Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Watsonville midair

Old 19th Aug 2022, 03:43
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm going to go around, you're coming at me pretty quick, man

https://archive.liveatc.net/kwvi/KWV...2022-2130Z.mp3 @ 24:40

Seems a Cessna twin ran into the back of a 152, both on approach to WVI.

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco...ville-airport/
bobbytables is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2022, 10:15
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Northeast
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Watsonville midair

3 people are killed after 2 planes collide over California airport, authorities say.

Reported by CNN.
rfc143 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2022, 20:50
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2022
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good Live ATC find, and interesting listen. You can hear the twin Cessna calling straight in approach several times, beginning 10 miles out. And you can hear what I assume to be the C150, calling out his position several times, including crosswind, downwind, and left base. He even calls that he sees the twin "behind him" when it seems he turns final. Then he calls that the twin is coming faster than he expected, and he is going around. Sure sounds like the C150 turned base and final too soon, thinking he could get in before the twin. Also watched the replay on Flight Radar 24, can see the twin coming in, but do not see the C150 on there at all.
Si Guy is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 14:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is it possible to land a C340 on a 4500 ft runway with a groundspeed of 180 kts at the runway threshold?
BFSGrad is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 15:43
  #5 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 61
Posts: 5,317
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
And you can hear what I assume to be the C150, calling out his position several times, including crosswind, downwind, and left base. He even calls that he sees the twin "behind him" when it seems he turns final.
Then it sounds like the 150 was established in the circuit, reporting his position (perhaps not using a transponder - perhaps not required), and the 340 flew a straight in. VFR landing traffic at an uncontrolled airport has to give way to airplanes established in the circuit.

Is it possible to land a C340 on a 4500 ft runway with a groundspeed of 180 kts at the runway threshold?
With great skill, somewhat abusive engine handling, and lots of braking, maybe. Normally, no.
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 17:41
  #6 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 58
Posts: 10,718
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why the 340 would be doing more than twice its stall speed on short final unless the pilot was in some way not entirely with it...? Or the ADSB reported figures are incorrect.

Only types I've seen crossing the fence at that sort of speed have been Concorde, SR-71, F-104 and maybe a few other military jets...
treadigraph is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 18:31
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have observed a similar accident with two cessnas with one taking off and one going around. In that case the aircraft taking off climbed into the one overshooting.

One scenario is that in this case the 340 realised that he was catching up the 152 and went around. The Cessna also decided to go around and climbed back to circuit height. In such a scenario neither aircraft can easily see the other.

The important point is that if you need to go around with an aircraft climbing out it is important to offset to the right so he doesn’t climb into you.
lederhosen is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 20:52
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Moray,Scotland,U.K.
Posts: 1,713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"The important point is that if you need to go around with an aircraft climbing out it is important to offset to the right so he doesn’t climb into you."
BUT: Both were possibly going around. Both .move to right..
Maoraigh1 is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 21:23
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fairly obviously the aircraft below is not advised to offset to the right in this situation. Situational awareness appears to have been lacking in both cockpits.
lederhosen is offline  
Old 20th Aug 2022, 22:29
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From the limited information available so far, the 152 pilot was a student pilot on an early solo. He was flying a circuit and almost certainly had no idea that the 340 was closing at such speed. The impression I have is that he continued onto finals, to follow his normal taught practice until it became obvious the other aircraft was closing rapidly. The 340 had announced its intention of doing a straight in when it was some distance away - 10 miles out - and appears to have held its speed right up to the accident point, which was just shy of the approach end of the runway.
If those figures are correct the 340 was still well above normal approach speed at impact point- around twice normal, so I'm not sure how its pilot intended to land off such an arrival.

This rather sounds as though the 340 driver completely lost situational awareness and had fixated on his approach path, even forgetting his need to slow down. The inexperienced student pilot did decide to go around, regrettably too late, but just in time to collect the overtaking 340.

Perhaps US rules are different. Straight in approaches put the onus for good clearance on the pilot doing the straight in - he/she needs to be sure the circuit and approach is clear. If in doubt, convert to a normal field arrival on the dead side and enter a circuit. (After all, there may be nonradio traffic around - or failed radio traffic)

Student pilots are on high workload just flying safely at first, so while I'd have hoped to see a low time pilot in this circumstance take positive action earlier, say orbit on base to remain clear of the potential conflict, what he did made sense within his likely awareness. (Who expects an aircraft rushing in at twice normal approach speed ?)

Horrible accident, with some sadly familiar old lessons.
biscuit74 is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 00:15
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Age: 58
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by biscuit74 View Post
From the limited information available so far, the 152 pilot was a student pilot on an early solo. He was flying a circuit and almost certainly had no idea that the 340 was closing at such speed. The impression I have is that he continued onto finals, to follow his normal taught practice until it became obvious the other aircraft was closing rapidly. The 340 had announced its intention of doing a straight in when it was some distance away - 10 miles out - and appears to have held its speed right up to the accident point, which was just shy of the approach end of the runway.
If those figures are correct the 340 was still well above normal approach speed at impact point- around twice normal, so I'm not sure how its pilot intended to land off such an arrival.

This rather sounds as though the 340 driver completely lost situational awareness and had fixated on his approach path, even forgetting his need to slow down. The inexperienced student pilot did decide to go around, regrettably too late, but just in time to collect the overtaking 340.

Perhaps US rules are different. Straight in approaches put the onus for good clearance on the pilot doing the straight in - he/she needs to be sure the circuit and approach is clear. If in doubt, convert to a normal field arrival on the dead side and enter a circuit. (After all, there may be nonradio traffic around - or failed radio traffic)

Student pilots are on high workload just flying safely at first, so while I'd have hoped to see a low time pilot in this circumstance take positive action earlier, say orbit on base to remain clear of the potential conflict, what he did made sense within his likely awareness. (Who expects an aircraft rushing in at twice normal approach speed ?)

Horrible accident, with some sadly familiar old lessons.


this…
it’s on the guy not entering in a standard manner.
421dog is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 03:07
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saigon SGN/VVTS
Posts: 6,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Straight in approaches put the onus for good clearance on the pilot doing the straight in - he/she needs to be sure the circuit and approach is clear. If in doubt, convert to a normal field arrival on the dead side and enter a circuit.
biscuit74, US rules ARE different. Nobody would know what a “dead side join” is. Standard procedure is to join the downwind leg at a 45° angle from outside the circuit/pattern.
India Four Two is online now  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 04:31
  #13 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 1,863
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by lederhosen View Post
Fairly obviously the aircraft below is not advised to offset to the right in this situation. Situational awareness appears to have been lacking in both cockpits.
The 152 N449931 was well within its normal rights. He was also entitled to do a G/A when he considered the aircraft from behind posed a threat. The 340A was observed to be at high speed according to the local rags, but was in all cases the overtaking aircraft, and was required to give way. Being right doesn't give much consolation when you are still timex. The 152 did everything right, he did an avoidance manoeuvre and if the plane behind ran into him... Did the 152 start an offset to the right? It appears that there was little time between the decision to Go around and the impact, so at 152 speeds, he isn't going to be far off the centreline, and he was apparently looking over his shoulder at least for part of the time. At 65-70kt, the 152 isn't going to go far compared with a 179kt 340A running into him.
fdr is online now  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 16:54
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks India Four Two, of course ! It's a long time since I last flew in the USA, too long evidently. Doing that downwind 45 degree standard join you describe would have allowed the 340 to see the circuit traffic, and them to see him.

It;s hard to see what the 152 pilot could have done safely, other than an orbit on base, which is not normal practice for students as far as I know. Doing a go around from base leg meant crossing the path of a fast moving machine - far from ideal., and would likely have led to the same outcome, without good luck. Not nice.
biscuit74 is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 17:07
  #15 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 13,959
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes on 10 Posts
The RAF used to teach (hopefully still do) a dead side join for light aircraft at training airfields, in order to avoid exactly this situation from occurring. The pilot of a joining aircraft must give way to those already in the circuit and joins parallel to the runway in use, in the circuit direction, but offset to the dead side. The joining pilot only crosses to the live side when safe to do so without getting in the way of others, even if this means flying well upwind.

Orbitting anywhere in the circuit, or extending down wind were both a big “no-no” and would result in a visit to the tower for a dressing down by the duty instructor.
ShyTorque is online now  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 18:16
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I had a bad experience myself (air miss) with a light twin pilot attempting an unauthorized straight in approach to the opposite runway from which I was departing in a 737. So I will admit to potentially being a bit biased about light twins. In this case if the reports are true that the twin was doing 180 knots inside 3 miles then there is no excuse for such poor airmanship. As has been pointed out by others it is hard to know what the 152 pilot could have done differently if this is true.
lederhosen is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2022, 18:43
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: dallas
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by India Four Two View Post
biscuit74, US rules ARE different. Nobody would know what a “dead side join” is. Standard procedure is to join the downwind leg at a 45° angle from outside the circuit/pattern.
in USA rules are definite different. A similar accident happened at HQZ a few years ago, father and son in a 150 doing a base to final turn when the big twin came behind doing a "straight in " approach to final that he called 15 miles out. Believe it or not the NTSB gave the right of way to the pilot calling for a straight in approach all 3 died in the accident. In 45 years of flying here i have seen the straight in approach being abused. No one respects the correct entry which is to listen for traffic or see traffic in the pattern. Almost impossible to do on a 15 mile final. Assuming no control tower is present no excuses, NORDO airplanes cannot transmit traffic so the onus should be on the pilot doing the straight in and see or hear traffic then if so give right of way. Almost all straight in approaches fail to correct that issue. Insanity at the best.

Last edited by magyarflyer; 21st Aug 2022 at 18:49. Reason: completion more info
magyarflyer is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2022, 00:12
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Was the C340 overtaking the C152 or did the C152 cut in front of the C340 on final... depending on how you see it one or the other was right, the other was wrong. Doesn't matter now when the collision is a fact. Some active coordination, instead of just position reports, would have been appropriate. Especially if you're intending to approach a GA field at 180 kts. Personally I think the C340 approach was madness...
172_driver is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2022, 02:09
  #19 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 61
Posts: 5,317
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Referring only to what has been posted here, and with reference to the Canadian rules; The overtaking airplane must give way, and move to the right to accomplish this. The airplane which is lower on the approach has the right of way. And, the airplane approaching the airport must give way to the airplane which is landing (established in the circuit/has turned final).

While training a pilot in his new 182 amphibian years ago, we were flying established circuits, and I was making all the calls, at the airport. This airport was monitored, with a mandatory frequency, by a flight service station at another airport ('could hear but not see traffic). On the downwind to base turn, I started hearing radio calls for straight in approaches to the airport from four 172s (All from a flying school I knew). What was happening was that an instructor dual cross country flight was "leading" three other solo cross country flights to a mid trip stop and go at the airport. I was losing track of which was where, and none were appearing to consider a circuit, nor acknowledging that we were established in the circuit already. I remember writing down registrations on the palm of my hand to try to keep track, but I was not sure who was where. I saw two of the 172's, but couldn't figure where the other two were relative to the ones I could see. I decided to give up, and climb out of the base leg, to let them all go under me. At about the same time, a Learjet was inbound IFR, and on the frequency. As I climbed out of the base leg, I called that "I could not safely land at the airport at this time, and was climbing to exit the circuit vertically on the dead side. I don't think any of the 172 pilots cared, but the Lear pilot sure took notice of what I said.

We went and did some water training for an hour, and by then, everything was calm at the airport. We landed, and I phoned FSS. I asked that the tapes be held, and that the FSS Specialist have a listen right around when I said "I could not land safely...". I called the flight school, and asked for a review of circuit entry procedures among their instructors. Turns out, the daughter of a friend of mine was one of the solo students, and had more or less told her dad what had happened on that flight. When I described my flight, he joined the dots. He was very disappointed that not only was his daughter being "lead" on a solo cross country, but also being lured into really poor circuit entry procedures! I do fly straight in approaches to this airport, but I always establish with FSS that there is no other aircraft in the airport vicinity when I do. Otherwise, I join and fly a correct circuit.

I opine that the C340 pilot "missed" the position calls from the 152 pilot. If the speeds suggested were correct, he probably had the nose coming up to slow it down, and lost the 152 under the nose - if he ever saw it!
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2022, 10:08
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Bridgwater
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fdr View Post
The 152 N449931 was well within its normal rights. He was also entitled to do a G/A when he considered the aircraft from behind posed a threat. The 340A was observed to be at high speed according to the local rags, but was in all cases the overtaking aircraft, and was required to give way. Being right doesn't give much consolation when you are still timex. The 152 did everything right, he did an avoidance manoeuvre and if the plane behind ran into him... Did the 152 start an offset to the right? It appears that there was little time between the decision to Go around and the impact, so at 152 speeds, he isn't going to be far off the centreline, and he was apparently looking over his shoulder at least for part of the time. At 65-70kt, the 152 isn't going to go far compared with a 179kt 340A running into him.
I doubt the C152 pilot was looking over his shoulder, especially if he was a student pilot on final, he'd be focussed on what's in front of him. To ascertain a plane is closing from behind fast he would have had to turn his head, capture the intruding aircraft, judge it's distance and closing speed - all whilst coming in to land. I'm pretty sure he had ADS-B in and was watching the aircraft closing on that screen..... looking at Flight Aware / Flight Radar, the C152 isn't visible, therefore had the 340A also had ADS-B in, he still would not have been aware of the C152.

What I do note is the calls of the C152 pilot - downwind, base but no call on final? Maybe this would have alerted the twin pilot as he was still looking for traffic on base....
FullMetalJackass is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.