I believe it's more a reminder of the importance of good decision making.RIP. This is a reminder of the importance of an instrument rating.
I think it’s both, but weather changes and sometimes you find yourself in situations you didn’t anticipate and having made the prior good decision to get fully trained in the airplane can save your life.I believe it's more a reminder of the importance of good decision making.
Fully endorse advanced ratings.I think it’s both, but weather changes and sometimes you find yourself in situations you didn’t anticipate and having made the prior good decision to get fully trained in the airplane can save your life.
You can never fully mitigate the risk of flying and can never fully guarantee that you won’t fly into non-visibility or other conditions even if you have the best decision making. The only way to fully mitigate is to not fly. That’s why I’m mentioning the advanced rating you also endorse. It’s a good decision that you make before you accidentally find yourself in a bad situation despite otherwise good decision making. Loss of control and death shouldn’t be the consequence of bad luck or a momentary lapse of judgment.Fully endorse advanced ratings.
Making good decisions is what will mitigate “ finding yourself in situations you didn’t anticipate”. The advanced ratings help to make those decisions but poor preflight decisions will trump the rating…
No, you cannot fully mitigate the risk.You can never fully mitigate the risk of flying and can never fully guarantee that you won’t fly into non-visibility or other conditions even if you have the best decision making. The only way to fully mitigate is to not fly. That’s why I’m mentioning the advanced rating you also endorse. It’s a good decision that you make before you accidentally find yourself in a bad situation despite otherwise good decision making. Loss of control and death shouldn’t be the consequence of bad luck or a momentary lapse of judgment.
The 7 P’s! My kids hear this a lot.All very valid points.
In summary, I will add:
P.P.P.P.P.P.P.
If you know, you know.
I've seen reports and videos about static load testing a wing to total failure and the failure event is almost explosive. Just imagine the crack of a stick being snapped but several magnitudes greater. The tail may have failed long before max speed was reached, the tailless and nearly wingless fuselage will go down like a lawn dart. I've seen R/C aircraft fail and the vertical speed of the fuselage descending can be amazing.This is why I’m currently IFR training in my 9. And have a fully functioning autopilot w level and 180 buttons.
Curious what would create the “boom” that witnesses reported prior to the aircraft hitting the ground. Also impressed that it did not break up til 250knots. RIP.
Please don't encourage people - for the very reasons you state in your last sentence.Truly sad.
You don’t need an instrument rating to navigate safely out of IMC.
........
As a VFR pilot, my biggest concern is being able to calm myself and let my training kick in if I ended up in a stressful and unfamiliar situation. It would be difficult.
Report says "VFR flight following". Strongly suggests they were not on an instrument clearance.I’ll take a shot at it.
No mention of the clearance.
No mention if the plane was certified for IFR flight.
Time not specified as to AM or PM.
It is not enough to know how to use the instruments; you actually need to be proficient. You are correct about training kicking in. The issue with a substantial number of pilots is that their last "training" was for their rating ride...and it was almost a certainty that any BAI was using goggles or a hood. KNOWING that you can just look up and take a peek is the problem. It is a bit different flying in a cloud and knowing that there is no "peeking"; you are relying solely on you skills. Now throw in turbulence, rain, ice, the unusual sounds that accompany them...the stress level goes up. Now throw in an abnormal or an emergency. The stress level goes through the roof.Truly sad.
You don’t need an instrument rating to navigate safely out of IMC.
Most RV’s these days have an HSI, VSI, ASI, GPS, Compass, and/or NaV/Com. I have three HSI’s, three VSI’s, and three ASI’s. One set was purposeful, and stand alone (Ray Allen, Steam VSI and HSI). Others tag along with my EFIS, and my portable.
But, as Sam noted, you have to know how to use them.
I think the biggest benefit of an Instrument Rating in these circumstances is not only do you know how to use them, you’re familiar with the circumstances of needing to use them.
As a VFR pilot, my biggest concern is being able to calm myself and let my training kick in if I ended up in a stressful and unfamiliar situation. It would be difficult.
Absolutely correct. I'll never forget giving an IPC to a pilot who seemed pretty good. It was night, mostly VFR, he was wearing a hood. I'm quite sure he wasn't "cheating". For our last approach, coming home, I called up and got an actual clearance, because I could see a line of scattered clouds ahead. As we entered the clouds, I told him, "Don't screw up now, we're in the clouds." His performance went way downhill. He was so focused on keeping the wings level that he ignored the fact that we were slowly drifiting off course. I had to practically beg him to initiate a small turn back toward the localizer........ The issue with a substantial number of pilots is that their last "training" was for their rating ride...and it was almost a certainty that any BAI was using goggles or a hood. KNOWING that you can just look up and take a peek is the problem. It is a bit different flying in a cloud and knowing that there is no "peeking"; ....
Indeed. A surprising number of VMC into IMC spatial disorientation crashes happen to pilots who are instrument rated. There is a huge difference between (a) having the rating & practicing under the hood and (b) being proficient in actual.Absolutely correct. I'll never forget giving an IPC to a pilot who seemed pretty good. It was night, mostly VFR, he was wearing a hood. I'm quite sure he wasn't "cheating". For our last approach, coming home, I called up and got an actual clearance, because I could see a line of scattered clouds ahead. As we entered the clouds, I told him, "Don't screw up now, we're in the clouds." His performance went way downhill. He was so focused on keeping the wings level that he ignored the fact that we were slowly drifiting off course. I had to practically beg him to initiate a small turn back toward the localizer.
I believe decision making is a much overlooked skill.I believe it's more a reminder of the importance of good decision making.
Please don't encourage people - for the very reasons you state in your last sentence.
You may be saying the same thing, but to add I think it’s also important to train for instrument failures, use of VORs and/or GPS for navigation and terrain avoidance, autopilot usage (if applicable), maneuvering for landing, and speaking with ATC for guidance, all at the same time while under the hood. The more structred training in a high workload, high stress environment, the better the potential outcome in a bad situation. This is why I advocate instrument training. PPL training touches on these topics briefly, but you are never forced to spend significant time learning them and typically they are not required to be practiced simultaneously. The 180 turn to safety that we learned as PPs is great if executed in time and weather isn’t dropping all around. Someday it may not be enough.See comments from Sam and Bob above. All pilots at the PP level and above are expected to be capable of control by reference to flight instruments alone. Anything less is a lack of basic competence. We should indeed be encouraging every pilot to fly by reference to instruments. I mean hood practice of course, so that when (not if) there is an inadvertent loss of visual horizon, it's no big deal.
The 180 turn to safety that we learned as PPs is great if executed in time and weather isn’t dropping all around. Someday it may not be enough.
That goes back to P.P.P.P.P.P.P.You may be saying the same thing, but to add I think it’s also important to train for instrument failures, use of VORs and/or GPS for navigation and terrain avoidance, autopilot usage (if applicable), maneuvering for landing, and speaking with ATC for guidance, all at the same time while under the hood. The more structred training in a high workload, high stress environment, the better the potential outcome in a bad situation. This is why I advocate instrument training. PPL training touches on these topics briefly, but you are never forced to spend significant time learning them and typically they are not required to be practiced simultaneously. The 180 turn to safety that we learned as PPs is great if executed in time and weather isn’t dropping all around. Someday it may not be enough.
In that case the VFR private pilot training in regard to appropriate weather decisions and having a "plan B" has been abandoned...........
Go back a few posts and look at the Dunning-Kruger chart. People need to see where they are on the chart, being brutally honest with themselves. If people are on the path to the valley of despair, it may be prudent to reevaluate their go/no-go decisions. Another good rule of thumb is, “if there is any doubt, then there is no doubt”.
Think about it…those Preflight decisions could be the difference between flying another day and not.
If the argument is that we don't need to be trained to get out of bad situations that could have been avoided by good decision making, then why teach stall and spin recovery? If pilots just followed their VFR training and never exceeded the critical angle of attack, then they wouldn't need to know how to recover from a stall or spin.
Sorry for the loss of your friend.I miss Mike. We became friends after I did the initial airworthiness inspection on his aircraft 07-03-2005. I been sadly following the accident since it occured.
View attachment 61975
I agree. I don’t think anyone is making that argument.I haven't seen any posts that in any way are making that argument. Please don't extend comments beyond their original intent just to press a point.
That's why I said "if". Sorry for the misunderstanding.I haven't seen any posts that in any way are making that argument. Please don't extend comments beyond their original intent just to press a point.
Dan, I respectfully disagree. I have sent a fair number of instrument students off to the DPE, and I always try to get them some actual IMC first even though it’s not required. To a person, they have all commented that it was not ‘no big deal’. Responses varied, of course. Some were just a bit apprehensive, others became very fixated on one gauge. To me the performance fall-off was almost always obvious. I made an exception for my very best student - he was ready, but there had only been the usual N. Cal vmc wx, but I signed him off anyway. He flew an hour north to the DPE, passed the test. But some overcast had moved in (nothing hard) so he decided to immediately use his new rating, file ifr. He later told me his ILS into his home field was the worst approach he had ever done, cdi needles all over the place. First time imc is not ‘no big deal’ for most pilots, even though the difference is ‘only’ psychological.I mean hood practice of course, so that when (not if) there is an inadvertent loss of visual horizon, it's no big deal.
Completely agree. Getting actual IMC time is definitely a benefit to new IFR pilots. It is always interesting to watch their faces and body language the first couple of actual IMC flights. I always try to get my students some actual during their training.Dan, I respectfully disagree. I have sent a fair number of instrument students off to the DPE, and I always try to get them some actual IMC first even though it’s not required. To a person, they have all commented that it was not ‘no big deal’. Responses varied, of course. Some were just a bit apprehensive, others became very fixated on one gauge. To me the performance fall-off was almost always obvious. I made an exception for my very best student - he was ready, but there had only been the usual N. Cal vmc wx, but I signed him off anyway. He flew an hour north to the DPE, passed the test. But some overcast had moved in (nothing hard) so he decided to immediately use his new rating, file ifr. He later told me his ILS into his home field was the worst approach he had ever done, cdi needles all over the place. First time imc is not ‘no big deal’ for most pilots, even though the difference is ‘only’ psychological.
First time imc is not ‘no big deal’ for most pilots, even though the difference is ‘only’ psychological.
How right you are. I have experienced most of this scenario and fortunately lived to talk about it.I find It interesting that this report doesn’t include details of the aircraft equipment. Someone above mentioned that it looked like the autopilot was in use. Sometimes this is shown by the accuracy of the tracking and height. So why the sudden loss of control?
Entering cloud at that height without pitot heat could quickly cause a blockage and airspeed failure.
often there’s more to these accidents than we’ll ever know.
However it still all comes down to doing good preflight weather checks, knowing your and your aircraft limitations, being prepared to turnaround early and having a plan B.
Did the plane have pitot heat? Seems to me an iced over pitot tube maybe leading to the overspeed as he descended.Very sad. I flew this very plane with the owner/builder Mike almost 20 years ago. He will be missed.