Jim,
I agree that having an instrument rating increases pilots skills, like ones you mentioned, that without a doubt could help in an emergency situations. Instrument ratings also expand the weather conditions that a pilot can fly in. My original point was about the decision-making process the pilot goes through leading up to an emergency situation. While on the ground and along the route a pilot has to make go no-go discussions that could help prevent emergency situations from arising. Obviously, this does not account for all emergencies but does account for far too many.
It happens far too often where an instrument rated pilot flying VFR ends up in IMC and becomes a statistic. When this happens it is more of the pilotÂ’s decisions leading up to an emergency and not the fact he had an instrument rating.
As an instrument rated pilot, I highly recommend to non-instrument rated pilots to become instrument rated. I also think and the point I am trying to make here is that just as much attention should be put on decision making as instrument ratings.
Tom, SR20, N161KT
It concerns me to think that pilots think if they had thier instrument rating that it will keep them out of trouble. There is more to it than that!!!
I don’t think anyone is contending that having an instrument rating will protect you from all mishaps. After all, even the airlines, with all their nav gear and their two ATP-rated pilots, go out of their way to avoid thunderstorms.
The point is that NOT having an instrument rating makes many mishaps far more likely. Simplest illustration: with instrument training, getting into clouds is not in itself an emergency, which it can easily be for VFR-only pilots. Familiarity with the ATC system, which is obviously a central part of IFR training and only a side note otherwise, also can come in handy in difficult circumstances.
Again, no one would claim that IFR is sufficient for safety. The question is whether it is increasingly necessary, especially with more sophisticated airplanes. Clinching argument: John Kennedy Jr. Does anyone doubt that the lack of instrument familiarity made a life-and-death difference to him?
You seem to be forgetting that the accident did not occur because the pilot lost control. The accident happened because the engine failed when no suitable landing site was available.
So you’re assuming that the engine failure was a bolt-from-the-blue random event, which “just happened” to occur when a VFR pilot was in the middle of fighting his way out of IMC conditions.A normally running engine chooses that moment to fail.It’s possible I guess.But it’s much more logical to think that the engine failure was related in some way to the IMC event.G forces, like somebody said.Or icing or something else.Your basing you’re case on a chance-in-a-billion and ignoring the more likely explanation.-j
It is probably safe to forget about induction system or any other icing as causal to the engine failure 6500’ over any point in Georgia in the middle of August, even around a thunderstorm. You could see some hail, but to get the freezing level down to 6500’ is extremely unlikely.
I am betting it is a fuel starvation issue due to a fuel pick-up problem as a result of negative G forces that may have lasted 8-10 seconds or more. Or, maybe it was time to switch tanks. Or maybe we will find that with low levels of fuel in the tanks, negative Gs are a problem.
Anyway, as a glider pilot who has landed off field safely many times and seen many fatal powered airplane crashes in perfectly landable fields, I commend the pilot for keeping his head during the emergency regardless of how the situation arose.
My humble opinion,
Greg
You seem to be forgetting that the accident did not occur because the pilot lost control. The accident happened because the engine failed when no suitable landing site was available.
So you’re assuming that the engine failure was a bolt-from-the-blue random event, which “just happened” to occur when a VFR pilot was in the middle of fighting his way out of IMC conditions.A normally running engine chooses that moment to fail.It’s possible I guess.But it’s much more logical to think that the engine failure was related in some way to the IMC event.G forces, like somebody said.Or icing or something else.Your basing you’re case on a chance-in-a-billion and ignoring the more likely explanation.-j
You seem to be forgetting that the accident did not occur because the pilot lost control. The accident happened because the engine failed when no suitable landing site was available.
So you’re assuming that the engine failure was a bolt-from-the-blue random event, which “just happened” to occur when a VFR pilot was in the middle of fighting his way out of IMC conditions.A normally running engine chooses that moment to fail.It’s possible I guess.But it’s much more logical to think that the engine failure was related in some way to the IMC event.G forces, like somebody said.Or icing or something else.Your basing you’re case on a chance-in-a-billion and ignoring the more likely explanation.-j
Hi jeff - this is me the orginal recipe jeff-
I don’t understand some of these fella’s.You response to this one is as I would have.You must be my long lost twin bro- anyways- read some of my other post below.This could have happened to any pilot in any bird.The cemetary is full of hotdogs that will take any chance to get to the golf course.As you know zero or neg g’s will kill fuel pressure really quick.Turn that fuel boost on man.That must have been one hell of a ride for that ole’ boy.btw- cirrus says if the chute is deployed the ac is a write off.That would be one hell of a ride.The cirrus is built like a tank so one might see another day at the green turf -j
You seem to be forgetting that the accident did not occur because the pilot lost control. The accident happened because the engine failed when no suitable landing site was available.
So you’re assuming that the engine failure was a bolt-from-the-blue random event, which “just happened” to occur when a VFR pilot was in the middle of fighting his way out of IMC conditions.A normally running engine chooses that moment to fail.It’s possible I guess.But it’s much more logical to think that the engine failure was related in some way to the IMC event.G forces, like somebody said.Or icing or something else.Your basing you’re case on a chance-in-a-billion and ignoring the more likely explanation.-j
Hi jeff - this is me the orginal recipe jeff-
I don’t understand some of these fella’s.You response to this one is as I would have.You must be my long lost twin bro- anyways- read some of my other post below.This could have happened to any pilot in any bird.The cemetary is full of hotdogs that will take any chance to get to the golf course.As you know zero or neg g’s will kill fuel pressure really quick.Turn that fuel boost on man.That must have been one hell of a ride for that ole’ boy.btw- cirrus says if the chute is deployed the ac is a write off.That would be one hell of a ride.The cirrus is built like a tank so one might see another day at the green turf -j
I wonder what the RATE OF CLIMB would be while under canopy in a situation like this (the up draft phase). Talk about a wild ride. The NTSB report might read “pilot and crew reported passing out due to hypoxia and later found themselves with a tinman and a scarecrow on a yellow brick road”.
Myers
Well it could have all been prevented if he got a good weather briefing and a bit of common sense.Deals like this are going to kill your insurance rates.Give general aviation a bad name.
Explain to me how a good weather briefing would prevent the engine from failing. I agree that this is giving GA a bad name, but I am starting to think that Cirrus and not the pilots is the source. This latest incident has killed any chance my girlfriend will fly in my Cirrus.
Explain to me how a good weather briefing would prevent the engine from failing. I agree that this is giving GA a bad name, but I am starting to think that Cirrus and not the pilots is the source. This latest incident has killed any chance my girlfriend will fly in my Cirrus.
I stand corrected.Any mention fuel fuel remaining? I am surprised myself the number of squaks and vacuum failures that are going on.I am sure cirrus is on top of it.Do your part and prepare as best you can before every flight “Just in case” .Most the time it’s not the cirrus plane but the cirrus pilot.It’s a great aircraft.
This latest incident has killed any chance my girlfriend will fly in my Cirrus.
Well, if you were planning to take her VFR into IMC, including cells you can see on the stormscope, sounds like she’s made a wise choice. -j
Sounds to me a new girlfriend is due…
Next time you go for a drive with her point out the cars on the side of the road. Did they stop to have lunch on the side of the road or something more fun in the woods…
Get a Cirrus and have a great day, and you can name your new girl anything you want. Mine will be named N555WP
Cheers,
Woor
Well it could have all been prevented if he got a good weather briefing and a bit of common sense.Deals like this are going to kill your insurance rates.Give general aviation a bad name.
Explain to me how a good weather briefing would prevent the engine from failing. I agree that this is giving GA a bad name, but I am starting to think that Cirrus and not the pilots is the source. This latest incident has killed any chance my girlfriend will fly in my Cirrus.
You forgot to factor in the pain and sufferings and the dead and injured that the insurance companies have to pay out
- Also as a Cirrus owner, I am sobered by what the third major-damage claim in this 211-airplane fleet may mean for insurance rates.
Well, insurance companies certainly COULD use this as an excuse to raise rates. But, it seems to me they have this level of risk built in.
I’m paying $5500 for $295,000 of hull insurance. My calculator suggests that would pay for 1 out of 54 hulls being totalled EACH YEAR. That is for 120 hours/no instrument rating at time of insurance. I suspect the insurance companies are still making money, thank you very much.
-Curt
You forgot to factor in the pain and sufferings and the dead and injured that the insurance companies have to pay out
Actually that is factored in. The $5500 is just for hull insurance. Liability is separate, and only $500. Go figure.
-Curt