PA34 down in the Alps
Thread Starter
PA34 down in the Alps
A Seneca from Shoreham, said to be enroute to Cannes, crashed in the Isère region of France yesterday. POB - 2 adults and 1 child.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/6352037.stm
RIP
Skua
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/6352037.stm
RIP
Skua
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three killed in French air crash
The bodies of a family have been found in the wreckage of a light aircraft that took off from Shoreham Airport, in West Sussex, and crashed in France.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/6352037.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/6352037.stm
Chocks Away!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Manchester Barton
Age: 54
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the plane had lost control in a snow storm as it flew over the Alps.
Very sad news indeed. Snow is disorientating enough while driving a car, I can't think what it's like flying an aeroplane. Our hearts go out to the relatives of this family.
Thread Starter
Also found this in the French press;
http://www.ledauphinelibere.com/info.../art_85942.php
it indicates a massive search & resuce effort had taken place since Saturday evening, also that the pilot was flying VMC under some sort of radar service, then indicated he had gone IMC a few minutes before the crash (at 1900m), and that weather conditions were particualrly bad in the area.
Skua
http://www.ledauphinelibere.com/info.../art_85942.php
it indicates a massive search & resuce effort had taken place since Saturday evening, also that the pilot was flying VMC under some sort of radar service, then indicated he had gone IMC a few minutes before the crash (at 1900m), and that weather conditions were particualrly bad in the area.
Skua
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Forest of Caledon
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time of crash: 13:07z
Location: 6,430' amsl on the Northern face of Grand Veymont, 1,250' below the
top. 44° 52' 44.15"N 5°31' 04.05"E matches the 6,430' contour with the physical description of the locus and also matches the sad photograph which depicts the consequences of flying a Seneca into the IMC of an Alpine snowstorm in February. It was a very bold thing to do.
Darwin's "theory" is cruelly demonstrable for those who forget that there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but ....
Location: 6,430' amsl on the Northern face of Grand Veymont, 1,250' below the
top. 44° 52' 44.15"N 5°31' 04.05"E matches the 6,430' contour with the physical description of the locus and also matches the sad photograph which depicts the consequences of flying a Seneca into the IMC of an Alpine snowstorm in February. It was a very bold thing to do.
Darwin's "theory" is cruelly demonstrable for those who forget that there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but ....
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Gt. Yarmouth, Norfolk
Age: 68
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That seems a rather bold statement. The French report says that the pilot was VMC until he radioed that he had entered IMC a few minutes before disappearing off radar. He was at that point in the middle of the Vercors. His options may have been somewhat limited.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Heart
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winter, VMC, Snowstorm, Mountains. Bold (or brave) is exactly the which springs to mind.
There is another word which springs to mind which, out of respect, I will not mention.
Now that options have been mentioned, I rather like the old adage, "Speed is life. Altitude is life insurance."
Sadly appropriate here.
There is another word which springs to mind which, out of respect, I will not mention.
Now that options have been mentioned, I rather like the old adage, "Speed is life. Altitude is life insurance."
Sadly appropriate here.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA34 Down in the Alps...
So tragic...and so avoidable too. Done that route many times in light twin... and lost a friend and his young family in the mid 70s when he did much the same thing in a Twin-Comanche (Mount Mangiabo a little further east)
To have routed a little further west would have added just minutes in a Seneca and kept them well clear of the mountains.
Bless them all, how tragic. bm
To have routed a little further west would have added just minutes in a Seneca and kept them well clear of the mountains.
Bless them all, how tragic. bm
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speed is life. Altitude is life insurance
Very true; however when flying one doesn't have simple options like that. That would be the case if there was no cloud, and no controlled airspace. In reality, flying is a complex trade of legal flight rules v. CAS v. permitted routings v. weather v. aircraft performance v. icing levels v. oxygen carriage, etc.
Initially, one has to choose either VFR or IFR.
In the former case, you have to be below cloud, or above it.
In the latter case, you can be in cloud but you wouldn't want to be in this kind of stuff. In fact, you don't want to be in anything that might have nasties embedded in it, because you can't see them. The enroute strategy then becomes one of getting VMC on top of whatever there might be, and a Seneca can't get above weather that has a significant amount of lift. Typical tops in N Europe tend to be below FL180 but they can go much higher if there is any lift.
An instrument-competent pilot can fly "official VFR" under cloud in the worst imaginable conditions, and be fine, but if he climbed higher he might for example ice up, or bust CAS.
I don't think he was on an airways flight plan because he would then have been higher, and in any case would have seen the stuff coming up ahead and would have asked for a 20 or 30 deg right due weather, and would have got it instantly (CAS is irrelevant on an airways flight). So my guess is that he was going VFR. In France you can go VFR up to FL105 without any issues but this muck would have had tops way above that, IMHO.
I wish I could get the skew-t charts for Lyon etc for 1200Z but those baloons didn't appear to have gone up. I can get the ones for 0000Z either side; the one 12hrs after the accident (12 hrs is a long time) shows near-IMC from deck to about 30,000ft, with a clear layer between 10k ft and 18k ft, very roughly. I haven't found a decent weather archive yet, free access.
But this is pure speculation.
can someone paint the a/c track over that weather pic?
From Shoreham to Cannes, assuming a straight line (unlikely) it passes right through the worst of it.
It's extremely sad.
Very true; however when flying one doesn't have simple options like that. That would be the case if there was no cloud, and no controlled airspace. In reality, flying is a complex trade of legal flight rules v. CAS v. permitted routings v. weather v. aircraft performance v. icing levels v. oxygen carriage, etc.
Initially, one has to choose either VFR or IFR.
In the former case, you have to be below cloud, or above it.
In the latter case, you can be in cloud but you wouldn't want to be in this kind of stuff. In fact, you don't want to be in anything that might have nasties embedded in it, because you can't see them. The enroute strategy then becomes one of getting VMC on top of whatever there might be, and a Seneca can't get above weather that has a significant amount of lift. Typical tops in N Europe tend to be below FL180 but they can go much higher if there is any lift.
An instrument-competent pilot can fly "official VFR" under cloud in the worst imaginable conditions, and be fine, but if he climbed higher he might for example ice up, or bust CAS.
I don't think he was on an airways flight plan because he would then have been higher, and in any case would have seen the stuff coming up ahead and would have asked for a 20 or 30 deg right due weather, and would have got it instantly (CAS is irrelevant on an airways flight). So my guess is that he was going VFR. In France you can go VFR up to FL105 without any issues but this muck would have had tops way above that, IMHO.
I wish I could get the skew-t charts for Lyon etc for 1200Z but those baloons didn't appear to have gone up. I can get the ones for 0000Z either side; the one 12hrs after the accident (12 hrs is a long time) shows near-IMC from deck to about 30,000ft, with a clear layer between 10k ft and 18k ft, very roughly. I haven't found a decent weather archive yet, free access.
But this is pure speculation.
can someone paint the a/c track over that weather pic?
From Shoreham to Cannes, assuming a straight line (unlikely) it passes right through the worst of it.
It's extremely sad.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very sad, it always is when this sort of thing happens........
The Seneca (depending on model) is a very capable aeroplane and if a turbo charged model is good for FL250. Ideally for touring Europe year round, I'd want a de-iced twin with 02 and weather radar or a TBM - otherwise it does pay to be a chicken sometimes and take Easyjet.
The Seneca (depending on model) is a very capable aeroplane and if a turbo charged model is good for FL250. Ideally for touring Europe year round, I'd want a de-iced twin with 02 and weather radar or a TBM - otherwise it does pay to be a chicken sometimes and take Easyjet.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wanted to add my sorrow after reading this news.
The Seneca is a capable aircraft and I would suspect he was capable pilot to take on that trip.
I wonder what persuaded him to cross the Alps? The Seneca had more than enough range to take a quite different route and still not need to stop.
As it turned out the conditions must have been really dreadful with no way to get above the weather.
Looking at the radar and the site of the accident he had most of the weather to the north and by then east of the route. Perhaps he had been running along the western edge of the front.
The Seneca is a capable aircraft and I would suspect he was capable pilot to take on that trip.
I wonder what persuaded him to cross the Alps? The Seneca had more than enough range to take a quite different route and still not need to stop.
As it turned out the conditions must have been really dreadful with no way to get above the weather.
Looking at the radar and the site of the accident he had most of the weather to the north and by then east of the route. Perhaps he had been running along the western edge of the front.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Heart
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540,
I have to disagree. Which of the other options is worse than actual outcome of this flight?
I will not speculate on this incident but the conditions appear ripe for moderate to severe icing; but that is only a risk of... The mountains don't pose so much a risk as a certainty.
I'd choose living over legal any day.
I have to disagree. Which of the other options is worse than actual outcome of this flight?
I will not speculate on this incident but the conditions appear ripe for moderate to severe icing; but that is only a risk of... The mountains don't pose so much a risk as a certainty.
I'd choose living over legal any day.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that when one is in a mess than one has to make hard decisions; I was referring to planning a flight.
It's a case of one thing leading to another, and we will never know what decisions were taken and why.
One factor which might have weighed on a pilot's mind, in the early stages of a looming crisis, is the well known attitude in France to American aircraft. So if on a VFR flight, one might think twice before declaring an emergency and infringing some bit of their copious military airspace, in the expectation that one is going to get well and truly turned over following a landing.
I would have not gone VFR - it appears not possible on the data I see unless there are passes through the terrain. I have flown that route a few times but never below FL100 or so.
It's a case of one thing leading to another, and we will never know what decisions were taken and why.
One factor which might have weighed on a pilot's mind, in the early stages of a looming crisis, is the well known attitude in France to American aircraft. So if on a VFR flight, one might think twice before declaring an emergency and infringing some bit of their copious military airspace, in the expectation that one is going to get well and truly turned over following a landing.
I would have not gone VFR - it appears not possible on the data I see unless there are passes through the terrain. I have flown that route a few times but never below FL100 or so.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Heart
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO,
My apologies for reading it as planning phase.
I remember something I read by Richard Collins about icing to the extent that there is no problem flying in forecast (or actual for that matter) icing as long as you have enough 'outs'. May well have played a part in the VFR decision though precipitation is still icing conditions.
I've done my time on ATRs so I have no quams about the icing game. It was good to know that the aircraft had been more thoroughly tested in ice than probably any other type.
My apologies for reading it as planning phase.
I remember something I read by Richard Collins about icing to the extent that there is no problem flying in forecast (or actual for that matter) icing as long as you have enough 'outs'. May well have played a part in the VFR decision though precipitation is still icing conditions.
I've done my time on ATRs so I have no quams about the icing game. It was good to know that the aircraft had been more thoroughly tested in ice than probably any other type.