The REAL QUESTION: Why did this very experienced pilot go below minimums? Basic IFR training teaches us to fly to DH/MDA, look up, if you cannot see the runway, go around and go somewhere else in this case. My guess: His vast experience probably influenced him to be too cocky and to think he could go below minimums when someone with less experience could not. BIG MISTAKE!
Brian,
However, he did NOT go below minimums, at least, not as I understand the preliminary report. He remained level at the DH but failed to climb during the Missed Approach.
Mike:
That is merely a matter of semantics. Proper procedure says if you cannot see the runway WHEN YOU REACH DH/MDA, unless you are not at the missed approach point, you perform a MISSED approach. All this requires is following the PROPER procedure. It is not rocket science and it does not take unusual skill to follow the âcook bookâ of the approach. Other folks in calm well thought out scenarios have already done the âhomeworkâ for you. Just follow the recipe and you will not crash as this pilot did. You just have to believe there are no exceptions to this rule; PERIOD.
Mike,
The flight was an instructional one. It is quite possible that the experienced CFI/ATP was looking out while the student (a commercial pilot whose experience was not given) was flying. Perhaps the CFI didnât realize they had passed the MAP.
One really dangerous thing about two pilots who are not used to crew coordination, CRM and division of responsibilities is that each may assume the other is doing something and as a result nothing gets done.
Interestingly the minimum visibility for the approach is one mile and the visibility given to the plane was 1.5 miles so even with the ceiling it would have been legal to shoot the approach even if it were an air carrier operation (visibility is the controlling factor)
Mike:
That is mere3ly a matter of semantics. Proper procedure says if you cannot see the runway WHEN YOU REACH DH/MDA, unless you are not at the missed approach point, you perform a MISSED approach. All this requires is following the PROPER procedure. It is not rocket science and it does not take unusual skill to follow the âcock bookâ of the approach. Other folks in calm well thought out scenarios have already done the âhomeworkâ for you. Just follow the recipe and you will not crash as this pilot did. You just have to believe there are no exceptions to this rule; PERIOD.
Brian,
No disagreement there. My concern is that a mistake may have been made by a very experienced pilot. As Jerry mentioned, itâs possible that a CRM issue was to blame. Weâll probably never know.
If what happened was a deliberate disregard of procedure, it is of course a different discussion.
Wouldnât this type of accident have been avoided with modern (and now available/affordable) avidyne/G1000 type avionics?
As I understand it, the MFD would have clearly shown the ridge (in red), and the Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) would have been issuing ground collision messages (e.g. âPull up!pull up!â).
Shouldnât we expect this type of procedural error to be unthinkable with an avidyne or G1000 installed, with the wonderful situation awareness they bring?
A pilot would have to both make a procedural mistake, and ignore the clear avionics terrain information/warnings.
Wouldnât this type of accident have been avoided with modern (and now available/affordable) avidyne/G1000 type avionics?
Warren,
Indeed, the installation of TAWS was among the recommendations of the FAAâs TAA (Technically Advanced Aircraft) study, in which both Cirrus and COPA participated. It wouldnât help in many cases (loss of control, etc.), but it could possibly have been a life-saver in this accident.
As I understand it, the MFD would have clearly shown the ridge (in red), and the Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) would have been issuing ground collision messages (e.g. âPull up!pull up!â). Shouldnât we expect this type of procedural error to be unthinkable with an avidyne or G1000 installed, with the wonderful situation awareness they bring?
One issue that others have raised is that a really helpful TAWS may need to have an audio cue (i.e. âterrain, terrainâ) to be effective. In other words, if one is already disoriented enough to not know about nearby terrain, will just having it displayed passively on the MFD be enough?
I would guess thatâs how the G1000 terrain feature works, as the G430/530 terrain feature does not have audio prompting.
And I donât even think the Avidyne has any type of TAWS information at all, does it? The Arnav has a little terrain information but it certainly wouldnât jump out at you if you were already confused and oversaturated with tasksâŚ
So, IMHO, yes, TAWS would help these types of accidents from occuring, but Iâm not sure either the Avidyne or the G1000 has the type of TAWS neededâŚ
There are NUMEROUS examples of IFR accidents where the crash was caused by lack of postional awareness. This one has reinforced the notion that on ANY instrument approach, it is absolutely mandatory that you know hwre you are on the approach at ALL times. Our Avidyne/Arnav helps immensely with that process but as I am flying an approach I want to be keenly aware of where I am right up until landing.
You must fly the instrument approach as published with no deviations. All altitude restrictions are to be met. If there is any doubt about where you are or what altitude you should be at, you should start a missed approach.
This is the one time that precise awareness of where you are and what is around you is critically important. There are a lot of busy tasks to perform during an IFR approach. You got to know hwre not to go!
I wonder how many pilots will blindly head the âpull upâ command and proceed to stall their plane? Perhaps TAWS should state âAdd Power! Climb!â Or perhaps, be more terrain aware and suggest a turn to a proper direction as a climb will not always be possible.
I wonder how many pilots will blindly head the âpull upâ command and proceed to stall their plane? Perhaps TAWS should state âAdd Power! Climb!â Or perhaps, be more terrain aware and suggest a turn to a proper direction as a climb will not always be possible.
Andy,
Do all TAWS systems say âPull Upâ? I seem to remember one on a simulator saying âTerrain! Terrain!â, but I couldnât swear to it.
On the other hand, âPull Up!â cuts a step out of the mental process - instead of describing a situation that the pilot has to react to, it simply tells the pilot what to do. Itâs pretty tough to stall an airplane thatâs in cruise configuration by pulling up (not impossible, but tough), so perhaps the FAA views that wording as optimal for most situations.