This is a really good, careful, and detailed analysis. It was very interesting to watch, as a pilot. Please do use your talents to analyze more incidents this way. You’re good at it!
Thank you, Mike. It's been a very challenging time for our family, but your analysis provides more closure and comfort in a situation no one could have ever anticipated. Sending hugs from North Dakota 💙
Nice work on this Mike. Thoughtful and insightful with every data point along the way. I'm a 2,400 hour guy who has flown singles, twins, turboprops, and now a Citation Jet -- Single Pilot, but I never tire of being reminded about Somatogravic Illusion, high density altitude, weight and balance. etc.. Analysis like this is invaluable to us all, so please keep doing these -- We appreciate your hard work putting this together. As a younger 'probably-nothing-will-go-wrong' pilot I flew single engine, at night, over the hills and mountains of Southern California many times but I would never do that now. Never. Doug was most likely a very conscientious pilot, but the helicopter time probably didn't prepare him for flying into that black hole with no ground references after takeoff. I was there once and it happens quickly and unexpectedly if you're not prepared. My heartfelt condolences to all those affected by this tragedy.
One thing you are missing in the analysis is that this plane was converted from 150 H.P. TO 180 H.P., so it had a better climb rate than a standard 140. I think this gave the pilot a false sense of confidence in the plane's climb ability. With 4 people in a Cherokee 140, I don't care how much horsepower you have, you will be over gross weight wIth the tanks filled to the tabs (36 gallons.) He probably flew like this in the past and got away with it in flatter areas. This time it was mountainous terrain. A circling climb over the airport would have been a better choice, so he could use the airport lights as ground reference and get to a safe altitude. I fly a 1973 140, and with 2 180 Lb. adults and 36 gallons of fuel, it climbs like a snail when there is any density altitude. Even with 180 HP, i would bet the short wings just can't support the plane with enough lift to climb more than 300 FPM when fully loaded.
Did most of my flight training in a stock mid 60's vintage 140 and I fully concur with your assessment. He was overloaded. Half full tanks still would have been asking a lot from the old girl at that altitude.. My instructor (who owned the 140) was against flying with anyone at all in the back seat if you expected to fill the tanks. 2 full grown adults and kids and luggage is way more than I would ever ask a 140 at that altitude.. that was sketchy at sea level even imho..
There are several other comments about the 180hp STC but we can't confirm if that was applied here, at least as far as the public record goes. I ran the calculations for a 180hp Archer separately (not really sure this is a fair comparison though; if anything it might be overly favorable), and even those did not meet the 456' per NM required for an instrument flight, and by all means this was an instrument flight in disguise under supposedly "clear skies" but was likely just as bad as being in the clouds from the unlit surroundings.
@@MalibuMikeCFII The registration info is somewhat conflicting it shows it had an o-320 but that it had 180HP, the 180hp would be an o-360. We had a pa-28 160 that had a 180hp STC and on it's registration info it was listed as having the correct o-360 and 180hp I am not sure how much if at all the STC would increase the 140's useful load but a PA-28 180 is normally over 1000lbs useful load. At that altitude according to a 180 POH at full gross it should climb at around 500fpm.
@@chaddthompson Again, not sure if comparing a PA28-181 is fair against a Cherokee 140, but even if we do assume that's a fair comparison AND the 180hp STC was applied, then at 14 degrees C at 4579' you climb at 76 knots at 487fpm, at a true airspeed of 83 knots, so you achieve 352 feet per NM, not close to the 456' per NM instrument departure requirement.
One very important technical piece: the speeds on the ADS-B track are GROUND speeds. Note at around the 14 minute mark when Mike zooms in, the adsbexchange software actually adds “ground” to the speed annotation. This means, since winds were basically calm, that these are TRUE Airspeed numbers on the ground track readout. Indicated Air Speed, which is what drives aircraft performance through the air, is about 8%, or 6 knots LESS, than each of the numbers presented on the ground track. Vy, or best-rate-of-climb speed for this aircraft, is 85 mph per the POH, or 74 knots, with a CLEAN wing. In my opinion, the IAS of the aircraft at the departure end of the runway associated with the 68 kt and 72 kt readouts of the ground track is therefore 62 kts and 66kts, respectively. For this Piper Cherokee, this is compatible with struggling in ground effect with 25 degrees of flap still out. Likely Col Larsen retracted the flaps after the turn. To get best performance for climb, an IAS of 74 kts should have been maintained, or GS/TAS (assuming no wind) of 80 kts.
Very detailed and easy to understand analysis. Landing at high density airports to refuel is usually uneventful, but getting back in the air is the tough part. Wish it didn't end this way for them.
Your DATA point analysis is one of the best that I have ever seen or read.....straight forward and makes a lot of sense....the Cherokee 140 is a "daytime", 2 passenger & fuel, fly & have fun type of aircraft IMO.....nice work!
Thank you for the update. My dad has flown his entire life and said he was never a fan of this plane. Amy was like a sister to me and we did everything together until I moved to Hawaii. Heading over on Sunday to say my goodbyes. 😔
Great job on this video Mike. Very intriguing information on such a sad unfortunate tragedy which could have been prevented. Condolences to Doug & his young family.
As a low lander, I was initially uncomfortable being in the mountains and high elevation for the first few times. The first time, I was flying near Winslow, AZ, and parts north and east. There were times where the ground was climbing at the same rate I was! The second time was flying into Sedona. When I decided to leave, density altitude had increased to something like 8500ft. I was in C172, but it was just me and a small bag. So no worries. But the difference in true airspeed to get to takeoff speed was eye opening. And I remembered to lean out during engine runup like I was taught. None of that business east of the Mississippi even on hot days.
I drive a 172R and I try to avoid taking 3 pax with me….let alone any bags….unless I am somewhere down between 1/2 and 3/4 full of gas. I won’t fly with full gross weight, and I try to avoid getting close to it. But, a key factor for me is that I fly for fun. I’m not trying to get somewhere.
I drove through Moab a few days after the crash. At one point south of Moab, I was passed by a pickup towing a flatbed trailer with this aircraft aboard. The only word to describe the fuselage is "crumpled," but crumpled from bottom to top, not front to back. There was no hope of survival. For those who have never visited Moab, the whole area is solid rock. The rock is full of contours. Ground elevations change rapidly and randomly - formed by water flows over millennia. The Moab area is also home to three certified Dark Sky Parks. Astronomers flock to the area on moonless nights because literally nowhere else on earth gets that dark. It gets dark in a way that most people have never experienced. Plus, the airport is several miles north of town and on a plateau. The city of Moab is not visible from the airport. So, on a night when the moon was barely at the level of the horizon and behind the pilot, it would have been like flying in a cave.
My first flying job fresh out of the service was in a Cherokee six flying for a power plant that had their own runway and hangar out at a remote site. Taking off one dark clear VFR night as I passed the last lights from the hangar I immediately lost all visual reference to the horizon. I was a commercial instrument pilot, I immediately transition to the instruments and held pitch attitude wings level straight out climb over the flat valley. After what seemed minutes but actually only a few seconds of VSI lag it finally showed a slow climb and altimeter increasing, I also noticed how startled I was accompanied by a knee shake on one side. If your knees aren’t shaking you haven’t really scared your self, I wasn’t prepared for that and didn’t anticipate. It happens fast, prepare mentally by briefing it and visually run through your mind where your going and what your going to do. RIP to this young family.
The "license to learn" they tell you when you get your private pilot license doesn't have to become "scare yourself straight" after trying a bunch of increasingly borderline dangerous things. Instead, grab an instructor and go fly this departure during the day, not fully loaded, and gently push the envelope, but not all things at once.
I had not heard about this tragedy until now, while I’m still reeling from the loss of Col McSpadden. I’m not a pilot but thank you, Mike, for your objective analysis.
I learned to fly at the Cessna company club in Wichita. Kansas is pretty flat. A lot of people head out to Colorado for vacation. The Club had a very hard and fast rule that you could not rent an aircraft for a mountain trip without having taken their mountain flying class. Also remember the 7 year old girl from California that was heavily promoted to be the youngest person to fly across the US. That was in 1996. Her instructor and father were with her. The aircraft crashed shortly after taking off from Cheyenne. It was a density altitude issue as well as bad weather and 'get home-itist.' They were from Half Moon Bay, CA and there were questions about the instructor's mountain flying experience.
High altitude takeoff, check. Night takeoff, check. Mountainous terrain, check. Max gross weight, check. I haven't looked at the climb charts and I didn't hear you mention DA but I'm willing to bet the airplane had close to zero climb ability. Even if it had 200-300 fpm climb ability per the charts he would have to fly a perfect profile to get that. That would become zero to negative in the turn with loss of lift. Really sad outcome here and totally avoidable. Just because a plane has four seats doesn't mean you can fill them all. As well, I wouldn't fly a Piper 140 in the mountains at night by myself much less with my entire family. A Piper 140 is like a day sailer. You don't go in deep water or rough seas. That plane is made for the lowlands on nice days. WTF was this guy thinking???
Very detailed and rational evaluation. Very disheartening and horrifying to look at a crash with this level of detail. Important lessons here, made all the more effective by that detail.
Like Clint said "A man has gotta know his limitations." To crash as a young, single inexperienced pilot is sad and bad, but to be this old with your family aboard is an avoidable tragedy.
@@scottw5315that’s a little judgmental. I try to offer a little grace in these circumstances recognizing I’m human and far from infallible. Unfortunately a momentary lapse in judgement can be deadly in aviation.
I'm blunt because I'm tired of reading these stories. I flew military and civilian flying is totally different. For one, military aircraft are just about all turbines and have loads of power. Piston singles don't compare on any level. Two, there is an ops department that works to not put you in situations that can be over your head. In civilian flying its all on you from flight planning to making sure the airplane is properly maintained. So many red flags on this one that I was really shocked to learn that he was an Army aviator. This was varsity level flying in an airplane not even close to being up to the task. Why? Sad loss indeed as this guy had a lot to contribute and a fine young family gone too. @@lorendjones
@@scottw5315I'm with you on this. People complain about being "smug" in the comments but it's one thing for it to be mechanical failure and another for it to be a stupid mistake that cost you and your family their lives! Sure it's sad! But crying about it doesn't fix anything or worrying about wether your comments are "smug" in the comment section on youtube like that one guy is worried about.. That airplane smashing into the ground wasn't worried about being smug.. If they would've made it out alive I guarantee it'd be a rude ass awaking he would have to deal with. He would definitely have to own up to it.
One added benefit of instrument training is the added planning you are taught to perform including departure procedure climb rates. When I was VFR only I simply avoided unknown fields at night, doubly so if there was surrounding terrain. Now that I have the instrument rating I always plan night flights as instrument and pay very special attention to approach and departure procedures. The instrument rating is not just about clouds.
Excellent analysis and presentation. There are so many density altitude accidents in the database. I read that this aircraft had an 180hp engine (modification?)...well that extra HP must have made him believe that he could make this flight happen. Before this aircraft took off, it was already an accident....I can't believe that someone didn't tell this pilot that a Cherokee 140 isn't made for flying in high terrain in the day much less at night. I flew between some trees (at sea level) with 2 adult passengers in a PA28-140 years ago and that was my last flight in an underpowered aircraft. The owner's handbook for a 140 states that the "rate of climb" for a 2150 pounds gross weight is 660 fpm at SL. I know for certain that number is deceiving since I barely climbed at SL on standard day. The Rate of Climb vs DA chart says that this aircraft would climb out at around 400 fpm at 6000' DA and would climb at 100 fpm at 14,000'. That can't be true, yet it's in the charts....perhaps in a brand new aircraft with a test pilot and a perfectly tuned and leaned engine....but most GA aircraft of this type are old and worn....they need a conservative pilot. What about rate of climb in a turn? Is there a chart or formula for calculating your rate of climb in a turn? How much vertical lift is actually lost when it is translated into a horizontal component? I can't find the answer in any GA text book or owner's manual. In GA aircraft, it's best to be ultra conservative and double everything or split it in half as a rule of thumb...and with your family onboard, add more pad for additional risk mgt. Split your performance numbers/Max GW in half, double your fuel reserves etc/double your weather minimums etc.
Just found the channel. Excellent analysis. I agree with you on your conclusions. They just finished a rather long leg of the their journey home. Why he would decide to fly during the night with his entire family and start another long leg towards home is baffling. Density altitude has claimed the life of many pilots. He should have got a hotel room for the night and tried in the daytime.
If that were true, they would have to depart very early in the AM as Density Altitude increases with just a few degrees added on know the known nightimes numbers. The failure to recognize was more likely it was already at or above gross weight even at sea level, much less around the 4,000 ft as calculated. Full tanks, 4 people + baggage is a lot to ask for a 140 even assuming it had the 0-360 conversion.
Thank you for a very good detailed report of the data that you broke down step by step. This is very likely what happened that can only be determined by the examination of the aircraft.
Good analysis. Sadly this is not the first nor will it be the last time this exact scenario plays out, and kills people. We struggle to invent new ways to crash, and unfortunately don't learn from the mistakes of others. Channels like yours will help us get the message out - good work!
This happens every year. Guys load up small planes with family and friends. Then get out in the mountains or weather or both. Their plane is barely capable and they stack the deck against themselves to the point of failure. Good lord, this is sad.
Thank you for covering this accident and remembering this family. I’m not a pilot but I am in TechOps. Flying these small a/c with weight restrictions and, unknown EGPWS/EFD, a go-around after takeoff may have been considered. All pilots I know say they aviate first. Condolences to the family.
Absolutely agree with the Somatogravic Illusion theory. Well done. The lack of airspeed loss points completely away from power loss IMHO. Mountains, Weather, Night: Pick only one.
A very thoughtful analysis. Being close to his final destination did the pilot acquire a case of get home itis? The delay and expense of an overnight stay at the local hotel might have been a factor. This was an IFR flight, was the pilot prepared to fly instruments after departure? Was he distracted and unable to complete a standard rate turn to the right? Was he startled by the almost zero climb rate and was the engine leaned properly? I saw the flight track and thought of the similar crash in Florida last year, also at night after the first turn over water with no horizon. A new subscriber.
"Get-there-itis" was my thought too. Juan Brown (the excellent Blancolirio channel) has warned about this many times before. Especially with your whole family on board, it would have been a no-brainer to go for a dinner, a motel, and then take off in the cool morning air in daylight. RIP to all involved.
You can switch the labels to geometric in the settings if the aircraft sends geometric altitude data. And yes by default the altitude you see is the pressure altitude as sent by the transponder.
Thanks for the analysis. I used to, 34 years ago, own one of these with the 180 STC that included a constant speed prop. Interpolating from my old notes, I estimate the rate of climb at 5500 ft density alt at full load about 500 fpm. You wouldn't get that in a tight turn however.Vx was 67 as I recall. Why the tight turn after TO? This would be disorienting at night and degrade climb performance. Why the high speed? I suspect this may turn out to be Visual Spacial Disorientation.
Dear Malibu Mike, @~6:40 You can log Night once the sun is 6° below the horizon or Evening Civil Twilight as published in the Air Almanac. Logging night currency is a different issue. From the overhead picture of the crash, it appears that he pancaked into the terrain and all occupants were killed by blunt force trauma. Notice the wings. It would have been great if you could overlap the two graphics. I think that you would find that he crashed into the ridge. During the day he would have been able to fly down the creek which flows to the Northwest and gained the altitude he needed to safely fly home. I've been into this airport twice during the afternoon, once is a SR-22Ta and one in a Baron. Very nice analysis. Aviationally yours, Bob.
The yellow vs black ADS-b ground track is ADS-b air mode vs ground mode in its data broadcast. Yellow doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft itself is airborne. Many transponders will automatically switch to air mode when it exceeds certain ground speed during takeoff.
I would never do a right hand turn out on that runway because it's only rising terrain. Also, I believe you have your approach plate inverted with respect to the actual orientation of the runway.
The standard instrument departure procedure calls for a right turn because otherwise you will hit rapidly rising terrain southwest of the airport. Yes, the only approach procedure is for runway 3 (opposite direction), but we use it here for obstacle point-outs that are not included on the VFR chart. Those obstacles off the departure end of runway 21 (only 1.5 to 2 miles out) are the precise reason the instrument departure calls for a right turn to heading 298 (northwest bound). This departure procedure assumes you cross the departure end of the runway at least 35 feet above the ground, climb at 456' per NM, then begin a right turn after climbing to 400 feet above the runway elevation. It seems here the pilot did not maintain a Vx (best angle of climb) climb rate due to somatogravic illusion and disorientation, with a possibility of being preoccupied about terrain warnings that might have been going off if a GPS was installed (extremely common to have a GPS but not required). Exacerbating was the inability to climb at 456' per NM.
If only they had waited until morning, taken off into the beauty that surrounds Moab, and been imprinted with scenic views that last a lifetime. Instead -- they take off into the darkness with "nothing to see..."
Or just went north east out of phoenix to lowlands then north, never having to go above 9500 feet. They would have been out of the mountains in daylight, maybe an hour longer flight and poor climb wouldn't be as much as a factor.
Great job explaining this. Venice Fl. VNC. Last year and a half , 2 Pipers departed to the west into the dark Gulf of Mexico. Crashed , 7 fatalities . ☹️
You did an excellent job, Mike, of explaining the limitations of the integration of instruments with contact flying. While night in the desert points to the advantages of using both instrument indications and outside the airplane reference, IFR and VFR does not mix well. When we lose the guarantee of safe and legal airspeed, altitude, and procedural track (IFR), we enter the maneuvering flight world where maximum use of level in low ground effect acceleration, pitch to just over any obstructions for cruise climb rather than Vy, and down drainage egress are sometimes (actually always) critical to good energy management. You caught the possible failure to lean to max RPM before takeoff problem in the mountains, actually anywhere, problem. The O-320 150 or 160 hp Lycoming, the 0-360 180 hp Cherokee engine, and the O-540 235 hp in Dakota are all carburetor engines that want lots of fuel to crank and then want to idle and run lean. I flew 3500 mile pipeline loops all over the midwest and west and always leaned to max for takeoff regardless of the elevation. While at Moab it is common to get an extra 300 rpm, we get only 50 or even less down low. The engine runs much better lean regardless of the rpm increase and for a disorganized pilot like me, default leaning prevents pitifully poor performance. Night should require an instrument rating and currency. His recorded track and use of the procedural turn seem to indicate he was using instruments as well as contact reference, which was good. Caught between the two techniques, integrated, however degrades the full safety of either. Night, for me, is IFR. Day, for me, is contact flying only. But then I spent 17,000 hours at 200' or below crop dusting and patrolling pipeline. It definitely gave me low altitude rather than the more common high altitude orientation. We takeoff VFR with both vertical and horizontal space available limitations and thus are in the maneuvering flight world. Even thinking of flying night contact is scary. Again, a really thorough evaluation. Thanks Mike. We need good early evaluation so as to perhaps learn something about how to better prepare ourselves for various situations.
Interesting analysis, cant wait to see how it stacks up against NTSB reports. Complacency, as we all know who fly regularly, is a constant battle. Experience seems to work against us sometimes. I still have to remind myself how important it is to not skip steps in our checklists, including checking my own attitude. He was likely tired and wanting to get home. I have been there. One thing I would add, aircraft info shows he had older Bendix King equipment, with likely no terrain warning on board, no synthetic vision, unless he had an Ipad, which I would not depend on for my life anyways. My home airport is 4600 so for me this would have been a normal flight and so I know what to expect, but time and time again, I have seen other pilots who have moderate to little experience with density alt, underestimate its effects. I learned my lesson when I was at 9k plus density alt with high temps, how even a SR22T can struggle under the wrong conditions. There was a few moments of utter disbelief, where I was in a momentary shock, as I watched the mountain ridges getting closer as my climb rate was halved before I decided to do some circling climbs. My own son turned to me and said, “Are we going to crash?”. My simple mistake? My wife had been asking me questions while I had been doing the flight planning and take off calculations, so I got distracted. Now, I make sure I am alone when doing all flight preps and double check them against ForeFlight figures. If I am interrupted, I go back to the beginning and start all over again. Really tragic ending for this family but hopefully we can all learn from it.
I read that the 140 had been upgraded with a 180HP engine?? I don't think that would change the performance as much as you'd hope though. Regardless, what was he thinking taking his family flying at night in the mountains at the edge of the performance curve? He must have had an instrument rating but that's not much use if you are struggling to get into the air !
Very tragic! May this family RIP. Astonishingly poor aeronautical decision making on this one and he wasn't an inexperienced pilot. It would have been very risky during the day but in the dark, almost a death wish. They were still over 600 NM from ND and all of it with high terrain. Love or hate him, Dan Gryder is right, night, IMC, ice or terrain.
I`ve got 10-15 hrs. in Cherokee 140`s and am disgusted that this pilot took his family to their deaths. It`s a very anemic airplane and mountain flying is not for amateurs.
All bout how you use it. It's an excellent 2 person trainer. It can even be a good cross country machine if you are by the book with the performance and density altitude charts. But all that stuff is just waste paper if you have any engine trouble at night over the mountains.
We don't know for sure if he had the 180hp engine STC -- official word on that will likely be included in the NTSB preliminary report that will come out in about a week's time.
Having been an active aviator and instructor for almost a half century, I’m still amazed by the smug condemnation that gets thrown about after a tragedy like this one. I prefer to just learn what I can from the mistakes of others and pray my human fallibility doesn’t allow me to make similar mistakes in the future. Prayers for their extended families.
I never cease to be amazed at the lack of accountability that is afforded to people in the aviation industry. If I killed four people while driving a car do you think society would just accept my human fallability and learn from my mistakes. No, I'd end up in a courtroom, vilified and held to account for my actions and end up serving serious jail time.
@@jb-xc4oh are of the opinion this aviator hasn't paid a sufficient price for his errors in judgment? I would think his life and those of his family might be sufficient, but it sounds like that's not enough for you, that his memory must be pilloried in the public square. Personally, I'm satisfied learning from others' mistakes.
No sir. This man deserves every bit of criticism aimed at him. . He broke about every rule in the book and killed 3 people in the process including 2 young children who had no say in the matter. He did it in a manner that bordered on criminal negligence. Smug condemnation?....... Hardly.
@@lorendjones This wasn't "a mistake". This was NUMEROUS mistakes violating basic aeronautical safety procedures. And no, I have never not one time made this many mistakes on a departure. Or I very likely wouldn't be here either.
I appreciate this careful early analysis. It’s a wonderful way to honor the legacy of Richard McSpadden whose videos have contributed so much to the interest of safe GA.
Mike you could be correct in your assessment but I have flown out of Moab many times and have experienced the same problem . You have to understand there is mountain layers of wind we had high winds sat ,Sunday , heavy storm Sunday night Monday storm , the front coming in Sunday night had raging winds aloft with wind sheer . I have experienced the winds sheer in this area flying a T206 climbing out at 1000 fpm full power and the rug pulled climbing into winds aloft wind sheer and falling nose up full power 4000 fpm 500 ft left by Time we turned back to airport landed (cleaned shorts out ), weather that day clear below 10000 msl minimal wind at airport. At night we would have been goners . After that experience now we are quick to respond and recognize the situation. My heart goes out to them . Under powered at night in the mountains climb into a mountain wave yikes.
Here is the real truth.We will never be able to stop this kind of tragedy completely.. Despite the preachings of CFI's like myself and this gentleman here, all of AOPA's seminars and those of others, all the articles and publications advocating safety, this man loaded up his family, and took off into a very bad situation. Why? Ego. There is a certain segment of the pilot community who thinks they are invincible. The John Kennedy accident comes to mind. You cannot stop or penetrate ego. We haven't been able to stop it in the last 43 years I've been in aviation. It is not illegal to be an egotistical fool, and many times results in the deaths of innocent people. This will happen again.
I'm going with sheer stupidity rather than ego. This flight had red flags everywhere from the airplane to the night takeoff in mountainous terrain to an overloaded airplane and he walked by them all.
@@scottw5315 100% agree all the red flags were there. But what we know about this guy.....military pilot was he not? Owned a business. Senator. Oh wait....no brains required there. Hey you could be right but this guy doesn't sound that dum. To me this is classic ego/get home/I got this. I know the type. Flew w them on flight reviews. They were all smiles until I started asking what our take off roll would be. Climb rate. Which are the gyro instruments? Where's the ammeter? What does it tell you? What are VFR wx mins in class C ? They looked at me like I was nuts. Then we went flying and it was ugly. And when I wouldn't sign them off the ego driven anger let loose. I usually never saw them again. This guy fits that profile to a T and his family paid with their lives.
It's unknown whether the 180 hp STC was performed on the accident aircraft; that isn't public knowledge. However I recalculated the takeoff performance assuming an 180hp Archer and the climb rate improved, but I'm not sure whether that's a fair comparison to the Cherokee with that STC. And even then, it still didn't provide the 456' per NM required for instrument obstacle clearance. All in all, the loading and 180hp vs 150hp is only 1 of the 3 core links in the accident chain here. VFR into IMC and somatogravic illusion are the other two that played a huge role here as well. I'm not sure we will ever be able to reverse engineer the data to see if a Vx climb would have led them to safety, without some clear performance numbers from an identically loaded and performing aircraft. Also we don't know if the mixture setting was correct either; we can hopefully infer that from the aircraft wreckage.
@@azsteinw2 I think that is the shadow of an airplane that can be seen 1750 feet to the southwest of the shadow. I say "i think" because, if you look at the shadows cast by the transmission-line towers, they point only slightly north of east and also show that the sun is quite high in the sky. I think the distance and direction between the airplane and the shadow is a result of the picture not being taken all at once, but by the natural scanning that comes from the satellite's motion. You can see a similar effect in the color separation of the airplane's image, which is due to the satellite's red, green and blue sensors not all scanning over the airplane at the same time, and the airplane moving between them doing so. I can't figure out what sort of airplane it is - maybe a glider?
"...likely had an instrument rating..." If so, was it current? Why did he attempt this flight VFR at night? Filing an instrument plan would have provided an additional measure of safety for this flight, but I''d bet he hadn't even filed a VFR plan or requested flight following from Denver Center. Bottom line: This airplane didn't have the required performance, and the pilot couldn't see terrain. If I had to do this VFR (which I wouldn't).I'd circle the airport in a couple of 360's to gain as much altitude as possible and burn off some fuel weight. Excellent analysis. Many thanks.
Looking at all the data points, it is quite hard to tell the elevation of the crash site, just because each transponder is going to have a different error offset from the other. My best estimation is that it is somewhere between 0 and 200 ft above the airport elevation. It is fair to estimate that the helicopter at one point did a low hover over the runway and that altitude looks very comparable to where it landed near the crash site.
I stopped for fuel at this airport one day in a C172 with my brother. Took off this runway and it was very nerve racking in the day and you have to turn to avoid the hills of sandstone. No way at night!
Sounds like a case of ‘we need to get home tonight’ over-taking judgement. Too many risk factors stacked against him. Tragic, especially for the children who didn’t have a say in the decision to go.
Interesting. One minor critique: At 19:45 Malibu Mike cites the Kobe Bryant helicopter crash as an example of somatogravic illusion. The Bryant flight was an example of a "graveyard spiral". Where the pilot thinks the aircraft is level and pitches up. But in reality the aircraft is not level, but banking, and his "pitching up" drives the aircraft into a downward spiral. Somatographic illusion usually happens on a go-around when there are no visual cues. The feeling created by the plane both accelerating and pitching up at the same time, leads the pilot to believe the pitch is too high and that a stall is going to occur. The pilot then pushes forward on the yoke and, unknowingly, puts the plane in a nose down pitch attitude to (he believes) lessen the upward pitch. An example of this is the Air Atlas 3591 crash in Houston.
"Graveyard Spiral" is a failed recovery pattern that typically results from a cocktail of both somatogravic illusion (the vertical component) and "the leans" where your body disagrees with the bank angle of the aircraft as indicated by the instruments (the horizontal component). Typically with a Graveyard Spiral you see a turn that continues to tighten, and I don't believe the Kobe Bryant crash was a very good example of that. The somatogravic illusion typically results in a leveling-off or pitching-down behavior, being misled by the inner ear from your acceleration that you are tipping backwards when you actually are doing the opposite. A steepening bank can accompany this pattern. But the Graveyard Spiral is typically seen as a spiral, not an arc. I think these are just esoteric semantics for cocktails of disorientation, but I think the overall point here is that the term "Graveyard Spiral" is not an illusion in and of itself, it is a failed attempt at a recovery after being subjected to illusions.
Well done review. Figured this was a weight issue plus altitude. Scott Perdue made mention about mountain flying and training before you go. This guy really stacked everything against him and his family.
0ld CFI here... I shudder at this story, because through my years (first issue in 1971) I've seen so many like it. The 140 is basically a two person plus moderate baggage airplane for any circumstances other than daytime VFR at low density altitudes, and long runways. It's a very common trainer, I have lots of time in the right seat flying with nothing but the pilot and me on board... And it doesn't impress at that. All the risk factors stacked up here and family on board... I just don't know what to say because what I want to say cannot be said here. What do you say to a dead man who killed his whole family? What is inexplicable is that he was a high-time helicopter pilot. I don't understand how someone with that experience could make these judgement errors.
The FAA registration info states an O-320 (150hp) although it's hard to know if or when that would be updated if the STC was performed. Based on 180 hp Archer performance numbers, it still does not achieve 456' per NM, but it would be less dangerous for sure. Then the new temptation would become the normalization of deviance to slightly overload the airplane ("because it can handle it") and get away with it until this demanding situation comes up. It's hard to speculate on the engine mods given only publicly available information.
LOL at almost this exact point in time I thought about what it would be like to work for the NTSB. You literally read my mind from thousands of miles away at this precise moment.🤣
Wow I learnt so much from this one video ⚠️ You have a new subscriber. An even worse scenario from this airport would be an engine failure at night, probably non survivable so why would anyone even attempt this in a single engine AC ??? It also begs the question ...... Should there be final decision by the airport manager/air traffic whether a particular aircraft can take off or not ? (given the weight and balance data and known aircraft performance figures for a given airfield elevation ) Thoughts ??
There have been accidents where high-performance (think: almost a jet) have been taxiing to take off, covered in ice (not properly deiced), with the runway having 6 inches of unplowed snow, and the airport manager has said "This is not a good idea, you should not go fly" and they proceed to crash off the end of the runway and kill everyone on board. That's an extreme example but has happened. The PIC (Pilot In Command) has the final authority for the safety of flight, and so it's important the pilot take that authority very seriously and always err on the side of caution. Definitely one consideration that the PIC must make is, "If I lose my engine shortly after takeoff, what is the plan here?" If the plan is to land into terrain that you can't see, that sounds like a case for waiting until the next day to depart. However for most single-engine airplanes there will likely be a short 1-2 minute window after takeoff where the airplane is very vulnerable to engine failures and not having many options, but having daylight is a huge advantage.
No margin-of-safety in this incident. 1) Fatigue. 3 hour flight from Scottsdale, likely at high cabin altitudes around 8000 feet or more. 6 hour flight ahead to Bismarck, with even higher altitudes possibly required. Was there supplemental oxygen on board? AIM recommends supp O2 above 5000’. 2). Night, single piloted, single engine over terrain and very forbidding country. Where do you go with an engine failure? Even, say, a voltage regulator failure? You have 30 minutes at night to get it down before your battery goes. 3) Inadequate climb performance at this DA with this load. No margin of safety. 4) Pilot may have been instrument rated, but did he have instrument currency or recency of experience? 5). The Black Hole scenario for this takeoff is an extreme challenge for an instrument rated, instrument current pilot. 5) The POH numbers from 1966 in this case are demonstrated on a brand new airplane with a test pilot at the controls. What will YOUR 57 year old airplane do? Do you know? Have you test flown it against the POH numbers? 6). As Mike mentioned, the aircraft has probably slipping through the air, requiring right rudder, at the departure end of the runway. Out-of-balanced flight kills climb performance. Again, Martin of Safety. If you don’t have a 25% to 50% margin above the POH performance numbers, reconsider. Yes, if flown at all, this flight should have been a daytime flight with a very fresh pilot. Very sad, my condolences to the family and friends. Margin of safety, people, margin of safety.
Excellent analysis. One thing I also noticed, if you look at the local area in Google Earth 3D and zoom in to the airport you can see that the area is like a fishbowl. I would not tried to fly out of there at night.
Factual analysis, consistent hypotheses. Now we wait for NTSB mechanical analysis. Sadly, biggest worry here is failure of pre-flight planning to consider aircraft performance at this density altitude. God help all the single 4 and 6 cylinder pilots flying at night in the mountains.
The gas tank in that aircraft has a tab and a full tank position, being the gas tank is full all the way to the tank's top. Most operators only fill their gas tank to the tab, not topped off because if you top it off it is very easily over grossed when you load the passengers. If he filled the tank, guaranteed he was over grossed with his wife and children. onboard. That airplane by itself, has a CG that is very forward, so in this case it is a good thing. The more weight the less climb performance. Density altitud will play a defining role in performance as well. You must lean the engine, after you apply full power on the runway and then release brakes to commence your take off run, because of the altitude. The good plan here is to climb in a spiraling track over the field until you have enough altitude to clear obstacles enroute, it might take 10 mins to do this or more. In my experience you must take the numbers in the manual in a conservative manner. Not a good operation for the conditions at night time. Good info!!
Agreed, a VCOA (Visual Climb Over the Airport) is also a good strategy, but if you're struggling to climb in the first place and it's practically instrument conditions because of the dark surroundings, I wouldn't recommend a VCOA here. VCOA's can also disturb your inner ear balance system from constantly being in a turn, and as others have pointed out, you will not climb as fast during the turn portion of the maneuver.
@@MalibuMikeCFII Exactly. He wasn't even able to visually climb right after takeoff. He apparently crashed not far from the airport. How would he be able to safely do a VCOA?
Deck stacked against them before taking off reminds me of many years ago when I was a young wx forecaster I briefed an AF Aero Club guy who was flying his family. I showed him the line of TS along his route and I thought he had decided to wait. But right at the end of the shift the base ops folks across the lobby got a call that he was lost off radar. They found the wreckage and he his wife and 2 kids scattered over many miles. They got sucked into a TS and torn apart at high altitude. He was never going to get through that line. In fact several years later his other kid who was not onboard sued the Aero Club for letting him take off with that forecast.
It seems with the light winds that the pilot could have taken off in the opposite direction. Had he done so, after takeoff he would have turned left and followed the highway while climbing. Or just waited until first light and make it easier with colder air and enough light to see the terrain. It is just another reminder that we are human. My deepest condolences to the family.
Just a sidenote: Pilots are setting the mixture of the engine manually!?! Since by far over half a century technology takes this away from the operator in cars - hundert of million cars without any flaw. Why to give this extra but unneeded workload to pilots?
It's a complicated answer. There is a reason our small planes are stuck in the 1950s like the cars we left in Cuba. Over regulation from government and our feral legal industry keep our manufacturers from daring to innovate. The costs to get through the FAA and liability insurance costs make it so.
@@scottw5315 Wrong: It is the American industry avoiding progress at any costs. Without Airbus challenging the American cartel we would still fly with 4 persons in a jet's cockpit ....
Boy you're a fun one. F. Lee Bailey, look him up or not I don't care. He owned Enstrom Helicopter back in the day. He said liability costs doubled his cost of manufacturing. A new Cessna 172 is 300k or so. That is way too expensive for most of us hence very few are made. Our GA fleet is old and getting older with only about a thousand new piston engined planes being produced per year for worldwide delivery. It is essentially dead. Experimental or homebuilt aircraft have thrived over the decades with the 51% rule. Look it up or not, I don't care. Homebuilts are relatively immune to lawsuits as they are licensed experimental, amateur built. So, the kit manufacturers have been free to innovate and they have. I have owned several. A Glasair or Lancair approached the speeds of WWII era fighters decades ago. That's innovation and improvement. Airbus? What has that to do with anything?@@peterebel7899
@@TheRayDog In parts agreed: 1. GA Prozess in America is dead since many decades 2. The American lawyer system (better to say the set of laws and businesses going alongside) is killing progress - and more. But: - Why do you think is this affecting GA but not luxury cars? - Why do you see the Democrats killing everything when the Republicans are dominating the country across all those decades? Chinese GA will take over the world's markets to give progress a chance.
The surface winds were light and variable, only a few knots as shown in the video from the METAR reports. As also stated in the video, the airplane seemed to level off and begin a slight descent which is consistent with a normally operating engine at full power, but highly likely there was disorientation and the pilot being unaware of the level off and descent.
Looks like it was airborne 2 minutes. Seems like with normal power it would have climbed 600 feet. After refueling at a strange airport I always suspect and check vigorously for fuel contamination
This is a really good, careful, and detailed analysis. It was very interesting to watch, as a pilot. Please do use your talents to analyze more incidents this way. You’re good at it!
Very impressive, thoughtful, and well- presented analysis young sir.
14000 hr G650 pilot and instructor here.
You will have a great career in aviation
Thank you, Mike. It's been a very challenging time for our family, but your analysis provides more closure and comfort in a situation no one could have ever anticipated. Sending hugs from North Dakota 💙
I am so sorry!
I'm not a pilot and so I very much appreciate your explanations as you went through this incident. Thank you.
Nice work on this Mike. Thoughtful and insightful with every data point along the way. I'm a 2,400 hour guy who has flown singles, twins, turboprops, and now a Citation Jet -- Single Pilot, but I never tire of being reminded about Somatogravic Illusion, high density altitude, weight and balance. etc.. Analysis like this is invaluable to us all, so please keep doing these -- We appreciate your hard work putting this together. As a younger 'probably-nothing-will-go-wrong' pilot I flew single engine, at night, over the hills and mountains of Southern California many times but I would never do that now. Never. Doug was most likely a very conscientious pilot, but the helicopter time probably didn't prepare him for flying into that black hole with no ground references after takeoff. I was there once and it happens quickly and unexpectedly if you're not prepared. My heartfelt condolences to all those affected by this tragedy.
One thing you are missing in the analysis is that this plane was converted from 150 H.P. TO 180 H.P., so it had a better climb rate than a standard 140. I think this gave the pilot a false sense of confidence in the plane's climb ability. With 4 people in a Cherokee 140, I don't care how much horsepower you have, you will be over gross weight wIth the tanks filled to the tabs (36 gallons.) He probably flew like this in the past and got away with it in flatter areas. This time it was mountainous terrain. A circling climb over the airport would have been a better choice, so he could use the airport lights as ground reference and get to a safe altitude. I fly a 1973 140, and with 2 180 Lb. adults and 36 gallons of fuel, it climbs like a snail when there is any density altitude. Even with 180 HP, i would bet the short wings just can't support the plane with enough lift to climb more than 300 FPM when fully loaded.
Did most of my flight training in a stock mid 60's vintage 140 and I fully concur with your assessment. He was overloaded. Half full tanks still would have been asking a lot from the old girl at that altitude.. My instructor (who owned the 140) was against flying with anyone at all in the back seat if you expected to fill the tanks. 2 full grown adults and kids and luggage is way more than I would ever ask a 140 at that altitude.. that was sketchy at sea level even imho..
There are several other comments about the 180hp STC but we can't confirm if that was applied here, at least as far as the public record goes. I ran the calculations for a 180hp Archer separately (not really sure this is a fair comparison though; if anything it might be overly favorable), and even those did not meet the 456' per NM required for an instrument flight, and by all means this was an instrument flight in disguise under supposedly "clear skies" but was likely just as bad as being in the clouds from the unlit surroundings.
@@MalibuMikeCFII The registration info is somewhat conflicting it shows it had an o-320 but that it had 180HP, the 180hp would be an o-360. We had a pa-28 160 that had a 180hp STC and on it's registration info it was listed as having the correct o-360 and 180hp
I am not sure how much if at all the STC would increase the 140's useful load but a PA-28 180 is normally over 1000lbs useful load. At that altitude according to a 180 POH at full gross it should climb at around 500fpm.
@@chaddthompson Again, not sure if comparing a PA28-181 is fair against a Cherokee 140, but even if we do assume that's a fair comparison AND the 180hp STC was applied, then at 14 degrees C at 4579' you climb at 76 knots at 487fpm, at a true airspeed of 83 knots, so you achieve 352 feet per NM, not close to the 456' per NM instrument departure requirement.
totally agree with your assessment. Loaded plane, HDA, moutain bowl, and nighttime. Gives me the sweats. So very sad.
One very important technical piece: the speeds on the ADS-B track are GROUND speeds. Note at around the 14 minute mark when Mike zooms in, the adsbexchange software actually adds “ground” to the speed annotation. This means, since winds were basically calm, that these are TRUE Airspeed numbers on the ground track readout. Indicated Air Speed, which is what drives aircraft performance through the air, is about 8%, or 6 knots LESS, than each of the numbers presented on the ground track. Vy, or best-rate-of-climb speed for this aircraft, is 85 mph per the POH, or 74 knots, with a CLEAN wing. In my opinion, the IAS of the aircraft at the departure end of the runway associated with the 68 kt and 72 kt readouts of the ground track is therefore 62 kts and 66kts, respectively. For this Piper Cherokee, this is compatible with struggling in ground effect with 25 degrees of flap still out. Likely Col Larsen retracted the flaps after the turn. To get best performance for climb, an IAS of 74 kts should have been maintained, or GS/TAS (assuming no wind) of 80 kts.
Very detailed and easy to understand analysis. Landing at high density airports to refuel is usually uneventful, but getting back in the air is the tough part. Wish it didn't end this way for them.
Your DATA point analysis is one of the best that I have ever seen or read.....straight forward and makes a lot of sense....the Cherokee 140 is a "daytime", 2 passenger & fuel, fly & have fun type of aircraft IMO.....nice work!
Thank you for the update. My dad has flown his entire life and said he was never a fan of this plane. Amy was like a sister to me and we did everything together until I moved to Hawaii. Heading over on Sunday to say my goodbyes. 😔
Great job on this video Mike. Very intriguing information on such a sad unfortunate tragedy which could have been prevented. Condolences to Doug & his young family.
Excellent analysis of this accident. Best I’ve seen so far.
Thanks for the outstanding analysis Mike. Every video is like getting a refresher flight with you.
As a low lander, I was initially uncomfortable being in the mountains and high elevation for the first few times. The first time, I was flying near Winslow, AZ, and parts north and east. There were times where the ground was climbing at the same rate I was! The second time was flying into Sedona. When I decided to leave, density altitude had increased to something like 8500ft. I was in C172, but it was just me and a small bag. So no worries. But the difference in true airspeed to get to takeoff speed was eye opening. And I remembered to lean out during engine runup like I was taught. None of that business east of the Mississippi even on hot days.
I drive a 172R and I try to avoid taking 3 pax with me….let alone any bags….unless I am somewhere down between 1/2 and 3/4 full of gas. I won’t fly with full gross weight, and I try to avoid getting close to it. But, a key factor for me is that I fly for fun. I’m not trying to get somewhere.
Az pilots almost never get to fly full rich, 4000ft Density altitude on a cool 90 degree day in Phoenix is pretty common.
I drove through Moab a few days after the crash. At one point south of Moab, I was passed by a pickup towing a flatbed trailer with this aircraft aboard. The only word to describe the fuselage is "crumpled," but crumpled from bottom to top, not front to back. There was no hope of survival.
For those who have never visited Moab, the whole area is solid rock. The rock is full of contours. Ground elevations change rapidly and randomly - formed by water flows over millennia. The Moab area is also home to three certified Dark Sky Parks. Astronomers flock to the area on moonless nights because literally nowhere else on earth gets that dark. It gets dark in a way that most people have never experienced. Plus, the airport is several miles north of town and on a plateau. The city of Moab is not visible from the airport. So, on a night when the moon was barely at the level of the horizon and behind the pilot, it would have been like flying in a cave.
Good Analysis, Mike!
You've won my subscription...and I look forward to more detailed reports from you and NTSB.
Wonderful presentation. I know nothing on this subject but was able to follow along with no problem. Keep up the great work!!
My first flying job fresh out of the service was in a Cherokee six flying for a power plant that had their own runway and hangar out at a remote site.
Taking off one dark clear VFR night as I passed the last lights from the hangar I immediately lost all visual reference to the horizon. I was a commercial instrument pilot, I immediately transition to the instruments and held pitch attitude wings level straight out climb over the flat valley. After what seemed minutes but actually only a few seconds of VSI lag it finally showed a slow climb and altimeter increasing, I also noticed how startled I was accompanied by a knee shake on one side. If your knees aren’t shaking you haven’t really scared your self, I wasn’t prepared for that and didn’t anticipate.
It happens fast, prepare mentally by briefing it and visually run through your mind where your going and what your going to do.
RIP to this young family.
The "license to learn" they tell you when you get your private pilot license doesn't have to become "scare yourself straight" after trying a bunch of increasingly borderline dangerous things. Instead, grab an instructor and go fly this departure during the day, not fully loaded, and gently push the envelope, but not all things at once.
A superb and thorough initial analysis of the short flight and crash. Great job!!
I had not heard about this tragedy until now, while I’m still reeling from the loss of Col McSpadden. I’m not a pilot but thank you, Mike, for your objective analysis.
Wow! you are very thorough! Nice analysis. Its going to be interesting to see the official results.
First time in your channel. Great analysis with objectivity. I am an IFR student. I found great advice on this analysis.
I learned to fly at the Cessna company club in Wichita. Kansas is pretty flat. A lot of people head out to Colorado for vacation. The Club had a very hard and fast rule that you could not rent an aircraft for a mountain trip without having taken their mountain flying class.
Also remember the 7 year old girl from California that was heavily promoted to be the youngest person to fly across the US. That was in 1996. Her instructor and father were with her. The aircraft crashed shortly after taking off from Cheyenne. It was a density altitude issue as well as bad weather and 'get home-itist.' They were from Half Moon Bay, CA and there were questions about the instructor's mountain flying experience.
High altitude takeoff, check. Night takeoff, check. Mountainous terrain, check. Max gross weight, check. I haven't looked at the climb charts and I didn't hear you mention DA but I'm willing to bet the airplane had close to zero climb ability. Even if it had 200-300 fpm climb ability per the charts he would have to fly a perfect profile to get that. That would become zero to negative in the turn with loss of lift. Really sad outcome here and totally avoidable. Just because a plane has four seats doesn't mean you can fill them all. As well, I wouldn't fly a Piper 140 in the mountains at night by myself much less with my entire family. A Piper 140 is like a day sailer. You don't go in deep water or rough seas. That plane is made for the lowlands on nice days. WTF was this guy thinking???
A very thoughtful and sensitive analysis. Thank you.
Very informative. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and expertise.
Not a pilot but I appreciate your thoughtful, complete and well presented analysis.
Good video. Btw, your greenscreen is super clean, how do you do that and make it look so good?
Great breakdown Mike. Tragic beyond description. And fitting words about Richard McSpadden.
Very detailed and rational evaluation. Very disheartening and horrifying to look at a crash with this level of detail. Important lessons here, made all the more effective by that detail.
Excellent analysis and commentary. Thanks
A lot to learn from you in this video, thx!
Like Clint said "A man has gotta know his limitations." To crash as a young, single inexperienced pilot is sad and bad, but to be this old with your family aboard is an avoidable tragedy.
I bet his Army flight records show some real judgement issues that he got away with because he flew with co-pilots.
@@scottw5315that’s a little judgmental. I try to offer a little grace in these circumstances recognizing I’m human and far from infallible. Unfortunately a momentary lapse in judgement can be deadly in aviation.
I'm blunt because I'm tired of reading these stories. I flew military and civilian flying is totally different. For one, military aircraft are just about all turbines and have loads of power. Piston singles don't compare on any level. Two, there is an ops department that works to not put you in situations that can be over your head. In civilian flying its all on you from flight planning to making sure the airplane is properly maintained. So many red flags on this one that I was really shocked to learn that he was an Army aviator. This was varsity level flying in an airplane not even close to being up to the task. Why? Sad loss indeed as this guy had a lot to contribute and a fine young family gone too. @@lorendjones
@@scottw5315I'm with you on this. People complain about being "smug" in the comments but it's one thing for it to be mechanical failure and another for it to be a stupid mistake that cost you and your family their lives! Sure it's sad! But crying about it doesn't fix anything or worrying about wether your comments are "smug" in the comment section on youtube like that one guy is worried about.. That airplane smashing into the ground wasn't worried about being smug.. If they would've made it out alive I guarantee it'd be a rude ass awaking he would have to deal with. He would definitely have to own up to it.
@@scottw5315 sometimes bluntness comes off as hubris. Hopefully others will learn from these mistakes.
Great analysis based on known parameters...
Just subbed you...thx
One added benefit of instrument training is the added planning you are taught to perform including departure procedure climb rates. When I was VFR only I simply avoided unknown fields at night, doubly so if there was surrounding terrain. Now that I have the instrument rating I always plan night flights as instrument and pay very special attention to approach and departure procedures. The instrument rating is not just about clouds.
Excellent analysis and presentation. There are so many density altitude accidents in the database. I read that this aircraft had an 180hp engine (modification?)...well that extra HP must have made him believe that he could make this flight happen. Before this aircraft took off, it was already an accident....I can't believe that someone didn't tell this pilot that a Cherokee 140 isn't made for flying in high terrain in the day much less at night. I flew between some trees (at sea level) with 2 adult passengers in a PA28-140 years ago and that was my last flight in an underpowered aircraft. The owner's handbook for a 140 states that the "rate of climb" for a 2150 pounds gross weight is 660 fpm at SL. I know for certain that number is deceiving since I barely climbed at SL on standard day. The Rate of Climb vs DA chart says that this aircraft would climb out at around 400 fpm at 6000' DA and would climb at 100 fpm at 14,000'. That can't be true, yet it's in the charts....perhaps in a brand new aircraft with a test pilot and a perfectly tuned and leaned engine....but most GA aircraft of this type are old and worn....they need a conservative pilot. What about rate of climb in a turn? Is there a chart or formula for calculating your rate of climb in a turn? How much vertical lift is actually lost when it is translated into a horizontal component? I can't find the answer in any GA text book or owner's manual. In GA aircraft, it's best to be ultra conservative and double everything or split it in half as a rule of thumb...and with your family onboard, add more pad for additional risk mgt. Split your performance numbers/Max GW in half, double your fuel reserves etc/double your weather minimums etc.
Just found the channel. Excellent analysis. I agree with you on your conclusions. They just finished a rather long leg of the their journey home. Why he would decide to fly during the night with his entire family and start another long leg towards home is baffling. Density altitude has claimed the life of many pilots. He should have got a hotel room for the night and tried in the daytime.
If that were true, they would have to depart very early in the AM as Density Altitude increases with just a few degrees added on know the known nightimes numbers. The failure to recognize was more likely it was already at or above gross weight even at sea level, much less around the 4,000 ft as calculated. Full tanks, 4 people + baggage is a lot to ask for a 140 even assuming it had the 0-360 conversion.
This is excellent and extremely helpful. Thank you.
Thanks, Mike!
Thank you for a very good detailed report of the data that you broke down step by step. This is very likely what happened that can only be determined by the examination of the aircraft.
Good analysis. Sadly this is not the first nor will it be the last time this exact scenario plays out, and kills people. We struggle to invent new ways to crash, and unfortunately don't learn from the mistakes of others. Channels like yours will help us get the message out - good work!
This happens every year. Guys load up small planes with family and friends. Then get out in the mountains or weather or both. Their plane is barely capable and they stack the deck against themselves to the point of failure. Good lord, this is sad.
Blancolirio TH-cam channel has a great video on Density altitude and older aircraft. th-cam.com/video/kcfD1kd1tH4/w-d-xo.html
Thank you for this analysis, amazing job! I would love to listen to you analyze Kobe’s helicopter crash and other famous accidents.
Excellent breakdown. Subscribing and looking forward to more of these. 500 hour pilot working on my commercial.
Thank you for covering this accident and remembering this family. I’m not a pilot but I am in TechOps. Flying these small a/c with weight restrictions and, unknown EGPWS/EFD, a go-around after takeoff may have been considered. All pilots I know say they aviate first. Condolences to the family.
Wow. Great analysis. Well done.
Great analysis!
thank you for this helpful analysis
Absolutely agree with the Somatogravic Illusion theory. Well done. The lack of airspeed loss points completely away from power loss IMHO. Mountains, Weather, Night: Pick only one.
A contributing factor may be that any calculated climb rate is predicated on wings level, any time you bank for a turn that rate of climb decreases.
A very thoughtful analysis. Being close to his final destination did the pilot acquire a case of get home itis? The delay and expense of an overnight stay at the local hotel might have been a factor. This was an IFR flight, was the pilot prepared to fly instruments after departure? Was he distracted and unable to complete a standard rate turn to the right? Was he startled by the almost zero climb rate and was the engine leaned properly? I saw the flight track and thought of the similar crash in Florida last year, also at night after the first turn over water with no horizon. A new subscriber.
"Get-there-itis" was my thought too. Juan Brown (the excellent Blancolirio channel) has warned about this many times before. Especially with your whole family on board, it would have been a no-brainer to go for a dinner, a motel, and then take off in the cool morning air in daylight. RIP to all involved.
Excellent summation!
What’s really sad is there is a Hilton Homewood Suites in Moab. Spend the night. Kids swim in the pool. Free breakfast and head out in the morning.
10/7/23;..very detailed analysis Mike, 'good job"! You & Juan Brown make a great analytical team. Stay safe & carry on!👍
Welll said! Proper leaning at altitude is absolutely essential!
You can switch the labels to geometric in the settings if the aircraft sends geometric altitude data.
And yes by default the altitude you see is the pressure altitude as sent by the transponder.
Hi, interesting analysis, thanks. Terribly sad outcome.
What software are you using?
Thanks for the analysis. I used to, 34 years ago, own one of these with the 180 STC that included a constant speed prop. Interpolating from my old notes, I estimate the rate of climb at 5500 ft density alt at full load about 500 fpm. You wouldn't get that in a tight turn however.Vx was 67 as I recall.
Why the tight turn after TO? This would be disorienting at night and degrade climb performance. Why the high speed? I suspect this may turn out to be Visual Spacial Disorientation.
Dear Malibu Mike, @~6:40 You can log Night once the sun is 6° below the horizon or Evening Civil Twilight as published in the Air Almanac. Logging night currency is a different issue. From the overhead picture of the crash, it appears that he pancaked into the terrain and all occupants were killed by blunt force trauma. Notice the wings. It would have been great if you could overlap the two graphics. I think that you would find that he crashed into the ridge. During the day he would have been able to fly down the creek which flows to the Northwest and gained the altitude he needed to safely fly home. I've been into this airport twice during the afternoon, once is a SR-22Ta and one in a Baron. Very nice analysis. Aviationally yours, Bob.
The yellow vs black ADS-b ground track is ADS-b air mode vs ground mode in its data broadcast. Yellow doesn't necessarily mean the aircraft itself is airborne. Many transponders will automatically switch to air mode when it exceeds certain ground speed during takeoff.
Spacial disorientation is a strange experience. Until you experience it, it is hard to understand
I would never do a right hand turn out on that runway because it's only rising terrain. Also, I believe you have your approach plate inverted with respect to the actual orientation of the runway.
The standard instrument departure procedure calls for a right turn because otherwise you will hit rapidly rising terrain southwest of the airport. Yes, the only approach procedure is for runway 3 (opposite direction), but we use it here for obstacle point-outs that are not included on the VFR chart. Those obstacles off the departure end of runway 21 (only 1.5 to 2 miles out) are the precise reason the instrument departure calls for a right turn to heading 298 (northwest bound). This departure procedure assumes you cross the departure end of the runway at least 35 feet above the ground, climb at 456' per NM, then begin a right turn after climbing to 400 feet above the runway elevation.
It seems here the pilot did not maintain a Vx (best angle of climb) climb rate due to somatogravic illusion and disorientation, with a possibility of being preoccupied about terrain warnings that might have been going off if a GPS was installed (extremely common to have a GPS but not required). Exacerbating was the inability to climb at 456' per NM.
Great analysis and explanation. I learned a lot from your video, including what you just helped me understand here. Great work.
If only they had waited until morning, taken off into the beauty that surrounds Moab, and been imprinted with scenic views that last a lifetime. Instead -- they take off into the darkness with "nothing to see..."
Or just went north east out of phoenix to lowlands then north, never having to go above 9500 feet. They would have been out of the mountains in daylight, maybe an hour longer flight and poor climb wouldn't be as much as a factor.
Great job explaining this. Venice Fl. VNC. Last year and a half , 2 Pipers departed to the west into the dark Gulf of Mexico. Crashed , 7 fatalities . ☹️
You did an excellent job, Mike, of explaining the limitations of the integration of instruments with contact flying. While night in the desert points to the advantages of using both instrument indications and outside the airplane reference, IFR and VFR does not mix well. When we lose the guarantee of safe and legal airspeed, altitude, and procedural track (IFR), we enter the maneuvering flight world where maximum use of level in low ground effect acceleration, pitch to just over any obstructions for cruise climb rather than Vy, and down drainage egress are sometimes (actually always) critical to good energy management. You caught the possible failure to lean to max RPM before takeoff problem in the mountains, actually anywhere, problem. The O-320 150 or 160 hp Lycoming, the 0-360 180 hp Cherokee engine, and the O-540 235 hp in Dakota are all carburetor engines that want lots of fuel to crank and then want to idle and run lean. I flew 3500 mile pipeline loops all over the midwest and west and always leaned to max for takeoff regardless of the elevation. While at Moab it is common to get an extra 300 rpm, we get only 50 or even less down low. The engine runs much better lean regardless of the rpm increase and for a disorganized pilot like me, default leaning prevents pitifully poor performance.
Night should require an instrument rating and currency. His recorded track and use of the procedural turn seem to indicate he was using instruments as well as contact reference, which was good. Caught between the two techniques, integrated, however degrades the full safety of either. Night, for me, is IFR. Day, for me, is contact flying only. But then I spent 17,000 hours at 200' or below crop dusting and patrolling pipeline. It definitely gave me low altitude rather than the more common high altitude orientation. We takeoff VFR with both vertical and horizontal space available limitations and thus are in the maneuvering flight world. Even thinking of flying night contact is scary.
Again, a really thorough evaluation. Thanks Mike. We need good early evaluation so as to perhaps learn something about how to better prepare ourselves for various situations.
Interesting analysis, cant wait to see how it stacks up against NTSB reports. Complacency, as we all know who fly regularly, is a constant battle. Experience seems to work against us sometimes. I still have to remind myself how important it is to not skip steps in our checklists, including checking my own attitude. He was likely tired and wanting to get home. I have been there. One thing I would add, aircraft info shows he had older Bendix King equipment, with likely no terrain warning on board, no synthetic vision, unless he had an Ipad, which I would not depend on for my life anyways. My home airport is 4600 so for me this would have been a normal flight and so I know what to expect, but time and time again, I have seen other pilots who have moderate to little experience with density alt, underestimate its effects. I learned my lesson when I was at 9k plus density alt with high temps, how even a SR22T can struggle under the wrong conditions. There was a few moments of utter disbelief, where I was in a momentary shock, as I watched the mountain ridges getting closer as my climb rate was halved before I decided to do some circling climbs. My own son turned to me and said, “Are we going to crash?”. My simple mistake? My wife had been asking me questions while I had been doing the flight planning and take off calculations, so I got distracted. Now, I make sure I am alone when doing all flight preps and double check them against ForeFlight figures. If I am interrupted, I go back to the beginning and start all over again. Really tragic ending for this family but hopefully we can all learn from it.
I read that the 140 had been upgraded with a 180HP engine?? I don't think that would change the performance as much as you'd hope though.
Regardless, what was he thinking taking his family flying at night in the mountains at the edge of the performance curve? He must have had an instrument rating but that's not much use if you are struggling to get into the air !
Very tragic! May this family RIP. Astonishingly poor aeronautical decision making on this one and he wasn't an inexperienced pilot. It would have been very risky during the day but in the dark, almost a death wish. They were still over 600 NM from ND and all of it with high terrain. Love or hate him, Dan Gryder is right, night, IMC, ice or terrain.
I`ve got 10-15 hrs. in Cherokee 140`s and am disgusted that this pilot took his family to their deaths. It`s a very anemic airplane and mountain flying is not for amateurs.
All bout how you use it. It's an excellent 2 person trainer. It can even be a good cross country machine if you are by the book with the performance and density altitude charts. But all that stuff is just waste paper if you have any engine trouble at night over the mountains.
We don't know for sure if he had the 180hp engine STC -- official word on that will likely be included in the NTSB preliminary report that will come out in about a week's time.
A friend used to have a 180 Cherokee. He weighed 300# and flew it in Arizona. Worked for him.
Sad day when a whole family perished in a crash. Great analysis Mike!
Having been an active aviator and instructor for almost a half century, I’m still amazed by the smug condemnation that gets thrown about after a tragedy like this one. I prefer to just learn what I can from the mistakes of others and pray my human fallibility doesn’t allow me to make similar mistakes in the future. Prayers for their extended families.
I never cease to be amazed at the lack of accountability that is afforded to people in the aviation industry. If I killed four people while driving a car do you think society would just accept my human fallability and learn from my mistakes. No, I'd end up in a courtroom, vilified and held to account for my actions and end up serving serious jail time.
@@jb-xc4oh are of the opinion this aviator hasn't paid a sufficient price for his errors in judgment? I would think his life and those of his family might be sufficient, but it sounds like that's not enough for you, that his memory must be pilloried in the public square.
Personally, I'm satisfied learning from others' mistakes.
No sir. This man deserves every bit of criticism aimed at him. . He broke about every rule in the book and killed 3 people in the process including 2 young children who had no say in the matter. He did it in a manner that bordered on criminal negligence. Smug condemnation?....... Hardly.
@@blue81blue81 we'll keep that in mind next time you make a mistake.
@@lorendjones This wasn't "a mistake". This was NUMEROUS mistakes violating basic aeronautical safety procedures. And no, I have never not one time made this many mistakes on a departure. Or I very likely wouldn't be here either.
I appreciate this careful early analysis. It’s a wonderful way to honor the legacy of Richard McSpadden whose videos have contributed so much to the interest of safe GA.
Mike you could be correct in your assessment but I have flown out of Moab many times and have experienced the same problem . You have to understand there is mountain layers of wind we had high winds sat ,Sunday , heavy storm Sunday night Monday storm , the front coming in Sunday night had raging winds aloft with wind sheer . I have experienced the winds sheer in this area flying a T206 climbing out at 1000 fpm full power and the rug pulled climbing into winds aloft wind sheer and falling nose up full power 4000 fpm 500 ft left by Time we turned back to airport landed (cleaned shorts out ), weather that day clear below 10000 msl minimal wind at airport. At night we would have been goners . After that experience now we are quick to respond and recognize the situation.
My heart goes out to them . Under powered at night in the mountains climb into a mountain wave yikes.
Here is the real truth.We will never be able to stop this kind of tragedy completely.. Despite the preachings of CFI's like myself and this gentleman here, all of AOPA's seminars and those of others, all the articles and publications advocating safety, this man loaded up his family, and took off into a very bad situation. Why? Ego. There is a certain segment of the pilot community who thinks they are invincible. The John Kennedy accident comes to mind. You cannot stop or penetrate ego. We haven't been able to stop it in the last 43 years I've been in aviation.
It is not illegal to be an egotistical fool, and many times results in the deaths of innocent people. This will happen again.
I'm going with sheer stupidity rather than ego. This flight had red flags everywhere from the airplane to the night takeoff in mountainous terrain to an overloaded airplane and he walked by them all.
@@scottw5315 100% agree all the red flags were there. But what we know about this guy.....military pilot was he not? Owned a business. Senator. Oh wait....no brains required there. Hey you could be right but this guy doesn't sound that dum. To me this is classic ego/get home/I got this. I know the type. Flew w them on flight reviews. They were all smiles until I started asking what our take off roll would be. Climb rate. Which are the gyro instruments? Where's the ammeter? What does it tell you? What are VFR wx mins in class C ? They looked at me like I was nuts. Then we went flying and it was ugly. And when I wouldn't sign them off the ego driven anger let loose. I usually never saw them again. This guy fits that profile to a T and his family paid with their lives.
These people were my friends, please do not call him an egotistical fool
I learned a lot from this video.
good analysis... and video
Video by blanco stated he had a 180hp motor in the 140. Were your calculations based on that, or a stock 140 engine?
It's unknown whether the 180 hp STC was performed on the accident aircraft; that isn't public knowledge. However I recalculated the takeoff performance assuming an 180hp Archer and the climb rate improved, but I'm not sure whether that's a fair comparison to the Cherokee with that STC. And even then, it still didn't provide the 456' per NM required for instrument obstacle clearance.
All in all, the loading and 180hp vs 150hp is only 1 of the 3 core links in the accident chain here. VFR into IMC and somatogravic illusion are the other two that played a huge role here as well. I'm not sure we will ever be able to reverse engineer the data to see if a Vx climb would have led them to safety, without some clear performance numbers from an identically loaded and performing aircraft. Also we don't know if the mixture setting was correct either; we can hopefully infer that from the aircraft wreckage.
@@MalibuMikeCFII Thank you for looking into it. I wouldn't fly a family in a 140 regardless, especially at elevation at night.
So sad. Has anyone looked at google maps, a shadow of a plane is on the location of the crash site. Just sad all around. 😢
@@azsteinw2 I think that is the shadow of an airplane that can be seen 1750 feet to the southwest of the shadow.
I say "i think" because, if you look at the shadows cast by the transmission-line towers, they point only slightly north of east and also show that the sun is quite high in the sky. I think the distance and direction between the airplane and the shadow is a result of the picture not being taken all at once, but by the natural scanning that comes from the satellite's motion. You can see a similar effect in the color separation of the airplane's image, which is due to the satellite's red, green and blue sensors not all scanning over the airplane at the same time, and the airplane moving between them doing so.
I can't figure out what sort of airplane it is - maybe a glider?
"...likely had an instrument rating..." If so, was it current? Why did he attempt this flight VFR at night? Filing an instrument plan would have provided an additional measure of safety for this flight, but I''d bet he hadn't even filed a VFR plan or requested flight following from Denver Center.
Bottom line: This airplane didn't have the required performance, and the pilot couldn't see terrain.
If I had to do this VFR (which I wouldn't).I'd circle the airport in a couple of 360's to gain as much altitude as possible and burn off some fuel weight.
Excellent analysis. Many thanks.
ToyotaKTM
Do you know what the elevation of the crash site was? Did the helicopter land at 5000 ft.
Looking at all the data points, it is quite hard to tell the elevation of the crash site, just because each transponder is going to have a different error offset from the other. My best estimation is that it is somewhere between 0 and 200 ft above the airport elevation. It is fair to estimate that the helicopter at one point did a low hover over the runway and that altitude looks very comparable to where it landed near the crash site.
Do you know if there were any ATC communications with pilot after takeoff?
It's a non-towered field. No ATC except for Denver Control Center, which they would have needed more altitude and time to reach.
As a pilot with a lot of mountain experience a high time engine that is weak will also make a big difference for climb performance.
I stopped for fuel at this airport one day in a C172 with my brother. Took off this runway and it was very nerve racking in the day and you have to turn to avoid the hills of sandstone. No way at night!
Sounds like a case of ‘we need to get home tonight’ over-taking judgement. Too many risk factors stacked against him. Tragic, especially for the children who didn’t have a say in the decision to go.
Interesting. One minor critique: At 19:45 Malibu Mike cites the Kobe Bryant helicopter crash as an example of somatogravic illusion. The Bryant flight was an example of a "graveyard spiral". Where the pilot thinks the aircraft is level and pitches up. But in reality the aircraft is not level, but banking, and his "pitching up" drives the aircraft into a downward spiral. Somatographic illusion usually happens on a go-around when there are no visual cues. The feeling created by the plane both accelerating and pitching up at the same time, leads the pilot to believe the pitch is too high and that a stall is going to occur. The pilot then pushes forward on the yoke and, unknowingly, puts the plane in a nose down pitch attitude to (he believes) lessen the upward pitch. An example of this is the Air Atlas 3591 crash in Houston.
"Graveyard Spiral" is a failed recovery pattern that typically results from a cocktail of both somatogravic illusion (the vertical component) and "the leans" where your body disagrees with the bank angle of the aircraft as indicated by the instruments (the horizontal component). Typically with a Graveyard Spiral you see a turn that continues to tighten, and I don't believe the Kobe Bryant crash was a very good example of that. The somatogravic illusion typically results in a leveling-off or pitching-down behavior, being misled by the inner ear from your acceleration that you are tipping backwards when you actually are doing the opposite. A steepening bank can accompany this pattern. But the Graveyard Spiral is typically seen as a spiral, not an arc. I think these are just esoteric semantics for cocktails of disorientation, but I think the overall point here is that the term "Graveyard Spiral" is not an illusion in and of itself, it is a failed attempt at a recovery after being subjected to illusions.
Most informative video I’ve seen, after several hundred. Great job with explaining like a teacher all that goes into a small GA flight.
Doug was my friend, I've spent hundreds of hours in helicopters with him in multiple airframes. He was my commander in Iraq. I'm going to miss him.
I'm so sorry for your loss.
Well done review. Figured this was a weight issue plus altitude. Scott Perdue made mention about mountain flying and training before you go.
This guy really stacked everything against him and his family.
I think I’m going to do a review of this using Flight Simulator for visuals using the same conditions and aircraft. I’ll tag you in it for follow up.
0ld CFI here... I shudder at this story, because through my years (first issue in 1971) I've seen so many like it. The 140 is basically a two person plus moderate baggage airplane for any circumstances other than daytime VFR at low density altitudes, and long runways. It's a very common trainer, I have lots of time in the right seat flying with nothing but the pilot and me on board... And it doesn't impress at that. All the risk factors stacked up here and family on board... I just don't know what to say because what I want to say cannot be said here. What do you say to a dead man who killed his whole family?
What is inexplicable is that he was a high-time helicopter pilot. I don't understand how someone with that experience could make these judgement errors.
Was it sabotage? Very 😔
Heard it had a 180HP conversion. Did you calculate that into your WB analysis?
The FAA registration info states an O-320 (150hp) although it's hard to know if or when that would be updated if the STC was performed.
Based on 180 hp Archer performance numbers, it still does not achieve 456' per NM, but it would be less dangerous for sure. Then the new temptation would become the normalization of deviance to slightly overload the airplane ("because it can handle it") and get away with it until this demanding situation comes up.
It's hard to speculate on the engine mods given only publicly available information.
You should apply for a NTSB job : ) Nice job
LOL at almost this exact point in time I thought about what it would be like to work for the NTSB. You literally read my mind from thousands of miles away at this precise moment.🤣
Wow I learnt so much from this one video ⚠️
You have a new subscriber.
An even worse scenario from this airport would be an engine failure at night, probably non survivable so why would anyone even attempt this in a single engine AC ???
It also begs the question ......
Should there be final decision by the airport manager/air traffic whether a particular aircraft can take off or not ? (given the weight and balance data and known aircraft performance figures for a given airfield elevation )
Thoughts ??
There have been accidents where high-performance (think: almost a jet) have been taxiing to take off, covered in ice (not properly deiced), with the runway having 6 inches of unplowed snow, and the airport manager has said "This is not a good idea, you should not go fly" and they proceed to crash off the end of the runway and kill everyone on board. That's an extreme example but has happened. The PIC (Pilot In Command) has the final authority for the safety of flight, and so it's important the pilot take that authority very seriously and always err on the side of caution.
Definitely one consideration that the PIC must make is, "If I lose my engine shortly after takeoff, what is the plan here?" If the plan is to land into terrain that you can't see, that sounds like a case for waiting until the next day to depart. However for most single-engine airplanes there will likely be a short 1-2 minute window after takeoff where the airplane is very vulnerable to engine failures and not having many options, but having daylight is a huge advantage.
No margin-of-safety in this incident. 1) Fatigue. 3 hour flight from Scottsdale, likely at high cabin altitudes around 8000 feet or more. 6 hour flight ahead to Bismarck, with even higher altitudes possibly required. Was there supplemental oxygen on board? AIM recommends supp O2 above 5000’. 2). Night, single piloted, single engine over terrain and very forbidding country. Where do you go with an engine failure? Even, say, a voltage regulator failure? You have 30 minutes at night to get it down before your battery goes. 3) Inadequate climb performance at this DA with this load. No margin of safety. 4) Pilot may have been instrument rated, but did he have instrument currency or recency of experience? 5). The Black Hole scenario for this takeoff is an extreme challenge for an instrument rated, instrument current pilot. 5) The POH numbers from 1966 in this case are demonstrated on a brand new airplane with a test pilot at the controls. What will YOUR 57 year old airplane do? Do you know? Have you test flown it against the POH numbers? 6). As Mike mentioned, the aircraft has probably slipping through the air, requiring right rudder, at the departure end of the runway. Out-of-balanced flight kills climb performance. Again, Martin of Safety. If you don’t have a 25% to 50% margin above the POH performance numbers, reconsider. Yes, if flown at all, this flight should have been a daytime flight with a very fresh pilot. Very sad, my condolences to the family and friends. Margin of safety, people, margin of safety.
Excellent analysis. One thing I also noticed, if you look at the local area in Google Earth 3D and zoom in to the airport you can see that the area is like a fishbowl. I would not tried to fly out of there at night.
Factual analysis, consistent hypotheses. Now we wait for NTSB mechanical analysis. Sadly, biggest worry here is failure of pre-flight planning to consider aircraft performance at this density altitude. God help all the single 4 and 6 cylinder pilots flying at night in the mountains.
The gas tank in that aircraft has a tab and a full tank position, being the gas tank is full all the way to the tank's top. Most operators only fill their gas tank to the tab, not topped off because if you top it off it is very easily over grossed when you load the passengers. If he filled the tank, guaranteed he was over grossed with his wife and children. onboard. That airplane by itself, has a CG that is very forward, so in this case it is a good thing. The more weight the less climb performance. Density altitud will play a defining role in performance as well. You must lean the engine, after you apply full power on the runway and then release brakes to commence your take off run, because of the altitude.
The good plan here is to climb in a spiraling track over the field until you have enough altitude to clear obstacles enroute, it might take 10 mins to do this or more. In my experience you must take the numbers in the manual in a conservative manner. Not a good operation for the conditions at night time. Good info!!
Agreed, a VCOA (Visual Climb Over the Airport) is also a good strategy, but if you're struggling to climb in the first place and it's practically instrument conditions because of the dark surroundings, I wouldn't recommend a VCOA here. VCOA's can also disturb your inner ear balance system from constantly being in a turn, and as others have pointed out, you will not climb as fast during the turn portion of the maneuver.
@@MalibuMikeCFII Exactly. He wasn't even able to visually climb right after takeoff. He apparently crashed not far from the airport. How would he be able to safely do a VCOA?
Deck stacked against them before taking off reminds me of many years ago when I was a young wx forecaster I briefed an AF Aero Club guy who was flying his family. I showed him the line of TS along his route and I thought he had decided to wait. But right at the end of the shift the base ops folks across the lobby got a call that he was lost off radar. They found the wreckage and he his wife and 2 kids scattered over many miles. They got sucked into a TS and torn apart at high altitude. He was never going to get through that line. In fact several years later his other kid who was not onboard sued the Aero Club for letting him take off with that forecast.
It seems with the light winds that the pilot could have taken off in the opposite direction. Had he done so, after takeoff he would have turned left and followed the highway while climbing. Or just waited until first light and make it easier with colder air and enough light to see the terrain. It is just another reminder that we are human. My deepest condolences to the family.
Plus he would have had better visual references above the highway and traffic with respect to the terrain below him.
Just a sidenote:
Pilots are setting the mixture of the engine manually!?!
Since by far over half a century technology takes this away from the operator in cars - hundert of million cars without any flaw.
Why to give this extra but unneeded workload to pilots?
It's a complicated answer. There is a reason our small planes are stuck in the 1950s like the cars we left in Cuba. Over regulation from government and our feral legal industry keep our manufacturers from daring to innovate. The costs to get through the FAA and liability insurance costs make it so.
@@scottw5315 Wrong: It is the American industry avoiding progress at any costs.
Without Airbus challenging the American cartel we would still fly with 4 persons in a jet's cockpit ....
Boy you're a fun one. F. Lee Bailey, look him up or not I don't care. He owned Enstrom Helicopter back in the day. He said liability costs doubled his cost of manufacturing. A new Cessna 172 is 300k or so. That is way too expensive for most of us hence very few are made. Our GA fleet is old and getting older with only about a thousand new piston engined planes being produced per year for worldwide delivery. It is essentially dead. Experimental or homebuilt aircraft have thrived over the decades with the 51% rule. Look it up or not, I don't care. Homebuilts are relatively immune to lawsuits as they are licensed experimental, amateur built. So, the kit manufacturers have been free to innovate and they have. I have owned several. A Glasair or Lancair approached the speeds of WWII era fighters decades ago. That's innovation and improvement. Airbus? What has that to do with anything?@@peterebel7899
@@peterebel7899 Wrong. It is the US trial lawyer-Democrat axis that has killed GA progress. It's hella expensive. Innovation is dead.
@@TheRayDog In parts agreed:
1. GA Prozess in America is dead since many decades
2. The American lawyer system (better to say the set of laws and businesses going alongside) is killing progress - and more.
But:
- Why do you think is this affecting GA but not luxury cars?
- Why do you see the Democrats killing everything when the Republicans are dominating the country across all those decades?
Chinese GA will take over the world's markets to give progress a chance.
The steady increase of airspeed in the turn seems to indicate a down wind turn. What was the surface wind? It seems clear the plane was not climbing.
The surface winds were light and variable, only a few knots as shown in the video from the METAR reports. As also stated in the video, the airplane seemed to level off and begin a slight descent which is consistent with a normally operating engine at full power, but highly likely there was disorientation and the pilot being unaware of the level off and descent.
Looks like it was airborne 2 minutes. Seems like with normal power it would have climbed 600 feet. After refueling at a strange airport I always suspect and check vigorously for fuel contamination