Citation 750 down in Egelsbach.

[AN2 Driver]

Around 1900 LT, crashed on final, no final word yet on fate of occupants but looks bleak. Registration confirmed N288CX, out of Linz.

[eagleflyer]

No IFR-approach available, crew cancelled IFR, continued in marginal VMC conditions and it was already dark. A KingAir crashed at virtually the same place about two years ago in similar conditions.

Sad!

[INNflight]

(German only) report from a local newspaper here including two photos of the crash site.

Business-Jet zerschellt: Mehrere Tote bei Flugzeug-Absturz | Nachrichten | Hessischer Rundfunk | hr-online.de (http://www.hr-online.de/website/rubriken/nachrichten/indexhessen34938.jsp?key=standard_document_44150908&rubrik=36082&seite=1#titel2)

288CX was literally touring the world, doing multiple RTW flights a year.

[Cobalt]

A German newspaper website reports "up to six" people on board, no survivors.Süddeutsche Zeitung (http://www.sueddeutsche.de/panorama/unglueck-im-hessischen-egelsbach-flugzeugabsturz-in-hessen-mindestens-drei-tote-1.1298244)

[AN2 Driver]

It really is this repetitive pattern of accidents, same conditions, same story, which make me sad and mad alike.

[frontlefthamster]

http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-flying-ga-etc/398158-king-air-crash-egelsbach-airfield-edfe.html

A terrible shame, if what seems to be true turns out to be so.

[chubbychopper]

Forgive me eagle flyer, but what exactly do you mean by "marginal" VMC? The flight conditions were either VMC or they were not, so what precisely is the point you are trying to convey?

Show a bit of respect, don't talk nonsense, and leave the fact finding to people who know aviation terminology - and the correct definitions.

[franktion]

Near Egelsbach / Frankfurt again a business jet crashed on thursday evening during night time VFR approach in foggy weather.

Business-Jet zerschellt: Mehrere Tote bei Flugzeug-Absturz | Nachrichten | Hessischer Rundfunk | hr-online.de (http://www.hr-online.de/website/rubriken/nachrichten/indexhessen34938.jsp?rubrik=36082&key=standard_document_44150908)

[frontlefthamster]

marˈginal ~ adjective

1 Relating to a margin
2 In or on the margin
3 Minor, subordinate or insignificant, not central, principal or mainstream
4 Barely sufficient
5 Not very relevant

The second definition above seems perfectly relevant and is in common use amongst aviation professionals. I have a feeling eagle flyer knows what he is talking about...

His post was crystal clear to me.

[AN2 Driver]

marginal VMC is even used in wx products such as GAFOR. So wtf is wrong with that? It's perfectly clear what he was saying, yes still VMC but barely so. Marginal VMC.

[GP7280-POC]

coming from LOWL. German TV reports 6 deaths.

Business-Jet zerschellt: Mehrere Tote bei Flugzeug-Absturz | Nachrichten | Hessischer Rundfunk | hr-online.de (http://www.hr-online.de/website/rubriken/nachrichten/indexhessen34938.jsp?rubrik=36082&key=standard_document_44150908)

Number of NOTAMs: 2

EDFE FRANKFURT EGELSBACH

E3383/11 - MEASURED VALUES FOR WIND-DIRECTION/SPEED ARE NOT RELIABLE FOR THR 09. 27 DEC 10:53 2011 UNTIL 25 MAR 23:59 2012 ESTIMATED. CREATED: 27 DEC 10:53 2011


E3326/11 - APPROACHING VFR AIRCRAFT INTENDING TO USE HPA ROUTING YANKEE 1 - YANKEE 2 MAY HAVE TO EXPECT ISOLATED DELAYS DUE TO OTHER HPA AIRCRAFT APPROACHING EGELSBACH AIRFIELD ON SAME ROUTING FROM WITHIN AIRSPACE CHARLIE FRANKFURT. THESE AIRCRAFT ARE PERFORMING A FLIGHT RULE CHANGE FROM IFR TO VFR AND ARE NORMALLY UNDER THE CONTROL OF LANGEN RADAR UNTIL REACHING YANKEE 2. CONTACT EGELSBACH INFO EARLY FOR INFORMATION. 19 DEC 08:03 2011 UNTIL 26 MAR 23:59 2012. CREATED: 19 DEC 08:03 2011

[misd-agin]

chubby - don't get a chubby over this. International website with terminology from different countries.

Definition for marginal vfr:

Web definitions:Weather of less than 3,000-foot ceiling and five miles visibility but above the required "1,000 and three.". phlairline.com/aviationglossary.html

[FLEXPWR]

Anyone got registration or operator?

[before landing check list]

Three die in German air crash (http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/World/Story/A1Story20120302-331137.html)

N2SA

[FLEXPWR]

G IV registered N2SA was involved in an accident last month in the Republic of Congo, according to the NTSB.

Link here: DCA12WA037 (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20120213X82241&key=1)

I doubt it would be the same aircraft. The article mentioned would have put a file photo from any accident to illustrate... another fine reporter!

[GP7280-POC]

more details here:
ASN Aircraft accident Cessna 750 Citation X N288CX Egelsbach Airport (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20120301-0)

[Cecco]

Cheers
Cecco

[what next]

For Metars Look here: ASN Aircraft accident Cessna 750 Citation X N288CX Egelsbach Airport (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20120301-0)

I can't imagine this accident is weather related as the weather wasn't too bad. And other than the King Air two years ago this aircraft has a ground proximity warning system to prevent the kind of accident that happened to the KA.

[His dudeness]

EDFE 011650Z 01005KT 8000 FEW008 09/08 Q1025=
EDFE 011720Z 03003KT 4000 BR FEW008 09/08 Q1025=
EDFE 011750Z AUTO 03003KT //// // /// 08/07 Q1025=
EDFE 011820Z AUTO 06002KT //// R27/P2000N // /// 08/08 Q1025=

EDFE ist UTC +1.

EDDF is really close by, 15 minutes drive. Not worth it, and VFR/night &foggy WX in a X onto a 1166mtr LDA runway or circling a very tight pattern to get the 1400mtr?
I have never flown it but it simply doesnt look like the ideal airplane for that.

[jetset2009]

It was N288CX. The aircraft was flying from Salzburg to Linz to pick up passengers and then planned to go into Egelsbach. Unfortunately it was not the first crash in Egelsbach under a VFR Night Approach and as far as I know the weather was not really good. And if you fly the first time to Egelsbach under VFR Night conditions this can be very tricky

[Denti]

We were going into frankfurt last night and low vis procedures were in force. Wonder how one can fly VFR in those conditions.

[aviamark]

Marginal VFR turned out to be a few minutes later to be IFR...
Just a few minutes after the crash weather in EDDF was following

METAR EDDF 011920Z 02005KT 0400 R07R/0750VP2000D R07C/0700V1600D R07L/1100VP2000D FG BKN001 07/07 Q1025 NOSIG=

Maybe there was some fog around at the accidentplace which was not taken into account by the
AUTO Metar from Egelsbach...

I had been do EDFE several times, tough thing to get an X in there on 1400m - again under
these conditions. Citation X minimum landing distance 1000m. EDFE LDA on 27 1166m

LINK: Area Chart EDFE, to illustrate the position of EDFE an EDDF...

http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_07.jpg

While I never want to criticize colleagues, this approach under these met conditions seems
to me a bit useless as you have Frankfurt a few miles to the west which has all IFR approaches
you can dream about... CAT III was in prorgess there.

My condolences to the familys who beareved. Very sad!

[Liftboy]

At least three dead in light aircraft crash - The Local (http://www.thelocal.de/national/20120302-41097.html)

[what next]

EDDF is really close by, 15 minutes drive

Yes. But have you tried to get an airport slot there recently? On short notice maybe? At seven in the evening on a weekday? In a private aircraft?

[jetopa]

Why on earth would anyone fly to EDFE with a C750? :ugh:

[jetopa]

Yes. But have you tried to get an airport slot there recently? On short notice maybe? At seven in the evening on a weekday? In a private aircraft?

Sad but true, unfortunately. And the bad news is: it ain't going to improve in either EDDM or the new Berlin airport when they close down EDDT.

But should that motivate one to seriously consider EDFE in a C750? Definitely not the right airplane for that airfield. :ugh:

[172driver]

Anyone got any info re the crew? I have a very unpleasant nagging feeling....

:(

[All-Ex]

EDDF is too crowded and EDFE is only 10 km away from EDDF.

To install ILS the runway has to be extended by 270 meters (currently 1,400-by-25-metre)

[Denti]

An ILS can't even then be installed as EDDF is too close and there is no space to legally design IFR procedures to EDFE until a few rules are changed.

Anyway, with the weather during the time of accident (EDFE 011750Z AUTO 03003KT //// // /// 08/07 Q1025) it wasn't even good enough for a CAT I ILS, nevermind RNAV or other IFR procedures. And to fly VFR in that kind of weather, well....

[ZeeDoktor]

First hull loss of a 750, let's hope they didn't die for a stupid reason like some in this thread suggest (IFR -> VFR transition in insufficient conditions).

[captjns]

EDFE 011820Z AUTO 06002KT //// R27/P2000N // /// 08/08 Q1025 [18:20 UTC / 19:20 LT: Automated weather report: Wind 060 degrees at 2 knots; Runway 27, touchdown zone visual range is more than 2000 meters; temperature 8°C, dew point 8°C; QNH 1025 mb]

What are the minima for a non precision approach?

[what next]

What are the minima for a non precision approach? Depends on a lot of factors. In Egelsbach they probably would be very close to the german VFR minima in class G airspace under which they very operating anyway: 1500m visibility, clear of clouds and not below 500ft GND unless taking off or landing.

The slashes in the Metar replacing the values for visibility and clouds stand for "cannot be determined" which can mean anything. We will have to wait for reports from other pilots and witnesses on the ground what the met conditions were like at the time of the accident.

[20milesout]

captjns:
What are the minima for a non precision approach?

There is no instrument approach in Egelsbach, therefore VFR apply here (NVFR, that is)

[Denti]

Well, EDDF right next to EDFE had at least for some time low vis procedures in progress yesterday evening. The weather in quite a few areas in western germany was pretty unpleasant, very low ceiling if any, heavy mist or fog and so on.

[Hotel Tango]

Will this turn out to be yet another pressonilitis in marginal weather (due to commercial pressures) accident?

[threemiles]

Yes. But have you tried to get an airport slot there recently? On short notice maybe? At seven in the evening on a weekday? In a private aircraft?
Things have changed. There is plenty of landing runway capacity in EDDF these days.

But should that motivate one to seriously consider EDFE in a C750? Definitely not the right airplane for that airfield.
The airfield is owned by Netjets and is promoted for exactly this purpose.

[yron]

Commercial with N registration ? or Private without AOC it wa limit with C525 , it 's a litle bit crazy no??:sad:

[20milesout]

Going around @ Egelsbach is no fun at all, especially not in a Citation. Remember: you had cancelled IFR prior to landing, and Langen Radar has long forgotten about you. Now you find yourself caught in a small cage of airspace, max altitude 1.500ft. (3.500ft, respectively) with only Egelsbach Info, and the big jets lingering only 2000ft. above you.

What do you do?

-Circle and wait for the wx to approve?

-Divert, including a huge workload with Langen Radar, and all the :mad: trouble after landing, because your company/boss/passengers won´t be amused?

-Close you eyes, pray, and try to make it anyway?

[WestWind1950]

not pretty....

Edit: photos removed...too many peeps reading too much into them, besides the press offers more

[jetopa]

The airfield is owned by Netjets and is promoted for exactly this purpose.

... but they don't operate C750s in and out of Egelsbach.

The C750 definitely is not the kind of airplane to be operated into relatively short fields. :=

These pictures though give me the chills. I used to fly this particular one years ago (when it had a different tail number).

[frontlefthamster]

Aeroncaman listed several agencies who may be involved in the investigation, one way or another, but did not mention that the investigation will of course be conducted by the BFU.

[WestWind1950]

experts from the NTSB and Cessna are flying in tomorrow, the BFU is of course already there (those guys seen in the pictures above), plus the local police and other authorites (me). :(

It was not a NetJet aircraft.

Sorry, but I can't give out any other (inside) details at this moment.

[Daysleeper]

Um Westwind, should you be posting those photos?

[WestWind1950]

daysleeper, take a look at the German press.... they have been posting much more detailed photos since last night. Should I add some links? Also some of the investigators have given live interviews from the site, with the aircraft still smoking in the background. My photos are harmless compared to those.

Citation crash 1 (http://www.op-online.de/nachrichten/egelsbach/absturz-flugzeug-2012-egelsbach-fotostrecke-1633745.html)

Citation crash 2 (http://www.echo-online.de/region/rhein-main/Helfer-bergen-fuenf-Tote-Auf-der-Suche-nach-der-Ungluecksursache;art7943,2675476,C)

and those are just a small sample...

[His dudeness]

Yes. But have you tried to get an airport slot there recently? On short notice maybe? At seven in the evening on a weekday? In a private aircraft?

Yupp. Did work out. Besides, when I file to EDFE and the wx is bad, I´ll go into EDDF which will be my alternate. The only prob you have then is to get out again.

But your reasoning is right and that is what I said for years: putting all that **** onto crews (CFMU/SLOTS/Special regulations) just adds pressure, that can lead to the wrong decisions.
I don´know how many times I had to worry about that stuff in addition to safe conduct of flight - guess you all know that.

[jetset2009]

As far as i know it was registered for the Company "Asia today" which is located in Honkong.

[Daysleeper]

Fair enough Westwind.

It would be fairly unusual in the UK to have such clear, close pictures so soon after the crash.

[GarageYears]

What do you do?

-Circle and wait for the wx to approve?

-Divert, including a huge workload with Langen Radar, and all the :mad: trouble after landing, because your company/boss/passengers won´t be amused?

-Close you eyes, pray, and try to make it anyway?

And which of these choices has a significantly non-zero chance of killing you? :ugh:

[krohmie]

Weather in Egelsbach can be different from the EDDF situation. Especially with banks of fog over the woods.
This is the second accident with an airplane flying in the terrain at nearly the same position (ca. 700ft elevation) under comparable conditions. A King Air crashed there in 2009. (http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_030/nn_226462/EN/Publications/Investigation_20Report/2009/Report__09__3X178__KingAirF90__Egelsbach,templateId=raw,prop erty=publicationFile.pdf/Report_09_3X178_KingAirF90_Egelsbach.pdf)

[20milesout]

Just learned, that the PAPI @ Egelsbach was working perfectly yesterday night. Any pilot who could either not see or "read" it, must have not attempted to land.

[20milesout]

@GarageYears:
From all I know at the moment, the PIC sadly seems to have made the wrong choice yesterday

[GP7280-POC]

Edfe 011650z 01005kt 8000 few008 09/08 q1025
edfe 011720z 03003kt 4000 br few008 09/08 q1025
edfe 011750z auto 03003kt //// // /// 08/07 q1025
edfe 011820z auto 06002kt //// r27/p2000n // /// 08/08 q1025
edfe 011850z auto 04004kt //// r27/0275n // /// 08/08 q1025
edfe 011920z 09005kt cavok 08/07 q1017
edfe 011950z auto 01003kt //// r27/1600vp2000u // /// 07/07 q1025

eddf 011650z 03006kt 8000 sct005 09/09 q1025 nosig=
eddf 011720z 01005kt 8000 few004 08/08 q1025 nosig=
eddf 011750z 01005kt 8000 few003 08/08 q1025 nosig=
eddf 011820z 01005kt 8000 few002 08/08 q1025 nosig=
eddf 011850z 01004kt 7000 bcfg mifg few002 07/07 q1025 tempo bkn002=
eddf 011920z 02005kt 0400 r07r/0750vp2000d r07c/0700v1600d r07l/1100vp2000d fg bkn001 07/07 q1025 nosig

***

[7478ti]

It is similar to scores of other earlier accidents of the past few years, globally, of the same generic profile, that didn't need to happen. A Citation X could have already been using RNP (as nearly all current production large jet transport airliners already have access to), which could have easily provided a safe path and an excellent instrument approach to both runway ends at EDFE, to minima of 200' HAT or below (if the science and policies are properly applied). And it wouldn't have needed either SBAS or LPV or APV to do it. RNP (as used by Alaska, Qantas, Westjet airlines for over a decade, and many other airlines now) could have wasily provided an entirely safe path for them use all the way to the TDZ, ....and even for safe missed approach extraction from the TDZ, had visual reference been lost below DA(H).

I fail to understand why bizav operators globally do not insist that OEMs provide the RNP capability for their new aircraft avionics, and why ANSPs do not more agressively implement the needed RNP based approach and deaprture procedures, which require NO additional ground infrastructureThis is just one more accident that didn't need to happen.

[ZeeDoktor]

Tom, that's a bit of "Binsenwahrheit" as the germans call it... a truism. No accident ever since science and engineering started investigating accident causes was necessary, strictly speaking.

And then there are those that happen due to blatant misconduct such as going below minima, switching to VFR in marginal conditions at night! whether the technology for safer operation exists or not is completely irrelevant, sadly.

Every crew has their operational limitations to work with, and the mark of good airmanship is that despite those limitations, you and I never show up in this forum or in an accident report.

I no longer fly commercially, however, I have for a many more years than I care to count and by golly do I understand the commercial pressures put on by management (or the owners)! If a Citation X owner out of convenience (or financial) considerations has a problem flying into EDDF rather than Egelsbach then, well, I hope they were the ones sitting in the back because unlike in airline management it at least killed those responsible for putting on the pressure.

Which, of course, is no excuse for poor decision making on the part of the crew.

It's sad and unnecessary to read such news. Perhaps once pilots are removed from the equation and all airplanes are flown gate to gate on autopilot we will have much safer skies. It's a well known fact that still to this day around 75% of all air accidents are directly caused by human error of one kind or another.

[frontlefthamster]

Herr Doktor,

You miss one important fact...

As history tells us, human perception is not perfect. Accidents have occurred in which, despite the difficulties around understanding human performance, investigators have shown that illusory visual cues played a part.

It is far too early to judge that happened at EDFE, and I am sure the investigators will do their best to establish how the accident happened. I hope and trust that they will consider the possibility that the pilots may, legitimately, not have realised the gravity of their situation. This moves the causal factor from the flight deck to the regulations, perhaps.

By the way, I fundamentally disagree with your 75% claim as put. You are mis-stating things. Let's put it another way: all accidents blamed on human factors are proof that regulators and designers have failed in constructing the error-tolerant systems which aviation demands. We have not correctly identified and implemented the 'acceptable error' level...

Tom Imrich is right, technology should help to eliminate all the accidents we see in non-precision and visual approaches, but regulators place VERY high demands on integrity.

[B737NG]

.. like a huge Airplane manufacturer that he is capable of producing a Airplane that can fly itself from Gate to Gate on Autopilot with only a System Operating Person in it and not a human error infected Pilot. The nightmare is that if there is no Pilot on Board there will be no paying PAX either.

You see another attempt to have even unmanned vehicles in the skies for military usage and short after the discussion started the ideas switched over that this "systems" could be used for Cargo Planes as well in the future. What :mad: is flying over our heads then ???

To fly without fatal errors is a natural goal and can be achieved usualy if you stay within the legal box. The regulation "chain" is designed that the weakest part is strong enough to keep it together. Part of the trainings is to recognize the chain of events and have the balls and bone to say STOP. That is what we learned from previous unneccessary accidents after investigating them thoroughly.

Let the BFU conduct the investigation, collect the facts and stay away from fiction and then find a conclusion and tell us the details. Maybe some SAFA Checks at EDFE would help in the future to scare the people away from EDFE in marginal conditions and "force" them to a real VFR conditioned field or to a low priced Instrument equipped field, the higher price tag would be the fine or the lost life in worst case scenario, that to avoid is the goal.

[worldpilot]

It is pretty simple - No system would help any pilot that has made a bad decision.

Close your eyes for just a second and imagine what it would look like if you were in a cockpit. :E:E

The pilots decided to continue the flight into disaster instead of going for the safer option, divert and avoid danger. :ugh::ugh:

[AN2 Driver]

If the german press has it right the accident position is 30 m away from the 2009 King Air impact site. Likewise, Egelsbach Airport and the police state that the airplane was clearly visible to the AFIS guy at Egelsbach and "he saw us too" meaning that he allegedly at least at some stage hat the field in sight. That place has PAPI's, so what the heck went wrong there?

[worldpilot]

Well, having PAPI in place won't prevent a pilot from flying low and impacting terrain. :{

The Citation X has EGPWS that must have warned the pilots about the inappropriate flight envelope in relation to the terrain. The interesting question is, what on-board events derailed pilot awareness and lead to this devastating event? The answer to this question would certainly be answered with the evaluation of the flight recorder and cockpit voice recorder that have been salvaged.

Fact is, there must have been an unusual cyclone of activity surrounding the flight configuration which eventually lead to this disaster.:ok:

[ATC Watcher]

According rumors, pilot reported field in sight. Guy in AFIS had a/c in sight ,
.
The answer might lie here :eddf 011820z 01005kt 8000 few002 08/08 q1025 nosig=
eddf 011850z 01004kt 7000 bcfg mifg few002 07/07 q1025 tempo bkn002=
Speculation : entering a lonely stratus. losing sight of PAPI and trying to go under the stratus to regain ground visual contact ? done that myself.. but not at night... and not in a Citation.

At night with that wx, VFR at 150 Kts ? why not divert to EDDF ? If you can afford a Citation X you should be able afford the landing fee and a short taxi ride no ?

[safetypee]

Amongst these examples (TAWS (www.icao.int/fsix/_Library%5CTAWS%20Saves%20plus%20add.pdf)), the hazards of night visuals and human behaviour; losing sight of the airfield, too low too far out, etc, etc.
N.B. events 3, 7, & 8.

[Corvus]

This discussion on which mistake the pilot may have made or what kind of technology could have prevented is pointless.
Shame on the city fathers of Frankfurt for not providing a suitable airport for executive jets. EDDF is congested and in the hands of airlines. Capacity for business jets is insufficient.
It shows how this city values industry leaders who bring business to Frankfurt and provide jobs. As long as the sheer size of an airplane is considered a benchmark on its importance any :mad: low cost carrier can rival an executive jet (apart from a few). Egelsbach is below any standards for high performance jets during nighttime. Even in decent weather conditions during daytime it is challenging to fly a high performance jet under VFR in that cornered airspace with little leeway for error.
The way business travelers are treated tells a lot about the city. For too many years at EDDL there has been a shabby shack at one end of the airport where you could meet all top nobs while the main terminal for (mainly cheap tourist flights) has been a stylish noble building. You could see the same thing at EDDK and a number of other airports in Germany. At least Duesseldorf has a nearby general aviation alternative with EDLN and in the meantime there is a decent executive terminal (owned and operated by Jet Aviation).
This crash at Egelsbach may fall into the category of pilot error and thus be first and foremost the pilot’s responsibility. Failure to offer a suitable alternative to EDDF, however, is what we should focus on. In the meantime it should have become clear that Egelsbach does not qualify as an EDDF alternative.

[yron]

And in France you can,t imagine.....:ouch:

[Earn]

Yes Corvus- you are right - but why not send a request to Warren Buffett - who-according to my information , has bought EDFE.:ok:

[fendant]

Corvus, you are right EDLN is a very good alternate for biz jets, fast friendly and efficient and very pleasant border control guys if you come in from outside Schengen.

[rak64]

The Wiesbaden_Army_Airfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiesbaden Army Airfield) would do the job. North of the RWY is enough land for an executive terminal! ICAO: ETOU, IATA: WIE, RWY 07/25 2153 m × 37 m, TACAN CH88 WIB , NDB 399 WBD.

[hawker750]

Corvus is exactly correct. The lack of access to Frankfurt puts a lot of pressure on operators and crew. I do not know the landing distances required for a C750 but I would surmise marginal, putting even grater strain on the crew. Together with the reducing visibility and the "unuser friendly" ATC enviroment there once you are out of the system it was all the cheese holes ligning up perfectly.
The people who regulate the slot sytem at EDDF must take the moral blame for this and more will happen unless GA is given a fair access to slots for what is the only really suitable airport for Frankfurt. But I guess they do not care for morality, only profit.

[WestWind1950]

hawker, don't be jumping to conclusions. It is not known (yet) if the pilot even ASKED if a slot in EDDF was available to him or not. And in an emergency he obviously can divert there or to Mannheim, Frankfurt-Hahn, or other fields. NO ONE forces a pilot to continue flying into a short (1166m) runway with 4 knots tail wind with a Citation x, on a foggy night, except the pilot himself.

So far it is assumed that it was a private, non-commercial flight. There were guests waiting for the plane at the terminal to board and continue on to Bratislava. I'm sure the pilot was not prepared for the situation he discovered when approaching EDFE, perhaps hasn't even performed a VFR approach in that type of aircraft for ages (if ever). But that's all speculation...let's wait for the accident investigation report.

[learjet50]

Another accident by an A/c not suitable for the A/F

A Citation X cannot land in 1166 m sorry

There are too many operators operating Aircraft on the ??(PRIVATE CAT)

operating into short ****ty airfield with a minimal of aids instead of saying
No Frankfurt slots then we go elswere NOT EDFE and if the pax dont like it Hard SxxT best they arrive with all in tact than what happened to the above

After 35 years in this business Im glad Im out to many acciedents by crews and aircraft operating into marginal //Illegal airports because pilots wont say NO

They normally end up in Body Bags with no regards for there faimiles they leave behind while the Fat Bosses who dont understand NO still make fortunes and take big Bonuses

PILOTS

Stand up and say NO to this time of operation and make the passengers travl a few miles more to opertate from a decent airport

Shout at me if u wish for above comments but there are people out there who know what Im saying


The Rest of the COWBOYS GET ON YOUR HORSES and surcummbe to the tyrants and hope you live to get your pay check

[p2222]

@ WestWind1950

diverting to Mannheim in a C 750 might not be a good idea.
guess you need the firebrigade there.

[WestWind1950]

true, Mannheim isn't a winner either, though it does have IFR which EDFE doesn't.

@learjet50 I agree... but in this case it seems the boss himself may have been the pilot! (just rumors so far so please don't take it as the truth... this is a rumor site after all). He should have known the runway length, he should know his aircrafts limits, he should know that only a PAPI is available, etc. etc. Again, we're starting to speculate again..... :=

[sovereign680]

Facts: The Pilot was the owner, he has landed in EDFE before in a CE-525,CE-560XL,CE-680 and he had level D simulator training going into EDFE.Otherwise I agree with learjet 50 but no rules prevent a "gambler" who can afford such an aircraft and the training from doing what he did. This owner/pilot was "special".
Let's wait for the BFU accident report.

[GP7280-POC]

http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_01.gif
http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_02.gif
http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_03.gif
http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_04.gif


http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_09.jpg
http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_07.jpg
http://www.egelsbach-airport.com/_img/aip/dfs_08.jpg

***

@souvereign680
What you mean with "special"??

[lederhosen]

There was a chap called porcorosso or something similar who used to post a lot on pprune. I remember him describing some of the crm issues of having the owner sit in the other seat.

Attempting a night vfr approach in a Citation X into an 1100m field in near cat 2 conditions would suggest questionable judgement.

However from articles in Flying magazine and elsewhere I know these heavy iron biz jets can sometimes be equipped with head up and even synthetic vision. I got the impression that this was a way around the fact that quite a lot of biz jets are not autoland capable.

One hypothesis I am sure the Bfu will investigate is whether slant range played a role. It is perfectly possible to be visual at a thousand feet looking through the mist from above. As you get lower you are looking through more of it and lose visual reference with the runway. This is is obviously not good at night with no ils etc.

If you had all the kit and knew how to use it maybe this kind of approach would not sound so crazy. But the end result is pretty indicative.

[GP7280-POC]

Our heartfelt condolences. We mourn with you to your son and the others.
Thanks for your statement.

[dc10fr8k9]

I agree, a Citation X had no business on a runway this short, especially at night in anything but the best of conditions. I know there will be some "Chuck Yeager" types out there who will proudly assert that they can and have landed there, but the fact of the matter is even if it is possible, and indeed it is, the margin for error there even in the best of conditions is simply too narrow to consider landing such a jet except in all but the best of conditions, on which occasion this was demonstrably not, despite again the rantings of the "Ueberprofis" regarding the semantics of VMC, VFR or MVFR or it either being IN or OUT of limits performance wise. Despite assertions to the contrary, a game with unknown variables cannot always strictly be black or white, despite our best efforts to make it so. Charts and graphs and calculated performance numbers are fine and all, but they do not take into account all the variables that can change at the last minute, a fog bank, or a sudden tailwind or another plane exiting the runway too slowly, a blown tire or a reverser that won't deploy or whatever. Those unexpected things are why the prudent pilots pad their performance calculations where they can. I don't know of many pilots who daily fly with exactly minimum fuel as per flight plan either without putting a little extra on for things like the inevitable holds in Moscow that are not etched into the regulations and thus not officially taken into account either, despite their daily reality. Quite simply this plane should have gone to EDDF in the first place.

Part of the puzzle seems to have been set in place if I am to believe the assertions that the Commander was the Owner also. There seems to be a peculiar characteristic of highly successful people (or simply people who inherited too much money and thus think they are highly successful), that they are invincible. In America the term for high performance airplanes affordable to the wealthy and overly risk adverse is "Doctor killer". I used to work for such a fellow, and there but for the grace of God goes he (and many of his pilots) because when you push things to the limit, eventually you snag a ragged edge somewhere and the whole game stops. In any case, when I started feeling uncomfortable there, I quit, and though I was jobless for many months as a result, at least I slept well. But the cocky self sure boss will never be convinced of his mortality and fallibility despite a hundred flashy CRM courses, he will always think he can get it on where "lesser mortals" can or will not. And it's always too bad that other people have to die when the "driver" thinks he's the best driver in the world and does something stupid.

My thinking is that this fellow did a dive and drive in his shiny Citation X. And he hit something he didn't see in the dark, which is obviously what happened. He didn't expect to hit cumulo-granite or nimbus-pine of course, but he did. Why? Because of a false sense of security no doubt, followed by an overabundance of self confidence also no doubt. We all know that following the VASIS or PAPI leaves us quite comfortably down the runway on touchdown (as well as comfortably above the terrain and obstacles on final approach!). However, in daytime when we can see the terrain and obstacles and runway we are often led into a false sense of security with regard to the margins of safety built in. So a lot of times when approaching such fields, one tends to prefer being "a little low" on the PAPI in order to squeeze as much asphalt out of the landing as possible, rather than aiming for the touchdown zone and possibly floating and ending even one inch off the other end of the runway as a result. It's the aeronautical equivalent of taking money out of your left pocket to put into your right, you are in the end no richer, you are "kiting checks" and in the end will have to pay for the deficit one way or the other some day. Most of the time if you drove it on with a red over red approach, you know you will still not clip any trees or rocks and land right on the threshold or close to it. MOST OF THE TIME. Just watch the action at Lugano or Samedan or London City or Egelsbach or anywhere else the performance charts say you can get in there because the runway is 3500 feet long and your charts say you can land on 3450 feet and the boss says it can be done so you must go. "Flieg, oder flieg raus" as they say in German (fly or get fired). And too many pilots risk it for their jobs, and too many cocky "owners" risk it because they think they are "Uebermenschen" who are capable of such feats without fail.

I don't know Egelsbach personally but there are plenty of other crashes where the pilot had sight of the runway and went below the glide path or the published flight path and hit a rock that was invisible of course in the dark until it is hit. I imagine with the toys this airplane had, that the crash was right on centerline though. Also noteworthy and true is the comment that executive aviation is given the short shrift at Frankfurt. Really it is a disgrace that such an important global player economic powerhouse city relegates its executives to a mickey mouse short single runway airport with no instrument approaches. Again, the tail is wagging the dog, where someone will wail that extending the runway will cause more noise or endangers the flock of yellow bellied sap suckers that roosts in a marsh near there once every decade. Personally I prefer the hushed noise of a hundred landing airplanes to the loud dull noise of even one crashing. But that is economics and politics, not to mention the side effects of NIMBY thinking (not in my back yard!).

Though I am surprised that the "Jet Set" doesn't have more influence in German politics even at the municipal level to get the runway there extended and to build an ILS, or to offer a suitable alternative. That may be the only good news here, because anywhere else, the money would have greased the political skids a long time ago and the runway would be extended even if they had to bulldoze Grandma's house to begin with. And to hell with the yellow bellied sap sucker.

Finally, if the owner was Commander, then very likely the FO again meekly went to his death like so many others in the pre-CRM era without uttering any protest to the act of attempting that landing in that aircraft in those conditions. The history of accident investigation is replete with FO's who knew something (or everything!) wasn't kosher, but fearing for their jobs, they said nothing and crossed their fingers, or trusted in their Captain's skill and judgement. It sucks being a co-pilot knowing you may not get another job with your low hours if you speak up and get fired. But I have always said it is better to be alive and out of work than dead on the job, and it is better to arrive late in this world rather than early in the next. And I have one rule that I stick to, that I have already sadly had to use, and that is that I consider my priorities in the following order only: Life, License, and finally job. I've lost a job once or twice, but I still have a clean License (and Certificate even for those who might get involved in semantics - I have both), and I have my life, and a good conscience too.

This was indeed another needless tragedy, and I await the outcome of the official report not with morbid curiosity or Monday morning quarterbacking in mind, but out of genuine interest in what measures (tombstone legislation) will be taken to help prevent such a needless tragedy from happening again. The only prediction I will make is that one way or another, this will be another "classic" case ruminated over in many a CRM class. Hopefully the lessons learned here will continue to at least save lives down the road.

My condolences to all who lost loved ones in this terrible accident also.

[dc10fr8k9]

As I was writing this, it seems that the mother of the poor FO seems to have verified my thesis, because only after posting my comments did I see the unfortunate commentary of "lost our loved one" posted while I was writing. My sincerest and most heart-felt condolences to you!

[lederhosen]

I too am very sorry to hear of your loss. Just for your information this airfield is I believe owned by Warren Buffett's company, which also owns Netjets and Flight Safety, who provide a lot of the simulator training for this size of aircraft. I do not think the findings of the investigation will be swept under the carpet therefore. However lets wait for the official findings and hopefully at least something positive will come out of this tragedy.

[EatMyShorts!]

Please accept my condolences as well. It is too unfortunate that your Jon allowed this cowboy-pilot (that's how I call these "special owner-pilots") to continue the approach under the given circumstances. No, I don't want to blame him. Let's hope that only good thing out of this accident is, that other pilots flying with cowboy-pilots will speak up and rather live and lose their job than die for a job. Yes, Netjets owns a majority stake at Egelsbach Airport and they would like to extend the runway and install an instrument landing system (be it an ILS or a GPS-approach) as soon as possible. Unfortunately there is too much political pressure on this whole project. People living in the cities around Egelsbach are afraid that Egelsbach could get much more traffic and that their houses would decrease in value (aircraft "noise"...). That's why here in Germany it takes many, many years to get such a project approved and then carried out. Let's hope that these were the last fatalities because of politics.

[WestWind1950]

The reasons for EDFE not yet having IFR is not just political! The runway would need to be extended and that can only be done toward the west.... and gets quite close to the Autobahn (highway) and power lines. On the east end is a commercial area but more "threatening" are the very busy train tracks with passenger as well freight trains. For this reason there is a 250 m displaced threshold already in place (the reason for the 1400 m runway being only 1166 for landings on 27).

Then there's the question of missed approaches on RWY 27.... would have to go direkt into the Frankfurt control zone! So every time there's an IFR approach, all traffic on the EDDF 18 has to wait... not making airlines very happy. So the problem is actually trying to fit an IFR system for EDFE into the EDDF system!

All the possibilities are already being checked, but such a system cannot be installed on short notice... it has to be checked and double checked and go through all necessary authorities (BMVBS, BAF, DFS, plus various ministries, etc etc). That all takes TIME! It is being worked on, but whether it will ever get installed..... who knows.

[Klimax]

My condolances to to the family.. Heart broken to read the words from the family..

[Beasmartsafepilot]

Although I only briefly met Jon a couple of times, he had a very warm personality. My condolences to you and your family. As an instructor pilot, this crash is very frustrating to me.

[agapilot]

I offer my condolences to Jon's family. I regret horribly not making sure more people knew about the owner/captain tendencies. I was former copilot for him also before this plane. Some still think jon should have done more, but I can say you can be very limited in the actions especially since the captain was prone to changing configurations of aircraft at last minutes and a copilot would have their hands full and that low leaves very little room for error and correction much less taking over the plane from a determined capatin. The "captain" was known for taking visual before having the airport in sight. Arguing with controllers, flying early in the morning after a night of heavy drinking, inappropriate changes in aircraft configuration on approaches, rarely even do a preflight of the aircraft, and a very much single pilot attitude person. His opinion was all these cessna business jets should be single pilot operations.
I left, and I'm sorry Jon was unable to change jobs sooner. I know mutual friends were trying hard and are heartbroken by this event as am I.

[Sydy]

Please, accept my condolences.

This accident has been commented a lot here in Brazil and the pilots feel sorry for the situation.

My respects,

Sydy

[Anotheravatar]

So if I am to understand that the guy flying was the owner, it might explain some things.

Part timers that decide to fly their plane to the scene of the accident has a proud and illustrious history.

We can talk all day long about loss and condolences, but consider the people in back that trusted the pilots with their lives.

[agapilot]

Being the copilot with this owner pilot prior to Jon just breaks my heart. Maybe I could have or should have done more to prevent this..

[agapilot]

He was no part timer pilot, just arrogant. Lots of hours Etc. but he could never leave his work or problems outside of the cockpit. If he was in a good mood I could do no wrong, if he had a bad day I could do no right. I have a list of situations ... But it's too late.

[formulaben]

The Citation X has EGPWS that must have warned the pilots about the inappropriate flight envelope in relation to the terrain. Not necessarily, as GPWS is automatically muted when flaps are set past a prescribed setting and withing a geographical boundary of an airport...they may have met the criteria for this. Otherwise, you would get a GPWS warning for every landing...

Lostourlovedone, thoughts and prayers are with you. This is so very sad!

[hawker750]

A very sad scene but I am guessing that this will be the final nail in the cofffin for the private ops guys who keep yelling that they can self regulate.

[AN2 Driver]

agapilot, you might want to get in touch with the German BFU. I am sure they would be interested in talking to you.

[Klimax]

Hawker750,

Dont blame PrivateOps for what happened in this accident. This could just as well have happened in a commercial biz jet ops. As a matter of fact many commercial airline accidents have happened - that should not have happened.

As much as there are probably more suspicius PrivateOps as opposed to suspicius AirlineOps - you can not solely blame PrivateOps for what happened here.

Thx.
K

[G-SPOTs Lost]

+1

H750 bit inappropriate in my opinion, there's captains flying public transport with worse attitudes than evidently this guy.

One accident does not a problem make

Anyway back on topic, FDRs & CVR's been recovered?

[Phil Brockwell]

I thought the 750 would have more runway requirement? Can anyone who flies these things commercially tell me if you would be able to make the figures stack up for a 750 into Egelsbach?

I know this isn't the place for the Commercia vs Private argument, but lets just head it off at the pass with this simple question and agree not to mention it again once we know the answer.

Phil

[long final]

Not knowing the 750 - but if previous LDA are correct of 1166m (3825ft) then for a non factored LDR, Cessna are saying 3400ft MLW ISA S/L.

So, not knowing any other factors, it should be able to be within (technical) limits.

Hope the regular AOC/Private protagonists fight their corner away from here.

Condolences.

[His dudeness]

What has the runway length required to do with an CFIT?

?

If you need to know that, look it up here:

http://textron.vo.llnwd.net/o25/CES/cessna_aircraft_docs/citation/x/x_fpg.pdf

If he'd used a factor of 1,25 (as we do with our C680) they airplane could have weighted 28.000 lbs WITHOUT a tailwind component to fit into the 1166 mtr of LDA

Still I think this part of the discussion is sort of irrelevant... why go onto a VFR only field in night and wx starting to go bad in the first place? Have a look at the map and you´ll see EDFE is a tricky place with all the obstacles around and the rising terrain to the east. I sometimes went there in KingAirs, Bravos and CJs, never liked it one bit in less than perfect wx.
Went there in a C680 and a few times in a CL300, ONLY in good wx. My peers wanted me to go there a few times ...told em I will decide when approaching the field and the WX is to my liking and it is DAYTIME. We went to EDDF then...

A very sad scene but I am guessing that this will be the final nail in the cofffin for the private ops guys who keep yelling that they can self regulate.

If the wx was below minima, he´d broke an existing law. So having another law stating the exact same thing does change exactly what???

If not, he did not break a rule. So?

Or do you want to impose higher minima for pvt ops?

BTW, you do know what the N in front of the Callsign means, don´t you? Can't see the EU regulating that register.

You do realize that from now on I will slag every friggin accident in the oh-so-safe EU-OPS world in your face....like the Premier 1 fellows in LSZS or the organ transplant flight at a very foggy Brum...

Actually I won´t, cause people like you can´t be changed. Have it your way. Enjoy. Forbid flying, hence there will be no flying accidents.


Over and out.

[wozzo]

Anyway back on topic, FDRs & CVR's been recovered?
Already in the hands of the BFU. There will be a "factual report" in about 4-8 weeks, investigation report not expected before 12 months.

[Flaymy]

I hope hawker750 is wrong. Hard cases make bad laws, and this was not a case to be generalised to "private ops". It sounds like a very unfortunate case of an owner/pilot who did not have a good attitude intersecting with Frankfurt's lack of good options.

Having said that, it does show how an AOC operation or a well-run private/corporate operation adhering to a well-written operations manual, with good oversight from strong, accountable management willing to say "no" to owners does give a massive safety advantage - and I don't think many AOC operators or good private ops would have sent a jet into EDFE in those conditions, let alone a Citation X.

Isn't landing factor 1.43 (only able to use 70% of available runway)? So if unfactored LDR is over 1000m a C750 could not have gone in public-transport even using the full 1400m runway length. However there are other factors in play here. Operations Manuals for AOC operators (and I presume reputable private ops) should have strict criteria for cancellation of IFR, and for descent below MSA when not on a published instrument approach.

With no instrument approach Egelsbach is also a cat B airport even for types able to operate full weight from the runway. That brings in a a briefing for the crew, and probably criteria decided on in the cold light of day by someone who knows he could be in court if the worst happens, having signed Form 4 to take responsibility for every flight.

Criteria for approach will vary from operator to operator it is true, but restrictions can be put in place such as weather minima and specific visual reference requirements tighter than usual ops manual criteria if the operator feels Egelsbach is especially difficult, which having been there in a Seneca I can assure you it would be for a jet. Equally importantly the briefing can be reviewed in light of awful accidents like this one; ours certainly is being.

Let us recognise what can be done to make operations into airports like EDFE safer. That is only possible if we look at best practice and acknowledge it, and in this case I would argue it starts with factors that would be required in an AOC operation but are not mandatory for others. However it is also in factors that are inherent to charter flights but not to many private flights, especially this one - in a charter the crew answer to company, not to the passenger.

[RainingLogic]

Condolences to the 3 people in the back that the pilots killed.

[TripleBravo]

And heartfelt condolences to the Copilot's family as well.

You can't avoid mistakes completely, let alone correct errors of others when there's this authority gradient present in the cockpit.

If you are going to die it doesn't automatically imply you did something on purpose or even that you did something lightheartedly. It can happen to people who feel responsible for others. I learned that the hard, sad way.

The only thing I really hate about people (and pilots specifically) is when they're becoming bold and asking for trouble. After all readings, seems that's what happened here with the owner / captain. But then again, I didn't know him.

[His dudeness]

sn't landing factor 1.43

Nope, thats for TPs, Jets are 1,67.

[lederhosen]

An unconfirmed analysis by an apparently well informed source looking at the approach using a flight tracking programme suggested that the aircraft appeared to be doing more than 190 knots inside four miles. I do not fly the Citation X but on my 737 that would not be a stabilised approach.

Another tracking programme shows the aircraft a day or so before flying from California to Europe by way of Goose Bay in around 20 hours. Nobody knows who was flying that trip. But speculating that the owner liked to fly the jet himself and from the tone of other posts on here a certain picture is developing.

There is nothing stopping you doing this kind of stuff in a private operation other than of course common sense, which in this case seems to have been sadly missing.

[Flaymy]

Dude

Ah, of course. so, for an approach for the purposes of CAT he would require 1700m or so. Do private operators tend to use the same, or is your 1.25 typical?

This one looks like such a tragedy for being to preventable.

Lederhosen

Is the 160kt limit still in place? Even if not then 190 kts seems lunatic around EDFE. It's not straightforward at 120 or so.

[afjose]

greetings everybody;
i would like to thank all the sympathizers with our family's loss at the same time let me clarify some things;
the ''cowboy pilot'' is the owner of the company and also a certified citation X pilot. jon was the company chief pilot and franklin is the co-pilot. But during this flight jon was the acting co-pilot as franklin was not available.there are flts.that jon has to fly with the owner as the co pilot and the regular co-pilot is to stay.franklin the ''door prize'' co -pilot was fortunate to be not on the flt as he already resigned prior to the flight.
the only way to find out what really transpired in the last 9 sec of the flt. is when they finally decipher the cvr,blackbox....then we could say what really happened.....so please let's all wait and keep quite ,we are all suffering from this bad accident....i'm asking for all of you to refrain from commenting as respect to my son and our family...
lastly i am not aware of this 44yr old lady who claims ''our jon'' leaving a daughter....?i know for a fact that the he has three sons; 2 with his wife, veronica from CA and 1 from his previous marriage. i would like to appeal to this 44yr.old woman to quit this claims thus messing up the grieved moments of the legal family.... just shut up pls as you are not helping the situation...pls be considerate of the family's feelings!
god bless..... ::O

[His dudeness]

Do private operators tend to use the same, or is your 1.25 typical? Can´t speak for many, but I know some that use the 1,67 and some that don´t use any factor at all.

I´m homebased on a short turf (3323ft LDA), so we could go in there at 1,43 at reasonable weights (we actually use 1,44 for wet runways), but not or only with a few drops of fuel at 1,67. There are aircraft based there that can´t use factors at all.

Only accident we had since 10 years or so was a commercial turboprop...

[jetopa]

You "special pilot" have taken so much from us and from so many others. I for one do not need the investigation reports, I already know.

Wow - that's a tough one... And very sad to read.

One has to be careful not to prematurely judge from what we seem to 'know', based on own perceptions or information that is publicized. But:

- it is a known fact that this airplane (which I used to fly some time ago) does not do particularly well to or from short runways and at low speeds. Any airplane needs a knowing hand, but the X can be an unforgiving beast. So, the choice of going into EDFE with it can be quite justifiably questioned. I'm confident the BFU will look into this.

- the X seems to be attractive for certain 'owner-pilots', appealing to their massive ego of owning and handling one of the fastest civilian birds in the sky. Some of these individuals even opt for the winglet-upgrade, to make their airplane even faster...
There are other airplanes available on the market which comfortably can transport the same load as the X, but can be operated to an airfield like EDFE with much more peace of mind. But that is apparently not their main objective.

- I personally had the 'privilege' of supervising some of this kind of pilots - one of whom residing not far away from this particular accident scene and another one more to the East. In short words: scary!

As long as authorities look the other way and TREs sign off their LPCs, this kind of 'aviators' will continue getting others into trouble, I'm afraid. And: they are liable to ruin the reputation of private / business aviation.

Not letting that happen should be one of pprune's agendas!

[WestWind1950]

@afjose
I find the smilies in your entry inappropriate

[WestWind1950]

@lostourlovedone
unfortunately the country I'm from (Germany, where the accident occured) blocked the video for copyright issues (music used) so I am unable to watch it. I am so sorry for your loss. {hugs}

[GP7280-POC]

17:47:59;12/03/01 17:47:43;0;0;098;001;N288CX;LOWL;EDFE;12/03/01 17:00:00;494523N 0093111E;80;Continuing;7655;339;288 59'43'';;;AA86642649;;

17:50:58;12/03/01 17:50:46;0;0;098;001;N288CX;LOWL;EDFE;12/03/01 17:00:00;495251N 0091424E;50;Continuing;7655;259;298 59'54'';;;AA86642649;;

17:53:58;12/03/01 17:53:48;0;0;098;001;N288CX;LOWL;EDFE;12/03/01 17:00:00;495610N 0085620E;30;Continuing;7655;240;282 59'49'';;;AA86642649;;

17:56:59;12/03/01 17:56:20;0;0;098;001;N288CX;LOWL;EDFE;12/03/01 17:00:00;495752N 0084215E;7;Continuing;7655;219;263 59'45'';;;AA86642649;;

Source:
h ttp://forum.airliners.de/index.php?showtopic=51175&view=findpost&p=612222

[INNflight]

I've met Jon & Chelsie downroute and he seemed like a very responsible and experienced aviator. Seeing the video tribute is sad, again my condolences.

[janeczku]

Update from the german investigators [13mar2012]

Source (http://www.op-online.de/nachrichten/egelsbach/drei-absturzopfer-identifiziert-1906498.html)

According to the district attorney, 3 out of 5 victims have been identified as of today:

1. A 52-year-old german business man, resident of Las Vegas (PIC)
2. An austrian businessman (PAX)
3. A 43-year-old german woman working in the management of the owners company (PAX)

The other 2 victims have not been positively identified yet.


@lostourlovedone
i really think you should keep those private details in the family. To disclose them here is certainly not reverent.

[what next]

i really think you should keep those private details in the family. To disclose them here is certainly not reverent.

I too found it a bit embarrasing to see variuos familiy members of a victim "washing dirty laundry" (a directly translated german proverb, not sure if the meaning is the same in english) in a public forum.
On the other hand I can now understand better why this copilot stayed with the company even if he thougt the flying was dangerous. Five children from two wives must really generate an economic pressure that most of us can't even imagine. I hope the investigators will consider that as a possible contributing factor.

[WestWind1950]

S, no need to apologize. You felt a need to say something and that's ok. At least most of the speculating has stopped.

@janeczku, that's just a press release and nothing "official". I'd be very careful in claiming it's actually from an official source.

[wozzo]

@janeczku, that's just a press release and nothing "official". I'd be very careful in claiming it's actually from an official source.
The press release was from the prosecutor's office (Staatsanwaltschaft) in Darmstadt, so it was official. Also, the owner's and PIC's name has already been in the textile trade press.

[searchingforanswers]

Has there been any more news re crash investigation? This thread dropped off 2 weeks ago. I am here because sometimes there are credible information and alternative theories in forums like this other than what may be available in traditional sources. I am Jon Jose's mother, both grieving and searching for answers.

[His dudeness]

searchingforanswers, my condolences, I can´t really imagine how you must feel...

In Germany, the BFU - Büro für Unfalluntersuchung - Air Accident Investigation Bureau - is the competent that has to deal with the investigation of this horrible accident.

You will find their homepage/contact under:

BFU Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung BFU - About us - BFU (http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_030/nn_226462/EN/The_20BFU/theBFU__node.html?__nnn=true)

There is nothing on the accident yet.

The investigation will most likely take years as you might already know. Even a interim report will not show up quick I think.
To the best of my knowledge (and business aviation is a fairly small group here) no new evidence has been found so far. I do fly a very similar aircraft, the Citation Sovereign (same cockpit basically) and I do know the airfield relatively well. If there are questions you wanna ask me, you are most welcome to do so per PN preferably (bear in mind I´m definately no expert in investigating air accidents, just a pilot...)

[searchingforanswers]

Thank you, "his dudeness", for your sympathy and offering to share your perspective on the accident. It's been difficult.

I checked the BFU site and obviously it's too early to see anything there on Jon's accident. Short of an interim report, would the investigation be open enough for me to inquire into progress? By the way, I saw a report on the 2009 King Air crash and was confused to see the report issue date of July 2009, yet the crash occurred in Dec, 2009? Also, you suggested to communicate "per PN." What does that mean? Thank you.

[searchingforanswers]

"His dudeness," thank you. It's been rough.

I thought I posted a response but don't see it in the thread. I did take a look at the BFU website and read the report on the 2009 King Air crash. How do I inquire into the progress of the BFU investigation? What's your theory? What does "per PN" mean?

[His dudeness]

You`re most welcome.

PN is my mistake, its the German acronym for PM - personal message. Sorry.

Well, on the inquiry...I doubt that there is a mechanism/law that allows you to do so. However, I´d try to seek contact directly with them through the contact details on their website. I was in a class held by one of the BFUs investigators two weeks ago and he seemed to be a fairly nice guy.

They will surely not give you any details if you can´t prove who you are, but they will be able tell you how this could be done. I´m not an expert in this field and MAYBE there is something in the law preventing them to disclose details early on...one path that springs to mind is btw to ask the US embassy in Germany to assist you.

Contact Us | United States Diplomatic Mission to Germany (http://germany.usembassy.gov/contact/)

If you want to call them, our time zone is UTC +2,(with DST effective now) I would think the best chances to reach them will be between 0800 to 1600 local time. Thats 0600 to 1400 UTC.

[WestWind1950]

@searchingforanswers

you possibly read the date wrong, since it's all in German. Here's the proper report, posted in November 2011:

Beech accident December 2009 (http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_030/nn_223970/DE/Publikationen/Untersuchungsberichte/2009/Bericht__09__3X178__KingAirF90__Egelsbach,templateId=raw,pro perty=publicationFile.pdf/Bericht_09_3X178_KingAirF90_Egelsbach.pdf)

That shows you how long it can take before the reports are finished. Of course there is already a lot of speculation, but until every single piece of the aircraft is studied for possible technical problems, it can take months before a final report can be published.

It's a difficult time for you and your's, I'm sure, making it hard to be patient. Sorry I can't help you any further.

[searchingforanswers]

Thank you, Hisdudeness, for the guidance. I do understand that investigations of this nature take long. I will try to go the routes you suggested. Also, will go via PN next time

[searchingforanswers]

Thanks for the clarification re BFU report on the 2009 King Air crash at Egelsbach. I agree that speculation can lead one up the wrong path. This forum though does provide me with perspectives from experienced pilots that I won't otherwise have, so I read them, knowing that evidence turned up in the investigation might prove the speculation wrong.

[Cpt_Schmerzfrei]

@searchingforanswers and @lostourlovedone

The Mayday Foundation ("Stiftung Mayday") is helping the families of crew that perished in aviation accidents. If you are facing financial hardship due to your loss, you may want to get in touch with them. Their web page is currently only available in German, but the English version should be on-line again in May.

www.english.stiftung-mayday.de/index.php

[wozzo]

Correct Links:
Stiftung Mayday - English version (http://english.stiftung-mayday.de/) (English Home, no content at this time)
Stiftung Mayday (http://www.stiftung-mayday.de/) (German Home)

[Cpt_Schmerzfrei]

Thanks, wozzo

[halwise]

I was interested to read this article posted by the Pilot who has been mentioned on this thread. Very sad reading, such an industrious, driven chap who realised the constraints of time and money on his chosen career, but persevered and had seemed to get the chance to fulfill his dream.
I'm sure Captain Jose's experiences are not unique, and that other aviators have experienced similar adversity in attaining their chosen profession, but I find his brief but very honest account of how he reached the position he had most poignant given the circumstances of what happened at Egelsbach.
Harry
Jon Jose (http://www.pilotmentornetwork.com/mentors.php?mtor_id=44)

[Trim Stab]

I would like to see some serious research done into the impact of commercial pressures on the safety of small-fleet business jet operations.

Small companies with only one or two aircraft on an AOC often have serious cash-flow problems, meaning the company can go under even if one or two sectors are loss-making (eg having to divert to an alternate, ore even de-ice). When a captain faces the prospect of losing his employment if he diverts, then he has a large incentive to take an unacceptable risk. If the captain also has a stake in the business (as here) then the incentive is even higher.

I myself have been put in such a position before, but luckily am still here to tell the tale. I've now made a personal decision to never again fly for small-fleet companies, as I don't ever want to be put into that situation again.

[WestWind1950]

@Trim Stab... I think you missed something. In this case, the PIC was the owner/operator himself so any pressure here he put on himself. At least, that's the way things look at the moment. Final details are not out yet and may not be for some weeks/months to come.

[His dudeness]

Small companies with only one or two aircraft on an AOC often have serious cash-flow problems, meaning the company can go under even if one or two sectors are loss-making

Do you have ANY proof whatsoever for this accusation ?

I have managed a 1 and later 2 A/C company for 4 years and was involved in doing so for 14 years and we NEVER were close to shutdown for the loss of de/cing etc. Gear overhaul, engine overhauls...that could get you in trouble, surely, but 2 sectors with a loss? When a company is so close to being bankrupt, than it is too late already IMO.

[Trim Stab]

I didn't make any allegations so there is no need for "proof". I simply suggested that it would be an interesting topic for further research.

I can certainly give from my own experience of flying with a small-fleet operator examples of situations where the captain/AOC stakeholder has taken substantial (and illegal) risks due to commercial pressure.

[His dudeness]

You didn´t?

so is Small companies with only one or two aircraft on an AOC often have serious cash-flow problems

fact or fiction ?

How about: meaning the company can go under even if one or two sectors are loss-making

Fact? Fiction? Not an allegation?

[Trim Stab]

You're being pedantic. Maybe your company is an icon of perfect management, but many small companies in any industry sector struggle from month to month. As I wrote, it would be an interesting topic for further research in aviation human factors.

[His dudeness]

You're being pedantic. Granted, in this case I was.

many small companies in any industry sector struggle from month to month.

This might be the case, but I wonder then what the authorities are up to. We had to report the financial situation regularly, 4 times a year, not only the 80.000€ available... and month to month sounds a tad different than your first statement doesn´t it?

Maybe your company is an icon of perfect management

Most certainly not, otherwise I would have pursuit a career in management.

[EatMyShorts!]

Let's don't argue over semantics. I think everyone understood what "Trim Stab" wanted to say and also that "The Dude" ;) luckily never had to work for such an outfit. It also depends on the country that your company is based in etc.

[20milesout]

BFU (German Air Accident Investigation Bureau) has just released a first intermediate report (http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_030/nn_223968/DE/Publikationen/Bulletins/2012/Bulletin2012-03,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Bulletin2012-03.pdf) in German, see page 16.

Can some experienced bizjet driver shed some light on the events, as I don´t know about Citation SOPs ?

His dudeness, you have control.

[what next]

Hello!

Can some experienced bizjet driver shed some light on the events, as I don´t know about Citation SOPs ?I think you can best understand what went on, when you read the safety recommendations issued by the BFU on pages 45 and 46. A short translation:

11/2012: Until recommendations 12/2012, 13/2012 and 14/2012 have been put in place, VFR night approaches for high performance aircraft to Egelsbach shall be suspended.

12/2012: The visual approach procedures to and from Egelsbach shall be revised. The description shall be simple, easily understandable and free of contradictions.

13/2012: The definition of High Performance Aircraft (HPA) with relation to Egelsbach shall be supplemented by the speed term Vref. It shall be guaranteed that HPA aircraft can fly procedures and traffic patterns safely with their relative Vref.

14/2012: From the visual approach charts of Egelsbach it shall be evident that due to the obstacle situation the final approach must to be flown at an angle of 4.4 degrees. The obstacles shall be clearly marked on the chart.


I do not know about any „Citation SOPs“ (although I fly Citations myself, but not this model). We fly according to our company SOPs. Therefore I do not know whether their high approach speed (285kt initially - the AIP entry for Egelsbach gives a maximum approach speed of 160kt), their late configuration and their excessive descent rate on final approach (> 2500ft/min) was in accordance with _their_ standard way of operating this aeroplane or not. I also do not know why they entered a different waypoint (ECHO) into their FMS when instructed to follow the published HPA approach via Yankee One and Yankee 2 (they read back this instruction!). Not that it matters much, both routes cross the same ridge of obstacles.

So as usual we will have to wait for the final report.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

But operators with an AOC ar the safest operators FACT.

The CAA say it is so.

[what next]

Hello!

But operators with an AOC ar the safest operators FACT.

The CAA say it is so. ???

I fail to see the connection of your statement with this interim report.

But had they been operating on an AOC, there would have been some minimal common training/operating standards and some very basic operating procedures at least. Whether or not the crews adhere to those is something completely different of course. Like flight preparation (Egelsbach really is an airfield that one has to familiarise himself with _before_ flying there at night in marginal weather) stability criteria for continuing the final approach or reaction to GPWS warnings: The power settings for both engines remained at 34% (idle?) after they had heard first "SINKRATE PULL UP" and then "TOO LOW TERRAIN". (BTW: The timeline given in the interim report regarding the GPWS warnings does not make sense.)

[Swiss Cheese]

I picked up the throttles staying at 34%, rather than TOGA (or equivalent) being selected. What should have been the proper timeline for the EGPWS to function as expected?

[what next]

Hello!

I picked up the throttles staying at 34%, rather than TOGA (or equivalent) being selected. What should have been the proper timeline for the EGPWS to function as expected?

The manual of "our" EGPWS (Honeywell MK V and MK VII - don't know if the Citation X has the same one on board) says (not aircraft specific!):

In case of WARNING ALERTS(PULL UP and WINDSHEAR are warning alerts):

1. Aggressively position throttles for maximum rated thrust. Apply maximum available power as determined by emergency need. The pilot not flying (if applicable) should set power and ensure that TO/GA power and modes are set.

2. If engaged, disengage the autopilot and smoothly but aggressively increase pitch towards "stick shaker" or Pitch Limit Indicators (PLI) to obtain maximum climb performance.

3. Continue climbing until the warning is eliminated and safe flight is assured.

4. Advise ATC of the situation.

NOTE: Climbing is the only recommended response unless operating in visual conditions and/or pilot determines, based on all available information, that turning in addition to the climbing is the safest course of action. Follow established operating procedures.


These manoeuvers are practised on every recurrent training in the simulator. Yet they never increased power and they did not disengage the autopilot, but used the pitch wheel instead to slowly raise the nose of the aircraft. Who knows why.

[INNflight]

What I find most curious is that towards the end of the summary, when they struck the trees, the BFU noted "The autopilot was engaged at this point".

How comes there was no sign to do an AP disconnect and execute a GA?!?

Basic airmanship should tell any pilot that if you have the AP on in a descent and the EGPWS shouts at you, disconnect the damn thing and execute a GA.
It seems that they just self-constructed an IFR approach where there was none, why otherwise would they have the AP engaged so close to the field and not hand-fly it.

That's just a sad fact apparently, but again the fact that they had the AP engaged right until impact puzzles me the most.

[His dudeness]

(Egelsbach really is an airfield that one has to familiarise himself with _before_ flying there at night in marginal weather)

Excuse me, that is true for any airport I go to.


It seems that they just self-constructed an IFR approach where there was none, why otherwise would they have the AP engaged so close to the field and not hand-fly it

Which is not necessarily wrong in my book. Let automation help you. BUT - before you do anything like that, make sure you know what you punch in (flightprep!) and be ahead of your airplane all the time.
2 nm isnt that close to have the A/P engaged. The Report says the elevator input was up to 17° Nose up and the pitch changed wtihn 2 seconds from - 4 to +20°, now call me a pussy but I think that is really rapid change most likely not achievable with the AP ENGAGED. Either by TCS or brute force someone overpowered the A/P IMO.

They were most certainly NOT stabilized or ahead of their airplane. The whole approach was...well downright bad. Speed, situational awareness etc.

[jetopa]

Reading the preliminary BFU report puzzles me and makes me think: how could people like that be allowed to fly such a demanding airplane? How was the crew's performance during their latest recurrent trainings? Has nobody noticed anything before that accident?

Gear and landing flaps fully down, spoilers extended (?), power at 34%? The Citation X won't maintain level flight like this.

Why on earth being constantly below a 3 degree glideslope (and below the PAPI of 4,4 degrees) 4 miles from the runway, 500 ft above the ground, fully configured and with a rate of descent of 1,200 FPM?

It appears that they never overflew the point YANKEE ONE but rather intercepted the final course just before reaching the next point YANKEE TWO, losing altitude at a moderate rate at first. Can there still be any doubt about the concept of a stabilized approach?

Why going to this unfamiliar airfield, at night and in marginal weather in the first place? Maintaining VMC...

And then the crew's reaction to the EGWS alert, the last line of defence. Unbelievable.

[flynowpaylater]

Jetopa - very well summed up.

Certainly not bashing non aoc ops, but without any real compliance monitoring of private ops like this one, the lines become fuzzy and it becomes very difficult to foresee any trends with crew performance / procedures / decision making etc...especially if the PIC is also the manager of the flight dept for the operation. An LPC once a year is not sufficient to establish all of these things.

It seems pretty clear that there were some seriously bad decisions made and that they were well outside of SOP's.

FNPL.

[His dudeness]

An LPC once a year is not sufficient to establish all of these things

So your LPC is done at night, in marginal wx to an unfamiliar field (btw, we have no idea weather they knew EDFE or not...)?
If not, what is it going to establish? That you can fly an ILS? Surely irrelevant to this accident.

Following your logic, the Premier in Samedan couldn`t possibly have crashed AOC ops!)...unless that was a technical (no report out yet I think)

And who do you report to, that the bosses performance is below par?

Certainly not bashing non aoc ops

Blablabla. Yes you are.

[flynowpaylater]

HD - Accidents will happen, AOC and non AOC. The point I make is that with the right safegaurds in place, the risk is reduced.

Bottom line is that this accident would appear to have been totally avoidable. Trying to put a C-X into EDFE is madness anyway, but to try it in marginal weather...:ugh: This guy has paid with his life for those poor decisions, and taken others with him.

AOC or not, these type of operations should be well supported by an active and competent flight ops department, so the guy at the pointy end can concentrate on what pilots do best - flying the aircraft. Under AOC there would be line training, which is designed to pick up on and rectify any sub standard problems any given crew member might demonstrate. For the life of me I can't imagine why anyone who gets in these rather fast, complex aircraft, beit pilot or pax, wouldn't want to ensure safe and robust operations.

This isn't a pissing contest between AOC and private, simply common sense to raise the safety bar all round. I get the impression that you think you are above all of these initatives, which is a real shame for you and your pax if that is the case. We never stop learning.

Trying to cut down human error as a factor in accidents is surely a good thing?

Blah blah blah - If it is the opinion of the non PT community as a whole that this scenario is somehow acceptable, and just a bit of bad luck old chap - - - then yes I certainly am bashing it. With responsibility come accountability.

[formulaben]

Trying to put a C-X into EDFE is madness anyway

Weather conditions aside, a 4600 ft runway is hardly Naval carrier territory...

[jetopa]

Weather conditions aside, a 4600 ft runway is hardly Naval carrier territory...

True. Also true: a C750 ain't a STOL aircraft either.

[His dudeness]

According to the FPG, it would have required 3360ft at MLM, and 2980ft at 28.000lbs (3180lbs below MLM), at 25000 2710ft. Even the 2.5 Knots of tailwind should have been bearable...LDA 27 3824ft, 09 4592ft.

I get the impression that you think you are above all of these initatives

I´m the first to admit that have made, do make and will continue to make mistakes. Anyone telling you different is either a liar or not in aviation.

But - I have been a commercial air taxi dude for 16 years and I´m in corporate for over 5 years now - what I`ve witnessed mostly in the air taxi aka AOC (pre and post JAR/EU-ops experience) world is, that apart from raising the levels of paper filled in, little has changed to the better.

Under AOC there would be line training, which is designed to pick up on and rectify any sub standard problems any given crew member might demonstrate

From what I have witnessed - and I was CRE / CRI in three different AOC operations - that is simply not true. Good pilots are often the ones to say 'no' and are exactly what the companies don´t want.



When a lot of pilots can´t do things that were considered normal knowledge in the 70s, 80s and 90s then we need to ask us two questions:

1) whats wrong with the way we train and check pilots? (when exactly did you do a VFR part for an LPC or OPC in a shiny jet? All we do (cause its right there in the form to be filled in as an mandatory item) is V1 cuts and the like, which statistically is an almost non event)

2) should we forbid anything but ILS to ILS because we don´t want to train our pilots properly (think MPL as an example)?

I had written a lengthy reply, but my computer has 'eaten' that one and I don´t have the desire to re-write everything I put down before... so:

yes, I object more regulation. These guys were from the safest aviation system there is, the US/FAA. Obviously they either simply slipped through the gates or they had a very, very bad day. The report says nothing about how long they have been up, whether the PIC was on a business meeting before the flight, how long the crew took to prepare themselves ( I honestly think they did not at all). These are very important factors IMO.
OTOH having the airplane in an AOC like structure (management) might have gotten them a slot in EDDF, but if not I don´t see how the outcome would have been a different one if the cockpit crew does not prepare itself for a nonstandard, close to the minima flight/landing.
They screwed that one up royally. ("Speed checks, Flaps to 5" 35 knots ABOVE the limit for Flaps 5 shows the stress level. E in the FMS instead of Y1 & 2, the totally unstable approach, the handling of the TCAS alert -> they were way behind their airplane and not prepared at all, IMO)

[TripleBravo]

Much had been posted about the behaviour of the pilots, not all was correct.

Flaps to 5" 35 knots ABOVE the limit for Flaps 5 VFE (flaps 5°) is 250 KIAS - they were set at 245 KCAS

But for me there is another perspective to the accident. That is the information that has been made available via AIP to those planning to fly to EDFE, which has been proven to be irritating and a bit chaotic.

The recommendations are quite revealing:

Recommendation: 12/2012
The Darmstadt Regional Council, in cooperation and coordination with the competent air traffic control agency and the Federal Supervisory Office for ATC (Bundesaufsichtsamt für Flugsicherung, BAF) the procedures for conducting flight under visual flight rules (VFR) to and from the airport Frankfurt-Egelsbach. The description of the procedure should be simple, understandable and free of contradictions and should be published in the AIP.
This also applies to VFR charts.Since all of the above should be absolutely standard and no-brainer, I see it as a major exposure of incompetency that the officials were not able to adhere to worldwide standards without being reminded.

Recommendation: 14/2012
In the VFR charts of Frankfurt-Egelsbach it should be made obvious that the descent angle of 4.4° during final approach is mandatory due to the obstacle situation. The wooded hills east of the square
should be presented as an obstacle in the charts.If you have a look at the approach charts yourself (partly scanned in the report) you might agree that they are quite cluttered with irrelevant information. Four pages of bureaucratic non-sense (e. g. repeating the depicted VFR traffic pattern in words - in case you cannot read a map) do not contain a hint that could have saved lifes again. But you are reminded to keep your transponder on and to "report overflying the compulsory reporting points". (sic!) But you do not find the hint for the 4,4° glideslope in the lengthy description of the approach. You find it in the Aerodrome Chart - if you are looking there for approach info, that is.

Egelsbach AIP is for me a perfect example for non-priorisation of information. It's printed in the map (not in the several pages text part) that "Take-offs and landings by students without instructor are not allowed." But NOT that the terrain is higher east of the field.

The last fatal accident occurred 2,5 years before in a KingAir 90, they impacted only 50 meters away. The maps weren't amended with any terrain warning.

[Cpt_Schmerzfrei]

@TripleBravo: Good points.

By the way, the interim report is also available in English:

http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_030/nn_223968/DE/Publikationen/Bulletins/2012/Bulletin2012-03,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/Bulletin2012-03.pdf

[Jetstar2Pilot]

How do I find the English version?

Thanks

[kitekruncher]

http://www.bfu-web.de/cln_030/nn_226422/EN/Publications/Interim__Reports/IR2012/I1__Report__12__CX005__C750__Egelsbach,templateId=raw,proper ty=publicationFile.pdf/I1_Report_12_CX005_C750_Egelsbach.pdf

[deefer dog]

Two years ago we were tasked to fly to dusseldorf then egglesbach. During a three hour layover in dusseldorf I took a look at the charts for egglesbach to prepare for our arrival in what were likely to be marginal conditions.

The charts were a confusing mess and so full of contradictions that I decided to visit the CAA office to get a copy of the AIP. The two gentlemen i met were at first very helpful but were not able to find anything. They then offered me help with the charts we had printed from egglesbach web site. They too were confused by what they read. Two pilots and two German CAA employees sat on the ground couldn't figure out half of what was going to be required of us later in the day at a time when we would be scrabbling around barely 1000 ft agl, and at 200 kts.

We decided to land elsewhere.

[Sillypeoples]

I have taught biz owners how to fly their jets for some time. A common component is an ego that translates 'if he can do it, I can do it'...which tends to serve them well in business, but if I land their jet with ease on a short runway, then I later learned that's like planting a flag on Everest, now they want to rush up the hill to do what I did.

Combine that with my attitude that 'you can do it, I'll teach you'...can get some guys in trouble.. WHEN I AM NOT THERE.

More often then not, biz owners just don't have the experience flying around year after year experiencing what pro pilots see...they have the money to buy the plane, they get signed off, now they think they are as good as the rest of us that do this for a living.

Make the condition at night, some wind, marginal visibility, add in the fact that they don't have short field experience, so instead of knowing to plant it on the numbers, or doing a go around, they run it down the runway a third like they were taught, 20 knots fast...the plane floats, anti lock brakes come on...they throw the buckets out when they aren't planted, so now they have 500 ft of runway left at 100 knots, committed and they don't have rubber on the ground. They can't stop, they can't go around.

Few pilots honestly have critical flight operation (CFO) experience where they HAVE to fly the aircraft to it's performance limitations, and sometimes beyond...they are working in the margins of how they were taught and the runway or conditions that day won't allow it, they have to push their abilities and aircraft to get the job done, and most guys have never done that, so they can get themselves in trouble.

Putting a ten on a 4600 ft field requires critical airspeed control, hitting the numbers, generally with a very low stabilized approach, at speeds that are on the slow side of normal, everything is 'done' on downwind, all that has to be done is hitting the numbers and stopping the aircraft. The danger is getting to low on the approach side, or landing to far down, to fast, buckets out on the other end.

So bottom line, these guys weren't up to the task, and the passengers paid for it.

[Klimax]

Silleypeoples,

I have not flown with a lot of owners, however your description of real life experiences and perception of realities seems very correct.. Anyone can go out and fly and make things happen - on the rare yearly occasions things are ever so slightly different from the ordinary and thats were a professional pilot with experience in his belt sees what lies ahead - as opposed to an less experience pilot - and makes crucial and life saving decisions (diversion, early established, on the numbers speed approach etc. etc.). Owners or less experienced "co-pilots/captains" may think they've got what it takes - it's only human. When you say NO as a pilot - thats when you realize you have come a long way - not when you say YES!

Silleypeoples, thanks for a very valid contribution! :ok:

[No RYR for me]

Hi Sillypeoples, how true. I lost an owner in a PC12 in line with what you describe: ego, marginal weather, wrong speed, low experience... :sad:

[jetopa]

Sillypeoples, that sums it up pretty accurately! :D

[Jetstar2Pilot]

Thanks Kitekruncher for the translation....I appreciate it. I landed a CE560XL there last year in daylight and VERY VFR conditions. Obviously in an Excel, no problem. I personally would NOT attempt a night landing UNLESS it was TRULY CAVOK there.

[jetopa]

Jetstar2Pilot

This is why a well known German operator stopped flying into Egelsbach with their C560s altogether, from what I heard...

[nomorecatering]

I think the talk about runway lengths, IFR into VFR is off the mark.

The case where an aircraft can impact reletively flat ground with the engines at flight idle, speedbrakes out etc indicates very poor situational awarenes. Who was watching the shop when they went below the MDA. Even the most inexperianced night VFR student has this hammered into them. Monitor distance, altitude and flight path.

Btw, 1400m shouldnt be a problem for a C750. They put 737-800s into snow covered runways that are 1500m long at Midway.

[jetopa]

Who was watching the shop when they went below the MDA.

Very true.

[Nordstrom]

I have watched this thread from a distance since the accident, and briefly scimmed the report of the local authorities this morning over coffee.

Weather was obviously a contributing factor in the accident, but not the killer. Secondly, pilot inexperience should not be over looked, both had min. experience at best, this is not to say they did not have skill, but experience and skill are different. Experience is the decision making process that is used to avoid situations so you don't have to use your skills.

The approach was not stabilized, speed, rate of descent all indicated that this was going to have the potential to turn out terribly wrong from the onset.

Landing flaps appear to have confused both pilots on short final approach when the pitch of aircraft drastically changed aircraft attitude to pitch down and likely prompted the EGPWS warning, they were off profile at this point anyway but still alive.

If fully configured and stable on initial approach this probably could have been avoided or at least maybe their skills could have gotten them out of this.

But I fear the biggest factor outside of what is mentioned above is the EGPWS warning and their inappropriate action to it.

The plane was fast, the descent profile was erradict, full flaps deployed at mid 100s and gear deployed. Ok...............

ACTION
Autopilot disconnect, pitch up to PLI (pitch limit indicator-max power )(simultaneously) this would be the initial recovery procedure to start with then flaps, gear etc etc

It appears the EGPWS warning was managed all on use of autopilot i.e. utilizing the altitude select control wheel to climb out of a terrain warning and power set at 34%.

That is not experience or skill working together at all.

The radio work was good though.

Sadly we have lost people to an accident that could have been avoided by a number of measures.

R.i.P. my sincere heart felt condolences to all the friends and family touched by this tragic event.

[Jetstar2Pilot]

Nordstrom......very well written observations on your part. It appears to me that you are "spot on" with your analysis of this tragic event.

Soooooo unavoidable, I do agree

RIP to those who perished.

Fly Safely to all of us.........