🔒Remove your personal information from the web at joindeleteme.com/DEBRIEF and use code DEBRIEF for 20% off 🙌 DeleteMe international Plans: international.joindeleteme.com
Agreed. Sad outcome Fair ruling. I’ve only flown an airplane twice, I’ve been disoriented before just hiking around. It seems to me if you’re disoriented, get to a higher altitude and level off… Communicate with control tower and settle your nerves down. I’m sure that’s easier said than done.
@@MaxMax-nb1lm Our tort laws protect us. Please don't whisk them off. All in all they serve a very important legal guardrail protecting our health, well being and security. That said, high probability (human nature), that if you thought you could use the legal system to cash out, you'd be right there. But I suppose that's not a good argument for or against civil liability.
March 20 2011, I had a pilot get spatial disoriented and he may have gone inverted. I somehow managed to get the pilot calm and wings level. I got him to start a slow climb and told him what the tops were reported at. He repeatedly asked me what heading he should be on. I told him not to worry about the heading and just stay level. I eventually got him on top of the clouds and he made it to his destination safely. I am not a pilot but I have been a controller for 36 years. I appreciate these types of videos and share them with my coworkers as emergency training is not handled as well as I think it should be. AOPA recognized me for the flight assist if anyone is looking for more info.
And it sounds like you understanding his situation saved his life. Well done. This pilot was experienced enough to know to declare an emergency and he didn't. The controller COULD have changed his response, but was under zero legal responsibility in this accident.
Thank you so much for helping that pilot out of a terrible situation. I have read and heard many times where even the most experienced pilots have gotten spatially disoriented and needed help, either by the copilot or the ATC and it is always important to leave the ego aside, declare the situation and the emergency and then get help. The ATC controllers can help in any way they can but you have to let them know as soon as possible and then follow the instruction given and dont be afraid to ask if you do not understand a request or did not hear it.
Regarding the lawsuit against the FAA... Wouldn't the FAA, as a government entity, be protected by sovereign immunity? While the controller may not have chosen the very best plan of action in this rather complicated situation, if he or she was acting in good faith and trying to do the right thing then wouldn't sovereign immunity kick in here and squash their lawsuit? Is anybody out there an attorney?
I fly out of Sarasota all the time and have actually been in a few plane crashes where everyone onboard died except me. Last time I ran out of fuel shortly after take off and went down in the water. I thought the water would be better than land because water but everyone died all the same. Lesson learned is that it doesn't matter whether you over land or water, you can still get killed on impact. Flying is just plain dangerous. Get it? PLANE dangerous.
The controller was not the pilot in command. The controller told him to climb and maintain. Period. The controller was probably put through years of hell in court by a family looking for someone to blame, in my opinion
(Don’t) be like Mike. If a flight instructor warns you about something (like not flying in weather until more experience is gained), then listen to them! It’s highly likely, as an attorney, Micheal would become irritated when clients wouldn’t listen to his advice. In aviation, not heeding advice/warnings can be the difference between life and death. It’s an unnecessary and unfortunate tragedy. RIP Micheal, I hope you’re flying with angels.
An excellent point. The controller was probably dealing with the emotional and mental fallout of being involved with a fatal flight to begin with. Endlessly wondering if he could have saved that pilot if he’d said differently. That should have been enough for the family.
I’m surprised the family also didn’t sue gravity for helping this guy crash while they were at it. But seriously: as a CFI I recognize this. The guy is flying with his wife and father in law. Inexperience pilots are reluctant to ask for help as they feel embarrassed in front of their friends and family. Hoover has featured similar accidents on his channel where this also was a factor.
I always wonder if the passengers/family are aware there is a problem and they are in trouble or if they are oblivious to what's going on. I always pray they never realize anything.
They're currently sending subpoenas to Isaac Newton via a medium. He is the guy responsible for controlling how gravity works right? At the very least, he documented the laws and that makes him directly responsible. Lawyer logic
@@MattHeslingtonYou laugh now, but somewhat out there is a lawyer thinking... "wait... suing gravity?... WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT???!!!" And without a hint of irony. Makes sense too, because (in the mind of a lawyer) if laws can be manipulated to suit agendas, which is essentially what they think they're for, then why can't the laws of physics? Given enough money, of course.
@@AlienGamer38 people like to throw out this example as if it proves their point but that was a legitimate lawsuit. Like how people think you can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater (Google it if you believe that)
Why are people turning against aviation lawyers here again? There are multiple examples of videos covered on THIS channel where attorneys sued the FAA and recovered money due to ATC negligence.
I haven’t flown in 22 years, and didn’t quite finish my instrument rating, but there’s something from training all those years ago that’s always stuck with me: Climb, Communicate, Confess, Comply. Altitude is your friend, let them know what’s going on ASAP, tell them you made a mistake or you’re in trouble, do what they say. And it’s ok to tell a controller you’re not familiar with a maneuver or procedure. Pilots are so afraid of the FAA, I’m more afraid of dying…..
Your stating the 4 Cs reminded me of the saying I learned many years ago. The two most worthless things to a pilot are the sky above you and the runway behind you. These debriefs are a sad reminder of how important proper training and practice are.
Well said. The first two points, climb and communicate, saved me on my first solo cross country flight. Clouds and fog had rolled in over the entire coastal city I had departed from hours earlier. It was only clear over the mountains and desert I had just crossed. I tried descending to get under it, but was unable. It was fog below the clouds. I climbed above it and got a vector to the initial approach point. Lucky for me there was a hole above that point and the ceiling was high enough to get under it. To be safe General Aviation requires as much training as professional pilots receive.
I noticed that there are some very common characteristics in these small plane crashes. 1. The pilots are usually only qualified for visual approach and have not received enough instrument training. 2. They will ignore the weather conditions and force a landing, even if they don't know how to land. 3. These people are usually rich or arrogant, or both. In short, they have a very high confidence in themselves, even if it is something they can't do. 4. They will not listen to orders and think that their authority is higher than that of air traffic control.
I've seen this arrogance in dog obedience class many times. Lawyers and Doctors with aggressive dogs think they know better than the instructor with 30 plus years experience, just because they're doctors or lawyers.
Generalizations are always incorrect. Of course for owning an aircraft you need some degree of wealth but many pilots are not rich....I actually venture to say that most are not rich. Rich and poor equally have the ability for lack of judgment which is one of the main causes of this crash (and many others).
As a doctor, I am 100% in agreement it comes from over confidence, access to money, and a desire for 'more power' when a Cessna 152 would serve the same purpose. They called the Bonanza V tail the 'Doctor Killer' for this reason.
If I was the controller, I would have gone with the "no gyro turn" because the pilot appeared to be completely incapable of following directional heading instructions. Shame on the family for refusing to accept the pilot's culpability!
Honestly, if I was a controller, I wouldn't. That's the last thing I would do. Instrument flying relies on instruments to keep oneself oriented. Since the pilot was disoriented, he clearly wasn't following proper procedures for instrument flying, and trying to get him to do a no gyro turn(while he was disoriented) was just likely to result in him becoming even more disoriented. I still agree with the ruling that he was unprepared for this type of operation. I don't think ATC is ultimately the one to blame, but they definitely could have handled it better.
I was kind of thinking along the same lines. Sueing trying to make the controller responsible only highlights your refusal to accept the risks you are taking and the fact that you put yourself into a not win situation.
It wasn’t the pilot who sued, it was the family who doesn’t understand the rules of the air and ultimate responsibility. I’m sure the pilot did, and WAS a safe pilot who unfortunately got into a situation that got away from him. That said, I’m sure the FAA could do way better with recurring emergency training for the controllers. More than a CBI……
The pilot failed to fly correct headings. Idc what anyone says if you can't follow simple instructions you shouldn't be flying guy got himself killed. Pathetic honestly
Hoover, I'm not a pilot or involved in aviation at all, but I just find these videos very interesting. I watch all the different channels, the flight channel, mentor pilot, 74 gear. but I really enjoy your channel a lot. Keep up the good work. I'm sure you're really saving lives.
Me, too. But Mentour pilot has become pretty much unwatchable lately, imho. Petter's videos used to be great, but his videos are far too long, now, and full of flashy graphics and unnecessary filler. I wish he would go back to his old style. Ain't nobody got time for 40-minute videos which could be done in 15 minutes, like Hoover's!
I agree with you completely. I'm not a pilot, but when your instructor tells you to wait and get more experience, you wait and get more experience. that's being prudent.
I fly out of Sarasota all the time and have actually been in a few plane crashes where everyone onboard died except me. Last time I ran out of fuel shortly after take off and went down in the water. I thought the water would be better than land because water but everyone died all the same. Lesson learned is that it doesn't matter whether you over land or water, you can still get killed on impact. Flying is just plain dangerous. Get it? PLANE dangerous.
"In his opinion that details the last moments of the flight, the judge found there was a lack of evidence the controller could have or should have been aware that the pilot was facing an emergency because he did not declare one. The judge also noted Michael’s flight instructor had warned him not to fly the Bonanza until he gained more experience with it."
Respectfully, when all is said and done it's the pilot in command to fly the plane and ask for help before it's too late! Plus, his instructor warned him before the flight to get more training.
Worse the NTSB really hung the controller out, holy batsticks, that report really burned the controller, as if they had any control, I really hope they sued both the family and the FAA/NTSB for millions, enough to bankrupt the useless NTSB..
I have just revieced my ppla yesterday and I wanted to thank you. Since my first flight I talked to my FI about various crashes you'd covered. Knowing and actually doing something are two different things, i know, but the things you've taught me have really changed my view on things. There were already some situations where I decided to go around, cancel my approach or cancel my flight in the first place - partly because I remembered the kind of awareness you're trying to teach here. You're probably never reading this, but PLEASE continue. You are actually saving lives. Thank you!
Pencil and paper helps. I never had to ask ATC to repeat, nor did I have to worry about tuning a misheard frequency and not being able to go back to the previous one - because the big clipboard in my lap had paper where I wrote down every call, so I could always look back and review.
My clipboard was small, just a bit larger than a Jeppesen approach plate. I could always go back to the previous frequency because I just switched between radios.
@@M1903a4 Most people do that. But with the paper record on my clipboard I could monitor 121.5 on one radio while safely switching the other to successive frequencies. I did once pick up strong 121.5 beeping, and told ATC the point between VORs where the signal was strongest.
We all sink to the level of our training...I learned that by living through a big engine room fire on a fast attack submarine at 400 ft down. Our training made it possible to keep down any panic and allowed the crew to maintain control of the submarine as the assigned fire crew saved the boat. Without proper training any situation can become life threatening and under-trained people die in their ignorance...the seconds tick by very fast and death is always near...
It's all about the money. There was an accident years back now where one of our highways was badly maintained. A semi and trailer was driving and a chunk of concrete was dislodged and went into a car. The driver survived though in a terrible state the family didn't get what they wanted out of the government and insurance. So they later sued the driver personally. The only problem was the accident had been investigated and there was nothing the driver did wrong, not speeding, swerving anything. Nor was there issue with the truck, wasn't overloaded nothing. They knew he was not responsible yet sued him because others didn't pay up enough to their liking. I couldn't even believe a lawyer would take that to court. To sue a party already deemed not at fault simply because the party at fault didn't give you enough money and they were the only one left to sue.
I started practicing with the hood this week. My CFI gave me altitude and heading instructions just like ATC would do, and i just watched the instruments. When the hood came off we were aligned on final. This pilot clearly had difficulty following the headings given to him by ATC. Can't blame ATC for that.
Even worse than not following ATC directions, he couldn't maintain level flight! Just did a bunch of random loops and lost altitude until hitting the ground.
Met the owner of a bare boat rental company, he told me the doctor and lawyers end up crashing and/or sinking more vessels than any other group of people. Wonder what the stats are for airplanes? Strange how that condescending nose up in the air can get you killed.
They are sometimes/often in position to afford high performance aircraft and so the absolute rate of doctor/lawyer-involved crashes may be misleading unless you correct for the %'s of ownership. If 50% of Bonanza crashes involve doctors, but half of Bonanzas are owned by doctors, then their rate of crashes is no higher than average. That said I'm sure there's some degree of arrogance and complacency out there among this population. I'm a physician and an instrument-rated private pilot. I like to think I'm pretty meticulous with my planning and decision making process when flying; and most of the docs I know that fly are likewise quite careful and know their limitations. For example a colleague of mine owned a Mooney 252. He called me up one day and asked me to fly him to check on his aging parents. I had a (somewhat slower) Mooney 201 at the time. For whatever reason, he didn't feel sharp that day and made the call to not fly himself. From my own personal experience, the only real incident I know of - there was an old retired orthopaedic surgeon I knew who landed on the taxiway, but I think there was a movie star who did that too, and not in the Millenium Falcon! Just putting it out there, that when people see doctor + high performance aircraft, they often jump to the conclusion that it's an arrogant SOB behind the yoke. But there are at least a handful who are good decision-makers and determined to continually learn and improve with each flight.
A good friend of mine retired not long ago after a 40-year career as a commercial pilot, most of it flying 747s for Continental Airlines. Like so many young pilots, he began his career building up his hours by teaching others how to fly. I’ll always remember him telling me that “doctors think they know everything” and “doctors are better at making holes in the ground than ditch diggers”. Sure enough the only person I know who killed himself in an airplane was a doctor. Not sure what my friend thought about lawyers…I’d imagine they’re even worse.
I was a CFI for 40 years (now retired from flying). Going from steam gauge to glass is a huge step. When I first started using the Garmin 430 I took 15 hours of dual as well as ground school to get used to it. Even then there was probably another 20 hours of flying myself during which time I discovered things I didn't know how to do yet. So, this poor guy was trying to learn the 530 and fly actual IMC at the same time; meaning there was no time learn how to reconfigure the 530 to respond to chnaging instructions and actual conditions.
I really appreciate your reconstructions! Someone once said that "under stress we don't rise to the occasion, we fall to our level of training." So the first hours in a new plane with a new cockpit can be very dangerous when the first unexpected thing goes wrong then the whole cockpit scene looks wrong. Possibly he briefed himself for a 5-Left approach. Very likely he failed to correct for DG drift so his DG was off 10 degrees. In any case he lost the picture and went into panic mode. At that point, lying to the controller and possibly lying to himself was fatal. Step 1 - level the wings, maintain altitude and direction, stop pretending, confess your situation and declare an emergency. It's your job to reject any instructions from the controller you don't understand or that you cannot complete confidently - only you can keep the plane under control. Apparently he was unable to use the Garmin 530 to pull up the approach and picture. However, if he had briefed properly for any approach ( 5L or 5R ) he should have had the VOR GSO loaded and at least known what radial he was on.. Instead of saying "what do you think of my approach?" or whatever,he should have said "I'm concerned my instruments are not working. Can you tell me my current location and how far I am from the localizer?" And if that didn't work he could have, and should probably have declared a missed approach and flown the missed approach - as he should have briefed himself and mentally practiced. If he wasn't capable of flying the missed approach he should not have been flying the approach -- period. If a controller gives you instructions you cannot safely complete, it's your right and duty to tell them "unable" and explain. If you can't maintain level flight and turn to a heading in IMC you have no business being there.
I'm a private pilot and my father was a commercial charter pilot until he retired, Dad said if you get disoriented the needle & bank is helpful it's a simple instrument to follow. He was not a fan of the turn coordinator. He also said the secret to staying alive in aviation is knowing your limitations.
Great debrief, it’s hitting close to home as I will be in the very near future flying a new aircraft Home from FL to WA. This debrief will be playing In my head. I will have a safety pilot with me and no reason to get home in a hurry. Thanks Hoover!
Thank God the Court got it right! These people did not deserve a dime. It was their "oh I'm rich so I'll get a plane and be a pilot" family member who was solely responsible for this accident. He, like many rich people, wasn't cut out to be a pilot.
I am retired ARTCC (Washington and Atlanta Centers) controller after 30 years and a 45 year ATP. Most controllers don’t fly, nor understand fully what a pilot does. Where as a professional, I get recurrent training (insurance requires that) for my C414A, and when I did fly for someone 6 month recurrency training was so beneficial to go over those things that don’t happen frequently like emergencies. I complained for decades that the FAA does lousy currency training, almost no recurrency or emergency training. As an ATP, CFII-MI, I know the benefits of practicing emergencies. I too don’t believe it was the FAA fault, and there is no requirement for a controller to be an instrument pilot, but it sure does help. I saw several pilot-controllers manage emergency situations with life saving results EVEN if the pilot was at fault. Sad story, for sure, thanks for sharing.
I agree. Recurrency training should be required for keeping the IR valid. Focus should be on unusual attitudes, disorientation and failure management specific for type aircraft. Simulator in GA world doesn't cut it as motion is a big attribute to pilots initial response in IMC. I have always believed and trained that knowing what pitch and power setting with wings level will keep you safe, we train that all the time at the airline. It also gives you as pilot a lot of comfort knowing you can get control back of the aircraft when disoriented with just a few simple steps that are like 2nd nature due to recurrent training.
Too many pilots treating their pilots license like a drivers license... Flying their planes as a necessary form of transportation... Treating the plane like a car on a roadtrip. Making stops, no flexibility in schedule, bringing family onboard, get home itis. Doing all this with little no IFR flight experience...
That is a very good point. I've been watching Hoover's videos for a couple of years now. They have scared me enough that I don't believe I have the gumption to be a pilot. Just too many holes in the swiss cheese for me.
I’ll tell ya what I think of this and all your other vids, friggin LOVE THEM!! As an older man now that has pilots and commercial pilots in the family and grew up being a passenger on GA aircraft I’m finally working towards being more involved in GA as a pilot and your vids always bring up so many rabbit holes for me to traverse and expand my knowledge. Bringing up situations and scenarios that could possibly trigger a moment of pause or reevaluation that could keep myself and others from a bad, or even worse, a tragic accident. Honestly cannot thank you enough for all the time and effort you put into these!
A lot of us ex-GA pilots experienced disorientation and task-overload ..... I did on three occasions, and all were in acceptable (but not great) VFR conditions. When it happens, the responsibility is always on the pilot to call it out asap and get assistance or execute the recovery manoeuvres we all trained. In my cases, I recovered two safely myself but called sector ATC for help on the third, and lived to be congratulated for doing so. This is clear-cut and well presented - albeit a grim lesson.
He didn't try to convince anyone to sue. He was already dead. His bereaved children tried to find a way that their mother and grandfather's deaths were not his fault. Completely natural and commonplace reaction. The courts set them straight.
The bonanza is a challenging plane to fly from a piper cherokee. 6 hours of training may make you legal in it, but it doesn’t make you proficient or safe.
I learned to fly in the 1970's. Cessna 150, 172 mostly. Learned to fly floats in a Taylor craft and got an instrument rating.. No GPS(obviously) and a hand held mike. Got checked out in a Piper Arrow for a complex aircraft(retractable and constant speed prop). Also much faster than a 172. Biggest difference in that Arrow due to speed was how quickly it was easy to "get behind the airplane". Less time to think and react. I think contributes to a lot of these accidents in pilots who get into a higher performance aircraft.
The comments are brutal; most are not necessary. The pilot’s inabilities are obvious, that’s the point of the debrief, it’s a teaching lesson. This channel is and was not designed to “take shots” at those affected. Simply, “watch and learn”; it might save your life one day!
Noones taking shots its common sense i dont drive cos i know id kill someone so if you have just got a plane havd some more lessons before you take your loved ones on a flight he made rrrors he tudely cut off the prople giving him vital weather instruction he proberly ruined life of ATC controller their familly should be sueing its not about getting on ivd never flown never want to bever been in a a plane you wouldnt get me flying and theres ti ex ive interubted prople on phone rudely but ive not had family with nd nor flying a plane. Im severly mentally ill do cant drive fly or anything and feel deep vondolenses for all involved but it need not have happened@Jimmer-Space88
@@Jimmer-Space88but truly, interrupting a briefing twice when serious weather concerns are being addressed, is a huge red flag and sets the tone for this entire event. The Swiss cheese model of errors lining up to create a disaster: weather coming in, rushed interrupted briefing, pressure to get the flight going, minimal time in type - first 100 hours in faster more complex aircraft; safety pilot no longer present; specific instructor warning about IMC approaches in this new plane; and this before the flight even began. Just so many holes of the Swiss cheese aligning it’s almost ridiculous. Perhaps the brutal comments stem from the combination of so many bad judgment calls and red flags with the family wanting to blame the FAA. Either way, a ton of learning here.
@@GabeWil Before the internet, weather round here consisted mostly of calling a number and listening to a recording. Everybody I knew hung up the phone once they'd got the cloud base, visibility and 2,000' wind.
I did instrument checks as Navy flight instructor in SoCal. Putting someone 'under the hood' in an aircraft is not without its risks. If you're operating in VMC conditions outside of positive control airspace--- you are still responsible for 'see and avoid', even if you're on an instrument flight plan. The controller is only responsible for separation between participating IFR traffic, separation from aircraft operating VFR is workload permitting. Depending on the visibility in the aircraft, you can be seriously hampering your ability to see and avoid other aircraft by putting one of the pilots 'under the hood'. Keep in mind the VFR traffic have just as much right to cross through airways vertically or horizontally as you do to be flying on them IFR. So this isn't just something to consider when flying direct off airways. If it's VMC outside positive control airspace, while you're doing the instrument training you still have to be able to see and avoid other aircraft. A kicker in this - the controller has the ability to inhibit/block the VFR transponder returns. In places like SoCal, on a nice day having those displayed clutters the display to the point the controller can't pick out the IFR traffic from the noise. Military had the advantage of full motion simulators, so I could do everything I needed to do in the simulator to check their ability to operate the aircraft without a visual horizon. In the aircraft-- it's reality, I wouldn't put them under the hood. I would ask the student when approaching the Oceanside VORTAC to tell me how many aircraft they could see. Usually somewhere between 2-4. Then I'd ask the controller to provide the number of aircraft over the VORTAC including VMC--- usually 15 to- controller couldn't count only estimate.
What a dangerous pilot. His bad attitude to sound advice, to weather and severe case of get-home-itis doomed that flight before it even started. Over estimation of his skills mixed with complacency really ensured the outcome. Tragic for the innocent victims.
I disagree about dangerous. Based only on the info in the video, the final flight with 1000' ceilings, as long as the pilot is IFR current is a safe decision. Even with a new aircraft. I had a student early 2000's, former Navy A7 pilot, and was flying 737's at the time checking out in a Cessna 182. Under the hood something happened, totally disoriented, couldn't figure out heading and suddenly couldn't hold altitudes on a VOR approach. I took the controls so he can stabilize himself. Bad moment in time. Professional and experienced, a much better pilot than me, but sometimes it happens.
@@bobrubens7769 Good comment, many in front of the computer don't understand how it can be, this pilot wasn't up to the situation he put himself and family in for sure though. A IFR rating is not enough unfortunately.
@@dwaynemcallister7231 thanks, I like when people are respectful and not trolls. What bothers me, being fair, I can imagine myself making the same decision. ILS, ok makes things easier, 1000'celings, great, I will be visual early on final, even with new gadgets I can just focus on centering the needles, with good trim, no problem. It's a scary but truthful assessment that I think any average pilot would make.
To see that screams were heard just pulls at my heart, prayers to all left to grieve. Changing from one aircraft to another takes a lot of learning of the new aircraft and I agree most of the fault falls on the pilot, even thou the controller needs more training for sure, just a tragic outcome, as always thank you Hoover for presenting your debrief with respect.
I think that knowing the plane's electronics is absolutely essential. I get the impression that he was struggling to set up an unfamiliar navigation system while hand flying in instrument conditions. If he had been flying his Cherokee, which is easier to fly and which he was completely used to, it probably would have turned out better.
If you follow all of ATC directions and die, then I think you could sue. When you follow none of the directions, don’t ask for help or don’t declare an emergency, I think you’re SOL and up the creek.
Nope. Pilot-in-Command is the term, for a reason. The PILOT is responsible for the safety of their aircraft, period. There's been more than one occasion where I've told ATC "unable" when they were putting me in a position I didn't want to be in. Now, if somehow ATC vectored two aircraft in IMC into the flight paths of each other, then yes, ATC would be responsible.
When I transitioned from a single engine airplane, which didn't have an autopilot, to the twin I now fly, which came with a 3-axis autopilot, the CFI I trained with insisted I learn how to use it. Having flown for over 1,000 hrs without one I brushed it aside, figuring I could learn it later. My CFI made it part of the syllabus before he signed me off for my MEI checkride, telling me anything in the aircraft is fair game for the DPE to examine my proficiency with. Most importantly he said that I should use it when I could to ensure it works and to maintain proficiency in using its various modes. "If you ever become disoriented engage heading and altitude hold and it will save your life". Truer words could not be spoken in my opinion and in this case, assuming this pilot had a working autopilot, it would have saved him by stopping the inadvertant turn and allowing him to climb to VFR conditions. I'm certain once he became disoriented a sense of panic ensued, which is why engaging the autopilot should have been committed to muscle memory if he was going to fly hard IFR.
That’s such a great point. If I’m going to potentially put myself in a life threatening situation , how do I get out? If I can’t answer then make other plans.
My CFI likes to throw students to the wolves. One of the first night flights was a RWY 7 departure from KSPG. Moonless hazy night. For all practical purposes, IMC. You better believe I reached over for the AP's wing leveler for the initial climb-out and turn. We spent plenty of time hand-flying during these practically-IMC night flights, including unusual attitude recovery. Very much worth the effort and time to do it in near-IMC conditions where you have to fly the instruments as there are no visual references.
@@grayrabbit2211Hey homie, if it’s a moonless night and you’re flying out of SPG and west bound. It’ll only take you 10-15 minutes max to get out over the Gulf and (in my opinion) you are literally in IMC conditions. Explanation: look out the window in the dark while over a dark ocean in front and around you. Now point to the horizon. You can’t (neither could I) and that’s the point. We should really evaluate what’s really VFR flying and what’s considered IFR. Edit 1. I’ll add. Look up “Head-up illusion” for reference to what I’m talking about.
I have had a couple of minor situations where I had one too many things to handle and then I lost track of all the other things I had previously understood. With all the details needed to land an airplane, I can picture this happening to the pilot. He needed someone to get him to focus on flying the plane by doing what he was competent at. Buy some time, settle down, then worry about landing.
In 1973, I flew a Ground Controlled Approach (GCA) at night (VMC) into Naval Air Station Moffett Field, Sunnyvale, CA under the hood in a Cessna 182. It was the first and only time I did so. The approach was uneventful, educational, and extremely satisfying. When the Ground Controller released me (hood off), I was slightly left of the runway and about 2000 feet short of the threshold. An adjustment to the right and a nice landing had me back on the ground. It sounds like a "no gyro turn" is the civilian form of a GCA. This accident is another tragic one, Hoover. The "get-there-itis" factor, the weather, and unfamiliarity with the aircraft and its avionics coupled with his poor flight planning certainly doomed him from the start. "Personal flying limitations" can be difficult to identify for most of us, but essential for safe flight.
GCA and no gyro are two different things. GCA radars are a separate radar system from the main terminal area radars. GCA radars are very precise, and provide both azimuth and glidepath corrections. A no gyro approach has no glidepath information. Azimuth corrections are based on standard rate turns and timings. The terminal area radar antenna probably rotates once every 6 seconds or so, leaving a pretty wide margin for error in headings. GCA radars update position every 1 second or even less.
@@vonJaerschky Thanks for that information. The No Gyro Vector procedure was just thrown out there in the video and I had never heard of it before. I found a good explanation of the procedure and its application in "IFR Magazine" online. "Thankfully, there’s yet another tool in the ATC garage that can save the day: the no-gyro vector. It requires several elements. First, ATC will tell you, “This will be a no-gyro vector” and instruct you to either “turn left” or “turn right.” Upon receipt of that instruction, you will commence a standard rate turn (3 degrees per second) relying on the turn coordinator. ATC will watch your aircraft’s track on radar. Once it appears the track is heading in the right direction, the controller will say, “Stop turn.” Due to radar lag, it may take a few additional turns back and forth to get you properly lined up."
@@vonJaerschky Old C-141 Loadmaster here. Sat in the jumpseat many times in my career listening to the radios when the pilots were doing a PAR approach, what here is being referred to as a GCA? It was always nice to see the runway become visible out of the clouds, rain, and mist when flying in complete IMC.
Personal limitations should be identified before ever leaving the ground. Heck, that should be done before leaving the house. Some like “if this, then this”. If ceiling is below X it’s a no go, for example.
That's the one thing I'm really scared of: Underestimating weather conditions and heading into an IFR situation that I'm unable to handle. I once went under a solid cloud cover with a flight of 6 small planes. The clouds went lower and lower and we followed until we were just a few hundred feet above the ground. I absolutely hated the fact that we had maneuvered ourselves into this tight situation but just when i was ready to turn back the clouds ahead started dissipating. Shouldn't have flown there, won't do that again, *ever.*
It was unfair to subject the controller to a court case. The fault lay with the pilot, who on recognising he was struggling should have declared an emergency and climbed into VFR, once in clear air and settled he could have been guided to where he could see where he was going. A sad tale and unnecessary loss of life.
Most of my 400 hours IMC was in Hueys without autopilot and with no computer avionics. Because we were always below 10,000 and had only 2.5 hours fuel, we were in the weather when there was weather. While with legal alternates, they had to be close in similar weather. I appreciated no gyro PAR because it reduced my work load. We had two pilots, but still used PAR when weather was near minimums. I don't fault the controller for suggesting PAR, but he was too far unglued by then. If he couldn't fly headings, he was beyond help.
That’s no easy task coming from someone in that world. During my time flying EMT, all the veteran pilots used to talk about their days jockeying the Bell 212 in IMC and night without autopilot, advanced avionics, or NVG’s, and my respect for them was instantaneous. You simply couldn’t have a bad day in that ship, or there would be 4 souls instantly wiped away. It’s like balancing a marble on a cutting board in a room with no windows, and then having the lights turned off on you. Loss of control happens that fast in a helicopter if you’re not on the dials.
@crazyralph6386 The safest pilot I ever flew with was David Trujillo, when we were in the 717th Medical Evacuation in the NMARNG. He was a Nighthawk pilot in Vietnam. He taught us to slow down to shaking on approach both day and night. It is amazing how much more you see on those shaking slow approaches. He taught his crew, copilot medic and crew chief, by osmosis. When he said, "nose coming left," that hovering Huey was locked in time and space until we all remembered to reply, "tail clear right, nose clear right, tail clear left.". He simply waited until it came to you to reply.
I'll have to agree with the court's final decision that the full weight of the accident lays on the pilot. To move up from a Cherokee to a Bonanza is quite the step. And to fly one of those in IFR without much experience... Well, we saw what happened. 😢
I think it's bye time we gift GA Synthetic Vision so they can see through the cloud/rain/snow/smog. Had it for almost a Century and it just needs a company to mass produce it at cost.
I realize that it hurts to lose loved ones; lost many, as I am 62. But filing a law suit against the FAA is beyond stupid. No doubt the silly attorney they employed was bored and did it pro bono
Yup you're spot on. Controller (and FAA) were definitely not responsible. The pilot couldn't maintain a direction, and none of the instructions the controller gave would have lead to the plane spinning out of control, that's on the pilot.
Sorry to hear of the tragic accident. Thank you for such detailed summary. The Controller works for the Pilot, but the Pilot is in Command and was advised to not fly in IMC until he had more time. When weather was bad, he should have opted for commercial tickets back home (or start driving), or reschedule Dr. Appointments, so there’s no pressure.
As a former instructor and commuter airline pilot (including a few bouts of spacial disorientation) and later an attorney who handled aviation cases, I have a few thoughts to share. First, as a pilot I would accept responsibility for the flight including obviously getting a full weather briefing and having the experience and skills required to fly my plane in IFR conditions. Sadly, I believe the facts show that initially he understood his limitations but when he was on the return leg he pushed outside his envelope of experience and skill. However, as an aviation attorney, the tort law in most jurisdictions is predicated on “comparative negligence” meaning that if two or more factors cause an accident, you can sue the other party ( in this case the FAA) for their negligence. Any financial damages awarded by the jury would be reduced by the percentage of your own negligence. Meaning if the jury awarded the family $1m but found the pilot 75% responsible for the crash, the recovery would only be $250k. However, since this accident happened in No Carolina, which is a contributory negligence state, the pilots negligence operates as a total bar to the family’s right to sue. That’s why the judge didn’t let the jury decide the case. So regardless of the FAA and NTSB findings, the court’s ruling appears to me to be correct. North Carolina is one of the very few remaining states that still use the law of “contributory negligence” as a bar to recovery- most states use comparative negligence so a jury decides the percentage of each party’s liability.
Good point and nice to know that everyone deserves their right to jury trial. However, too bad he didn't just lower the gear, slow to 120 and it would fly easier than the Cherokee, and the autopilot would have helped immensely. The A36 is a very predictable and easy plane to fly...wish I never sold mine.
@@mowtivatedmechanic1172 : while some may think contributory negligence worked here, you can easily imagine a situation where you make a relatively minor mistake and the other party is almost entirely at fault, but you are thrown out of court. For example, you are driving down a road at 45 mph- the speed limit is 30 mph- the other driver blows through a stop sign at 55 mph and T bones you. You suffer multiple injuries and fractures and a traumatic brain injury. The court dismisses your case because you were speeding and therefore contributed to the accident. Fair?
*CAN YOU SUGGEST* why, in so many of these cases, the pilot does not follow the controller's heading instructions, then asks again, and again doesn't follow them? Is it because they are trusting (wrongly) their own senses? Or are they failing to absorb what's being said out of panic?
It’s been 28 years since medical reasons forced me to quit flying. Sometimes, when returning to my hometown airport (HTS) the controllers would ask if I would accept a no gyro approach. They wanted to maintain their proficiency. When I was instructing, I made certain my students practiced the no gyro approach. Huntington, not being a busy airport, controllers would grant my request when traffic was light.
North Carolina is a contributory negligence state, meaning that even if FAA had some negligence, the pilot’s contribution is an absolute bar to any recovery. The family attorney should have known that before consuming those resources. It’s a sad tragedy, but pilot in command was ultimately responsible. Screams noted at the end of the last transmission just haunt me. 😢
federal courts exercising diversity of citizenship jurisdiction (eg, NC Federal District Court hearing suit between PA plaintiff and DC defendant; venue in NC because that’s where incident giving rise to suit occurred) can apply the law of the state in which they sit (NC) unless controlling statutes or the parties agree otherwise. This may have been a negligence action brought under North Carolina law arising out of an accident that occurred in NC by an out of state plaintiff against a federal agency defendant over which federal courts presumably have primary personal jurisdiction, but which nevertheless apply substantive North Carolina negligence legal principles to the case. I haven’t read any of the relevant documents in this case to know for sure. The attorney for the estates that brought the action may have had a duty to the estate to pursue the action for a variety of reasons.
@@MrShobarThat’s first year law school diversity of citizenship. This would be brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act. (Yes, substantive state law would still play a role.) A big issue in such cases is discretionary versus ministerial function.
When Michael recognized that he was disorientation he should have immediately asked for clearance to ascend above the clouds to reclaim some semblance of his control over the situation. That he continued to fly in IFR conditions in a state of disorientation was a fundamental and deadly mistake.
In an emergency you don't even have to ask, just do it, and communicate what you're doing IF ABLE. He could have climbed back out of it at any time, permission or not and if he had done it soon enough, he'd still be alive.
Thanks for this debrief. It’s a cautionary tale for all of us. Until one has intimate knowledge of their avionics and particularly modern navigation equipment, they are more of a distraction than a tool. Although I knew the ending of the story all along, I couldn’t help but hope at the moment he recognized a level of disorientation, he would hit the wings level button that the auto pilot likely had and take a few minutes to breath. Everyone please know your safe altitudes and just fly straight and level till you get it together.
Based on the radio calls, I got the impression that Michael was either already behind the aircraft prior to descending into the clouds or impaired in some way. No mention of toxicology results. Thanks Hoover for the debrief.
I am a retired TRACON controller, and I have no idea what the controller was thinking with no-gyro turns. In all of my years on a radar scope, I think I've used them once for a real airplane (total electrical failure at night in the dark in weather), and for pilots practicing. The most common use of no-gyro turns, would be a ground controlled approach (GCA), or a surveillance approach. IMHO, a no-gyro vector had no place in this scenario. I would have worked to get his wings level, and get him climbing to VFR conditions. The quick left turn to right turn in IMC may have also sealed their fate. It's been a few years, but the clearance is: "This will be a no-gyro vector to the "ILS final, make (standard/half-standard rate turns, turn left, stop turn." He likely confused the pilot too.
I think that's why the lawsuit was brought. Sort it out in court where everything that happened is taken into account before rendering a decision objectively.
I’m not a pilot and have no interest in ever going up in a small plane but your videos are fascinating and so well done. I’m learning a lot about aviation. Thank you for posting them
Always have a out. Have a back up plan to your back up plan. This was a simple approach and all he needed was the ability to get the wings level and climb to his "out". Then reassess. If he would have had a no "out" to VMC, and if not low on fuel, then declare a emergency and ask for one vector and one altitude in a safe direction. And stay on that until you get your head straight. Talk to yourself. I am wings level at the right direction and altitude. Ask the controller for a Supervisor and discreet frequency to develop a plan, take charge of your survival. Don't allow yourself to get overloaded. If you start getting overloaded go back to wings level at the right altitude and direction. Tell the controller when you are ready to start gentle turns. Whatever it takes to get you safely on the ground. Right after I got my Instrument I did my first IFR cross country where I had to climb to 10k to get over a pass. Once over it I was VMC on top. I had the option of staying at that altitude VMC or descending to 8k and go IMC. I descended to 8k where I would get 2 1/2 hours of IMC practice and if anything went "wonky" I could climb up to VMC. I didn't want find out if my IMC skills were up to par while attempting my first solo actual IMC approach.
@Gilles45 Well it's YT comments, I think the data says that about 20% of the comments are accurate. For things I really know and can sort out the right and wrong I noticed about 10%.
Almost 15 years ago i got my high performance complex rating endorsement in a 182 RG. I am a VFR pilot. I tried the auto pilot once. It's from 1978, as is the aircraft. And just as sloppy. So i hand fly the bird. That being said, i got months of training and practicing before going across 5 states to see mother. My ultimate goal. Quite a ride, let me tell you. When weather caves in, yours truly is on the ground. Waiting for improvement. This seems to work for me. Matter of fact, I've been doing this same thing for 25 years. Maybe I'm on to something....
If you are in clouds and become disoriented, set your auto-pilot to an altitude 500 feet above the top of the clouds and start it. If you were communicating with a tower at the time, tell them that you need to do that because you are disoriented. Then when you get above the clouds, take your time to regain your composure. Then figure out your current heading and then the heading and altitude you need to get to, which you should also use auto-pilot for. This man was not qualified to fly in those conditions.
Sounds to me like he was perhaps unable to dial in the frequency etc. for the ILS. I even wonder if he was instructing one of his passengers in what to do with the Garmin and something went wrong causing confusion and disorientation as to where they were in relationship to the airfield.
A kid in my neighborhood fell of a neighbor's swingset and bumped her head a little, had a scratch. Her father, a lawyer, sued the neighbor. LOL If you are a lawyer who is reading this, be aware that this kind of bulllshiiit is why people hate lawyers.
They are aware. They leverage the discomfort/stress of being sued to get a settlement out of people. It’s a business and they don’t care about moral principles. Just file your response court papers and be patient, let them yap, it’s all bluff.
@@pinkmendoza They have to pay court costs. In Ontario there’s also a law that says the lawyer should pay the bill if he gave bad advice to his client.
Glad to hear the court used logic. It sounds to me like he was probably fixated on the Garmin unit and couldn't set it and ended way behind the curve and then started to panic. The part about his friend helping him learn the Garmin unit on the way down is key, so I would ask people to listen to this because I taught HVACR for decades, when you are teaching someone something you have to make them do it, not watch you do it, people do not learn from watching, they learn from actually doing it, it connects the brain with the activity and puts it into memory and it needs to be done several times, at least 3, our brains have 2 tape decks, short term and long term, unless you do something several times it may only be on the short term deck which gets erased and never goes to long term. While this is guess, I think that is what happened.
There's a saying that in a crisis people don't do what they've been trained to do, they do what they have practiced (actually it might drilled, eh) . For myself, yeah I have to do it to learn it. I honestly don't see how it could be otherwise. At a minimum doing both pretty much covers it if there's an argument about which is better.
I agree with your assessment of this accident. I have been in a helicopter in a storm at night, not fully disoriented, but altimeter had not reset. It is something you will never forget. I was sitting left seat in an OH-06 in Vietnam. We hit the search light the pilot frantically pulled pitch we were 10-15 feet off the churning water. One of many of those pucker moments. LOL
Saying "almost disoriented" instead of "I am disoriented, and I am declaring an emergency" is pure ego. Keep an eye on GA crash debriefs, and you will see a frequent situation: Wealthy people confuse financial success with competency and ability. That ego sets them up for heartbreak. And there is probably someone reading this and thinking "yeah, but not ME. I EARNED everything I have." Hubris is rampant now-a-days.
It's always, always so much easier to blame someone else for your mistakes than accept them as your own. And I'm glad the courts threw out their claim.
The family should have had no reason or excuse to sue when the pilot just wasn't following instructions. It's always got to be somebody else's fault. Can't be your fault right? Got to collect that money from somebody
I feel bad for the weather asvisor's. They have a relatively simple yet important job, but if the person on the other end of the phone doesn't listen that's probably their end.
I've done a no-gyro approach under the hood with my instructor. Just an awesome experience for him to say on final approach "OK take off the hood and land the plane". Great for building confidence in the entire aviation community and in your flying skills.
That's exactly what my father said back in the '70's, he was a commercial charter pilot, he said the secret to staying alive in aviation is knowing your limitations, I never forget his words.
The problem with some people is that they mistakenly conflate financial success with competency and skill. Who would tell ATC they were "almost disoriented"? That was an ego talking, not a rational brain. "I am disoriented, and I am declaring an emergency" is an intelligent radio transmission from a rational mind. Ego had control on this day, and it ended in heartbreak.
You can tell that this guy had absolutely NO clue how to use his new avionics system on the new plane and needed way more hours of flying time on it with an instructor. He was probably used to having someone else helping him and holding his hand when flying with it prior, and once he was on his own and under pressure after he overshot the localizer it all fell apart. He had no clue how to properly use his autopilot, no clue how to use heading select + autopilot (or how to even fly a heading without the AP). No clue how to use altitude select + vertical speed or FLC to get to 4000 feet. No clue how to even hand fly the plane and look at the PFD to fly to an altitude requested by ATC. There's no way the FAA or ATC can be held accountable on this one when this guy evidently had no clue how to use his new avionics and carry out the most basic commands. This was so frustrating to watch.
🔒Remove your personal information from the web at joindeleteme.com/DEBRIEF and use code DEBRIEF for 20% off
🙌 DeleteMe international Plans: international.joindeleteme.com
Love to be advertised at. Keep gobbling that greedy cash down, you goblin.
Don’t you already make enough money off the TH-cam views so that you don’t have to include embedded ads?
Don't you already know that this is not your business. Scroll on.@@momsterzz
@@momsterzzwhat a weird thing to say. Do you accuse gas stations of selling other things besides gas as well?
This reply has been brought to you by the refreshing taste of Pepsi
Leave it to the family of an attorney to sue someone that’s not responsible. Total incompetence.
Agreed.
Sad outcome
Fair ruling.
I’ve only flown an airplane twice, I’ve been disoriented before just hiking around. It seems to me if you’re disoriented, get to a higher altitude and level off… Communicate with control tower and settle your nerves down. I’m sure that’s easier said than done.
Absolutely.
Lawyers & Insurance companies have ruined this country.
Total american.
@@MaxMax-nb1lm Our tort laws protect us. Please don't whisk them off. All in all they serve a very important legal guardrail protecting our health, well being and security. That said, high probability (human nature), that if you thought you could use the legal system to cash out, you'd be right there. But I suppose that's not a good argument for or against civil liability.
March 20 2011, I had a pilot get spatial disoriented and he may have gone inverted. I somehow managed to get the pilot calm and wings level. I got him to start a slow climb and told him what the tops were reported at. He repeatedly asked me what heading he should be on. I told him not to worry about the heading and just stay level. I eventually got him on top of the clouds and he made it to his destination safely. I am not a pilot but I have been a controller for 36 years. I appreciate these types of videos and share them with my coworkers as emergency training is not handled as well as I think it should be. AOPA recognized me for the flight assist if anyone is looking for more info.
Wow 36 years is impressive! What’s your advice to stay calm in a stressful situation?
And it sounds like you understanding his situation saved his life. Well done. This pilot was experienced enough to know to declare an emergency and he didn't. The controller COULD have changed his response, but was under zero legal responsibility in this accident.
Thank you so much for helping that pilot out of a terrible situation. I have read and heard many times where even the most experienced pilots have gotten spatially disoriented and needed help, either by the copilot or the ATC and it is always important to leave the ego aside, declare the situation and the emergency and then get help. The ATC controllers can help in any way they can but you have to let them know as soon as possible and then follow the instruction given and dont be afraid to ask if you do not understand a request or did not hear it.
Thank you for keeping us safe, sir.
Well done sir👏👏👏
So the pilot disobeyed several instructions and then never declared an emergency and the family tried to blame the ATC person? That's ridiculous.
You did hear the narrator say there were several things ATC should havd said but was unfamiliar with this type of circumstance right?
@@Richard.HybelsIrrelevant.
@@Richard.Hybels
"Roger heading two three zero."
*changes heading to 280*
🤦♂️
Adding asterisks enables bold font?!? 🤯
Regarding the lawsuit against the FAA... Wouldn't the FAA, as a government entity, be protected by sovereign immunity? While the controller may not have chosen the very best plan of action in this rather complicated situation, if he or she was acting in good faith and trying to do the right thing then wouldn't sovereign immunity kick in here and squash their lawsuit?
Is anybody out there an attorney?
Good to hear the court ruled against the family of the pilot.
Lovin it...
If only they ruled against hoover too
@jimhofer8496dumb comment
I fly out of Sarasota all the time and have actually been in a few plane crashes where everyone onboard died except me. Last time I ran out of fuel shortly after take off and went down in the water. I thought the water would be better than land because water but everyone died all the same. Lesson learned is that it doesn't matter whether you over land or water, you can still get killed on impact. Flying is just plain dangerous. Get it? PLANE dangerous.
@jimhofer8496???
The controller was not the pilot in command. The controller told him to climb and maintain. Period. The controller was probably put through years of hell in court by a family looking for someone to blame, in my opinion
I hope the union or the controller counter sue the family for hundreds of millions, and counter sues the FAA..
(Don’t) be like Mike.
If a flight instructor warns you about something (like not flying in weather until more experience is gained), then listen to them!
It’s highly likely, as an attorney, Micheal would become irritated when clients wouldn’t listen to his advice. In aviation, not heeding advice/warnings can be the difference between life and death.
It’s an unnecessary and unfortunate tragedy. RIP Micheal, I hope you’re flying with angels.
An excellent point.
The controller was probably dealing with the emotional and mental fallout of being involved with a fatal flight to begin with. Endlessly wondering if he could have saved that pilot if he’d said differently.
That should have been enough for the family.
they can sue you too @@justinepaula-robilliardmaybe
agree 100%. How can you blame the controller when the pilot doesn't even follow controller instructions?
I’m surprised the family also didn’t sue gravity for helping this guy crash while they were at it. But seriously: as a CFI I recognize this. The guy is flying with his wife and father in law. Inexperience pilots are reluctant to ask for help as they feel embarrassed in front of their friends and family. Hoover has featured similar accidents on his channel where this also was a factor.
I always wonder if the passengers/family are aware there is a problem and they are in trouble or if they are oblivious to what's going on. I always pray they never realize anything.
I shouldn't but that first sentence 🤣
They're currently sending subpoenas to Isaac Newton via a medium.
He is the guy responsible for controlling how gravity works right?
At the very least, he documented the laws and that makes him directly responsible. Lawyer logic
@@MattHeslingtonYou laugh now, but somewhat out there is a lawyer thinking... "wait... suing gravity?... WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT???!!!"
And without a hint of irony.
Makes sense too, because (in the mind of a lawyer) if laws can be manipulated to suit agendas, which is essentially what they think they're for, then why can't the laws of physics? Given enough money, of course.
Another frivilous lawsuit dismissed. The pilot is responsible for his aircraft.
Yeah just like suing a restaurant for not saying the coffee is hot and spilling it yourself
@@AlienGamer38 people like to throw out this example as if it proves their point but that was a legitimate lawsuit. Like how people think you can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater (Google it if you believe that)
Spell frivolous.
Learn English.
Be thankful for this lesson.
Why are people turning against aviation lawyers here again? There are multiple examples of videos covered on THIS channel where attorneys sued the FAA and recovered money due to ATC negligence.
@@MoivinSulunker Learn some manners if you're going to correct people
I haven’t flown in 22 years, and didn’t quite finish my instrument rating, but there’s something from training all those years ago that’s always stuck with me: Climb, Communicate, Confess, Comply. Altitude is your friend, let them know what’s going on ASAP, tell them you made a mistake or you’re in trouble, do what they say. And it’s ok to tell a controller you’re not familiar with a maneuver or procedure. Pilots are so afraid of the FAA, I’m more afraid of dying…..
A little dad advice he gave me:
Why do birds fly so well? They do it every day.
(practice until it is ingrained into your system)
Your stating the 4 Cs reminded me of the saying I learned many years ago. The two most worthless things to a pilot are the sky above you and the runway behind you.
These debriefs are a sad reminder of how important proper training and practice are.
Well said. The first two points, climb and communicate, saved me on my first solo cross country flight. Clouds and fog had rolled in over the entire coastal city I had departed from hours earlier. It was only clear over the mountains and desert I had just crossed. I tried descending to get under it, but was unable. It was fog below the clouds. I climbed above it and got a vector to the initial approach point. Lucky for me there was a hole above that point and the ceiling was high enough to get under it. To be safe General Aviation requires as much training as professional pilots receive.
Altitude is your friend till your plane catches fire
The plane had autopilot too, I feel like turning it on then declaring an emergency would have been a fine solution
I noticed that there are some very common characteristics in these small plane crashes. 1. The pilots are usually only qualified for visual approach and have not received enough instrument training. 2. They will ignore the weather conditions and force a landing, even if they don't know how to land. 3. These people are usually rich or arrogant, or both. In short, they have a very high confidence in themselves, even if it is something they can't do. 4. They will not listen to orders and think that their authority is higher than that of air traffic control.
THANK YOU!
I've seen this arrogance in dog obedience class many times. Lawyers and Doctors with aggressive dogs think they know better than the instructor with 30 plus years experience, just because they're doctors or lawyers.
Generalizations are always incorrect. Of course for owning an aircraft you need some degree of wealth but many pilots are not rich....I actually venture to say that most are not rich. Rich and poor equally have the ability for lack of judgment which is one of the main causes of this crash (and many others).
Common nickname for the Bonanza: The Doctor Killer. - for all the reasons you outlined.
As a doctor, I am 100% in agreement it comes from over confidence, access to money, and a desire for 'more power' when a Cessna 152 would serve the same purpose. They called the Bonanza V tail the 'Doctor Killer' for this reason.
If I was the controller, I would have gone with the "no gyro turn" because the pilot appeared to be completely incapable of following directional heading instructions.
Shame on the family for refusing to accept the pilot's culpability!
Pilot: "Is there a nearby airfield?"
ATC: 🤬 FFS! "You're on approach to the nearest airfield!!!"
They also rejected their own _guilt,_ allowing a guy like that to feel like an unchallenged leader...
Honestly, if I was a controller, I wouldn't. That's the last thing I would do. Instrument flying relies on instruments to keep oneself oriented. Since the pilot was disoriented, he clearly wasn't following proper procedures for instrument flying, and trying to get him to do a no gyro turn(while he was disoriented) was just likely to result in him becoming even more disoriented. I still agree with the ruling that he was unprepared for this type of operation. I don't think ATC is ultimately the one to blame, but they definitely could have handled it better.
I hate when people refuse to take responsibility and sue bc they are unable to
I was kind of thinking along the same lines. Sueing trying to make the controller responsible only highlights your refusal to accept the risks you are taking and the fact that you put yourself into a not win situation.
the way of the USA today unfortunately. the attorneys will rule us all
Roger that/
It wasn’t the pilot who sued, it was the family who doesn’t understand the rules of the air and ultimate responsibility. I’m sure the pilot did, and WAS a safe pilot who unfortunately got into a situation that got away from him. That said, I’m sure the FAA could do way better with recurring emergency training for the controllers. More than a CBI……
The pilot failed to fly correct headings. Idc what anyone says if you can't follow simple instructions you shouldn't be flying guy got himself killed. Pathetic honestly
Hoover, I'm not a pilot or involved in aviation at all, but I just find these videos very interesting. I watch all the different channels, the flight channel, mentor pilot, 74 gear. but I really enjoy your channel a lot. Keep up the good work. I'm sure you're really saving lives.
Me, too. But Mentour pilot has become pretty much unwatchable lately, imho. Petter's videos used to be great, but his videos are far too long, now, and full of flashy graphics and unnecessary filler. I wish he would go back to his old style. Ain't nobody got time for 40-minute videos which could be done in 15 minutes, like Hoover's!
hoover is a ghoul
Blancolorio is another great channel. Juan does quick briefs in easy to understand layman's terms. A very humble down to earth professional pilot!
@@LindysEpiphany Humble? You ain't watch Juan, ha ha.
A lawyers family suing. Shocking.
He's not an attorney.
@@blankspace178umm, he states at the beginning that’s he was an attorney.
@@blankspace178 not anymore
@ He was disbarred almost 2 years before the plane crash....do a damn google search.
@@blankspace178 You need to figure out why you didn’t just post that to begin with. Or, live life as a troll. Your choice.
I agree with you completely. I'm not a pilot, but when your instructor tells you to wait and get more experience, you wait and get more experience. that's being prudent.
Like blaming the Weather Channel when someone gets hit by lightning.
Not exactly but close!
There's a lawyer somewhere working on the case now.
An excellent analogy!
I fly out of Sarasota all the time and have actually been in a few plane crashes where everyone onboard died except me. Last time I ran out of fuel shortly after take off and went down in the water. I thought the water would be better than land because water but everyone died all the same. Lesson learned is that it doesn't matter whether you over land or water, you can still get killed on impact. Flying is just plain dangerous. Get it? PLANE dangerous.
@@beckydoesit9331 a few?????
"In his opinion that details the last moments of the flight, the judge found there was a lack of evidence the controller could have or should have been aware that the pilot was facing an emergency because he did not declare one.
The judge also noted Michael’s flight instructor had warned him not to fly the Bonanza until he gained more experience with it."
Respectfully, when all is said and done it's the pilot in command to fly the plane and ask for help before it's too late! Plus, his instructor warned him before the flight to get more training.
Worse the NTSB really hung the controller out, holy batsticks, that report really burned the controller, as if they had any control, I really hope they sued both the family and the FAA/NTSB for millions, enough to bankrupt the useless NTSB..
I have just revieced my ppla yesterday and I wanted to thank you. Since my first flight I talked to my FI about various crashes you'd covered. Knowing and actually doing something are two different things, i know, but the things you've taught me have really changed my view on things. There were already some situations where I decided to go around, cancel my approach or cancel my flight in the first place - partly because I remembered the kind of awareness you're trying to teach here. You're probably never reading this, but PLEASE continue. You are actually saving lives. Thank you!
Pencil and paper helps. I never had to ask ATC to repeat, nor did I have to worry about tuning a misheard frequency and not being able to go back to the previous one - because the big clipboard in my lap had paper where I wrote down every call, so I could always look back and review.
Smart
I been flying only for 15 years but still write everything immediately down. I laugh how I can hold a pen for hrs and not even notice
this comment wins
My clipboard was small, just a bit larger than a Jeppesen approach plate.
I could always go back to the previous frequency because I just switched between radios.
@@M1903a4 Most people do that. But with the paper record on my clipboard I could monitor 121.5 on one radio while safely switching the other to successive frequencies. I did once pick up strong 121.5 beeping, and told ATC the point between VORs where the signal was strongest.
We all sink to the level of our training...I learned that by living through a big engine room fire on a fast attack submarine at 400 ft down. Our training made it possible to keep down any panic and allowed the crew to maintain control of the submarine as the assigned fire crew saved the boat. Without proper training any situation can become life threatening and under-trained people die in their ignorance...the seconds tick by very fast and death is always near...
It amazes me when people try to sue the governing body concerned when it is clearly the Cap's mistake.
It happens a thousand times a day. You should not be so amazed anymore.
Never admit you’re wrong never take responsibility- it’s the American way.
When your mindset is that the Government provides everything, then it's only natural to believe it's the Government's fault when something goes wrong.
It's all about the money. There was an accident years back now where one of our highways was badly maintained. A semi and trailer was driving and a chunk of concrete was dislodged and went into a car. The driver survived though in a terrible state the family didn't get what they wanted out of the government and insurance. So they later sued the driver personally. The only problem was the accident had been investigated and there was nothing the driver did wrong, not speeding, swerving anything. Nor was there issue with the truck, wasn't overloaded nothing. They knew he was not responsible yet sued him because others didn't pay up enough to their liking. I couldn't even believe a lawyer would take that to court. To sue a party already deemed not at fault simply because the party at fault didn't give you enough money and they were the only one left to sue.
I started practicing with the hood this week. My CFI gave me altitude and heading instructions just like ATC would do, and i just watched the instruments. When the hood came off we were aligned on final. This pilot clearly had difficulty following the headings given to him by ATC. Can't blame ATC for that.
Even worse than not following ATC directions, he couldn't maintain level flight! Just did a bunch of random loops and lost altitude until hitting the ground.
Are you the Patric Duffy from Dallas by chance?
Met the owner of a bare boat rental company, he told me the doctor and lawyers end up crashing and/or sinking more vessels than any other group of people. Wonder what the stats are for airplanes? Strange how that condescending nose up in the air can get you killed.
Look at the reputation of the Beechcraft Bonanza…
@@JAleksandrV tail. Docta killa
They are sometimes/often in position to afford high performance aircraft and so the absolute rate of doctor/lawyer-involved crashes may be misleading unless you correct for the %'s of ownership. If 50% of Bonanza crashes involve doctors, but half of Bonanzas are owned by doctors, then their rate of crashes is no higher than average.
That said I'm sure there's some degree of arrogance and complacency out there among this population. I'm a physician and an instrument-rated private pilot. I like to think I'm pretty meticulous with my planning and decision making process when flying; and most of the docs I know that fly are likewise quite careful and know their limitations. For example a colleague of mine owned a Mooney 252. He called me up one day and asked me to fly him to check on his aging parents. I had a (somewhat slower) Mooney 201 at the time. For whatever reason, he didn't feel sharp that day and made the call to not fly himself. From my own personal experience, the only real incident I know of - there was an old retired orthopaedic surgeon I knew who landed on the taxiway, but I think there was a movie star who did that too, and not in the Millenium Falcon!
Just putting it out there, that when people see doctor + high performance aircraft, they often jump to the conclusion that it's an arrogant SOB behind the yoke. But there are at least a handful who are good decision-makers and determined to continually learn and improve with each flight.
A good friend of mine retired not long ago after a 40-year career as a commercial pilot, most of it flying 747s for Continental Airlines. Like so many young pilots, he began his career building up his hours by teaching others how to fly. I’ll always remember him telling me that “doctors think they know everything” and “doctors are better at making holes in the ground than ditch diggers”. Sure enough the only person I know who killed himself in an airplane was a doctor. Not sure what my friend thought about lawyers…I’d imagine they’re even worse.
@@JAleksandr You (and other commentators) have it backwards. The Bonanza is just a tool. The pilots are the Bonanza killers!
I was a CFI for 40 years (now retired from flying). Going from steam gauge to glass is a huge step. When I first started using the Garmin 430 I took 15 hours of dual as well as ground school to get used to it. Even then there was probably another 20 hours of flying myself during which time I discovered things I didn't know how to do yet. So, this poor guy was trying to learn the 530 and fly actual IMC at the same time; meaning there was no time learn how to reconfigure the 530 to respond to chnaging instructions and actual conditions.
I really appreciate your reconstructions! Someone once said that "under stress we don't rise to the occasion, we fall to our level of training." So the first hours in a new plane with a new cockpit can be very dangerous when the first unexpected thing goes wrong then the whole cockpit scene looks wrong. Possibly he briefed himself for a 5-Left approach. Very likely he failed to correct for DG drift so his DG was off 10 degrees. In any case he lost the picture and went into panic mode. At that point, lying to the controller and possibly lying to himself was fatal. Step 1 - level the wings, maintain altitude and direction, stop pretending, confess your situation and declare an emergency. It's your job to reject any instructions from the controller you don't understand or that you cannot complete confidently - only you can keep the plane under control.
Apparently he was unable to use the Garmin 530 to pull up the approach and picture. However, if he had briefed properly for any approach ( 5L or 5R ) he should have had the VOR GSO loaded and at least known what radial he was on.. Instead of saying "what do you think of my approach?" or whatever,he should have said "I'm concerned my instruments are not working. Can you tell me my current location and how far I am from the localizer?"
And if that didn't work he could have, and should probably have declared a missed approach and flown the missed approach - as he should have briefed himself and mentally practiced. If he wasn't capable of flying the missed approach he should not have been flying the approach -- period.
If a controller gives you instructions you cannot safely complete, it's your right and duty to tell them "unable" and explain. If you can't maintain level flight and turn to a heading in IMC you have no business being there.
I heard that from that Multi engine video here on youtube, nicely put.
Hi there. DG drift/angle off: I'd expect this to be equipped HSI. Maybe not ? Blue Skies !
I wonder what the passengers was telling him to do, to many voices in a small plane.
I'm a private pilot and my father was a commercial charter pilot until he retired, Dad said if you get disoriented the needle & bank is helpful it's a simple instrument to follow. He was not a fan of the turn coordinator. He also said the secret to staying alive in aviation is knowing your limitations.
Not that it matters, but it was the Greek poet Archilochus that first stated the phrase.
Great debrief, it’s hitting close to home as I will be in the very near future flying a new aircraft
Home from FL to WA. This debrief will be playing
In my head. I will have a safety pilot with me and no reason to get home in a hurry.
Thanks Hoover!
Hey man, watch out for headwinds and icing conditions.
Safe travels ❤
Thank God the Court got it right! These people did not deserve a dime. It was their "oh I'm rich so I'll get a plane and be a pilot" family member who was solely responsible for this accident. He, like many rich people, wasn't cut out to be a pilot.
His instructor already told him not to fly in bad weather, when u don't like to listen u learn the hard way.
The problem is that it was the last thing he learnt in life, it was too late, and he took two others with him.
I am retired ARTCC (Washington and Atlanta Centers) controller after 30 years and a 45 year ATP. Most controllers don’t fly, nor understand fully what a pilot does. Where as a professional, I get recurrent training (insurance requires that) for my C414A, and when I did fly for someone 6 month recurrency training was so beneficial to go over those things that don’t happen frequently like emergencies. I complained for decades that the FAA does lousy currency training, almost no recurrency or emergency training. As an ATP, CFII-MI, I know the benefits of practicing emergencies. I too don’t believe it was the FAA fault, and there is no requirement for a controller to be an instrument pilot, but it sure does help. I saw several pilot-controllers manage emergency situations with life saving results EVEN if the pilot was at fault. Sad story, for sure, thanks for sharing.
I agree. Recurrency training should be required for keeping the IR valid. Focus should be on unusual attitudes, disorientation and failure management specific for type aircraft. Simulator in GA world doesn't cut it as motion is a big attribute to pilots initial response in IMC. I have always believed and trained that knowing what pitch and power setting with wings level will keep you safe, we train that all the time at the airline. It also gives you as pilot a lot of comfort knowing you can get control back of the aircraft when disoriented with just a few simple steps that are like 2nd nature due to recurrent training.
Too many pilots treating their pilots license like a drivers license... Flying their planes as a necessary form of transportation... Treating the plane like a car on a roadtrip. Making stops, no flexibility in schedule, bringing family onboard, get home itis. Doing all this with little no IFR flight experience...
That is a very good point. I've been watching Hoover's videos for a couple of years now. They have scared me enough that I don't believe I have the gumption to be a pilot. Just too many holes in the swiss cheese for me.
That was the correct ruling....
I’ll tell ya what I think of this and all your other vids, friggin LOVE THEM!! As an older man now that has pilots and commercial pilots in the family and grew up being a passenger on GA aircraft I’m finally working towards being more involved in GA as a pilot and your vids always bring up so many rabbit holes for me to traverse and expand my knowledge. Bringing up situations and scenarios that could possibly trigger a moment of pause or reevaluation that could keep myself and others from a bad, or even worse, a tragic accident. Honestly cannot thank you enough for all the time and effort you put into these!
The pilot is in command of the aircraft, period! Many bad decisions by the pilot
A lot of us ex-GA pilots experienced disorientation and task-overload ..... I did on three occasions, and all were in acceptable (but not great) VFR conditions. When it happens, the responsibility is always on the pilot to call it out asap and get assistance or execute the recovery manoeuvres we all trained. In my cases, I recovered two safely myself but called sector ATC for help on the third, and lived to be congratulated for doing so. This is clear-cut and well presented - albeit a grim lesson.
Overconfidence is a deadly drug❤
I hate it when lawyers try and convince family members they have a case !
they can only win, at least financialy....
He didn't try to convince anyone to sue. He was already dead. His bereaved children tried to find a way that their mother and grandfather's deaths were not his fault. Completely natural and commonplace reaction. The courts set them straight.
Not to mention the official report said FAA controller had partly contributed to the cause of the crash.
Or vice versa.
@@ericperkins3078
Not "normal", but "understandable".
The bonanza is a challenging plane to fly from a piper cherokee. 6 hours of training may make you legal in it, but it doesn’t make you proficient or safe.
I feel for Michael's family, but he was lining up the holes in the Swiss cheese before he ever climbed into the cockpit and flew into bad weather.
1,100 overcast is not bad weather
@@Ophidian14 Wow. How pathetic, TH-cam warrior.
I learned to fly in the 1970's. Cessna 150, 172 mostly. Learned to fly floats in a Taylor craft and got an instrument rating.. No GPS(obviously) and a hand held mike. Got checked out in a Piper Arrow for a complex aircraft(retractable and constant speed prop). Also much faster than a 172. Biggest difference in that Arrow due to speed was how quickly it was easy to "get behind the airplane". Less time to think and react. I think contributes to a lot of these accidents in pilots who get into a higher performance aircraft.
The pilot sounds like an arrogant piece of work who blatantly ignores and interrupts briefings and safe flight. Then the family wants to blame others.
its amazing how many of these stories are similar in nature.
The comments are brutal; most are not necessary. The pilot’s inabilities are obvious, that’s the point of the debrief, it’s a teaching lesson. This channel is and was not designed to “take shots” at those affected. Simply, “watch and learn”; it might save your life one day!
Noones taking shots its common sense i dont drive cos i know id kill someone so if you have just got a plane havd some more lessons before you take your loved ones on a flight he made rrrors he tudely cut off the prople giving him vital weather instruction he proberly ruined life of ATC controller their familly should be sueing its not about getting on ivd never flown never want to bever been in a a plane you wouldnt get me flying and theres ti ex ive interubted prople on phone rudely but ive not had family with nd nor flying a plane.
Im severly mentally ill do cant drive fly or anything and feel deep vondolenses for all involved but it need not have happened@Jimmer-Space88
@@Jimmer-Space88but truly, interrupting a briefing twice when serious weather concerns are being addressed, is a huge red flag and sets the tone for this entire event.
The Swiss cheese model of errors lining up to create a disaster: weather coming in, rushed interrupted briefing, pressure to get the flight going, minimal time in type - first 100 hours in faster more complex aircraft; safety pilot no longer present; specific instructor warning about IMC approaches in this new plane; and this before the flight even began.
Just so many holes of the Swiss cheese aligning it’s almost ridiculous.
Perhaps the brutal comments stem from the combination of so many bad judgment calls and red flags with the family wanting to blame the FAA. Either way, a ton of learning here.
@@GabeWil Before the internet, weather round here consisted mostly of calling a number and listening to a recording.
Everybody I knew hung up the phone once they'd got the cloud base, visibility and 2,000' wind.
I did instrument checks as Navy flight instructor in SoCal.
Putting someone 'under the hood' in an aircraft is not without its risks. If you're operating in VMC conditions outside of positive control airspace--- you are still responsible for 'see and avoid', even if you're on an instrument flight plan. The controller is only responsible for separation between participating IFR traffic, separation from aircraft operating VFR is workload permitting. Depending on the visibility in the aircraft, you can be seriously hampering your ability to see and avoid other aircraft by putting one of the pilots 'under the hood'. Keep in mind the VFR traffic have just as much right to cross through airways vertically or horizontally as you do to be flying on them IFR. So this isn't just something to consider when flying direct off airways. If it's VMC outside positive control airspace, while you're doing the instrument training you still have to be able to see and avoid other aircraft.
A kicker in this - the controller has the ability to inhibit/block the VFR transponder returns. In places like SoCal, on a nice day having those displayed clutters the display to the point the controller can't pick out the IFR traffic from the noise. Military had the advantage of full motion simulators, so I could do everything I needed to do in the simulator to check their ability to operate the aircraft without a visual horizon. In the aircraft-- it's reality, I wouldn't put them under the hood. I would ask the student when approaching the Oceanside VORTAC to tell me how many aircraft they could see. Usually somewhere between 2-4. Then I'd ask the controller to provide the number of aircraft over the VORTAC including VMC--- usually 15 to- controller couldn't count only estimate.
What a dangerous pilot. His bad attitude to sound advice, to weather and severe case of get-home-itis doomed that flight before it even started.
Over estimation of his skills mixed with complacency really ensured the outcome. Tragic for the innocent victims.
and in a newer, higher-performance plane to boot. Sad.
I disagree about dangerous. Based only on the info in the video, the final flight with 1000' ceilings, as long as the pilot is IFR current is a safe decision. Even with a new aircraft. I had a student early 2000's, former Navy A7 pilot, and was flying 737's at the time checking out in a Cessna 182. Under the hood something happened, totally disoriented, couldn't figure out heading and suddenly couldn't hold altitudes on a VOR approach. I took the controls so he can stabilize himself. Bad moment in time. Professional and experienced, a much better pilot than me, but sometimes it happens.
@@bobrubens7769 Good comment, many in front of the computer don't understand how it can be, this pilot wasn't up to the situation he put himself and family in for sure though. A IFR rating is not enough unfortunately.
@@dwaynemcallister7231 thanks, I like when people are respectful and not trolls. What bothers me, being fair, I can imagine myself making the same decision. ILS, ok makes things easier, 1000'celings, great, I will be visual early on final, even with new gadgets I can just focus on centering the needles, with good trim, no problem. It's a scary but truthful assessment that I think any average pilot would make.
What's next, Sueing gravity ?
Hand flying in IMC for long periods makes my armpits cry stinky tears.
I could have lived without knowing that. It makes me think of those Lume commercials (shudder).
To see that screams were heard just pulls at my heart, prayers to all left to grieve. Changing from one aircraft to another takes a lot of learning of the new aircraft and I agree most of the fault falls on the pilot, even thou the controller needs more training for sure, just a tragic outcome, as always thank you Hoover for presenting your debrief with respect.
I think that knowing the plane's electronics is absolutely essential. I get the impression that he was struggling to set up an unfamiliar navigation system while hand flying in instrument conditions. If he had been flying his Cherokee, which is easier to fly and which he was completely used to, it probably would have turned out better.
If you follow all of ATC directions and die, then I think you could sue. When you follow none of the directions, don’t ask for help or don’t declare an emergency, I think you’re SOL and up the creek.
Reasonable. But lawsuits not always in that category.
Nope. Pilot-in-Command is the term, for a reason. The PILOT is responsible for the safety of their aircraft, period. There's been more than one occasion where I've told ATC "unable" when they were putting me in a position I didn't want to be in. Now, if somehow ATC vectored two aircraft in IMC into the flight paths of each other, then yes, ATC would be responsible.
100% correct. The pilot was NOT up to the task.
When I transitioned from a single engine airplane, which didn't have an autopilot, to the twin I now fly, which came with a 3-axis autopilot, the CFI I trained with insisted I learn how to use it. Having flown for over 1,000 hrs without one I brushed it aside, figuring I could learn it later. My CFI made it part of the syllabus before he signed me off for my MEI checkride, telling me anything in the aircraft is fair game for the DPE to examine my proficiency with. Most importantly he said that I should use it when I could to ensure it works and to maintain proficiency in using its various modes. "If you ever become disoriented engage heading and altitude hold and it will save your life". Truer words could not be spoken in my opinion and in this case, assuming this pilot had a working autopilot, it would have saved him by stopping the inadvertant turn and allowing him to climb to VFR conditions. I'm certain once he became disoriented a sense of panic ensued, which is why engaging the autopilot should have been committed to muscle memory if he was going to fly hard IFR.
That’s such a great point. If I’m going to potentially put myself in a life threatening situation , how do I get out? If I can’t answer then make other plans.
My CFI likes to throw students to the wolves. One of the first night flights was a RWY 7 departure from KSPG. Moonless hazy night. For all practical purposes, IMC. You better believe I reached over for the AP's wing leveler for the initial climb-out and turn. We spent plenty of time hand-flying during these practically-IMC night flights, including unusual attitude recovery. Very much worth the effort and time to do it in near-IMC conditions where you have to fly the instruments as there are no visual references.
@@grayrabbit2211Hey homie, if it’s a moonless night and you’re flying out of SPG and west bound. It’ll only take you 10-15 minutes max to get out over the Gulf and (in my opinion) you are literally in IMC conditions. Explanation: look out the window in the dark while over a dark ocean in front and around you. Now point to the horizon. You can’t (neither could I) and that’s the point. We should really evaluate what’s really VFR flying and what’s considered IFR.
Edit 1. I’ll add. Look up “Head-up illusion” for reference to what I’m talking about.
I have had a couple of minor situations where I had one too many things to handle and then I lost track of all the other things I had previously understood. With all the details needed to land an airplane, I can picture this happening to the pilot. He needed someone to get him to focus on flying the plane by doing what he was competent at. Buy some time, settle down, then worry about landing.
In 1973, I flew a Ground Controlled Approach (GCA) at night (VMC) into Naval Air Station Moffett Field, Sunnyvale, CA under the hood in a Cessna 182. It was the first and only time I did so. The approach was uneventful, educational, and extremely satisfying. When the Ground Controller released me (hood off), I was slightly left of the runway and about 2000 feet short of the threshold. An adjustment to the right and a nice landing had me back on the ground. It sounds like a "no gyro turn" is the civilian form of a GCA. This accident is another tragic one, Hoover. The "get-there-itis" factor, the weather, and unfamiliarity with the aircraft and its avionics coupled with his poor flight planning certainly doomed him from the start. "Personal flying limitations" can be difficult to identify for most of us, but essential for safe flight.
What
GCA and no gyro are two different things. GCA radars are a separate radar system from the main terminal area radars. GCA radars are very precise, and provide both azimuth and glidepath corrections. A no gyro approach has no glidepath information. Azimuth corrections are based on standard rate turns and timings. The terminal area radar antenna probably rotates once every 6 seconds or so, leaving a pretty wide margin for error in headings. GCA radars update position every 1 second or even less.
@@vonJaerschky Thanks for that information. The No Gyro Vector procedure was just thrown out there in the video and I had never heard of it before. I found a good explanation of the procedure and its application in "IFR Magazine" online.
"Thankfully, there’s yet another tool in the ATC garage that can save the day: the no-gyro vector. It requires several elements. First, ATC will tell you, “This will be a no-gyro vector” and instruct you to either “turn left” or “turn right.” Upon receipt of that instruction, you will commence a standard rate turn (3 degrees per second) relying on the turn coordinator. ATC will watch your aircraft’s track on radar. Once it appears the track is heading in the right direction, the controller will say, “Stop turn.” Due to radar lag, it may take a few additional turns back and forth to get you properly lined up."
@@vonJaerschky Old C-141 Loadmaster here. Sat in the jumpseat many times in my career listening to the radios when the pilots were doing a PAR approach, what here is being referred to as a GCA? It was always nice to see the runway become visible out of the clouds, rain, and mist when flying in complete IMC.
Personal limitations should be identified before ever leaving the ground. Heck, that should be done before leaving the house. Some like “if this, then this”. If ceiling is below X it’s a no go, for example.
That's the one thing I'm really scared of: Underestimating weather conditions and heading into an IFR situation that I'm unable to handle.
I once went under a solid cloud cover with a flight of 6 small planes. The clouds went lower and lower and we followed until we were just a few hundred feet above the ground.
I absolutely hated the fact that we had maneuvered ourselves into this tight situation but just when i was ready to turn back the clouds ahead started dissipating. Shouldn't have flown there, won't do that again, *ever.*
So good to hear you again Hoover! So glad you're feeling better
It was unfair to subject the controller to a court case. The fault lay with the pilot, who on recognising he was struggling should have declared an emergency and climbed into VFR, once in clear air and settled he could have been guided to where he could see where he was going. A sad tale and unnecessary loss of life.
Most of my 400 hours IMC was in Hueys without autopilot and with no computer avionics. Because we were always below 10,000 and had only 2.5 hours fuel, we were in the weather when there was weather. While with legal alternates, they had to be close in similar weather. I appreciated no gyro PAR because it reduced my work load. We had two pilots, but still used PAR when weather was near minimums. I don't fault the controller for suggesting PAR, but he was too far unglued by then. If he couldn't fly headings, he was beyond help.
That’s no easy task coming from someone in that world. During my time flying EMT, all the veteran pilots used to talk about their days jockeying the Bell 212 in IMC and night without autopilot, advanced avionics, or NVG’s, and my respect for them was instantaneous. You simply couldn’t have a bad day in that ship, or there would be 4 souls instantly wiped away. It’s like balancing a marble on a cutting board in a room with no windows, and then having the lights turned off on you. Loss of control happens that fast in a helicopter if you’re not on the dials.
And you had another guy in the airframe to remind you when you were being stupid. No substitute for that.
@crazyralph6386 The safest pilot I ever flew with was David Trujillo, when we were in the 717th Medical Evacuation in the NMARNG. He was a Nighthawk pilot in Vietnam. He taught us to slow down to shaking on approach both day and night. It is amazing how much more you see on those shaking slow approaches. He taught his crew, copilot medic and crew chief, by osmosis. When he said, "nose coming left," that hovering Huey was locked in time and space until we all remembered to reply, "tail clear right, nose clear right, tail clear left.". He simply waited until it came to you to reply.
@@jimmydulin928fascinating. there’s no school like old school.
This channel could be turned into a tv show. I’m not a pilot and don’t want to be, but I still enjoy it immensely.
I'll have to agree with the court's final decision that the full weight of the accident lays on the pilot.
To move up from a Cherokee to a Bonanza is quite the step. And to fly one of those in IFR without much experience... Well, we saw what happened. 😢
I think it's bye time we gift GA Synthetic Vision so they can see through the cloud/rain/snow/smog.
Had it for almost a Century and it just needs a company to mass produce it at cost.
Glad the court made the decision they did
I realize that it hurts to lose loved ones; lost many, as I am 62. But filing a law suit against the FAA is beyond stupid. No doubt the silly attorney they employed was bored and did it pro bono
no that attorney took their money also. they tell people there is a chance.
Pilot was an attorney, could have been a colleague, it's possible the pilot being found at fault could be an issue if the company had him insured
@@Thissapunyo good point
This is very true.
@@breakupgoogle nice display name haha
Yup you're spot on. Controller (and FAA) were definitely not responsible. The pilot couldn't maintain a direction, and none of the instructions the controller gave would have lead to the plane spinning out of control, that's on the pilot.
This youtube channel is saving peoples lives. Thank you Hoover
Agree with the court!
Sorry to hear of the tragic accident. Thank you for such detailed summary. The Controller works for the Pilot, but the Pilot is in Command and was advised to not fly in IMC until he had more time. When weather was bad, he should have opted for commercial tickets back home (or start driving), or reschedule Dr. Appointments, so there’s no pressure.
Definitely - call an audible and stay out of harms way
As a former instructor and commuter airline pilot (including a few bouts of spacial disorientation) and later an attorney who handled aviation cases, I have a few thoughts to share. First, as a pilot I would accept responsibility for the flight including obviously getting a full weather briefing and having the experience and skills required to fly my plane in IFR conditions. Sadly, I believe the facts show that initially he understood his limitations but when he was on the return leg he pushed outside his envelope of experience and skill. However, as an aviation attorney, the tort law in most jurisdictions is predicated on “comparative negligence” meaning that if two or more factors cause an accident, you can sue the other party ( in this case the FAA) for their negligence. Any financial damages awarded by the jury would be reduced by the percentage of your own negligence. Meaning if the jury awarded the family $1m but found the pilot 75% responsible for the crash, the recovery would only be $250k. However, since this accident happened in No Carolina, which is a contributory negligence state, the pilots negligence operates as a total bar to the family’s right to sue. That’s why the judge didn’t let the jury decide the case.
So regardless of the FAA and NTSB findings, the court’s ruling appears to me to be correct. North Carolina is one of the very few remaining states that still use the law of “contributory negligence” as a bar to recovery- most states use comparative negligence so a jury decides the percentage of each party’s liability.
Very interesting observation, Jim. Thanks for the contribution. I learned something today!
Good point and nice to know that everyone deserves their right to jury trial. However, too bad he didn't just lower the gear, slow to 120 and it would fly easier than the Cherokee, and the autopilot would have helped immensely. The A36 is a very predictable and easy plane to fly...wish I never sold mine.
Contributory and comparative negligence. Got it. Just making notes to remind myself later. Thanks Jim
@@mowtivatedmechanic1172 : while some may think contributory negligence worked here, you can easily imagine a situation where you make a relatively minor mistake and the other party is almost entirely at fault, but you are thrown out of court. For example, you are driving down a road at 45 mph- the speed limit is 30 mph- the other driver blows through a stop sign at 55 mph and T bones you. You suffer multiple injuries and fractures and a traumatic brain injury. The court dismisses your case because you were speeding and therefore contributed to the accident. Fair?
*CAN YOU SUGGEST* why, in so many of these cases, the pilot does not follow the controller's heading instructions, then asks again, and again doesn't follow them? Is it because they are trusting (wrongly) their own senses? Or are they failing to absorb what's being said out of panic?
It’s been 28 years since medical reasons forced me to quit flying. Sometimes, when returning to my hometown airport (HTS) the controllers would ask if I would accept a no gyro approach. They wanted to maintain their proficiency. When I was instructing, I made certain my students practiced the no gyro approach. Huntington, not being a busy airport, controllers would grant my request when traffic was light.
Hoover, Thank you for your service.
Yeah. Safe pilot. Listens to the start of a weather brief and blows off the rest to "beat the storm". Genius.
North Carolina is a contributory negligence state, meaning that even if FAA had some negligence, the pilot’s contribution is an absolute bar to any recovery. The family attorney should have known that before consuming those resources. It’s a sad tragedy, but pilot in command was ultimately responsible. Screams noted at the end of the last transmission just haunt me. 😢
It’s a Federal action.
@@Jimmer-Space88 Tried according to state law. See Erie Railroad v. Tompkins.
federal courts exercising diversity of citizenship jurisdiction (eg, NC Federal District Court hearing suit between PA plaintiff and DC defendant; venue in NC because that’s where incident giving rise to suit occurred) can apply the law of the state in which they sit (NC) unless controlling statutes or the parties agree otherwise. This may have been a negligence action brought under North Carolina law arising out of an accident that occurred in NC by an out of state plaintiff against a federal agency defendant over which federal courts presumably have primary personal jurisdiction, but which nevertheless apply substantive North Carolina negligence legal principles to the case. I haven’t read any of the relevant documents in this case to know for sure. The attorney for the estates that brought the action may have had a duty to the estate to pursue the action for a variety of reasons.
@@tkingsley5761 thank you for the clarification.
@@MrShobarThat’s first year law school diversity of citizenship. This would be brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act. (Yes, substantive state law would still play a role.) A big issue in such cases is discretionary versus ministerial function.
When Michael recognized that he was disorientation he should have immediately asked for clearance to ascend above the clouds to reclaim some semblance of his control over the situation. That he continued to fly in IFR conditions in a state of disorientation was a fundamental and deadly mistake.
Ego. Lots of people are too weak to admit they need help.
In an emergency you don't even have to ask, just do it, and communicate what you're doing IF ABLE. He could have climbed back out of it at any time, permission or not and if he had done it soon enough, he'd still be alive.
Thanks for this debrief. It’s a cautionary tale for all of us. Until one has intimate knowledge of their avionics and particularly modern navigation equipment, they are more of a distraction than a tool. Although I knew the ending of the story all along, I couldn’t help but hope at the moment he recognized a level of disorientation, he would hit the wings level button that the auto pilot likely had and take a few minutes to breath. Everyone please know your safe altitudes and just fly straight and level till you get it together.
Based on the radio calls, I got the impression that Michael was either already behind the aircraft prior to descending into the clouds or impaired in some way. No mention of toxicology results.
Thanks Hoover for the debrief.
I am a retired TRACON controller, and I have no idea what the controller was thinking with no-gyro turns. In all of my years on a radar scope, I think I've used them once for a real airplane (total electrical failure at night in the dark in weather), and for pilots practicing. The most common use of no-gyro turns, would be a ground controlled approach (GCA), or a surveillance approach. IMHO, a no-gyro vector had no place in this scenario. I would have worked to get his wings level, and get him climbing to VFR conditions. The quick left turn to right turn in IMC may have also sealed their fate. It's been a few years, but the clearance is: "This will be a no-gyro vector to the "ILS final, make (standard/half-standard rate turns, turn left, stop turn." He likely confused the pilot too.
I think that's why the lawsuit was brought. Sort it out in court where everything that happened is taken into account before rendering a decision objectively.
I’m not a pilot and have no interest in ever going up in a small plane but your videos are fascinating and so well done. I’m learning a lot about aviation. Thank you for posting them
Love Sundays with Pilot Debrief!!
Always have a out. Have a back up plan to your back up plan. This was a simple approach and all he needed was the ability to get the wings level and climb to his "out". Then reassess. If he would have had a no "out" to VMC, and if not low on fuel, then declare a emergency and ask for one vector and one altitude in a safe direction. And stay on that until you get your head straight. Talk to yourself. I am wings level at the right direction and altitude.
Ask the controller for a Supervisor and discreet frequency to develop a plan, take charge of your survival. Don't allow yourself to get overloaded. If you start getting overloaded go back to wings level at the right altitude and direction. Tell the controller when you are ready to start gentle turns. Whatever it takes to get you safely on the ground.
Right after I got my Instrument I did my first IFR cross country where I had to climb to 10k to get over a pass. Once over it I was VMC on top. I had the option of staying at that altitude VMC or descending to 8k and go IMC. I descended to 8k where I would get 2 1/2 hours of IMC practice and if anything went "wonky" I could climb up to VMC. I didn't want find out if my IMC skills were up to par while attempting my first solo actual IMC approach.
ATC is only an advisory service. Its up to you to fly the aircraft and keep everyone safe. Poor guy just made the wrong decision to fly that day.
What about "14 CFR § 91.123 - Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions"?
ATC services can be advisory and mandatory in which case they have responsibility. But it all depends on what you’re doing and when.
"poor guy"
ATC is absolutely NOT only an advisory service! On which planet do you live? 🤦♂️
@Gilles45 Well it's YT comments, I think the data says that about 20% of the comments are accurate. For things I really know and can sort out the right and wrong I noticed about 10%.
I noticed every time Hoover says "me" or "I" he puts his hand on his heart. I believe this shows honest, empathy and caring.
Almost 15 years ago i got my high performance complex rating endorsement in a 182 RG. I am a VFR pilot. I tried the auto pilot once. It's from 1978, as is the aircraft. And just as sloppy. So i hand fly the bird.
That being said, i got months of training and practicing before going across 5 states to see mother. My ultimate goal. Quite a ride, let me tell you.
When weather caves in, yours truly is on the ground. Waiting for improvement. This seems to work for me. Matter of fact, I've been doing this same thing for 25 years.
Maybe I'm on to something....
You ARE on to something: safe, smart, not falling prey to get-there-itis or ego. Keep up the good work!
If you are in clouds and become disoriented, set your auto-pilot to an altitude 500 feet above the top of the clouds and start it. If you were communicating with a tower at the time, tell them that you need to do that because you are disoriented. Then when you get above the clouds, take your time to regain your composure. Then figure out your current heading and then the heading and altitude you need to get to, which you should also use auto-pilot for. This man was not qualified to fly in those conditions.
Sounds to me like he was perhaps unable to dial in the frequency etc. for the ILS.
I even wonder if he was instructing one of his passengers in what to do with the Garmin and something went wrong causing confusion and disorientation as to where they were in relationship to the airfield.
You know what i think is Hoover does great work explaining these unfortunate accidents.
A kid in my neighborhood fell of a neighbor's swingset and bumped her head a little, had a scratch. Her father, a lawyer, sued the neighbor. LOL
If you are a lawyer who is reading this, be aware that this kind of bulllshiiit is why people hate lawyers.
Well, people hate other people's lawyers, but people love THEIR lawyers. So lawyers do get some love after all.
They are aware. They leverage the discomfort/stress of being sued to get a settlement out of people. It’s a business and they don’t care about moral principles.
Just file your response court papers and be patient, let them yap, it’s all bluff.
There’s no repercussions for frivolous litigation and for lawyers it’s always someone else’s fault.
@@pinkmendoza They have to pay court costs. In Ontario there’s also a law that says the lawyer should pay the bill if he gave bad advice to his client.
I agree with you Hover, unfortunate results for the pilot and passengers, however, this is on the pilot and depth of his skills. ✌🏻
Glad to hear the court used logic. It sounds to me like he was probably fixated on the Garmin unit and couldn't set it and ended way behind the curve and then started to panic. The part about his friend helping him learn the Garmin unit on the way down is key, so I would ask people to listen to this because I taught HVACR for decades, when you are teaching someone something you have to make them do it, not watch you do it, people do not learn from watching, they learn from actually doing it, it connects the brain with the activity and puts it into memory and it needs to be done several times, at least 3, our brains have 2 tape decks, short term and long term, unless you do something several times it may only be on the short term deck which gets erased and never goes to long term. While this is guess, I think that is what happened.
There's a saying that in a crisis people don't do what they've been trained to do, they do what they have practiced (actually it might drilled, eh) . For myself, yeah I have to do it to learn it. I honestly don't see how it could be otherwise. At a minimum doing both pretty much covers it if there's an argument about which is better.
I agree with your assessment of this accident. I have been in a helicopter in a storm at night, not fully disoriented, but altimeter had not reset. It is something you will never forget. I was sitting left seat in an OH-06 in Vietnam. We hit the search light the pilot frantically pulled pitch we were 10-15 feet off the churning water. One of many of those pucker moments. LOL
Family sued FAA? When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Almost disoriented???? Dude had a bad case of 'Gottagetthereitis' , shit weather & unfamiliarity of his aircraft. Short cuts = Short life.
Saying "almost disoriented" instead of "I am disoriented, and I am declaring an emergency" is pure ego. Keep an eye on GA crash debriefs, and you will see a frequent situation: Wealthy people confuse financial success with competency and ability. That ego sets them up for heartbreak. And there is probably someone reading this and thinking "yeah, but not ME. I EARNED everything I have." Hubris is rampant now-a-days.
Thanks Hoover. Excellent channel bro 👌
Need a debrief for John Denver. Thank you for the videos 👍🏼
Couldn’t turn the fuel selector valve to the tank with fuel.
Yes, it was in a not very accessible place...😔
It's always, always so much easier to blame someone else for your mistakes than accept them as your own. And I'm glad the courts threw out their claim.
The family should have had no reason or excuse to sue when the pilot just wasn't following instructions. It's always got to be somebody else's fault. Can't be your fault right? Got to collect that money from somebody
I feel bad for the weather asvisor's. They have a relatively simple yet important job, but if the person on the other end of the phone doesn't listen that's probably their end.
Glad you are feeling better
I've done a no-gyro approach under the hood with my instructor. Just an awesome experience for him to say on final approach "OK take off the hood and land the plane". Great for building confidence in the entire aviation community and in your flying skills.
Family loses meal ticket and so sue traffic controller
The pilot's name was Michael Apfelbaum. If you look up his family, they're all lawyers. So it's not surprising they're trying to blame someone else.
5:49 "One of my goals has been to always help people stay safe....and that includes protecting your personal data". Gotta love that segue.
It’s Sad but true a man must always no his limitations and prepare for them.
That's exactly what my father said back in the '70's, he was a commercial charter pilot, he said the secret to staying alive in aviation is knowing your limitations, I never forget his words.
The problem with some people is that they mistakenly conflate financial success with competency and skill. Who would tell ATC they were "almost disoriented"? That was an ego talking, not a rational brain. "I am disoriented, and I am declaring an emergency" is an intelligent radio transmission from a rational mind. Ego had control on this day, and it ended in heartbreak.
You can tell that this guy had absolutely NO clue how to use his new avionics system on the new plane and needed way more hours of flying time on it with an instructor. He was probably used to having someone else helping him and holding his hand when flying with it prior, and once he was on his own and under pressure after he overshot the localizer it all fell apart.
He had no clue how to properly use his autopilot, no clue how to use heading select + autopilot (or how to even fly a heading without the AP). No clue how to use altitude select + vertical speed or FLC to get to 4000 feet. No clue how to even hand fly the plane and look at the PFD to fly to an altitude requested by ATC. There's no way the FAA or ATC can be held accountable on this one when this guy evidently had no clue how to use his new avionics and carry out the most basic commands. This was so frustrating to watch.
Experience and muscle memory are two different levels of training.
Just because you can doesn’t been you should. Guy was in over his head and probably knew it. Hit the AP get stabilized, climb and divert.