Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Message
Author
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Making aviation exhausting, everywhere

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#101 Post by photofly » Tue Apr 19, 2016 4:16 pm

Ask for a contact approach...
---------- ADS -----------
  
“This isn’t flying, it’s falling. With style.”

timel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1209
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:50 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#102 Post by timel » Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:00 pm

From what I was told the pilot had his ifr since 3 years, but he didn't any commercial experience and he wasn't flying ifr very often. It seems he took the instructor with him that day to assist him with the wx conditions.

Why would go down over water and try a 'visual approach'. It seems like a very desperate move especially with the winds, like TB said. Maybe the crash has more to do with ice, a mechanical or avionics/instruments failure.
---------- ADS -----------
  

timel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1209
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:50 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#103 Post by timel » Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:00 pm

Double post.. Edit
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by timel on Wed Apr 20, 2016 3:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

cncpc
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1283
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:17 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#104 Post by cncpc » Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:36 pm

timel wrote:Why would go down over water and try a 'visual approach'. It seems like a very desperate move especially with the winds, like TB said. Maybe the crash has more to do with ice, a mechanical or avionics/instruments failure.
I agree. There seems to have been some inability to maintain altitude, or awareness of altitude. It doesn't take a lot of altitude around there to be safe.

Swiss cheese. Starting with the decision to even attempt it.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.

pdw
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1468
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:51 am
Location: A mile final 24 CYSN

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#105 Post by pdw » Wed Apr 20, 2016 4:06 am

cncpc wrote: There seems to have been some inability to maintain altitude, or awareness of altitude.
It is clear IMO that the diagnosis offered by the TSB in their prelim ... "slightly nose up at impact", shows maybe no choice in the matter of "nose down" (as per comment by an eywitness of this tragedy).

"Nose down" , if that is around 15-20sec before impact ? .. is clearly pilot-control to gain airspeed, as for any inadvertant bleed that threatens an aircraft's IAS decaying to the edge of stall whether in practice for a license or otherwise. If so here, there wouldn't be much time at all between the realization of being too slow to the point of almost stall and then reaching for that airspeed recovery. ie Shedding extra drag that's building there just at the edge, via a gradualized descent-angle with power-on, prior to running out of precious altitude; that opens the largest-possible window of time with-in that sudden challenge ... to beat stallspeed towards that nearing point where a "slightly nose up" must happen.

The levelling/ "slightly nose up" control input at impact is one valuable finding for the TSB investigators to have if it shows that attempt is made .... to place an AOA for recovery in a 'last chance' for round out.
---------- ADS -----------
  

cncpc
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1283
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:17 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#106 Post by cncpc » Wed Apr 20, 2016 11:09 am

pdw wrote:
cncpc wrote: There seems to have been some inability to maintain altitude, or awareness of altitude.
It is clear IMO that the diagnosis offered by the TSB in their prelim ... "slightly nose up at impact", shows maybe no choice in the matter of "nose down" (as per comment by an eywitness of this tragedy).

"Nose down" , if that is around 15-20sec before impact ? .. is clearly pilot-control to gain airspeed, as for any inadvertant bleed that threatens an aircraft's IAS decaying to the edge of stall whether in practice for a license or otherwise. If so here, there wouldn't be much time at all between the realization of being too slow to the point of almost stall and then reaching for that airspeed recovery. ie Shedding extra drag that's building there just at the edge, via a gradualized descent-angle with power-on, prior to running out of precious altitude; that opens the largest-possible window of time with-in that sudden challenge ... to beat stallspeed towards that nearing point where a "slightly nose up" must happen.

The levelling/ "slightly nose up" control input at impact is one valuable finding for the TSB investigators to have if it shows that attempt is made .... to place an AOA for recovery in a 'last chance' for round out.
I doubt it will come to that.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.

User avatar
Vickers vanguard
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 528
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 2:04 pm
Location: YUL

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#107 Post by Vickers vanguard » Thu Apr 21, 2016 5:19 am

timel wrote:From what I was told the pilot had his ifr since 3 years, but he didn't any commercial experience and he wasn't flying ifr very often. It seems he took the instructor with him that day to assist him with the wx conditions.

Why would go down over water and try a 'visual approach'. It seems like a very desperate move especially with the winds, like TB said. Maybe the crash has more to do with ice, a mechanical or avionics/instruments failure.
Didn't want to get involved so far but just wanted to correct some of the above. I worked for the guy as a side job on a regular basis in 2009 and 2010. I did the whole avionic upgrade on his personal P210 and flew his airplane a couple of times with him for the testing afterwards. He had his IFR ticket for longer than 3 years for sure, and was flying in the system on a regular basis. I don't think he was flying for hire at that time, but I also know he did some charter flights, as either a safety pilot of even PIC for a local operator ( CYHU) on occasions. He often flew single engine piston like the 210 ( which he was fond of ) and Sr20-22 in crappy weather for testing purpose and part of his company's projects ( avionic mods ). Pascal was very knowledgeable and had ton of experience operating Garmin GPS navigators. In flight, he was very sharp and showed a lot of confidence flying IFR. He was passionate about aviation and quite a brilliant guy I have to admit. During my time with his company, I saw him introducing that little mini-recorder, which turned out to be a bloody great idea. That thing worked like a charm. Once set-up, it'll automatically upload the data to the server as soon as it is within range of a wireless. Once the data there, Pascal had it play over a google map with the pilot/pax audio and engine RPM ( extracted using algorithm customized to each airplane using ambient noise). Altitude was included and you get a video animation of the flight. Fight schools could play any previous flights and customers like Air Richelieu, busted more than few clowns who misused their airplanes. anyway, i could go on and tell you about all kind of crazy projects he was involved in but it would take pages and pages. RIP
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
SheriffPatGarrett
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 5:11 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#108 Post by SheriffPatGarrett » Thu May 05, 2016 7:42 pm

Finally, it is obvious he was trying to sneak in below clouds but was totally lost, showing a severe lack of situation awareness...
With all the nav-aids available...He had NO business to be where he was.
All he had to do is power up, climb away and sort things up, get aligned and land...but noooo...This is a very over powered plane
and that stuff is NOT supposed to happen with it.(Look like BOTH engines/props were fully functional)
---------- ADS -----------
  

cncpc
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1283
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:17 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#109 Post by cncpc » Thu May 05, 2016 10:56 pm

SheriffPatGarrett wrote:Finally, it is obvious he was trying to sneak in below clouds but was totally lost, showing a severe lack of situation awareness...
With all the nav-aids available...He had NO business to be where he was.
All he had to do is power up, climb away and sort things up, get aligned and land...but noooo...This is a very over powered plane
and that stuff is NOT supposed to happen with it.(Look like BOTH engines/props were fully functional)
All good observations.

You have to ask why he wouldn't shoot the approach normally first, just to see what was there, and maybe if he could get a break.

Even if he has windshield ice, he has to see that he's just above the rooftops and that he needs to climb now. Go to Charlottetown and wait for something workable. He filed Charlottetown as an alternate, no big deal to go there, why this outcome?
---------- ADS -----------
  
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.

The Raven
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 392
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 8:37 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#110 Post by The Raven » Fri May 06, 2016 4:15 am

SheriffPatGarrett wrote:Finally, it is obvious he was trying to sneak in below clouds but was totally lost, showing a severe lack of situation awareness...
With all the nav-aids available...He had NO business to be where he was.
All he had to do is power up, climb away and sort things up, get aligned and land...but noooo...This is a very over powered plane
and that stuff is NOT supposed to happen with it.(Look like BOTH engines/props were fully functional)
Why is it obvious? Has there been some sort of report or statement from the TSB to this effect? If so, can you give me a link to it?

I'm not doubting you. I have an interest in this accident for other reasons and am trying to gather as much information as possible.
---------- ADS -----------
  

cncpc
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1283
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:17 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#111 Post by cncpc » Fri May 06, 2016 6:00 pm

The Raven wrote:
SheriffPatGarrett wrote:Finally, it is obvious he was trying to sneak in below clouds but was totally lost, showing a severe lack of situation awareness...
With all the nav-aids available...He had NO business to be where he was.
All he had to do is power up, climb away and sort things up, get aligned and land...but noooo...This is a very over powered plane
and that stuff is NOT supposed to happen with it.(Look like BOTH engines/props were fully functional)
Why is it obvious? Has there been some sort of report or statement from the TSB to this effect? If so, can you give me a link to it?

I'm not doubting you. I have an interest in this accident for other reasons and am trying to gather as much information as possible.
He was seen below the clouds and to the right of the localizer about four miles back crossing that shoreline that 199 parallels. He was very low there. He was heading for the airport. Not an instrument approach procedure.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.

anofly
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 6:46 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#112 Post by anofly » Fri May 06, 2016 7:28 pm

IF he was that low, that far back, something was not right, or he "may" (conjecture) have been trying to break out below cloud, over water on purpose, and slip in . With a 200 foot ceiling at the airport, there is not much room between hilltops and cloud, it would not have been a pleasant trip in and things would be happening fast. add a bit of ice to a windshield, straining to look forward for the airport, off the needles now, so you wander off the loc,, it piles up on you a bit....rip.
---------- ADS -----------
  

goldeneagle
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 560
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#113 Post by goldeneagle » Wed Jul 13, 2016 9:53 am

There's been a lot of speculation here about low scud running, typical low and slow stuff. But the recorder says, high and hot.

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/medias-media/c ... 160713.asp

The approach graphs in that report really make one re-think the eyewitness reports of low airplanes. At 3 miles back it was still 500 feet high and 50 knots fast.
---------- ADS -----------
  

RatherBeFlying
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:27 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#114 Post by RatherBeFlying » Wed Jul 13, 2016 2:39 pm

The approach graph raises a bunch of questions:

It's hard to think of a stall, even with icing, at that speed. If there had been a serious load of ice, you'd think there'd be fragments at the impact site or debris trail.

TSB says no mechanical failures so far discovered.

Would a gust drop a wing at that airspeed?

Or would there be a trim problem that manifested itself on autopilot disconnect?

TSB has their work cut out for them.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Old fella
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1765
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#115 Post by Old fella » Thu Jul 14, 2016 12:54 pm

Having good quality experience in this type of operation(although not on a/c type) and review of the descent profile this says to me the pilot was well behind the aircraft or the aircraft was well ahead of him either way you want to view it. Throw in his TT and time on type, combine it with single pilot operation in very questionable WX, non precision approach, I can see the situation getting out of hand to the demise of all. I suspect the TSB has a real good idea but need to dot some I's and cross a few T's.
---------- ADS -----------
  

cncpc
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1283
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:17 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#116 Post by cncpc » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:26 pm

Something isn't jiving here.

He was sighted by people on the ground at the shoreline, over Domaine du Vieux Couvent, 2 miles back.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.

J31
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 977
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#117 Post by J31 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:28 am

The final report is out.

Fast unstable approach followed by stall/loss of control at low altitude.

http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-r ... 6a0032.asp

Full video of the crash site, animation and news conference.

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/111757266
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by J31 on Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

Ypilot
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2014 2:08 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#118 Post by Ypilot » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:46 am

He was way too high, way too fast, he wasn't stabilized on the approach path, eventually he slowed down the power to idle, got too slow, kicked back up the throttle and lost control. The pilot was not in control. Wx probably didn't help.

The pilot had very little experience on the airplane and didn't fly much ifr in the past month. The MU shouldn't be allowed single pilot. If a second qualified pilot would have been there, I am sure a go around would have been initated.
---------- ADS -----------
  

J31
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 977
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#119 Post by J31 » Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:48 am

---------- ADS -----------
  

fish4life
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#120 Post by fish4life » Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:52 am

Ugly, flying only 20 hours in 90 days certainly wouldn’t help either.
---------- ADS -----------
  

CpnCrunch
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2867
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#121 Post by CpnCrunch » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:02 am

I had a look in SFAR 108 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14 ... FAR_No_108) and there doesn't seem to be any mention of the rather extreme rolling tendency of the MU-2 on application of full power at low airspeed.
---------- ADS -----------
  

55+
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 401
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:49 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#122 Post by 55+ » Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:14 am

Please correct me if in error but didn’t airlines cancel their flights going in there on that fateful day.
---------- ADS -----------
  

lownslow
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 978
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:56 am

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#123 Post by lownslow » Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:53 pm

Ypilot wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 8:46 am
The MU shouldn't be allowed single pilot.
That's a little harsh, I would think somebody could cock up an approach in any airplane if they fell behind like that.
---------- ADS -----------
  

GyvAir
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1760
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:09 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#124 Post by GyvAir » Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:11 pm

CpnCrunch wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:02 am
I had a look in SFAR 108 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14 ... FAR_No_108) and there doesn't seem to be any mention of the rather extreme rolling tendency of the MU-2 on application of full power at low airspeed.
This is talking about home flight sim software, but there is a bit of discussion here about the MU-2's torque roll tendancies. I've heard a couple pilots comment on it over the years as well.

http://forums.x-pilot.com/forums/topic/ ... d-the-mu2/

Very unfortunate series of decisions.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AOW
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:23 pm

Re: Crash at Iles-de-la-Madeleine

#125 Post by AOW » Wed Jan 10, 2018 2:50 pm

GyvAir wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:11 pm
CpnCrunch wrote:
Wed Jan 10, 2018 11:02 am
I had a look in SFAR 108 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14 ... FAR_No_108) and there doesn't seem to be any mention of the rather extreme rolling tendency of the MU-2 on application of full power at low airspeed.
This is talking about home flight sim software, but there is a bit of discussion here about the MU-2's torque roll tendencies. I've heard a couple pilots comment on it over the years as well.

http://forums.x-pilot.com/forums/topic/ ... d-the-mu2/

Very unfortunate series of decisions.
I think you'll find that most airplanes will have a tendency to yaw and/or roll if you rapidly add power from the brink of stall. I have a few hours in an MU2, and it's slow flight characteristics aren't really much different from similar aircraft that I've flown... I have witnessed many new pilots, some even on their first flight in the MU2, completing an approach to stall at altitude, initiating the recovery only after the stick shaker activates. I have never seen any of them fail a PPC check ride on the approach to stall manoeuvre, and even the first attempt, with maybe 1 hour of experience on type, does not result in this type of upset. Yes there may be a rolling tendency, but it does not require superhuman reflexes to correct.

The sad thing in this accident is that the pilot should have known 9 miles prior to impact that there was no way he could stabilize the approach, and a timely go around and a second attempt at the approach would have given them a lot more time to get stable, and they might not have been so far behind the machine. Or to go even further back, it sounds like he planned his descent around a target of 3000 ft at the initial fix. The airplane is easily able to do a 3000+ FPM descent, so planning a 2000 FPM descent profile is quite reasonable; BUT, he did not monitor their progress towards the goal. It is easy to descend 500 FPM faster 30 miles back, but if you don't realize that you're too high until crossing the fix, there is no way to meet that goal.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”