Thunder Bay airport accident

[Lost in Saigon]

Did this pilot ever have a reputation for being reckless or taking risks?

I guess the only good thing about this accident is that only the pilot was killed. It could have been a lot worse.

[‘Bob’]

To put any blame at all on the controller is absurd, they don't fly the plane.

Period.

This is 100% on the pilot, and they paid the ultimate price, thank God it was just one fatality. There's even a confirmed pattern of decision making here, how much more evidence do you need?

The TSB doesn’t assign blame. It’s objective. They are looking for root causes as to why this plane and pilot wound up being a smoking hole in the ground.

The controller asking for and encouraging this type of flying definitely contributed to the pilot’s decision making process.

If the controller filled a CADORs instead citing reckless and negligent operation of an aircraft, you can bet this pilot would have had a stern talking to by his CP and still be alive today.

Just because you’re not directly responsible doesn’t mean you can’t be culpable.

[rookiepilot]

To put any blame at all on the controller is absurd, they don't fly the plane.

Period.

This is 100% on the pilot, and they paid the ultimate price, thank God it was just one fatality. There's even a confirmed pattern of decision making here, how much more evidence do you need?

The TSB doesn’t assign blame. It’s objective. They are looking for root causes as to why this plane and pilot wound up being a smoking hole in the ground.

The controller asking for and encouraging this type of flying definitely contributed to the pilot’s decision making process.

If the controller filled a CADORs instead citing reckless and negligent operation of an aircraft, you can bet this pilot would have had a stern talking to by his CP and still be alive today.

Just because you’re not directly responsible doesn’t mean you can’t be culpable.

Who explicitly blamed the controller for the accident? Not me.

That being said. This was unprofessional behavior.

I must be old. I come from a time when one falls far below the professional standards expected, they lose their job. It’s sure different today.

Heck, I'm SURE some of you professional pilots would LOVE this guy to be promoted to YYZ Tower. You know, so he can handle your aircraft when it's 200 / 1/2.

[digits_]

Ah please. Nothing unprofessional about what the controller did. He was eager to see planes fly. It's almost as if he likes airplanes and aviation, who would have guessed in a job like that! They are humans, not robots. And it wasn't 200 1/2 weather.

It's not ATC's job to police pilots everytime they do something that might look dangerous or illegal but might not be.

More deaths will be caused by attempting to cover up mistakes from a police force ATC vs the occasional pilot who might take it too far.

[cdnavater]

Ah please. Nothing unprofessional about what the controller did. He was eager to see planes fly. It's almost as if he likes airplanes and aviation, who would have guessed in a job like that! They are humans, not robots. And it wasn't 200 1/2 weather.

It's not ATC's job to police pilots everytime they do something that might look dangerous or illegal but might not be.

More deaths will be caused by attempting to cover up mistakes from a police force ATC vs the occasional pilot who might take it too far.

Nothing unprofessional, if you want to see an air show, go to an air show.
Whose job is it to “police” pilot actions? How do they do it?
It’s called the CADORS, TC can’t be at every airport so an agent that works for the federal government passes information to the authorities.

“Why CADORS?
Good safety information is key to the continuous improvement of aviation safety. As the main source of aviation occurrence information in Canada, the Civil Aviation Daily Occurrence Reporting System (CADORS) is an invaluable aviation safety tool.”

[digits_]

Ah please. Nothing unprofessional about what the controller did. He was eager to see planes fly. It's almost as if he likes airplanes and aviation, who would have guessed in a job like that! They are humans, not robots. And it wasn't 200 1/2 weather.

It's not ATC's job to police pilots everytime they do something that might look dangerous or illegal but might not be.

More deaths will be caused by attempting to cover up mistakes from a police force ATC vs the occasional pilot who might take it too far.

Nothing unprofessional, if you want to see an air show, go to an air show.
Whose job is it to “police” pilot actions? How do they do it?
It’s called the CADORS, TC can’t be at every airport so an agent that works for the federal government passes information to the authorities.

“Why CADORS?
Good safety information is key to the continuous improvement of aviation safety. As the main source of aviation occurrence information in Canada, the Civil Aviation Daily Occurrence Reporting System (CADORS) is an invaluable aviation safety tool.”

If an infraction happened, ATC would likely have created a cador. The fact that they didn't here, means they didn't consider it dangerous or illegal.

It's TC enforcement's responsibility to police pilots. Not ATC's.

You can kill yourself on every takeoff if you yank up the yoke and stall. Do we expect ATC to know the max possible climb rate of every plane, and if a pilot zooms faster than that CADORS it? Will that prevent accidents?

There's an interesting document circling around about pilot life at some Chinese carrier. Every little sop exceedance is recorded and reprimanded. It results in a witch hunt and creates unsafe situations.

[rookiepilot]

Duplicate

[Bede]

The TSB report should be required reading for every pilot. I hesitated to post my observations after the crash, but they're appropriate now. I saw the first fly-by earlier in the day. He took off and as soon as airborne cranked it right over barely missing the tower. I remember thinking at the time, "geez, that's pretty unnecessary and irresponsible. That's low level airshow type flying." When I heard about the accident, I immediately thought of what I saw earlier in the day and suspected this was similar behaviour gone awry. Sure enough.

I get it, we all want to hot dog every once in a while. But this was well beyond having a bit of fun- this was negligence plain and simple. Let this be a learning experience for the rest of us.

[cdnavater]

Ah please. Nothing unprofessional about what the controller did. He was eager to see planes fly. It's almost as if he likes airplanes and aviation, who would have guessed in a job like that! They are humans, not robots. And it wasn't 200 1/2 weather.

It's not ATC's job to police pilots everytime they do something that might look dangerous or illegal but might not be.

More deaths will be caused by attempting to cover up mistakes from a police force ATC vs the occasional pilot who might take it too far.

Nothing unprofessional, if you want to see an air show, go to an air show.
Whose job is it to “police” pilot actions? How do they do it?
It’s called the CADORS, TC can’t be at every airport so an agent that works for the federal government passes information to the authorities.

“Why CADORS?
Good safety information is key to the continuous improvement of aviation safety. As the main source of aviation occurrence information in Canada, the Civil Aviation Daily Occurrence Reporting System (CADORS) is an invaluable aviation safety tool.”

If an infraction happened, ATC would likely have created a cador. The fact that they didn't here, means they didn't consider it dangerous or illegal.

It's TC enforcement's responsibility to police pilots. Not ATC's.

You can kill yourself on every takeoff if you yank up the yoke and stall. Do we expect ATC to know the max possible climb rate of every plane, and if a pilot zooms faster than that CADORS it? Will that prevent accidents?

There's an interesting document circling around about pilot life at some Chinese carrier. Every little sop exceedance is recorded and reprimanded. It results in a witch hunt and creates unsafe situations.

Posted below about the CADORS because you clearly don’t understand the system and how it’s supposed to work.
It’s been a while since I’ve flown a visual departure, aren’t you supposed to climb straight ahead to 500 before making a turn enroute? A steep turn at 45’ would’ve been investigated if a CADORS was issued, without encouraging the behaviour maybe this turns out different, maybe not but I’m willing to bet the ATC tower controller is and has beat himself up over this

https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/public ... tem-cadors
Where does the information come from?
NAV CANADA provides about 80% of aviation occurrence information used to create a CADORS record. That information is provided in an aviation occurrence report (AOR). Other sources of information used to create a CADORS record may come from the Transportation Safety Board (TSB), Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), aircraft operators, and other government agencies.

[ant_321]

I was really hoping this wouldn’t be what the report would say but I had a feeling it would. I met the pilot when we were teenagers flying gliders but didn’t have much contact with him in the years leading up to the accident. Sadly many of our mutual friends weren’t surprised at this outcome. Hopefully some young, dumb pilots read this and decide to not be cowboys.

[sportingrifle]

In addition to some of the conclusions and comments, 1.8 “G” at liftoff shows a stunning lack of understanding of basic aerodynamics.

[digits_]

It’s been a while since I’ve flown a visual departure, aren’t you supposed to climb straight ahead to 500 before making a turn enroute? A steep turn at 45’ would’ve been investigated if a CADORS was issued,

That's a requirement in uncontrolled airports: 500 ft if staying in circuit, 1000ft before proceeding on course.

There's also a sizeable hill in the extended centerline of that runway.

Do you have a reference that defines steep turns and prohibits them after TO?

[piperdriver]

Do you have a reference that defines steep turns and prohibits them after TO?

Well in this specific accident Physics prohibited the steep turn and the takeoff. Common sense > CARS

[Sailtime]

The TSB report should be required reading for every pilot. I hesitated to post my observations after the crash, but they're appropriate now. I saw the first fly-by earlier in the day. He took off and as soon as airborne cranked it right over barely missing the tower. I remember thinking at the time, "geez, that's pretty unnecessary and irresponsible. That's low level airshow type flying." When I heard about the accident, I immediately thought of what I saw earlier in the day and suspected this was similar behaviour gone awry. Sure enough.

I get it, we all want to hot dog every once in a while. But this was well beyond having a bit of fun- this was negligence plain and simple. Let this be a learning experience for the rest of us.

I agree 100%. Very irresponsible and completely unnecessary. This should not have happened at all and certainly should not have been condoned by the controller either. Lack of discipline both in the cockpit and the cab. Ultimately, the pilot is at fault but a bit of the system failed him too.

[digits_]

Do you have a reference that defines steep turns and prohibits them after TO?

Well in this specific accident Physics prohibited the steep turn and the takeoff. Common sense > CARS

Did he do a steep turn, or a regular turn with too much pull up which dropped a wing?

But this exactly my point. A gentle 45 degree steep turn is much safer than an agressive 30 degree bank turn. How can ATC judge this?

[Lost in Saigon]

This was the third time in one day that he pulled off this same “stunt”. There must have been lots of other people who witnessed the first two departures and I am surprised that no one questioned it or reported it.

The first two times he had a forestry air attack officer on board. I would be interested to hear what the air attack officer had to say about it. This pilot had been flying Bird Dog all summer, and I wonder if he had acted this way in the past, or was he just getting over confident late in the season?

Maybe it was just the combination of: 1) No passenger, 2) ATC spectator, and 3) showing off for the Pilot friend in the landing Bearskin aircraft, that made him try to pull off the ultimate departure.

[tbayav8er]

It’s been a while since I’ve flown a visual departure, aren’t you supposed to climb straight ahead to 500 before making a turn enroute? A steep turn at 45’ would’ve been investigated if a CADORS was issued,

That's a requirement in uncontrolled airports: 500 ft if staying in circuit, 1000ft before proceeding on course.

There's also a sizeable hill in the extended centerline of that runway.

Do you have a reference that defines steep turns and prohibits them after TO?

I spent a fair bit of time teaching aerobatics, and it is actually in the CARs. Aerobatics are defined as: a manoeuvre where a change in the attitude of an aircraft results in a bank angle greater than 60 degrees, an abnormal attitude or an abnormal acceleration not incidental to normal flying.

The CARs states that aerobatic manouevres are prohibited in class D control zones unless prior coordination is made with the ATC unit responsible for said control zone. Not sure what that entails though, and if that exchange over the radio would satisfy that rule. I know the bank angle probably didn't intentionally exceed 60 degrees, but I would say an abrupt pull-up and steep turn low to the ground would constitute "an abnormal attitude not incidental to normal flying".

I could be wrong in my logic with this, but I'm open to others' thoughts. RIP to the pilot. Very tragic situation, and it was tough reading the report.

[Donald]

We are taught as pilots early on, that the buck stops with you. If you are working for a boss that pushes you into bad weather, or to fly overweight, we are told that if you crash, the blame will rest with you.

This pilot made a choice to show off, the controller didn't even request it, it was offered.

It's a tragedy, but there's only one person who chose to fly the aircraft in that manner that day.

[pelmet]

This sort of maneuver does happen on occasion at uncontrolled airports but kind of surprising to see it at a controlled airport that gets quite a few airline flights.

[flyinhigh]

The report is out. Typical TSB, “We know a similar profile was intentionally flown twice that day but that’s not the axe we’re here to grind,” but otherwise seems complete enough. I wonder how the trainee controller felt about the whole affair.

https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... c0078.html

Oh god ... That's bad ...

I wonder what the communication with the landing aircraft was about. They don't clarify, yet repeat multiple times they knew each other.


Blaming this on the controllers would be a bit misplaced IMO.

It was general banter. The ATC recordings that were released approx 2 days later had the discussion. It would be a very somber feeling to know that your friend you just chatted with crashed, literally 100 ft from you while taxiing.

There was a comment about birddog pilots staying at 500'. Do they not do the steep pull/turn out on fires to direct the tankers where to drop? I saw this happen years ago at a fire in YXL.

I'll keep my opinion to myself on this accident due to the fatality, but that report is an eye opener for young pilots.