SR22 Down in St. Louis - KSUS / 2 Dead

HighFlyingA380

HighFlyingA380

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,035
Location
St. Louis
Display Name
Display name:
Jim F.
Last edited:
HighFlyingA380 said:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_59295401-3ff3-5709-bb31-34f2335a8c36.html

He was a really nice guy; Never met the daughter. Still pondering why, as a 2-month old instrument pilot with no actual IMC experience, he thought he should takeoff in 200-1/4 with heavy fog...

(To be fair, It's not proven yet to not have been a mechanical problem, yet very doubtful.)
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to beat up on this pilot, but he departed below minimums with 200-1/4.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1308/NC3TO.PDF

Reading the pages of another, "why is GA unsafe?" thread going on right now with all kinds of theories and no consensus. Well, these kinds of situations are exactly why GA is unsafe, a commercial operator wouldn't have departed. This is the place GA should start to increase safety.

Very sad, RIP.
 
Alexb2000 said:
I'm not trying to beat up on this pilot, but he departed below minimums with 200-1/4.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1308/NC3TO.PDF

Reading the pages of another, "why is GA unsafe?" thread going on right now with all kinds of theories and no consensus. Well, these kinds of situations are exactly why GA is unsafe, a commercial operator wouldn't have departed. This is the place GA should start to increase safety.

Very sad, RIP.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong as I'm out of IFR practice, but the mins for his part 91 flight should be 0/0, as he departed 26R. (Not saying it's smart, just legal.)

And yeah, that was my exact thought as I just read that "GA Unsafe" thread.
 
HighFlyingA380 said:
I could be wrong as I'm out of IFR practice, but the mins for his part 91 flight should be 0/0, as he departed 26R. (Not saying it's smart, just legal.)

And yeah, that was my exact thought as I just read that "GA Unsafe" thread.
Click to expand...

You are correct, part 91 doesn't require anything to depart. Although doing so as a fresh IFR pilot with no IMC experience and/or no plan B is just a failure on many levels. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
 
HighFlyingA380 said:
I could be wrong as I'm out of IFR practice, but the mins for his part 91 flight should be 0/0, as he departed 26R. (Not saying it's smart, just legal.)

And yeah, that was my exact thought as I just read that "GA Unsafe" thread.
Click to expand...

I didn't know what runway he took off from, so I'll retract my earlier comment, you're right no minimums for 26R. Lots of runways there and it's interesting that 26L is 300/2 and nothing for 26R, most be some obstructions on that side.

Edit: I guess I was wrong on two accounts I just looked up 91:175. I guess part 91 can do anything they want. OK, well I won't be doing that.

Anyway, another sad avoidable loss.
 
Last edited:
No mention of pulling the chute so it may be CFIT. As for launching into the slag so soon after earning his IR, I am going to heretically suggest the he was probably better prepared to deal with it than many of us are several years after earning our own. I never felt better "tuned up" than I did right after my instrument check ride. During our training we are doing it day after day for weeks or months on end. I am not ashamed to admit that my proficiency decays quite rapidly and that is why I try to get in some hood time, or even better, actual when it's possible, every month.
 
DrMack said:
No mention of pulling the chute so it may be CFIT. As for launching into the slag so soon after earning his IR, I am going to heretically suggest the he was probably better prepared to deal with it than many of us are several years after earning our own. I never felt better "tuned up" than I did right after my instrument check ride. During our training we are doing it day after day for weeks or months on end. I am not ashamed to admit that my proficiency decays quite rapidly and that is why I try to get in some hood time, or even better, actual when it's possible, every month.
Click to expand...

Just for conversation, you would be OK with a newly minted instrument pilot with no time in actual launching into 200-1/4?
 
DrMack said:
No mention of pulling the chute so it may be CFIT. As for launching into the slag so soon after earning his IR, I am going to heretically suggest the he was probably better prepared to deal with it than many of us are several years after earning our own. I never felt better "tuned up" than I did right after my instrument check ride. During our training we are doing it day after day for weeks or months on end. I am not ashamed to admit that my proficiency decays quite rapidly and that is why I try to get in some hood time, or even better, actual when it's possible, every month.
Click to expand...

This.

I'd wait for the report before drawing a conclusion.
 
dell30rb said:
According to the article, he was described as a 'daredevil'
Click to expand...

Some folks think anyone who pilots a plane or parachutes out of one is a "daredevil". You can't ever be too safe.:rolleyes:
 
DrMack said:
No mention of pulling the chute so it may be CFIT. As for launching into the slag so soon after earning his IR, I am going to heretically suggest the he was probably better prepared to deal with it than many of us are several years after earning our own. I never felt better "tuned up" than I did right after my instrument check ride. During our training we are doing it day after day for weeks or months on end. I am not ashamed to admit that my proficiency decays quite rapidly and that is why I try to get in some hood time, or even better, actual when it's possible, every month.
Click to expand...
While I do agree that right after a checkride is indeed probably the most confident time, what I'm focusing on is the no actual IMC time. I don't care if you have 100 hrs. under the hood, it's no substitute for actual. Those minor peeks you get of the horizon out of the glasses does wonders to help keep you properly oriented. There's just no substitute for actual IMC practice.
 
HighFlyingA380 said:
While I do agree that right after a checkride is indeed probably the most confident time, what I'm focusing on is the no actual IMC time. I don't care if you have 100 hrs. under the hood, it's no substitute for actual. Those minor peeks you get of the horizon out of the glasses does wonders to help keep you properly oriented. There's just no substitute for actual IMC practice.
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree that it's "different", there could be any number of issues here outside of that. I'm sure you wouldn't make the statement that he had no actual time if you didn't know. This could still be pilot error (anything from mis-set instrument to distraction from door not set properly), which may or may not be related to actual IMC time.

Curious: do you know what the tops were? My experience is that ground fog tends to have pretty low tops & he could have been through it fairly quickly.
 
DrMack said:
No mention of pulling the chute so it may be CFIT. As for launching into the slag so soon after earning his IR, I am going to heretically suggest the he was probably better prepared to deal with it than many of us are several years after earning our own. I never felt better "tuned up" than I did right after my instrument check ride. During our training we are doing it day after day for weeks or months on end. I am not ashamed to admit that my proficiency decays quite rapidly and that is why I try to get in some hood time, or even better, actual when it's possible, every month.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this. The troubling part though, is he had no experience in actual. I did most of my IR training in actual, including at least two takeoffs in 0/0 conditions. And I've taken off in 0/0 a couple times on my own within a year of getting my IR. Taking off in a 200 foot ceiling is quite commonplace out here, as are landing at minimums.

I wouldn't do that today though. My skills just aren't sharp enough as I haven't been flying IFR much lately.
 
wsuffa said:
While I don't disagree that it's "different", there could be any number of issues here outside of that. I'm sure you wouldn't make the statement that he had no actual time if you didn't know. This could still be pilot error (anything from mis-set instrument to distraction from door not set properly), which may or may not be related to actual IMC time.

Curious: do you know what the tops were? My experience is that ground fog tends to have pretty low tops & he could have been through it fairly quickly.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know his CSIP very well, and he said there was no actual IMC logged.

Not sure of the tops, but I got to the airport to fly a few hours after the crash, and there was a pretty good ceiling around 2K-ish, so that might have been there over the fog.
 
It's good to know that the readers of that newspaper are just as quick to fix blame as our aviation forums.:mad2:
Sad situation, it's always bad to lose a fellow aviator, and worse when children perish as well.:(
I took off once in low foggy conditions, below ILS minimums, maybe 100 ft, 600 RVR, it was hard to taxi to the runway. I did it once, that was enough for me in a Conquest II, clear skies at 1000 AGL, but I'll never do it again! :hairraise:
Rotate, positive rate, gear....in soup....up, no time to transition to instruments. From rotation to white out conditions, maybe 5-7 seconds! :yikes:
 
DrMack said:
I never felt better "tuned up" than I did right after my instrument check ride. During our training we are doing it day after day for weeks or months on end. I am not ashamed to admit that my proficiency decays quite rapidly and that is why I try to get in some hood time, or even better, actual when it's possible, every month.
Click to expand...
There's some truth in that but I found (and still find) departures into low ceilings one of the most challenging aspects of IMC flight, especially if it's the first flight operation performed in the last week or month by a non-pro pilot like myself. While an approach is generally preceded by all the sensations and distractions of flight, an IMC departure can take you from standing around in the hangar one minute to being suspended in a sensory deprivation chamber juggling a couple of balls a few minutes later.

Said another way, taking off into a 200' ceiling is easy after landing in the same conditions. Making the first takeoff after 2 weeks of downtime into a 200' ceiling sets off my personal minimums alarm.

I remember taking off on a second leg into some low ceilings over KRIC. Even though I had just landed in the same conditions and was totally in the game, there was a moment of panic during rotation when I caught a whiff of something burning. What was it? The same bad smelling duct tape adhesive that I smelled on the previous 3-4 legs. Some fresh duct or friction tape had been added to some heating system SCAT just before the trip. I could smell it on every takeoff then it would go away. But it didn't generate any adrenaline until the low ceiling departure.... distractions.

Tragic accident here.
 
HighFlyingA380 said:
While I do agree that right after a checkride is indeed probably the most confident time, what I'm focusing on is the no actual IMC time. I don't care if you have 100 hrs. under the hood, it's no substitute for actual. Those minor peeks you get of the horizon out of the glasses does wonders to help keep you properly oriented. There's just no substitute for actual IMC practice.
Click to expand...

I agree with Dr Mack about being at a high level of proficiency after your IR check ride, but the lack of actual IMC experience really matters. My CFII was a 10,000 hour former AA MD-80 captain, and he made sure I got some actual, including night and day IMC, including approaches at night below minimums, experiencing what precision and non-precision missed approaches feel like. I had about 10 hours of actual IMC in my logbook before my check ride, and those are the most valuable hours in my logbook.

I certainly would have grabbed a CFII to launch into hard IMC before doing so with my 7-year old daughter.

RIP. :sad:
 
One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that it was 4:50am local time when he departed. The sun probably rose yesterday shortly after 6am in st. Louis so it was still dead dark. Thus, if it was a shallow layer, even after he popped through, he had little or no reference...especially considering it's almost new moon too.

Regarding low ceiling departures. I would regularly do it when I was flying all the time (200+ hours a year) and proficient. I wouldn't do it today (75 to 100 hours a year and no actual IMC for two years).

But, even when I was regularly flying I wouldn't have done it at night.
 
Last edited:
Alexb2000 said:
Just for conversation, you would be OK with a newly minted instrument pilot with no time in actual launching into 200-1/4?
Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't do it myself even though I have flown down to absolute minima in actual. My personal minima are in the MVFR range for planning purposes but occasionally the wx takes a turn for the worse enroute and I have ended up at the legal limits upon arrival.
 
timwinters said:
One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is that it was 4:50am local time when he departed. The sun probably rose yesterday shortly after 6am in st. Louis so it was still dead dark. Thus, if it was a shallow layer, even after he popped through, he had little or no reference...especially considering it's almost new moon too.

Regarding low ceiling departures. I would regularly do it when I was flying all the time (200+ hours a year) and proficient. I wouldn't do it today (75 to 100 hours a year and no actual IMC for two years).

But, even when I was regularly flying I wouldn't have done it at night.
Click to expand...
Even a high cloud deck with good visibility underneath can be very challenging on a night takeoff (or go-around) if there's little or no lighting on the ground ahead. You're on instruments with no reliable ground reference the instant you raise the nose.
 
For me the issue of taking off into very low overcast isn't so much controlling the aircraft as it is having zero options if the engine pops.
 
I was thinking about this accident a few minutes ago...Isn't there some form of trick your mind plays on you going into the slag right off of the ground...I thought I remember it would cause a pilot who was not aware of it to push the nose over...
 
So Sad, doesn't matter how it happened, prayers are with their family and friends. This is horrible really destroyed a family!
 
I can't comment on what may or may not have happened but as a student IFR pilot I was surprised on how many schools would not let their students into IMC. Since I own my own plane I was able to hire a very experienced CFII for my training as I want as much actual as I can get before launching on my own. I am not saying that many school CFII's are not experienced, I just don't want them to have their hands tied when I want to train for the real thing as much as possible.
 
Luvrv8 said:
I can't comment on what may or may not have happened but as a student IFR pilot I was surprised on how many schools would not let their students into IMC. Since I own my own plane I was able to hire a very experienced CFII for my training as I want as much actual as I can get before launching on my own. I am not saying that many school CFII's are not experienced, I just don't want them to have their hands tied when I want to train for the real thing as much as possible.
Click to expand...
I'm with you there. My university where I did my Inst. hated clouds. I got .3 actual and me and my CFII hot yelled at for the "stupidity." :mad2: I'm currently working with some very experienced CFIIs at the school where I work to just get caught up to where I should be.
 
bbchien said:
For operations beyond the competency off the Cirrus Pilot, --->pull the chute.

Whoops. that only works if you get to 1500 feet....
Click to expand...
Yeah, the BRS wouldn't had a chance. I talked to the CSIP again today, and he got a good close-up look today while flying with students. Said there was just a small hone in the tree canopy, so he went straight down in. (The tops would've been sheared off around if he lost power and glided in.) Almost certainly a stall/spin from about 800'.
 
I, too, had not a lot of actual during my IR training. In fact I had about as much actual during my primary training as I got with my first CFII. The reason is that he wouldn't launch if he wasn't 100% sure he could get back in at home base, couldn't be troubled to wait for a ride. The first actual in my own plane was with my finish-up CFII, about a month before my checkride, and it was the only actual I had in my own plane before my checkride.

I have to agree with DrMack based on my own experience. Despite having not a lot of actual, I felt proficient and well trained and that flight with my last CFII gave me enough confidence that I launched solo into decently "hard" IFR conditions a week after my checkride. Launching into fog at night though is something I wouldn't do unless I was being chased by savages. I don't care how proficient I am, the issue isn't so much controlling the plane as lack of options if something goes wrong after you rotate.

R.I.P. to the deceased... very sad. :(
 
HighFlyingA380 said:
Yeah, the BRS wouldn't had a chance. I talked to the CSIP again today, and he got a good close-up look today while flying with students. Said there was just a small hone in the tree canopy, so he went straight down in. (The tops would've been sheared off around if he lost power and glided in.) Almost certainly a stall/spin from about 800'.
Click to expand...
That seems strange to me....I would have expected a freshly minted Instrument pilot doing a zero/zero takeoff without previous time in actual to have fallen victim to the classic trap of shallowing out and failing to climb (going into the trees at ~200') rather than stall/spin.
 
Kelvin said:
I was thinking about this accident a few minutes ago...Isn't there some form of trick your mind plays on you going into the slag right off of the ground...I thought I remember it would cause a pilot who was not aware of it to push the nose over...
Click to expand...
There's a somatographic illusion that makes it feel like you're pitching up when accelerating. If you respond to that by pushing the nose down you'll end up in the weeds but I don't think that's what happened given that the impact zone is small. If this was an issue on this accident I'd expect to see the effects of a shallow descent at high speed.
 
I guess I am mostly chicken. Personally I would never take off in at a field that was below minimums, I want the ability to return to the field should I need to. As for I true IMC during training, I think I had about 5 hrs or true IMC when I took my checkride, but only one real approach to minumums in IMC, and ended up going missed because it turned out to be below minimums, every other approach that was in IMC was typically broken to about 500 ft above minimums. In any case, probably >98% of my true IMC time has been spent enroute and not on approach, and for me the true challenge is IMC on approach. In addition to the inability to completely remove outside clues, the other thing that the hood fails to reproduce is the chop that often occurs in IMC.
 
Surely a tragic event, and one can debate the wisdom of launching into that weather, but all that aside, the basics of a low vis take off are pretty straight forward: Rotate, trim to the desired climb speed, and let the plane fly. We didn't get a lot of actual in basic at Pensacola, (made up for that later :yesnod:), but flying on instruments is ALL about proper trim and following procedures. While I have no numbers to back up my suspicion, I think most folks getting into trouble in similar circumstances forget that the plane will do exactly what you tell it to.
 
So sad hearing about a little girl and her daddy. Hits me for sure. I wish the family the best and may the pilot and his daughter RIP. I hope there is a good lesson to be learned in the near future from this that can save lives of others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top