Fatal Floatplane Crash in PQ, May 26, 2008

[Widow]

CADORS Number: 2008Q1336 Reporting Region: Quebec

Occurrence InformationOccurrence Type: Accident Occurrence Date: 2008/05/26
Occurrence Time: 2015 Z Day Or Night: day-time
Fatalities: 2 Injuries: 0

Canadian Aerodrome ID: Aerodrome Name:
Occurrence Location: Lac Joncas (Parc de La Vérendry) Province: Quebec
Country: CANADA World Area: North America

Reported By: NAV CANADA, CACO, TC, BST AOR Number: 94189-V1
TSB Class Of Investigation: 5 TSB Occurrence No.: A08Q0095
Event InformationCollision with terrain
Nose over
Aircraft InformationFlight #:
Aircraft Category: Aeroplane Country of Registration: CANADA
Make: CESSNA Model: 180B
Year Built: 1959 Amateur Built: No
Engine Make: TELEDYNE CONTINENTAL Engine Model: O-470-K
Engine Type: Reciprocating Gear Type: Sea
Phase of Flight: Unknown Damage: Substantial
Owner: Private Operator:
Operator Type: Private

Detail InformationUser Name: Sirois, Richard
Date: 2008/05/27
Further Action Required: No
O.P.I.: General Aviation
Narrative: Un Cessna 180 de propriété privée, effectuait un vol selon les règles de vol à vue (VFR) depuis Stone Cliff à destination des lacs Bruce, O'Sullivan ou Kennedy situés au Québec. L'appareil a été déclaré disparu à 2015Z, alors que celui-ci n'était pas de retour à Smiths Falls-Montague comme prévu. Le centre de recherche et sauvetage de Trenton(RCC TR) a été avisé. L'appareil a été retrouvé inversé à 50 pieds de la rive dans le lac Joncas (parc de la Vérendry). Les deux occupants ont été retrouvés décédés à l'intérieur. Le Bureau de la Sécurité des Transports (BST) a été avisé.

User Name: Sirois, Richard
Date: 2008/05/29
Further Action Required: No
O.P.I.: General Aviation
Narrative: Mise à jour #1: Le numéro et la classe d'enquête du BST ont été ajoutés. Selon le rapport du BST # A08Q0095: Le Cessna 180B, CF-LTN a décollé samedi matin le 23 mai 2008 de Stone Clift, Ontario et a été porté disparu dans la nuit du 27 mai 2008. Le matin du 27 mai 2008 l'appareil a été retrouvé inversé dans le lac Paul Joncas, Québec. Les deux occupants ont subi des blessures mortels. Les dommages de l'appareil sont importants.

My sincere condolences.

[bmc]

Relevance?

Another meaningful post. Slow day?

It has as much relevance as Bombardier in Mexico and Mixture settings.

[lazyboy]

I agree....I know I don't need widow on here telling us about ever airplane crash...

[Doc]

Methinks she has her computer "hard wired" to the CADORS site, with some sort of "auto post" software, that keeps us up to date whether we want it or not. I'm also really fed up with comments like "RIP", "he died doing what he loved".....enough already.

[Widow]

Why do I get shit when no one else does?

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... &sk=t&sd=a

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... =5&t=43429

I'm not the only one that posts about fatalities, and I do have a specific interest in floatplane accidents - with good reason.

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... =25&t=8889

[Ranjency Dixonator]

Its in French on an mainly english speaking site...

Why post this?

[Navajo-dude]

Jeez, ease off people.

How about reading what happened, (use Google translate if need be), and see if perhaps there's anything can can be leaned from this accident.

[Widow]

It's a TSB Class 5 investigation. I wonder if the wreckage will be recovered.

[Blakey]

It's a TSB Class 5 investigation. I wonder if the wreckage will be recovered.

Yes. It floated.

[CANAIR]

Widow

good for you giving your condolences there is nothing wrong with that

don't mind those losers who just make posts to increase there rank you should be ashamed of yourselves ... seriously go look in the mirror you are really losers. I dont usually say much but you should really show more compassion someone out there lost a loved one. GROW UP


can

[Widow]

The crash was substantial enough to cause fatal injuries but it floated? I wonder if the CADORs is correct, or if cause of death has not yet been established.

[snoopy]

It is important we know about these accidents, and why they're happening. If nothing else, they serve to remind us that "There but for the grace of God/Allah/Fate/etc, go I".

Accidents aren't supposed to happen - so why did this one or that one happen? Can we learn from it? Did one of those long-time risk takers finally run out of luck? Was it a mechanical failure, and if so are other aircraft at risk? Could training have been improved? Bad decision making? Was it someone we knew? There are a thousand questions that can and should be asked after every accident, because as long as they keep happening, we still haven't got it right.

In a perfect world, we would have a method to measure safety - the intangible part- one that would evaluate people for how they think and how they operate in a good way. Instead, we have a perverse and inaccurate system where one can exercise bad airmanship, bad judgement, and break every rule in the book - and, as long as no accident results, be considered safe.

If we can't evolve our thinking to the first method, then all we can do is draw attention to the accidents, and hope that eventually, somebody will connect the dots and realize 'Hey, maybe we're not the safest country in the world after all'. And maybe we should figure out a better way to do business.

Of course it is much easier if we don't talk about, or think too hard about accidents, and safety, and airmanship, and standards - because then we don't have to make a choice to do something about the problem, and we don't have to face our guilt if we decide to do nothing.

So I'm all for bringing the discussion out into the open, and reminding ourselves there is a problem, and each and every one of us needs to be a part of the solution.

For those that prefer to stick their heads up their asses (or in the sand), the best advice I can give you is if you don't like what you're hearing or seeing - stop listening and looking!!!

It is not Widow's fault that Quebec CADORS are published in French and ROC (Rest of Canada) is published in English. I do find it intensely annoying that the French CADORS are not translated into English, but likely no more so than a Francophone might be annoyed that the ROC CADORS are not translated into French. Bet you never thought of that, did you?

Cheers,
Snoopy

[square]

You guys are jerks. Thank you Widow. I, for one, do want to hear about every accident that happens, especially in Canada, which is a reason I check this site. Any who don't should. It's like free hours.

I'll try to roughly translate.

A privately owned C180B CF-LTN flying VFR from Stone Cliff to Bruce, O'Sullivan or Kenny in Quebec, umm, was found inverted in a river.

Ok no this is painful, here's dictionary.com's interpretation:

Narration: Cessna 180 of private property, accomplished a flight according to the rules of flight at sight (VFR) since Stone Cliff bound for the lakes Bruce, O' Sullivan or Kennedy located at Quebec. The apparatus was declared disappeared with 2015Z, whereas this one was not return to Smiths Falls-Montague as envisaged. The research center and rescue of Trenton (RCC TR) were advised. The apparatus was found reversed with 50 feet of bank in the lake Joncas (park of Vérendry). The two occupants were found died inside. The Security Office of Transport (BST) was advised.

Narration: Update #1: The number and the class of investigation of the BST were added. According to the report/ratio of BST # A08Q0095: Cessna 180B, CF-LTN took off Saturday morning on May 23, 2008 de Stone Clift, Ontario and was reported missing in the night from May 27, 2008. The morning of May 27, 2008 the apparatus was found reversed in the lake Paul Joncas, Quebec. The two occupants underwent wounds mortals. The damage of the apparatus is important.

[Inverted2]

The crash was substantial enough to cause fatal injuries but it floated? I wonder if the CADORs is correct, or if cause of death has not yet been established.

Geez, it just happened, not every cause of the accident is immediately evident!

[square]

Floats have a lot of compartments in em, and you gotta break a fair number of them to get it to sink.

[Widow]

Inverted2, that was a question about cause of death, not the cause of the accident. I believe the CADOR may be incorrect in stating the occupants "underwent mortal wounds".

And square, I do know rather a lot about floats and their compartments.

[small penguin]

me thinks those whom complain about the report being in French should shut it and learn the language

While Im not one to offer condolences or the typical 'RIP' - I do like to hear about the accidents. There is usually something worthwhile to learn from them.

[Sasquash]

There you go guys, translated as best I can:

NARRATIVE : A private Cessna 180 was on a VFR flight from Stone Cliff to Lacs Bruce, O’Sullivan or Kennedy in Quebec. The aircraft was reported missing at 2015z, when it did not arrive to Smith Falls-Montague as planned. Trenton Search and Rescue was advised. The aircraft was found inverted 50 feet from shore in Lac Joncas ( De La Verendry Park). The two occupants had passed away inside. The Transportation Safety Board was advised.

UPDATE #1: The TSB file number and class was added. According to the TSB @ A08Q0095: The Cessna 180B, CF-LTN took off Saturday morning May 23, 2208 from Stone Clift, Ontario and was reported missing during the night of May 27, 2008. In the morning of May 27, 2008, the aircraft was found inverted in Lac Joncas, Quebec. The two occupants received fatal injuries. Aircraft damage was major.

Hope this help, play nice

Sasquash

[petpad]

Thank you

[Ogee]

Wow! The Dork Alert Meter was really going off the scale on this one.

Thanks, Snoopy, for that little bit of DorkAway spray.

[valvelifter]

You guys are jerks. Thank you Widow. I, for one, do want to hear about every accident that happens, especially in Canada, which is a reason I check this site. Any who don't should. It's like free hours.

Honestly, it's good to hear about accidents b/c as somebody pointed out it puts things back into perspective and maybe it makes us fly somewhat safer the day you read it, but I don't see what else could be said about this CADORs report other than RIP. And if that is the case, then I am not sure if this is the forum for this type of news.

IF there was some sort of indication as to what caused the crash, THEN we can learn something from this and yes I would like to read about the post. But dry facts from the CADORs about who, what, where, when, without the WHY.......there is no discussion involved.

If the incident/accident involved an aircraft with a larger number of people affected, then I would also understand somebody bringing that up in this forum just because it affects the entire industry in a huge way, as well as public safety, which of course affects most of us here if not all.

My 2 cents.

[Widow]

Allow me to explain why I disagree. In the majority of fatal floatplane accidents, the deaths occur as a result of drowning, not as a result of fatal injury. I have reason to believe that was the case in this accident.

Float-flying is often an integral part of the career path of Canadian pilots. The TCCA requirement for a float endorsement is 7 hours of flight time … which most agree is a joke. Many pilots build hours by flying privately. Training, however does not include egress training, which is recognized by Transport as being “invaluable for any pilot who flies regularly over water, regardless of the type of aircraft flown. As a matter of fact, passengers or non-pilot crews who also fly regularly over water should consider underwater escape training. Once you have had the training, you will also be in a better position to brief your passengers about what to expect... should the unexpected occur.” (Reference: http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Syste ... 98/008.htm).

If, in fact, the occupants of this aircraft did perish as a result of drowning, and not fatal injury – egress training may well have saved them. Being dissatisfied with the “results” of the “Floatplane Safety Review” recently conducted by TCCA (see this thread: http://www.avcanada.ca//forums2/viewtop ... =25&t=8889), I believe it is important to ensure that all pilots who do fly regularly over water understand why egress training could save their lives.

The cause of the crash isn't the only thing that can be learned from.

[valvelifter]

OK, point understood. But so as to not confuse people with the point of the thread I would have included the egress info as part of the original post.

[Widow]

Point taken.

[xsbank]

Widow, thank you for taking the time to post this information here. I, for one, appreciate the effort you make on our behalf. Snoopy, excellent post, I thoroughly agree with you - I just can't let a woman have the last word!

Many pilots think they are immortal. They learn to control their fear of height, they read the accident reports and think that the pilots who died must have had some defect or character flaw or inferior skills and the same circumstance would never happen to them. Then they proceed to disparage anyone who might suggest that they themselves are not superior pilots.

There are many of us here that managed to operate successfully in the lunatic fringe aspect of aviation (bush, specialty etc.) for many years, surviving on our wits and not relying on the backups and training inherent in large airlines. I like to think that we did learn from the mistakes of others, that we did watch and judge the progress of our fellow aviators and we never stopped learning. We never lost sight of the risks, the deaths and the bent metal.

Widow, pay no attention to the comments of those that are too stupid to realize that something beneficial is being done of their behalf. You will never please them all no matter how you write your contributions.