Early Analysis: Mooney M20J Power Line Strike November 27, 2022 Gaithersburg, MD
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- ASI Senior Vice President, Richard McSpadden, CFII, MEI, SES, MES, former Commander/Flight Leader for the USAF Thunderbirds, provides early analysis of an accident on November 27, 2022, when a Mooney M20J struck power lines during final approach to land at Montgomery County Airpark in Gaithersburg, MD.
In this Early Analysis video, the AOPA Air Safety Institute makes a preliminary assessment of the accident, addressing notable portions of the flight and highlighting areas the NTSB will likely investigate to determine a probable cause.
The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) is the largest community of pilots in the world, providing aviation advocacy, education & inspiration. AOPA has represented the freedom to fly for all pilots since 1939. To learn more about becoming a member visit www.aopa.org/j....
Check out the Air Safety Institute Website:
www.aopa.org/t...
Follow AOPA on Twitter:
/ aopa
Follow AOPA on Instagram:
/ flywithaopa
Follow AOPA on Facebook:
/ aopapilots
#aopa #flywithaopa #aviation #pilot #flying
UPDATE: The National Transportation Safety Board has released its preliminary report (ERA23LA071) regarding the investigation into the power line tower strike of a Mooney M20J 201 (N201RF).
data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/106368/pdf
I, as a pilot and an airplane owner, see this channel always provide educational information that maintain a safer aviation and give better understanding while other channels just relaying information based on the news. Specifically to this accident, whilst everyone else was criticizing the pilot and giving chair flying ideas, this channel however, respectfully provided all surrounding details. Good job sir.
Thank you.
So you’re saying these accidents are rarely the pilots fault? Mostly it comes down to pure stupidity for these light aircraft
@@JeepCherokeeful I am assuming that you have never made a “stupid” decision, nor known anyone who is ordinarily smart, but made a bad decision. The rest of us, who are mere humans with biological brains, can and do make bad decisions some times, which is why we study these accidents. That way, we can build safety systems that are better than just our fallible brains. Of course, you learn nothing by just declaring that other people are stupid.
God forbid we are even remotely critical of those who are recklessly putting other peoples lives in danger. We don't need less shaming, we need MORE shaming of morons who fly like this.
@@formulaben As long as you assume that other people are morons, you fail to learn the lesson that it could happen to you.
Even though I'm not a pilot, I love listening to Richard describe an early analysis of what possibly took place .
Thank you for the kind remarks!
If you’re an aviation enthusiast, don’t wait another day to start. Go fly!
@@AnonyMous-jf4lc I would love to. When I retired 4 years ago I had the time and money to learn how to fly. But at 65 I decided against starting into it because of my deteriorating senses including sense of balance.
@@toddb930 In many cases, a person's sense of balance can actually be a _liability_ rather than an asset. The human vestibular system wasn't designed for flight and is easily confused, so part of learning to fly is learning to ignore your own senses and focus on the instruments. I'm not going to tell you what to do, but if you already know your sense of balance can't be trusted, that might actually make you a _better_ pilot.
Richard will be missed. Big lost to our aviation community.
I have a military flying background and hold an ATP. One lesson I learned on an approach where the weather was at minimum was my tendency to decent below glideslope when I saw the ground, instead of remaining on glideslope and waiting until the runway environment is insight. You got to stay on the glidepath until the runway environment is insight !!!!
That was my first thought - he saw the ground and decided to continue his approach visually
We will miss This man. RIP Richard Mcspadden.
LIFR at night is about as difficult as you can get. The navigation issues preceding the approach are enough to let a pilot know they’re already over their head. Wait for the weather!
They should provide parking garages in the sky suspended fir planes ti wait out bad weather. Like in star wars when millennium falcon entered death star on approach?
There’s another waypoint BECKA, as opposed to BEGKA, just northwest. Based on that initial turn, looks like he was going direct BECKA.
This is an excellent observation! Thank you!! That seems very likely the cause of the confusion as the pilot is inbound and probably rattled him a little. We've passed this on to the NTSB and they thanked us for the observation. May we get your contact so we can send you an Air Safety Institute tee-shirt!
@@richardmcspadden9189 Has it ever been considered for waypoints that are geographically close, to use names that are not easy to confuse, similarly to the alpha-bravo-charlie alphabet?
Looks like a case of "Get there-itis" combined with scud running to get down Juuussssst a little lower....if I can get just a little lower i'll see the approach lights even though I'm way below mins.
A lot of channels go into the details of the accident, but almost none take the next step, which is to produce the well thought out discussion of the lessons learned and how to apply them. This one does and the community is much better off for it. Thank you for the excellent content.
Great advice about not transitioning too early from the instruments to the outside view especially with ragged bases and visibility at or near minimums for the approach.. A respected senior instructor told me about technique/tip that decades ago while we were working on low visibility approaches (CAT II) and single engine ILS in a simulator session. His point was that the instruments had done a great job getting me to the DA, so why not keep them in your scan as you transition to the visual portion rather than entirely dropping the instruments out of my scan for the landing.
You have to be comfortable doing this stuff and that means good training and keeping current with the airplane, equipment and airspace. In the airline world we fly all the time; three to four days a week. If you are rusty, not really confident or experienced and then go out at night flying single pilot IFR into low IFR weather that is not the ideal place to build experience. It is great if you survive, but the hazards and risks are high.
I know that in the United States visibility is all one needs for minimums, not ceilings (cloud height-straight in minimums & not circling). But honestly if the reported ceilings are at 200' what is this pilot thinking he/she will see when they arrive at the RNAV minimums which are presumably well above 200'?
Kindly indulge my slight correction, for I think you’re being a tad “loose” with the regs:
§91.175 Takeoff and landing under IFR.
c) Operation below DA/DH or MDA.
(1) The aircraft is continuously in a position from which a descent to a landing on the intended runway can be made at a normal rate of descent using normal maneuvers
(2) The flight visibility is not less than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach being used
These two requisites mean it is the responsibility of the PIC to establish that the required *slant range* visibility exists at the expected position on the approach path in order to continue to landing.
The angle of the power lines as they relate to the runway saved those people's lives. Instead of the typical stop and drop the lines acted as a shock absorber as they reduced the aircraft's speed and redirected it before impact. Getting stuck in the tower was another fantastic stroke of luck. Wrecking your airplane will certainly wreck your day, but they're alive to tell the tale and that's as good as a holiday gift gets.
Thanks for the thoughtful work.
Great analysis. At 4:47 in video, he actually hit the towers further to the left by the strip mall and McDonalds. I try not to judge other pilots as I wasn’t in the cockpit experiencing what he was experiencing. I’ve shot that approach in the past. Tough conditions for sure that night w/ 200 foot ceilings (below all approach mins). I was unable to contact KGAI AWOS by their phone number shortly after incident which I thought was strange. Airport was NOTAM’ed closed shortly after.
Considering they knocked out power to 100,000 people (I heard), it’s possible the AWOS lost power?
These folks were very fortunate to survive and that the plane didn’t crash to the ground after they hit the lines and tower. Hope they heal up and everyone learns from this.
Thanks for this very articulate & thoughtful commentary. As you alluded in the first words, several things converged at the wrong time - how unfortunate. Hindsight is 20/20, but this ‘accident chain’ likely started some hours prior. Hopefully, some will learn and apply for their future GA adventures.
As a new pilot, I found the suggestion of moving into a holding pattern to resolve issues that might be problematic immensely helpful…no need to land your airplane until your in complete control.
As a new pilot, you should fess up to ATC quickly and ask for vectors to safely get to an altitude clear of clouds. A holding pattern in the soup isn’t a big deal for an instrument rated pilot but if you’re new you need to get in the clear. Standard rate turns, don’t rush your control movements and keep everything slow and deliberate. Think 3x before doing anything and remain calm.
Absolutely, having confidence in getting into a hold and remaining in it is at the upmost importance in situations as this
My father was a private pilot, and subscribed to the AOPA magazine. I would read them, as well. I find the approach to safety totally different in the US Aviation world, than say petroleum world. Overhauls after a specific amount of time in Aviation, versus run until it fails in petroleum production.
The accident here reminds me of the one in Ontario Calif., where a private plane hit high tension power lines, and got entangled in them, in 1986.
single-pilot IFR at night is no joke…he should have never taken off and is lucky to be alive.
I never thought it was possible to do an "early analysis" worth a damn until I saw this series. Incredible job.
Thank you. They are tricky to do. People are curious to understand accidents, so we try to offer what's known and then discuss possibilities and lessons learned. We work to be careful to realize that we won't know for sure what happened and all of the "factors" until the NTSB finishes their work.
Can't say enough good things about this channel. Extremely professional and invaluable.
Thank you for you comment and explanation.
One thing I want to know about this is what would have happened if the power line wasn't there. I'm guessing it saved the life of those on board. I wonder what the odds really were of this happening without ending in their fatalities.
I think a decent into the trees was a real possibility.
9 years ago a jet engine plane crashed into a house and burned several others on approach to The same airport
My thoughts exactly.
Decided to go down and take a peek. Just the wrong time to try it.
What he saw, "shocked" him.
Thank you Richard for sharing your informed insights on this challenging situation. Living local to the airport, spending more time navigating a submarine than an airplane (some lessons) and both a control systems engineer and software engineer, root cause analysis and applying lessons learned is critical! Thank you!
Thank you as always, Richard, for the quick and informative analysis!
Glad to hear the pilot survived. Single pilot night Low IFR to minimums is one of the most demanding scenario. I busted minimums on approach more often that I care to admit - this video is a great reminder that these minimums are here for a reason. Excellent point on the transition IFR-VFR on approach.
Great overview and good lessons to apply to my vfr private training even though this was ifr flying.
These analysis are so great! An awesome job reviewing the factors and identifying learning opportunities 💯
Excellent analysis as always!
Although you state he struck the power lines several times, I'm not sure he hit the lines. He certainly struck and became entangled in a tower. Appreciate your videos, insight, and avoidance of major speculation. You're providing a service on behalf of AOPA by providing safety suggestions to other pilots - the learning opportunities.
Yes. There are two parallel sets of towers, with four three-phase transmission circuits (two three-phase circuits on each tower set). According to Pepco briefings, the airplane actually struck the lines of the nearest sets of towers first, severing one or more, before becoming embedded in one of the farther towers.
Pilot: "Hey, look, blinking red lights. Must be the runway! Descending now."
There was a small single plane accident in Torrance CA today, crashed at the local airport. I'm interested to see if you will offer an opinion. Sadly two people perished. Thx for all the videos, I've learned a lot.
Outstanding job. Great work.
I’m a longtime inactive CSEL/PSES/Inst pilot. Every pilot can learn from analyses like this.
Thank you. That is our hope and why we produce these.
@@richardmcspadden9189 do you attended EAA AirVenture? If so, I’d like to meet you.
@@dk138nyc Yes! every year and usually give a couple of seminars. Drop by the AOPA tent this year. I'm usually in and around there. Also attend Sun-n-Fun. Stop in and say hi!
I will look for you! We live in Shawano WI, 60 miles north of OSH.
Great analysis. I especially appreciate the ADSB track info overlayed with the approach fixes and ATC info.
Thank you so much for these great videos!!!!
Given the low field altimeter setting at the time (29.45) and the pilot's descent below MDA, I'm curious if the altimeter was incorrectly set higher before the approach. After a long flight against 50 knot headwinds it may have been tempting to try to get down to minimums quickly to try to spot the airport and get on the ground. But an altimeter incorrectly set at 29.92 would have placed the aircraft around 500 ft MSL, which is about where the power lines were.
This has been my question. Or whether the 80' adjustment was made as required if KGAI weather was out as well as their runway lights and they used IAD?
They were extraordinarily lucky. I’ve got a lot of flight time and I know that their survival was nothing short of a miracle.
Thank you for another informative video. I have flying background and I appreciate a thoughtful, well articulated review of facts. Keep up the good work!
Very insightful and well explained. Thanks.
This is the ONLY channel I will watch regarding an accident report prior the NTSB report. While McSadden gives his best educated guess, what is more important is the takeaways he gives us to keep us safe.
One comment, ceiling is NOT limiting for the approach, visibility is, the visibility required for the approach was 1 mile and the reported visability was 1 1/4 miles. Yes the ceiling was reported as being below minimum and he probably wasn't going to get in, but again ceiling is not limiting for the approach. Oh and Part 91 you can shoot the approach regardless of what the reported visibility and ceiling were.
I’d be interested to know if there was a wind shear line , as you mentioned ; if there was , and it was inside the FAF , then he’d be losing IAS at some point on the glide slope and pitching down to get it back up . Without a sufficient and timely power increase those wires would be waiting.
I remember flying in New Jersey on a windy day and descending toward my home base and encountering a heavy jolt which was wind shear that really rattled my teeth. I would not have liked to be in the soup when I hit it. I'm only 5'8" and I hit my head on the overhead.
I used to fly a 201, I agree, wind shear on the approach might have been a factor. What also may not have helped is dropping the gear early on the approach; it makes an effective airbrake; an immediate power increase would have been needed to recover the lost altitude. Was he alert and paying attention? Was he tired after a stress filled day? Or became fixated on hoping to spot the approach lights he had turned up and lost awareness of obstacles or where they were?
Hitting the power line instead of crashing short of the runway probably saved their lives….
The towers don't appear to be in line with the runway, so he wasn't even lined up? Disoriented and mistook the lights on the tower for the runway?
You can see twice past the FAF he drifted left of course. The wind would have helped that happen.
In general, thank you for the analysis. I agree with most of what is said. However, I would like to just make one critical statement, which I do hear a lot. The statement that I don't like is "Low IFR at Night". As a pro pilot, I think it is critically important to understand something. Day or Night, it does not make any difference how you fly an approach. I have yet to see an approach chart label "day" or "night". It is true, that if lights are out the minimums change sometimes, approaches can not be flown sloppy period. It is irrelevant day or night obstructions can not be seen, and that is why the approach is designed the way it is to keep the aircraft and the obstruction from merging. It should not be any more demanding to fly an approach at night. I am not being critical of the pilot, I do not know enough of the facts to know it was pilot error. I am only critical that somehow, day and night IFR is different, it's really not, if it was the FAA would have you do 6 approaches day, and 6 approaches night, like they do on the landings..... see my point? Thanks for reading.
A lot of pilots -- particularly those without a lot of IFR experience -- have a tendency to "reach for the ground" as they close in on the airport in poor visibility. That is, they get a glimpse or two of the ground as they go in and out of clouds on approach. But instead of remaining on the approach path, they descend lower and lower to try to break out of the weather completely well before landing -- and well before they should.
I am NOT saying this is what happened here or that the pilot does this or is low-time IFR (I don't think he is, in fact.) But it's something to keep in mind.
I was waiting for your early analysis of this as I knew it would be more detailed than the first couple of videos that came out shortly after the incident. Plus it's only two counties away from me so it hits kinda close to home even though I'm not familiar with the facility or approach there.
That’s a Power-line-approach! No kidding though, 200 feet overcast and 1,5 miles visibility is darn bad!!
Leave that weather to the professionals.
Can we get some videos from the old format back in rotation?
Visibility was pretty bad that night. It was night time, raining, windy, and a little foggy. It was a really bad combination. I know some people that were there for the rescue. They had to dispatch all personell.
Thanks for the explanation. Google actually routed me to a really good video.
The old adage of get-homeitis....it can be the same thing as get-down-itis. Which both can be occurring simultaneously which can become deadly especially when flying in hard IMC conditions. The ongoing issue of constantly being below RNAV waypoint altitudes seemed to become more prevalent following a predictable pattern the closer he got to the airport. I am a retired firefighter (captain) all I can say is even if in serious conditions all occupants in that Mooney were very lucky with the plane hitting those ultra high-voltage power lines and with the plane hanging suspended. It just was not their time to go on that horrible night!
So glad he survived! What a scary visual of the plane suspended by fatal electricity!
Wow, so glad the people survived this accident. This must be rare to hit the actual tower? Great job by the emergency crews that can’t have been a straight forward rescue🙏🏼
This was about 15 minutes from my house, and we were fortunate not to lose power. It was high drama, although with the thick fog, you couldn't really see much on the live streams from the local channels. I had to wonder... how did they get the people inside water, how did they go to the bathroom.... so many questions.
Excellent analysis. Great tips at the end.
It's amazing that they survived!
I thought about learning to fly, but know I'm scared 😨. Been binge watching these accidents/fatal episodes. Seem the only time to fly if you are vfr is day time when the weather is good, short trips and get weather updates along the way
he probably wanted to get below the clouds to see
Please do a follow up video with what the NTSB found to be the cause of the accident, Thanks.
Check back on this page in the comments section. We’ll update any significant NTSB reports.
Thank you from Amsterdam.
IFR or not I think that going to a familiar airport or a new one makes a huge difference, I know I am probably stating the obvious but I don't think many people will take mental notes as to their surroundings during VFR to be able to recall features during IFR.
Great factual presentation as always - congratulations! [IFR MEP Pilot]
Wonder if this pilot ever filled (and updated) his personal minima. I did 300ft actual IFR in day conditions with my instructor, and I feel comfortable with 500ft ceiling on my own (I hVr limited experience, PPL, CPL, IFR, Multi, just 350 hrs total. Probably this guy has 2000 hrs), and 200ft at night would definitely be out of my personal minima. So I would go to alternate or find some other solution, leaving the hard approach as last resort.
But most pilots I know "change" their personal minima in-flight
200 ovc and you gun for a circling approach? These are around 500-600 minimums. just speculation here. But he gambled that he could just ignore minimums, use the approach to line up. And just get below 200, get visual contact with the runway, and land. But this doesn’t even make sense on a circling approach, especially an Alpha, which just dumps you in the vicinity below the clouds where you maintain visual contact and land. Whatever the case this pilot should hang up the wings
Quite! It’s bad enough to get directly over the field and then dip below minimums in the hope of dropping it in, but diving down that low so early is suicidal.
@@MikeGranby I'm a layman but it seems like if his situational awareness was poor enough that he didn't realize that he was descending to early, then yeah, that's egregious enough that he at least needs to go back to the simulator for a long time, or hang up his wings and count himself lucky.
@@R2Bl3nd I think that's quite possible, especially if he's dipping the nose to strain to see the airport through the gloom. I was merely following up on the idea that he did it deliberately, noting that while some people roll that dice over the field, doing it that far out is typically bad news.
I think he did “hang up his wings”. Just did it into the power lines…
@@R2Bl3nd anytime you land at an airport you check weather on the way in. If it tells you the clouds are at 200ft and you request an approach that requires the clouds to be no lower than 500ft, the second you decide to proceed, with passengers….yeaaah. No
As usual, great analysis.
Why did this pilot lose trust in his instruments so close to the runway? It will be interesting to see the final NTSB report.
Thank goodness the PIC can be directly questioned in this case, and that all involved, including the rescue and power crews will be okay.
it is very possible that he was at (or maybe a little below) the DA and then saw the ground. He may have dropped down lower to maintain ground visibility assuming he could visually finish the approach. There is a tremendous sense of relief when you come out of the soup, and a natural tendency to not want to go back in. If this is what happened, it is obviously not the correct procedure.
@@treetopflight7624 I agree. I am not a pilot, yet I felt this was a likely contributing factor. It is only human to seek comfort in a stressful situation, and seeing those lights may have provided the PIC, falsely in this case, a sense of comfort and confidence.
Scud.... not enough altitude, looking for the lights. Fly the gauges and wait for the VASI to tell you where you are. If you don't see it at minimums, go around. GetthereItus is real... Lucky they both didn't die. Decide before you leave what you're going to do if the weather is crap at your destination. That is why I fly helicopters, if you can't see where you want to go, land now. I've landed in a lot of strange spots (Arby's overflow parking lot, Burger King by the Interstate) trying to get past weather changes. Wait it out and live to fly another day....
Hi But once again there obstacles at the edge of the runway when conditions are poor it catches the airplane. Waiting for more details. Good summary
It couldn't resist the blue light.
I figured you'd cover this considering it's what... 30 minutes from the AOPA office?
I made the drive from Boston to DC the day this accident occurred. The weather was atrocious and I suspect the pilot dropped low in an attempt to see the runway. There was moderate rain and wind for a wide, wide area. Very dark, low overcast.
Great stuff. Thanks
You seemed to skirt the issue of commencing an approach when the destination airport was below minimums. Why? Is there some uncertainty that the pilot knew the weather conditions made either of the two approaches unauthorized?
Shooting an approach when weather is below minimums is legal; however, you cannot descend below MDA or DA/DH.
Thank you for this educational video friend. Amen for life. Amen 🙏
Did this pilot have a prior crash.
Yes
@@db3281 Imagine my shock!!!
Demanding conditions in IFR at night are certainly factors but you forgot one additional factor. It was stated at the very beginning of the video and repeated a couple of times but towards the end when you're really looking into possible or potential causes you forget all about it: there was a second person aboard the plane.
Two people aboard the plane, who is there for the passenger to talk to? The pilot. Is the passenger a pilot? Maybe, maybe not. If they're not then I doubt they followed the sterile cockpit rule during this phase of the flight.
I'm surprised the number isn't much much higher. I would have expected the number of accidents that take place at the end of the flight would be fairly close to 100%.
Too funny!
Question, don't they always go over the tower instead of the wire ?
Did the plane have a autopilot that could fly a coupled approach?
If it did and the pilot was not skilled at using it that's a shame.
Autopilot is better than human.
Autopilot or not, good airmanship is better than poor airmanship.
The plane identifies as a Moth.
The power tower identifies as a Bug Zapper.
Low IFR? It was foggy on the ground.
Funny I was just thinking he’d be in trouble in Norfolk (my home town) when you said the same thing
Anyone know if there was a NOTAM for lightning at the destination airport?
"Tailwind coming out of the SE"? Only when he turned NW briefly for some reason. ??
Sad but I wonder how many planes landed in tall trees 🌳 where they might have survived the immediate cushion if branches then tk fall just 50 or 100+ feet to the ground & didn't survive that drop?
Towers don't have blinking lights. I mean they are like right in the path of the runway.
The instrument to visual transition is one of the most challenging maneuvers in all of aviation. This requires the PIC to be qualified with appropriate certifications, capable (“IMSAFE”), and current (recency of experience.)
That said, whenever we depart for an airport with marginal and deteriorating weather, we must *mentally* prepare ourselves for the high likelihood of going missed approach, and proceeding to the alternate.
I have found this “preload” of the missed approach into our skulls “keeps us on the crosshairs”, and any descent to touchdown is more likely to occur at a normal rate.
And let’s not abruptly dismiss the landing and rollout from an Instrument approach: “wildlife” like the tranquil settings of that runway. 😮
… blue skies and tailwinds.
“To air is human”
Seems to me he confused the LPA DA with an MDA and chopped it down to the DA way before he should have. Definitely speculation, however.
The deviation described starting at 1:50 in this video shows the pilot flying right over KDMW (Carroll County airport). I wouldn’t think that would be arbitrary. Maybe an early but abandoned thought of landing at a familiar alternate as this plane often flys to KDMW?
I would be surprised if the pilot was considering KMDW while still at an altitude of 4400 feet.
It’s likely his inflight interaction with the power lines prevented him from landing in the trees.
Those wires had to dissipate a lot of energy before the Mooney hit the tower for it to be that intact...lottery winning odds.
Richard, if you are reading comments, what might you have to say about the fact that the ADS-B track indicates he hit a 671 foot high tower while indicating 1200 barometric altitude? Do you suspect that too may be a significant contributing factor?
That last ADS-B track that we depicted was a bit before the impact. He flew for a bit more before impacting the tower.
Lucky man!
This is nothing but needless speculation.. the pilot survived so you ask "WHY?" why don't you just ask the pilot, only HE knows WHY.
The ADS-B data says collision at 1100 feet but that would seem to be a problem because that mast is below 600 feet. Did you consider that?
Does ADS-B output GPS altitude or air pressure? it's a little difficult to imagine GPS altitude being calculated wrong but airpressure could be wrong?
I want to throw this in there: There is a notam out for the gaithersburg airport that the runway lights for 14 are out of service. The date and time of the NOTAM is very close to the time of the accident, so it's likely the pilot didn't see that the runway lights were down. That could explain why he was clicking for the end lights so many times. It's probably next to impossible to find the runway at overcast 200' with no lights at night.
To connect to items together… when the plane crashed into the power lines it cut power to 100,000 people - including all the power to the airport. The NOTAM came after the accident - eg the accident caused the airport (along with everyone else in the region) to lose their power and thus their lights!
Sounds like gethereitis... No weather to be shooting an IFR in that plane at that airport.
Is it possible the power lines saved this pilot's life?
Could icing (maybe of the pitot tube?) be a factor too in this case? I did not hear that mentioned in this video, but I could imagine that false speed indications would confuse and add to any disorientation that may already exist.
Just a thought; I don't have the weather data to analyse if icing could be a factor.
IFR is foggy
Curious does ATC have a point where they have to ask a pilot "Are you ok?" or just help Pilot with a Clear area of airspace; Let the Pilot know they now have activated a "no fault"/ "safety allowance" of 2,3,5 (whatever amount of minutes) in that airspace to just reset- re-evaluate their situation and that atc will be back with them in a few minutes etc. Just thinking when you have to correct a plane so many times, could pilot be just stuck in a rut and need an external "pretend the pilot asked" kind of assistance?