Youtube Pilot and her dad perish in TN

Status
Not open for further replies.
FastEddieB said:
So, without electric trim, the autopilot by itself could not do anything with the plane’s trim. If it was drastically out of trim, it had to have been put there by the pilot with the trim wheel, right?

I thought in a small GA aircraft, regulations said a pilot should be able to override even a maximum amount of nose up or nose down trim with a reasonable amount of force. Do I have that wrong?
Click to expand...
I read in another forum that it might have been auto trim. I have very little experience with auto pilots but it made sense what was said. Some auto pilots 'auto trim.' The guy was speculating that the pilot was overpowering the auto pilot with the yoke pressure. The auto pilot keeps setting the trim the way way it thinks should be done as if it was still in charge and not being over ridden by the pilot with control force on the yoke. Then the auto pilot turns off and the plane is in full trim deflection.
 
TrueCourse said:
The preliminary report states that both the pilot and passenger attempted at least one radio transmission during the final moments.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering if they were both affected by carbon monoxide, and not fully functioning.

As an example from the report:

"During the final moments of the flight, a faint communication from the pilot stating the airplane's registration and "Debonaire" followed by an emergency declaration and an unintelligible word."
 
luvflyin said:
I read in another forum that it might have been auto trim. I have very little experience with auto pilots but it made sense what was said. Some auto pilots 'auto trim.'
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure it’s been established that, without electric trim, there was no interface between the autopilot and the plane’s pitch trim.
 
Bell206 said:
While its not common, if a video or photo evidence is directly connected to the Probable Cause they have included a narrative and even stills in the Public Docket to substantiate the findings.
Click to expand...
I think the Pilatus crash in South Dakota a couple years ago had a witness’s video of the takeoff included in the public docket, in video form. Do you know of any onboard camera footage that found its way, still or video, into the public NTSB files? I’m curious if they only do that when the cameraman gives consent, which would limit it to video from outside the cockpit. But at any rate, they are able and willing to include video when appropriate to the task.
 
iamtheari said:
I think the Pilatus crash in South Dakota a couple years ago had a witness’s video of the takeoff included in the public docket, in video form. Do you know of any onboard camera footage that found its way, still or video, into the public NTSB files? I’m curious if they only do that when the cameraman gives consent, which would limit it to video from outside the cockpit. But at any rate, they are able and willing to include video when appropriate to the task.
Click to expand...
The San Diego 340 crash docket had videos from several doorbell cameras at different houses as well.
 
Jim K said:
I avoid the "attractive woman doing stuff" youtube genre like the plague, so I had no idea this lady existed before this thread. I kind of want to watch the videos so I know what all the hubbub is about, but it feels extra creepy to me to go back and watch them now that she's deceased. Makes me wonder what happens to a channel like that when something like this happens. I guess it becomes part of her estate? Does her executor get control of it? Would/should/could he/she shut the channel off? Do they even realize it exists? What's youtube's role in all of this? Whole thing is just weird.
Click to expand...
I don’t know who owns it but I had a friend die in a plane crash six years ago and his channel is still up. Also gets an occasional comment asking questions. If there was someone in control I figure they would turn off comments but it never happened.

His videos still pop up in my suggestions occasionally. Sometimes I watch them and spend a few minutes reminiscing.
 
Cluemeister said:
I'm wondering if they were both affected by carbon monoxide, and not fully functioning.

As an example from the report:

"During the final moments of the flight, a faint communication from the pilot stating the airplane's registration and "Debonaire" followed by an emergency declaration and an unintelligible word."
Click to expand...

We have seen enough evidence to suggest that this pilot could have crashed all by herself, but seeing as to how it's pretty difficult to accidentally crash a plane from cruise in VFR weather, I think it's possible. Take a pilot with her characteristics—poor situational awareness, poor airmanship, easily distracted—and a little bit of CO could mean the difference between successfully completing a flight and not. In addition, twenty minutes of increasingly worsening altitude fluctuations and the bizarre radio communications would support a CO hypothesis.
 
Half Fast said:
Again, it might be relative.

I recall a car when I was young that didn't have power steering. My dad and I could handle it fine in maneuvering around a parking lot, but my mother didn't have enough strength to turn it well when entering or backing out of a parking space. For her, the steering wheel was hard to use.
Click to expand...
Sounds like your mom should not drive that car…
 
I have doubts she really had a PL. Someone signed off on her and should be raked over the coals.

I saw a person who was fixated on making sure the cameras were looking at her, playing with tablets and gawd knows what else. Then the screwing around with the AP constantly.

She was an incompetent operator of an aircraft.
 
Piperonca said:
Saw that video earlier. She may have been trying to stop what she perceived as the "autopilot causing her to climb" by cranking in manual nose down trim. That's what makes this so maddening. She may not have 1) known how to turn the autopilot off; or 2) decided to manually override it in her way of thinking. The only scenario that makes sense is a bizarre mindset that is frightened to fly without the autopilot yet at the same time refusing to learn how to fly with it when resources are available, e.g. factory customer support or qualified instructors.
Click to expand...
This sounds very plausible. If the autopilot was trying to climb when she didn't want it to, and she was keeping the altitude steady by reducing power, and applying down trim so that the autopilot couldn't climb or maybe stall, that might maintain altitude, but that's nuts.

From my read of the report, if both max vertical and horizontal speeds were at the same time, that airplane reached a speed of around 250 knots. Pretty sure that's way over Vne. Also from that report, it sounds like the aircraft was intact when it hit, and trim was estimated to be 5 degrees down at that point.

So expanding on the scenario above, if could have been autopilot flying, with full down trim to attempt to compensate for the AP problem. For whatever reason, pilot disengaged autopilot, and either didn't notice or couldn't correct the descent that probably went past Vne. Seems likely they didn't reduce power to idle, from report evidence. Seems possible that she didn't figure out how to correct down trim until to late, if at all. It also seems possible that when it was significantly past Vne it wasn't recoverable? Or at least not without power reduction.

If the scenario is true, and that's a big if, seems like over-reliance on auto-pilot, using equipment (autopilot) that was known or suspected to not function, lack of understanding of autopilot, lack of understanding of trim operation, lack of understanding and ability to correct from nose down/trim down attitude, lack of attention to and possibly lack of understanding of importance to attitude and airspeed. In my mind that's about 6 different things that lined up to be this version of swiss cheese.

Accurate or not, it doesn't make it any less sad. But might make it more understandable to me.
 
I am not a fixed wing pilot nor am I instrument rated in anything.
My limited experience with fixed wing aircraft flying under the hood (3 hours) had me feeling that pitch controlled airspeed and throttle controlled altitude.
I don't understand how an autopilot can hold altitude without controlling the throttle and it is my understanding that this autopilot did not control the throttle when it is engaged.
I would appreciate it if someone would help me be confused on a higher level.
 
Vance Breese said:
I am not a fixed wing pilot nor am I instrument rated in anything.
My limited experience with fixed wing aircraft flying under the hood (3 hours) had me feeling that pitch controlled airspeed and throttle controlled altitude.
I don't understand how an autopilot can hold altitude without controlling the throttle and it is my understanding that this autopilot did not control the throttle when it is engaged.
I would appreciate it if someone would help me be confused on a higher level.
Click to expand...
Autopilots that control throttle are not normally seen outside of jet aircraft and even then it’s not required. In my experience I’ve only flown two jets with auto thrust, that’s 2 of 6… . None of the turboprop or pistons had auto throttles.

Generally autopilots don’t fly airplanes. They help pilots fly airplanes. The most basic autopilots are wing levelers only while the most advanced have all flight controls, auto thrust and auto land capabilities.

The majority of my time in piston airplanes was a two axis without auto trim. The pilot was required to operate rudder/pitch trim and throttle as necessary.
 
Half Fast said:
Sorta.

Assume a plane is trimmed for level flight at max cruise and then the autopilot is engaged with altitude hold. After a while, the pilot reduces throttle, perhaps a lot, to slow the plane. The autopilot pitches the plane up to hold altitude, the plane slows and settles back into stable flight at a slower speed.

With no electric trim, the autopilot is now fighting the previous trim setting but the pilot doesn’t necessarily know it. If the pilot disengages the autopilot, the pilot will then have to fight the trim as the autopilot had been doing. Otherwise, the plane will pitch downward immediately.
Click to expand...
I’ve had exactly this happen to me in a plane I was unfamiliar with. It had electric trim, which I’d never used before as well as the AP which was also new to me. I was trying to stay below a cloud deck and “forgot” I was using alt hold on the AP. After a couple attempts to trim it out to stay below the clouds, I remembered and cancelled the AP, and whoosh, down I went. Fortunately, I knew exactly why and promptly dealt with it, but if she didn’t understand how things worked, I could see that being a cause here. It took an eye opening amount of strength to hold the nose up while I trimmed the plane again.
 
Vance Breese said:
I am not a fixed wing pilot nor am I instrument rated in anything.
My limited experience with fixed wing aircraft flying under the hood (3 hours) had me feeling that pitch controlled airspeed and throttle controlled altitude.
I don't understand how an autopilot can hold altitude without controlling the throttle and it is my understanding that this autopilot did not control the throttle when it is engaged.
I would appreciate it if someone would help me be confused on a higher level.
Click to expand...

The simple answer is that in cruise or a stable climb or descent, airplanes require very little more than subtle control inputs. So the a/p can control altitude by maintaining a constant barometric pressure as measured by the a/p sensor by subtle changes in pitch attitude.

Large excursions from stable require pilot intervention. That's why when the shtf, the first thing you do is punch off the a/p. A pilot should never have to ask " what's it doing now ?"
 
I too thought maybe this was a big trim down situation, but that doesn’t begin to describe the altitude excursions noted. The plane didn’t simply dive to the ground, there were large positive altitude excursions as well. The later altitude data is a mess. You can see where she had the AP set to hold 6000ft (pressure altitude on ADSB was ~6300), and it held initially. Then something hapened, and the plane would be all over the place, then she’d get it back on AP and it would hold altitude for a little bit. You can see in the middle of the panel labeled 11:41 AM the A/P was engaged and held altitude for a while, then the wild ride to the end began.

It’s pretty obvious that she was relying on the A/P to fly the plane, and when it wasn’t she couldn’t and/or wouldn’t control the plane while she was debugging the A/P.

As others have said, the obvious thing to do in this situation is to hit the A/P disconnect and hand fly the airplane to the destination. It is interesting to note that while the vetical flight path was all over the place when the AP was not holding altitude, the flight track remained in a straight line towards the destination. I believe she never once disconnected the AP, but devoted all of her attention to the altitude hold or lack thereof while the AP maintained lateral course. Again, ANYTIME George starts doing crazy things, hit the big red button!

I would have hoped she would have had the skills to hand fly, but the ADSB data and her dogged insistence on trying to correct the altitude hold issues points to her not being capable of flying the plane without assistance.IMG_6636.jpegIMG_6637.jpeg
 
FlightmechH3 said:
I have doubts she really had a PL...
Click to expand...
e828af430e06b2fe908263deb409ec61.jpg


Let there be no doubt.

FlightmechH3 said:
…She was an incompetent operator of an aircraft.
Click to expand...
Apparently. Hopefully the full docket will find some contributing physiological issues. It’s hard to accept the lack of airmanship on display, but I do keep in mind most of the public information on her skill is what she wants people to see.

Maybe that was the worst of it, maybe it was the best, but who knows what story she was trying to tell.
 
Bill said:
Then something hapened, and the plane would be all over the place, then she’d get it back on AP and it would hold altitude for a little bit
Click to expand...

Just a guess, but I suspect the "something" was her trying to overpower the AP without disconnecting it. F!ying precisely while fighting an AP would be very difficult so wild excursions might be expected in that situation.
 
Half Fast said:
Just a guess, but I suspect the "something" was her trying to overpower the AP without disconnecting it. F!ying precisely while fighting an AP would be very difficult so wild excursions might be expected in that situation.
Click to expand...
Or even fighting the trim without fixing it after cancelling the AP. Perhaps she did pull a breaker for the trim thinking it was a problem, but after already being way out of trim.
 
Half Fast said:
I thought it was established that the plane did not have electric trim. Did I misunderstand?
Click to expand...

As I understand it the plane did not have power trim. The AP has an annunciator light that flashes to inform the pilot to trim up/down to alieviate control forces.
 
Vance Breese said:
My limited experience with fixed wing aircraft flying under the hood (3 hours) had me feeling that pitch controlled airspeed and throttle controlled altitude.
I don't understand how an autopilot can hold altitude without controlling the throttle and it is my understanding that this autopilot did not control the throttle when it is engaged.
Click to expand...

Sorta, and it's the simplest way to control a plane. It's somewhat interactive in reality.

At a given airspeed, there is one combination of pitch and throttle that will maintain level flight. We can climb at the same speed by increasing throttle, or descend by decreasing throttle, but if we want to stay level and slow down we must reduce throttle and increase pitch. If we just increase pitch without reducing throttle the plane will climb but it will also slow. It reaches a slower airspeed that matches the new, steeper pitch, but the throttle setting is greater than necessary for level flight at that speed so the plane climbs.

An autopilot without throttle control can maintain level flight by making pitch changes, but the airspeed will change. Pull the throttle way back and the AP will pitch up and up while speed decays until the plane stalls.
 
eman1200 said:
I think the report claimed a descent rate of almost 12k fpm
Click to expand...
That’s 136 mph vertically and they probably weren’t pointed straight down. It’s not surprising that they couldn’t identify any of the instruments. It’s a little surprising they could identify the empennage and downright impressive that they could identify the cameras.

Vance Breese said:
I am not a fixed wing pilot nor am I instrument rated in anything.
My limited experience with fixed wing aircraft flying under the hood (3 hours) had me feeling that pitch controlled airspeed and throttle controlled altitude.
I don't understand how an autopilot can hold altitude without controlling the throttle and it is my understanding that this autopilot did not control the throttle when it is engaged.
I would appreciate it if someone would help me be confused on a higher level.
Click to expand...
Pitch and power together control altitude and airspeed. Pilots talk about being on the front side of the power curve or the back side of the power curve and how power and pitch affect altitude and airspeed differently. When you’re using an autopilot to control the pitch axis of the plane, you can tell it to maintain a vertical speed, an indicated airspeed, or an altitude. It controls pitch (and potentially pitch trim) to do that, and the variable it is not trying to control will vary accordingly. You have to control power to control that other variable.

For example, in cruise flight I use the autopilot to hold altitude and I watch the airspeed, which might decrease if the plane is making less power or picking up ice. In a climb, I might set the AP to hold indicated airspeed and then adjust my power to get the rate of climb I want. I have to increase power as I climb, or the same indicated airspeed will level me off before I reach my cruising altitude.

When you are flying slower in a small plane, such as approaching the runway for a landing, it’s common to consider pitch the primary control for airspeed and power the primary control for altitude. But the reality is that they always work together.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
Yes, but IIRC the allowable forces are significantly higher in CAR3.
Click to expand...
The limits are similar with only one value slightly higher in the CARs for roll with a control wheel. The requirements for trim force limits reference back to these limits as best as I can tell but there are other parameters like one-engine out, etc. that change the force limits.

CAR 3.106
1703085927907.png

FAR 23.143
1703085975749.png
 
iamtheari said:
Do you know of any onboard camera footage that found its way, still or video, into the public NTSB files?
Click to expand...
I’m only familiar with the helicopter side but have seen video stills from onboard of accident aircraft used in the docket. While I couldn’t find the ones I was thinking of I did find NYC04FA117 which contained a video study report of the onboard video footage and ANC20MA010 which has onboard video from aircraft day of the accident but not of the accident aircraft and a previous day. I still haven't mastered the NTSB CAROL yet nor doubt I will.
FPK1 said:
Too bad, the NTSB really needs to see them!
Click to expand...
FYI: NTSB has subpoena power via federal courts.
 
Salty said:
Or even fighting the trim without fixing it after cancelling the AP. Perhaps she did pull a breaker for the trim thinking it was a problem, but after already being way out of trim.
Click to expand...

Don't know about a Deb, but I can say fighting an out of trim Comanche is a handful. I once took off with the trim set at nose up landing attitude. Had to push like hell to help the nose down while turning the crank. Not easy to overpower like a trainer. Would not have been easy for someone of considerably smaller physical stature. Take off trim set is now indelibly etched on the brain.

I believe it's been the cause of more than one departure stall fatality. Can't imagine the pull for nose down would be any easier.
 
Bell206 said:
The limits are similar with only one value slightly higher in the CARs for roll with a control wheel. The requirements for trim force limits reference back to these limits as best as I can tell but there are other parameters like one-engine out, etc. that change the force limits.

CAR 3.106
View attachment 123440

FAR 23.143
View attachment 123441
Click to expand...
So it looks like up to 75 pounds of force for pitch is acceptable. Just looking at the pilot’s physique, I’d guess she’d probably need both hands on the yoke and both feet on the panel to come close to that.
 
Jim K said:
Makes me wonder what happens to a channel like that when something like this happens. I guess it becomes part of her estate? Does her executor get control of it? Would/should/could he/she shut the channel off? Do they even realize it exists? What's youtube's role in all of this? Whole thing is just weird.
Click to expand...
Without delving into YT's ToS, I'm confident there are provisions for it. I'm sure Google has spent enough on its lawyers to expect that they've thought of this eventuality. Considering their business model, I wouldn't think de-publicizing the content is the default response, even if that happens in specific cases.

I haven't practiced much in this area, but I've done a few simple wills for friends. I advised them to appoint an electronic Power of Attorney that sprung and survived their death or incapacitation. More importantly, make a list of the websites and associated passwords for that person and/or their Executors to have easy access to their online electronic records without drawn out negotiations with banks, etc. Just being able to review the records can be valuable, even if they cannot move money around just yet. If it is a valuable YT channel (I'm sure there was some ad revenue, but how much is the question), keeping the channel up while interest spikes -- morbid though it may seem -- is a financial benefit to estate and its heirs.

As a general rule, anything you own or have a right to control while you are alive becomes property of your "estate"; the "estate" in this context is just a word contrived to describe that pool of stuff. If the deceased made a Last Will and Testament (LWAT), they can use that document to name who will execute their wishes ("Executor/Executrix"), and specify what those wishes are. If any part of the LWAT fails -- executor dies first or refuses appointment; the deceased has property not accounted for in the LWAT and there is no residual saving clause ("...everything else not specifically accounted for is hereby bequeathed to ...") -- then a probate court makes up the gap: by appointing an Executor, and/or distributing property according to preexisting laws of intestacy.

Sometimes, a property or a right, by its terms has other considerations, e.g., owning property as Joint Tenants with right of survivorship -- often with a spouse -- the surviving tenant automatically assumes full ownership on the co-tenant's death without court intervention. If the deceased has a right to control certain property, e.g., as a Trustee, the Trust document can specify a successor Trustee who automatically assumes those rights and duties on the death/incapacitation of the Trustee -- the Trustee rights would not belong to his estate.
 
Vance Breese said:
I am not a fixed wing pilot nor am I instrument rated in anything.
My limited experience with fixed wing aircraft flying under the hood (3 hours) had me feeling that pitch controlled airspeed and throttle controlled altitude.
I don't understand how an autopilot can hold altitude without controlling the throttle and it is my understanding that this autopilot did not control the throttle when it is engaged.
I would appreciate it if someone would help me be confused on a higher level.
Click to expand...
My instrument instructor taught the opposite.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
My morbid curiosity has me wondering if once the videos are viewed by the authorities do they ever come out and say here's the play-by-play of what was seen on the video?

Once they watch that video I assume they know exactly what happened.
Click to expand...

The final report for the Tango and Juliet crash had a short description of events that came from the go-pro footage. It was detailed enough that the report could say what happened when down to the second.
 
Echo419 said:
The final report for the Tango and Juliet crash had a short description of events that came from the go-pro footage. It was detailed enough that the report could say what happened when down to the second.
Click to expand...
The details are very different, but this recent crash reminded me of that one in some ways. They were a nice seeming couple, but the airplane was a big shiny toy, like Jenny they really didn't seem to be in tune with the technical aspects of flying, or the potential consequences of getting it wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top