Air Tindi Crash near Lutsel K'e

[magic wand]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/sto ... named.html

John Pearson from the TSB said one of the wings entered the cabin as a result of the crash, and said it's fortunate there weren't more fatalities.

"Some parts were shed, the cargo box and propeller, landing gear were shed on the west side," said Pearson. "And other parts continued over to the east side of the peninsula and down 600 feet, down an eight-degree slope, then became airborne and the plane landed inverted."

Watch the video again.
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Canada/N ... 2148629988
Did you see the flight path? The first 1/4 of the video shows the debris path and again at the 4/5thspoint of the video - it is pretty obvious.

[r22captain]

RIP MB

[Prairie Chicken]

Ah geez, when is this going to end?

Condolences to those affected.

To the rest of you, fly safe out there!

[Brown Bear]

Ah geez, when is this going to end?

It will end my good chicken, when companies stop dispatching VFR machines into VERY marginal conditions. When pilots learn to say "NO".
And not until. I'm tired of hearing about pilots who will never celebrate their 30th birthdays.
Now before everybody jumps one me, did this really have to happen? Read the wx for the area when this happened.
My thoughts are with the families.

[bushwhacker]

As long as there is another operator willing to send a flight into the crap weather and a pilot willing to take it, the end will never come.

Its the nature of the business, as sorry as it is.

[bushwhacker]

Also , food for thought

Make all Day VFR companies operate piston engine aircraft (this will take away the comfort level of the turbine reliability) and don't let them install all the fancy GPS units with weather capabilities and moving maps.
I am willing to bet there won't be many piston otters and beavers going into the crap like happens now.

Make the pilots have to remain VFR and learn how to read a map.

[grimey]

I don't think taking tools away is a good answer, but it might be one that actually works. If you were a responsible VFR pilot, though, meaning you would check the weather ahead of time and not be afraid of saying no or turning around, wouldn't you rather have something to help get you out of shit if you did @#$! up? GPS isn't the problem, it just helps to enable the problem, which is operators pushing inexperienced pilots beyond safe limits, and inexperienced pilots wanting to impress the operator they fly for.

Anyway, I don't know the pilot's qualifications or frame of mind, the machine's capabilities, or what pressure if any the company put on him, so don't take the above as a criticism of the Air Tindi or the pilot who died.

[fish4life]

perhaps make commercial VFR 1000' AGL just like 705 operators have as a restriction is a good start. or even 700 feet would be a good comprimise

[tbaylx]

VFR? Am i missing something? I was under the impression there was a RNAV approach at destination and the C208 is a perfectly capable IFR machine.

[System Message]

Its not the ceiling, its the poor visibility and moisture on the windsheild that often comes with clouds. If the weather was too poor to see the ground right in front of you, and was the same at the destination you can't fly there IFR either.

[Justjohn]

Its not the ceiling, its the poor visibility and moisture on the windsheild that often comes with clouds. If the weather was too poor to see the ground right in front of you, and was the same at the destination you can't fly there IFR either.

The Wx at Lutsel K'e was fine for IFR ... ~1000 OVC and 3 + miles vis. The flight was on it's way back (according to news sources) to Lutsel K'e because of deteriorating Wx.

[System Message]

Thanks, I didn't know.

[tbaylx]

Its not the ceiling, its the poor visibility and moisture on the windsheild that often comes with clouds. If the weather was too poor to see the ground right in front of you, and was the same at the destination you can't fly there IFR either.

You can fly anywhere IFR, you just might not be able to land off the approach...and if you're maintaining 25 mile safe and transition to an IFR approach you won't have to worry about smacking a hill around the airport so it really doesn't matter if you can see or not.

Guess my question is..is it common for operators to go VFR instead of IFR in crap weather if the operation and aircraft are IFR capable?

[Doc]

Also , food for thought

Make all Day VFR companies operate piston engine aircraft (this will take away the comfort level of the turbine reliability) and don't let them install all the fancy GPS units with weather capabilities and moving maps.
I am willing to bet there won't be many piston otters and beavers going into the crap like happens now.

Make the pilots have to remain VFR and learn how to read a map.

You're new to this , aren't you?
Pushing weather is probably the single biggest killer of Beaver and Otters. Believe me, being a turbine or a piston has nothing to o with a pilot's or a company's willingness to push weather. Taking away the equipment will only help "close the door" to a possible "out". What is this "map" thing of which you speak?

[Doc]

VFR? Am i missing something? I was under the impression there was a RNAV approach at destination and the C208 is a perfectly capable IFR machine.

Some girls are pretty. Some, not so pretty. With me?

[PistonPounder2800]

I think the problem isn't with VFR or IFR flying. It's when the two get mix. IFR has sector altitudes and safe altitudes that take right to an approach, how can it get much safer? But convincing yourself that you know the area so it's safe to descend through cloud and sneak your way in isn't acceptable anymore. There are too many instances of CFIT from that cowboy shit. I'm not saying that this happened in this case but it's quite possible.

[bushwhacker]

Hey Doc,

I'm not really to new to this business unless starting in 1974 qualifies me as such.

It is meant to be a bit of tongue in cheek on piston vs. turbine equipment, but the bottom line is there seems to be more weather related accidents happening now than 30 years ago, or a least now with internet etc. maybe we're just hearing about them quicker.

It might be interesting if someone could pull up stats for the last say 50 years.

I stand by my comment on the willingness of VFR operators pushing flights into crap weather conditions in order to keep the customer happy. I know first hand the pressure of a group of fishermen wanting to get to their destination can bring to bear on a dispatcher and pilot along with the whining about having to pay for overloads etc. ( the typical group of tourist would happily jump in any aircraft with 1000 lbs. of overload to save the cost of another plane to get their beer and water to camp).

I truly wish there was a common sense answer to stop all accidents from happening.


Thanks for listening

Jack Pope

Nestor Falls, Ont.

[Doc]

Hey Doc,

I'm not really to new to this business unless starting in 1974 qualifies me as such.

It is meant to be a bit of tongue in cheek on piston vs. turbine equipment, but the bottom line is there seems to be more weather related accidents happening now than 30 years ago, or a least now with internet etc. maybe we're just hearing about them quicker.

It might be interesting if someone could pull up stats for the last say 50 years.

I stand by my comment on the willingness of VFR operators pushing flights into crap weather conditions in order to keep the customer happy. I know first hand the pressure of a group of fishermen wanting to get to their destination can bring to bear on a dispatcher and pilot along with the whining about having to pay for overloads etc. ( the typical group of tourist would happily jump in any aircraft with 1000 lbs. of overload to save the cost of another plane to get their beer and water to camp).

I truly wish there was a common sense answer to stop all accidents from happening.


Thanks for listening

Jack Pope

Nestor Falls, Ont.

Good points Jack. I'd almost be willing to bet that the number of weather related accidents has pretty much remained the same vs. the number of aircraft out there. Obviously the attitude has remained stagnant over the years. Pilots keep pushing. Operators keep pushing. All my life's a circle? I have NO idea what the answer is, but I do know, we need to find one. Your comment about the tourists and their beer is SO true. I can understand where that comes from. What I don't understand is the same attitude displayed by commercial operators to stuff more pop and chips on board. Wouldn't a second flight or a larger aircraft net them more money? As far a weather, why not go tomorrow? Or go IFR?
Cheers mate.

[CAN_Yeager]

It has not been said here yet, TAWS could have prevented this accident. I am not saying this pilot was pushing the weather but if he got stuck in something and turned around a Bitching Betty yelling "Caution Terrain Caution Terrain" "Terrain Terrain pull up! pull up" would have ended all curiousity about whats under the cloud. There not that expensive now and it is a small price to pay to make sure everyone comes home at the end of the day.

[Northern Flyer]

Every Caravan I ever flew had some sort of TAWS or GPWS. But they don't say much when you inhibit the audio. While purposely flying low level you will inhibit or it is going off full time.

[Doc]

Every Caravan I ever flew had some sort of TAWS or GPWS. But they don't say much when you inhibit the audio. While purposely flying low level you will inhibit or it is going off full time.

No Caravan I've ever flown had either a GPWS or a TAWS.

[medi-whacked]

It has not been said here yet, TAWS could have prevented this accident. I am not saying this pilot was pushing the weather but if he got stuck in something and turned around a Bitching Betty yelling "Caution Terrain Caution Terrain" "Terrain Terrain pull up! pull up" would have ended all curiousity about whats under the cloud. There not that expensive now and it is a small price to pay to make sure everyone comes home at the end of the day.

Simply maintaining VFR would have also prevented this accident. Put your eyes out the window, not in the cockpit. Follow the rules that govern your flight. Cheaper than TAWS.

[Doc]

It has not been said here yet, TAWS could have prevented this accident. I am not saying this pilot was pushing the weather but if he got stuck in something and turned around a Bitching Betty yelling "Caution Terrain Caution Terrain" "Terrain Terrain pull up! pull up" would have ended all curiousity about whats under the cloud. There not that expensive now and it is a small price to pay to make sure everyone comes home at the end of the day.

Simply maintaining VFR would have also prevented this accident. Put your eyes out the window, not in the cockpit. Follow the rules that govern your flight. Cheaper than TAWS.

It's actually easier than that. Know how and when to execute the one hundred and eighty degree turn.

[Northern Flyer]

Every Caravan I ever flew had some sort of TAWS or GPWS. But they don't say much when you inhibit the audio. While purposely flying low level you will inhibit or it is going off full time.

No Caravan I've ever flown had either a GPWS or a TAWS.

Guess I've been lucky.

[Redneck_pilot86]

1 of the 5 caravans I have flown had GPWS. Its far from standard equipment.