6 seater a/c crash Somerset

[500AGL]

News of a light aircraft crash with four deceased en route Dunkeswell

Four people dead as plane crashes in Somerset - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34822189)

[manrow]

I would be surprised if Dunkeswell was flyable at all today. I live just a few miles away and been in cloud all day, plus strong winds and certainly drizzle with occasional heavy rain.

[IB4138]

Appears to be N186CB. Was based at Fairoaks.

[Chronus]

Photos and report at :

Kathryn's Report: Piper PA-46-350P Malibu Mirage, N186CB: Fatal accident occurred November 14, 2015 near Churchinford, Somerset, England (http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2015/11/piper-pa-46-350p-malibu-mirage-n186cb.html)

Wreckage suggests a stall from a low altitude.

[rog747]

i was thinking the same ever since when i first saw the bigger photos on the link

Kathryn's Report: Piper PA-46-350P Malibu Mirage, WWSL Inc Trustee/Whitespace Work Software Ltd, N186CB: Fatal accident occurred November 14, 2015 near Churchinford, Somerset, England (http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2015/11/piper-pa-46-350p-malibu-mirage-n186cb.html)

perhaps the pilot in vain maybe was looking for a field to put down in and wanted to get the speed down as low as possible for a crash land?

all i know that living only some miles away is that the weather on Saturday was not much different to that what is happening today (same time too)

its howling and lashing with very low cloud <500m and vis below about 2000m - i live on high ground


a complete tragedy - would his departure station Fairoaks not have given him as what seems a very novice pilot with a new plane some hint that its not a good idea to go or do they not have that remit to say anything???

[Chronus]

i was thinking the same ever since when i first saw the bigger photos on the link

Kathryn's Report: Piper PA-46-350P Malibu Mirage, WWSL Inc Trustee/Whitespace Work Software Ltd, N186CB: Fatal accident occurred November 14, 2015 near Churchinford, Somerset, England (http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2015/11/piper-pa-46-350p-malibu-mirage-n186cb.html)

perhaps the pilot in vain maybe was looking for a field to put down in and wanted to get the speed down as low as possible for a crash land?

all i know that living only some miles away is that the weather on Saturday was not much different to that what is happening today (same time too)

its howling and lashing with very low cloud <500m and vis below about 2000m - i live on high ground


a complete tragedy - would his departure station Fairoaks not have given him as what seems a very novice pilot with a new plane some hint that its not a good idea to go or do they not have that remit to say anything???

Yes it is a tragedy. The victims have been named, see link below.


Tributes to Birmingham family killed in Somerset plane crash - Birmingham Mail (http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/tributes-birmingham-family-killed-somerset-10454320)

The above report describes the pilot as an amateur. The family of four were heading for their grand daughters birthday party. It does make one question as to why by air on a day when weather conditions were less than ideal.
Would anyone hinted about going flying on that day, who knows. Perhaps all that can be said is that the decision is down to the private owner pilot. But what an awful price to pay if it proved to be wrong. Sadly am sure some of us looking back at the club scenes can recall many who tragically proved wrong.

[Pace]

Very sad and seeing the pictures of that lovely family very tragic.

Looking back I can understand why some pilots fly in such bad weather when even the birds would rather be on the ground. Many of us have done that in the past.

It really reinforces the idea of flying within your own limits and the aircraft limits and sadly many overestimate their own limits or the aircraft limits some of us get away with it. But especially carrying such a precious cargo brings a special responsibility.

My feelings and that is all they are is that the winds had more to play in what appears to be a stall and crash.

I have flown in conditions where the ASI is leaping up and down 25 to 30 kts with severe windshear.

Not a time to be flying low level near the stall or for that matter near the normal VREF. One massive downdraught ?
But as I said just an instinct it could have been disregard for airspeed while peering into the gloom or overbanking again at too slow a speed.

Very very sad

Pace

[runway30]

Some speculation. He was picking up from Dunkeswell and then going on to Cardiff. Not a quick trip by road but a short hop in an aircraft. Probably explains wanting to press on regardless. The nearest weather forecast for Dunkeswell is Exeter, 10.2 nm SW. Exeter is 100ft elevation, Dunkeswell is 850ft. Maybe he thought the weather was better than it was.

[pax britanica]

A very very tragic story and made worse looking at the family pics shown. One hates to say it but it seems to me that to be succesful in business and to make a good pilot there are some conflicting personal qualities.

Humility and caution are it seems important qualities in a pilot but they are not much of a recipe for business success . Equally drive and single mindedness are valuable business skills but for a pilot-hmm not so sure .

What kind of licence is required for something like the TBM, which despite being a prop single is nothing at all like a C150 and frankly looks apretty hot ship where things can go wrong very very quickly if youare not trained and experienced.

Not looking to denigrate the poor guy at all but it does seem a big ask for a guy with limited time for flying to take something like this aloft on a day when the birds would choose to walk.

[Pace]

PB

It was a Mirage which is a piston powered pressurised single the TBM is a Turboprop, just a small correction.

But yes there are pilots who are PPLs and will fly in most weather and do a pretty good job but I stress it takes a lot of experience a lot of spatial awareness and an ability to pick up your game to whatever is required which can be lacking in many PPLs especially those with low experience

i stress fly within your limits but know and respect what your limits are as well as the aircraft especially when your cargo is so precious.

I can look back and think of occasions when Mother luck was on my side but thats looking back from a different place now.

Pace

[anderow]

What about the plausible scenario that this low time pilot panicked in IMC, lost control of the aeroplane and ended up spinning in?
Disoriented, panicking possibly and in a new HP plane with his most precious cargo (family) on board doesn't seem like a good place to be in those conditions.

Does anyone know the pilots hours/experience and if he was IMC or IR rated?

[rlsbutler]

The photos we have been linked into suggest to me that the wreckage was in line - the result of a straight stall rather than of a spin.

At five miles out, the pilot had no need to poke about at low level yet.

My money is on a loss of power at safety height or early on the glide path.

He should not have been low on fuel if he only came from Sussex.

He might have been subject to engine icing, unaware of it but losing power irreparably once he had throttled back for his descent into Dunkeswell.

In the weather prevailing, he would have been gliding in cloud to the last moment. He might have had a last second choice either to fly into what obstacles presented themselves or to pull back on the stick to avoid them. The former might have been his better choice.

[runway30]

Pilot wasn't shy in announcing on social media obtaining his PPL and his new aeroplane. No mention of an IMC rating or I/R. Many instances of VFR pilots getting into difficulties in IMC in this aeroplane.

[rotorspeed]

Does anyone know what the weather actually was at Dunkeswell around the time of accident? And presumably the pilot would have been told of this on RT given he was only 5 miles away.

[rotorspeed]

Rlsbutler - coming a short distance doesn't mean fuel is very unlikely to be a cause - depends on the pilot's refuelling plans. The headwind would certainly have been very big and flight time much longer than in still air. And maybe fuel was a lot cheaper at Dunkeswell - I've no idea, but a thought. And there was no fire by the look of it.

[anderow]

If he wasn't instrument qualified, then the conditions on the day were pretty poor throughout the UK from recollection of the TAFs and from flying that day further north. I think at Dunkeswell the cloudbase will have been sub 500ft with poor viz, hopefully someone can confirm weather conditions there at the time.

An engine failure is one option but unlikely IMO and wouldn't have resulted in the high speed vertical impact unless the pilot had stalled it while gliding.
I think far more likely is the conditions quickly overtook his skill and experience levels (and qualifications) and he got disorientated and stalled it or lost control completely.
RIP to them all

[Chronus]

Pilot wasn't shy in announcing on social media obtaining his PPL and his new aeroplane. No mention of an IMC rating or I/R. Many instances of VFR pilots getting into difficulties in IMC in this aeroplane.

This was an N reg. If my memory serves me right, many years ago, an FAA PPL was required and when these hot ships first came out an IR was thrown in for good measure for the buyer. Then some bits and pieces started falling out of the sky and some new rules and training requirements were introduced. To get me out of trouble IMC rating, not recognised on the Continent, was hotly debated for many years and remained with a don`t try this yourselves at home warning. PPL`s with FAA IR`s could only opt for IFR after crossing the foreign FIR`s and the same for the return. They could not exercise the privileges of their FAA IR `s in UK controlled airspace in UK reg aircraft.
Without a valid IR, when an IFR routing is a must, it cannot be planned. By definition therefore it becomes a VFR plan. I don`t know the wx conditions on the day for the whole of the planned/intended routing, but if vis and cloud base were not present to conduct the flight under VFR then mechanical malfunction or not risk was significantly increased and flight safety margins were reduced if not compromised.

[Pace]

From what I gathered he stated that this was a new toy and he needed to learn to fly it but that was 2 years ago so I am sure he would have had some experience by now.
you don't buy a Mirage without an IR as its a pressurised single designed to fly in the high teens.
My guess is that he would have held an FAA IR but would have had relatively low hours.
You don't buy a Mirage for low level VFR flight but make use of its TAS high level

N reg with an FAA IR you would file IFR in UK airspace. On short runs and the fact that the Mirage is not the best climber on the planet it would probably fly IFR OCAS at 3000 to 7000 feet with a cloud break over a known point for the position flight or he tried to fly VFR under the clouds never a good option in bad weather close to the ground.
Again there would be radar traces and altitude readouts as well as RT communication recorded
i believe it was windy that day and reaching low level possible wind shear. take the transition from instrument flight to visual flight confusuion and maybe incorrect speed for the conditions while looking into the gloom for the airfield and its easy to see how a stall may occur

Pace

[runway30]

According to FR24, apart from climbing to 4700 ft to transit the Southampton Zone, he was at low level.

[SFI145]

I would never speculate as to the actual cause of this tragedy. However I have looked at the NTSB figures for the PA-46.
On their database there have been 66 fatal and 153 non-fatal accidents on this type so far with the loss of 151 lives.

[Pace]

SF

I personally think it is healthy for pilots to speculate on What COULD have happened because with the accident fresh in our minds it makes us more open to consider what mistakes or aircraft failures MIGHT have lead to a crash like this and hopefully avoid a similar situation ourselves.

To state anything as fact is a different matter as that would be WRONG but to discuss the possibilities can only be positive. Like all of these accidents when the AAIB reports are complete the incident has gone to the back of our minds from the initial horror. Its the initial horror! There for the grace of God go I which makes us open to take note

The Malibu did have a spate of accidents when it was first released and I believe it was limited to VFR flight only for a short time.
the Cirrus too has a comprehensive training schedule in place as that too was having more than its fair share of accidents
We are all probably aware of the V tail Bonanza known as the Doctor Killer

All of them are relatively fast complex aircraft and many wealthier individuals jumped straight from the PA28 or Cessna 172s into these faster less forgiving aircraft without the currency on type or experience and detailed knowledge hence the more rigorous training demanded by the insurance companies

It was not the aircraft at fault but the pilots flying them in the majority of cases

Pace

[rog747]

I am living only some miles away - West Dorset on high ground too.
the weather on Saturday was not much different to that what is happening this week - especially yesterday which was likened to Saturday

high winds - strong gusts
low viz less then 1- 2km in fog sometimes (as is today)
very low cloud base less than 500 feet
dew point same as temp and the forecast for Saturday was not set to improve during daylight

more or less the whole area from Dunkerswell to say Compton Abbas was the same - downright awful
he was coming from Fairoaks and the wx there was not much better - worsening as he went West.

i fly from Compton Abbas sometimes with a friends Bulldog and there is no way in the past 10 days would any PPL'er would have likely gone anywhere, nothing few from CA on Saturday.

its been howling and lashing with very low cloud and some fog for a week and a half round here - surely a phone call before take off to Dunkerswell would have secured a decision not to go?

this is a tragedy and i cannot fathom why anyone flew down here this way that day unless you were very very experienced and rated accordingly

[suninmyeyes]

There are elements in this accident similar to the JFK junior Piper Saratoga accident. Namely a wealthy individual, possibly relatively inexperienced, buying a high performance single. Then there were circumstances on the day such as family pressures and weather that limited visual contact with the runway and airport surroundings that would have meant dependence on instruments at low level.

[awqward]

Quote:
Originally Posted by runway30 View Post
Pilot wasn't shy in announcing on social media obtaining his PPL and his new aeroplane. No mention of an IMC rating or I/R. Many instances of VFR pilots getting into difficulties in IMC in this aeroplane.
This was an N reg. If my memory serves me right, many years ago, an FAA PPL was required and when these hot ships first came out an IR was thrown in for good measure for the buyer. Then some bits and pieces started falling out of the sky and some new rules and training requirements were introduced. To get me out of trouble IMC rating, not recognised on the Continent, was hotly debated for many years and remained with a don`t try this yourselves at home warning. PPL`s with FAA IR`s could only opt for IFR after crossing the foreign FIR`s and the same for the return. They could not exercise the privileges of their FAA IR `s in UK controlled airspace in UK reg aircraft.
Without a valid IR, when an IFR routing is a must, it cannot be planned. By definition therefore it becomes a VFR plan. I don`t know the wx conditions on the day for the whole of the planned/intended routing, but if vis and cloud base were not present to conduct the flight under VFR then mechanical malfunction or not risk was significantly increased and flight safety margins were reduced if not compromised.

Just for the record and for the sake of the less up to date on these things reading in here, and making no assertions regarding the qualifications of this particular pilot, as it stands an FAA PPL with an IR allows one to fly an N-reg aircraft under the IFR any where in the world in accordance with ICAO protocols.... It also allows (until April 2016) such a pilot to fly a G-reg aircraft anywhere in the world (VFR only). After April next year (unless there is a further extension to the derogation), EASA has thumbed their noses at ICAO and for such a pilot (if he is a European resident) to fly under the IFR in his N-reg aircraft he/she will need an EASA IR (in addition to his FAA IR)....so-called "dual papers"...

An FAA IR on its own has never been sufficient for flying a G-reg aircraft under the IFR.

On a further note, the FAA allows a pilot to fly an N-reg aircraft in a given state with only the pilot licence of that state....so it is possible to fly an N-reg under the IFR in the UK without any FAA licence if you have a UK issued EASA licence...note this does not allow said pilot to fly to say France or anywhere outside the UK (in this example)...there has been some conjecture as to whether the FAA will allow an N-reg to be flown under the IFR by a pilot with only an IMC rating (known as an IR(R) under EASA) and not a full IR...

AQ

[awqward]

Without a valid IR, when an IFR routing is a must, it cannot be planned. By definition therefore it becomes a VFR plan.

Not quite correct. A valid IR is needed to fly in Class A airspace. It is perfectly possible for an IR(R) or IMCR pilot to file and fly an IFR flight plan (in the UK) if the route does not enter Class A airspace.

[Chronus]

Awkward, this part of the quote you have copied was not mine

"Originally Posted by runway30 View Post
Pilot wasn't shy in announcing on social media obtaining his PPL and his new aeroplane. No mention of an IMC rating or I/R. Many instances of VFR pilots getting into difficulties in IMC in this aeroplane."

The following part was mine

"This was an N reg. If my memory serves me right, many years ago, an FAA PPL was required and when these hot ships first came out an IR was thrown in for good measure for the buyer. Then some bits and pieces started falling out of the sky and some new rules and training requirements were introduced. To get me out of trouble IMC rating, not recognised on the Continent, was hotly debated for many years and remained with a don`t try this yourselves at home warning. PPL`s with FAA IR`s could only opt for IFR after crossing the foreign FIR`s and the same for the return. They could not exercise the privileges of their FAA IR `s in UK controlled airspace in UK reg aircraft.
Without a valid IR, when an IFR routing is a must, it cannot be planned. By definition therefore it becomes a VFR plan. I don`t know the wx conditions on the day for the whole of the planned/intended routing, but if vis and cloud base were not present to conduct the flight under VFR then mechanical malfunction or not risk was significantly increased and flight safety margins were reduced if not compromised."

I have always wondered as to why the FAA PPL/IR and a N reg is such an attractive proposition for private flying in the UK and the near Continent. Given that costs would not be expected to be of any significant consequence to a businessman who can afford to buy a sophisticated aircraft and will use it over this side of the pond, and as they say "in anger", why not go for a UK IR. Would it not be better. It is not just the ticket that matters, it is after all just another piece of paper? What really matters is the rigorous training,the tough exams and tests and the knowledge gained, the appreciation and the respect for the inherent risks to flight, that gives a good understanding and ability to plan and make that all too important decision to embark on a flight on a given day. In so many words Pace has said it all, it takes a lot more than success in business to also succeed in flying. It is difficult to devote the required amount of time in the correct measures to be successful at both at all times. I have known busy businessmen who employ chauffeurs for their cars not because they want to advertise their big success, but because they admit that it is safer for them and all who travel with them. It is so difficult to serve two masters. Best to choose one and stick with him through thick and thin I`d say.

[awqward]

My apologies Chronus, I messed up the quote function on that one....


You are quite right about the requirement for rigorous, thorough and relevant training coupled with frequent use and recurrent training. Yes the FAA only requires one written 20 question exam for the IR versus a minimum of 7 exams for a PPL IR in the UK...but the training is about the same and in fact whereas a UK IR holder can do a revalidation flight and then not fly at all, let alone conduct approaches to minimums, for 364 days and still be legal to fly, an FAA IR holder must have conducted 6 approaches in actual or simulated IMC in the preceding 6 calendar months to remain current....this can be difficult for a pilot not flying for a living and as a result many if not most will undertake an IPC roughly every 6 months. So the main difference is the huge effort required to pass the exams. Only two exams can be taken in a given sitting and they can only be held at a limited number of inconvenient locations. Their value (vs the FAA approach) is questionable and they are a legacy from the fact that the UK training industry is set up for basic VFR PPLs or airline pilots...PPL IRs are not really catered for. So that is one of the drivers for private individuals with a life who can't take six months to live in a residential training facility like aspiring airline pilots.


But as I mentioned in my previous post, EASA has made it a requirement that regardless of aircraft registration, if you are a resident of one of the EASA states then you must have an EASA licence. Most (all?) EASA states elected to claim the available derogation t extend the deadline for this implementation and the latest extension has taken it to April next year, although it may be extended further.


Also although the more readily obtained FAA IR may no longer be a driver for business people flying an N-reg aircraft, there are many benefits to operating an N-reg aircraft over a G or F or D with regards to the available STCs for various mods, the direct owner control over maintenance which contrary to popular European myth, follows the same manufacturer recommended schedules and although for example, the UK allows engines to run on-condition past their TBO, many other EASA states do not.


Hope that explains it!

[Chronus]

Thank you Awkward, it does explain things well. Now in my after life, since the end of my flying days and the stage of well past ripeness, I am left with much time and inclination to reflect on many memories of those days. There were many sad occasions, one of which was a UK PPL for whom along with the spanking brand new PA46 came an FAA IR and not so long thereafter came the grief of a sudden encounter with a mountain peak in VMC whilst out on a VFR FP. It was then discovered by all and sundry that he had 400 hrs tt including his initial training, duals and IMC. Nothing was said or found about his instrument time. Such an important thing I thought this so called instrument time was.

[pa34pplir]

New to the forum in terms of posting, but felt compelled to say something, so here goes.

I flew a Seneca in UK and Europe as a businessman with a UK PPL IR. I am same age roughly as this pilot and like everyone very saddened at the brutal finality of this accident. The images of this family, and the family in the PA34 that crashed in Kentucky earlier this year (little girl survived in 3rd row), stick with me as being so familiar to my own experiences.

I very nearly killed myself once when I made an awful decision, in an N registered aircraft. The plane was a seaplane equipped with very basic (VFR) instruments, but I had my trusty G-reg Seneca fully equipped for IFR and I was in current instrument practice. I chose to fly the seaplane in bad conditions relying (rationalizing) that my instrument rating allowed me to do this safely.

The story makes me shiver still and fortunately I turned the plane around and landed VFR safely, but with very little fuel left. This is a specific example of a terrible decision (to go in the first place) that did not end in tragedy, but could (and would) have done. I don't know how this helps other than to confirm the old adage about aviation being very unforgiving of poor decision making.

Actually I think the problem I encountered was blurring the line between a well planned IFR flight (typical Seneca trip) and a VFR jolly (seaplane trip). My totally flawed seaplane plan (on the bad wx trip) was to descend to near sea level and land VFR. This would never have worked, the sea would have been too rough etc etc. Melding these 2 familiar scenarios (IFR cruise and VFR approach) into one impossible trip was nearly fatal.

[Miles Magister]

As a general statement, as we do not know the background to this particular incident.

I believe it is beholden on all of us professional and experienced pilots to say something when we see someone about to try and operate beyond their ability, but in practice very few people ever do.

Some years ago I was present when a PPL IMC chap was about to to try and take off to get home in a single engine piston 6 seater without any airframe anti or deicing equipment. The weather was freezing fog and stratus with embedded icing. Incredibly there were other professional pilots around who turned their back and hid by the coffee machine when I was trying to persuade this chap not to fly. They just kept quiet and did not want to get involved. I am still fairly confident that I prevented the chap from having an accident that day.

Please be prepared to help each other carefully and sensibly, even if it means sticking your neck out sometimes.

MM

[Pace]

MMagister

When I was getting my multiengine piston many moons ago my instructor had to take a Baron 55 up north to Scotland. He offered to let me left seat the trip for the experience. We landed in Inverness and departed again south at night in Horrendous weather and straight into snow blizzards

When we lined up ATC announced that they wanted it recorded that they did not approve of this departure as apart from the snow blizzards there was severe low level turbulence in the forecast.

Rather than taxi back he calmly announced we were departing and overruled the warning. We took off and the snow was so heavy you could not look forward but only at the panel as the swirling snow was so intense and the turbulence was severe.
To look out ahead was completely disorientating

It was such a relief breaking out near Glasgow and seeing a mass of twinkling city lights below.
I am not sure whether you can stop a takeoff ? He was a very cool relaxed pilot as comfortable in the air as on the ground and we survived so another notch on the experience belt. I do remember clearly thinking if we lost an engine that there was no way you could hold it all together in that turbulence

Pace

[runway30]

Surely, ATC can only withhold take off clearance if instructed by a higher authority. When it comes to weather the airport authority could close the airport but if the airport is open the Captain's decision is final, the warnings of ATC might have relevance for the subsequent enquiry/court case though.

[Miles Magister]

You will find the R/T messages for withholding clearances in CAP 413 2.76

CAP 493 Section 1 Chapter 4: Control of Traffic
Withholding Clearance
4.31 The Aerodrome Operator and certain other persons are empowered to
prohibit flight and they may instruct controllers to withhold a clearance.
A list of the personnel authorised under civil aviation legislation and
the procedures to be adopted when detaining aircraft appear in unit
instructions.
4.32 If a controller is instructed to withhold take-off clearance, he should take
reasonable steps to establish the authenticity and powers of the person
giving the instruction.
4.33 In addition a controller shall withhold clearance to take-off when it is known that an aircraft has been detained by a police or HM Customs officer.
4.34 If a controller has not been instructed to withhold clearance but he has reason to believe that a planned flight is liable to endanger life or involve a breach of legislation, he is to:
1. warn the pilot of the hazardous condition or apparent infringement and obtain an acknowledgement of the message;
2. in the case of an infringement of legislation, warn the pilot that if he does take-off the facts will be reported to the appropriate authority;
3. if the pilot still requests take-off clearance after acknowledging the warning he should be advised, when traffic permits, that there are no traffic reasons to restrict take-off;
4. record the warning and any comment made by the pilot in the ATC Watch Log.

[Pace]

MM

When I was training for my MEP must have been 25 years plus ago so don't know what the regs were like then.

Take off minima are very low you can takeoff in fog or into a very low cloud base and it is not the responsibility of ATC to know your qualifications or abilities.

Normally if the weather is unfit for flight! Operations from the airport are delayed!
Going out of Dublin I can remember about 20 jets in front being held as a bad storm crossed the field with multiple lightning strikes, even refuelling was temporarily stopped.

Obviously in CAS you cannot takeoff without a take off clearance and to do so would be an infringement but to withhold that clearance based on a doubt on the ability or qualifications of the pilot??
A pilot could request an IFR clearance and would be given it as its not ATCs responsibility to know if the pilot is qualified to take it.

In my MEP days we had about a 94% mission success rated to weather fog at destination being the main show stopper other weather usually not although a diversion and road trip was sometimes needed

It is also difficult for one PPL to determine what is safe for flight or not safe for flight as what maybe deemed as unsafe by one pilot maybe routine conditions and safe for another, so we are probably talking about extreme weather conditions where ATC will intervene

Pace

[awqward]

In the UK licensed airfields have a minimum visibility requirement of 150m for takeoff. This is imposed by the airfield not a limitation on the pilot. A private pilot has no such limitation.... I'm sure you have practised take-offs under the hood... Of course none of this is sensible, especially in a single engine aircraft... a sensible minimum should be the visibility and ceiling required to land back where you took off from.....but even at 200ft an EFATO will leave absolutely no time to assess your landing area....you will break out just in time to see the crash site...

[Above The Clouds]

When I was getting my multiengine piston many moons ago my instructor had to take a Baron 55 up north to Scotland. He offered to let me left seat the trip for the experience. We landed in Inverness and departed again south at night in Horrendous weather and straight into snow blizzards

When we lined up ATC announced that they wanted it recorded that they did not approve of this departure as apart from the snow blizzards there was severe low level turbulence in the forecast.

Rather than taxi back he calmly announced we were departing and overruled the warning. We took off and the snow was so heavy you could not look forward but only at the panel as the swirling snow was so intense and the turbulence was severe.
To look out ahead was completely disorientating

It was such a relief breaking out near Glasgow and seeing a mass of twinkling city lights below.
I am not sure whether you can stop a takeoff ? He was a very cool relaxed pilot as comfortable in the air as on the ground and we survived so another notch on the experience belt. I do remember clearly thinking if we lost an engine that there was no way you could hold it all together in that turbulence

I would have thought given the weather conditions described when the B55 departed were clearly IFR and possibly below limits for an approach if he had to return to Inverness, in which case the pilot would have been required to have a take-off alternate within 30 mins single engine flying time from Inverness ?

[awqward]

Thank you Awkward, it does explain things well. Now in my after life, since the end of my flying days and the stage of well past ripeness, I am left with much time and inclination to reflect on many memories of those days. There were many sad occasions, one of which was a UK PPL for whom along with the spanking brand new PA46 came an FAA IR and not so long thereafter came the grief of a sudden encounter with a mountain peak in VMC whilst out on a VFR FP. It was then discovered by all and sundry that he had 400 hrs tt including his initial training, duals and IMC. Nothing was said or found about his instrument time. Such an important thing I thought this so called instrument time was.


Hi Chronus, I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that he got his FAA IR without doing the required training...you make it read like it was in the back page of the owner's manual!....In fact during the 80s after a spate of accidents the FAA investigated and basically exonerated the aircraft and recommended type specific training (but fell short of mandating it). In any case, as is often the case, the insurance industry made sure that minimum hours and minimum recurrency training be undertaken by pilots..... You can't realistically just get in one of these aircraft and fly it...especially in Europe where insurance is a legal requirement.....


Have a read of this if you're interested: http://www.mmopa.com/gallery/234_Training_PA46_Pilots.pdf

[Above The Clouds]

awqward
In the UK licensed airfields have a minimum visibility requirement of 150m for takeoff. This is imposed by the airfield not a limitation on the pilot. A private pilot has no such limitation.... I'm sure you have practised take-offs under the hood... Of course none of this is sensible, especially in a single engine aircraft... a sensible minimum should be the visibility and ceiling required to land back where you took off from


You do have a minimum in a multi engine aircraft, and that is to be able to return to the airport you took off from and legally commence an instrument approach in the event of an engine failure, or have a suitable take-off alternate within 30 minutes single engine flying time.

Also is additional training not required to take-off in less than 400m as it then deemed to be low viz ops.

If you are operating single pilot is it not a requirement to have a minimum of 800 RVR to commence an approach ?

Of course that would not be applicable in a single engine aircraft should the engine fail.

[awqward]

Yes but don't confuse AOC operations with private operations...

[Above The Clouds]

awqward
Yes but don't confuse AOC operations with private operations...


800m RVR is a legal requirement for single pilot ops regardless of private or AOC to commence an approach under EASA, unless you have a suitably equipped auto-pilot in which case normal RVR minima for the approach in question can be applied. But how many GA aircraft especially older ones have a suitable auto-pilot that will couple to fly an accurate approach with 550m RVR.

Still, why would you take-off in 150m even if that is the minimum airport RVR without a suitable take-off alternate, when at best the lowest usable single pilot approach Ops RVR is 550m, dependent on equipment installed and increments added to your DA/DH ?

[awqward]

Indeed ATC you are correct for approaches, but my point was that private operators are far less restricted for takeoff.... and I 100% agree wrt the unwiseness of taking off when you can't turn around and land...


btw you would be surprised how many very capable SEP IFR tourers have approach certified A/Ps....even the venerable KAP150 is approved down to 200ft...

[Pace]

ATC

The low visibility training is more directed at large airports where taxi collisions are possible rather than the runway takeoff. The last thing you want is an aircraft turning up the wrong taxiway or crossing an active runway because they are lost
OCAS i do not think there is a stipulated minima.

obviously departure and arrival minima are different and any fog departure will mean that you are not coming back so a close alternative is a must. Or again you gamble?

In a single its like flying on a dark night its Russian roulette. In a light twin it is also to a certain lesser extent Russian roulette but the majority of light singles will happily fly level on one if you have the altitude when it goes bang

But then many single engine turboprops TBMs PC12s do play that game at night over water, over very low cloud etc and this has been a long held argument over the safety of single engine in bad weather, many quoting statistics especially with single turboprops.
Even when your departure and arrival are clear what happens enroute when the cloud is down to 100 feet below you when you are happily sitting in the sunshine above?

There is a night rating which legally allows you to fly a single cross country on a black night even without an instrument rating for me that is equally crazy, Russian Roulette and making a risk judgement you have no right to make for unknowing PAX yet that is approved by the authorities :ugh:

It all comes down to risk management and what level of risk you are prepared to take and that is about knowing and respecting your own limits as well as the aircraft you are flying as well as realising that you are making risk decisions for other precious cargo in the back and not just for yourself

Pace

[Above The Clouds]

btw you would be surprised how many very capable SEP IFR tourers have approach certified A/Ps....even the venerable KAP150 is approved down to 200ft...

I not that surprised being very fortunate to fly aircraft at both ends of the spectrum, from multi jets to SEP/MEP light aircraft and holding MPA and SPA IR's.

The difference in auto-pilots being "approved and actually being capable" of performing the task, certainly in a crosswind situation with 550m RVR.

Having flown the PA46 in crosswind conditions during low vis approaches I can confirm its auto-pilot performance was not that spectacular low down on an approach with a crosswind.

[Pace]

Having flown the PA46 in crosswind conditions during low vis approaches I can confirm its auto-pilot performance was not that spectacular low down on an approach with a crosswind.

ATC never trust an autopilot ;) always be prepared to disconnect and hand fly and always keep current on hand flying so you can do it as well as the autopilot especially in IMC :ok:
Its an aid to your superior skills not a replacement for a lack of skills and the reason for many accidents by reliant pilots

As a good pilot i am sure you agree )

Pace

[awqward]

Well the aforementioned KAP150 is an attitude based A/P and does a pretty good job albeit by analog means. I believe the original PA46s mostly have Stec rate-based analog A/Ps which probably explains your experience of it...I believe more recently the Garmin integrated digital DFC700 is fitted and does a very good job... but generally low RVR is associated with low winds and the Stec should be good enough in that case...

[Above The Clouds]

Pace

+1^ :)

[Pace]

A question ? Who in these discussions would have flown in those conditions and how to an airfield with no instrument approach ? Would you attempt to go there ? Would you have flown across IFR / IMC with some sort of cloud Break MDA and an IFR alternative with an instrument approach above minima ?
Just trying to work out the ones who will fly in conditions like that or the shut the curtains and go to sleep brigade ? ��
Have to say in my piston twin days I would have but with a likely instrument diversion
I would have been more bothered flying a single piston point to point on a dark night

Pace

[runway30]

I would have been flying to the well equipped international airport ten miles down the road because of accurate weather forecasting/reporting and the option of instrument approaches if the weather is worse than forecast.

[runway30]

I also recall departing with my destination forecast to be unavailable so filing for an en route destination and alternative. Refiling en route as the weather improved and my destination became available. A lot of work en route but safe and legal at all times.

[Miles Magister]

Can any of you good chaps tell me where the 800m RVR for single pilot ops is written. I am sure it used to be in the UK AIP but I can not seem to find it.

Thank you
MM

[Pace]

All the references seem to apply to public transport but found this odd one ?


Single Pilot Operations Minimum

In single pilot operations a landing RVR of less than 800 m is not permitted except when using a suitable autopilot coupled to an ILS or MLS, in which case normal minima apply.

The Decision Height applied must not be less than one and a quarter (1.25) times the minimum height for using the autopilot.

[runway30]

Now in Appendix 1 of EU-OPS

[007helicopter]

A question ? Who in these discussions would have flown in those conditions and how to an airfield with no instrument approach ?

For me the question would be who would have flown with their wife and kids?

Or for that matter any non qualified pilot unable to understand the risk.

I enjoy flying in IMC but that particular day would have been well outside of my limits.

[runway30]

If it isn't safe to fly with your wife and kids then it isn't safe to fly.

[Chronus]

Hi Chronus, I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that he got his FAA IR without doing the required training...you make it read like it was in the back page of the owner's manual!....In fact during the 80s after a spate of accidents the FAA investigated and basically exonerated the aircraft and recommended type specific training (but fell short of mandating it). In any case, as is often the case, the insurance industry made sure that minimum hours and minimum recurrency training be undertaken by pilots..... You can't realistically just get in one of these aircraft and fly it...especially in Europe where insurance is a legal requirement.....


Have a read of this if you're interested: http://www.mmopa.com/gallery/234_Training_PA46_Pilots.pdf

But of course not, don`t know what it entailed, must have done some kind of training. I was rather more curious to elicit some response to my earlier:

" I have always wondered as to why the FAA PPL/IR and a N reg is such an attractive proposition for private flying in the UK and the near Continent. Given that costs would not be expected to be of any significant consequence to a businessman who can afford to buy a sophisticated aircraft and will use it over this side of the pond, and as they say "in anger", why not go for a UK IR. Would it not be better."

Back in the old days when a whole lot of poverty stricken self improver CPL hours builders went States side, staying in sleezy motels, there were also a bunch of PPL`s who could not hack the UK IR who also took themselves over there for a few weeks lapping up the sunshine in five star hotels.

[Pace]

Chronue

Let me flip the question around ;) Why are there so many N reg aircraft in Europe and have been for decades and so many hold IRs ? while few PPL IRs were JAA ?

Surely its a demand thing like in any market place? If I offer a product which is better cheaper and easier to get why would I want something which was NO better more expensive and harder to achieve?

Remember many PPls are businessmen or have family and full time work commitments who don't have the time or inclination to spend months of evenings locked away from their families studying for exams which are full of unpractical stuff bearing little relevance to what they want to fly IFR.

Please don't say that the European IR or for that matter CPL or ATPL are better or turn out better pilots because no studies have indicated that WHATSOEVER and there have been many studies trying to prove we are better than you NAAAH

That is the sad thing with EASA who had a clean sheet to really advance aviation and GA in Europe. They could have taken the tried and tested FAA system improved it, adjusted it to suit European needs and pulled world aviation much closer together.
They could have saved the European tax payers a fortune instead they feathered their own nest their own jobs churning out the complicated mess and expensive Frankenstein monster they have created, but not for the benefit of aviation but for themselves and a few powerful pressure groups

Pace

[awqward]

Chronue

Let me flip the question around ;) Why are there so many N reg aircraft in Europe and have been for decades and so many hold IRs ? while few PPL IRs were JAA ?

Surely its a demand thing like in any market place? If I offer a product which is better cheaper and easier to get why would I want something which was NO better more expensive and harder to achieve?

Remember many PPls are businessmen or have family and full time work commitments who don't have the time or inclination to spend months of evenings locked away from their families studying for exams which are full of unpractical stuff bearing little relevance to what they want to fly IFR.

Please don't say that the European IR or for that matter CPL or ATPL are better or turn out better pilots because no studies have indicated that WHATSOEVER and there have been many studies trying to prove we are better than you NAAAH

That is the sad thing with EASA who had a clean sheet to really advance aviation and GA in Europe. They could have taken the tried and tested FAA system improved it, adjusted it to suit European needs and pulled world aviation much closer together.
They could have saved the European tax payers a fortune instead they feathered their own nest their own jobs churning out the complicated mess and expensive Frankenstein monster they have created

Pace

Spot on Pace. What EASA have done however, perhaps to offset their non-ICAO policy of requiring EU/EAA residents to hold an EASA licence even to fly a non-EASA reg in Europe, is to make it very easy to obtain an EASA IR if you hold a non-EASA IR (ie not just limited to FAA IRs) by simply doing an Initial test flight....no written exams required....and no need to go anywhere near an ATO....provided one has at least 50hrs "IFR time" (which doesn't mean hood time, it means PIC under the IFR).., so they have made it incredibly easy now for an experienced FAA IR holder to get an EASA IR....but even so, many are still holding off....firstly because there was a lot of confusion within the various NAAs about who could conduct the flight tests...and secondly many FAA IR holders are holding off to see whether the US/EU BASA will mean the flight test can be treated as a revalidation flight and thus not require a CAA staff examiner...

[Pace]

Awqward

This is really going way off topic but still nothing is clear they appear to be coming to a conclusion on PPL stuff but have hardly touched CPL or ATPL and yet we have yet another deadline of April 2016? Will that be extended again? Will commercial pilots loose their jobs and income if they don't comply with getting expensive dual licences? Will older pilots with only a few years to run be forced out because the sums don't add up regardless?
Its all in the air With EASA playing games with honest hard working pilots some who have legally worked this way in Europe for longer than the EU has existed and some longer than the common market yet since 2012 everything delayed every year and still no definition because of an incompetent bunch of self indulgent people called EASA and certain pressure groups and individuals with their own motives which have nothing to do with safety but their own back pockets
Frankly that is the facts

Pace

[awqward]

Awqward

This is really going way off topic but still nothing is clear they appear to be coming to a conclusion on PPL stuff but have hardly touched CPL or ATPL and yet we have yet another deadline of April 2016? Will that be extended again? Will commercial pilots loose their jobs and income if they don't comply with getting expensive dual licences? Will older pilots with only a few years to run be forced out because the sums don't add up regardless?
Its all in the air With EASA playing games with honest hard working pilots some who have legally worked this way in Europe for longer than the EU has existed and some longer than the common market yet since 2012 everything delayed every year and still no definition because of an incompetent bunch of self indulgent people called EASA and certain pressure groups and individuals with their own motives which have nothing to do with safety but their own back pockets
Frankly that is the facts

Pace

Indeed Pace... I understand that the process for extending the derogation is already underway.... It has already been law in most (all?) EASA states for several years but each state has chosen to apply for derogation ... You would have to think that eventually it will need to be implemented.... Unless new legislation is put through the European Parliament....unlikely I'm afraid....

[Pace]

You would have to think that eventually it will need to be implemented..

Or EASA are really true to their word and working around the clock to a BASA with the FAA in which case as a BASA is close on PPL stuff they will without doubt extend 2016 for CPL and ATPL while they achieve a BASA on that.

If that is the case we will be complying with what is required by that BASA not what is in the existing regulations

Then my estimation of EASA will increase two fold, If not they will be disclosed as the Liars and cheats and dishonest organisation that many suspect
They could deal with the dual licensing thing so easily and fairly with existing working pilots by issuing a restricted CPL or ATPL valid 3rd country private aircraft only and not public transport that would cost little in money and time

Pace

[GWYN]

Pace

Since you have asked…

First of all, what a terrible tragedy to a beautiful family. How very sad.

Having lived a large part of my life in that area, learned to fly at Dunks many moons ago, and spent a large amount of time flying from and hanging around the airfield I have a little, local (if ancient) knowledge.

As a caveat, I also realise how easy it is to pontificate after the event from the comfort of a chair.

Having said all that, I have never (sadly) flown one but the PA46 is a very capable machine and must necessarily be very well equipped; it is definitely not your average club 150 and surely not the sort of aeroplane in which one would try and crawl in under the clag. The pilot’s experience is unclear but it is extremely unlikely he would be flying that aircraft without instrument flying experience and qualification. So I am puzzled; looking at the weather for that day, assuming a serviceable aircraft, there is no way he should have been at that level in that area. Indeed he would most likely have been talking to Dunks on the radio and they would have advised him of the conditions on the airfield.

Personally I very much like to think that I would have been in the ‘shut the curtains’ camp. IF one were to get caught out and find oneself in that situation in that area, knowing the terrain and hazards of descending with no procedures, surely there should be no hesitation in simply going to Exeter and descending on the ILS or other procedure –forget the other airfields up on the Blackdowns mentioned before. If picking someone up from Dunks it is only a 20 minute (car) journey to Exeter. Alternatively, as suggested above, descend till visual on the procedure and then try and go back to Dunks. Indeed I have done that before: failed to get in there on a direct track, back to Exeter, ILS till visual then follow the A30 up to Honiton and turn left up a valley to find the airfield. In an aircraft like that, almost certainly equipped with moving map etc., I just cannot understand why this happened, assuming a serviceable aircraft.

Having said all that, we have probably all done things when flying which we may, in retrospect, realise were unwise. Mostly we get away with it…….

How awful.

I also find it hard to disagree with your comments about the job creation scheme known as EASA, although I would probably extend it to Eurocontrol as well.

[Pace]

GWYN

I cannot disagree with what you are saying. There are those who choose to fly and those who have to fly!
There have been many occasions in the past when I have turned up at airfields at 0500 mid winter, usually in the dark and often in pouring rain or worse and back then in piston twins
You have a plan as well as alternatives and go in most cases.
But in that learning experience I can think of occasions I am not proud of and luck played a part but that is looking back I survived so far. Now I hope I am older and wiser.

Very different to the PPL who flies for pleasure using their hard earned cash. Open the curtains to a **** looking day and close them again and do something else in the day but that is not the situation for all.
So some is having to fly! I don't mean that in quite the way I had put it as no one HAS to do anything so maybe pressured to fly is a better word.

Pressured to fly can refer to the PPL too. The guy who chooses to use his aircraft for business and doesn't want to leave potential clients sitting at an airport because he cannot make it.Ego comes into it big time

Pressured to fly can also be an internal thing! the challenge? I have failed if I don't get there brigade. Etc
A lot of successful businessmen are driven people in business and sometimes that kicks into aviation in the wrong or dangerous way?

So pressured to fly can be external or internal of the mind
So it still comes down to knowing your limits and respecting your limits as well as the aircraft limits. some pilots have much higher limits due to mainly currency and experience others don't know their limits and pressure themselves out of those limits

Do we actually know the pilots qualifications ?

Pace

[007helicopter]

If it isn't safe to fly with your wife and kids then it isn't safe to fly.

Runway, everyone has a different outlook and for me I strongly disagree with you.

For example personally I enjoy flying at night, I recognise it is a higher risk if something goes wrong , for this reason I do not take non pilots or children who do not understand that risk.

Equally I chose to do a transatlantic flight which carries relatively high risks and it was something I calculated I was prepared to do and the same applies.

Flying in bad weather with another qualified pilot or competent instructor I enjoy, but I simply am not taking loved ones but am prepared to fly myself, for these reasons I disagree with your outlook.

In terms of this accident we have no idea what went wrong but as pilots we understand the higher risks on the day due to the weather which for me and my level of skill would (I hope) have been to high to take uninformed pax.

[Chronus]

GWYN

I cannot disagree with what you are saying. There are those who choose to fly and those who have to fly!
There have been many occasions in the past when I have turned up at airfields at 0500 mid winter, usually in the dark and often in pouring rain or worse and back then in piston twins
You have a plan as well as alternatives and go in most cases.
But in that learning experience I can think of occasions I am not proud of and luck played a part but that is looking back I survived so far. Now I hope I am older and wiser.

Very different to the PPL who flies for pleasure using their hard earned cash. Open the curtains to a **** looking day and close them again and do something else in the day but that is not the situation for all.
So some is having to fly! I don't mean that in quite the way I had put it as no one HAS to do anything so maybe pressured to fly is a better word.

Pressured to fly can refer to the PPL too. The guy who chooses to use his aircraft for business and doesn't want to leave potential clients sitting at an airport because he cannot make it.Ego comes into it big time

Pressured to fly can also be an internal thing! the challenge? I have failed if I don't get there brigade. Etc
A lot of successful businessmen are driven people in business and sometimes that kicks into aviation in the wrong or dangerous way?

So pressured to fly can be external or internal of the mind
So it still comes down to knowing your limits and respecting your limits as well as the aircraft limits. some pilots have much higher limits due to mainly currency and experience others don't know their limits and pressure themselves out of those limits

Do we actually know the pilots qualifications ?

Pace

No Pace, we don`t know his qualifications n`or his experience. The PPL assumption has been generated from the media reports which referred to him as an amateur pilot. We have therefore just taken the lead from that.

I do remember the Graham Hill accident, it had left an indelible mark on all at that time. That such a capable person, a champion driver came to meet his end behind the control wheel of an aircraft and not the steering wheel of a F1 race car.

Here is the link to the then AAIB report.


https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/5422f6a040f0b61342000593/14-1976_N6645Y.pdf

He held a UK PPL, with NR and IMC,and an FAA IR.

For me the whole matter is simple, ask anyone what their job is. What should the PPL holders` reply be. You are right ego plays a big part when it comes to giving the answer.

[runway30]

007, I guess I'm looking at it from the point of view of using an aircraft as a dependable form of transport which is the reason why PPLs do an IMC rating or I/R. I always felt safe in a radar/stormscope equipped twin with de-ice flown within the limits of my rating. However, I would not wish to be in IMC in a single for an extended period of time, however well equipped and I have been in a single with my family on board and I've turned around and gone home.

[007helicopter]

Runway likewise I would turn around and go home if not happy with the weather, or these days more likely not even get in the car When taking into account flying with family.

For me it does put a big difference in my thinking and I am much more risk adverse in this situation.

[Pace]

007

Sometimes pilots get lured into situations where they feel out of their depth! One of the biggest mistakes is to try and stay VFR in worsening conditions as that leads to confusion and being lost low level! It's better to be IMC above the MSSA flying a plan with an alternative plan than the former!
While many say turnaround before things get too bad that doesn't always work I can remember trying to beat a front flying Scotland to the south! I was flying north south the front was from the west and mountains East turning meant the weather behind was as bad as in front and a climb above MSA and into IMC was the only way so don't take it for granted that the weather behind you was what you left 10 mins earlier

Pace

[sooty3694]

I love the way some on here are prepared to type "I got away with it, but that was years ago" or "when I was less qualified I did it."

What do statement like that serve to promote? It reads to me like "I was clever once, but now I am only wise."

[Chronus]

I love the way some on here are prepared to type "I got away with it, but that was years ago" or "when I was less qualified I did it."

What do statement like that serve to promote? It reads to me like "I was clever once, but now I am only wise."

Sharing experiences does neither promote bravado n`or boast. I hope it promotes the development of respect for all that is involved in aviation and a sense of humility towards one`s fallibility.

Here is a well known quote, by Vernon Law.

"Experience is a hard teacher it gives the test first and the lesson afterwards".

[Pace]

BSooty

I will be quite honest if you relate something which happened yesterday and was none to clever you will get jumped on for doing it )) if you relate from years ago your relating experiences from the past which means you would never dream of doing it today so you are let off the hook :E

Seriously though it's hard to read comments from many who say they would never dream of flying on days like that and it's hard to say yes yes it's disgusting that a pilot would be so reckless when I know I have flown in stuff like that and worst ( in the past ) It does not have to be reckless and know many who also use their aircraft in anger. I have been flying over 30 years and am still here so surely relating experiences from the past cannot be a bad thing ?

Some of us are lucky and got away with things an experience a lesson and one which tells you that you woud never do that again!

Please don't presume a turn back is always the best way because it's sadly not always the best! spatial awareness of what is happening with fronts terrain, icing levels position plans B C and D are the best. Never do something without an out or its Russian roulette that is something I have learnt even flying in **** weather

Pace

[Teslataildragger]

The pilot does not appear to have any instrument qualifications/ratings


Airmen Database Search Result Name : GARVEY, PHILIP JOHN

Airman's Address : UNITED KINGDOM

FAA Region : European

Airman Certificates :
Private Pilot (foreign based) Airplane Single Engine Land

Airmen Database Search Result (http://www6.landings.com/cgi-bin/nph-search_namd?pass=193800885&&7=&2=phil&17=&1=garvey&max_ret=10&16=&13=&start_ret=1&6=&9=&14=&8=&10=&5=)

[GWYN]

Teslataildragger: I don't think that is a very comprehensive or accurate source. It only appears to list FAA licences.

[tubby linton]

If you follow the link you will see that it is a summary of the information held by the FAA!!

[runway30]

He could have been flying on a UK licence with an IMC rating.

[Pace]

Can you fly an N reg in the Uk using Uk ratings ? If it's piggyback are the ratings on your Uk added ? I am sure the IMCR could not be added ?
Not sure maybe someone could clarify but he appears to have been attempting to fly VFR anyway so within his FAA licence holding

Pace

[runway30]

Could you have flown a transit of the Solent CTA VFR at 4700 ft on that day?

[Chronus]

It would seem discussion so far has largely been influenced by comments about wx at destination. How accurate is this. Here are the METAR`s for EGTE for the 14th.

SA 14/11/2015 23:50->
METAR EGTE 142350Z 26019G29KT 230V290 9999 BKN020 15/13 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 23:20->
METAR EGTE 142320Z 26017KT 9999 BKN020 15/13 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 22:50->
METAR EGTE 142250Z 25015KT 9999 BKN016 15/13 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 22:20->
METAR EGTE 142220Z 26016KT 9999 BKN018 15/13 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 21:50->
METAR EGTE 142150Z 25018KT 9999 BKN016 15/13 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 21:20->
METAR EGTE 142120Z 25016KT 9999 BKN017 15/14 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 20:50->
METAR EGTE 142050Z 24015KT 9999 BKN016 15/14 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 20:20->
METAR EGTE 142020Z 25015G27KT 9999 BKN018 15/14 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 19:50->
METAR EGTE 141950Z 24014KT 9999 BKN018 15/14 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 19:20->
METAR EGTE 141920Z 25015KT 9999 BKN018 16/13 Q1017=
SA 14/11/2015 18:50->
METAR EGTE 141850Z 25014G26KT 9999 SCT018 15/14 Q1018=
SA 14/11/2015 18:20->
METAR EGTE 141820Z 22010KT 9999 FEW008 BKN015 14/13 Q1018=
SA 14/11/2015 17:50->
METAR EGTE 141750Z 22010KT 9999 FEW010 BKN015 14/13 Q1018=
SA 14/11/2015 17:20->
METAR EGTE 141720Z 21011KT 9999 FEW008 BKN015 14/13 Q1018=
SA 14/11/2015 16:50->
METAR EGTE 141650Z 21010KT 9999 FEW010 BKN015 14/13 Q1018=
SA 14/11/2015 16:20->
METAR EGTE 141620Z 20010KT 9999 FEW010 BKN015 14/13 Q1019=
SA 14/11/2015 15:50->
METAR EGTE 141550Z 21011KT 9999 FEW008 BKN015 14/13 Q1019=
SA 14/11/2015 15:20->
METAR EGTE 141520Z 22011KT 9999 FEW008 BKN015 14/13 Q1019=
SA 14/11/2015 14:50->
METAR EGTE 141450Z 22012KT 9999 FEW008 BKN015 14/13 Q1019=
SA 14/11/2015 14:20->
METAR EGTE 141420Z 23018KT 9999 FEW008 BKN015 13/12 Q1019=
SA 14/11/2015 13:50->
METAR EGTE 141350Z 22016KT 9999 -RA FEW010 BKN015 13/12 Q1019=
SA 14/11/2015 13:20->
METAR EGTE 141320Z 22017KT 9999 FEW010 BKN015 12/12 Q1020=
SA 14/11/2015 12:50->
METAR EGTE 141250Z 21017KT 9999 -RADZ FEW010 BKN015 12/11
Q1020=
SA 14/11/2015 12:20->
METAR EGTE 141220Z 21014KT 9999 BKN012 11/11 Q1021=
SA 14/11/2015 11:50->
METAR EGTE 141150Z 21014KT 9999 -RA SCT020 BKN035 11/10 Q1022=
SA 14/11/2015 11:20->
METAR EGTE 141120Z 20009KT 9999 -RA SCT020 BKN035 10/10 Q1023=
SA 14/11/2015 10:50->
METAR EGTE 141050Z 21011KT 9999 -RA SCT018 BKN048 10/10 Q1024=
SA 14/11/2015 10:20->
METAR EGTE 141020Z 22010KT 9999 RA SCT018 BKN048 10/10 Q1024=
SA 14/11/2015 09:50->
METAR EGTE 140950Z 18008KT 9999 RA SCT018 SCT048 10/09 Q1025=
SA 14/11/2015 09:20->
METAR EGTE 140920Z 17007KT 9999 RA FEW034 BKN040 09/09 Q1025=
SA 14/11/2015 08:50->
METAR EGTE 140850Z 18006KT 9999 RA SCT025 SCT046 09/09 Q1026=
SA 14/11/2015 08:20->
METAR EGTE 140820Z 18008KT 9999 RA SCT035 09/08 Q1026=
SA 14/11/2015 07:50->
METAR EGTE 140750Z 20008KT 9999 -RA FEW040 10/08 Q1026=
SA 14/11/2015 07:20->
METAR EGTE 140720Z 20007KT 9999 FEW040 09/08 Q1026=
SA 14/11/2015 06:50->
METAR EGTE 140650Z 20009KT 9999 BKN045 09/08 Q1026=
SA 14/11/2015 06:20->
METAR EGTE 140620Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 05:50->
METAR EGTE 140550Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 05:20->
METAR EGTE 140520Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 04:50->
METAR EGTE 140450Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 04:20->
METAR EGTE 140420Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 03:50->
METAR EGTE 140350Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 03:20->
METAR EGTE 140320Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 02:50->
METAR EGTE 140250Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 02:20->
METAR EGTE 140220Z NIL=
SA 14/11/2015 01:50->
METAR EGTE 140150Z 23008KT 9999 FEW032 08/06 Q1028=
SA 14/11/2015 01:20->
METAR EGTE 140120Z 23008KT 9999 FEW032 08/07 Q1028=

Cannot see anything really nasty there.

[Pace]

Chronus

Don't be misled by Exeter as i believe Exeter has one of the best climates in the UK and is often used as a diversion when everywhere else is down with low cloud. I used it many times when attempting to get into Davidstow years ago in a Baron 55 and Crusader 303 as an alternative.

It is possible that the poor guy picked up weather for Exeter and was misled by that into thinking VFR flight was possible. But of course those are Metars and not TAFS. TAFS would be more interesting as that is what he would have looked at as an alternative. But even then you need to get there and it would still require IMC flight above the MSA anD IFR approach and instrument let down. his destination would have been a phone call to ATC and pilot reports

Pace

[runway30]

Fc 14/11/2015 08:02->
taf egte 140802z 1409/1418 20007kt 9999 few015 sct040
tempo 1409/1415 7000 ra
prob30 tempo 1411/1415 bkn012
becmg 1412/1415 23017kt
prob40 tempo 1413/1418 24020g30kt
prob40 tempo 1415/1418 7000 -dz bkn008=

[Chronus]

Chronus

Don't be misled by Exeter as i believe Exeter has one of the best climates in the UK and is often used as a diversion when everywhere else is down with low cloud. I used it many times when attempting to get into Davidstow years ago in a Baron 55 and Crusader 303 as an alternative.

It is possible that the poor guy picked up weather for Exeter and was misled by that into thinking VFR flight was possible. But of course those are Metars and not TAFS. TAFS would be more interesting as that is what he would have looked at as an alternative. But even then you need to get there and it would still require IMC flight above the MSA anD IFR approach and instrument let down. his destination would have been a phone call to ATC and pilot reports

Pace

I was not aware of Exeter as having a reliable sort of climate. I used to always follow the advice offered on the Continent, " if you don`t like the weather in the UK just wait a minute " and had my ear tuned to all volmet and ATIS broadcasts as soon as reaching tx range of stations. I was amazed by the variation in whether conditions over relatively such a small land mass.
Don`t know anything about Dunkerswell, so I would similarly expect that this unfortunate chap would have called them before departure so that someone there stuck a nose or finger out to check where the wind was blowing from and whether the wind sock was visible. I do wonder though whether any one else was flying around there at that time. I have looked at the TAf`s posted earlier and they don`t show the extent of the clag and whether it was down to the deck. But generally looking at the TAF`s and the route I would have been inclined to file an IFR FP. I cannot quite see how VFR could have been maintained all the way there. Would it have been the so called VMC on top ... of what precisely. But there again back in the old days didn`t have all these GPS things and the RNAV VOR/DME shifting gadgets were the bee`s knees and people used to have finger trouble and end up unannounced all over the place.

[Pace]

Dunkeswell is around 840 feet ASL and even when other low airports are giving 1200 feet cloud base its quite possible that the aircraft attempted to fly VFR under a 1200 to 1500 foot cloud base but Dunkeswell could have easily had a cloud base with rising terrain on the ground or not far above it with mist and poor visibility.
Attempting to get in in those conditions with a big dollop of get there itis and its easy to see how this accident could occur flying VFR

David stow more west from Exeter was on the top of moorland and on a number of occasions impossible to safely get into while Exeter not far to the east was clear. It was also well known that Exeter had its own unique mini climate
i flew a construction company almost every week there ( Davidstowe ) for almost a year landing on 500 metres of good runway and often having to clear livestock in a low pass in a Baron 55 and Crusader 303 so knew if all bad at my destination chances were Exeter was good but I used a strict regime on deciding to chuck it away and divert no get there itis

Pace

[Notoc]

The unfortunate pilot mentioned in his reviews of Birmingham and Dunkeswell airfield, that he completed his IMC rating in November 2012. Also adding the comment that the landing fees were cheaper at Dunkeswell when comparing Exeter.

He also hired out his a/c to IR pilots.

I'm saddened and would like to convey my condolences.

[awqward]

Can you fly an N reg in the Uk using Uk ratings ? If it's piggyback are the ratings on your Uk added ? I am sure the IMCR could not be added ?
Not sure maybe someone could clarify but he appears to have been attempting to fly VFR anyway so within his FAA licence holding

Pace

Hi Pace, short answer is: yes...refer to my post #24... Ref the FARs CFR14 Part 61.3 (a)(1)(v)

AQ

[piperboy84]

Report out in this accident, sad event, impressive how in depth the investigation was.

https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-piper-pa-46-350p-malibu-mirage-n186cb