In all of this quick transfer of information, American 1539 was impeccably clear. The speed of all of this is mind boggling. Slowing down, just a little, may help capture readback errors.
I remember this crash. He crashed into a house then 10 seconds later the plane exploded. He had a pacemaker and was showing vital signs of still being alive for sometime after impact because he had a high concentration of carbon monoxide in his system.
NTSB said that CO wasn't a factor, however, the COHb in his blood was excessive and there is no mention of CN testing. Hi COHb without CN would slant toward CO poisoning, where CN together with COHb would lean toward smoke inhalation. This guy was well experienced and particularly with this route. I can't help but think CO was a factor.
I assumed a possible cause was flying into icing conditions on autopilot. However, according to the NTSB report, it appears the pilot failed to manage airspeed and allowed the aircraft to get too slow.
I think he was scud running, well below the instrument approach path, trying to comply with the controller's request to go visual and cancel his IFR before landing.
It would appear that the operator went below the established vertical limits of the GPS approach, well short of the airport, potentially to try and comply with the controller's request to release their IFR while still in the air. Telling the pilot "if you don't cancel your IFR before you land, I have to stop all arrivals to New York" put pressure on the pilot to comply. To be clear, you would want to be on the local CTAF or Tower frequency when on an instrument approach I would think......and if the ceilings are low, you aren't going to have time to break out, call runway in sight, switch back to approach, cancel IFR, all while performing a landing. Hence the need to try and duck under the layer and find the airport early to comply with that stupid ass ATC issue.
It depends on the approach minimums and how high you break ou. At a 1000ft ceiling, sure - cancelling in the air is totally do-able. 500ft probably not - might not even get good reception without a GCO frequency. Somewhere in between maybe. Trying to duck under the ceiling to help the controller seems like a bad idea. I will always comply with the charted altitudes on an approach - ATC's wishes be damned.
I'm working on a ppl and have very limited flight knowledge at this point. I'm not sure I follow why the fact that he was ifr lead to a stall/crash. It didn't appear that he was in any tight turns, etc. is this just a failure to monitor instruments properly? Or is it a wait and see NTSB investigation? This video doesn't seem to suggest any reason for the crash?
The channel unfortunately don't do analysis I suggest blancolerio or pilot debrief they are excellent channels to help new pilots learn watch to watch out for. In this case slow air speed resulted in a stall of the airplane. In addition every pilot needs to have training in instruments imo
It could have been spatial disorientation or perhaps a VMC roll due to loss of an engine. Speaking from experience, instrument flying is very challenging especially if you aren’t current or “get behind the airplane”. My first approach to minimums was an eye opener and unless there is a darn good reason (there usually isn’t) I’m sticking to my personal minimums and will either wait until the wx improves or don’t go at all. I had a crusty old instructor tell me that the two things that kill pilots the most are experience and weather. Good luck in your training and always remember this: a pilot never stops learning. When you think you know enough…you’ll find out quickly that you don’t and sometimes it can be fatal. Enjoy the journey you’re embarking on savor every moment in the air.
I often wonder if most GA pilots would be better off using only the VOR/DME when shooting approaches in IMC. VOR approaches are very simple, far fewer electronic gizmos to monitor, no buttons to push and, most importantly, fewer distractions.
I would have to disagree, I find that the RNAV is significantly easier for students to fly and understand. What I do find alarming is how many students are never taught how to truly understand and fly using ground based navaids.
@@LabGuyCFI If the pilot is competent and practiced in using the modern electronics, and if he/she can also shut OFF the AP and confidently hand-fly in IMC when needed, sure. However, I think that many of the fatals we're seeing these days occur because the pilots become fixated on attempting to make the AP do what they want, resulting in an upset. This situation is exacerbated by the huge amount of info/options available with the glass. I bet if some of those guys had nothing more than a VOR/DME to monitor they wouldn't lose the plot so easily.
Perhaps ATC should just preemptively ask every GA plane “Are you a doctor?”
omg..I WAS JUS SAYING!!
Instrument Profeciency is a must...
It appears he wasn’t monitoring his airspeed and got too slow until it stalled 😢
In all of this quick transfer of information, American 1539 was impeccably clear. The speed of all of this is mind boggling. Slowing down, just a little, may help capture readback errors.
Single pilot IFR workload can be busy in any aircraft and staying Instrument current is so very important . My condolences
I remember this crash. He crashed into a house then 10 seconds later the plane exploded. He had a pacemaker and was showing vital signs of still being alive for sometime after impact because he had a high concentration of carbon monoxide in his system.
NTSB said that CO wasn't a factor, however, the COHb in his blood was excessive and there is no mention of CN testing. Hi COHb without CN would slant toward CO poisoning, where CN together with COHb would lean toward smoke inhalation. This guy was well experienced and particularly with this route. I can't help but think CO was a factor.
I assumed a possible cause was flying into icing conditions on autopilot. However, according to the NTSB report, it appears the pilot failed to manage airspeed and allowed the aircraft to get too slow.
I think he was scud running, well below the instrument approach path, trying to comply with the controller's request to go visual and cancel his IFR before landing.
Stall?
Man, do you miss a lot of the words. I guess if you're not a pilot, it could be difficult to understand the terminology.
The pace that he is cranking these out, it is probable he is using a voice-to-text app.
You need be IFR rated to understand the verbiage, they are pretty standard approach control communication.
I always thought circling non precision approaches are death especially if you are not proficient. RIP.
What's up with the shaky video at the end??????????
More money than skills.....
It would appear that the operator went below the established vertical limits of the GPS approach, well short of the airport, potentially to try and comply with the controller's request to release their IFR while still in the air. Telling the pilot "if you don't cancel your IFR before you land, I have to stop all arrivals to New York" put pressure on the pilot to comply. To be clear, you would want to be on the local CTAF or Tower frequency when on an instrument approach I would think......and if the ceilings are low, you aren't going to have time to break out, call runway in sight, switch back to approach, cancel IFR, all while performing a landing. Hence the need to try and duck under the layer and find the airport early to comply with that stupid ass ATC issue.
It depends on the approach minimums and how high you break ou. At a 1000ft ceiling, sure - cancelling in the air is totally do-able. 500ft probably not - might not even get good reception without a GCO frequency. Somewhere in between maybe. Trying to duck under the ceiling to help the controller seems like a bad idea. I will always comply with the charted altitudes on an approach - ATC's wishes be damned.
WHAT is the deal with Doctors and Aviation? I mean, where is the connection??
I'm working on a ppl and have very limited flight knowledge at this point. I'm not sure I follow why the fact that he was ifr lead to a stall/crash. It didn't appear that he was in any tight turns, etc. is this just a failure to monitor instruments properly? Or is it a wait and see NTSB investigation? This video doesn't seem to suggest any reason for the crash?
After you've flown your first solo approach to minimums in IMC you will understand all of this quite well.....
The channel unfortunately don't do analysis I suggest blancolerio or pilot debrief they are excellent channels to help new pilots learn watch to watch out for. In this case slow air speed resulted in a stall of the airplane. In addition every pilot needs to have training in instruments imo
You get into the clouds and lose orientation and dont stay on instruments 100% you wo t make it.
Get to slow in a twin and this is what happens.
It could have been spatial disorientation or perhaps a VMC roll due to loss of an engine. Speaking from experience, instrument flying is very challenging especially if you aren’t current or “get behind the airplane”. My first approach to minimums was an eye opener and unless there is a darn good reason (there usually isn’t) I’m sticking to my personal minimums and will either wait until the wx improves or don’t go at all. I had a crusty old instructor tell me that the two things that kill pilots the most are experience and weather. Good luck in your training and always remember this: a pilot never stops learning. When you think you know enough…you’ll find out quickly that you don’t and sometimes it can be fatal. Enjoy the journey you’re embarking on savor every moment in the air.
Looks like he was flying straight in and just lost altitude by airspeed or control.
If he had a pace maker im asuming hed had heart issues in past should he hsd been flying
I often wonder if most GA pilots would be better off using only the VOR/DME when shooting approaches in IMC. VOR approaches are very simple, far fewer electronic gizmos to monitor, no buttons to push and, most importantly, fewer distractions.
I would have to disagree, I find that the RNAV is significantly easier for students to fly and understand. What I do find alarming is how many students are never taught how to truly understand and fly using ground based navaids.
Rnav/gps is cake. VOR/ILS is a pita.
@@LabGuyCFI If the pilot is competent and practiced in using the modern electronics, and if he/she can also shut OFF the AP and confidently hand-fly in IMC when needed, sure. However, I think that many of the fatals we're seeing these days occur because the pilots become fixated on attempting to make the AP do what they want, resulting in an upset. This situation is exacerbated by the huge amount of info/options available with the glass. I bet if some of those guys had nothing more than a VOR/DME to monitor they wouldn't lose the plot so easily.
Another doctor's EGO cost him his life.
Why ego?
JUST SAYING THE SAME THING I JUST DID. SPOT ON
@@AirBlairNZ wHY nOT Ego?
@@U.S.bill2066 every pilot who crashes his airplane has an ego problem? Or just this one?
@@AirBlairNZ hey professor, we were talking about physicians and I was agreeing.
you need someone better to do your translation to text or just don't do it at all.