seems to be whatever was (re?)issued last on the date searched (?). I’m having a hard time coming up with the right way to ask for that clarification.

Basically, if a NOTAM was issued, for example, 20 days prior to the date we search, then a new NOTAM for the same thing was reissued at 05z on that same day, would we still see the original, superseded, 20-day-old NOTAM in the archive on that day?

Anyway, if the NTSB said it was already NOTAMed, I’d be surprised if that was a swing and a miss.
 
Flying Keys said:
Anyway, if the NTSB said it was already NOTAMed, I’d be surprised if that was a swing and a miss.
Click to expand...
I checked for the 12th and there were two active NOTAMs, but not the ones in question. So the accident happened on the 13th, 19 minutes after midnight local time (0719Z). These NOTAMs were not active on the 12th. The search function says it displays all NOTAMs that were active on that date, not NOTAMs that were originated on that date. So I would call it a swing and a miss, strike one.

what is an archive search.jpg
 
Last edited:
John Collins said:
I checked for the 12th and there were two active NOTAMs, but not the ones in question. So the accident happened on the 13th, 19 minutes after midnight local time (0719Z). These NOTAMs were not active on the 12th. The search function says it displays all NOTAMs that were active on that date, not NOTAMs that were originated on that date. So I would call it a swing and a miss, strike one.

View attachment 150655
Click to expand...
That was my initial conclusion as well. I was really surprised when the NTSB said they were active at the time of the accident.
 
specialty helo recovery? oof that looks expensive. Not your typical "call a flatbed" cessna on the side of the state road type of thing.
 
So many seem to want to place a fair bit of blame towards Garmin. I see a HANDFUL of other factors that contributed to a much higher level.
 
sourdough44 said:
So many seem to want to place a fair bit of blame towards Garmin. I see a HANDFUL of other factors that contributed to a much higher level.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Advances in flying very sophisticated light planes coupled to RNAV approaches into smaller airports requires a lot of attention to detail; to overall flight planning, fine print found on an approach plate, and constant situational awareness.

Wonder if this pilot ever shot a RNAV approach into uncontrolled airport at night (with almost non-existent airport lighting), in the mountains? My WAG is this may have been the maiden voyage with his new super capable equipment in the above conditions.
 
sourdough44 said:
So many seem to want to place a fair bit of blame towards Garmin. I see a HANDFUL of other factors that contributed to a much higher level.
Click to expand...
Garmin really bears little, if any, responsibility in this IMO. They programmed their units per the TSO and FAA guidance. They wrote their documentation to match, clearly indicating that VNAV does not provide terrain separation in this instance.
 
I wonder if this is a result of going through all the approaches again with a fine tooth comb?
 
This is the "Hill" that was hit. Flight Path is left to right with SBS out of the picture to the right. The Yampa Valley is bordered by Emerald Mountain where the accident happened and Mt Werner and The Steamboat Ski Area at 10000' opposite Emerald Mountain.
1774106896930.jpeg
 
X3 Skier said:
This is the "Hill" that was hit. Flight Path is left to right with SBS out of the picture to the right. The Yampa Valley is bordered by Emerald Mountain where the accident happened and Mt Werner and The Steamboat Ski Area at 10000' opposite Emerald Mountain.
View attachment 150944
Click to expand...
That’s also a really nice view of the extended centerline where the +V wouldn’t have hit the “hill”.
 
X3 Skier said:
This is the "Hill" that was hit. Flight Path is left to right with SBS out of the picture to the right. The Yampa Valley is bordered by Emerald Mountain where the accident happened and Mt Werner and The Steamboat Ski Area at 10000' opposite Emerald Mountain.
View attachment 150944
Click to expand...
The size of the hill is irrelevant if impacted by a flying machine.

Steamboat is a beautiful airport. Always enjoyed flying there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top