I agree with all of that, except for the pilot not understanding the implications of squawk 1200. He knew.
That may very well be in doubt, forget whether this came from the report or docket.
The second SCT controller said that, when he received his first radio communication from the accident pilot (when the pilot advised that he was starting a climb to go above the layers), the pilot spoke as if the flight were receiving ATC radar advisory services (which it was not). To identify the flight, the controller requested that the pilot “ident,” observed the flight’s location and 1200 transponder code, and asked the pilot for information about his intentions. During this exchange, the controller lost radar contact and radio communication with the flight. According to the controller, he was not providing flight-following service to the flight at the time he lost contact with it because he had not received enough information from the pilot to complete the flight’s entry into the system. He said he did not report losing radio communication and radar contact with the flight because such losses were routine with low-flying aircraft in that area due to spotty radio and radar coverage in the mountains.
I am disappointed in the NTSB Final Conclusion as to the Cause of the Accident....it goes far deeper than one guy getting the whirlies and losing control of the aircraft
Would you care to expand
SAS so we all may learn, I thought the probable cause was a fair summation. We can rabbit on about vestibular illusions and the like, but the focal point is he was not supposed to put himself in a situation where those illusions might arise, it's a typical VMC into IMC accident, with rookie mistakes apparent, such as failing to slow down, was arrival time for drop off important, far, far better to be late than dead on time.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the pilot’s decision to continue flight under visual flight rules into instrument meteorological conditions, which resulted in the pilot’s spatial disorientation and loss of control. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s likely self-induced pressure and the pilot’s plan continuation bias, which adversely affected his decision-making
Love a plagarised quote - The irony about flying in fog is that the weather nearly always clears up and sunny by the time they put you in a body bag
Anyone with any aviation knowledge would likely be filtered out by the defence during jury selection
That's when one side or the other brings out its "expert witness", sometimes a contradiction in terms.