AOPA Webpage fatal accident study

[steveinindy]

So I have spent a lot of time over the years thinking what could I have done differently. Any ideas? Could this have been prevented?

My last CFI up in Michigan was training me to be more or less instrument qualified before I was ready to solo. Then again, he took me along on business trips (he was a lawyer) so I just had to buy lunch in exchange for the lessons and the time building. I think more time teaching "emergency" situation resolution skills including how to fly either an ILS with vectors or a ground controlled approach should be included in the basic private pilot curriculum. Upset recovery/unusual attitude training should also be included even if it means farming the student out to an aerobatic instructor. That would be my approach if I were designing a training program.

[EDGEFLY]

I feel that steveindys' Type A analysis covers this whole situation. The AOPA presentation is much more effective than the normal NTBS paper wrap-up and most importantly to the pilots not into or just starting their training, let this be a part of your development as a competent pilot not the reason to not become a pilot.

Edgefly

[David Pavlich]

David, I don't want to bore you but I had an experience eerily similar to this one.

When I was a young CFI, I taught an 'older' gentleman (upper 40's, lol) how to fly. He had been passed from CFI to CFI, all out just to empty his wallet. None of them had any intention of letting him progress to first solo, so at 40 hrs of dual one CFI decided he needed a dual X-C.

Then I started flying with him. We started at the beggining. To say he was a challenging student is an understatement. But I got him to solo. Then another. Then I soled him on the requisite x-c flights. Then I prepped him and got him passed his checkride. After that we sat down and had a long talk. I "advised" him to avoid marginal wx conditions. Same with night. Fly only on good VFR days. Then I told him to stay in simple airplanes, those with only two seats. This was all based on my experience flying with him. I knew his weaknesses.

About 6 months later, he purchased a Cessna 172L. He wanted me to check him out in it. So I did. Older but well cared for plane. We parted ways and I gave him the same advice, good VFR only, >5000/5, no night, don't fill up the seats with passengers.

Well, one fall Sat. in 1983, he loaded up his dad, adult son and daughter and flew from Louisiana to College Station, TX for an A & M football game. (What is it with planes and football games?) They came back home around 7pm, very dark night due to low ceilings (BKN 007), light rain, reduced visibility. He ended up about 50 miles N. of where he should have been, recognized he was lost, circled, called for help, received assistance in the form of radar vectors but became spatially disoriented and crashed in a steep nose down attitude. There were no survivors.

The IIC told me that while his poor choices got him into a bad situation, he was doing everything right to get out of it -apparently he had a good CFI (his words). Unfortunately, he couldn't control the plane by reference to instruments long enough to end the flight successfully. I knew that would happen if he ever inadvertenly entered IFR for more than a couple minutes. Maybe I'm not such a good CFI after all.

So I have spent a lot of time over the years thinking what could I have done differently. Any ideas? Could this have been prevented?

Boring? More like heart wrenching! Being the one here that isn't a pilot, I would say, yes, it could have been prevented, but only by a very different decision than flying home after the game. It would have likely been avoided had they stayed in College Station that night and flew home the next day under better conditions. Symptoms: Night flight with degrading weather. What could be worst? Well, icing, but that's not what happened. What he did was contrary to your best advice.

Reading this, I hope that you're still not beating yourself up over it. I can imagine that any CFl with an ounce of compassion would feel rotten if a student parishes in an accident. It's not my place to say since I wasn't there, but you did your job, seems to me. Beyond sitting in the right seat everytime he went up, what could you do? Humans have free will and for better or worst, we exercise that every time we get out of bed. Choices have consequences no matter how much our culture tries to convey a message of victimhood. Responsibility lies with the person that has made the decision. The pity is that sometimes that decision affects others negatively. This whole thread is a testament to you pilots that have made the right decisions when you leave the hangar. It's obvious that you have had good instruction and/or you have good ole' common sense. I hope that when my day finally arrives, I have the temperment that you all have shown.

David

[Flyfalcons]

This is what amazes me. Someone will get a few hrs under thier belt then want to fly loved ones around. Myself I will not fly any passengers until I get close to 1000 hrs.

Becuase of this and my age I will never fly anything but a single seater. If I do go up in a two seater or bigger, I am a passenger along for a ride. If I get a little stick time thats great, if not oh well.....This is just me....

I have a Motto I wish more would take on..It is.........I refuse to be a Statistic......

H.A.S.

If you need 1000 hours to become a safe pilot then that is scary.

[1600vw]

If you need 1000 hours to become a safe pilot then that is scary.

I fly safe and will not subject anyone to a low time pilot in the left seat as PIC. Just the way I do things. Say what you want, it does not bother me one bit....If this scares you, I feel for you......

What scares me is a low time pilot acting as PIC.....Look at the statistics.....They speak volumes.......Its pilots that think this way that kill people.....

You want to fly passengers there should be a min amount of logged hrs flying before you can take anyone up....

I hope Steve from Indy rings in on this, he see's what a low time pilot will get you......KILLED is what it will get you.

H.A.S.


You must be better then me...Thats ok for I am sure you are the best.

[martymayes]

If you need 1000 hours to become a safe pilot then that is scary.

I agree, it's not quantity that makes you a better pilot, it's quality.

A 100 hr, well trained and disciplined pilot can be much safer than a 1000 hr pilot.

[martymayes]

My last CFI up in Michigan was training me to be more or less instrument qualified before I was ready to solo. Then again, he took me along on business trips (he was a lawyer) so I just had to buy lunch in exchange for the lessons and the time building. I think more time teaching "emergency" situation resolution skills including how to fly either an ILS with vectors or a ground controlled approach should be included in the basic private pilot curriculum. Upset recovery/unusual attitude training should also be included even if it means farming the student out to an aerobatic instructor. That would be my approach if I were designing a training program.

Adding 40-50 hrs of pre-solo training simply isn't practical. Learning how to tune and fly and ILS is great, however, unless a pilot practices flying by reference to instruments on a regular basis, he will likely lose control long before he ever gets anywhere near the ILS.

The same is true for upset training, if it's not rehearsed on a regular basis, those skills atrophy quite rapidly. Can't do it one time and be good to go for the remainder of your flying career.

[Joe LaMantia]

Marty and Steve,

I totally agree, and Steve has some great suggestions, but in the present environment it is doubtful that any of those changes would be considered, let alone adopted. Given the state of "politics" and the state of general aviation economics adding time and requirements to training for the PPL is not realistic. I am a simple low time pilot with most of my hours doing low and slow within 100 miles of my home base. I've accummulated about 430 hrs in 20 years of flying. I am retired and my "schedule" doesn't set me up for "get homeitist". I think that newly minted low-time VFR pilots need to keep safe through the recognition that flying demands planning, practice, and recurrent training if we are to remain safe. It is up to each pilot to evaluate his abilities and stay within his skill limits. This guy had 200 plus hours and "some" instrument training, but was not IFR rated. What set him up for this accident is just another "classic" case of a VFR pilot continuing flight into IMC. In my opinion, a 60 Hr pilot knows that IMC is a no go and the number 2 issue to be avoided is running out of fuel, add in low level gymnastics and overloaded take-offs and you've got the bulk of what gets low-timers killed. This isn't rocket science, it's all about keeping away from this stuff through personal discipline. It is unfortunate that this happened, but it isn't the first time and won't be the last. In the end, its still up to the individual pilot to make decisions in flight and the only hour in your log book that counts is the next hour your going to fly.

Joe

[martymayes]

I think that newly minted low-time VFR pilots need to keep safe through the recognition that flying demands planning, practice, and recurrent training if we are to remain safe. It is up to each pilot to evaluate his abilities and stay within his skill limits.

That is correct, but we need to teach pilots how to do this.

[David Pavlich]

It all boils down to common sense. The latest issue of Flying magazine has a couple of good articles about weather and electronics and how electronics can bite you as well as help. In the end, error on the side of caution and the odds go way up that you'll have an uneventful take off and landing.

David