Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 16
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911442
@Iron Chicken Our aircraft has inertia reel seat belts (it's basically a 1990 Renault 5 GT with wings as far as seats and belts are concerned)

We wear life jackets that are donned similarly to waistcoats and the belts can only go over the top as far as I can see and that's certainly how they are worn.
By TomWW
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911456
I'm always wary of flying into CB's. I like to give them a nice bit of room, although probably not as much as I should. Flying into cloud with CB's forecast and no on board weather is a no go for me.

But the thing I haven't noticed anyone wittering on about is icing so I'm going to witter away. Flying into cloud above the icing level is a no go as well from my point of view. I'm assuming they didn't have FIKI.
By Ibra
#1911458
TomWW wrote:I'm always wary of flying into CB's. I like to give them a nice bit of room, although probably not as much as I should. Flying into cloud with CB's forecast and no on board weather is a no go for me.

But the thing I haven't noticed anyone wittering on about is icing so I'm going to witter away. Flying into cloud above the icing level is a no go as well from my point of view. I'm assuming they didn't have FIKI.


I doubt FIKI or WX radar are necessary for this flight? clouds were sparse and could be avoided using naked eye and units of Avgas...again, many "clean aircraft" who were on LeTouquet ramp that day flew just fine !

I doubt WX radar are that useful on GA aircraft speeds, you would penetrate turbulent air at 130kts (green arc or Va), that is not "fast enough" to find your way if it goes pop corn and you can get caught quickly: it takes 5min for a nasty cloud to blow up, you should be 20nm away...also, I doubt FIKI is useful for VMC flying nor to remove ice that is found inside an active CB?

PS: it's more likely to be CU/TCU cloud than CB/TS cloud, very cold day with dew point bellow 6deg not above 40deg, the tops were barely at 8kft, no single lightning was recorded that day but the distinction on what IFR equipment is needed to fly is moot anyway, the pilots were not IFR qualified
By TomWW
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911465
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:I think @TomWW was making the point that without Wx radar and FIKI you make sure you stay out of cloud.


That is almost exactly what I meant. :thumright: :thumleft:

Stay out of cloud if imbedded CB's are possible, unless you have some sort of on board weather. Stay out of CB's in any event.

Stay out of possible icing unless you have FIKI.

Both of these are very relevant to this flight. Freezing level was forecast at 2K on that day.


BTW Lbra on board weather is very useful at GA speeds. :D
Ibra liked this
#1911473
I think @TomWW was making the point that without Wx radar and FIKI you make sure you stay out of cloud


Which totally obscures the point. These two had no qualification to fly in anything other than VMC. They shouldn’t have been within a mile or a thousand feet of any cloud. Others on this same ‘fly out’ and the exact same route, managed to avoid the same (so called ‘freak’!) weather.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

With no experience and no qualification it’s entirely plausible they went the same way as many, many, many others and were simply unable to keep the blue side up within a minute or so of entering IMC.

Depressingly predictable.
Iceman, AlanM, Cessna571 and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911476
A4 Pacific wrote:
I think @TomWW was making the point that without Wx radar and FIKI you make sure you stay out of cloud


Which totally obscures the point. These two had no qualification to fly in anything other than VMC. They shouldn’t have been within a mile or a thousand feet of any cloud. Others on this same ‘fly out’ and the exact same route, managed to avoid the same (so called ‘freak’!) weather.

Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

With no experience and no qualification it’s entirely plausible they went the same way as many, many, many others and were simply unable to keep the blue side up within a minute or so of entering IMC.

Depressingly predictable.


OK so the two poor sods cocked up .

And paid the ultimate price .

My feeling is that enough has been said on this thread and we should leave it at that.

Show some respect for their grieving families .
kanga, Jonzarno, Ben K and 1 others liked this
By TomWW
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911483
A4 Pacific wrote:
I think @TomWW was making the point that without Wx radar and FIKI you make sure you stay out of cloud


Which totally obscures the point. ........


I'm not sure quite which point you think it obscures.

It may well be that they had done it before and got away with it. So they thought they could do it again. That is definitely a point as far as I am concerned. Normalisation of risk is an insidious process. You seem to be missing the point that they have done it before with no problem.

There is far more than a single point to be learned here. Flying is not a black and white occupation.

Its certainly made me think a bit and I think I've probably moved my thinking about bad weather flying at least a bit, as a result of reading this report. I am supposed to be flying on Monday with a 300 ft cloud base forecast on departure and a destination at 3,300ft (I mean the runway not the cloud base :lol: ). Much of the trip is forecast to be in unconditionally unstable air, so CB's are a distinct risk. I'm sure I could make it safely, but I'm quite likely to cancel, and that may well have been influenced by reading this report.

Its not just inexperienced pilots who can learn and that report raises far more than a single point.
AlanM, Rob P, Flyin'Dutch' liked this
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911488
Yes, that happens.

Informal Chatham House Rules on the day and afterwards is the way I've always viewed it - nothing to offend friends and family of affected parties - but open discussion out of the public eye to aid in learning from tragedy.
AlanM, johnm, Ben K and 3 others liked this
By AlanM
#1911489
Thank you @Dave W. I compile and deliver our annual regulatory ABES training - and operate similarly. There are so many discussion points when you facilitate such events.

As for the accident; I think the AAIB have shown respect and written that report with delicacy. It is so important for everyone to look at these events and help each other in learning and risk assessments. Often the data is there….. but as said, that Normalisation of Deviance issue is often occurring. We review our incidents in an annual way - that and Stabalised Approaches are always in our ‘top 5’.
highfive, Dave W liked this
By GAFlyer4Fun
#1911491
TomWW wrote:It may well be that they had done it before and got away with it. So they thought they could do it again. That is definitely a point as far as I am concerned. Normalisation of risk is an insidious process. You seem to be missing the point that they have done it before with no problem.


Not specific to this mishap, but to some extent isnt this how most PPL pilots spread their wings with their weather comfort zone? It wont always be cavok and eventually they will go beyond the familiar local flying area.

It is sometimes seen as pushing the boundaries with crosswind landing compared to the POH max demonstrated xwind limit, perhaps with some bragging which may lure others into it.
(Some are sufficiently skilled to do it, and some are not but get away with it)
It is sometimes seen as successful press-on-itis with various degrees of less than ideal weather.
Sometimes the signs might be unexpected maintenance related to tyres or undercarriage.

It is particularly difficult for inexperienced pilots to know what is seriously ok and what is bar talk/gung-ho.
User avatar
By MikeB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911502
Many comments on this thread about the decision making of the pilots concerned, but the facts are that several pilots elected to go on the basis of the forecast and only 1 elected to divert based on actuals. The Human Factors arising from a Club Flyout need due consideration.
johnm, reubeno, MattL and 9 others liked this
By Ibra
#1911515
The lack of recent overall flying & currency on this flight is appealing, let alone IMC flying, 1.3h in last 90 days and 4h on type seems to be very "light" to go inside convective clouds and handfly? while some still fly VFR in IMC on PPL because they did it last time and it was OK, one has not to forget that currency on type of aircraft & operation is king, this may not apply to pilots who regularly their own aircraft but something that is taken lightly when renting !

Someone who flew fine for 1h in stratus clouds 10years ago in school PA28, should not attempt cumulunimbus in a rented Arrow after a long 2y break from flying, there are limits on the "normalisation of deviance"

While ago when I used to rent IFR aircraft and fly them to new places or countries, I figure out that sticking to integrated G1000 (or steam with GTN) makes my life easier and enhance safety, fiddling with new avionics after 1h checkout on tight schdules and challenging flights is not easy

PS: even an IRI with +800h TT IFR they tend to get lost with new avionics layout on his 1st hour on type if it's straight into weather...
By A4 Pacific
#1911519
there are limits on the "normalisation of deviance"


There is a sense in which that is precisely the danger of “normalisation of deviance” and it’s genesis. If the initial rule breaking doesn’t immediately result in catastrophe, then it’s insidious nature means the only ‘limit’ to the deviance becomes catastrophe.

The original example cited by Diane Vaughan, an American sociologist, was the events leading to the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster in 1986
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 16