PPRuNe Forums - Southend Inquest into Student Pilot Death

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- ATC Issues (https://www.pprune.org/atc-issues-18/)

- - Southend Inquest into Student Pilot Death (https://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/331885-southend-inquest-into-student-pilot-death.html)

Southend Inquest into Student Pilot Death

Can anybody help me here?

On Tuesday this week the inquest opened at Southend into the death of a 16 yr old student pilot on his second solo in 2006 at Southend Airport.

He was told in non-standard ATC terms to break off his approach on final in favour of a faster a/c approaching behind him.

He crashed shortly after and was killed.

The Inquest was covered on local TV on Tuesday and continued yesterday.

Coverage by the media has ceased today and there was nothing in today's papers.

Does anyone know if the Inquest is still continuing: If not anybody know what the verdict was?

Cheers

Cusco (interested flyer with no axe to grind in case you ask)

Thanks Emma, but that link is 2 days old.

Cusco

The death of a 16-year-old pilot killed in a plane crash was an accident, an inquest jury has decided.

This link is 4 hours old http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/7464332.stm

Link to the AAIB report on the accident.

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/cms_resou...BB%2007-07.pdf

I remember during my PPL training (2001) my instructor made me spend a lot of time going from slow speed in the landing configuration to climbing away as if going around etc, all done at height. Also practised, and tested on the skills test, turns with flaps down and purposely bleeding speed off to the stall and recovering. I can't recall doing this early on in the training, and don't think it was before my first solo flights though, but luckily I had enough flying experience in the past that MAY have got me out of such situation that this student encountered, but for an inexperienced person, such awareness or training may not have been taught yet. A real tradgedy for all involved. :sad:

Quote from the end of the AAIB investigation:-

Conclusion
During his second solo flight the student was instructed
to carry out an unfamiliar and non-standard manoeuvre.
Presented with a situation beyond his experience, he
failed to reconfigure the aircraft for level flight. The
aircraft continued to fly level at a power setting which
the available evidence indicates would have been
insufficient to maintain flying speed, and eventually
the aircraft stalled at a height from which recovery was
impossible.

When I read the AAIB report I was a bit puzzled about the conflict resolution the controller(s) used. That said, I also remember that power on with full flap during bank was part of my JAR-FCL PPL skill test.

The holes really lined up on this one. :ouch:

In my view, the key aspect of this tragic incident was addressed by the recommendation at the end of the AAIB report which read:

Safety Recommendation 2007-037

The Civil Aviation Authority should amend MATS Part 1 so that, with the exception of issuing instructions to go‑around, controllers shall not issue instructions that would require an aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land to deviate from its expected flight path unless exceptional overriding safety considerations apply.

This resulted in an addition to MATS Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 1 as follows:

15.3 Instructions to aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land

15.3.1 The final approach represents an increased period of flight deck workload. Unusual situations and emergencies during this period can be particularly demanding for the pilot. Therefore, with the exception of instructions to go-around, instructions shall not be issued to aircraft in the final stages of approaching to land that would require it to deviate from its expected flight path unless exceptional and overriding safety considerations apply.

Two other secondary (in my view) recommendations read as follows:

Safety Recommendation 2007-050

The Civil Aviation Authority should instigate the use of a suitable prefix, for use in civil radiotelephony, to signify a student pilot, flying solo.

Safety Recommendation 2007-051

The Civil Aviation Authority should amend the Manual of Air Traffic Services Part 1 and the Radio Telephony Manual (CAP413) to emphasise to controllers that pilots identifying themselves as students have limited ability, which must be taken into consideration when issuing instructions.

These were also implemented by the introduction of a callsign prefix "Student" by AIC 83/2007 (Pink 123) and also appropriate changes to MATS Part 1, Appendix E, Para 4.4, soon after the publication of the report.

CAP 413 has yet to be amended.

JD
:)

what exactly happened? his plane stalled while he was climbing or turning? this kid probably had like 22 hours under his belt.:ugh:

Hilrtougi:

Read the AAIB report, that will tell you what happened.

Sam Cross was 16years old , had 15 hours and was on his second solo.

He was given non standard instructions initially to go around while on final to get him out of the way of a faster aeroplane on final behind him by ATC who didn't know he was a student despite the pilot having cocked up instructions at take-off to backtrack the take-off runway from an intersection , and while flying a locally based flying school aeroplane.

The go-around instructions were almost immediately cancelled and he was told to head north away from the final track.

This he appears to have done , while still in landing configuration and with landing power.

The holes in his cheese lined up that day and no mistake.

Cusco