N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

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

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

GyvAir
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1804
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:09 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by GyvAir »

Gogona wrote:
Cat Driver wrote:Don't forget about the guy in Europe who taught himself, made up his own license and then flew 737's for ten thousand hours before they caught on.
I believe, it's a typical urban legend, sorry...
The news archives look genuine enough. Google: Thomas Salme
---------- ADS -----------
 
Relic
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 4:47 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by Relic »

Shiny Side Up wrote:Oh, well when you explain it that way it makes so much more sense. BTW I'm a good dentist. I don't have any official credentials or anything, but I can make you a good deal next time you need some work done. :roll:
I can think of farm machinery, and road building equipment far more skill demanding than a Champ or C 150 on a nice summer day, in quiet, uncontrolled airspace.
Actually I can't, and I've done both for a living. It should be noted that when one makes such comparisons that in all cases the users of such equipment are somewhat limited in the scope of freedom they have with it. I've been handling equipment since I could - but never in public. Same with driving a vehicle. Its cool to say I was the best driver on the farm, a different matter to say that gave me some sort of right to be on public roads. And that's the part these sort of guys just don't get. There is no private airspace. You can't guarantee that uncontrolled aerodrome is going to stay quiet. For that matter you can't guarantee they're going to stay there either. Sort of like when I got my first motorcycle, when I was much younger ad stupider I didn't think I needed to be restricted by something silly as a license either, and I certainly didn't stay restricted by the farm either (as my Dad had advised until I got the license). Lets say it was a learning experience that you're probably not as clever as you think are and the rules are there for reasons. You know those little details that reading a book that you really wish the rest of the people on the open road were held to a better standard. Its bad enough that the standard is low and I can sympathise with disdain for it, but to throw even more into the mix who are complete wildcards makes the situation almost intolerable.
:prayer:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Gogona
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:41 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by Gogona »

GyvAir wrote:The news archives look genuine enough. Google: Thomas Salme
Gogona wrote:So, if you are talking about those Swedish pilot, he didn't have ATPL, but actually held his expired long time ago, but still legal CPL.
And of course, he didn't make it himself. Neither he taught himself to fly any kind of aircraft.
Who do you think am I talking about?
---------- ADS -----------
 
MrWings
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1004
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 10:35 am

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by MrWings »

He may have been an excellent stick and rudder pilot.

But I'm guessing that a guy who blatently ignored mandatory licensing and certification rules sure as hell didn't adhere to restrictive MDAs, MEAs or weather minima.
---------- ADS -----------
 
westcoastwonder
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by westcoastwonder »

Just off the topic a bit, TC's big threat is to suspend your license.
But if you don't have one and own your own plane, don't have to prove license to rent, what can they do?

And another thought, a private or corporate owned machine would still want to be insured. Insurance is based, partly on experience, you would need to document that to the insurer.

If you faked that too, your insurance would be void.
---------- ADS -----------
 
old_man
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 319
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by old_man »

westcoastwonder wrote:Just off the topic a bit, TC's big threat is to suspend your license.
But if you don't have one and own your own plane, don't have to prove license to rent, what can they do?


You're joking right? Fines come to mind. Remember this guy? Looks like TC fined him $17K, grant it it was exceptional circumstances and also the least of his problems. Also, I have a feeling if you crash a airplane without a licence and kill someone you are in serious trouble.....jail time type.


And another thought, a private or corporate owned machine would still want to be insured. Insurance is based, partly on experience, you would need to document that to the insurer.

If you faked that too, your insurance would be void.
I think you answered your own question. If you know the insurance company is not going to payout once they find out you were not licenced why bother getting insurance to begin with. You are making the decision break the law and fly without a licence....why stop there, break some more regs and fly without valid insurance.

This is an answer to the hypothetical question above and not what I think may or may not having occurred in the original subject accident.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bizjets101
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2105
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by bizjets101 »

Click Here falsified records used to obtain helicopter rating - pilot in control - kills self and wife in accident.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Ramjet555
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 8:19 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by Ramjet555 »

It is a classic reminder that psychological factors are the primary cause of accidents.
Yes, those characters who have an attitude / psychology of "to hell with the paperwork and less government in our lives"
are also quite often entrepreneurs, business owners whose decisions have made them wildly successful.
They tend to make decisions based on their own reasoning that is often flawed from a lack of knowledge
or even a willingness to admit that their expectations are flawed.

I remember one multimillionaire who purchased a twin and demanded to be taught how to fly and go
solo in his twin. He read the Regs and discovered that he could legally learn to fly and go solo
in his twin. I may be wrong but I believe the FAA has the same quirk.

Take an Ultra-light with two engines, it's legal but its obviously improper for a student to learn
and go solo.

I recall several illiterate students all of whom hid the fact that they could not read or write.
It was amazing, and I had to teach one of them how to read and write in order to pass his exams.
the other students simply found someone who gave them the pass.

The pilots who fly unlicensed are often well respected, well known, and everyone
they come into contact with turns a blind eye. Then there are the aircraft that
for one reason or another can't fly legally but end up doing local flights.

Then there is that very wealthy highly skilled pilot, who does not have a medical, often has
a psychological problem, and or a personality "quirk" that most people will not understand
that predisposes them to risks. Licensed or unlicensed, they often bite the dust killing themselves
and their passengers.

Carl J. Douglas of Stinger Welding in Ariz, flew a King Air 100 from Coolidge Arizona to Libby Montana.
He most probably made the flight under pressure, did not have a qualified pilot or instructor
with him, probably had one available but chose not to use him,
probably have arrived tired after a long flight, made mistakes,
and probably flew a stabilized approach
into a ridge 7 miles south of the airport
just after reporting the field in sight.


Makes you wonder about the number of people who had a duty to act failed to do so.
---------- ADS -----------
 
bizjets101
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2105
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by bizjets101 »

NTSB Preliminary posted;

NTSB Identification: WPR13FA073
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, December 18, 2012 in Libby, MT
Aircraft: BEECH B100, registration: N499SW
Injuries: 2 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On December 18, 2012, about 0002 mountain standard time (MST), a Beech B100, N499SW, collided with trees at Libby, Montana. Stinger Welding was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The noncertificated pilot and one passenger sustained fatal injuries; the airplane sustained substantial damage from impact forces. The cross-country personal flight departed Coolidge, Arizona, about 2025 MST on December 17th, with Libby as the planned destination. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the nearest official reporting station of Sandpoint, Idaho, 264 degrees at 46 miles, and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan had been filed.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reported that the pilot had been cleared for the GPS-A instrument approach procedure for the Libby Airport. The clearance had a crossing restriction of 10,700 feet at the PACCE intersection, which was the initial approach fix for the GPS-A approach. The pilot acknowledged that clearance at 2353. At 2359, the airplane target was about 7 miles south of the airport; the pilot reported the field in sight, and cancelled the IFR flight plan.

A police officer reported that he observed an airplane fly over the city of Libby, which was north of the airport; the airplane then turned toward the airport. The officer went to the airport to investigate, but observed no airplane. He noted that it was foggy in town, but the airport was clear. He also observed that the rotating beacon was illuminated, but not the pilot controlled runway lighting.

When the pilot did not appear at a company function at midday on December 18, they reported him overdue. The Prescott, Arizona, Automated Flight Service Station (AFSS) issued an alert notice (ALNOT) at 1102 MST; the wreckage was located at 1835.

The National Transportation Safety Board investigator-in-charge (IIC) and investigators from the FAA and Honeywell examined the wreckage on site. A description of the debris field references debris from left and right of the centerline of the debris path. The debris was through trees on a slope that went downhill from left to right.

The first identified point of contact (FIPC) was a topped tree with branches on the ground below it and in the direction of the debris field. About 50 feet from the tree were composite shards, and a piece of the composite engine nacelle, which had a hole punched in it.

The next point of contact was a 4-foot tree stump with shiny splinters on the stump. The lower portion of the tree had been displaced about 30 feet in the direction of the debris field with the top folded back toward the stump. Underneath the tree trunk were the nose gear and a couple of control surfaces followed by wing pieces.

One engine with the propeller attached was about 50 feet from the stump, and on the right side of the debris path. Next on the left side of the debris path was the outboard half of one propeller blade; another propeller blade was about 10 feet further into the debris field.

Midway into the debris field were several trees with sheet metal wrapped around them. Near the midpoint of the debris field, a portion of the instrument panel had imbedded into a tree about 15 feet above the ground. The wiring bundle hung down the tree trunk to ground level. To the left of the instrument panel was one of the largest pieces of wreckage. This piece contained the left and right horizontal stabilizers, vertical stabilizer, and part of one wing with the landing gear strut attached. The rudder separated, but was a few feet left of this piece.

Next in the debris field was a 6- by 8-foot piece of twisted metal, which contained the throttle quadrant.

About 100 feet right of the debris path centerline and downhill from the throttle quadrant was a 10-foot section of the aft cabin. This section was connected by steel cables and wires to a 4- by 7-foot piece of twisted metal.

The furthest large piece of wreckage was the second engine; the propeller hub with two blades attached had separated.
---------- ADS -----------
 
alpha1
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 8:57 am

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by alpha1 »

On June 20, 2001, helicopter pilot Anton Tyukodi was killed in a mid-air collision north of Toronto. His R22 was struck from behind by a Cessna, flown by an unlicensed pilot.

In addition to being a skilled pilot and air show performer (CPL/Multi/IRF - fixed and rotary - S76 rating), Anton was a legendary stunt performer in the Toronto film community, with over 100 film credits to his name. He was also a 25 year veteran of Toronto EMS, a great guy and a loving father.

What a shame.

From the Toronto Star, back in the day:

Probe to investigate unlicensed flying in wake of crash

MARISSA NELSON

Tuesday, June 26, 2001


Investigators are trying to determine whether a fatal plane crash involving a man who did not have a pilot's licence indicates there is a widespread problem of unlicensed pilots of small craft.

"We're trying to determine whether this is an epidemic problem. . . . If it's a wider problem we'll upgrade the investigation," David Curry, lead investigator for the Transportation Safety Board, said yesterday. "We'll be putting our feelers out to see if it's a bigger problem."

About 8 p.m. last Wednesday, a light plane crashed into a helicopter just outside the village of Sandford, northeast of Toronto. The helicopter pilot, Anton Tyukodi, 45, of Toronto, died in the crash. The pilot of the plane, Miles Tunney, 56, of Mount Albert, made a forced landing in a field, but walked away unharmed.

Mr. Curry said he finished collecting information about how the crash happened last weekend and he is confident in his findings to date. He said the plane, which is still at the edge of a field near Uxbridge, was taking off from a private grass air strip and came up underneath the helicopter, which was en route from Lindsay to Toronto. The plane's nose hit the back blade of the helicopter. Divers combed the bottom of a nearby pond, but could not find the helicopter's main rotor.

Mr. Curry said the pilot of the plane had a learner's permit that expired in 1995, but had never had a proper pilot's licence. He also did not have insurance on the plane or the required medical or airworthiness certificates. However, Mr. Curry said he did not find any indication that Mr. Tunney had carried out any pilot procedures badly or in a way that would have caused the crash.

Mr. Tunney said yesterday that he had no comment on the case.

Detective Pearl Gabona of Durham Regional police said there will not be a criminal investigation into the crash. "I've found there does not seem to be any grounds for criminal charges," she said. Det. Gabona said they would likely never understand why the pilots of the two aircraft did not see each other before colliding.

"There's no indication there was anything untoward," she said. The family of Mr. Tyukodi has been told about the findings and understand why there will not be any criminal proceedings. "They're very good people, who say an accident is an accident," Det. Gabona said.

This week, Mr. Curry will talk to industry experts and owners of private grass airstrips to see whether there are any wider safety implications. "When we turn over the right rocks, it's quite easy to get information," he said.

An advocacy group for pilots and airplane owners said yesterday that there is no need for more regulations or policing of private pilots.

"All the regulations are in place," Kevin Psutka, president the of Canadian Pilots and Owners Association, said in Ottawa. "This is an extremely rare event."

Mr. Psutka said that many pilots do get asked for their certificates in spot checks.

TBS report:

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repor ... 1o0164.asp
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by PilotDAR »

I wonder, without speculating.... Would there be a greater percentage of licensed to unlicensed pilots? Or drivers?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Re: N499SW King Air fatal crash - Owner/pilot was unlicensed

Post by Shiny Side Up »

PilotDAR wrote:I wonder, without speculating.... Would there be a greater percentage of licensed to unlicensed pilots? Or drivers?
From experience, probably about the same, though a higher number of fraudulently "licensed" drivers since there seems to be a whole industry around that. There is probably an equal rate of unreported accidents and incidents with airplanes (in GA at least) as there is with vehicles.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”