I agree that planning is very important, but the planning process should not stop when airborne.
Multi crew procedures, say for take-off, are a good example of how decisions can be made clear cut in a phase of flight where ambiguity will kill. I.e." below x kts. we will stop for blah blah and above y kts.we will continue etc etc.". No deviation. I try to apply the same criteria for critical decisions on any flight, particularly when alone and I don't have the luxury of another crew member to temper my enthusiasm. In this situation I would like to think that at the onset of I.M.C. I would have made an immediate 180 degree turn and gone back. This plan would have been made long before the situation had arisen, hopefully preventing me from making the wrong decision when I was under stress.
I love piston engined aeroplanes but don't like to mix them with mountains and ice. Under-powered light twins are no match for the type of conditions that prevailed over the Alps on Saturday.
I have read on this thread about oxygen, performance, icing and how this situation might have been survivable, but:
What would have happened if the aircraft had suffered an engine failure whilst the pilot had been attempting the climb to the sector safe altitude, which, incidentally, would have taken several minutes even with both engines operating ?
When was the last time any of us was tested for performance under the enormous stress this poor guy was under ? Like most of you, I have been in places I didn't want to be in an aeroplane and it ain't nice !
Faced with these factors there was only one option, turn back.
Perhaps the pilot was attempting to do just that, we will find out in due course.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but the chance of making an error can be reduced if, whilst during the first 2 hours or so of this type of flight when the conditions are V.M.C.and the autopilot is on, that one thinks about the potentially most hazardous part of the journey and plans for when things turn to rat sh#t.