I don't disagree with anything said above.
Any accident that results in loss of life or serious injury is a tragedy, however, the circumstances described in the ATSB report should not have resulted in loss of the aircraft.
In this case, the pilot had completed a MECIR some 5 months prior to the accident. It is hard to believe that he was not proficient in flying on limited panel. If he wasn't - then he should have been. Ditto to having an effective instrument scan.
ATSB reports state the facts, but there is often more to what actually happened that can be gleaned from the ATSB report on first reading.
The AP in the aircraft was U/S and therefore the pilot would have been hand flying. That being the case, it is hard to imagine that he would not have picked up discrepancies in his instrument scan if the low suction was having an effect on the reliable function of the AH and DG.
AS, AH, Alt, GD, T&B, compass ......... hmmmmmm!! What's the deal here?
I have had 3 vacuum pump failures and one AH failure in SE aircraft in IMC. With the vac pump failures, in all cases, continued slight discrepancies between flight instruments alerted me to the problem - before the low suction light came on or I noticed the low reading on the suction guage. For the AH failure, I just happened to be looking at it when it rolled upside down.
Look at the whole picture:
1) Night VMC flight
2) No AP
3) Dark night
4) Suspect suction for primary flight instruments
5) Surface trough with CBs in the vicinity of the aircrafts track
6) Slippery aeroplane
7)
"I got out here OK, I should be able to get back"
.... and the deck is starting to get stacked against you!
Nobody could accuse me of being faint-hearted when it comes to single pilot Night VFR/IFR/night flying in an SE aircraft, but I doubt that I would have made the flight, unappealling though a night at the Warburton aerodrome may have been.
Early start - back next morning - live to fly another day!
Dr 