Light plane missing in blizzard in Scotland (Merged) [Archive]

fisbangwollop

6th Apr 2008, 11:20

I remember a similar incident a few years ago when an American registered Cessna with 4 on board hit the summit of Ben Macdui in poor weather, in this incident all 4 SOB survived, I remember the incident well as I had been talking to the flight prior to handing it off to Lossimouth radar......the following is a report from the Mountain rescue team.........
Grampian crash report
An official report into a light aircraft crash in the Grampian mountains said the survivors were fortunate to be found alive by rescue teams. Four people escaped from the wreckage of the Cessna 172 plane after it came down above Glen Callater, near Braemar in January. The aircraft had been travelling from Peterborough to Inverness when it crashed 3,000ft up a mountain after flying low to escape ice forming on the wings.
Mark Peacock (22), and his girlfriend Judy Laidler (19), escaped with minor injuries while pilot Stephan Broughton (53), and his 38-year-old co-pilot who did not want to be identified, suffered broken bones.
After the crash the survivors walked about a kilometre in freezing conditions until they found a cove where they huddled together for warmth. They had all been close to giving up when they were spotted by an RAF helicopter and flown to hospital. All four were suffering from mild hypothermia due to a lack of appropriate clothing for the extreme weather conditions. The air accident report stated that Mr Broughton, from Ipswich, had thousands of hours of flying experience. It confirmed that the Cessna aircraft had no de-icing capability.
The report said that there was initial confusion over the location of the crash from the Cessna's emergency beacon. The survivors were found walking away from the beacon, which was their only location aid.
The report concluded that their chances of survival were slim as temperatures began to plummet with the onset of darkness. It adds: "When rescued they were already suffering from mild hypothermia. Sunset that evening was 4.26pm after which the chance of locating the survivors would have been remote. They would then have been forced to spend the night on the hills in extreme conditions without appropriate clothing, protection or any location aids." An RAF spokesman said the case highlighted the importance of light aircraft carrying emergency beacons. Aviation journalist Jim Ferguson said: "It was absolutely unbelievable that they survived, they were very, very lucky indeed. The report confirms what we knew. The plane flew into cloud, it wasn't supposed to and the report does not make it clear why. The pilot had an awful job keeping control and he crash-landed on the slope.''

IO540

6th Apr 2008, 12:01

A good job it was an "American registered Cessna" then because a UK registered Cessna (which of course has superior de-ice capability :ugh: ) has no mandatory ELT carriage.

cats_five

6th Apr 2008, 16:02

STV news has just reported the search has been called off following the discovery of wreckage and a body 1km south of the Cairngorm ski area. Very sad news. The web sites have not been updated to match this report yet (17:00 local time).

cats_five

6th Apr 2008, 16:26

The web sites have not been updated to match this report yet (17:00 local time).

The BBC one has now:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7332901.stm

smarthawke

6th Apr 2008, 20:05

Very sad news.

Just to put one fact straight, IO540. If you are talking about the previous accident with the 172, it was a newish UK reg aircraft and they come with approved ELTs fitted.

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/cms_resources/dft_avsafety_pdf_500225.pdf

frontlefthamster

6th Apr 2008, 21:12

liam548

6th Apr 2008, 22:55

Very sad news.

..."Must not let news stories like this put me off my PPL"...

K.Whyjelly

7th Apr 2008, 02:21

liam548

Please don't let it put you off your PPL, but please do learn from it.

"Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

— Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group,

Three Yellows

7th Apr 2008, 06:11

Very sad news.

..."Must not let news stories like this put me off my PPL"...

Liam,

Don't be put off. One of the great things about aviation is that through the AAIB reports we all have a chance to learn by other people's mistakes. After all, there isn't time for us to make all the mistakes ourselves.

20/20 Hindsight is a wonderful thing. As aviators we need a bit of foresight too. I was planning a trip to Glasgow on Sunday from the deep south, returning Monday. I have a seriously capable, IFR, de-iced, twin engined aeroplane but I took the decision on Friday to cancel the trip given the forecast which had been talked about for almost a week on the BBC. I am not put off by bad weather, but I just thought that this was too much.

I don't know what equipment this particular aircraft had or what the pilot had planned to do or indeed why he was so keen to make the trip. Some of that will come out in the report.

Once you have your PPL, there is a whole lot more to learn that will help in the decision making process, but picking up ice, in lowering cloud over a mountain range is not somewhere any of us would want to be.

However, I always tell my friends that the most dangerous part of any flight is the drive to the airport. Don't be put off by this incident. GA is one of the safest activities around, its just that when it sadly goes wrong it becomes headline news. How many families have been affected by road accidents this wekend I wonder? So many its not newsworthy anymore.

Condolances to the family of this particular pilot, as it nearly could have been any of us.

stocker

7th Apr 2008, 08:24

I agree with Three Yellows, its a terrible shame but should not put anyone off.
I too was planning a flight this weekend but out to the Western Isles, it seemed obvious with the weather info available that this was not a good idea, so while this poor chap hit the mountain I was sitting at home in front of the fire.
I am not for one moment suggesting any superior judgement, only that we must learn from others and having learned to fly in Scotland I have learned a lot about mountain weather, some of it at the high cost of other pilots.

Mikehotel152

7th Apr 2008, 09:00

Like Three Yellows and Stocker, I was planning a flight up to Scotland from East Anglia on Sunday and cancelled because of the band of sleet and snow showers travelling down the country from the North.

I'm very sad whenever I hear of loss of life in aviation, whether it's a business jet in Kent or a light single in Scotland. RIP.

moggiee

7th Apr 2008, 09:38

I've just heard that it was an owner/pilot, believed to be taking the aeroplane from Halfpenny Green to the USA (via Wick). Most people based here will know the chap in question.

RIP G.K.

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 11:35

IO540, another thing to ponder might be whether a machine operating on a flag of convenience, far from the reach of the regulatory authority which ensures its airworthiness, ensures the standards kept by its maintainers to keep it airborne, ensures its pilot is proficient, etc, confers any benefits in terms of safety, over a machine honestly operated in its state of registery.What a load of utter b011ocks, Hamster. You are making a very cheap point.

"flag of convenience" - what rubbish, you have no idea why it was N-reg
"far from the reach of the regulatory authority" - rubbish
"ensures the standards kept by its maintainers to keep it airborne" - rubbish
"ensures its pilot is proficient" - rubbish
"confers any benefits in terms of safety" - utter rubbish

I have news for you, Hamster, but you will need to sit down before you read this as it might come as a shock.

The UK CAA does not do any of the above either. No ramp checks, no maintenance checks. At the average UK airfield, the worst maintained wreckage is G-reg. N-reg planes tend to be owner-pilot stuff and they get looked after better, on average, and the pilots are much more current too.

There is ZERO data supporting the assertion that FAA registered aircraft is less safe than some European reg. A lot of people have looked for such data (because it would be sooo useful to types like you) but nobody has found any.

As for this particular incident, I wouldn't judge the pilot. The archived weather data suggests the bad weather was quite patchy. He could have climbed high and stayed high. As to why he didn't do that, that's a good question. Maybe he left it too late and iced up? Did he have an IR? If N-reg, it's quite likely he did.

Three Yellows

7th Apr 2008, 12:06

Moggiee,

I notice that you edited your post from earlier is this because (a) the pilot in question was not who you refered to or (b) you just thought better of it?

Just curious.

BoeingMEL

7th Apr 2008, 12:24

thanks for your post moggiee.... so, was it Mr.B.G. do you know?

Cheers, not morbid but I know quite a few guys at 1/2p green. Cheers bm

S-Works

7th Apr 2008, 12:45

why would someone be taking a G Reg aircraft to the USA at this time of year?

DX Wombat

7th Apr 2008, 13:39

Must not let news stories like this put me off my PPLNo, Liam, you mustn't let it put you off. I know the person involved and. although I am saddened by this accident, I will continue to fly. Keep going, learn from all you read as well as your FI, and enjoy your flying.

moggiee

7th Apr 2008, 13:48

Moggiee,

I notice that you edited your post from earlier is this because (a) the pilot in question was not who you refered to or (b) you just thought better of it?

Just curious.Just that on second thoughts, although the chap in question had some "history", I decided it was better to remove any reference to that.

thanks for your post moggiee.... so, was it Mr.B.G. do you know?
Initials GK

why would someone be taking a G Reg aircraft to the USA at this time of year?Good question. Perhaps the question of why fly at all on saturday is more relevant.

vanHorck

7th Apr 2008, 14:52

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7332901.stm

Bahn-Jeaux

7th Apr 2008, 15:49

Originally Posted by bose-x
why would someone be taking a G Reg aircraft to the USA at this time of year?

Seems he was starting a new life in the USA according to the video newscast.

moggiee

7th Apr 2008, 16:10

Any idea on cloud levels (above MSL if such data is available)? Thanks

BoeingMEL

7th Apr 2008, 16:27

Sorry PKPF, I just can't reconcile your view that this gentleman was "unlucky." I don't know if or when he studied TAFs, Metars etc.. but what IS clear is that he set-off on a flight over a notorious mountainous area into and through the most appalling weather - and in an aircraft singularly ill-equipped for such a flight. My sincere respect for the deceased (I didn't know him) prevents me from saying more... but, luck? Luck? Oh, for heaven's sake.. Rgds bm:ugh:

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 16:57

People are talking about conditions on the ground, but one doesn't (normally) fly on the ground.

This plane had a ceiling of 15k-17k feet (dep. on exact type of Lance) and that was plenty enough to fly VMC on top on the day, avoiding any vertical development while remaining VMC.

Presumably ATC will know if he actually did that but somehow got into IMC and iced up. But to fly low down in those conditions doesn't make any sense - unless he didn't have an IR. And flying to the USA without an IR is problematic because much of the flight across the water has to be at a low level too.

bookworm

7th Apr 2008, 17:00

METAR EGPD 050850Z 34019KT 9999 -SHRA FEW015CB SCT040 04/02 Q1017 TEMPO 3000 SHRASN SCT015CB=
METAR EGPD 050920Z 35016KT 9999 FEW009 SCT013 03/01 Q1018 TEMPO 3000 SHRASN SCT015CB=
METAR EGPD 050950Z 36013KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT013 05/02 Q1017 TEMPO 3000 SHRASN SCT015CB=
METAR EGPD 051020Z 33017KT 9999 -RA FEW009 SCT015 05/02 Q1017 TEMPO 3000 SHRASN SCT015CB=
METAR EGPD 051050Z 33015KT 300V030 6000 SHRA FEW007 SCT015CB 04/02 Q1018 TEMPO 3000 SHRAGS=
METAR EGPD 051120Z 36019KT 9999 VCSH FEW008 SCT012CB 03/02 Q1018 TEMPO 3000 SHRAGS=
METAR EGPD 051150Z 36016G28KT 8000 -SHRASN FEW008 SCT012CB 02/M00 Q1019 TEMPO 3000 SHRAGS=
METAR EGPD 051220Z 35014KT 9999 -DZ FEW008 SCT012CB 03/01 Q1018 TEMPO 3000 SHRAGS=
METAR EGPD 051250Z 35021G31KT 9999 VCSH FEW012 SCT017 03/01 Q1018 TEMPO 3000 SHRAGS=

METAR EGPE 050850Z 34010KT 9999 FEW012 SCT044 05/02 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 050920Z 34012KT 9999 FEW012 SCT042 05/01 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 050950Z 34009KT 9999 FEW014CB SCT036 06/02 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 051020Z 36014G30KT 9999 4000E VCSH FEW012CB SCT028 02/00 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 051050Z 35010KT 9999 VCSH FEW012CB SCT036 04/03 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 051120Z 35020KT 6000 SHSNRA SCT009CB BKN028 02/01 Q1022=
METAR EGPE 051150Z 01013KT 9999 VCSH FEW009 SCT015CB 02/01 Q1022=
METAR EGPE 051220Z 36013KT 9999 VCSH FEW009 SCT015CB BKN028 05/03 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 051250Z 36014KT 9999 VCSH FEW009 SCT015CB SCT022 04/01 Q1021=
METAR EGPE 051320Z 35019KT 9999 VCSH FEW009 SCT015CB SCT028 04/M01 Q1022=

METAR EGPC 050820Z 35011KT 9999 VCSH FEW007 SCT010CB 03/01 Q1019=
METAR EGPC 050850Z 35023KT 9999 VCSH FEW007 SCT010CB 03/01 Q1019=
METAR EGPC 050920Z 35016KT 9999 VCSH FEW007 BKN010CB 03/01 Q1019=
METAR EGPC 050950Z AUTO 35013KT 9999 -SHRA SCT007/// 03/01 Q1020=
METAR EGPC 051020Z 35020KT 9999 VCSH FEW008 FEW014CB 03/01 Q1020=
METAR EGPC 051050Z 34021KT 9999 FEW008 FEW014CB 02/M01 Q1019=
METAR EGPC 051120Z 34021KT 9999 FEW008 FEW012CB 04/M01 Q1020=
METAR EGPC 051150Z 33020KT 9999 FEW008 FEW012CB 04/M02 Q1020=
METAR EGPC 051220Z 35022KT 9999 FEW008 FEW012CB 03/M01 Q1019=
METAR EGPC 051250Z 34020KT 9999 FEW008 FEW012CB 04/M03 Q1019=
METAR EGPC 051320Z 35019G29KT 9999 -SHSNRA FEW008 SCT012CB 03/M02 Q1019=

It looks unpleasant, but without further details of the flight, I don't think you can say that he flew "through the most appalling weather". Over flatland, most of this sort of stuff tops out quite low. At 10,000 ft with a forecast temperature of -19 degC, I'd expect it all to be glaciated, and you'd be flying above the tops with the odd shower to dodge -- though I don't doubt the mountains do nasty things with the convection.

F215 said

SCT/BKN (LOC OVC FRONTS/TROUGH) CU SC AC 015-030/070-XXX
OCNL (LOC EMBD FRONTS/TROUGH) CB 010-020/XXX
with FRQ 3000M SHRASN SHGS and ISOL <much worse>

Rod1

7th Apr 2008, 17:54

Weather data posted on Flyer indicates the tops were 20,000 in places.

The Lance may have a ceiling of 17,000, but did it have oxygen?

With a single engine, operating right at its limit, your chances of puling off a forced landing almost zero…

Rod1

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 18:15

Rod1, the "single engine" is irrelevant to whether one can fly the mission.

Carrying (or not) a spare engine affects only one' attitude to risk, not whether the plane will make it safely.

This flight was IMHO doable in a 16k ceiling plane. But much hangs on the detail.

Did he have an IR? If not, he would not have been let into the controlled airspace and that would have been the end of it.

Did he carry oxygen? I ask this question whenever somebody (flying a perfectly capable machine) piles it into terrain, and usually the answer is NO. Without oxygen, you have cut off your far and away best weather escape route (but, in the UK, you need the IR also).

Look up N2195B. 10/2/07, France. 25k ceiling, IR, de-icing & turbo (Seneca), yet he still managed to come down at ~ 7000ft. 3 died. The tops might have been very high, but he had no oxygen so cut off all his options even before takeoff.

In this latest case, the plane was < 2000kg so the usual reason for not flying IFR ;) doesn't apply either

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 18:22

Sorry, I did not know it could fly at that height.Yes, most half decent tourers can do 16k-20k, and most turbo ones can do 25k. My TB20 can do 20k. I've crossed the Alps at FL190 - just above the cloud tops and at about -26C. One gets through a lot of oxygen, which is another story (getting a refill), but it does the job, and you are sitting in nice sunshine.

That is what "IFR" is about. Most pilots think an IR allows you to fly in cloud but actually that is the last thing a "smart" IR pilot does. An IR gives you an implicit clearance along the entire filed route, with controlled airspace and national frontiers (in Europe) becoming irrelevant, and what you do is limited essentially only by aircraft performance (and whether you carry oxygen).

You climb up to VMC, sit there enroute, then descend. One does everything possible to avoid battling one's way through cloud.

I've just looked up the pilot named on the news and he did have an FAA piggyback PPL but no FAA IR. If he had an IR it would have been a Euro one and there is no database for that.

vanHorck

7th Apr 2008, 18:31

Talk of which, I carry a Mountain High pulse oxygen system in my Seneca. It uses canulla's and automatically gives off a puff of 02 everytime you breathe in, fully automatic. A brilliant light system that uses little o2 and so lasts a looooong time

With the canulla s it s cleared to 18.000 (up to 25.000 with mask) but i dont fly much higher than FL 160 simply because the climb performace of the Seneca is not there (sooooo slooooow at that height) but also because it gets pretty hostile there, even with O2 and de ice boots

So in a Saratoga, without deice and possibly no o2 he would have tried to climb to FL120 or so. At that altitude it may have been impossible to avoid tops. The icing in the climb may already have had it s effect

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 18:39

it gets pretty hostile there, even with O2 and de ice boots

where?

BoeingMEL

7th Apr 2008, 19:23

Thank you PKPC for your informative and courteous reply (by personal message). For those who question the actual weather, I respectfully suggest that you check the aftercast... and consider the outcome of this attempted flight. Would many aviators with the slightest respect for airmanship have attempted this flight? I don't believe they would have. Just my opinion.Rgds, bm

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 20:38

Not VFR, outside controlled airspace, BoeingMEL. But there is a lot of IFR capable pilots out there and we don't know two of the key factors here:

IR
Oxygen

fisbangwollop

7th Apr 2008, 21:05

Although in this incident it was of no ultimate or eventual help to the pilot but, at the very least he had made the effort to speak to ATC during his transit across some very hostile terrain, because of this when the tradgedy happened at least the authorities knew he was missing and had a good idea where to start the search......you would be amazed at how many people fly that route on a daily basis and never bother to advise ATC of their presence, if anything can be learned from this incident that is when ever possible maintain contact with the appropriatte ATC unit....in this case Scottish Info.

Aspects

7th Apr 2008, 21:22

I took off from halfpenny green on Friday at 13.10 in front of this Saratoga. I had a 5 minute conversation at the fuel bays with him about his planned route to America while he was waiting to re-fuel behind me. Just wanted to send my condolences to the family. Seemed such a lovely guy.

moggiee

7th Apr 2008, 21:37

This flight was IMHO doable in a 16k ceiling plane. But much hangs on the detail.
Not in those conditions in an aeroplane with no de-icing capability, it wasn't.

Decency prevents me saying too much but, sadly, this accident comes as no surprise to those who knew Gary.

IO540

7th Apr 2008, 21:47

This flight was IMHO doable in a 16k ceiling plane. But much hangs on the detail.
Not in an aeroplane with no de-icing capability, it wasn't.

I would disagree (in principle). If you can climb to VMC on top, de-ice equipment is irrelevant. The trick is to not collect ice on the way up, or on the way down.

This is how IFR capable pilots fly European airways routinely. They don't sit in IMC, collecting ice.

None of the best-selling IFR tourers (mostly SEPs) can fly in moderate icing for say 5 hours.

De-ice kit gets used at the ends of the route. If one cannot climb/descend without risk of collecting too much ice, the flight has to be scrapped, though this is obviously not a clear decision.

The only experienced pilots who fly in IMC enroute are those flying >2000kg piston twins and who want to avoid IFR route charges :)

Decency prevents me saying too much but, sadly, this accident comes as no surprise to those who knew Gary.

Well, could well be. If you know him - do you know if he had an IR? It would help illuminate this sad accident.

moggiee

7th Apr 2008, 21:53

With tops at 20,000 he could not have attained "VMC on top".

We're pretty certain that he did not have a JAA IR (or even UK IMC). He may have had an FAA IR but as it was a UK reg a/c he would not have been allowed to plan to exercise its privileges.

The simple facts are that the weather was unsuitable for this kind of flight by that pilot in that aeroplane. He only had to wait 24-36 hours and he would have been fine.

The plan to take an aeroplane with no long range tanks across the atlantic would also appear to have a few holes in it....

DX Wombat

7th Apr 2008, 22:52

Seemed such a lovely guy.Aspects - he was a nice person and he loved flying. He offered to take me flying when I was a student at HGFC but it never happened as we were rarely there at the same time.
Decency prevents me saying too much but, sadly, this accident comes as no surprise to those who knew Gary.As Moggiee can tell you, my first thought on hearing that the pilot had set off from EGBO was that it was Gary. I hoped I was wrong, but sadly that wasn't to be. RIP.

bookworm

7th Apr 2008, 22:55

For those who question the actual weather, I respectfully suggest that you check the aftercast...

What "aftercast" are you alluding to?

moggiee

7th Apr 2008, 23:03

The video from the RAF rescue helo tells you all you need to know - those were the same conditions as at the time of the crash.

goatface

7th Apr 2008, 23:39

The speculation here is bordering upon the lurid.

Have a little respect for the poor guy's family and wait for the AAIB report.:rolleyes:

IO540

8th Apr 2008, 06:33

The surface video is not relevant. One doesn't fly on the surface. You could have conditions like that, with tops at 5,000ft. As regards tops at 20,000ft the data does not support that except in patches.

He may have had an FAA IR but as it was a UK reg a/c he would not have been allowed to plan to exercise its privileges.

One can check the name on the FAA pilot database - a very useful thing this is too; try it sometime for people you know ;) He had an FAA piggyback PPL (2006) but no IR.

He could have used an FAA IR in a G-reg for IFR (worldwide) but only outside controlled airspace (ref ANO article 26).

For a VFR-only pilot, I agree this would have been a total no-go flight.

yawningdog

8th Apr 2008, 07:10

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7332901.stm

BoeingMEL

8th Apr 2008, 08:23

I apologise if my post lacked clarity IO540. I was not referring to the legality of the flight... I was questioning the wisdom of it! Yes, there are many pilots with the experience and qualifications..and yes, there are many aircraft suitably equipped. However, my view remains that the necessary qulifications, experience, equipment and weather were not appropriate on this occasion. Happy to clarify. Rgds bm

IO540

8th Apr 2008, 09:01

BoeingMEL - I agree, for a plain PPL which this appears to have been.

moggiee

8th Apr 2008, 09:28

The surface video is not relevant. One doesn't fly on the surface.
The surface conditions ARE relevant - it was the surface that the aeroplane hit, after all. The surface conditions were bad enough that the ground could not be seen from the air - therefore VFR terrain clearance would have been impossible.

If you can see the ground, you can avoid it (VFR). If you can't see it, then you can't avoid it (VFR).

Lurking123

8th Apr 2008, 09:55

But moggiee, it is irrelevant whether you can see the ground or not if the engine has stopped and/or the wings are no long providing lift. One thing in this scenario is absolutely certain, you are going to hit the ground regardless of whether you are VMC or IMC. Flight Rules (ie VFR/IFR) are completely irrelevant - go and read the ANO.

There is no evidence (at least in the public domain) as to why the aircraft crashed. You can speculate about weather, someone else will focus on technical issues. The AAIB man who, right now, is probably freezing his cockles off on a mountain side will probably discover why. The rest of us are wildly speculating.

Rod1

8th Apr 2008, 10:37

Lurking123

If you are single engine and it quits the conditions below are very relevant. If you have 1000 ft gap between the ground and the cloud you will get about 30 – 40 sec to crash into something survivable, which is a reasonable risk over normal terrain in warm damp conditions.

If you have strong wing, blizzard conditions, extreme icing and lots of rock etc below you and you have only one engine then if it fails you are 99% likely to die. If you go down in these conditions then you are also putting the rescue teams at risk, which is also relevant in my opinion.

Rod1

Lurking123

8th Apr 2008, 10:59

So, hypothetically, what are the chances of surviving a PA32 forced landing on the side of a Scottish mountain, regardless of weather?

moggiee

8th Apr 2008, 10:59

Flight Rules (ie VFR/IFR) are completely irrelevant - go and read the ANO.

There is a whole world of difference between regulation and airmanship.

Many things are legal, but unwise.

Rod1

8th Apr 2008, 11:05

“So, hypothetically, what are the chances of surviving a PA32 forced landing on the side of a Scottish mountain, regardless of weather?”

If you were at 10,000 ft over the mountains on a gin clear summers day your chances of surviving the force landing would be 90%+ assuming you were in reasonable practice. This would not involve hitting the side of a mountain, as obviously you would see it and chose a better location.

Rod1

moggiee

8th Apr 2008, 11:06

So, hypothetically, what are the chances of surviving a PA32 forced landing on the side of a Scottish mountain, regardless of weather?
Slim -if you are low and the weather bit manky. Better if you are higher and in clear weather.

However, your chances of surviving CFIT because you can't even see the mountain are even more slim!

None of us know yet why Gary hit the side of that mountain, but given the weather there on that day his likelihood of having a problem was dramatically increased and his potential for surviving that problem dramatically decreased.

I knew the pilot, and I liked him - we would chat and pass the time of day, even if we were not "mates" as such. I therefore have no particular desire to criticise him. However, I also knew him well enough to know that he was a risk taker and that I am not alone in thinking that there was a certain inevitability to this sad event.

gasax

8th Apr 2008, 12:15

A forced landing on the side of a Scottish mountain should be very survivable. Landing on the upslope should mean your ground speed is very low - with fixed gear it will either tear off or spin or tumble the aircraft but with a bit of skill I'd be very disappointed not to get out of the wreckage in one piece. A lot of the time you can virtually hover of the peaks but it the wind in that strong then it may not ease sufficiently on the ground not to tumble you.

Of course surviving means having shelter and good clothing. That day was pretty nasty even on the coast, flying over the massif would have been horrid, the up and downdrafts alone would have caused real difficulties. I'll be interested to see at what height the wreck is.

The Norwegian who was rescued from his C150 when he flew it into the base of Mount Keen was nearly 1000' below the summit. He was so low that the slope was pretty mild and with doubtless a last minute pull-up the airframe wasn't badly damaged.

Forced landings in these areas are not about finding a decent field, they are about arriving at the crash with the minimum energy.

scooter boy

8th Apr 2008, 12:22

I had planned to spend last weekend in Glasgow, Scotland - a colleague who had been very good to me was retiring, big party etc...
The plan was from Plymouth to Cumbernauld with an ETA at around 1730 LCL, hotel + transport booked, eager newly qualified PPL friend coming along for the "experience".

If Cumbernauld had been on the other side of the trough (that caught the Lance in the Cairngorms earlier in the day) in relatively ice-free air then I probably would have gone and taken the small chance of an engine failure while crossing over the tops, as IO540 states, this is the essence of IFR . However, by the time I was due to arrive there the trough had passed further South and the worst weather was right around my destination options.
As Cumbernauld has no Instrument procedure I could have gone to Glasgow or Prestwick if things looked impossible for a visual approach when I got up to the central belt, but by that time I would have descended from clear air (say Fl100-FL160) to be at a couple of thousand feet looking around for an 800m tarmac strip in freezing conditions (while being tossed around in a strong blustery wind, chunks of ice being flung off the prop, having to deice the windscreen every couple of minutes and unable to extend my speedbrakes (not advisable in icing conditions) and even with my TKS deicing I may not have been able to climb to accept arrival instructions for Glasgow. Even going straight for Glasgow or Prestwick from the outset would have had its risks.

Options diminish very rapidly in weather as poor as this.
Crossing over the top of it is one level of risk but ascending or descending through it, even with deicing and O2 puts a whole different perspective on things.

I didn't go.

As somebody already commented early in the thread, Saturday was not a day for flying light aircraft in Scotland.

RIP,

SB

Rod1

8th Apr 2008, 12:36

According to Flyer the pilot got lost on his flight the previous day (to Carlisle) and had to call D&D. I am starting to get the feeling this accident may have a sting in the tail…

Rod1

mm_flynn

8th Apr 2008, 13:04

Having read the thread from start to finish just now it is interesting to see the 'facts' change. It appears to be fact that
1 - The aircraft was G-Reg
2 - It was a non-turbocharged PA-32R-300 (not deiced either)
3 - The pilot has a 'based on' FAA PPL (no IR) with a no night flight restriction. It is unclear if the pilot had a UK IR or IMCr.
4 - There was no airspace restriction for a climb up to FL195 at his location (have not looked at a real chart this could be wrong)

It seems reasonable to assume
1 - The pilot still did not have an IR/IMC
2 - Given the lack of IR and turbocharging it is unlikely the pilot had O2
3 - Given the above, the pilot would be unlikely to have planned to operate above the clouds at say FL130-150

It seems very odd that
1 - A pilot unlikley to have an IR (removed comment re previous ferry experience) would be planning a transatlantic trip (maybe he was meeting a ferry pilot in Wick)
2 - A pilot would plan a VFR or IFR with no rating flight through the mountains in some very bad surface weather conditions.

DX Wombat

8th Apr 2008, 13:47

1 - A pilot with no IR (or previous crossing experience) would be planning a transatlantic trip (maybe he was meeting a ferry pilot in Wick)
That is quite an erroneous conclusion to come to. I was at EGBO when Gary returned with an aircraft he had just ferried over from the USA. I think it was one of two which later bore a personalised registration. On that occasion he flew via Iceland and Wick.(assuming no change of ownership since a 2005 incident)The aircraft involved at the weekend didn't belong to Gary, it belonged to Bernie Gomez former engineer at EGBO. I agree wholeheartedly with Moggiee's statement:I knew the pilot, and I liked him - we would chat and pass the time of day, even if we were not "mates" as such. I therefore have no particular desire to criticise him. However, I also knew him well enough to know that he was a risk taker and that I am not alone in thinking that there was a certain inevitability to this sad event. I shall miss seeing Gary around HGFC, he always found time simply to pass the time of day with those he knew. RIP.

Kiltie

8th Apr 2008, 13:51

PKPF I agree with you. Why are these forums always infested with "wait for the AAIB report and don't speculate" comments? As long as there is nothing derogatory or insulting directed to those involved or their families, and no confidences are broken, I am at a loss to see just why commenting is so taboo.

mm_flynn

8th Apr 2008, 13:53

I should have looked the owner up in G-info. I would have noticed that the owner was not the pilot. Also, that would suggest the qualifications reported for the owner in 2005 are not those of the pilot. Hence, it is unclear if the pilot did or did not have an IMCr or UK-IR.

bookworm

8th Apr 2008, 14:16

scooterboy

Your analysis is interesting and I'm not surprised you cancelled your flight. However, the aircraft in question was bound for Wick, which has an IAP over the sea, and is in an area of low traffic density. That's very different from a 800 m strip with no approach aids in the middle of the Scottish TMA.

I'm not suggesting that a flight over the weather into Wick would have been easy, but I don't believe it would have been impossible. Until we know more about the route and level at which the flight was planned and executed, I don't see how we can second-guess the weather decision.

scooter boy

8th Apr 2008, 16:37

Hi Bookworm,
I agree that the circumstances of our flights are a bit different but they also involved crossing the same bit of weather albeit a few hours later and in a different place. I also had the option of going to Glasgow or Prestwick and following the instrument procedure but also felt this hazardous in the prevailing weather conditions.

It seems that the pilot in question held no IR or IMC and was making the trip in a non-deiced aircraft. If there were going to be any insurmountable areas of cloud (CB) they would have been close to the trough which was at around the accident area at around the accident time (I was watching the weather closely that morning hoping for good news). ATC Analysis may show whether the pilot concerned attempted to go over the top of the weather (the only feasible way to get to Wick on that day in a light single deiced or not) and entered cloud with a high chance of finding an embedded CB and freezing precip causing sudden severe icing or whether he soldiered on through it, but icing seems likely to have been a factor. My TKS deicing buys me a little time (to turn around climb or descend in light or moderate icing conditions), in my opinion severe icing conditions were almost certainly present in the region of the trough as it passed Southwards. This is the part that really scared me and made me bin the flight.

SB

fisbangwollop

8th Apr 2008, 16:43

After accidents like this it is often the case that most of us make comments and speculate, not in any form of disrespect for the lost pilot or his family but indeed in the hope that someone may learn and hopefully not make the same mistake( if a mistake was made in the first place?) for those of you that know me it would be wrong of me to report on this BB the facts that I know. However I would like to pass on my respects and thoughts to the deceased, his family and also to my colleague who was talking to the flight shortly before contact was lost. In the fullness of time the facts will be reported from the appropriate authorities and hopefully from that we will all learn. We all go through life making mistakes, but more often the case we escape with no more than a scratch or two, gaining along the way a huge ammount of learning!!!. With that in mind I for one will be happy to continue to listen to the speculation and reason that may have lead to this fatality. We must all understand though that flight over inhospitable and high terrain in wintery conditions will always have its hazards, it is often not possible to climb above the cloud as at this altitude as in the wrong conditions ice build up will be a real hazard.

bookworm

8th Apr 2008, 17:44

in my opinion severe icing conditions were almost certainly present in the region of the trough as it passed Southwards

That really doesn't seem consistent with my understanding of the conditions in the upper air. The temperature at FL100 was forecast to be -19 degC. The Lerwick sounding shows a 700 hPa temp of -21.7 degC, dewpoint -39.7 degC. The radar shows areas of significant precip, but with flyable gaps between.

While there may be the odd CB sticking a few thousand feet above, I would expect them to be well scattered in clear air, and clearly glaciated. I can imagine picking up a lot of ice in a climb in such an area, or in a descent. But I can't imagine someone icing up in an embedded CB.

You may think this is academic but if it turns out that the pilot couldn't choose to fly above the weather because of the letter at the start of his registration, I think there may be some interesting issues raised.

frontlefthamster

8th Apr 2008, 18:55

No.

A pilot should know his capabilities, and those of his aircraft, before departure. He should take them into account in deciding whether to depart, in selecting a route, and in balancing risk versus the benefit of completing the flight.

A pilot restricted by his qualifications, or the aircraft he flies, must bear those restrictions in mind before setting off; the restrictions are not a cause for catastrophe, though poor decisions or bad judgment may be.

IO540's earlier rant warrants a short reply; it demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the work that is done in the UK by both a large number of CAA staff who exercise their powers to administer and enforce regulation, and a very small number of FAA staff, who have no powers to speak of, and have no interest in small aircraft other than in a very few limited circumstances. I deal regularly with both sets of people, and I'm very glad to confirm that IO540 is not firing on all cylinders, on this one.

IO540

8th Apr 2008, 19:03

IO540's earlier rant warrants a short reply; it demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the work that is done in the UK by both a large number of CAA staff who exercise their powers to administer and enforce regulation, and a very small number of FAA staff, who have no powers to speak of, and have no interest in small aircraft other than in a very few limited circumstances. I deal regularly with both sets of people, and I'm very glad to confirm that IO540 is not firing on all cylinders, on this one.That is simply false, Mr Hamster. The CAA does close to no enforcement in the UK, short of blatent stuff like obvious breaches of AOC requirements and only when a nearby AOC holder complains.

The evidence for the level of enforcement is on their website. Do a search on 'prosecutions' and you will find a few PDF lists. This is how it should be; the vast majority of pilots obey the regs.

I would agree the FAA does little enforcement in Europe (of pilots; they do regularly turn over FAA maintenance facilities over here) but the CAA does just as little.

frontlefthamster

8th Apr 2008, 19:10

IO540,

The folk at Kingsway do a lot more than pushing through the odd case in front of a magistrate. I don't need pdf files, I ring IW and talk direct. Their action against those engaged in unlawful public transport is a great deal more significant than you say, and does not depend upon complaints from other organisations. Sorry, on this one you need to concede that you don't know what you're talking about. That said, Enforcement, of necessity, keep many of their cards very close to their chests.

IO540

8th Apr 2008, 19:27

Well I am delighted that the discussion has been narrowed down essentially to the pursuit of illegal AOC ops, Mr Hamster. I have been in contact with IW too ;)

Anyway, illegal PT has no bearing on people ending up in mountains.

mm_flynn

8th Apr 2008, 20:02

And the question of relative activity of the CAA and FAA in the UK GA sector has no relevance to an accident in the UK, in a G Reg aircraft, flown by a UK national, with a UK licence (which we are still not clear if it had an IMCr or IR attached to it).

angusmunros

8th Apr 2008, 20:22

IMHO having witnessed the last moments of this flight first hand(Skiing not controlling) and as a practising ATCO AND not knowing the background to the flight my first reaction was one of disbelief that anyone was there intentionally in those conditions; they were indeed extreme - vis var 25-100m, solid cloud with prolonged hail and snow showers passing through on a NE airstream. God only knows the events leading up to the tragic ending; over to AAIB. What I can say having some experience of the "industry" is it is not an experience that I would wish to repeat for a long time; hopefully never again!
My heart goes out to the pilots family and friends.
As soon as I heard the engine noise (which incidentally, sounded perfectly normal) my blood ran cold. Strangely I tried to think of ludicrously irrational reasons as to why the situation was all OK, yet knowing that the aircraft was probably doomed.
He passed overhead at what I estimate was well below 200' agl on roughly a southerly track(very briefly made out a shape through the clag!) heading to what I know was gently rising terrain above the Ski area. My location was about 100m E of the Cairngorm Ptarmigan restaurant which sits at an elev amsl of 1097m and I reckon the A/C passed just to the west of my position between the building and me.
Retrospectivly I reckon CFIT almost definitely. If he did see the terrain it would have been too late to reconfig. and lessen any impact. A substantial tailwind component probably compounded this situation(but I am no expert!).
I did listen for any impact after first sighting but given the following wind it wasn't surprising that I heard nothing!
It was only later that my worst fears were realised when speaking to Ski Patrol staff and they informed me that a Light A/C was indeed missing at which point I told them of my sighting.
I only hope that it was of some assistance in eventually locating the crash site.
RIP.

DX Wombat

8th Apr 2008, 20:42

But moggiee, ........... go and read the ANO.:eek: Lurking! You know not to whom you are speaking. Moggiee probably has a FAR better idea of the contents of the ANO than many on here.
Angus, that cannot have been a pleasant experience for you, thank you for posting it.

BigEndBob

8th Apr 2008, 21:15

I said this was going to happen.
RIP Gary.

XL319

8th Apr 2008, 21:22

We have to remember it was reported that the pilot was heading south, so my theory is that he decided to turn around when the weather became severe. Something which an experienced pilot would do. My thoughts are with his family at this sad time.

moggiee

8th Apr 2008, 21:36

Angusmunros - thank you for your input. Sadly, it pretty much confirms what most of who knew Gary expected.

As an expert eyewitness, your evidence will no doubt go quite some way towards helping the AAIB put all the pieces together.

neilmac

8th Apr 2008, 22:05

Angusmunros account:

Very powerful and honest account, can only imagine what went through the Pilots thoughts. But AMs account should be a lesson into a pilots worse case scenerio off what ifs!! Forums are here to discuss points and leave the true investigations to the experts. I myself by the grace of God 15 years ago as a solo U/T PPL sent of on his qualifying cross country almost hit Duncansby Head southbound descending out of cloud which engulfed me, believe you me I thought I was going to die. Landed Wick cloud base 500ft with a Pan, still wanna hit the FI who sent me solo!!
RIP and thoughts with his family and friends at this time

NM

scooter boy

8th Apr 2008, 22:55

Angusmonros,
Thanks for your input. CFIT while trying to maintain VMC in near impossible conditions would seem to be the gist, but the AAIB will confirm or refute.
A tragic loss.

SB

mad_jock

8th Apr 2008, 22:58

Just to throw some local experence into the discussion.

With a northly 15 knts at INS I would expect some pretty horrible mountain wave around that area getting towards +- 1000ft/min if not more.

Sub 5.0A - 2.5A in Deeside would have been pretty horrible for rotar.

Over the Cairngorms it can be quite deceptive with slots between the hill tops and cloud. With a northerly it would be quite possible to have 300ft of slot between the clouds and the tops. If you routed Glen Esk, Driesh over into Deeside it might not look to bad as the air will have lost alot of its moisture on its first lift at Cairngorm / Macdui if you didn't know there was going to be a wall of cloud in the Spey valley it would be very easy to presume the conditions were similar to deeside. It would have been quite good fun up up to that point.

Sad thing is if he had bitten the bullet and climbed on a northerly track he was already past the peaks and proberly would only have had 3-4 mins of IMC while benefiting from the lift from the mountain wave before breaking clear of it.

Its not the first time pilots (myself included) have been caught out by the conditions in the area which intially look quite good but quicky turn to poo.

I wouldn't be suprised if he crashed very close to where the american planes went in.

moggiee

8th Apr 2008, 23:47

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/7336662.stm

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44551000/jpg/_44551503_garykey226.jpg
Gary Key

It seems more "real" with a name and picture.

IO540

9th Apr 2008, 07:15

If he was below radar in his last moments, I doubt the AAIB will have much more clue as to what happened. Many AAIB reports on GA accidents (and I have read many) are little more than informed speculation. That's why this kind of discussion is valuable.

bookworm

9th Apr 2008, 07:23

A pilot should know his capabilities, and those of his aircraft, before departure. He should take them into account in deciding whether to depart, in selecting a route, and in balancing risk versus the benefit of completing the flight.

Of course. Pilots certainly have that responsibility too.

A pilot restricted by his qualifications, or the aircraft he flies, must bear those restrictions in mind before setting off; the restrictions are not a cause for catastrophe, though poor decisions or bad judgment may be.

It's not quite as simple as that. Regulators, who are effectively safety managers, also have responsibilities. In my opinion, there is reason to question the efficacy of any regulation that encourages a pilot to adopt a plan that is legal but less safe and reject one which is safer but prohibited by regulation. The balance of overall risk is often difficult to assess in issues of training and licence privilege, but that doesn't invalidate the question.

If the authorities make the instrument rating more difficult and expensive to acquire than is justified by safety requirements, then those authorities must take some of the responsibility for accidents where pilots without valid IRs have come to grief in circumstances where they were capable of executing the flight safely but unable to do so because of regulation. On the flip-side, those who argue for an easier IR might bear some responsibility for the accidents involving pilots who attempted to exercise the privileges of an IR but who came to grief because of insufficient training.

This accident may or may not be relevant to that debate. It may be that the pilot was licensed to fly above the weather but chose not to do so. It may be that the pilot would have come to grief anyway -- though I stick to my assertion that a flight over the weather on a day like that was vastly lower risk than trying to go through it, and that that risk was reasonable in the circumstances of the flight. It may even be that the pilot elected to fly above the weather but some failure brought him down anyway. But this accident may also offer useful evidence to inform the debate that responsible safety managers should be engaged in.

Fuji Abound

9th Apr 2008, 07:55

If the authorities make the instrument rating more difficult and expensive to acquire than is justified by safety requirements, then those authorities must take some of the responsibility for accidents where pilots without valid IRs have come to grief in circumstances where they were capable of executing the flight safely but unable to do so because of regulation.

Well said.

If I didnt have an IR but conditions were such that the only way of ensuring the continued safety of the flight was to climb in CAS I would declare a pan and and tell AT that I was climbing into CAS without further thought.

Cactus99

9th Apr 2008, 08:12

Around the crash site, there is no controlled airspace (EGPE ATZ) being the closest at around 20 nm or so. It is all open FIR, therefor not preventing any climb or lateral movement to avoid WX.

I think it would be wrong to assume there was no alternative route but over the Cairngorms, a much safer (much lower MSA) exists to the east towards Dundee, Aberdeen and then onto Wick, with the obvious advantages of ABZ radar for most of that route.

The A9 valley (5 NM to West of crash site) was another very obvious low level route which would have avoided the very worst of the WX, and kept him well clear of the mountains with excellent line features to take him safely north towards the lower ground.

IMHO there was no reason why the flight should have been where it was, flying in probably the worst weather conditions in the UK on that particular day.

We all have to RESPECT the big lumps of granite, especially on days like that. They take no prisoners!!

mm_flynn

9th Apr 2008, 09:18

If he was below radar in his last moments, I doubt the AAIB will have much more clue as to what happened
There are a couple of facts the AAIB will dig out which could help illuminate the issues.

1 - What were the pilot's qualifications
2 - At what altitude had the pilot planned to fly (At least was there indication of a plan to go over the weather - it is would be surprising if someone planned to fly above FL100 and not use a radar service, or at least painting Mode C - even in Northern Scotland)
3 - If, as has been implied in this thread, the pilot was in radio contact there will be some indication of what his intentions were and how they might have changed (due to weather, equipment, etc).
4 - Is the Flyer rumour correct that the plane (and by implication the pilot) was temporarily unsure of position the previous day? Would that have any bearing on the mind set of the pilot?
5 - What was the overall context of the flight (i.e. was it the start of a transatlantic journey, was there some 'compelling need' to be in Wick).

I am always surprised at incidents where pilots fly low level VFR in mountains during weather in which there is a substantial risk of encountering proper IMC. While this is only a possible explanation in this case, it seems certain to have been the case in the North Wales crash recently discussed and the Seneca that went down in the French Alps. I worry about what context caused the pilot to make the decision and what I need to be aware of to make sure that someday it isn't me being debated on this board.

gasax

9th Apr 2008, 12:17

Interesting picture. The weather just ot eh south of Aberdeen was significantly worst. Most of the time at least half the horizon was obscured. It would probably have been possible to maintain VFR given 90 degree plus changes of direction from the planned course on the coast.

Just a couple of miles inland this was not the case.

The central massif is a major chunk of high ground and most of the time it creates both its own conditions and delinates differing weather. In the usual SW airstream it is pretty common to have good flying conditions on the east side of the massif and 8/8 cloud on the west.

On the day in question there were significant squalls making their way south right across the massif. There may not have been pure wave but there would have been really nasty turbulence up to at least FL60 and in places a lot higher. Approaching the northern flank of the massif the weather would have been 'piling' up on the windward face and probably pretty much solid low cloud, squalls and snow which ties in with the observed conditions at Cairngorm.

A point to bear in mind though is that the weather shadow from the massif quite often allows you to fly almost up the windward edge. In settled conditions this often means there is a clearly defined edge to the cloud.
Now on the day that was not the case but conditions downwind (i.e. to the south) would have been significantly better than those to the north. Classic conditions to sucker people into continuing and possibly explaining the about course?

IO540

9th Apr 2008, 12:21

That CB tops out at FL100, no more.

mad_jock

9th Apr 2008, 12:26

PKPF I was basing it on my experences ferrying planes for maint down and back to DND from INV 1-2 times a week for 18months.

I was either don't go or A9. Did the east coast a couple times and ended up at sub 500ft dodging ****e hawks. At least with the A9 you have a chance if the donk goes and you can follow the road to stop you getting caught in blind glens

stocker

9th Apr 2008, 12:59

one of my mates was up on the hill watching the wreckage being removed on a piste-basher. He reckons impact was nose first and estimated the impact point to be less than a couple hundred metres from the Ptarmigan restaraunt which was pretty full due to the poor weather and skiers taking shelter, close to the tourist route up to the top of Cairngorm.(speculation of course as I did not see it firsthand)

Thankfully no one else was involved.

stocker

9th Apr 2008, 13:10

I would just like to add a comment to cactus99 about routing along A9. This is not a good idea during this type of weather as the road passes through a very high pass at Drumochter (approx 1000ft) where you have Munroes (hills of 3000ft +) in very close proximity, less than a mile at the narrowist point. The pass is quite often clagged in.

IO540

9th Apr 2008, 13:11

Thankfully no one else was involved.

Pretty unlikely for somebody else to be involved. Last unrelated ground fatal caused by powered aircraft in the UK was Lockerbie...

stocker

9th Apr 2008, 13:28

Regardless of previous statistics you have to admit that it was a close call.

mad_jock

9th Apr 2008, 13:37

Its maybe not a wave but its more like a stream hitting a weir and getting deflected up sharply. the resulting flow undulates a couple of times befor dampening out.

In this case when it does happen it usually can't be really felt south of the campsies

It almost seems like a right of passage to the instructors up north. The old hands who have moved on warn them about what can happen. Three months later in the pub you listen to the next instructor to discover that a C172 can fly with ice hanging off the spars to past the door. And you can go up at 700ft/min while at idle and Vne. And if you poo yourself then you better wait for the follow through when it starts taking you down at 1000ft/min at max power and best rate climb speed.

And the most important lesson that flying IFR in IMC in a PA38 or C172 over the Cairngorms really is a F***ing stupid idea.

IO540

9th Apr 2008, 13:43

Regardless of previous statistics you have to admit that it was a close call.

Not close, by a vast vast factor.

stocker

9th Apr 2008, 13:56

bookworm

9th Apr 2008, 14:02

Around the crash site, there is no controlled airspace (EGPE ATZ) being the closest at around 20 nm or so. It is all open FIR, therefor not preventing any climb or lateral movement to avoid WX.

That's not really the point. In order to fly over the weather, the pilot would have needed to climb above and stay above it for most of the trip. Thus the pilot would have needed to cross segments of class A airway. In particular, the pilot would have to cross P600, which has a base of FL55 in places. I have no traffic data for P600 between FL100 and FL180, but it's hard to imagine that it would be impossible to squeeze a crossing in on a Saturday morning. However, if the pilot were not instrument rated, no crossing would be available to him.

OwnNav

9th Apr 2008, 14:05

Agree with Mad Jock on that, scared myself in that area once in my PA22, had full power on, best rate indicated, still going down at 1000 fpm, learned about wave and that adrenalin is brown that day.

stocker

9th Apr 2008, 14:10

Ive been flying in the Scottish mountains for years and have experienced similar effects. Recently I have considered taking a few gliding lessons to get a different perspective.

mm_flynn

9th Apr 2008, 14:11

Enlighten us as to what you mean by a vast factor. I am not being cheeky, just curious to know what info you may have and if you can share your knowledge with us so we can all have a better understanding of this event.

Taking a reasonable size for the restaurant and the wreckage area, you probably have a 5% chance of hitting the building if you crash within 150 meters of the building - even then the chance of fatalities on the ground is not that high for something like a Lance hitting a building.

On the other hand crashing within 150 meters of an open air assembly of 100k people in central London and not killing someone would be a very close call.

stocker

9th Apr 2008, 14:17

Can you write my insurance policy for me please........

IO540

9th Apr 2008, 15:09

The whole world would flog you an insurance policy against a light plane crashing on you, Stocker.

Especially in Scotland :)

cats_five

9th Apr 2008, 15:21

Having looked at a chart, I can't see how P600 would be a problem unless his route from Carlisle involved going to the east of the Edinburgh airspace, and even then only if he was above the base of the main parts - FL85 & FL105. If he went via Cumbernauld he would be under the very south-most part of P600 for a very short time and would then be free to climb to whatever altitude seemed to best avoid the wx.

TheFlyingScot

9th Apr 2008, 17:21

A tragic loss
RIP

bookworm

9th Apr 2008, 17:25

Carlisle to Wick is pretty much due north and a straight line pretty much goes over Edinburgh. I would have thought a route east of the TMA would be more natural, and that's where all the class A is. In principle you could avoid that by aiming directly between Edinburgh and Glasgow and crossing the middle of the TMA which is class D, despite presumably being much busier. Not having had cause to try it, I have no idea how receptive Scottish is to "request crossing at FL100 and you have to keep me out of the class A". Perhaps it's standard practice?

An instrument rated pilot just files a sensible airways route from Talla to Perth, climbs quickly above the weather and lets ATC worry about the airspace. The last thing you'd want to do is be forced to descend into the icy tops as you were approaching the worst of the weather because of a daft airspace classification issue.

HN1708

9th Apr 2008, 22:11

I saw the wreckage being loaded onto a truck today at the ski centre, it was a chilling site.

Thoughts with the bereaved, RIP.

mad_jock

9th Apr 2008, 22:22

No its not normal to go up the middle bookworm.

When we have stupid headwinds we can go down to FL120 or FL140 for the TLA Foyle section heading up North instead of our usual FL180.

It causes ATC no end of grief. Either you are in the way of Gla's arrivals or Edi's departures or vice versa. We know what grief it causes and don't do it unless there is a pretty good reason. We can get an increase of 50knts ground speed by going low. This is in CAT

But Scottish are pretty good at dealing with specials and alot of them seem to really enjoy helping light aircraft to do the unusual. So I wouldn't say it it would be impossible.

I wouldn't even consider it to be honest. It would be St Abb's up to Angus (I think thats the intersection name) then direct over the top or to perth and up the A9. I think the bottom of the airway is about FL70 at Angus and you have more than enough room to climb to FL100+ before getting to the worst wx at the intersection between hill and Spey valley.

angusmunros

10th Apr 2008, 00:09

Taking a reasonable size for the restaurant and the wreckage area, you probably have a 5% chance of hitting the building if you crash within 150 meters of the building - even then the chance of fatalities on the ground is not that high for something like a Lance hitting a building.

Felt a bit more than that to me at the time! I guess that if you take the probability view your right, and I am smaller than a restuarant after all and a damn sight more frangible.:)

Georgemorris

10th Apr 2008, 09:27

For what it is worth, for those with local knowledge, the best routes through the Cairngorms are as follows:

Wind west of N/S - go east of Perth and try to get west of the ADN zone. If you can't get over the hills to the south of Aberdeen they will let you route up the coast. Can be turbulent in strong westerlies.

If there is any east in the wind there may be up-slope stratus on the coastal plain. The A9 route is best. The Drumochter pass is quite high but in extremis you can go west of it via Loch Tummel. In my experience Drumochter is usually OK in northerlies, the crunch point is often Dunkeld in southerlies.

In northerly winds as (in this case) the sucker trap is that the weather is often reasonable up to Aviemore and then you get into the weather and it's a long way to go back.

I am assuming that you cannot fly VMC on top for whatever reason.

The straight line gps route takes you over the highest ground with the fewest visual references, possibly through the Lecht valley (beware fast-jets)

The weather as viewed from Kinloss on the day of the accident was not suitable for light ac aviation but if you are contemplating a trip in a single engined aircraft across the north Atlantic and Greenland , a forcast main base of about 2000ft with snow showers for sixty miles or so may not have seemed all that off-putting. Hard rules.

Further points for the unwary: the weather forecasts for the Cairngorm region are not very helpful - the rainfall radar cannot see below 8000ft (I believe) and there are no observing stations sw of Aberdeen. The weather at Wick in my experience is often foul even when you think you can see it from Kinloss; I too have sent a solo qualifuing cross sountry to Wick only to have a totaly unforecast band of rain and low cloud cross the area while the poor lad was groping his way south towards Inverness. For what it is worth, my advice on encountering weather in montains in a low performance aircraft is ' whatever you do, do not even consider climbing - stay VMC below at all costs'. It won't work every time.

mad_jock

10th Apr 2008, 11:30

I would have reservations with that as well.

You do get a band over the hills to the south of Inverness but its nothing compared to the wall that occurs at the Cairngorms. You can nearly always either go west to drop into the great glen or nip through following the A9 at low level.

The best wx you can get for the cairngorms is by an old boy who has been doing mountain forcasts for hill walkers for years. He was in the local papers last year because he couldn't afford to do it much longer and the 6 hourly met obs were getting to him and his wife. I presume some oily in Aberdeen that enjoys his hillwalking got his company to bung him some cash.

Hang on it could be PK with his obvious knowledge on met. :ok:

The sad thing is 20 years ago when there was a proper met officer at ABZ and INV the quality of the forcasts were alot better. It is way to common for the apron at INV to fill up with a line of helibuses coming from ABZ on fuel maydays due to unforcast fog; the Met office don't seem to know that the Haar is affected by the tide on the east coast. And you can't even ask the old hand ATCO's for an opinion these days due to them being liable and not apperently trained to look out the window and have an informed opinion based on 20-30 years experence. Instead we have to go with some graduates opinion stuck in an office miles away who has never felt the wind on his face or the taste of the air when the wx is a changing in ABZ.

Climebear

10th Apr 2008, 17:13

Angusmunros.

I was a member of one of the mountain rescue teams that spent Saturday afternoon/evening and Sunday morning tramping over the Cairngorms looking for the ac. Your information, other witness statements, and - eventually - some radar plots was very useful in narrowing the search area.

Thank you.

angusmunros

11th Apr 2008, 23:56

I was a member of one of the mountain rescue teams that spent Saturday afternoon/evening and Sunday morning tramping over the Cairngorms looking for the ac. Your information, other witness statements, and - eventually - some radar plots was very useful in narrowing the search area.

Great job in challenging conditions; folks don't realise how sorted they are within the patrolled area - take away the snow fences, ski patrol, marked pistes and big flourescent markers and you are in deep S**t; even when you're fixed to Terra Firma. Strap on even a low perf. light A/C and it just gets deeper!

Does that breed a false sense of security? I know I try to avail myself of all the info I can, but , bottom line you've got to know YOUR limits; not anyone else's, yours. If in doubt, bin it. And that's the challenge!

Interesting comment about radar plots; rumour is it was accurate down to 300m radius of site - but, as you say, I guess it takes time to feed that info back through the tech machine to the Coal Face.

Heading back up tomorrow since conditions for ground based activities :ok: are unseasonally good. :):).

P.S. I know what some of the posters mean about Av. Met. Services and centralisation of the same! :bored: