A map of plane crashes in Colorado
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 2
From: Oxford, UK
I had expected that a number of these accidents might had something to do with wave or rotor conditions in these mountains; but having a quick look through the causes given, not once mentioned as a factor. Night flying, density altitude, approach problems, marijuana, buzzing the neighbours, all too many end up impacting high terrain. And few bothered to file a flight plan.
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
Against that accumulation of wreckage one needs to appreciate the sheer size of the U.S. GA activity.
It is at least one order of magnitude bigger than the UK, which in turn is an order of magnitude (or more) bigger than much of Europe.
It is completely normal to fly from say UK to say Crete, crossing southern UK, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, Greece and see 1 or 2 GA planes at the UK end, and absolutely zilch (except contrails at FL300+) the rest of the way. And virtually no "apparently GA" traffic on the radio, too.
The USA also has loads of serious terrain, whereas the UK has almost none except a few "hills" in Scotland and up there there is very little GA anyway.
So for every pl0nker in the UK who gets himself splattered into terrain, having launched into OVC010CB +TRSAGS and winds of XXX/050G075 or whatever (having evidently never read the metars or tafs, and possibly would not have understood them anyway) there will be a dozen doing the same thing in the USA. Here is one, doing it in a plane rather similar to mine.
Despite all that, the U.S. accident rate, per hour flown, and to the limited extent one has stats available, seems to be better than that of the UK. Probably largely because of their much more accessible IR, which enables any pilot willing to do reasonable due diligence on the wx, relative to his aircraft capability, to fly much more safely.
It is at least one order of magnitude bigger than the UK, which in turn is an order of magnitude (or more) bigger than much of Europe.
It is completely normal to fly from say UK to say Crete, crossing southern UK, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, Greece and see 1 or 2 GA planes at the UK end, and absolutely zilch (except contrails at FL300+) the rest of the way. And virtually no "apparently GA" traffic on the radio, too.
The USA also has loads of serious terrain, whereas the UK has almost none except a few "hills" in Scotland and up there there is very little GA anyway.
So for every pl0nker in the UK who gets himself splattered into terrain, having launched into OVC010CB +TRSAGS and winds of XXX/050G075 or whatever (having evidently never read the metars or tafs, and possibly would not have understood them anyway) there will be a dozen doing the same thing in the USA. Here is one, doing it in a plane rather similar to mine.
Despite all that, the U.S. accident rate, per hour flown, and to the limited extent one has stats available, seems to be better than that of the UK. Probably largely because of their much more accessible IR, which enables any pilot willing to do reasonable due diligence on the wx, relative to his aircraft capability, to fly much more safely.
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 0
From: Gone
The amazing part is, is that I had no idea that so many crashes/fatalities had happened to the degree shown.
I have flown regularly from Boulder Municipal to San Jose and visa versa. Weather can close fast there. A factor, I don't know ?
I have flown regularly from Boulder Municipal to San Jose and visa versa. Weather can close fast there. A factor, I don't know ?
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
From: Niort
Click on the 'show mountain passes' button and it becomes pretty obvious why quite a number of them occured - especially given the general height at which most spamcans struggle and the terrain.
You could do something similar for the Alps and it would look pretty similar - just fewer crashes due to EASA, Part M and general beaurocracy giving fewer flights
You could do something similar for the Alps and it would look pretty similar - just fewer crashes due to EASA, Part M and general beaurocracy giving fewer flights
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
For straight crossings of the Alps, you have to get fairly high. Much of the terrain goes to 10-12k. The IFR airway MEAs tend to be FL140, with FL180 in some places.
A significant % of pilots fly without oxygen - both here and in the USA. This was one celebrated example, with a post-landing pic here. They don't like cannulas but, regardless of aircraft performance, they are flying with both hands tied behind their back.
BTW, why does pprune not allow certain URLs to be linked? It forces h t t p :// www. p run e. or g g in front of them.
A significant % of pilots fly without oxygen - both here and in the USA. This was one celebrated example, with a post-landing pic here. They don't like cannulas but, regardless of aircraft performance, they are flying with both hands tied behind their back.
BTW, why does pprune not allow certain URLs to be linked? It forces h t t p :// www. p run e. or g g in front of them.
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
From: Here and there. Here at the moment but soon I'll be there.
I'd guess that in the vast majority of these accidents the aircraft was not crossing the range but flying to/from airports within the area and that weather was a major factor.
Joined: Apr 2002
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 57
From: Surrey, UK ;
Not a huge surprise. I've flown a bit in that area and you really need to know about mountain flying. Weather can change amazingly quickly and density altitude and turbulence are often a problem. You need a downhill 'out' and you must never try and outclimb downdrafts or rising ground in a box canyon,
I was at Buenavista in September and in a 160 HP C172 was getting about 200 fpm climb (altitude is 7,946 ft). That's just down the valley from Leadville at 9,927 ft which was too high for us to attempt. MEF in the area is 14,800.
I fly there with a local expert in the mountains who us also a member of the S & R team and sadly the tales of woe and stupidity leave me no doubts why crashes happen.
You need to respect, plan and then often just don't try it.
I was at Buenavista in September and in a 160 HP C172 was getting about 200 fpm climb (altitude is 7,946 ft). That's just down the valley from Leadville at 9,927 ft which was too high for us to attempt. MEF in the area is 14,800.
I fly there with a local expert in the mountains who us also a member of the S & R team and sadly the tales of woe and stupidity leave me no doubts why crashes happen.
You need to respect, plan and then often just don't try it.
Last edited by Dave Gittins; 20th December 2011 at 12:57.
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 0
From: Gone
Amazing story 
Without starting another twin/single debate I use a C340
We have been in/out of Boulder 9 times. Brilliant little GA field. I recall at least 3 cancelled trips due to weather the Boulder end and we have ended up on a United Flights into Denver.
All flying in that area is amazing and even breathtaking if it is CAVOK
Without starting another twin/single debate I use a C340
We have been in/out of Boulder 9 times. Brilliant little GA field. I recall at least 3 cancelled trips due to weather the Boulder end and we have ended up on a United Flights into Denver.
All flying in that area is amazing and even breathtaking if it is CAVOK
Last edited by Jetblu; 19th December 2011 at 14:34.
