Steve Fossett missing - Final NTSB Report [Archive]

sternone

5th Sep 2007, 07:19

May he RIP...

http://www.avweb.com/newspics/stevefossett_150x220.jpg

Searchers are combing an area of western Nevada looking for adventurer Steve Fossett, who was reported missing in his Citabria Super Decathlon early this morning. The Nevada Record-Courier is reporting that Fossett left the Hilton Ranch in the Smith Valley in the aircraft Monday evening. It's not known where he was heading.

Nevada Civil Air Patrol spokeswoman Maj. Cynthia Ryan said three crews were launched early today and more will be dispatched through the day. A check of neighboring airports apparently came up empty. The aircraft Fossett was seen taking off in is blue and white and the terrain in the area of the Hilton ranch is rugged and sparsely populated. Fossett is best known for his around-the-world flight in a balloon and another unrefueled flight in a single-engine jet aircraft. He was in Nevada recently preparing for a land-speed record attempt in a jet-powered car on the Bonneville Flats but it's not known why he was at the Hilton Ranch.

Plane who is missing:

http://www.aero-news.net/images/content/sportav/2007/N240R-Fossett-plane-0907a.jpg

Sedbergh

5th Sep 2007, 07:23

Bit early to RIP him. Worrying though

the bald eagle

5th Sep 2007, 09:11

Never flown an "N" reg aircraft is it a standard FAA policy that all "N" reg aircraft have to have an ELT? or are we just assuming he had one with him?
Sorry guys n gals for being a bit naive here

MichaelJP59

5th Sep 2007, 09:14

Hope they find him, without a known destination though there is a massive area of Nevada to search:(

Canada Goose

5th Sep 2007, 09:52

Never flown an "N" reg aircraft is it a standard FAA policy that all "N" reg aircraft have to have an ELT?

I think it is ! All the a/c I flew in Canada has an ELT. I was surprised on returning to the UK to find the opposite, i.e. most a/c don't have an ELT ! That said, I was once involved in a SAR whilst paradropping as LATCC called to see if I could see a downed a/c as they were picking up an ELT. I tuned into 121.5 - kinda eerie blip blip noise and then I spotted smoke ! Turned out to be a bonfire !! Think the source was eventaully traced to a hangered a/c.

Anyways, back to thread. Hope Steve is found safe and well. Firts thing that went through my mind was if he had crashed surely they would have picked up an ELT, unless of course it was destroyed/malfunctioned.
CG.

poorwanderingwun

5th Sep 2007, 10:56

I don't believe that it's mandatory to carry an ELT on N reg a/c... I've certainly flown without them... one would imagine though that any a/c operating over the sort of terrain that this a/c was operating over would be carrying one... of course if they're not mandatory there's no guarantee that it is regularly maintained.. Let's hope he returns promptly back to friends and family with another good story to relate...

PBL

5th Sep 2007, 11:49

is it a standard FAA policy that all "N" reg aircraft have to have an ELT

It is a Federal Aviation Regulation, namely 14 CFR 91.207
(aka FAR 91.207). Findable on the WWW.

PBL

poorwanderingwun

5th Sep 2007, 12:22

OOps...

Apologies for not knowing that and we'll get one ftted.. :uhoh: does the FAA read this ?

PBL

5th Sep 2007, 13:14

we'll get one ftted.. does the FAA read this ?

Probably not - I'll forward your note for you right away :}

PBL

PPRuNe Radar

5th Sep 2007, 15:40

A true legend in aviation, let's hope the outcome is positive.

jammydonut

5th Sep 2007, 15:48

Where are the Bonnaville Flats ?

Saab Dastard

5th Sep 2007, 16:42

Let's hope that he is indeed found safe and well.

I can't help saying that anyone who flies a single-engined aircraft without a flight plan over the desert in Utah must be a complete MORMON! :p

Sorry.

SD

411A

5th Sep 2007, 17:32

In the not too distant past, many business jets and most jet airliners did not require an ELT.
Not anymore.
If one were to be brave enough to fly their light aircraft without a functioning and properly maintained ELT, certification action starts with a suspension of 180 days.
Get caught once again...certificate revocation.
Better have one Bubba, otherwise you is in a heap o' trouble.:ooh:

A good friend of mine is deputy commander of the Civil Air Patrol in California, and when an ELT is reported, a search can be organized in thirty minutes, maximum forty five.
The CAP is very serious about finding lost/downed aircraft, and will keep looking until it is found.
They are very professional at their work.

My tax dollars at work....productively, for a change.:rolleyes:

NH2390

5th Sep 2007, 17:41

Or d) The landing was soft enough not to activate the ELT but the pilot was incapacitated.

Julian

5th Sep 2007, 19:10

Have heard that a large number of the ELTs dont go off on impact and end up having to manually activated.

J.

green granite

5th Sep 2007, 19:23

Presumably an ELT would have a very short range in that sort of terrain, especially if deep down in a narrow valley.

PBL

5th Sep 2007, 19:30

Presumably an ELT would have a very short range in that sort of terrain, especially if deep down in a narrow valley.

I know that terrain pretty well, and it's pretty open. You are right that if the ELT can't be picked up, that indicates either that it is/was defective, or that the craft is sitting in some ravine somewhere. It surprises me greatly that he hasn't been found yet, given (as 411A says) the dedication and expertise of the California CAP (who I presume would be called for such a search).

PBL

PBL

cwatters

5th Sep 2007, 19:50

Any possibility of listening for his phone? I know he's out of coverage but perhaps flying a portable base station over the area would be better than using eyes alone?

silverhawk

5th Sep 2007, 19:53

Seems a shame that Uncle Richard puts so much staunch in the ads from Breitling about their watch.
We all know the output is so low that any aircraft looking for a Breitling 121.5 signal needs to be right on top of you to locate you.
Of course if it happens, that's great.
However, not really likely. Survival comes from proper kit and proper training.
Hope Steve's going to be OK
Suspect that Breitling's ads are about to be shown for the smokescreen they really are.
Breitling 121.5 watch is a gimmick bought by the rich and vulnerable.

stevef

5th Sep 2007, 20:00

All the routine maintenance checks of ELTs I've been involved with included a hard manual deceleration to prove the inertia switch as well as local tower confirmation that it had been activated on the frequency. Never known one to fail but there's always a first time...

alph2z

5th Sep 2007, 20:02

.....if the ELT can't be picked up, that indicates either that it is/was defective, or that the craft is sitting in some ravine somewhere.

Or if the ELT is underwater. But I don't know how much little water there is there.

In New Brunswick, Canada there was a small plane crash in a remote area for which the ELT turned-on 1 year later. They presume that possibly an animal had touched it somehow.

A commercial flight at -15 C, with ice on wings during TO, crashed into the St-Lawrence river; the ELT was under only a few feet of water. That seriously hampered emergency response and resulted in deaths.

It is not rare to hear that an ELT does not work as advertised.

I remember one activating on touch-down and jamming my conversation with the tower; of course during my early solo days :ugh: .
.

Melax

5th Sep 2007, 20:03

ELT signals are picked-up by passing Satellites and many aircrafts listen to 121.5 newer models (EPIRB type) will give more info (Coordinates and registry info such as owner etc...). No ELT means: A non functioning or non installed unit. Exhausted or deflective Batt. Unit Destroyed unit upon impact fire or water immersion etc... OR... Someone turned it off... Conspiracy theories anyone ?
Kidnapping, UFOS ...

ChristiaanJ

5th Sep 2007, 20:20

Conspiracy theories anyone ?No flight plan, no radio contact, no ELT........
Don't we all wish he's gone off to a top-secret rendez-vous with his latest girl friend? Or landed in Area 51?

But let's admit it. Things do NOT look good.

boofhead

5th Sep 2007, 21:45

A standard ELT works as advertised only 10 to 20 percent of the time. Fact.
Recommend that if you are going down, turn on the ELT (if you have a remote switch of course as well as squawk Emergency on the Transponder. Don't rely on the g switch.
Buy a portable PLB. Much better.

NH2390

5th Sep 2007, 21:48

They have a 75% failure rate!

Brian Abraham

6th Sep 2007, 01:27

standard ELT works as advertised only 10 to 20 percent of the time

Too true Boof. Don't know about the percentage but it is all too depressing to read of the number of accidents where prompt action may have saved peoples lives but the antenna to ELT connection got busted in the crash.

bomarc

6th Sep 2007, 01:52

advanced C130 aircraft with special IR and cameras are part of the search.

one article indicates that the plane had survival gear aboard.

as to ELT's...if the plane were out in the open and it was on, they would have heard it

but if he was in a mountain pass...maybe not. terrain is different out here.

many sightings of old wrecks, one copter went out to check on one over a year old.

in the past, airliners didn't require ELT's as long as dispatch and radar were used to keep track of planes. even domestic USA we used to have to send position reports to dispatch a few years ago.

while area 51 is within the range of the plane, it might be unlikely that he went that far...but you never know.

if he was just using pilotage for nav, it would be easy to get lost.

boofhead

6th Sep 2007, 03:13

I bought an antenna from Radio Shack that fits the ELT in my airplane and in rental airplanes (the old square units) so that if the airplane is upside down or the antenna is broken off I can remove the ELT and connect my antenna. use it as a portable ELT, move it away from the airplane etc. The antenna cost me $15 and it lives in my survival vest (a fishing vest with lots of pockets for matches, candles, hand warmers and the like since I fly mainly in Alaska. Also have a mozzie net since in two hours Alaskan mozzies can take half of the total amount of blood in a human body). Even if it is too hot (temps over 5 C) and I cannot stand to wear the vest it sits beside me whenever I fly).
When brushing snow off the airplane take care not to break the fixed antenna.
I am in the CAP and spend a fair bit of time looking for ELTs, most of which are accidentally set off or that are so old the switch corrodes and turns the unit on. Some are used by hunter guides (they have dozens of them in jackets for their customers) and we have regular problems with those guys throwing their jackets in a pickup, setting off one or two, then driving hundreds of miles along the highways, CAP 172 in hot pursuit. Biggest problem though is in the antennas, which have corrosion at the attach point and are rarely cleaned or serviced. I doubt if Steve has that type of problem. I am surprised he does not have a PLB in his pocket.
In 2009 they are shutting down the satellite that looks after 121.5 ELTs and only the new PLBs will be supported.
Sad situation. Not nice when nothing is found, it leaves family members always wondering and they say that is worse than getting confirmation of the loss. Still it is too early to give up.

Paris Hilton

6th Sep 2007, 04:00

Remember from a survival course, we had to prioritize various bits of kit/ provisions etc. as to their value. (ELT not on this list). The expert opinion listed a signalling mirror as no.1 (water being no.2).

Ignition Override

6th Sep 2007, 05:06

It must be very tempting to have the convenience of a simple single-engine plane, even in the mountains.
Maybe Steve's chances at high density altitudes would have been much better in an empty King Air C-90, or a Pilatus s.e. turboprop (the Air Force trains in the T-6 II), which should be quite affordable for him.

PBL

6th Sep 2007, 05:30

Maybe Steve's chances at high density altitudes would have been much better in an empty King Air C-90, or a Pilatus s.e. turboprop

(Flatlanders :rolleyes: ) A Decathlon is OK, especially when solo. Lots of lift, flies slow, turns on a dime, you can see out of both sides down, and land it most anywhere that looks flat.

I only flew one once, from the back seat. Flared 3 feet too high and spent the next few seconds anticipating gravel rash.

PBL

Ghostflyer

6th Sep 2007, 05:36

The single vs 2 argument works only if you assume an aircraft failure. What about hitting the ground whilst trying to survey it from the air? A medical emergency, etc, etc, etc.

A standard ELT works as advertised only 10 to 20 percent of the time. Fact

If he is alive, there is a fair chance the ELT would have been manually operated and every ELT that I have used has worked fine under those circumstances. The odds do not look good.

ZAGORFLY

6th Sep 2007, 05:54

you must be functioning to activate any kind of ELT..unfortunately.

cwatters

6th Sep 2007, 06:18

At a difficult time like this it's hard to laugh but somehow I doubt Steve has landed in cyberspace...

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hu5Ip6-JjXMirJLN9fHn6oVQkv9A

"British tycoon Richard Branson, who partnered Fossett on earlier attempts to circle the globe in a balloon, said he had contacted Internet search giants Google to help with the search."

visibility3miles

6th Sep 2007, 06:29

cwatters, from the same article:

Later Wednesday Ryan revealed that rescuers had believed they had found Ryan's plane after spotting wreckage, only to be disappointed when it turned out that the debris was from an old crash site.

"We thought we had it nailed," Ryan said. "Unfortunately, it turned out to be one of many dozen unmapped wreck sites from previous years.

It would be ironic if they find other planes that have gone missing over the years. :(

They are looking in a huge area, including mountains. I hope it ends well.

sternone

6th Sep 2007, 06:54

If he's alive he can active the ELT.. he suppose to have 2 of them, one on board and one on his wrist

On CNN international http://edition.cnn.com/ there is a vote:

do you think Steve Fosset is still alive

Yes 35%
No 65%

Let's hope he's ok and has enough water to his disposal...

Ada Quonsett

6th Sep 2007, 09:46

Calif. Wing members, ARCHER-equipped Utah Wing aircraft join mission

September 05, 2007

NEVADA -- The U.S. Civil Air Patrol has expanded its search for famed aviator Steve Fossett, bringing in cutting-edge technology -- the organization's ARCHER system, which stands for Airborne Real-Time Cueing Hyperspectral Enhanced Reconnaissance -- and members of the Utah and California wings to join Nevada Wing members involved in the mission.
An ARCHER-equipped Gipplsand GA-8 Airvan was dispatched from the Utah Wingin the continuing search for Fossett, last seen about 9 a.m. Monday when he took off from the Flying M Ranch's private airstrip near Yerington, Nev., in a Citabria Super Decathalon single-engine aircraft with the tail number N240R.

During search and rescue missions, CAP can apply ARCHER using an on-board computer to take a spectral picture of a particular object, relying on light reflected from the object. That information is then relayed, by e-mail and satellite phone using CAP's satellite-transmitted digital-imaging system, to units on the ground as they conduct their search.

A set of parameters describing the target's color and shape is programmed into the system, and through a sophisticated algorithm, the ARCHER system is able to differentiate a potential target from background clutter. The nation's first fully operational, large-scale hyperspectral imaging system, ARCHER can identify a target using as little as 10 percent of the target's characteristics.

Also this morning, more than 60 members of CAP's California Wing -- equipped with 17 of their aircraft -- began searching about a 1,000-square-mile-area over the California state line from Bridgeport, Calif., about 80 miles south of Lake Tahoe, Nev., to Bishop, Calif., about 20 miles south of Bridgeport.
Searchers were first notified late Sept. 3 that Fossett had left the private airstrip about 9 a.m. and was planning to return by noon in order to leave the area. A formal search began at 6 p.m. that evening, as six CAP aircraft were launched with highly trained, well-equipped crews of three each in order to do sophisticated "grid" searches of hundreds of square miles of terrain in areas where the pilot may have been.

On Sept. 4, searchers accumulated over 35 air hours of flying time in up to 14 aircraft, both planes and helicopters, from CAP, the Nevada Air Guard and the California Highway Patrol. Four CAP ground search teams were activated from Lyon and Mineral counties in Nevada, as well as Nevada and Mono counties in California. The search area included an area roughly 600 square miles long, extending from the Yerington area to Bishop, Calif., and about 200 miles wide with a western boundary following the eastern flank of the Sierra Nevada mountain range. http://www.cap.gov/

PAXboy

6th Sep 2007, 11:30

I realise, of course, that it might be seen as impertinent for a non-pilot to say anything.

The biggest mistakes are often the smallest ones. Whatever the outcome of the search, it will help to remind everyone to file a flight plan ...

BackPacker

6th Sep 2007, 12:03

Flight plan would help? Not too sure in this particular case.

As said, Mr. Fossett was flying to scout out dry lakebeds for a land-speed record attempt. By definition, that means just flying about until you find something, then circling around to check details etc. All this in a vast area of uninhabited land (desert?). His flight plan would not have contained anything useful in the "route" field. Not more than what we currently know already from friends who reported him missing.

Flight plans in the context of search and rescue are useful if you intend to fly a specific route, and do not deviate from it without informing ATC. But if you make sure that someone on the ground (in the UK context this is called a "responsible person") has the route information instead and knows your callsign, take-off time, EET and endurance, a flight plan does not offer much more information.

In the US, you can get "flight following" whether you filed a flight plan or not, and that's a far better investment, safety-wise. But from what I hear about the area, flight following might not be available there.

MichaelJP59

6th Sep 2007, 13:39

"British tycoon Richard Branson, who partnered Fossett on earlier attempts to circle the globe in a balloon, said he had contacted Internet search giants Google to help with the search."

Did he really say that? It seems a ridiculous suggestion, aren't google earth/maps aerial images often several years old?

ChristiaanJ

6th Sep 2007, 14:03

MichaelJP, that was my first reaction too, but a more complete news item explained that Google Earth of course has close contacts with the satellite image provider, so they would be one of the first people to turn to for up-to-date pictures.
However, the hi-tech survey plane they've brought in sounds like a better bet.

Pax Vobiscum

6th Sep 2007, 14:39

When Internet pioneer James Gray was lost at sea this February, Google used their satellite expertise to help in the (sadly unsuccessful) search. I imagine it's much easier to use satellite imaging to find a sailboat at sea than a light aircraft in rugged terrain.

jammydonut

6th Sep 2007, 15:02

Still confused why he should be looking for a lake bed when a tried and tested track is already available at Bonaville. Apart from well supervised from the ground solo flights, what other solo flying has he done?:hmm:

ChristiaanJ

6th Sep 2007, 15:07

jammy,
you may have to look through the various press releases that are linked. One mentioned in some detail why he was looking for other sites.

J.A.F.O.

6th Sep 2007, 19:24

However, the hi-tech survey plane they've brought in sounds like a better bet.

You don't need hi-tech you need lots of eyes looking out of lots of windows.

ChristiaanJ

6th Sep 2007, 19:54

J.A.F.O.,
Ever tried to survey hundreds of square miles by eye for a needle in a haystack?
The "hi-tech" aircraft already seems to have found another wreck, so the technology seems to work.
There are limits to what the Mk. 1 eyeball can achieve.

niknak

6th Sep 2007, 23:39

The same principal applies to satellite technology, if you know where your target is you can keep the satellite above it and take as many pictures as you want.
If you don't have an exact position, you rely on the machine spotting something during it's sweep over the ground and then have to wait until it covers the area again.
It could take months for a satellite to spot such a target.

Brian Abraham

7th Sep 2007, 01:40

From Avweb today. A bit off thread, but you would think that Steve would have the best. My experience when we had a 406 beacon accidently fire it took no more than 5 minutes before flight service were on the phone making enquiries. Can't get better satellite sevice than that.

NTSB Wants Better ELTs in Aircraft

The FAA should require that all emergency locator transmitters in general aviation aircraft must be upgraded, the NTSB said (PDF) on Wednesday. The newer 406 MHz transmitters have significant advantages, the NTSB says, including longer range, better accuracy, and the ability to encode identification information, so rescuers know exactly what airplane is in distress. The safety board cites two accidents: In one airplane equipped with an older ELT, 16 hours elapsed before rescuers found the survivors, and when an airplane with a 406 MHz ELT crashed, the wreckage was located within an hour. The FAA should require an upgrade to the 406 MHz units before February 2009, when a change in satellite services will make the older units even less reliable, the NTSB says.

"This [change in service] will necessitate U.S. search and rescue authorities reverting to older, less effective search methods and techniques, which would greatly decrease the likelihood of finding downed aircraft in a timely manner," the NTSB said. AOPA has opposed mandatory ELT upgrades, citing costs. The new units can cost from $1,000 to $1,500. The 406 MHz units activate in about 81 to 83 percent of crashes. The older units, which operate on the 121.5 MHz frequency, have an activation rate of 73 percent in actual crashes, AOPA said.

kiwi chick

7th Sep 2007, 03:47

Have they found anything yet...?

Hokulea

7th Sep 2007, 06:07

kiwi chick: it's pretty much on the news here all the time and so far nothing relevant has been found. The latest is that the civil air patrol now have four "credible" leads which they are following up, but they haven't given any details of what those leads are.

niknak: I don't understand your comment about keeping a satellite above a spot. You do realise that would be difficult to do unless the satellite is already in geosynchronous orbit, don't you? In that case it's unlikely to be able to do much to help with the search.

onetrack

7th Sep 2007, 07:33

Reading a little on the Decathlon history of airframe problems leaves one feeling a little uneasy ..

http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepCitabria.html

Despite being an aerobatic aircraft, this is a 1980 Decathlon, and a hired one at that. I wonder just what the history of this aircraft is? Accidents? Upgrades? .. Does this particular aircraft still wear wooden spars?? ..
Did the last pilot who rented, throw a show, and pull 6G's, and overstress the wings?? ..

After 4 full days, going on 5 .. and with 14 aircraft looking for him, including FLIR equipped aircraft .. you'd expect SOME result. They can find a wreck that happened 20 years ago? .. but not Fossett?

I fear the worst, and that a wing separated, and he speared in, leaving only a tiny footprint.

If it happened over a ravine, as is entirely possible, it may take 10 years to find the remains.
There are plenty of parallels, with wrecks not being found for years afterwards.

My personal opinion is that small aircraft, flying low and slow are more likely to have success, at finding wreckage, than anything else.

Despite high tech equipment, Eyeball Mk 1 is connected to Brain Mk 1, which has more computing ability than anything electronic .. and often a glimpse is all that's needed for Brain Mk 1, to say, "backtrack and just check that out".

Electronics will examine the narrow parameters that were inputted .. and if they don't fit, they move on .. possibly abandoning good clues.

The last possibility, is the one the search crews now seem to be thinking about seriously .. an underwater search. Despite there being little water out there .. there's always that million-to-one chance, that the plane went down, right over the only patch of water for miles.

J.A.F.O.

7th Sep 2007, 09:28

ChristiaanJ

J.A.F.O.,
Ever tried to survey hundreds of square miles by eye for a needle in a haystack?
The "hi-tech" aircraft already seems to have found another wreck, so the technology seems to work.
There are limits to what the Mk. 1 eyeball can achieve.

Yep, spent the last twenty years doing that in one way or another, hence my comment.

It's been a long time now but I do hope he's okay and hope that the CAP get something soon.

ETOPS

7th Sep 2007, 11:24

Operated LAX-LHR last night with a Gorman departure and Northeasterly routing which took us right over the search area. Made sure that 121.5 was turned up to max and did spend a lot of time looking - well you never know.

Unless you have seen northern Nevada from the air, it might be difficult to see why the search has failed so far. For those that are familiar you know it's very rugged, desolate country - see Google Earth and look around Tonapah for example.

I hope they find Steve soon (or at least what happened) It won't be much fun stuck in the hills waiting for help..............:sad:

eidah

7th Sep 2007, 14:35

Anyone know the latest on the search???

M609

7th Sep 2007, 16:41

You don't need hi-tech you need lots of eyes looking out of lots of windows.

Hi tech sure does help. Our Aero Club is part of the Norwegian CAP (RMK: Different system), and I've done SAR training as an observer in a Cessna.
You don't understand how much you miss before you try it.

Ex: We did a exercise where 2 dummys in blue coveralls was placed sitting in a alpine area of 3 x 3 nm. We (pilot and observer) missed both.
Even flying at 500ft AGL as slow as safely possible, it was amazing how hard it was to spot the dummys when the instructior pointed them out to us. (And they where sitting on high ground, without vegitation.

Pilots on this forum mock hi-wiz wests and it's use at the airfield. I kind of agree, but I carry one in the aircraft, if only to have it available post forced landing!

Looks bleak for Mr Fosset

J.A.F.O.

7th Sep 2007, 16:53

Don't get me wrong, I'd want everything available thrown at it if I was stuck out there; it's just that people overlook the effectiveness of a properly executed visual search.

I've flown over the area a couple of times and know that it's no fun, anything that can bring this to a conclusion should be used it's just that these days the technological solution is used to the exclusion of the most sophisticated search system ever designed - your eye/brain.

I've no idea how many millions of square miles I've searched but I know that in the daytime I've found more people by looking out of the window than any other method.

It's a terrible area to search - and a worse one to be stuck in - so I wish CAP and their partners the best of luck with whatever search technique they try.

IO540

7th Sep 2007, 16:57

Some misinformation on ELTs.

On an N-reg you need to carry an ELT activated automatically by a forward-impact G force.

Typically these are 121.50 + 243MHz, with the 243 used for satellite based location fixing and the 121.5 used for close-in VDF.

More recent ELTs are 121.50 + 406MHz which offer much better satellite position fixing, but the 121.5 signal is still useful only for close-in VDF i.e. about 10-20nm away.

A few private planes have a GPS link which stores the last GPS fix and sends it off in the 406MHz transmission to the satellite(s). These are more pricey and not many people have them.

Of course it all assumes the ELT doesn't get smashed in the impact, or sinks below water.

Not many European pilots have the fixed 406MHz ELTs because of the ripoff charges (EASA, or DER costs if N-reg) for getting the installations approved. I was quoted £2000 just for the paperwork, so didn't bother with 406MHz and have a couple of 406MHz portable ones instead.

bomarc

7th Sep 2007, 17:38

I went down to Minden airport (KMEV) and met up with a friend doing a story on the search for mr. Fossett.

Quite a bit of machinery involved in search. Conflicting information on whether he had the ELT watch with him or not.

A wreck (Not FOSSETT) was found that was some dozens of years old and has provided some answers to a missing plane and man for his family...this wreck has gone unnoticed for dozens of years...that is what the terrain is like. my friend went up and took footage that might be available at cnn.com, it was shown this morning in the US around 6:40 am pacific time...in case you want to see what the terrain is like.

IF YOU ARE FLYING near there make sure to "break squelch"on 121.5...that is turn off the squelch or adjust it to hear the white noise or static...this will make it more sensitive to an ELT. questions, PM me.

slatch

8th Sep 2007, 01:52

Seeing the aircraft was probably N240R, 8KCAB-180, belonging to the flying M ranch, I would believe the condition of the aircraft would not be an issue. ATC radar coverage in the area 12,000 feet and below is poor (at best) or none (mostly), so even if he did turn on his transponder it probably never got high enough to be tracked so any data reduction of center radar would probably not be useful. If he did have his transponder on and went north and got high enough, Fallon Naval Air Station radar may have tracked him. But I am not sure how good their radar data reduction tools are. I find it strange that no one had any idea of which set of dry lakes he was going to look at. Seems to me he would have been looking over sectionals and topo's before the flight getting an idea of were to start. Or at least what direction from the ranch to start from. And like others have stated the area is desolate and rugged, it will be very difficult to see the wreckage from the air.

onetrack

8th Sep 2007, 14:12

Here is the latest, somewhat novel attempt at search assistance. AVweb is asking people with time on their hands to search fresh images from Space, courtesy of DigitalGlobe (image suppliers to Google Earth), and via Amazon Mechanical Turk .. :confused:

Amazon Mechanical Turk is a web service .. in essence, computers asking people to help, by conducting pixel by pixel search of the fresh images from Space, then compiling the results.

It is apparently hoped, that a sizeable number of human eyes, poring over fresh images from DigitalGlobe, pixel by pixel, will produce something of value, as in possible wreckage location, that CAP has missed, or not covered.

AVweb request for assistance .. http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/YouMightHelpFindSteveFossett_196093-1.html

Mechanical Turk .. http://www.techcrunch.com/2005/11/04/amazon-finally-shows-itself-as-the-matrix/

bomarc

8th Sep 2007, 14:54

USAF Hill AFB has a special team working on radar data looking for fossetts plane.

so far nothing.

I say he is within 30 minutes flying time of his departure point and that he never got high enough for a radar hit.

whether he really was looking for a dry lake bed or just out to "bore holes in the sky" is not confirmed. ONe good friend of his says he simply wasn't looking for dry lake beds as is being reported in the press.

the question to you is: if you were out for a joyride would you go look at the few pretty things in the desert, or would you head out into the magnificent desolation?

if he crashed looking at a tree, he was probably near a small river which would provide water to survive. but his plane might be hidden by the trees.

if you were looking at the desert, no water, but perhaps out in the open.

a mountain pass is my best guess and of course that is the hardest place for others to find you imho (at least by air) less water...very dry in nevada this year 85 days since rain just a few weeks ago.

this is saturday and there may be many off roaders just cruising around and hopefully they might just get lucky.

DX Wombat

8th Sep 2007, 18:32

latest update suggest that he was NOT carrying any survival food or water That is definitely NOT good news. It is too horrible to contemplate that he may have landed safely with non-functioning radio(s) transponder, ELT, etc and be waiting in vain for rescue whilst slowly dehydrating. I for one hope they find him soon, or that he was killed on impact if he has crashed - gruesome maybe, but better something swift than having to wait helpless, dying slowly of dehydration.

fireflybob

8th Sep 2007, 19:36

I just hope and pray for a miracle that Steve is found alive and well.

I find it incongruous in this day and age of GPS, radar, satellite imaging etc that an aircraft can be "missing" for so long. Have a/c gone missing in this area before? If Steve had filed a flight plan what difference would it have made? Isn't it possible also that they are looking completely in the wrong place?

I know these might seem naieve questions but my feeling is that this story is becoming more and more mysterious as the hours and days roll by.

bomarc

8th Sep 2007, 21:54

have aircraft gone missing in this area before? YES

in fact, during the fossett search planes that have been missing for over 30 years are being found (6 so far).

unless there is secret air force radar involved, regular ATC radar is useless for the altitudes he was likely flying.

I realize the UK doesn't really have mountains...so unless you take a look, you don't have a clue...the US Miltary uses the area nearby to train some pilots for work in Afghanistan. some areas nearby are marked on the chart as "wilderness".

aero junkie

9th Sep 2007, 00:02

Isn't it possible also that they are looking completely in the wrong place?

I was thinking the same thing. If he was looking for dry lake beds he could have flowen anywhere?(I'm un-familiar with the area and stand to be corrected)

"The search area has now been expanded from 26,000 to 44,000 square kilometres, and 45 planes and helicopters are involved."

"Searchers looking for missing adventurer Steve Fossett have discovered half a dozen other plane crashes, but have found no substantial clues about the multi-millionaire's whereabouts."

Updated report:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070908/fossett_search_070908/20070908?hub=TopStories

RobertS975

9th Sep 2007, 00:13

"Saturday marked the sixth day he has been lost in one of the most unforgiving regions in the continental United States. Authorities expanded the overall size of the search area from 10,000 square miles to 17,000, a region about twice the size of New Jersey.
In a stark illustration of the region's remoteness, searchers have discovered six old plane crashes that had not previously been identified since they began the intensive hunt for Fossett on Tuesday.
Crews are marking crash sites discovered during the Fossett search and will return later to examine them in detail. No human remains have been found, which is no surprise in a region where coyotes and mountain lions are prevalent."

I am somewhat amazed that the search has uncovered 6 previous unknown crash sites! The effort going into this search reminds me somewhat of the time that JFK, Jr. crashed into the ocean off of Cape Cod and Martha's Vineyard. There were several US Navy ships involved in the recovery effort (and in that case, nobody was looking for survivors, just victims).
There is something a bit perverse that 6 other crash sites have been discovered... suspect some of those planes have been missing for years!

bomarc

9th Sep 2007, 00:13

this article seems to say it all. think about the size of the state and how few people, how few survivable spots there are in the state...and I live here.

Fossett coverage reveals a lonely state, unlike any other
By SCOTT SONNER Associated Press Writer
News Fuze
Article Launched:09/08/2007 01:13:26 PM PDT
RENO, Nev.—This week's news reports about missing aviator Steve Fossett have been filled with references to the barren and empty landscape he was flying over when his plane disappeared.

But from outside Nevada, it's hard to fully appreciate just how expansive, how desolate the wide open spaces of the state can be.

Superimposed over a U.S. map, Nevada's 110,000 square miles would stretch from New York City, west to Pittsburgh and south to Myrtle Beach, S.C. Then remove nearly all the people.

While Nevada's population has been the fastest growing in the nation for most of the last three decades, it averaged just 18 people per square mile in 2000, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That compares to a national average of 80 people per square mile and 1,134 in New Jersey, the nation's most densely populated state.

Even that doesn't tell the whole story. Some 2.3 million of Nevada's nearly 2.6 million residents live in just the two counties that include Las Vegas and Reno. Across the rest of Nevada, there are fewer than three people per square mile.

"There's just very, very few human beings out there," said Guy Rocha, Nevada's state archivist.

So much of the state is so desolate that the Web site of the Nevada Commission on Tourism urges visitors to carry plenty of water and gasoline when traveling to many of the destinations it lists. Cell phone coverage is spotty, and often nonexistent.

The area of northwest Nevada where the search for Fossett is concentrated is considered one of the state's most barren regions and has been relatively unchanged for more than a century.

"I don't think the general public watching on TV really has too much of an idea of just how rugged and remote this area is," Rocha said.

Outside Reno, Las Vegas and the capital, Carson City, the nation's seventh-largest state is a vast emptiness.

The severe landscape that marks the overwhelming majority of Nevada is far different from the traditional travel brochures that feature the beaming lights of the Las Vegas strip or the forested ski resorts ringing Lake Tahoe.

Miles of high desert are broken up by hundreds of mostly barren, craggy mountain ranges rising 8,000 to 11,000 feet from dry lake beds and seas of sagebrush. The state has 300 named mountain ranges—more than any other state in the nation—and few roads outside its main cities and towns.

"In Nevada, there is a lot of 'middle of nowhere,'" said Chris Healy, a spokesman for the Nevada Division of Wildlife, which issues licenses to hunt deer, elk, antelope, bighorn sheep and mountain lions.

Rural Nevada is dotted with gold and silver mines, many abandoned a century ago. Irrigation allows limited farming and livestock grazing in some of the valleys, mostly on territory administered by the state's largest landholder—the federal government.

One leg of the California Trail, used by 19th century pioneers coming overland in wagon trains, passes through the Fossett search area. It runs from a former Pony Express post into the dry wasteland that stretches to the flanks of the eastern Sierra Nevada.

Few immigrants, however, dared to brave the barren route. One party that made it through in 1853 threatened to lynch its leader because of the deprivations it endured along the way.

"The route was described as 'strewn with wreckage of prairie schooners (covered wagons), oxen yoke and bleached animal bones,'" reads one historical marker.

Today, the most traveled part of the region is on the eastern edge of the search area bordering Walker Lake, where Highway 95 connects Reno to Las Vegas some 450 miles south.

The quality of the view is in the eye of the beholder.

"The mountains are pretty. It's scenic," said Healy, the wildlife official.

John Sullivan wasn't prepared for the isolation when he first made the drive to Las Vegas after moving to Reno 20 years ago from his native San Francisco.

"Boring. Just so monotonous," Sullivan said. "It's just dirt, sand and a couple three or four small towns you've got to drive through."

On the bright side, he said the trip to Las Vegas goes faster than the mileage might suggest because it's easy to get away with exceeding the speed limit.

"I made it in 5 1/2 hours once," he said.

Typically, the drive takes about eight hours.

CSilvera

9th Sep 2007, 01:14

Who is paying for this search?

EvilKitty

9th Sep 2007, 01:24

Who is paying for this search?

The US taxpayer. CAP is the civil auxiliary of the USAF (http://www.cap.gov (http://www.cap.gov/)).

20driver

9th Sep 2007, 04:20

I am somewhat amazed that the search has uncovered 6 previous unknown crash sites!
Ever see Fargo? Not every crash crew wants to be discovered.
But I have to admit I'm suprised.
20driver

sternone

9th Sep 2007, 06:24

If he would be still alive, and succeeded in finding water and food from maybe eating cactus or something else, believe me, he would be creating a large fire or burn his plane or something else so it would be seen on radar images...

I feel sad about this, we must understand he's gone.. RIP

Hokulea

9th Sep 2007, 06:59

I don't live in the area where the search is happening but have visited and flown over it several times. It's a frighteningly large and barren area with a whole bunch of features that could hide crash sites, especially for small aircraft, and the CAP definitely have a difficult job on their hands.

A question for anyone with a little more knowledge than I: I also found it rather remarkable that six "uncharted" (quoting CNN) crash sites have been discovered. Are these flights that the authorities knew went missing or are they real surprises, i.e., flights that no one had any idea about?

Maybe a little too early to ask that question, but am curious as to how many more mysteries this sad event might turn up.

Phil Space

9th Sep 2007, 07:36

A agree with Stenone. Little chance of him still being alive after a week with no contact.

alph2z

9th Sep 2007, 08:48

>> That would explain the lack of ELT signal.

Rescuers to probe lake as Fossett search enters fourth day

LOS ANGELES (AFP) — The search for adventurer Steve Fossett entered its fourth day on Wednesday, with rescuers preparing to probe a lake close to where the aviator's plane took off before it disappeared.
As aircraft took to the skies shortly after 7:00 am (1400 GMT), police said a search and rescue boat fitted with sonar equipment would be deployed on a lake near the Hilton Flying M Ranch, 80 miles (129 km) southeast of Reno, Nevada where Fossett was last seen.

"The new information is that they're going to put a boat onto the lake with sonar equipment that can detect large and fixed objects beneath the surface of the water," Nevada State police spokesman Chuck Allen told AFP.
While rescuers had no information to suggest that Fossett's light plane had crashed into Walker Lake, in Mineral County, Allen said officials wanted to take to the water "if only to rule it out."........

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gTQCd4ZynKmFO3BssvRraEr_dPrQ
.

robbreid

9th Sep 2007, 12:20

http://www.mturk.com/mturk/preview?groupId=9TSZK4G35XEZJZG21T60&kw=storyUse the above link, to search using GOOGLE EARTH to assist in finding Steve Fossett.A few tip and tricks from AVweb editor Jennifer Whitley, who's been helping with the online search:Read and follow the instructions on the Fossett Mechanical Turk home page carefully. It ain't rocket science -- if you know your way around a computer, you can help. For better detail, view the images in Google Earth.(Download and install this free application if you don't have it already.) Load the KML file provided on the Fossett Mechanical Turk home page to ensure you're viewing current (not cached) satellite data. Then cut and paste the latitude/longitude of the area you're reviewing into Google Earth. Use Google Earth's pan, tilt and zoom features to uncover more detail on the area you're reviewing. If in doubt, be conservative and mark the image for review. It will be passed along to search-and-rescue specialists for further analysis.

RobertS975

9th Sep 2007, 12:23

Does anyone know the site of the ranch from which he took off? Nearest town or crossroads to find the spot on a map?

M609

9th Sep 2007, 12:37

http://www.flashearth.com/?lat=38.611422&lon=-118.999894&z=16.1&r=0&src=ggl

cwatters

9th Sep 2007, 18:23

I spent around 2 hours yesterday looking at some 200 sat images.
All the terrain I was given was very difficult. All mountains, 500ft cliffs, trees, rock and and ravines. Google earth had some photographs and in that area - landing on a lake or perhaps a rock strewn river bed looked about the best there was. Hope he's not in that area.
Edit: link deleted as it was wrong.

ve3id

10th Sep 2007, 02:15

One sobering thought that I had when looking at the images of Nevada was the similarity with images of the Pakistan border where they have been looking for Osama Bin Ladin. Admittedly the latter is not trying to be found, but look at the resources that the allies have been expending to look for him, still to no avail.

I am afraid there is little hope of finding him.

Islander Jock

10th Sep 2007, 05:50

Very sad, my condolences to those in the US. I'm sure the thoughts of many of my fellow West Australians are with Steve at the moment.

I had the pleasure of meeting Steve very briefly back in 2002 when he launched off from Northam in Western Austrlia on his successful round the world baloon flight named "Spirit of Freedom". I've got some fantastic photos of Steve launching off on that cool winters morning.

onetrack

10th Sep 2007, 06:33

A recent news report says the Mechanical Turk search may have born some fruit, with a possible wreck sighting logged ..

http://www.theage.com.au/news/web/net-search-finds-fossett-lead/2007/09/10/1189276589116.html

njfly

10th Sep 2007, 10:10

How about into a lake...

Sedbergh

10th Sep 2007, 10:24

How long before a "Fossett was kidnapped by aliens" sect starts up? :rolleyes:

ChristiaanJ

10th Sep 2007, 10:24

njfly, they've already been there, done that.

golfyankeesierra

11th Sep 2007, 17:21

Any news? And how about that lake they were supposedly searching?

ChristiaanJ

11th Sep 2007, 17:26

golfyankeesierra, it would seem they already took out a launch with sonar (don't ask me how they found one in Nevada) on the lake and found nothing.

bluesilk

12th Sep 2007, 17:33

Some years ago I had the privelage of formating on Steve when on one of his round the world attempts in a baloon. I had Sir RB on board who chatted to the baloon for a while and a more unassuming man than Steve it would be hard to find. I trust and pray he will be rescued but the time since his disappearance does not augur well.

Confabulous

12th Sep 2007, 18:43

How many days can one survive without water in a hot environment? Five or six?

ChristiaanJ

12th Sep 2007, 18:59

Confabulous,How many days can one survive without water in a hot environment? Five or six?How long is a piece of string?
So many factors have to be taken into account, that your question simply has no answer.....
But by now we're talking about a week, so things ARE starting to look grim.

High Wing Drifter

12th Sep 2007, 19:29

What is really chilling is that due to this web based search effort, the number of crash sites they are discovering of aircraft that went missing without a trace decades ago.

Transall

13th Sep 2007, 21:32

Hi,

Since this search began, I have been thinking of "DB Cooper".
He's the chap who hijacked a 727 and jumped from the rear door in the early 1970's. I gather that the parachutes he was given were not first class equipment.
No trace of him was ever found. I'm not enough of a romantic to believe that he landed safely and just walked out of there.
If I'm not mistaken, this happened hundreds of miles further North but in similar terrain.

I'm still hoping for the best for Mr Fossett.

Best regards, Transall.

RatherBeFlying

14th Sep 2007, 00:36

Somewhere in my pile of books is one on DB Cooper's life after his parachute landing. It seems he injured his ankle upon landing in a forest, buried the cash (a portion of which was dug up by a raccoon and scattered) and found shelter in an isolated cabin where a lady took him in. The author bases his account on the lady's story which was related to him after DB Cooper's demise from natural causes many years later.

The serial numbers had been recorded, but the remaining money was laundered by buying chips at casinos, playing at a few tables and cashing out the chips when leaving.

bomarc

14th Sep 2007, 02:04

I know of few places like the nevada desert in the USA...I would have to think that unless he landed near some form of water he might be in real trouble.

the state of california, part of the possible area he was flying in has more water.

IF he is alive, I can't imagine him being in the desert. this has been a very dry year even by nevada standards...one small bit of rain in 85 days.

the snow on top of many of the mountains has long since melted.

two new leads are being explored...air search is hampered by high gusty winds...which in most spots wouldn't bother an experienced pilot, but swooshing over the sierra, one gets involved with turbulence and mountain wave.

RobertS975

14th Sep 2007, 03:26

None of the marked bills given to DB Cooper have ever turned up in circulation.

solocmv

15th Sep 2007, 09:37

I seem to recall about 5 or ten grand in twenty dollar notes being found by a kid fishing some years ago.

Cheers,
Solocmv.

172driver

15th Sep 2007, 11:15

Sadly, still no news from Steve. After almost two weeks w/o water out there, this, alas, doesn't look good at all. :(

Unless, of course, he chanced upon an alien starship and took it for a spin around the galaxy :ok:

Let's hope it's the latter....

Ada Quonsett

15th Sep 2007, 12:37

Abigail Butcher meets the high-flying pilots who keep an eye on the countryside: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/09/15/easky115.xml

VFE

15th Sep 2007, 16:44

Very sad business. :(

VFE.

CSilvera

18th Sep 2007, 05:15

I just heard they found the plane, but it was on "Coast to Coast" Am, so not sure it's accurate. . . .http://www.coasttocoastam.com/

alph2z

18th Sep 2007, 06:19

Hunt for Fossett grinds to a halt: police

LOS ANGELES (AFP) — The hunt for missing aviator Steve Fossett has ground to a virtual standstill, police said Monday, two weeks after the adventurer's plane vanished over the Nevada wilderness.

Nevada State police spokesman Chuck Allen told AFP the search for Fossett had been dramatically scaled back with only two grounded aircraft on standby and "four or five" military helicopters now deployed in the hunt.

At one stage during the search for 63-year-old Fossett -- who has not been heard from since taking off from a private airstrip in Nevada on September 6 -- around 45 aircraft were patrolling the area.

However Allen said the Civil Air Patrol had wound down their operations after completing their searches of an estimated 20,000 square miles (52,000 square kilometers) of rugged mountain terrain.

"The Civil Air Patrol feel that they have completed their search of 98 percent of the ground that needed to be covered," Allen told AFP.........
.

West Coast

18th Sep 2007, 06:23

To anyones knowledge has the identification of any of the six (or so) aircraft found during the search been released?

BigEndBob

18th Sep 2007, 19:44

Perhaps he's done a "Reggie Perrin".... any leather gloves or sunglasses found on the apron?? (go look up on Wiki any non UKer's)
Would he have any reason to disappear?

Gingerbread Man

18th Sep 2007, 20:29

Sorry, they found 6 other aircraft while searching?! Is that right?

This is really sad as it seems fairly certain that the outcome won't be good. The idea of not (maybe never) knowing what has happened to someone is very sobering - I can't imagine what his family must be going through.

kiwi chick

18th Sep 2007, 22:38

Yep, Gingerbread Man, apparantly so!

All unrelated wreckages, the question posed was whether anyone was AWARE of these missing aircraft or were they a complete surprise?!

I find it hard to believe that six different pilots (and poss pax) could have disappeared without anyone looking for them - I'm sure there's not that many homeless people with access to aircraft? :confused:

RobertS975

19th Sep 2007, 04:40

Some of the six discovered aircraft have apprently been missing for years.

ChristiaanJ

19th Sep 2007, 09:38

I did see a note somewhere (sorry, didn't bookmark the source) that, after verification of various records, five out of the six wrecks were known accident sites.

nippysweetie

19th Sep 2007, 18:21

Search now called off officially. Inevitable, and sad

172driver

19th Sep 2007, 19:25

Search now called off officially. Inevitable, and sad

Where did you get that from ? His site (http://www.stevefossett.com/) says otherwise.....

visibility3miles

20th Sep 2007, 01:22

http://www2.skynews.com.au/news/article.aspx?id=190511

Fossett search ends
Updated: 07:54, Thursday September 20, 2007

The search for missing US adventurer Steve Fossett has been called off, two weeks after he disappeared in a single engine plane in Nevada.

The most extensive search ever mounted in the western US state has failed to find any sign of him, but air crews will be kept on standby to fly to possible crash sites.

The legendary adventurer hast has survived a number of close calls and harrowing crash landings over his years, including a 9,000 metre plummet into the Coral Sea off Australia, when his balloon was torn in bad weather.

Fossett claimed almost 100 world records during his career, but his most notable achievement was being the first person to fly solo around the world in a balloon, in 2002.

He was also the first person to complete a solo, non-stop, non-refuelled circumnavigation of the world in 67 hours in the Virgin Atlantic Global Flyer.

:(

rodthesod

20th Sep 2007, 10:10

uk.msn.com are saying:
Fossett search called off

http://estb.msn.com/i/83/98C13EB0B09434C4D4113AC8B2CA2B.jpg

Authorities have stopped searching for missing US adventurer Steve Fossett.
In the most extensive search ever mounted in the western US state of Nevada, air crews have found no sign of Fossett, the first person to pilot a balloon solo around the world in 2002.
Mr Fossett took off alone in a single-engine air plane on September 3 from a private air strip in Nevada.
Spokesman Chuck Allen of the Nevada Department of Public Safety said the search is being scaled back.
But he said the authorities are hopeful Fossett may be alive.
Air crews are on standby to fly to possible crash sites, a spokesman for Nevada's public safety department said.

In my book 'scaled down' does not mean 'called off' - there's still hope.
rts

Flying Signman

26th Sep 2007, 12:10

Now CNN (as of yesterday) say "likely tracks" found by Airforce
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/25/steve.fossett.ap/

It has been a surprise to me that given the supposed coverage of USA Airspace by AWACS, that some of this information has not come to light earlier.....

I hope their is a conclusion to this soon..... one way or another.
I have helped with over 2,500 pics from the AmazonTurk / Google collaboration, so lets still hold hope for a while longer.

Ian.

dvv

26th Sep 2007, 17:18

Ian, your supposition is wrong, hence the surprise.

Flying Signman

27th Sep 2007, 19:13

dvv,

Let me put it another way.......

Having only driven from Yosemite National Park to Las Vegas over 3 days last month, I am very aware of the topography of the Valleys and Mountain ranges in that region.

To inspect the valley floors, Steve would probably be well below normal Radar coverage, so any "traces" the military have, must surely have come from Aircraft bourne systems on the day of flight that are looking down to the ground.

Why has it taken 3 weeks for any relevant traces to be found?
(If I read the report correctly)

That time could be the difference betweeen life and death.

Regards,

niknak

27th Sep 2007, 23:56

FS

The military observe radar tracks for the obvious reasons of defence of the Country and counter surveillance when requested.

Sadly, it seems that CNNs ever decreasing accuracy in reporting the facts and willingness to screen anything which gets ratings has pounced again.

In this particular instance, it would have taken a specifically dedicated aircraft to be following tracks in the vicinity of Fossets last known flight, to have picked up any tracks and, if a dedicated aircraft had been on such a mission, it would have almost been under instruction to report where they first picked up the track and where it ended, no more than that.
Thereafter, the relevant intelligence services would have assessed whether it was likely to be worth following up in terms of it being relevant to their investigation.

If not, they wouldn't have concerned themselves with it for a second longer than necessary and would have persued other leads.

The fact that someone was missing was probably of no relevance to what they were doing, or could have done to help.

172driver

3rd Oct 2007, 08:07

Doesn't look good :(

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h4Tt3Ok0yMNfSsatpddlmScxyEiQD8S1I9UG0

proctor

3rd Oct 2007, 15:21

one of the largest efforts to locate a missing plane in modern history.

...compared to those in, say, the Renaissance...

golfyankeesierra

25th Oct 2007, 21:14

Unbelievable that after all the effort nothing turned up.
I just googled for news and there's not much.
On www.stevefossett.com (http://www.stevefossett.com/) I read that on oct 19th the (privately funded) search was still on.
Any other news?

Spruit

26th Oct 2007, 09:52

I agree, I find it amazing that someone can just plain disappear in this modern day and age! You'd have thought with the technology available to the American government in the shape of satellites that can read news papers from orbit, it wouldn't be difficult to find a plane would you!

I hope if he has paid the ultimate price that it was quick and he didn't suffer!

Times like these I always think of the poem.

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth" by John Magee Jnr

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of earth,
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
Sunward I've climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
Of sun-split clouds, --and done a hundred things
You have not dreamed of --Wheeled and soared and swung
High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there
I've chased the shouting wind along, and flung
My eager craft through footless halls of air...
Up, up the long, delirious, burning blue
I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace
Where never lark or even eagle flew --
And, while with silent lifting mind I've trod
The high untrespassed sanctity of space,
Put out my hand, and touched the face of God.

Spru!

IO540

26th Oct 2007, 15:00

I am certain that (unless he was under cloud) the technology does exist for finding him.

But the chances of it being put to that use, potentially revealing the capability, is about the same as HMRC being able to approach the GCHQ to help them crack a secret code in your encrypted PDA if you are a builder and are suspected of doing cash jobs :)

niknak

12th Jun 2008, 15:51

The SKY News website is reporting that two teams are to resume the search on foot, concentrating on a smaller area although I don't have the details of that area or their resources.
This must be the ultimate "needle in a haystack" search & I don't see what else they can do after this if it reveals nothing, but good luck to them and his family anyway.

aviate1138

2nd Oct 2008, 06:13

One news source is reporting aircraft wreckage in the area. Closure for the family if true....

Teletext National News - Fossett 'wreckage' find (http://www.teletext.co.uk/news/national/99425b7a4dc250a9e80e94189bc9ec58/Fossett+'wreckage'+find.aspx)

Alanwsg

2nd Oct 2008, 08:33

Also from the BBC ....
BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Fossett searchers 'spot wreckage' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7647732.stm)

hum

2nd Oct 2008, 12:11

Google Earth Blog: Steve Fossett Items Found Near Mammoth Lakes (http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2008/10/steve_fossett_items_found_near_mamm.html)

airborne_artist

2nd Oct 2008, 16:16

A sad end but at least closure for his wife and family after 13 long months.

Not until they find his remains, I'd suggest, which I hope they do, or the conspiracy theorists will have way too much ammunition.

mustpost

2nd Oct 2008, 19:47

Don't know the area (obviously), but surpising that a square search wasn't done quickly just to check the immediate vicinity.
approximately 440 yards from where the personal belongings were found
One news source is reporting aircraft wreckage in the area
:confused:

IO540

2nd Oct 2008, 19:51

According to the news, the plane hit the terrain straight in, and the engine was a long way from the rest. Completely mangled. He wouldn't have walked anywhere.

MichaelJP59

3rd Oct 2008, 09:02

LA Times reporting that they have found a bone fragment so DNA testing should confirm one way or the other. Hopefully Steve died instantly in the crash.

It seems that the location is outside the area of the intensive search box. Although people have bemoaned the fact that Fossett set off without leaving details or a flight plan, surely that was part of the pleasure for him of just casually jumping in the aircraft and flying wherever he felt like in that beautiful wilderness area. He paid the price but surely we can all understand why he would do it. I certainly do when most of my flying here in England is constrained inside regulated airspace boxes:(

Exnomad

3rd Oct 2008, 12:47

Surely someone as experienced as Steve Fossett did not fall victim to a stuffed cloud, Most other things except for a major structural failure would have given time for a mayday.

IO540

3rd Oct 2008, 12:57

He may have been out of VHF contact. He was certainly out of radar contact.

Also if heading for a mountain (which is not normally something that gradually creeps up on you) you aren't going to be making radio calls.

I assume he was an instrument capable pilot - was he? If so, this is a mystery.

Exnomad

3rd Oct 2008, 13:01

Surely someone as experienced as Steve Fossett did not fall victim to a stuffed cloud, Most other things except for a major structural failure would have given time for a mayday.

mm_flynn

3rd Oct 2008, 15:22

I assume he was an instrument capable pilot - was he? If so, this is a mystery.
He doesn't seem to be in the FAA database anymore, but I am pretty sure he had an IR. However, the plane would probably have had minimal sophisticated nav kit - so if in temporary cloud could easily result in CFIT.

On the otherhand, the terrain at the crash site has a very sharp change in pitch (roughly 2:15 on the way and then 3:1 at the crash site), he would have had pretty limited climb performance at 11000 feet. It seems pretty likely he thought he was going to clear the ridge and then couldn't maneuver out of the crescent.

n5296s

3rd Oct 2008, 15:34

In the US you need an IR to fly above FL180, which he did on his round the world trip. (There are glider pilots who have an IR just so they can do this).

The valley he was in is quite wide, I've flown through it and it doesn't seem like a canyon. I measured it on Google Earth, there is plenty of room to turn especially in a Decathlon - I've practised canyon turns in one and it is amazing how little space you need. It's hard to see how he could have flown straight into a mountain like that unless he was in cloud.

It's all very strange.

n5296s

dicksorchard

3rd Oct 2008, 16:23

Is it not possible that Steve Fossett may have been incapacitated due to a sudden illness and was incapable of flying his aircraft ?

This seems a much more likely set of events than people questioning the mans flying ability .

I find the probability that the guy has had a heart attack or maybe stroke or seizure very high .

This would go some way to explaining the mystery as to how he could fly the aircraft into a mountainside .

After all Mr Fossett was in his 60's and could quite easily have an undiagnosed medical condition.

My friend ( just turned 50 ) seemed in perfectly good health and had recently passed all his medicals yet he had a massive heart attack just 6 hours after arriving
home from a flight to Malaga and back ( As Captain ).

There was absolutly no indication that my friend was in any way ill or suffering from heart problems . Thanfully he is alive and well but retired . Although we always wonder what could have happened had he been flying and become incapacitated .

I feel very sorry for all concerned but i bet the Fossett family are actually relieved to finally find out what happened to Their Steve .

The conspiracy theory will be know more and those that started it are looking rather stupid now .

R.I.P

172driver

3rd Oct 2008, 16:59

Agree, a couple of things don't quite gel here. I guess we can discount any doubts about SF's flying abilities. Also, a man of his experience wouldn't have got caught out in a mountain valley.

What intrigues me are two things:
1) if indeed he was looking for a large, flat area to break the land speed record, the Mammoth Lakes area isn't exactly the place to go looking
2) apparently the a/c flew straight into the mountain. Straight. I find it very hard to believe that a pilot of SF's experience would approach a ridge head-on.

All very weird indeed

ChristiaanJ

3rd Oct 2008, 17:02

dicksorchard,
Quite possible...
But there seems to be little point in speculating about that, especially since it happened over a year ago.
Let's give the NTSB time to examine the wreck site, and see if they can come to any conclusion as to "probable cause".
Anything else is now little more than sensationalism.

CJ

IO540

3rd Oct 2008, 18:54

Surely if you are looking for a large flat area, you................ ............... ................ get a MAP!!!

You don't get into a plane and set off into a load of terrain.

Did he actually say to somebody he was off to look for a large flat area? Is that statement verifiable? It sounds completely bonkers. The USA is so well mapped. Even google earth gives you hi-res pictures for most of it.

David Roberts

3rd Oct 2008, 19:56

This time last year the FAI conference in Rhodes was to have presented Steve with one of the top awards. It was a sad occasion with the news we had then.

Steve was an adventurer par excellence in many types of aircraft. I believe he was an ATP as well as PPL etc. More particularly, in view of the location of the accident in relation to his experience, he was a world record breaking glider pilot. Not in the flatlands but in the Alps of New Zealand and the Andes of Chile / Argentina. He knew the mountains, wave, turbulence and the severe dangers. In my humble view it is highly unlikely he would make the sort of mistake to fly straight into a mountain unless he was either disorientated by sudden cloud formation, or I would hazard a guess, incapacitated. It happens to others.
Steve was an inspiration to those who seek adventure in the skies. I have found some of the wilder speculation here and elsewhere quite appalling.

May he rest in peace in the knowledge he got out of life the maximum, which most of us aviators can only dream of most of the time. Life is not a dress rehearsal. Enjoy!

bad bear

3rd Oct 2008, 20:21

Well said David. We should all rejoice in the great things he did and not degrade his great name with some of the silly and unnecessary speculation that appears here. If I can break even one of his 121 records I would be so proud.

b b

vanHorck

3rd Oct 2008, 20:27

Like allways there will be contributory factors. The questions is just if we will ever find out the truth given the time since the accident and the lack of human remains.

He would have known of (and undoubtedly practiced) hammerhead turns to get out of the tightest of spots, and have known about the risks of going IFR in that region if there was cloud at all.

So my bet is on either physical incapacitation or a mechanical major malfunction such as stuck elevators/ailerons etc both PRIOR to the impact.

We lost a great pilot, but he died whilst practicing what he loved..... RIP

n5296s

3rd Oct 2008, 23:52

I really wonder if this "looking for somewhere to break the speed record" thing hasn't been way overplayed. You can imagine it yourself... there you are on a beautiful day in an incredibly scenic place, a plane just waiting for you, and with people who you like well enough but have seen plenty of. So you say, "Maybe I'll just go flying for an hour or two, it's such a great day".

And someone says, "Oh, why, what are you planning to do?" And you're way too polite to say, "Nothing much, but it'll be a whole lot more interesting than sitting round yakking with you lot", so you say "Oh, I dunno, I thought maybe I'd, er, maybe look for some big flat lake somewhere, you know, for this speed record thing."

And you take off, and you look at the Sierras 15 mins flying away, and you say to yourself, "Maybe I'll just mosey over there and see if I can find that ridge where I hiked last year, maybe take another look at Yosemite from above".

And of course you go missing and that last thing you ever said to anyone suddenly becomes incredibly important, but you never really meant it.

n5296s

IO540

4th Oct 2008, 06:43

More than likely, n5296s.

NigelOnDraft

4th Oct 2008, 21:33

...and let the NTSB get on and complete what will no doubt be a very difficult job under the circumstances.It will be interesting to see how much effort the NTSB put in ;)

With little evidence (?), a light single and just a single fatality, it is a regrettably common GA accident :eek: The "unusual" aspect is how well known the fatality was... and I am not sure that is grounds for a much deeper than usual investigation?

NoD

Lurking123

4th Oct 2008, 21:56

Something along the lines of:

"Is there any obvious sign of a significant aircraft failure (structure/engine/controls)?"

"No"

"File it as NPD"

BackPacker

5th Oct 2008, 07:01

Is there a guesstimate on how long identifying the human remains (presumably through DNA testing) is going to last? Or is this already done and dusted, so that we're sure it was Steve?

aviate1138

5th Oct 2008, 07:14

"Or is this already done and dusted, so that we're sure it was Steve?"

Jesus! Another conspiracy theorist! No, Steve gets out of his Decathlon and swaps with a suicidal pilot [who's family will be recompensed by the grateful Steve Fossett] and surely they must look for the tyre tracks of Steve Fossett's escape car hidden nearby, or maybe the witness marks of the alien space craft that has whisked Steve off to the Scientologist's Planet!!! :rolleyes:

How much time was spent on Frank Tallman's crash in the Sierras or Neil Williams' in the Pyrenees?

What possible evidence [other than a note] could explain why another highly experienced pilot hits a granite filled cloud from the remains of the accident?

BackPacker

5th Oct 2008, 08:09

Oh, come on. I know that twenty years ago, before DNA testing, the NTSB would have examined the tail number, matched that with Steves, and then proclaim Steve dead. But now that we have DNA testing, I know that it is standard procedure to verify the remains through DNA, before Steve is "officially" declared dead.

So all I wanted to know is whether that official declaration has been issued, or whether we're still waiting for that 0.000001% chance that it isn't Steve.

Flying Binghi

5th Oct 2008, 08:15

Does a Decathlon have cabin heat ?

aviate1138

5th Oct 2008, 11:23

Thread creep I know but.........

The World seems to have to require 100% safety, proof, reliability, organic, carbon offset.......

Why do we need the last 0.0000001% of anything? It makes everything So expensive!

Regaining thread.......

Wish there were more Steve Fossetts around and less Al Gores!

Pilot DAR

5th Oct 2008, 13:27

No, the world does not require 100% safety, proof, reliability, organic, carbon offset.......

Many in the world (clients) require lawyers. Lawyers and their clients require 100% safety, proof, reliability, organic, carbon offset.......

We all wait and pay....

Pilot DAR

BackPacker

5th Oct 2008, 18:22

SoCal, thanks.

With both the NTSB investigation and DNA testing expected to take months, I guess there won't be any more news soon.

And if the area is indeed now covered in two feet of snow, even more so.

RatherBeFlying

5th Oct 2008, 20:20

The debris field is quite large which suggests a glancing impact as opposed to "head on".

The right side cylinder heads / valve covers show damage while the left side shows no apparent damage in the photo.

One photo shows wreakage caught in a tree.

Looks like CFIT.

Perhaps an aerobatic maneuver gone wrong and/or entered too low? At 10,000' we have higher TAS and increased radii for turns and pullouts.

OFBSLF

6th Oct 2008, 14:43

The actual DNA test won't take months. But there is probably a backlog at the state forensics lab. This testing is likely to be deemed a lower priority than DNA tests for active crime cases, so it goes to the back of the queue.

India Four Two

6th Oct 2008, 17:18

Does a Decathlon have cabin heat ?

Yes. (10 characters required)

Machaca

7th Oct 2008, 03:17

SAR ops & crash site photos available here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rockwellb/sets/72157607737959209/).

RatherBeFlying

7th Oct 2008, 18:33

SAR ops & crash site photos available here.Photo 46 in higher resolutions shows the remains of the burnt-out fuselage structure in a copse which at first glance looks like a jumble of twigs:(

There are a few brightly painted bits, but a good likelihood that they were covered by subsequent snowfalls.

I wouldn't fault any searchers for missing this one.

Newforest2

7th Oct 2008, 21:32

Would this photo of a propeller suggest that it was not turning at the moment of impact?:confused:

40 on Flickr - Photo Sharing! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rockwellb/2913217718/in/set-72157607737959209/)

ChristiaanJ

7th Oct 2008, 21:38

Machaca,
Thanks for the link!
Those photos alone are enough explanation why such scattered wreckage on a hillside outside the 'formal' search area wasn't found before.

FoolsGold

9th Oct 2008, 19:48

Very good question about the cabin heat.
Its a simple shroud around the muffler that vents the air into the cabin. Dangerous as all get out if there is a carbon monoxide leak which just might have been what caused this incident. Atleast that would be consistent with the comments about high noise levels, the probable inverted attitude at impact, the engine developing power but apparently not full power and the pitch control possibly at cruise instead of climb.
Another possibility is bird strike incident.

Recapitulation of Search:

Flight was purely a pleasure flight; it was not to scope out flat racing sites.
He said he would follow a particular road and apparently did so only deviating to take a very scenic route to one of the 14,000 foot peaks he had not yet climbed but was one he intended to climb.
CHP sighting is consistent as to time and place.
Ranchhand Brawley at hill top cell phone conversation with his girlfriend was familiar with the plane and claimed to have seen it heading for Mud Flat near Hawthorne but this appears now to have been given too much weight by the searchers.

n5296s

9th Oct 2008, 23:13

Where does the info about pitch and throttle settings come from, and the witness info? First I've seen of those.

As for CO - definitely a possibility, but then this Decathlon must be in a different class from all the Citabrias/Decathlons I've flown, which have howling gales through the cabin at all times from the numerous ventilation holes, intentional and otherwise. otoh since it belonged to the richest hotel-chain owner in the world, I guess it's possible - walnut-panelled Super-D with extra thick pillows and room service anyone?

n5296s

FoolsGold

9th Oct 2008, 23:36

It was a plane belonging to Baron Hilton's Flying M Ranch and was used for spotting cattle in the brush that men on horseback would then go in and herd out of the brush. It was a working plane not a cushy play thing.

The sighting at Nine Mile Ranch as it flew overhead and was later seen as a distant speck heading for Mud Flat, Hawthorne area may have been a different date. Ranch hand had no particular reason to note the plane or the day and ranch hand was on vacation when interviewed at a rodeo in Pendleton, Oregon.

It is possible his observations were correct but too much weight was given to them and not enough to the pilot's own statements of his intentions that day.

Information on throttle settings and pitch settings is from analysis of photographs of the wreckage. Whatever situation there was instinct would have been to push the throttle all the way to the firewall so as to get every bit of power when it was most needed and propeller pitch would have been all the way to climb rather than cruise since a desperate climb was needed. The only thing that is consistent with the reports of noisy operation, improper throttle and pitch settings and inverted attitude is medical impairment due to carbon monoxide. Obviously its speculative at this point in time, probably not ever going to be verifiable without body tissue and probably based on only a rudimentary analysis of the debris field.

It appears he deviated from intended IFR track (I Follow Roads) solely to take the most scenic route to a peak he would later be climbing. This shows a functioning mind at the beginning of the deviation. Which would leave insidious intoxication by carbon monoxide or bird strike as disabling features causing a flight into steeply rising terrain at an inverted attitude.

Flying Binghi

10th Oct 2008, 03:27

this Decathlon must be in a different class from all the Citabrias/Decathlons I've flown, which have howling gales through the cabin at all times from the numerous ventilation holes, intentional and otherwise

It was a working plane not a cushy play thing.

Seems there is agreement that the machine was reasonably ventilated.

Re the claimed altitudes the aircraft was suposed to be flying at, and references to needing O2 - would it require much carbon monoxide to affect the pilot ? ...even allowing for the ventilated cabin.

FoolsGold

10th Oct 2008, 15:13

Reasonable ventilation does not negate insidious effect of carbon monoxide. Hemoglobin has an affinity for oxygen but it has a 300 percent greater affinity for carbon monoxide and extra ventilation will not induce the hemoglobin to let go of the carbon monoxide and pickup oxygen instead.

Inverted??
Well there are TWO indications. Blue paint on rock as first known impact with blue paint on the top of the aircraft and orange paint on the bottom. Also engine travelled 300 feet UPhill and crankshaft fracture is consistent with inversion.

Bird strike?? Personal ID, which I originally assumed had been dispersed by animals, may have been blown from cockpit by bird strike some distance from point of initial impact. There was a fire after the crash but none of the personal items bear fire indications.

jammydonut

10th Oct 2008, 15:31

Maybe it should just be accepted that he wasn't that good a pilot without a back up team to guide him.

RatherBeFlying

10th Oct 2008, 19:42

Information on throttle settings and pitch settings is from analysis of photographs of the wreckage.Which photos?

Blue paint on rock as first known impact with blue paint on the top of the aircraft and orange paint on the bottom. Also engine travelled 300 feet UPhill and crankshaft fracture is consistent with inversionOn what evidence do you base that? Do you have access to a map of the wreakage distribution or were you on the scene?

FoolsGold

10th Oct 2008, 21:56

The NTSB will be slow, ponderously so, often neglectful of certain avenues of inquiry, but above all else: slow!
I do indeed realize that much of this is speculative and second-hand, but its better than nothing.

I've had contact with two sources. Already there is confusion as to their use of the word 'plastic': plastic identification covering or plastic canopy shards?

I wish data was more readily available and more precise, but the NTSB just keeps its yap shut until the preliminary report and then waits and issues a final report when everyone but the lawyers have forgotten about the incident.

Flying Binghi

10th Oct 2008, 23:37

Atleast that would be consistent with the comments about high noise levels, the probable inverted attitude at impact, the engine developing power but apparently not full power and the pitch control possibly at cruise instead of climb.

I see FoolsGold has already covered it - but in pilot speak.

Perhaps a Decathlon pilot would care to answer in more layman terms re, How would a Decathlon fly if the pilot was incapacitaited ?

If the Decathlon was trimed for cruise, would it just fly straight and level until it ran out of fuel or rock free air ? or, would the aircraft start to wander about the sky doing progressively more aggressive 'aerobatics' ?

BackPacker

11th Oct 2008, 06:16

If the Decathlon was trimed for cruise, would it just fly straight and level until it ran out of fuel or rock free air ? or, would the aircraft start to wander about the sky doing progressively more aggressive 'aerobatics' ?

I have never flown a Decathlon in my life but since everybody here seems to be speculating anyway, I'll throw in my two cents as well...

My guess is that the Decathlon would behave like any other light aircraft when trimmed for the cruise: It will either cruise straight on until running out of fuel and then descend at cruise speed until it hits terrain, or gradually bank over and go into a spiral dive.

But I cannot imagine a scenario where an aircraft would spontaneously go into aggressive aerobatics, or start to fly inverted, without a conscious and extreme control input.

IO540

11th Oct 2008, 10:05

I have never come across a "normal" aircraft which is stable in roll.

All normal ones are stable in pitch, which means they will either climb to the ceiling for that engine setting (or available output), or descend into the ground.

But all of the above will enter a spiral dive within minutes at most. My TB20 is one of the most stable types but it will be in a dive certainly within minutes. From a few thousand feet, you would hit the ground close to vertical, at well over Vne. But I doubt it would actually end up inverted.

The one thing I noticed in the photos is that the cylinders got ripped off on one side but hardly damaged on the other. Assuming a conventional flat four, this suggests hitting the terrain with the side, not upside down, and not vertically either.

S-Works

11th Oct 2008, 10:28

Virtually every certified aircraft I have ever flown is stable in roll as well as pitch. AFAIK it is part of the certification requirements.

The only aircraft I have flown apart from a few twitchy permit types that displayed the symptoms IO describes were incorrectly rigged.

In smooth air my Cessna when trimmed will fly for hours in a straight line hands off.

With all due respect peter, it might be worth looking at the rigging on your aircraft if it is rolling like that as it is certainly unusual.

Fuji Abound

11th Oct 2008, 10:46

You will find with the 22 if you set the aircraft in a 45 degree bank (or whatever you like) take your hand of the side stick it will go round and round forever - well at least until it runs out of fuel or you feel sick.

Most certified aircraft are very stable in roll and pitch - after all that is what the designers want these days.

Move towards aerobatic aircraft and that of course changes. However, even things like the FA200, my namesake, is pretty stable in roll and pitch. In contrast the Extra (in which I only have a couple of dozen hours) seemed to me to be stable in neither. The Bambi (on permit) which I have also flown given that it is not aerobatic is, IMO, completly unstable, but fun. I wouldnt want one however.

(Edited to add: I suppose stability is a relative term. If you havent flown very many types an FA200 compared with say a Cessna will seem unstable in roll and pitch. If the aircraft is badly rigged (always a possibility) some one who is familiar with the type will have agood idea whether the rigging is off.)

IO540

11th Oct 2008, 11:09

One "learns" something every day (http://www.aoe.vt.edu/%7Ecwoolsey/Courses/AOE3134/Lectures/AOE3134.Lecture8.pdf)

In the case of rolling motion, there is no feature of an airplane which provides static roll stability per se.

Lurking123

11th Oct 2008, 12:48

Indeed one should learn something every day. Lateral Stability (static or dynamic) is not normally defined with regards to rolling motion. The 'roll' is directly linked to a slip and if you bothered to read all of the document you quoted, you would note that stability in a slip (roll) can be achieved with a wide variety of methods. Also, from FAR 23:

Sec. 23.171 General.

The airplane must be longitudinally, directionally, and laterally stable
under Secs. 23.173 through 23.181. In addition, the airplane must show
suitable stability and control "feel" (static stability) in any condition
normally encountered in service, if flight tests show it is necessary for
safe operation.

However, the requirements of 23.177(b), static lateral stability, do not apply to to acrobatic category airplanes certificated for inverted flight. So, in this circumstance, there appears to be no legal requirement for a Super Decathalon to be statically stable. Whther it is or not, I do not know.

Fuji Abound

11th Oct 2008, 14:53

I have flown a Super -D (only twice). It was reasonably stable in both pitch and roll, very similiar to the FA200 (on which I have over 1,500 hours).

n5296s

11th Oct 2008, 17:21

The Super D is kind of normal as far as stability goes.

I agree with IO540 that indefinite hands-off stability is not the norm. In fact if you give an aeroplane too much roll stability, you get dutch roll, and as I understand it a limited degree of spiral divergence is generally considered preferable. After all the idea is not that you can fall asleep (or die) and the plane will fly until it's out of fuel, it's just to avoid what happens in the movies where the moment the pilot takes his hand of the yoke, the plane careens earthward.

If a plane is trimmed for level flight and it enters a stable bank, then the nose will start to drop and that is the departure point for a spiral dive.

My 182 will certainly fly hands off for 30 seconds or so, but then it does start to turn. I haven't left it to see what happens over a longer period, but I will next time I fly it.

Of course if you are incapacitated, especially in a plane with a stick, it's quite likely that the controls will not be free anyway.

Be all that as it may, spiral diveregence leads eventually to hitting the ground more or less vertically, which did not happen in this case.

At this point I'd say the little available evidence suggests that he found himself making a canyon turn and just didn't get it to turn tightly enough. There is very little horizontal space in the area where he crashed. Although he was an experienced pilot, I don't remember seeing that he had aerobatic experience, so (like the SR20 in New York) he may not have been comfortable making a *really* tight turn. And it's possible that in the last couple of seconds when he realised how close he was, that maybe he did pull/bank harder and enter an "unusual attitude" - maybe snapped or something - which could explain - if indeed it is the case, for which personally I have not seen convincing evidence - that he was inverted (but not vertical) when he hit.

n5296s (or maybe n452s in this case)

IO540

11th Oct 2008, 18:04

I agree with n5296s. I don't know the SD but I doubt there is any common low wing plane which does not have spiral divergence. That would amount to indefinite static roll stability!! In calm air, it would fly a constant heading forever. Nice, but I would think sales of the old wing leveller autopilots would have been pretty poor :) Every Cessna or Piper I ever flew would go into a spiral dive quite happily.

Flying a banked turn (a constant orbit) is not quite the same thing as static roll stability. One could indeed fly a constant 5 degree orbit in a C152, seemingly indefinitely, if trimmed appropriately. But the same plane would always enter a spiral dive from trimmed straight and level flight, eventually.

Fuji Abound

11th Oct 2008, 21:11

IO540

I think there is a difference between being stable in roll and eventually departing. Without having read all the previosu posts a Super-D is relatively stable in roll (from my limited experience). It is possibly less stable than a TB20, but not by much, and a great deal more stable than some other aircraft I have flown.

Perhaps your point was that eventually any aircraft will depart in the horizontal axis?

That said there is a very well documented case of the Cessna that took off without the pilot and some while later landed with no damage at all. A case of divine intervention in the horizonatal and vertical axis perhaps or proof that the big fella got his PPL.

S-Works

12th Oct 2008, 10:06

Every Cessna or Piper I ever flew would go into a spiral dive quite happily.

Perhaps some time with an Instructor would help sort this out?

In still air my Cessna correctly trimmed and loaded will fly in in a straight line for a very long time. And I am pretty sure it is a standard example of a 30 year old spam can.

dirkdj

12th Oct 2008, 10:48

Spiral dive recovery is specifically demonstrated in the Bonanza Pilot Proficiency Program. In good VMC nobody will have any problem with it, but a pilot trained on say a 172 who gets his hands on a Bonanza in IMC may have more than he wanted unless trained for it.

Here is some serious reading:

Angle of Attack Stability, Trim, and Spiral Dives [Ch. 6 of See How It Flies] (http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoastab.html#toc118)

At the first PPLIR meeting in Kortrijk (1997?) I gave a paper on Spiral Dive Recovery and anyone who was present will remember it, I even got email messages from enthousiastic members who tried it on the way home.

Of the dozen airplanes I'm checked out in, including the Super Decathlon, not one of them will not enter a spiral dive if left alone, never was checked out in any Cessna however.

Fuji Abound

12th Oct 2008, 12:44

Bose

Is the problem that many people spend all their time with the autopilot engaged. I use to do a lot of flying in an aircraft in which I couldnt engage the autopilot - there wasnt one. Particularly in IMC once CORRECTLY trimed it would fly itself for literally miles even very often in the lumps and bumps of the clouds.

S-Works

12th Oct 2008, 17:32

Indeed Fuji, it could be. All I know for a fact is that every Cessna I have flown that has not flown straight and level has been miss-rigged or miss-loaded.

I have just flown back in from Hibblestone, perfect smooth air and my aircraft flew straight and level trimmed hands off for nearly 50nm. I am certain I do not have a magic Cessna!

n5296s

13th Oct 2008, 05:50

I tried extended hands-off flying today. No spiral dive but the plane would often enter a very slow turn and be very stable with one wing slightly down. However it is extremely sensitive to rudder trim, not surprisingly, so it could have been due to not having this set absolutely perfectly.

(I flew a heli for the first time too, which was a lot of fun, but not really relevant!)

n5296s/n9888s

Fuji Abound

13th Oct 2008, 09:54

IO540

I have been thinking about this a bit more. The TB20 is, I think, designed as a long range tourer with IFR capability. It has no pretentions of aerobatic capability. As an older design it also does not gain its speed from clever aerofoil design or a particularly streamlined airframe - its more about brute strength. I would therefore have expected the designers to have built in a healthy quantity of stability both in pitch and roll. I wonder if there is any possibility the rigging is off, if yours displays so little stability in roll, or perhaps this is an unexpected quirk of the design?

n5296s

How did you fing the egg whisk?

Lurking123

13th Oct 2008, 10:21

I agree, the TB20 has a fine reputation as a long range cruising machine. The though of having to constantly 'fly' it seems a bit alien.

BackPacker

13th Oct 2008, 12:06

Since I was the person who introduced this whole roll stability thing into this thread, may I also be the one to suggest to stop discussing this now as part of the "Steve Fossett missing" thread?

If anyone feels the need to discuss the finer points of static, dynamic and divergent roll stability further, please open another thread.

(Alternatively, moderators, could you split off the last dozen or so posts into a different thread?)

IO540

13th Oct 2008, 16:06

Backpacker - agreed!

Fuji - I think that either somebody (not you) is taking the p*ss out of me as usual, or we are talking with wires crossed.

I have flown PA38, C150, C152, C172, C182, PA28 (various specimens of the foregoing, as found at a certain airport which you know about), TB10, TB20 (several ones), SR22, DA42, C421C, an RV6 (or RV8?) and maybe a few others I don't recall right now. None of them had static roll stability, meaning that you could just trim it for wings level, altitude not changing, and it could be left like that indefinitely (hours). My TB20 can go (I've tried it) for anything up to a few mins before it is entering the old spiral of death, which is highly stable and makes for very easy long distance manual flight, but that is a completely different concept from total static stability in which any reasonable departure from wings level will restore the wings level condition.

One can achieve total roll stability with a lot of dihedral, and/or other ways, and it's easier if the COG is below the centre of lift (as in high wing planes) and this is routinely done on model aeroplanes which often don't have ailerons - just a rudder, and in some cases not even an elevator.

I've just checked this out with some other pilots and also aircraft design experts so I am happy enough.

S-Works

13th Oct 2008, 16:39

Fuji - I think that either somebody (not you) is taking the p*ss out of me as usual, or we are talking with wires crossed.

Nope, you have just become paranoid.

I still maintain and so does my engineer that any aircraft that descends into th spiral of death that you are indicating is probably down to being miss-rigged or miss-loaded.

I have just done a flight test in a Chipmunk and lo and behold, trimmed it out straight and level and flew along for several minutes in a straight line with out any inclination to start a turn or head for a dive.

Wrong Stuff

13th Oct 2008, 19:05

Spiral stability is covered in many standard texts. From Thom...

The lateral stability characteristics of the aeroplane, such as dihedral, cause the lower wing to produce increased lift and to return the aircraft to the wings-level positions. There are two effects in conflict here:

- the directionally stable characteristics (large fin) want to steepen the turn and drop the nose further; and
- the laterally stable characteristics (dihedral) want to level the wings.

If the first effect wins out, i.e. strong directional stability and weak lateral stability (large fin and no dihedral), then the aircraft will tend to bank further into the sideslip, towards the lower wing, with the nose continuing to drop, until the aeroplane is in a spiral dive (all without any input from the pilot). This is called spiral instability.

Most aircraft are designed with only weak positive lateral stability and have a slight tendency to spiral instability. This is preferable to the reverse situation - an effect called Dutch roll.

Further reading... AvWeb - The Deadly Spiral (http://www.avweb.com/news/airman/184306-1.html)

Contacttower

3rd Nov 2008, 23:48

DNA tests have confirmed that the remains in the aircraft were those of Steve Fossett.

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Bones confirm Steve Fossett death (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7707397.stm)

Tfor2

13th Mar 2009, 03:09

Impossible to prove, but as a private pilot who's known to talk to himself in a tight situation, how's this for a scenario?
:O "Lovely day for flying -- Wow, I see some lakes over there, think I'll take a look-see. May want to do a water speed record if it's suitable. -- No, too small, I don't think that'll do it, but do I see another lake, a little further on? If not, maybe I could find some really flat land to break my land-speed record -- No, nothing here, I suppose I could land and look around -- Oh oh, must change my mind, it's late, and I'm way off track and people are waiting for me. -- Come to think of it, I didn't file a flight plan, but who does, these days, I didn't know where I was going anyway on such a nice day -- I'll just have to take a short cut through that range over there and straight line it home -- What, no VOR, no navigating instruments, no landmarks? Is the fuel gauge good on this aerobatic machine? Where the hell am I? Ages since I practiced instruments anyway -- Seat of the pants? This is absurd, for me. Ironic indeed -- Geeez, look at the fuel gage! Where is it? I'm nearly out, if I go down, my cell phone won't work -- Don't panic, everything will be alright -- There's a gap! Thank God, I'll go through it, bound to take me home real fast, or then I can glide. Oh for a balloon! -- SHEEEIT, it doesn't go anywhere. Is this what they mean by a Box Canyon? -- Can I make a tight turn to the left? How about to the right? -- Too late, better release my harness and hope for the best. Maybe I can get out if the landing's not too hard. Don't panic. Stay cool." C-R-A-S-H!! Curtain. :(

vanHorck

13th Mar 2009, 08:58

Why so complicated? An older experienced pilot had a stroke or heart attack...
He had a great life and died doing what he loved
End of story

Pilot DAR

13th Mar 2009, 11:17

Tfor2's imagined "complicated" scenerio is largely preventable with self discipline, the simple scenerio much less so. Reminding ourselves to fly with discipline is never a bad thing.

Pilot DAR

mm_flynn

13th Mar 2009, 11:19

The NTSB seems to think he was trying fly over the ridge and got caught in an unexpected downdraft he wasn't able to outclimb the terrain. Heart attack, etc. you would normally expect it to look like a loss of control accident rather than CFIT.

Tfor2

15th Mar 2009, 06:15

Think so? Check out the story of Frank Tallman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Tallman), a very experienced pilot, and his partner, both died for no good reason.

Maoraigh1

15th Mar 2009, 21:09

That Wlki link is to CFIT in IMC. I find it hard to believe an experienced glider pilot would have got himself into the position in the first place, and that a pilot of Fossett's experience would have crashed in the way he did, if fully conscious.

Tfor2

16th Mar 2009, 06:30

Mountain flying is for experienced locals. Winds, density altitude, and familiarity with the plane's performance suggest he should not have been flying alone. Or not gone adventuring.

Here's the report: SEA07FA277 (http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20081007X17184&ntsbno=SEA07FA277&akey=1)

IO540

16th Mar 2009, 06:56

I've just read the whole report. It sounds totally inconclusive. In particular, unless I have missed something, no conclusion whatsoever could be reached regarding medical factors.

mm_flynn

16th Mar 2009, 16:54

Inconclusive but with a lot of important facts

It was a severe clear day - No clouds, 60 miles viz (so CFIT in IMC is not a real possibility
It was way above standard and the POH says 370 fpm is the best the aircraft would do at the accident site.
There is a radar track at the right time and place that has no irregularity worth commenting upon (other than the loss of Mode C).
The debris trail and impact signatures seem consistent with CFIT .
[Opinion]the two points above are not consistent with a medical emergency.
There was 35 knots (from memory) of wind across the mountain.
The NTSB commissioned a meteorological analysis that indicated downdrafts in excess of the aircraft's maximum climb rate would have been expected at the crash location.
PIREPS indicate very smooth air interrupted by quite bumpy periods.

No conclusion is reached, but inadvertent IMC or medical issues seem remarkably unlikely to have anything to do with this accident.

jammydonut

16th Mar 2009, 17:26

Its bewildering why Fossett thought that he could undertake such flight without the assistance of his retinue of paid experts who would normally do all his flight planning and navigation.

Morane

16th Mar 2009, 20:06

Hi,

"3. There is a radar track at the right time and place that has no irregularity worth commenting upon (other than the loss of Mode C). "

The radar track reached 14900ft and there is no mention that he used oxygen.
If he did not, a loss of consciousness is quite possible.
With a climb rate of 300ft/min, the climb from 12000ft to 14900ft would have brought him over the legal limit for nearly 10 minutes.

Joe

IO540

16th Mar 2009, 20:20

Its bewildering why Fossett thought that he could undertake such flight without the assistance of his retinue of paid experts who would normally do all his flight planning and navigation

Please explain. This bloke had some 6k+ hours. Maybe many not in pistons?

The radar track reached 14900ft and there is no mention that he used oxygen.
If he did not, a loss of consciousness is quite possible.
With a climb rate of 300ft/min, the climb from 12000ft to 14900ft would have brought him over the legal limit for nearly 10 minutes.

Yes, FAA-illegal perhaps but not a risk re consciousness unless he had a medical issue.

It does appear that he was flying pretty close to the actual aircraft ceiling, so would have been going fairly close to Vs and it would not have taken much of a downdraught to bring him back down. However, in that situation and faced with celarly visible obstacles one would have turned around. The wreckage was of a very high speed flight straight into the mointain.

It doesn't make sense to me at all.

Lightning6

10th Jul 2009, 00:43

Latest report from the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8143540.stm).

Bill Harris

10th Jul 2009, 02:04

NTSB report SEA07FA277 out today:

SEA07FA277 (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20081007X17184&key=1)

In a nutshell:

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The pilot’s inadvertent encounter with downdrafts that exceeded the climb capability of the airplane. Contributing to the accident were the downdrafts, high density altitude, and mountainous terrain.

--Bill

TiiberiusKirk

10th Jul 2009, 07:44

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 9, 2009
SB-09-35
NTSB DETERMINES THE PROBABLE CAUSE OF THE 2007 PLANE CRASH INVOLVING STEVE FOSSETT WAS AN ENCOUNTER WITH DOWNDRAFTS
Washington, DC – The National Transportation Safety Board has released its final report on the aviation accident that claimed the life of Steve Fossett.

The Board determined that the aircraft, a Bellanca 8KCAB-180 (N240R) struck mountainous terrain near Mammoth Lakes, California following an inadvertent encounter with downdrafts that exceeded the climb capability of the airplane. Contributing to the accident were the downdrafts, high density altitude, and mountainous terrain. On September 3, 2007, Mr. Fossett, the only person aboard, departed Flying M Ranch, a private airport near Yerington, Nevada on a local, personal flight and failed to return. A month-long search by the Civil Air Patrol, state and county authorities, and friends of the accident pilot failed to locate the aircraft.
On October 7, 2008, a hiker found some of the pilot’s personal effects. “Once these items were found, the Safety Board launched a team to conduct the on-scene phase of the investigation,” said NTSB Acting Chairman Mark V. Rosenker. An aerial search located the airplane wreckage about 0.5 miles from the pilot’s personal effects, at an elevation of approximately 10,000 feet.

On the day of the accident, no emergency radio transmissions were received from the pilot, nor were any emergency locator transmitter signals received. After the wreckage was discovered, a review of radar data from September 2007 revealed a track that ended about 1 mile northwest of the accident site.
The Board's report, including the probable cause, is available on the NTSB's website at: SEA07FA277 (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20081007X17184&key)=

NTSB Media Contact: Terry N. Williams
terry dot williams @ ntsb dot gov ([email protected])

Superpilot

10th Jul 2009, 08:01

Tragic thing is a man of his experience should've known all that there is to know about mountain flying but had to push himself to the very edge. Winds near mountain ridges are not nice. Downdrafts especially.

TiiberiusKirk

10th Jul 2009, 08:33

Not that it would have made any difference in the sense of saving life, but it's a bit odd that the authorities ignored a 20 minute radar track because of a single eye-witness report that put the plane elsewhere.

The eye-witness report was correct, but the time of the sighting was incorrect by 1 hour. The radar track was of SFs' plane.

From the radar track, the search could easily have been concentrated in a very small area and the the wreckage found.

poteroo

10th Jul 2009, 08:37

The estimated 'downdrafts' of 300fpm were rather conservative, considering a reported wind forecast of 30-50 kts at 13,000ft in the mountains.

Maoraigh1

10th Jul 2009, 08:38

IO540

10th Jul 2009, 09:01

Exactly; they haven't got a clue really. This is the case for most GA accidents.

Locked door

10th Jul 2009, 09:01

If the personal effects were found away from the crash site how long did he survive post crash? Seems a real shame the radar trace was ignored if he was alive but hurt on the ground.

Michael Birbeck

10th Jul 2009, 09:02

An older aircraft probabaly running x% under its rated horse power, high density altitude, near aircraft maximum ceiling, down drafts and mountains below.

With these conditions pertaining, a day out in a light aircraft can become deadly for even an aviator as skilled and experienced as Steve Fosset.

astir 8

10th Jul 2009, 09:15

From what I have gathered from news reports and reading the descriptions of the aircraft wreckage, death would have been instantaneous. The body parts were subsequently moved away from the crash site by scavenging bears etc

FoolsGold

10th Jul 2009, 09:16

Although not explicitly resolved in the report, it appears that as impact forces would have been fatal, any post-crash migration of personal items was by animals later attracted to the scene.

An excessive weight given to a ranchhand's recollection diverted the search area for both offiial efforts and private efforts. Unstated in the report is the time of the later analysis of phone records.

That radar track was located where the pilot had indicated he would be.

I know mountain flying is difficult and demanding but I think the report should have addressed the pilots knowledge of it and his skill level involving avoidance of pitfalls and recovery from them.

TowerDog

10th Jul 2009, 09:34

The estimated 'downdrafts' of 300fpm were rather conservative,

The estimated "Climb Capability" of the airplane at the altitude was 300fpm, the downdraft was probably a lot more than that, hence the crash...

oversteer

10th Jul 2009, 09:36

I would have thought, having worked for five years to set a record for altitude gained in a glider (via mountain wave), Steve Fossett would have known everything about flying in mountains and the risks of doing so.

The downdrafts mentioned - would this be related to curlover? How high above a ridge is it likely to affect you, at the quoted 30-50kts ?

mm_flynn

10th Jul 2009, 09:42

400 ft per minute downdraft would not make the aircraft uncontrollable. Turbulence might. But all he had to do to avoid a crash was turn away. The remains they found can give no information on whether he was incapacitated before the crash.
Remember he was close to Vs, a sharp turn means stalling or unloading the wings by a constantly accellerating down and it takes a considerable bearing turn (particularly in an arc shaped ridge - which is my recollection of the topography) to start increasing the distance from the hazard.

racedo

10th Jul 2009, 09:53

While probably not at the time of his choosing I guess he would have preferred doing something he loved up to his death than sitting around in a nursing home for years on end.

Graybeard

10th Jul 2009, 13:13

Links to the search and recovery are at: Aircraft Wreck Finders Home Page (http://www.aircraftwrecks.com/) Scroll most of the way down the left column.

The report on the Mooney M20 is a bit of comic relief. The pilot was known as Mooney Hank, although he never owned another Mooney. Pat Macha was puzzled by the wreckage they found, until I told him about Mooney Hank.

GB

MLS-12D

10th Jul 2009, 21:31

jammydonutMaybe it should just be accepted that he wasn't that good a pilot without a back up team to guide him.

jammydonutIts bewildering why Fossett thought that he could undertake such flight without the assistance of his retinue of paid experts who would normally do all his flight planning and navigation.
If you have any actual evidence that his piloting skills were weak, please share it with us.

davidswelt

10th Jul 2009, 22:39

oversteer (http://www.pprune.org/members/118315-oversteer), in a glider, you simply don't want to go to the downwind side of a ridge.

As far as lift goes, it very much depends on wind direction and shape and height of the hill, but I'd get lift up to 1,500-2,000 ft above a 1,200 ft ridge in moderate wind that perpendicular to the ridge (that's maybe 15kts of wind).

Lift tends to move further out from the ridge as you get higher. I reckon that the downdraft does the same, but of course I have no first-hand experience from that side of the ridge :)

Now, if you have a huge mountain, and you're up where the wind is 50 kts or more (didn't read the report), go figure.

Glider pilots with mountain flying experience can probably say more about this...

But you know, someone like SF will have known all this a lot better than any of us here.

421dog

11th Jul 2009, 01:42

Well, he's dead...

LH2

11th Jul 2009, 01:45

I haven't read the NTSB report, and only skimmed over recent posts to see if I was taking this out of context, but...

400 ft per minute downdraft would not make the aircraft uncontrollable. Turbulence might. But all he had to do to avoid a crash was turn away.

...with any mountain experience at all (and the gentle rolling hills of Scotland don't count :)) you would realise you've just described the typical day out which ends with bits of brain splattered all over the granite. To wit:

400 ft per minute downdraft would not make the aircraft uncontrollable

-400fpm (approx. -2m/s) is very bad news at high density altitudes, such as your typical summer mountain environment.

Turbulence might

Strong winds + mountains = rotors. Plenty of ways those can kill you, incl. losing consciousness following a sudden meeting of cockpit and skull.

But all he had to do to avoid a crash was turn away

One needs to appreciate that at high density altitude if you're lucky you've got 50% as much engine as at sea level, while at the same time you require a bigger turn radius. If you happen to be on a downdraft your available turning space will be reduced both horizontally and vertically, more so the longer you stay in the downdraft. Pulling a successful turn in the mountains requires experience, but that same experience will usually stop you from getting into a situation where you need to contemplate that sort of thing. I can remember two recent accidents (within the last 18 months) where non-mountain pilots and their passengers got killed just that way.

So yes, the conditions you describe can easily kill any pilot regardless of experience and no, you can't "just" turn away, because it doesn't work like that.