Beyond belief
Fly Conventional Gear
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
From: Winchester
yawningdog maybe you are right, I just think that they probably would have crashed anyway. OK they might not have died (because they would have been warned that they were about to crash by the altimeter reading zero) but certainly the report made it clear that the AAIB believes that by the time they had reached the Blackpool area their chances of making a successful landing on a runway were almost nil.
From the report:
From the report:
The cloud ceiling was between 100 ft and
200 ft aal and daylight was fading, conditions that would
have made it nearly impossible for a pilot, flying an
aircraft without serviceable navigation equipment and
without instrument flying training and experience, to
locate and land at the airport. There were few options
open to the pilot. He was unable to make a safe approach
and landing at Blackpool, the aircraft did not have
enough fuel to fly to an alternate airport and the onset
of darkness would have made it unlikely that a suitable
field could be found for a precautionary landing beyond
the area covered by cloud.
200 ft aal and daylight was fading, conditions that would
have made it nearly impossible for a pilot, flying an
aircraft without serviceable navigation equipment and
without instrument flying training and experience, to
locate and land at the airport. There were few options
open to the pilot. He was unable to make a safe approach
and landing at Blackpool, the aircraft did not have
enough fuel to fly to an alternate airport and the onset
of darkness would have made it unlikely that a suitable
field could be found for a precautionary landing beyond
Red On, Green On
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 6,490
Likes: 2
From: Between the woods and the water
Their fate was not sealed on leaving Exeter, as after leaving Exeter they must have passed/been within range of airfields that were open and with better conditions than Blackpool.
Knowing they were not flush with fuel, at 45 mins from Blackpool, for example, they could have a) checked Blackpool's actuals (by phone if needed), re-checked their fuel state and decided to divert, as they would have known they did not have enough fuel to attempt Blackpool and then divert.
Basic en-route checks of fuel, distance to run and actuals at the destination would have given them loads of options.
Knowing they were not flush with fuel, at 45 mins from Blackpool, for example, they could have a) checked Blackpool's actuals (by phone if needed), re-checked their fuel state and decided to divert, as they would have known they did not have enough fuel to attempt Blackpool and then divert.
Basic en-route checks of fuel, distance to run and actuals at the destination would have given them loads of options.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: heathrow
A38
I am afraid ERROR CHAIN goes over the heads of a lot on here, to them an accident occurs at point of impact. It is a shame really because the chain is so much more interesting than the end result and provides more lessons to be learnt.
Sadly, in aviation, the fate of some is sealed the day they sign their licences
I am afraid ERROR CHAIN goes over the heads of a lot on here, to them an accident occurs at point of impact. It is a shame really because the chain is so much more interesting than the end result and provides more lessons to be learnt.
Their fate was not sealed on leaving Exeter, as after leaving Exeter they must have passed/been within range of airfields that were open and with better conditions than Blackpool.
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
From: Lymington
I am afraid ERROR CHAIN goes over the heads of a lot on here.
If it is my comment to which you are referring, that the altimeter setting was the crucial cause of the crash, then perhaps you do not understand my point. My point is that many pilots will continue to push the limits and lower their safety margins with every surviving flight, regarding survival as success. I am not referring to the previous events that led to the situation. That's obvious and has been repeatedly discussed.
Although you may talk about "error chains", the perceived value of an error will differ from one pilot to another. Perhaps to the passenger in this case, there were no errors, except for the final incorrect QNH setting.
The Original Whirly
Joined: Feb 1999
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 4,327
Likes: 2
From: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
How not to line up the holes in the cheese...
To summarise...
1. They could have refused to go in the first place in that weather.
2. They could have checked the weather at Exeter and decided to stay there overnight.
3. They could have re-fuelled at Exeter.
4. They could have refuelled at a number of airfields on the way back.
5. They could have checked the weather back at Blackpool by a number of means, and diverted.
6. They could have checked that all instruments were set correctly.
But by the time they got to Blackpool, it was too late.
A cautionary tale...
I remember, some years ago, I was on a flying holiday in the Highlands. We were at Oban, and wanted to fly to Plockton, then Inverness, then back. It was an extremely hot day, Plockton is a short strip, so we didn't want to go in there with more than half fuel. Half fuel would be enough to get us to Plockton and on to Inverness, where we could refuel for the return journey. Looks OK, doesn't it?
BUT...the TAFs were giving a 30% probability of fog coming in to Inverness. If we couldn't make Inverness, there would be nowhere else to refuel, and nowhere else to divert to on the way back to Oban. Even options for a precautionary landing up there are severely limited.
We mulled it over, and realised we couldn't take the risk - we took full fuel, had a look at Plockton from the air, and went to Inverness. And of course, it was beautiful weather all day.
But if we'd gone, and the weather had closed in, and we'd run out of fuel...there would have been a discussion like this one.
Yet it would have been so easy to just go - it looked OK, if you didn't factor in all the 'what-ifs'.
I realise it's not an exact parallel; the main point I'm making is that it's very easy to be wise on the ground after the event.
1. They could have refused to go in the first place in that weather.
2. They could have checked the weather at Exeter and decided to stay there overnight.
3. They could have re-fuelled at Exeter.
4. They could have refuelled at a number of airfields on the way back.
5. They could have checked the weather back at Blackpool by a number of means, and diverted.
6. They could have checked that all instruments were set correctly.
But by the time they got to Blackpool, it was too late.
A cautionary tale...
I remember, some years ago, I was on a flying holiday in the Highlands. We were at Oban, and wanted to fly to Plockton, then Inverness, then back. It was an extremely hot day, Plockton is a short strip, so we didn't want to go in there with more than half fuel. Half fuel would be enough to get us to Plockton and on to Inverness, where we could refuel for the return journey. Looks OK, doesn't it?
BUT...the TAFs were giving a 30% probability of fog coming in to Inverness. If we couldn't make Inverness, there would be nowhere else to refuel, and nowhere else to divert to on the way back to Oban. Even options for a precautionary landing up there are severely limited.
We mulled it over, and realised we couldn't take the risk - we took full fuel, had a look at Plockton from the air, and went to Inverness. And of course, it was beautiful weather all day.
But if we'd gone, and the weather had closed in, and we'd run out of fuel...there would have been a discussion like this one.
Yet it would have been so easy to just go - it looked OK, if you didn't factor in all the 'what-ifs'.I realise it's not an exact parallel; the main point I'm making is that it's very easy to be wise on the ground after the event.
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,689
Likes: 0
From: England
That accident report makes for very saddening and sobering reading for anyone connected with general aviation. A reminder that lack of understanding of our licence privilages could result in death. OUR death.
It is tricky not to come across as smug when posting on these sort of accidents - the chain of appalling errors all so glaringly obvious with hindsight etc,... but I must say this:
One thing that will always bug me is people placing Air Law at the bottom of priorities when working their way through the ground exams. How many times do you hear people slate it's importance in the scheme of the PPL course? A hurdle to be skipped as quickly as possible before the first solo, then the book to be tossed aside with glee. How foolish some can be....
With a future career planned in commercial aviation this poor young gentleman obviously wasn't aware of some basic laws regarding the privilages of his licence. That was one mistake but by far his worst mistake was having misplaced trust in the other prats surrounding him that fateful day.
Many, I suspect, would have fallen into the same trap this unfortunate young flyer did. Misled by older, so called 'experienced' flyers whom he would no doubt have trusted having started his flying at that particular FTO years earlier. Words almost fail me when reading about this 'de-facto' CFI - if he thought it safe for ANY of those guys to take off into a 200ft cloud base he deserves to be struck off. But he obviously knew his air law! How very poignant.
RIP fellow aviators.
VFE.
It is tricky not to come across as smug when posting on these sort of accidents - the chain of appalling errors all so glaringly obvious with hindsight etc,... but I must say this:
One thing that will always bug me is people placing Air Law at the bottom of priorities when working their way through the ground exams. How many times do you hear people slate it's importance in the scheme of the PPL course? A hurdle to be skipped as quickly as possible before the first solo, then the book to be tossed aside with glee. How foolish some can be....
With a future career planned in commercial aviation this poor young gentleman obviously wasn't aware of some basic laws regarding the privilages of his licence. That was one mistake but by far his worst mistake was having misplaced trust in the other prats surrounding him that fateful day.
Many, I suspect, would have fallen into the same trap this unfortunate young flyer did. Misled by older, so called 'experienced' flyers whom he would no doubt have trusted having started his flying at that particular FTO years earlier. Words almost fail me when reading about this 'de-facto' CFI - if he thought it safe for ANY of those guys to take off into a 200ft cloud base he deserves to be struck off. But he obviously knew his air law! How very poignant.
RIP fellow aviators.
VFE.
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 1
From: Cambridge, England, EU
One thing that will always bug me is people placing Air Law at the bottom of priorities when working their way through the ground exams. How many times do you hear people slate it's importance in the scheme of the PPL course? A hurdle to be skipped as quickly as possible before the first solo, then the book to be tossed aside with glee. How foolish some can be....
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 1,689
Likes: 0
From: England
Very true Gertrude, and in the past I too will have been guilty of placing the general importance of the whole topic in the 'learn and burn' category. Indeed, at the level the established commander of G-BK was at it can be hard determining the wheat from the chaff, as those who've trodden the same career path as the one he was embarking on will attest - the ATPL exams are the worst offenders for dross content. If the JAA were testing more relevant things within Air Law then perhaps the seemingly harmless attitude displayed towards it by some would change however, as we know, it's only through experience and error that most of us will learn, sadly in the case of some, all too late...
The more I think about this crash the more I become angry. On the face of things, judging by the implications of the AAIB report, it seems someone at Blackpool ought to be facing more hardship than just a mere wrestle with their conscience over this truly soul destroying chain of events. One can only hope that if this is the case, the law empowers due punishment. Whilst being mindful of the general gist of this thread and whilst not wishing to sway it towards unsavoury corners, 'De-facto' would suggest someone assigned the title of CFI but without legal recognition, correct? The authorties must decide where blame lies for that particular state of affairs... might not be as obvious as most here think!
Looking for a positive from a negative here - it is great to see the number of people who've read this report, have offered up their own opinions, and chewed over a few possible future scenarios for themselves. If one life has been saved from the existance of this thread then PPRuNe has justified every nausiating, self righteous, and at times truly galling posting since it's inception!
Stay safe.
VFE.
The more I think about this crash the more I become angry. On the face of things, judging by the implications of the AAIB report, it seems someone at Blackpool ought to be facing more hardship than just a mere wrestle with their conscience over this truly soul destroying chain of events. One can only hope that if this is the case, the law empowers due punishment. Whilst being mindful of the general gist of this thread and whilst not wishing to sway it towards unsavoury corners, 'De-facto' would suggest someone assigned the title of CFI but without legal recognition, correct? The authorties must decide where blame lies for that particular state of affairs... might not be as obvious as most here think!
Looking for a positive from a negative here - it is great to see the number of people who've read this report, have offered up their own opinions, and chewed over a few possible future scenarios for themselves. If one life has been saved from the existance of this thread then PPRuNe has justified every nausiating, self righteous, and at times truly galling posting since it's inception!
Stay safe.
VFE.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: heathrow
Thing is, there's stuff in Air Law that's mindless bureaucracy (what colour paper various notices are printed on, the date of such-and-such a convention, garbage like that), and stuff that will save your life.
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Lancashire
I know a lot of the people involved in this accident.
He DID believe the "experienced passenger" was an instructor, because that is what the "de facto CFI" had told him
He was absolutely certain that the chap in RHS was not only an instructor but therefore in command.
So in the event, NOBODY was actually pilot in command of this flight.
Yes
The aztec pilot has an ATPL
In what way? there is no QGH procedure at Blackpool and the hand held GPS unit they had would have been way more accurate than any VDF kit.
It still doesn't enable them to find an airfield buried below a 100' overcast with poor visibility to boot.
The mis set QNH merely determined the location of the accident, not the actualilty of it.
The accident was pretty much inevitable once they crossed the Mersey (Liverpool was about 450 metres sky obscured), the only choice they had left was where.
IMHO the ATCO concerned (good friend of mine) saved a few land based lives by persuading them to go out over the sea rather than crash on land with the attendant press reports of plummetting near schools/hospitals etc and committing mass puppicide.
I don't think anyone has a troubled conscience over this, as so many of those who WERE responsible simply do not have a conscience!
The AAIB report suggests that the Commander may have thought that his "experienced passenger" was in fact an instructor. In which case, is it not likely that he thought that the "instructor" would be Commander of the flight? Especially since he was out of currency.
I agree. What we have here is a young pilot who was ASKED to do a flight by the CFI. A flight which needed doing. He tries to refuse, saying he's not current. The CFI tells him he'll have someone more experienced with him. He could also have implied that the accompanying passenger would be unofficially in command, even though the pilot would be officially, since he needed the hours.
So in the event, NOBODY was actually pilot in command of this flight.
Was the "experienced passenger" in the front right hand seat when they departed BPL in IMC?
The report says that the other two passengers were picking up an Aztec from Exeter. Logic would suggest that one or both of these passengers had an IR (although not definite), and they in fact might have been in the front seat or offered instrument flying advice from the back seat on departure from Blackpool, thus giving the commander the confidence to fly into cloud on take off from Blackpool.
Given the clearly desperate circumstances, ATC could (since the Radar was U/S duie clutter) have provided more in the way of guidance using the VDF.......either a QGH or a Spiral descent in the VDF overhead. Shame that the only available approach aid went largly unused!!!!
It still doesn't enable them to find an airfield buried below a 100' overcast with poor visibility to boot.
The mis set QNH merely determined the location of the accident, not the actualilty of it.
The accident was pretty much inevitable once they crossed the Mersey (Liverpool was about 450 metres sky obscured), the only choice they had left was where.
IMHO the ATCO concerned (good friend of mine) saved a few land based lives by persuading them to go out over the sea rather than crash on land with the attendant press reports of plummetting near schools/hospitals etc and committing mass puppicide.
I don't think anyone has a troubled conscience over this, as so many of those who WERE responsible simply do not have a conscience!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
From: LONDON
VOLMET & ATIS frequencies
There was a reference earlier in this thread to Volmet as a useful inflight resource for getting a general update on the weather. I couldn't agree more.
Both Volmet and ATIS frequencies can be downloaded at:
www.smartcockpit.com/swissknife
You will see a link to each on this very useful aviation resource site (thanks to Captain Ludo Andre and Martin Kukura). The frequency charts print out in PDF onto A4 size, and if laminated they then make a handy addition to the cockpit !
Both Volmet and ATIS frequencies can be downloaded at:
www.smartcockpit.com/swissknife
You will see a link to each on this very useful aviation resource site (thanks to Captain Ludo Andre and Martin Kukura). The frequency charts print out in PDF onto A4 size, and if laminated they then make a handy addition to the cockpit !
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
From: England
VFE post #95
An excellent observation and I fully concur - despite its shortcomings, this forum has one very very important function. It permits aviators to discuss events and LEARN something positive from them. This accident serves to illustrate how vital the pilots code of "don't assume - CHECK!!!" can be. It always has and will continue to save lives.
The AAIB report should be read and FULLY UNDERSTOOD by every pilot ...........and those who "authorise" them.
When something "seems" wrong.......it probably is!
FS
The AAIB report should be read and FULLY UNDERSTOOD by every pilot ...........and those who "authorise" them.
When something "seems" wrong.......it probably is!
FS
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Lancashire
BTW, AFAIK Blackpool is not on the VOLMET. It was replaced by Humberside several years ago although various publications still list it as being on London North.
That doesn't stop any pilot (or "experienced passenger") from asking whomever they happen to be tuned into at the time to phone ahead and get the very latest METAR.
That doesn't stop any pilot (or "experienced passenger") from asking whomever they happen to be tuned into at the time to phone ahead and get the very latest METAR.