NTSB#ERA12LA145 - PIPER PA-24-180 N7648P 1/15/12 (2-Fatalities)

Jaybird180

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
9,034
Location
Near DC
Display Name

Display name:
Jaybird180
I read an interesting NTSB report and I have a few observations, questions and opinions that I would like to use as a starting point for discussion.

The report is listed here:
Factual
Probable Cause

Observation:
The report is very extensive, more than usual

Question:
  1. I wonder what the cloud tops looked like
  2. Anyone know what typical weather is in that part of the country, that time of day/year?
  3. Why does it appear the NTSB went above and beyond with this investigation? Was the pilot a celebrity or otherwise wealthy person? Was there a lawsuit involved?
Opinion:
  • I do not believe there ever was smoke in the cockpit....maybe smoke and mirrors
  • I am of the opinion the breaker was not of the correct type in spite of the 337 in the logs
  • The CFII was negligent in allowing a pilot with known aircraft control deviations to: 1) fly in IMC 2) loose control of the aircraft
 
The CfII was a very competent pilot.Thats all I have to say.May they rest in peace.
 
Thanks,he was a personal friend,that I had flown with on many occasions.
 
Thanks,he was a personal friend,that I had flown with on many occasions.

What comments do you have regarding the report and/or my post?
What can you tell us that is not in the report to give us a better view?
Sorry for the loss of your friend.

I truly am interested in the lessons learned.
 
So far, 288 views of this thread and all comments are only of condolences.

Not that I'm advocating ripping into the deceased just for the sake of Monday morning quarterbacking, however there are several big items and clues that perhaps something could have been done to change the outcome. Does anyone want to discuss that?

I came upon this NTSB report reading an article which I found as a result of a Google search around the PP-PTS standard of 'safe outcome of the flight is never in doubt' (my version).
 
Troubling things in the NTSB report.

1. Pilot reports 'smoke' in the cockpit but no soot or evidence of fire in found in the wreckage. Master wire harness is intact as well as avionics.

2. Pilots toxicology report shows depressants in his blood (valium I think)

3. CFI is not heard on the radio even though ATC is querying them about altitude deviations.

4. Plane is flying IMC with a surface temp of -11 and snow. They did take off VMC though. Why would they be in icing conditions in that plane?


So, iced up plane, fake fire, and pilot on drugs. I guess I'm leaning towards murder / suicide? Weird, regardless.
 
See FAR 91.3

So this guy found himself in trouble in icy soup and so the first thing he does is transmit a made up story to cover his a$$ under FAR 91.3? Get outtttta here. And muder-suicide? Based on? Did you guys run out of flight 370 conspiracies to talk about? :confused:
 
So this guy found himself in trouble in icy soup and so the first thing he does is transmit a made up story to cover his a$$ under FAR 91.3? Get outtttta here. And muder-suicide? Based on? Did you guys run out of flight 370 conspiracies to talk about? :confused:

Okay, here's another...

CFI can't fly IMC and doesn't know what icing conditions are. Investigators don't know what burned up airplane looks like. Valium is in discarded syringe that happens to be floating at crash site and pokes pilot.



BRAKE



I forgot another small issue in previous post; according to the report the flight plan was filed a full day prior to taking off. No mention of updated weather briefing.
 
My cheap .02 pesos? With all due respect to friends of the deceased as I don't know the people involved and would have no reason to bash them, I think the proposition of acting as a safety pilot from the right seat of these craptastic left-seat oriented six pack airplanes in the soup, proved fatal. Comanche 180? I can only imagine the hodgepodge instrumentation they had to deal with. I bet a steak dinner the right seater didn't have field-of-view-aligned flight attitude instruments.

I don't remember the last time I did instrument instruction in actual behind a parallax-laden cross-cockpit mess of an instrument setup. At work, I'm sitting in tandem with my student and thus have access to my own personal ADHRS-based EFIS. I like it that way.

I reckon most recreational CFIs would auger it in if you threw one distraction in actual while trying to get such an aircraft down safely while partial panel, after a student almost invariably aggravates your day with the typical student-created unusual attitude you let them develop (after all, they can't learn if you don't let them put you in danger right? /sarcasm). The fact the CFI was quiet as could be tells me he was chin deep behind the instrument cross-check, trying for all his life to get his bearings while looking cross cockpit. Horrible horrible position to be in. I don't put myself in that position anymore. You either give me dead-center flight attitude instrumentation to my field of view, with a second AI, or I don't go up with a student in actual. I no longer have anything to prove and frankly, the job doesn't pay enough in the civilian side for such troubles.

Perhaps a bit conservative, but hey at least I'm not in the ranks of the dead due to spatial-D precipitated loss of control. To each their own.

I do not think there was a conspiracy to throw off ATC by purposely feigning a smoke in cockpit call because someone was trying to save face. The two unfortunate souls were fatally behind the airplane in this particular flight. IMC is no child's play folks. Automation continues to lull people into dismissing IMC. IMC doesn't care about experience level either. It will kill you the one time you're not on your A game and your automation betrays you or systems failure suck your situational awareness. Tying one hand on top of that (sitting cross cockpit to primary instrumentation) is just fuel to the fire.
 
Loose generator belt? Battery discharges (negative amps), low voltage (wife's statement), leads to gear problems (on a prior flight) and pitot-static problems due to icing (NTSB report observed the alternate static switch was "On"), and also due to battery depletion (problem encountered after shooting a couple of approaches)--a loss of electrical backup instrumentation (T&B at odds with AI?).

Smoke in the cockpit? Radical attitude changes dislodging some trapped solvent left over from the annual inspection onto the cockpit heater? Who knows? :confused:

dtuuri
 
Last edited:
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top