I always find it a good rule never to assume. ;)

I think we can all assume that is a good rule.:ok:

SkyHawk-N,


..... no on second thoughts I won't write that..... something about getting a divorce....

IO540,

Given your 11,000+ posts, one could assume that you'd be an experienced pilot who knows what he's talking about. But given the the nonsense you've written in this post, that appears not to be the case.

I know this is a rumours forum, but you shouldn't write with such 'apparent authority' on topics which you appear not to understand.

Can you be more specific?

I'm sure IO540 knows what he is on about. He certainly walks the walk. IO's views are a product of his wallet and experience :E

Except in my airline, where using FMS for primary nav below MSA is forbidden.
You have to follow the needle otherwise you can't call established. If the FMS says you are a mile off track but the ADF is on track which is right? Who knows? Our FMS is BRNAV so it must be within 5nm 95% of the time. That could be worse than the ADF. Don't expect a straight approach every time with an NDB but do expect to be able to position the aircraft for a decent landing if visual at minima.

Just think, if you disregarded the needle, followed the FMS, flew down to 300ft MDA where you shouldn't be, got EGPWS warnings, and then at the investigation said "well I disregarded procedure and followed the FMS rather than the appropriate nav aid because I don't like NDBs then you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. FMS may be the norm but it isn't perfect.

If I were flying an NDB approach, sure I'd use the needle as a backup, but would prefer to use the G430W as the primary nav. I wonder how long before Overlay approaches are available for all these old NDBs....?

Do you know what your FMS uses for the fix-ups?

It will be DME/DME or GPS. That will answer your question :)

BRNAV is just the approval category. It barely relates to the actual technology. I have a BRNAV (RNP5 equiv.) approved GPS but the only way I would be 5nm off track is if Ronald Reagan came back and turned the system off. With a paperwork exercise I can make it RNP0.3 which is probably closer to the actual accuracy ;)

But surely if your FMS and your ADF disagreed massively, you would divert to some place with an ILS. I would.

I think some of you have missed the point here. Re-read that word that comes before single engine. Yes,OVERLOADED. Once a crew is overloaded, whether it be single engine,single pilot GA or multi engine, multi crew commercial then all bets are off. There's no predicting what can happen, as all the assumptions about what you'd normally expect the crew to do are out of the window.

The trouble is, unless the crew tell anyone, or there are big enough clues for ATC to spot then nobody knows and there's nothing anybody can do to help them.

Is it totally inconceivable for a very inexperienced pilot to turn up at a busy airfield expecting an ILS approach because he hadn't briefed properly and then finding its an NDB? Struggling to fly the approach procedure, selecting the wrong frequency for tower? Being so fixated on landing that he didn't even see an aircraft lined up?

Yes there are many opportunities for a pilot to exit the above scenario, but that's the beauty of target fixation...you just don't see anything other than what you're focused on.

Of course that is possible, and if it was a C172 it might even be plausible. However, it seems remarkably unlikely that a 'very inexperienced pilot' would be flying a TBM850 (mega buck high end turboprop).

There is undoubtedly a story with several Swiss cheese holes lining up. However, at the moment there is nowhere near enough information to have even a mildly useful speculation.

As in most flying mishaps it will not be one event but a combination of errors which lead to the end result.
We have to look at the part ATC played in this even if not their contribution bit why they failed to stop it happening.
We have to look at the other aircraft and his contribution if any ?
We have to look at the TBM Pilot himself ?

Only than will we know ? But would be interesting to know

Pace

The pilot of the impounded a/c flew into BHX on the wrong radio frequencies, the Dash was lined up and told to wait, the impounded idiot made an approach and landed over the top, then got impounded.

BHX were transmitting on APP/TWR/GND/DIR frequences basically telling him to FRO...................

I was there, saw and heard it all, as for what was going through the idiots mind.......i can only speculate....not a lot...:suspect:

Roger

I still hold with my quote above. We still dont know the circumstances that lead to this or the explanation the pilot has given.
Taking what you saw and heard as being correct doesnt explain why?
For all we know the pilot may have been ill and decided to land over rather than go around?
Unlikely but my point is that we do not know.
Normally a pilot will be handed from one frequency to another. He may indeed take down the wrong frequency make a call and get no response.
The previous frequency would be in the standby position and easely called back.
If the pilot landed over we have to question why! Whatever presuming that he saw the aircraft lined up on or near the numbers there would have been some reason in his mind that made him decide he would be better on the ground than risking a go around and another approach.
Most pilots of that calibre level are not idiots so would still love to know his explanation? It could have simply been overload which can happen in SPO

Pace

If they weren't getting a response did they use the lights?

Single pilot, using the FMS and trying to fly the approach using the ADF whilst dodging traffic on the runway - lights? You're kidding aren't you?

However...

Just pehaps the pilot had a medical emergency onboard and was not sure he was capable of another approach.....and perhaps the aircraft is not impounded after all but "parked".....

It has been over a month since the incident. Any update?

Lights , good question
 

No Emergency landing lights at Birmingham airport ( at least on that day ) , it seems that the runway 15 , the first part is not BLACK , it's light GREY , maybe this help to understand the "over" landing , white aircraft on light grey asphalt .

The aircraft wouldn't be impounded purely on the basis of the incident described. Detaining an aircraft is an extremely serious procedure and requires the airport authority to be in possession of a Mareva injunction.
As has been been intimated, it was almost certainly a case of unpaid fees being involved.

The CAA have the power to detain aircraft but they could only do so with a similar legal order (which take weeks to establish, unless previously proven) and it would involve far more serious circumstances than unpaid bills.