Kingair 90 crashes at Lanseria Airport
 

Plane crashes at Lanseria Airport | News24

Report of 3 fatalities.

First Pictures
 

Anyone know if the crew was Sim type rated, or another one of those 6 guys in the back for 2 hour type ratings a la Unkel Triple R.:hmm:

Flight Safety sim type rated in USA

Does anyone know what happened ?
The photos show wreckage in a rather peculiar place, 06L is rather long for a King Air to run off the end, maybe a stall on approach to 24R ?

There's quite a lot of informed chatter going on over at the dark side where there are some seemingly local lads discussing the sorry business.

2 missed approaches and sadly didn't work out on the 3rd

How many times is it that 'third attempt'? (See also the Cork crash.)

Just do two then go somewhere else...

Does anyone even know if there had been an IFR flight plan filed for the short hop from FAGM to FALA and therefor which under which rules the flight was being conducted?

That last comment really pisses me off.
How many planes have been bent on the 3rd try?
After flying two missed approaches and the 3 approaches, you could be at least half way to your alternate.

My personal philosophy. Approach, if you go missed, but looks like it might be good for a second shot. Give it a go. If not even close, divert.

If its because of a thunderstorm over the runway. Just hold. Its why I carry granny gas at this time of the year.

Just noticed that Lanseria has just had a major revamp and they now have only one wider runway 07/25. This probably mean that the ILS is not working yet which could be a factor ?.

The only real factor is getting yourself outside the limits prevailing on the day; be it, the limits of the weather, the limits of the aircraft, the limits of your skill level.

One odd, to me, factor.

The pilot had 20 years experience and was 59!

So he was a very late starter.

And, your point is...?

Ian

A really pointless and :mad: statement! :yuk:

I know pilots with 20 years of 'experience' and less than 1000 hours, so please, lets clarify the issue.

'Years' of experience and the age that a pilot 'starts' are totally irrelevant.

See http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...1%20G-OJEM.pdf, noting para 1.5.1; para 2.1.2; para 2.1.3 and para 3(a)5.

The commander in this case had held a professional pilots licence for just under 10 years, so work out how much of a 'late starter' he was!

Hopefully that puts an end to any further twaddle about years of experience or 'late starters'!!

Trossie,

My point was quite simple, it is 'odd' meaning 'unusual.'

I know and have known many commercial and military pilots, the vast majority of them started their careers in aviation at a young age.

Far younger than in this case.

'Odd' to you, in your world, maybe. There is a big world out there. With many, many good pilots.

DON'T use 'age' or 'years of experience' as any meaningful yardstick. At all. Again, I shall use that HS748 pilot to back up my case.

But if all you know is less than that, so be it...

If experience is so meaningless, why are hours on type and total hours always prominently mentioned in accident reports?

And why does every long service pilot make a point of 'casually' mentioning how many hours he has accrued?

Age and experience completely irrelevant????? What? Sorry but you're wrong and I suspect a late starter or low timer yourself. The CAA has their minimums but insurance really runs this industry and they have minimums. There's a reason for this. Also, I've been flying with some FO's as of late who are late bloomers and love to tell me how old they are, how "lucky" I am that I'm Captain, and all around passive aggresive with a lack of CRM. Many companies will not hire old starter FO's amd I think there's a good reason.

"Hours on type and total hours" are not at all the same as 'age' or 'years of experience'. Hours on type and total hours are far more relevant. However this does not in any way mean that a pilot with 50 hours on type will necessarily handle a situation any worse than a pilot with 5,000 hours on type. It all comes down to the individual.

And to counter the attitudes of 'late starter FOs', there are also young whipper-snapper FOs who have poor attitudes and lack of CRM. Again, it all comes down to the individual.

(Quote: "... you're ... I suspect a late starter or low timer yourself...". I like that one!!!)

However, there doesn't seem to be a lot of real information about that crash that this whole thread is about.

'Total hours' and 'hours on type', is simply a means of putting a meaningful numeric value on 'Total Experience' and 'Experience on Type'. So it must relate to 'Years of Experience', as hours on type can only be accumulated within years of experience.

If those hours are accumulated over an extraordinary length of 'years of experience' this can only dilute any perceived benefit seen as a result of accumulating the hours.

As for the age factor, without knowing of any unusual factors, I personally would view the early starter more favourably than the late starter.

This really has nothing to do with age or experience.
The weather was foul, they had plenty of alternate airfields to land and wait it out but they chose to bust minimums 3 times and crashed on the 3rd attempt.
They could have diverted to Grand Central, Rand, Wonderboom or JNB - all only minutes away.

Why take stupid risks ?
Getthereitis is the big killer.

Two points of perhaps salient interest which have in part at least been raised before.
Was an IFR flight plan filed out of FAGM or was the positioning flight the usual VFR under the TMA story?
If you tank at FALA for an international flight, can you claim back VAT/Excise or any financial benefit on refuelling which you could not have done had you tanked for the long flight at FAGM?
Plenty of aged and experienced pilots have whacked out in SA in situations where a less experienced and perhaps younger man would have taken fright earlier on in the proceedings and either stayed put or diverted as appropriate to the particular circumstances of the day.

Maybe another factor is the normally excellent SA weather. Elsewhere you are always prepared and briefed for a diversion, in SA, especially the highveld, VMC is normal and weather bad enough to preclude a landing is quite rare so pilots are likely to be less mentally prepared to divert.

In a land where the sun always shines it is all too easy to become complacent.

Add to that the violence of highveld thunderstorms, usually more so than what you find in Europe. 600 mile long squall lines are not uncommon.

Given the choice of only one the two following systems being operative, in the UK in winter one would usually prefer to have anti icing whereas in South Africa in summer one would normally opt for a serviceable weather radar. Misuse or unserviceability of either or both will dispatch you to higher flight levels in the wrong circumstances.

Still no names released? Taking rather a long time isn't it?

Being dead also occupies quite a lot of one's time although there's no conclusive proof at the moment that anyone is aware of the spans involved.
The name of the pilot and his employer have been mentioned in the press. The dead employee appears to remain nameless. Perhaps that's by his own request?
But then, why should names of the dead be released at all? And who or what should do the releasing? The relatives of those who died must be aware of their own loss and there can be no need to enforcedly share identities with the vulturian general public.

ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON!! (If you needed to know then you do, if you didn't then s0d off!)