Vectors into a mountain

denverpilot

denverpilot

Tied Down
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
55,469
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
DenverPilot
The title isn't completely fair, but it got your attention, didn't it?

Cessna 182 gets a vector toward his destination and also toward terrain, and a simultaneous frequency change. He never checks in with the next controller and never flips back to the previous to see if he's on the right frequency, and proceeds to fly into a mountain.

Just sharing. I'm sure some here have seen this, others not.

If a frequency change doesn't work out, always go back. And always know where the terrain is...


The controllers trying to reach him is heartbreaking.
 
There was a similar accident, I believe in the San Diego area, decades ago, with a female CFI who got vectored into a mountain by ATC. Apparently her (manual) squelch was mis-set (IIRC). After that I think ATC started alerting pilots when a vector would lead them into terrain, but I am not sure that's really done today.
This particular modern accident is a clear reason for everyone to (at the very least) keep a low-cost tablet with terrain alert on board. No rational reason not to, and would have prevented this tragic result. In my own case I have both the tablet and the panel independently warning me of terrain.
 
Could have been medical for all we know. No way I'd go that long without ATC contact and not climb.
 
I don't get it - the controller giving him the altimeter setting starting at the 1:34 mark would seem to imply he did call on the correct frequency at least once. Based on that, I'd have to believe he did in fact check in with the correct controller and something else happened.

I saw the audio was credited to liveatc.net - they don't always pick up everything.
 
MAKG1 said:
Did no one try 121.5?
Click to expand...

Most GA planes don't monitor 121.5, even at the airline I was at for years we didn't, monitored Company frequency on #2. Years later, maybe after 9/11 not sure, we monitored 121.5.
 
denverpilot said:
When you know the airplane it hits a little too close to home, doesn't it? Obviously worse if you know the pilot...
Click to expand...


Yes indeed. Thankfully I didn't know the pilot. Been around GA for 22 years, and only know one person who's gone west in an accident.
 
RotorDude said:
There was a similar accident, I believe in the San Diego area, decades ago, with a female CFI who got vectored into a mountain by ATC. Apparently her (manual) squelch was mis-set (IIRC). After that I think ATC started alerting pilots when a vector would lead them into terrain, but I am not sure that's really done today.
This particular modern accident is a clear reason for everyone to (at the very least) keep a low-cost tablet with terrain alert on board. No rational reason not to, and would have prevented this tragic result. In my own case I have both the tablet and the panel independently warning me of terrain.
Click to expand...

A sectional which shows MEA will also do for terrain backup. While I know the aviation world is going to electronics, a cheap sectional backup doesn't hurt either at least until they stop printing them. Got to wonder if this was medical or radio.
 
sferguson524 said:
Yes indeed. Thankfully I didn't know the pilot. Been around GA for 22 years, and only know one person who's gone west in an accident.
Click to expand...

You're fortunate. I've known 3 in 34 yrs. Two were not their fault. When it happens to someone you know, it brings reality to the forefront and reminds you that aviation can be dangerous - but then so can driving on the interstate.
 
old cfi said:
A sectional which shows MEA will also do for terrain backup. While I know the aviation world is going to electronics, a cheap sectional backup doesn't hurt either at least until they stop printing them. Got to wonder if this was medical or radio.
Click to expand...

A sectional doesn't show you where you are on it, unlike the tablet which does. Also, I can't say I have ever seen any IFR pilot keep sectionals open during IFR flight in IMC. Personally I have stopped using sectionals on board (even for VFR) a few years ago since the alternatives are cheaper and vastly superior, and even at home I use SkyVector and not the paper product for planning.
 
That's true. But at least it will tell you your MEA for your entire flight. Keep that altitude in mind when these things happen and at least you're not going to end up like this poor fellow did. I'm not knocking the tablets but there are some out there that still use paper for however long it lasts. And I never said keeping a sectional open while on IFR plan. Just jot down the MEA when flying in high terrain areas. With lost coms in IFR you have your clearance to fly but in VFR, well, how high are those mountains I have to cross. Not trying to start an argument but MEAs do have their place in the cockpit in certain terrain conditions.
 
I think it may have been a medical issue also. How can you fly that length of time IFR & not talk to ATC? Worse case, if you're in the clouds & think you're on the wrong frequency switch to 121.5. Someone will hear you.

Like many have said. An iPad with Forefight would have been priceless.
 
Geez, that was tough to hear. Agreed an EFIS or EFB with synthetic vision would have been priceless. RIP pilot.
 
Well that's eerie...

938288f9fc173809ad7b6abcf2d948a7.png
 
old cfi said:
A sectional which shows MEA will also do for terrain backup. While I know the aviation world is going to electronics, a cheap sectional backup doesn't hurt either at least until they stop printing them. Got to wonder if this was medical or radio.
Click to expand...
Eh? Sectionals don't show MEAs.
 
ChiefPilot said:
I don't get it - the controller giving him the altimeter setting starting at the 1:34 mark would seem to imply he did call on the correct frequency at least once. Based on that, I'd have to believe he did in fact check in with the correct controller and something else happened.

I saw the audio was credited to liveatc.net - they don't always pick up everything.
Click to expand...

The controller is calling in the blind to him. I've had that happen before when I switch frequencies and the controller is talking nonstop to other aircraft. After about 5 call/responses from other aircraft with no breaks, the controller called out my tail number and gave me the altimeter. I acknowledged and he went back to more radio calls for the big stuff.
 
Part of my flight planning is to identify what I might run into and the altitudes required to clear obstacles.

I follow along on the chart checking off waypoints for better situational awareness.
 
While I agree that SVT is a marvelous thing, pilots have been flying IFR safely long before that tech came out. Even on vectors, I always know my general position.

In this case, the pilot is doing an IAP into KSMO. If he had the VOR dialed in, he would at least know the radial. Compare that with the MSA on the plan view. Just the depiction of the terrain on the plan view should lead one to climb after a couple of minutes of lost commo. Makes me think more and more that this could have been medical.
 
When in a mountainous terminal area, and receiving vectors, having an MVA option on your moving map would place you on the same page with ATC. I doubt that will ever come to pass in this country. Where countries include MVA charts in their official AIP, Jeppesen publishes them. Example attached. If the Jepp charts are capable of being displayed on the moving map, presto: ship's position is melded with the MVA chart.
 

Attachments

  • SCDA MVAs.pdf
    279.2 KB · Views: 13
aterpster said:
When in a mountainous terminal area, and receiving vectors, having an MVA option on your moving map would place you on the same page with ATC. I doubt that will ever come to pass in this country. Where countries include MVA charts in their official AIP, Jeppesen publishes them. Example attached. If the Jepp charts are capable of being displayed on the moving map, presto: ship's position is melded with the MVA chart.
Click to expand...
That's a shame, that information could be useful to pilots for several reasons, safety among them. Why is it unlikely to happen?
 
aterpster said:
When in a mountainous terminal area, and receiving vectors, having an MVA option on your moving map would place you on the same page with ATC. I doubt that will ever come to pass in this country. Where countries include MVA charts in their official AIP, Jeppesen publishes them. Example attached. If the Jepp charts are capable of being displayed on the moving map, presto: ship's position is melded with the MVA chart.
Click to expand...
The FAA does have MVA charts on line now. Unfortunately, they're not geo-referenced, and they have a disclaimer that they are not to be used for navigation.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/mva_mia/
 
Last edited:
SkyDog58 said:
No but they do show Maximum Elevation Figures (MEF) which is probably what he was referring to.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Don't forget to add 700 feet or 1700 in mountainous terrain if you want to use them as an ad hoc MEA. You get some interesting situations out west with those. There are airports with field elevations more than 10,000 feet below the MEF

EDIT: they pretty much give you 300 feet but there are situations were that is not guaranteed. Adding 1000/2000 feet would be the safe way to go
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
The FAA does have MVA charts on line now. Unfortunately, they're not geo-referenced, and they have a disclaimer that they are not to be used for navigation.
Click to expand...

My last six years in ATC I served as the facility Airspace and Procedures Specialist. Some of my work is still available through this site, which means it hasn't been updated in over three years. I have a different PDF file of this map, obtained through the FAA intranet. This map includes the location of the ASR they are centered on, to a tenth of a second. Also indices for true and magnetic north. I can imagine no positive reason to remove this information.
 
SkyDog58 said:
No but they do show Maximum Elevation Figures (MEF) which is probably what he was referring to.
Click to expand...
Which is fine if you are VFR or possibly lost comms well off an airway, but the MEF is often going to be substantially higher than the legitimate IFR altitude and certainly climbing to the MEF isn't what 91.185 tells you to do. Of course, the IFR charts will give you an OROCA altitude as well.
 
Palmpilot said:
The FAA does have MVA charts on line now. Unfortunately, they're not geo-referenced, and they have a disclaimer that they are not to be used for navigation.
Click to expand...
Not only are they not georeferenced, they don't even provide any usable landmarks that would make them useful other than for curiosity purposes.
 
denverpilot said:
The title isn't completely fair, but it got your attention, didn't it?

Cessna 182 gets a vector toward his destination and also toward terrain, and a simultaneous frequency change. He never checks in with the next controller and never flips back to the previous to see if he's on the right frequency, and proceeds to fly into a mountain.

Just sharing. I'm sure some here have seen this, others not.

If a frequency change doesn't work out, always go back. And always know where the terrain is...
Click to expand...

The pilot's last transmission is a correct readback of the new frequency. He doesn't call. He doesn't respond to transmissions in any way. He, apparently, holds course and altitude until running into higher terrain. Heart attack shortly after reading back the new frequency? Something like that appears to be the most logical explanation.
 
ChiefPilot said:
I don't get it - the controller giving him the altimeter setting starting at the 1:34 mark would seem to imply he did call on the correct frequency at least once. Based on that, I'd have to believe he did in fact check in with the correct controller and something else happened.

I saw the audio was credited to liveatc.net - they don't always pick up everything.
Click to expand...

Could have been a call to see that he was on frequency.
 
saddletramp said:
I think it may have been a medical issue also. How can you fly that length of time IFR & not talk to ATC? Worse case, if you're in the clouds & think you're on the wrong frequency switch to 121.5. Someone will hear you.

Like many have said. An iPad with Forefight would have been priceless.
Click to expand...

Not if the pilot is incapacitated.
 
Last edited:
ircphoenix said:
The controller is calling in the blind to him. I've had that happen before when I switch frequencies and the controller is talking nonstop to other aircraft. After about 5 call/responses from other aircraft with no breaks, the controller called out my tail number and gave me the altimeter. I acknowledged and he went back to more radio calls for the big stuff.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Nothing unusual about that. No point in asking "are you here yet" when just giving an instruction and getting the read back answers that question.
 
Palmpilot said:
The FAA does have MVA charts on line now. Unfortunately, they're not geo-referenced, and they have a disclaimer that they are not to be used for navigation.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/mva_mia/
Click to expand...

That is correct. FAA MVAs in the Western U.S. are more complex than foreign MVA charts that Jeppesen charts. But, in order for Jeppesen to chart FAA MVA charts the FAA would have to have an orderly, systematic update process, such as they use for other IFR procedures. But, neither FAA ATC management nor the controllers union wants FAA MVA data to be on pilots' moving maps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top