accident in austria, flight UK to hungary (?)

[rmac]

Unfortunately more ammunition for EASA to insist that Europe based N-reg come under their control

[vanHorck]

Condolences from another PPRUNE Dutch GA pilot

Bert

[StbdD]

Last (official) date of issue (Second Class) medical (Pilot): 11/2005

Several months ago, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was informed about Pilot's (65) EXPIRED medical certificate.

Somehow, the London International Field Office (IFO) FAILED to take (any) corrective action !!

Sez who?

Nothing in the material you have provided addresses any of your accusations much less identifies the pilot.

You may well be right, but when making accusations and after being anal enough to uselessly provide the home links to the FAA and the IFO, one wonders why you didn't provide any evidence for your claims.

[IanSeager]

If you look for the date of my medical on the FAA database it will say 11/2005 but my last FAA class II medical was in 2008.

Ian

[IO540]

OK, boys and gurlz, calm down.

One of my PPL instructors claimed he had a CAA ATPL (fake).

Another one claimed he was a CAA IR examiner (fake, he did have an IR but it was lapsed).

If the UK CAA trawled through its own pilot database and started checking up on who is doing what, all hell would break loose. I bet they would find hundreds of pilots who never paid up the 5-year JAA license expiry.

Of course they would find many pilots all over the pilot forums, falsely claiming they do this and that, which would take some checking out.

Be thankful that the FAA database is public, because this stops loads of wild claims and bogus pilots going around. There will be some, sure, but self proclaimed CAA paperwork holders have a total free for all because nobody can check. Especially as one could knock up a JAA ATPL with an inkjet printer in half an hour. More to the point, one could knock up a JAA PPL in half an hour too, and you don't need much "protocol knowledge" to convincingly fly spamcans, so off you go, lifetime PPL privileges for free. Wonderful! And if I can think of this .............................

I have no axe to grind, with a CAA Class 1, FAA Class 1, FAA CPL/IR, all valid. But let the man without sin cast the first stone.

And the axe grinders are visible from miles away, especially here

[BackPacker]

I'm 100% right, saw the e-mails.

You may well be 100% right in the sense that the FAA databse contains evidence that his FAA medical was lapsed. That doesn't justify the moral high road you're riding, and implicitly (with bold face) asserting that that's the cause of the crash.

He may have a valid medical, but that data did not make it into the FAA database yet. He may have had a non-FAA medical, which may have been sufficient for the FAA (for instance if his license is a piggyback). He may not have an FAA medical and thus be formally illegal, but may have an appropriate JAA medical thus be deemed of sufficient health in any case. He may have been flying on his JAA license and medical. And so on and so forth. There are lots of scenarios where a lapsed entry in the FAA database might still not make it an illegal or irresponsible flight.

And if you read AAIB reports you will regularly find phrases along the lines of "although his paperwork was technically not in order, and thus the flight technically illegal, we don't believe that this is a primary or secondary cause of the accident". So even if the flight were illegal, license-wise, this may not be the cause of the accident.

Oh, and about blaming the FAA for not grounding him: A lapsed medical or license would only be cause for action for the FAA (or one of its field offices) if they knew that the person involved was still flying around on its license. If you don't fly anymore, the FAA couldn't care less and let's be honest, 1000s of people let their license lapse each year precisely because they don't need it anymore. Combine this with the fact that the FAA does not keep a record of flights, who was PIC on each flight and which license he/she used to claim command authority, and combine this with an aversion to Big Brother syndrome and I can perfectly understand why the FAA doesn't pursue a lapsed medical without very good cause.

[henny39]

He has had a medical check just a few months ago and was OK. Unfortunatly, from all the scenarios we have gone through today, a medical problem seems the only logical explanation for this tragedy. It looks like he flew in unconscious state full speed right into the wood. I'm his brother, Henny van Oortmarssen

[BackPacker]

Henny, condolances with your loss. I hope Rotorblast has the decency to apologize for his insinuations.

When you say that you've gone through all the scenarios, does that mean that you did that with the authorities, with access to radio/radar tapes and so on? In other words: do you have access to more information than what's available to us here on PPRuNe?

You must understand that the folks here have a natural tendency to discuss accidents like this, if only to learn from them and to prevent making the same mistakes (or being overwhelmed by the same circumstances) ourselves. So any facts that you can contribute will be highly valued here.

On the other hand, I can perfectly understand that at this time you would not be willing to join an in-depth discussion about your brothers death with a bunch of total strangers.

In any case, thank you for posting. It's a reminder that after such an accident, it's not just fellow pilots that are looking for answers, but family too.

[henny39]

No, these were our own scenarios. None info from autorities yet. Must be Austria's "grundlichkeit". We hope to get more information soon. Untill I have facts, this is my last post for now. By the way, Gerry was a very experienced pilot (and instructor), just unbelievable this happened to him.
Henny

[vanHorck]

Rotorblast provided some factual information from the FAA database, but as others correctly pointed out, there may be other reasons why the given medical date was as it was.

Furthermore the validity of the medical may not have had any impact on the accident.

Finally from his brother it seems that he had at least some medical license (JAA?).

It is in my view sensationalist to edit the text so that it becomes more of a Christmas tree than a factual report, and this does not help Rotorblast's cause.

Let's stay balanced in the opinions we voice as well as the way we present them but continue striving for facts

[IO540]

Rotorblast - why are you running this vendetta? It looks like you did not like Mr Oortmarssen, and, if what you say is true, you or some colleague of yours tried to get him exposed to the FAA, but he is dead now so he should not concern you anymore.

Henny39 - do you know if your brother had intended to fly to (e.g.filed a flight plan) to LOAV (Bad Voslau) or LOWW (Vienna)? The problem I have with a medical (pilot incapacitation) explanation is that the reports state that he cancelled IFR (which is normal) but no urgency call has been reported, yet LOAV was not accessible given the weather conditions obtained for either airport, but Vienna would have offered an easy and stress-free ILS approach which, if the pilot was for example not feeling too well, he would have taken. Also, most modern planes can fly an ILS using the autopilot which makes this the obvious choice if there is any problem or a high workload. He was obviously not short of money to the extent of ruling out Vienna on the basis of the landing fee, which many pilots would have done.

[Chilli Monster]

Originally Posted by Rotorblast

BTW this pilot (65) held/hold FAA Pilot certificate(s) ONLY

Rotorblast - would you care to go back and check the FAA site again, or would you like me to point out your stupidity to all?

Page 2 of the Certificate Detail Data:

PRIVATE PILOT (Foreign Based)
AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND
INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE

Limits


INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE US TEST PASSED.
ISSUED ON BASIS OF AND VALID ONLY WHEN ACCOMPANIED BY NETHERLANDS PILOT LICENSE NUMBER 80-0049.
NOT VALID FOR AGRICULTURAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS.

Such Certificate would have been rendered valid had the above conditions been complied with PLUS POSESSION OF A VALID JAA Medical. This licence plus medical combination would have been perfectly legal for the flight - no FAA medical required.

If this is the case then your original post is nothing short of insulting and vindictive to all concerned and you're going to have to re-think your attitude to an apology.

[vanHorck]

Thank you chilli monster

It seems rotorblast is having a last go in a feud here, assuming your information is correct, and if this is the case, i think Mr Rotorblast is disgusting as rarely people are.

[172driver]

Another update from the Austrian TV website claims he wanted to go to LOAV to pick up a business partner. According to the article, while trying to maneuver to land he flew into the mountain. It is not clear from the article if this was a missed approach or the initial attempt at landing. As usual, reports by journalists should be treated with the requisite caution.

[vanHorck]

There are 3 likely options

Pilot incapacitation
Mechanical or software failure
Disorientation

Or a combination of these. Whilst it is not impossible that the fog played a part in this tragedy, it still remains to be proven.

The issue of the FAA license is at best a contributory factor and IF true that technically his license was invalid, even then it will not be the principal cause. I am saddened by the punctuation and formatting that some poster has decided to employ, as if he had found the best thing since sliced bread, as well as by his decision to initially not post a (relevantly) important bit of information (the Dutch medical). If he has been in conflict with the deceased (whom he obviously knew), so be it, but this is no place to give the final blow.

I did not know the pilot, the only common ground is that we are both Dutch and both love GA.

Yes the truth hurts (and will hurt the family, not the deceased), but the loss of their loved one will hurt more I am sure, so lets be as factual (-ly complete) as possible, devoid of emotions and keep each other up to date on developments whilst showing respect for a fellow GA pilot

[Whirlybird]

It is interesting and educational to discuss accidents like this and learn from them.

However, it is irrelevant and a complete waste of time to have to trawl through details of what legal bits of paper the deceased had or had not kept up to date. Even the AAIB knows that forgetting to jump through the legal hoops rarely if ever causes an accident.

My sincere condolences to the family and friends of this pilot.

[172driver]

Rotorblast, for whatever reason you seem to be on some sort of personal crusade against this pilot. Let me just tell you - this is NOT the place for it. If you have something to contribute to the discussion about possible causes of the accident, then say so. If not - shut up, I at least find your attitude disgusting.

Now back to the accident. In the article I referenced earlier, an Austrian investigator is quoted as attributing the accident to pilot disorientation. To quote - "trying to find the airport, he underestimated the Lindkogel (mountain where accident happened). That was the problem - he was on his way to the approach zone, but on this way there was an obstacle - the mountain"

The article also mentions that he circled, although does not elaborate.

It's been many years, but I have flown to LOAV a couple of times. The field lies at the last foothills of the 'Vienna Woods', i.e. the eastern slopes of the Alps. Approaching from the west, you would more or less track the slopes down until on final or in the circuit. Why he would try to land at LOAV when a very comfortable approach was available a few miles away at LOWW will most likely remain his secret.

Henny, my condolences.

[Fuji Abound]

If the pilot experienced a medical condition that effected the command process than the lack of a current medical (if correct) may have been a contributory factor.

However, we have no idea yet what caused the accident.

There seems very little point speculating whether or not this was a factor at this stage. In fact there is nothing known at the moment to point to this even being a more likely factor in the accident than any other.

Keep to the facts and we potentially have much to learn from this sad accident, depart from the facts, and we might just as well discuss gnerally why aircraft crash.

The report that the pilot may have been inclined to push the limits could well be a factor and could be relevant. However this could also have been an isolated incident by an inexpereinced (at the time) pilot.

I am sorry this accident has occurred.

[IO540]

Now back to the accident. In the article I referenced earlier, an Austrian investigator is quoted as attributing the accident to pilot disorientation. To quote - "trying to find the airport, he underestimated the Lindkogel (mountain where accident happened). That was the problem - he was on his way to the approach zone, but on this way there was an obstacle - the mountain"

I think this is standard language used by people who do not know aviation procedures (e.g. that instrument approaches exist, decision heights, etc). The press people think that private pilots just fly around aimlessly, like those in the WW1 movies, with leather caps and goggles, maps and compasses on their laps, wondering into clouds and fog, hitting mountains in they can't see them, etc. They haven't got a clue about real-world navigiation and procedures.

Also, formally, the accident would have occurred in VMC, not because it was known to be in VMC but because the pilot (apparently) cancelled IFR and therefore must have been in VMC. I have seen this kind of thing elsewhere. And ATC have no job to question what the pilot can see (rightly so).

The article also mentions that he circled, although does not elaborate.

That could be a journo misinterpretation of "circling approach" which technically (in ICAO/Jeppesen speak, if not called thus on the EAD approach plate) that VOR approach is.

Rotorblast - if you want to make a point, make it on the basis of available facts, not by dragging out some assertions about paperwork which are at best irrelevant to this accident and at worst could be totally bogus, and which (as you obviously know) you will get away with only because the subject is dead and cannot sue for libel.

[Fuji Abound]

I to write this, but I don't fellow Pilots who break elementary (basic) rules and/or regulations.

Rotorblast

You are in danger of not being taken serioulsy because your contribution strongly suggests you have a particular axe to grind. That would be a real shame if you have something to contribute about factors that may have contributed to this accident.

What a pilot may or may not have done 28 years ago is probably not relevant as an isolated instant. We can all fall into the trap of breaking the rules at some point, we all make mistakes. One mistake can have serious consequences and I am not making any excuses for breaking the rules even once but there is a difference between someone who is habitually a rule breaker and someone who does so once.

If you were so concerned about what you saw all those years ago perhaps it was worth making a complaint at the time. If you are still concerned you should contact the investigating authority. They will be interested in the "history" of the pilot and will want to talk to other pilots who knew him and knew how he flew.