Missing north of Peterborough

[Cat Driver]

I love the irony To be found here in this forum.

We have an anonymous poster telling a TSB employee to disregard anything said by anonymous posters.

Fortunatey some of us do not hide behind anonimity.

[Illya Kuryakin]

As someone who often flies between Montreal and Toronto: USE THE 401, IT'S A GIANT LIGHT CHAIN THAT POINTS TO YOUR DESTINATION.

This is a wise idea period!

You mean, some pilots don't do this? WHY
Illya

[trey kule]

You mean, some pilots don't do this? WHY
Illya

I dont because I dont like either of these cities. The lovely young things in Montral think I am to old, and I dont speak any of the nine languages spoken in Toronto.

[Illya Kuryakin]

You mean, some pilots don't do this? WHY
Illya

I dont because I dont like either of these cities. The lovely young things in Montral think I am to old, and I dont speak any of the nine languages spoken in Toronto.

Funny thing you should mention that. There are 27 different languages and dialects spoken in Toronto area schools!
Illya

[PilotDAR]

I can certainly think of a few accidents in that region over the years, which were obviously short on fact and explanation. I guess the TSB have to do the best they can with the little information they can verify. A tough job when people are looking for closure and answers, and there are few to find.

I am guilty of a lot of risky flights in the past, flights with routes such as they described for this accident. I'm also guilty of some poor decision making with respect to flying "VFR" equipped aircraft into poor weather. Happily, I was usually too scared to try both at once. More and more I listened to the people who told me that this kind of flying, though legally compliant, was still foolish. II was told to pay for the hotel room instead. I can remember the first time I completely diverted and turned tail out of night bad weather in the 150. It felt so good and so safe to step into a muzzy motel room, and then to see my plane gleaming on the ramp, in the sunshine the next morning.

I have helped to clean up a number of wrecked planes from the forests of Ontario. Very few were associated with a well planned, good weather day flight in a well equipped aircraft. It's such a privilege to fly with the freedom we do in Canada. I really don't want to think of Transport Canada finding reasons to regulate more. Like the intersection which finally gets traffic lights after the third fatal car accident, we don't need more restrictive night flying because one more plane crashed.

We need good decision making, and preparedness in pilots, it needs to be taught in at an early age. I think about these two pilots, and wonder what they had done to prepare for a possible forced landing that was not injurious. We've had a great thread on survival gear to stir the thoughts. To be truthful, I expect that for a well fueled C 150 and two people crossing that route at this time of year, adequate survival gear would probably weigh more than their excess payload. That possible circumstance, and my presumption that the 150 was not well equipped for long range flight without effective visual reference to the ground, has me questioning decision making.

I've had friends die in crashes. The best the investigators could come up with was a term like "misadventure", which I read as "we have no idea, but we had to report something". But even so, it was difficult to come up with a long list of wise choices they'd made about the flight. I have no facts about this accident beyond what's publicly known. But if some really sharp decisions were made to enhance the safety of that flight, I can't see those either. Perhaps good choices were made, and they will become known. Perhaps there was some very obscure, totally unforeseeable reason for this accident - I will wait to read, and maybe learn.....

But, in the mean time, I hope pilots, new and old, will think of this accident, and remind themselves about the risk benefit equation of night VFR in unpopulated areas, flying modestly equipped and capable aircraft in poor weather. Your flight is private, and you have the expectation of privacy, until you crash and make the news. Then you're fair game, for the news and the internet speculators.

Ewan, in the future, when the report is released, would you make a post on this thread, simply directing readers to the report?

[Rookie50]

PD,

Agree with your post -- and to the investigator -- from my (admittedly limited) experience flying over some of that same route, in light airplanes, at night --- IMO this accident will come down to pilot decisions made on the ground in respect to navigation and weather planning -- and furthered in the air once visability and navigation came into question, that inexperience at night would amplify.

Night flying can be safely achieved in light aircraft, but extra time, care and planning, must be done on the ground before such flights in appropriate conditions.

[davecessna]

Reading this still makes me upset. Air Navigation Free will literally point you to the nearest airport and is available on most cellphones with GPS (which most have nowadays). Big surprise, it costs nothing.

[Lost in Saigon]

I have a few questions....

What kind on navigation equipment would have been on board this aircraft?
(I would assume at least a VOR)

Were there any VOR's in the area they were operating in?

Did they have basic VOR knowledge?

[pelmet]

I am the investigator in charge of the TSB investigation into this accident.

If anyone has any information or opinions that they believe are relevant to the investigation, you can contact me directly via email at ewan.tasker@tsb.gc.ca

I may not be able to answer every question, or respond directly to speculation, but I would truly appreciate your input.

Thanks for your help,

Ewan Tasker.

The TSB frequently makes recommendations to TC in their accident reports. Without commenting on this accident as many details are unknown, I hope that there is not some sort of a knee jerk reaction that if somebody has used poor judgement or had poor flying skills, then that is a reason to recommend making things more restrictive for the large number of skilled pilots who have good judgement.

There appear to be a lot of pilots who make foolish decisions about weather and fuel. We read about it all the time. There have been plenty of aircraft that have gotten lost in the daytime and plenty of aircraft that have run out of fuel in the daytime. These scenarios may be more likely at night time but that is not a reason to make things more restrictive(like in Europe) for the vast majority of competent pilots using good decision making.

I don't know the details of what is required for a night rating anymore but there may be a case for adjusting the training as opposed to many parts of the world where the instinct is to regulate the industry out of business.

Perhaps a good training scenario(from an experienced, instrument rated instructor) would by a requirement to fly on a nice dark VFR night in a pitch black environment such as taking off from YTZ southbound or over an area further north.

[CpnCrunch]

One potential issue is radio navigation. As far as I can tell, in Canada there is no training on using the ADF or VOR for the PPL. When I did my PPL in the UK, we had to be able to determine our position using VOR/DME. I'm wondering how the heck Canadian PPLs are supposed to figure out their position if they're lost out in the middle of nowhere in IMC or at night.

I know that ADFs and VORs are being relegated to the dustbin, so perhaps it should be a requirement that PPLs can use some kind of GPS device to determine their position if they're lost. This would be a lot simpler, and more useful. In theory you would think that everyone has a GPS and knows how to use it these days, but it seems like this isn't always the case.

[photofly]

These scenarios may be more likely at night time but that is not a reason to make things more restrictive(like in Europe) for the vast majority of competent pilots using good decision making.

I think we just need for the sake of accuracy to squash the impression that night VFR is not permitted in Europe. In fact a little checking suggests the only country that doesn't permit night vfr in Europe is Holland.

Given that it's permitted in most of Europe, Canada and the US - that covers about 99% of GA-land.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Funny thing about night VFR. When I had 100 or so hours, I wouldn't hesitate to go flailing off night VFR pretty much anywhere in the trusty 150. I don't think you could pay me to do some of those trips today.
Illya

[Shiny Side Up]

In fact a little checking suggests the only country that doesn't permit night vfr in Europe is Holland.

I knew there was a reason that the second thing I couldn't stand in this world was the Dutch.

Funny thing about night VFR. When I had 100 or so hours, I wouldn't hesitate to go flailing off night VFR pretty much anywhere in the trusty 150. I don't think you could pay me to do some of those trips today.
Illya

It really depends on how you think about things. I have no qualms about flying single engine at night, aside from the usual complaints about missing supper. The chances of me being hurt because of the engine stopping aren't any worse than me being hurt doing a lot of other things. That said, its usually just my butt on the line when I do it. One must be reasonable about it though. Taking an unfamiliar airplane out in the dark is a bad idea, no matter where you go, even staying in the circuit would be a bad idea. One doesn't go out of one's way to make things more challenging or difficult then add night time to it. Take the long route, when in doubt postpone until daytime.

Its never "safe" but then neither is flying in daytime. You can only mitigate the risks to a reasonable level.

[photofly]

In fact a little checking suggests the only country that doesn't permit night vfr in Europe is Holland.

I knew there was a reason that the second thing I couldn't stand in this world was the Dutch.

Fair enough, I deserved that.

[Cat Driver]

I was based in Holland for three years and found the Dutch people to be the best people I ever worked with, so I guess it all depends on personal experiences.

[iflyforpie]

That was from a line Michael Caine said in an Austin Powers movie, Cat... I'm pretty sure SSU meant no disrespect...

[Cat Driver]

Yes, I know Ifly...I just wanted to share my experience with the Dutch.

[PilotDAR]

What kind on navigation equipment would have been on board this aircraft?
(I would assume at least a VOR)

Were there any VOR's in the area they were operating in?

I do not know how the subject aircraft was equipped. I do know that at lower altitudes in that area, reception is uncertain. I don't know if the use of VORs and ADFs is taught to PPLs (I'm many to many decades down the road from PPL to have relevant information on that), but I'm certain that any pilot can present themselves at a flying school and pay for additional training of a more specific nature.

I agree with Pelmet, that we hope to not have more regulation after such an event. Regulation would not help here. Mentoring would though! Illya, as I, did some flights in a mighty 150, at night, which make me shudder to think about now. I crossed the northern Everglades to the center of Florida at night - to find my destination airport closed, and lights out. 'Landed anyway, no better choice then. Very foolish. It's not that I don't do this any more, but I do it with much greater preparation, and margin for things to go other than planned.

Things you can do in a 150 range from silly benign safe (1 of 10 alarm), to suicidal (10 of 10 alarm). I think everyone would agree that tail slides in 150's are 10/10 alarm. The fact that you're on a cross country flight does not mean you can assume that you're at only a 3/10 of alarm, that cross country flight could be a 9/10 alarm if things are going badly - a well trained, and experienced pilot would notice and even anticipate these factors. 3/10 for any cross country, + 2/10 for night + 2/10 for the route, + 2/10 for less good weather, and we're at 9/10, without talking fuel worries, and emergency kit. Maybe a broken radio with no back up, a bit of airframe icing, some panic, and this alarm factor keeps going up.

New pilots should be more scared when they launch off on long cross countries. Not to say that they should not attempt a trip, but a lot of thought should go into keeping the alarm factors to a minimum. I hope that new pilots are reading about this unhappy event, and figuring out how they will plan to prevent it happening to themselves, while they still plan to do long trips ('cause they are fun!)

[Cat Driver]

Spatial disorentation and complete loss of control at night is the real killer for pilots who are not competent in flight by instruments only.

And the lack of ability to fly by reference to instruments only is due to improper training and lack of experience on instruments only.

And wearing a hood is a piss poor method of learning how to fly by instruments only.

[Rookie50]

I have a few questions....

What kind on navigation equipment would have been on board this aircraft?
(I would assume at least a VOR)

Were there any VOR's in the area they were operating in?

Did they have basic VOR knowledge?

I am not sure this is the major issue that seems to be the consensus read, ie they got lost, ran out of fuel, rest is history.

My read on it is Cat's above, it's a (night) VFR into IMC accident. Better Nav skills may not have prevented this accident.

Getting lost is, perhaps incidental as a primary cause. I could be wrong, often am, but I don't think so.

To put it bluntly, all the glass in the world aint going to help if you can't control the aircraft in the conditions out there, as been shown, time and time again. I'm not even sure it might have mattered if this happened over 8 lanes of the 401 if they entered solid IMC at night.