Oops, darn it...

Farmboy said:

...The polk school Cherokee came over to shoot touch and goes at winter haven….. because it’s too congested at home?
Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

Click to expand...

Yes, now that Amazon is a major tenant at Lakeland-Linder, pattern work forces them to move elsewhere. If things keep progressing as they are, I suspect Sun n Fun will be pushed out in due time. It has already caused modifications of the layout for the show.

I transit this Alert area nearly everyday to get to a quiet grass strip. I do so at 500' or lower given the extreme amount of training traffic above every day. It's not uncommon to have 7 training aircraft in the pattern at my home airport extending the pattern more than the 3.2 miles that is the diameter of the Class Delta. A poor situation for developing consistency and saving the student time and money. So many of us travel away from "home" to get the job done.

Daryl

Farmboy said:

I just got back from a 4 day trip down through FL and back, and the density level of traffic in FL is quite amazing.
I didn’t watch the video(s) as I prefer to have my own interpretation, but AOPA seems to be a bit lost these days if they are jumping on the “YouTube accident review” wagon. We already have yahoos doing that.

The polk school Cherokee came over to shoot touch and goes at winter haven….. because it’s too congested at home?


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

Click to expand...

Before you condemn AOPA for being "Lost" by posting these videos, perhaps you might want to WATCH one or two of them first. These are not Bronco Dude or Dipstick Dan videos. In fact, the idea is to get some RATIONAL and non accusatory INFORMATION out there, instead of the other videos. Richard McSpadden is very knowledgeable and offers very carefully considered brief explanations of what happened, without casting blame. I think they are very well done, and every one I've watched to date provides some very basic (and public) information that the news media didn't cover. That extra bit of coverage, by a pilot, is often important to understanding the scenario. Personally, at first I was concerned that this wasn't a good idea, but after watching a few of these, they are well done, very respectful to the parties involved, and offer some idea of the scenario, from the perspective of a pilot, as opposed to the news media.

Secondly, the comment about the Polk Warrior going to Winter Haven because their home drome is congested? As a CFI, I always try to get "students" (even "students" who hold an ATP) to new airports with different procedures/patterns/problems. That's all part of comprehensive instruction. Operating in a congested environment is also important for training, but a variety of environments is essential for well rounded pilots in my opinion.

Others have commented about the "short approach" by the Warrior crew. Looking at the evidence, I thought that instructor was doing a great job encouraging the student to fly fairly tight patterns. In any case, none of those patterns they flew were what I'd call a "short approach", but that's me. Unfortunately, that may not have been the best environment to fly tight patterns, but....

MTV

Farmboy said:

I didn’t watch the video(s) as I prefer to have my own interpretation, but AOPA seems to be a bit lost these days if they are jumping on the “YouTube accident review” wagon. We already have yahoos doing that.

Click to expand...

Watch the video Peter, I think Richard did an excellent job as he did on the B17/P63 mid air.

I am really surprised at some of the comments here. I wonder if the commenters watched the same video I did.

As for ADS-B, I find it to be a useful tool, not my only tool but a tool.

I think Richard McSpadden does an excellent job with these accident reviews. He makes no presumptions; he simply looks at situations that may have been a contributing factor and discusses strategies to avoid them. His observations are worth consideration.

When AOPA presented their first one, I had the same reaction as Farmboy before I watched it. In the past, I had started to watch videos from other "analysts" and shut them off before I was 60 seconds into them. After that, I never clicked on them in the first place. I only played Mr. McSpadden's first accident analysis because I had met the man and respected him.

I will say the the multitude of comments after the piece reveal that there are too many pilots out there that are truly clueless. They reveal an over reliance on and a misunderstanding of technology as well as an ignorance of the aviation world outside of their small slice of experience.

I don't have an aversion to tech tools and in fact use them when flying an airplane with no electrical system. Like most, I always monitor a portable comm radio and use an iPad, ForeFlight app, and ADS B receiver when flying into an area that will likely have some traffic. All that is great stuff, but none of it indicates all the traffic in the area. Thats why the "glass" in the cockpit that I constantly monitor is the windshield.

frequent_flyer said:

The iPad has no built in capability to receive a transponder, 1090 ES, or UAT. It must rely on some other hardware receiver, not just an app, to display any traffic.

Click to expand...

Most apps have reception from the GPS, which gives lots of interesting data. I am not the tech guru, but I can tell you from experience that when Alaska Airlines used to burn up my back side into Sitka the very expensive FAA funded Capstone box would not indicate their location, but my iPad would show them every time.

On to our actual discussion...

Between sun in a pilot's eyes, distractions, (two planes flown by students learning new things), and some bad luck this is a sad deal. As a pilot and instructor my true interest is how can we reduce this type of accident?

While we sometimes seem to think aviation is shrinking, we are seeing an influx in people doing quick schools with the desire to get in on the airlines hiring frenzy. Get hours, get ticket, get hired. What is worse is as urban sprawl continues, little airports are going away and neighbors are upping the complaints- forcing more restricted airspace use which compacts everyone into a tighter space.

As stated prior, if you read many comments on the YouTube, or on the Facebook forums it becomes startling how much basic knowledge is missing from so many. Worse, lots of them don't realize and probably don't care they don't know.

Bottom line for me is the intent to find the brightest lights I can find, make them flash, look outside, glance on occasion at any traffic data I might get inside, ask passengers to look for traffic and point it out, and just remember that even if I am paranoid, it does not mean that someone out there won't try to run me over again!!

FYI: I hate flying down the highway corridor from the north into Anchorage on a nice day. so many pilots busy finishing up getting their electronics tuned in and just not watching! Out of I think three trips last summer I had near misses on two, one of them we were watching the Bonanza for a long ways come our way and I kept edging away and it never saw us. mountains on one side and restricted on the other!

aktango58 said:

Most apps have reception from the GPS, which gives lots of interesting data. I am not the tech guru, but I can tell you from experience that when Alaska Airlines used to burn up my back side into Sitka the very expensive FAA funded Capstone box would not indicate their location, but my iPad would show them every time.

Click to expand...

Perhaps it would help if you said what your iPad was actually connected to. A GPS receiver will provide nothing except information about your own aircraft's position and movement. If traffic positions were displayed there must have been something else involved.

Watched the video. Learned it was more head-on than I expected, and the rest was typical.
Disagree with suggesting ADSB.
I’d rather see them use a radio.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

frequent_flyer said:

Perhaps it would help if you said what your iPad was actually connected to. A GPS receiver will provide nothing except information about your own aircraft's position and movement. If traffic positions were displayed there must have been something else involved.

Click to expand...

https://www.mypilotstore.com/mypilo...MInt3gz6jZ_QIVoxnnCh0KAAhgEAAYASAAEgJJlfD_BwE

My ADS-B proximity warning would be hard to ignore. Radio calls get stepped on all the time.

Farmboy said:

Watched the video. Learned it was more head-on than I expected, and the rest was typical.
Disagree with suggesting ADSB.
I’d rather see them use a radio.

Click to expand...

Ditto.
I agree about the radio,
I was surprised to see McSpadden suggest that maybe it was time for Jack Brown's to use ADSB,
yet he didn't say anything at all about their nordo ops.

stewartb said:

My ADS-B proximity warning would be hard to ignore. Radio calls get stepped on all the time.

Click to expand...

I don't have a proximity warning, my ADSB-in display is on my tablet.
I have to continually remind myself not to fixate on my adsb display, instead of keeping my eyes outside where they belong.
The nice thing about a radio is that I can monitor it without taking my eyes out of the windshield, unlike my ADSB.

stewartb said:

My ADS-B proximity warning would be hard to ignore. Radio calls get stepped on all the time.

Click to expand...

This is something that a lot of people don't seem to get. You don't have to stare at an iPad! All of the apps (and panel mount stuff) will give you an audio alert if you set it up. If you don't have bluetooth headsets, stick an earbud in under your headset. Works fine.

I thought Richard did a good job with this preliminary review. A lot better than some of the click chaser analyzers who we have all seen.

At no point did he say "ADSB would be the be all end all cure for this problem". He also talked about proper use of another distracting device as well... the altimeter...

sj

SJ said:

.... He also talked about proper use of another distracting device as well... the altimeter...

Click to expand...

If I understood him, apparently the standard practice at Jack Brown's is to set the altimeter to zero even though the seaplane base is at 140' ASL.
That surprised me. I guess it's great for landing back at the seaplane base,
but it seems like it would involve unnecessary math for referencing your altitude to anything else.

If overlying airspace is AGL....

Gary

hotrod180 said:

If I understood him, apparently the standard practice at Jack Brown's is to set the altimeter to zero even though the seaplane base is at 140' ASL.
That surprised me. I guess it's great for landing back at the seaplane base,
but it seems like it would involve unnecessary math for referencing your altitude to anything else.

Click to expand...

I agree. In aerobatic flight, it makes sense to set the altimeter to zero prior to launch so you don't have to do math while thinking about recovering from a maneuver such as a spin.

But, I've flown floats a lot and never considered setting the altimeter to zero, even around fairly flat country. So, I'm not sure why Brown's would do that unless they're concerned about overflights of homes, infrastructure, etc. With lots of houses, etc around there, they MAY have done that so their pilots don't have to do math to ensure they're at least 500 feet from people, places and things. And, the standard response to any accusation of low flight would be "nope, we set our altimeter to zero and it read 600 feet when we flew over your house...."?? I'll bet they get a lot of "low flight" complaints in that part of the world.

But, doing so could definitely cause additional confusion when flying around UNDER traffic patterns.

MTV

I fly with a group of guys every Sunday morning, sometimes there is two of us and can be as many as 8. We bar hop up and down the Brazos River landing at different spots with some opting out of some and others where everyone lands. With the old Super Cub it was visual separation, which can be hard when some people's Cubs are painted camo and via radio communication. My new Cub has a Garmin 760 being fed ADS-B with a GDL52. Separation is still visual and radio communication to determine where people are but I also can quickly look at my panel and see traffic as well. I find it all helpful and use it.

I was in a midair collision at Sun & Fun in 2002 under controllers direction. I was lucky, the other pilot was not. I always had a false sense of security when operating in controlled airspace until that accident. Not any more. Everyone covers their own arse no matter what. I verify traffic through all means possible now leaving nothing to chance, if I don't see it I find it, ask where the traffic is etc. I never want to go through that experience again, the accident or the 5 years of litigation and enforcement action. I prevailed but the scars are there both physical and mental. Be prudent and use all tools at your disposal. We all want to fly another day.

If the nearby terrain and lakes are flat, FAR 91.119 applies, and...the base of Class E or whatever is overhead, then maybe they found it easier to maintain clearance. I don't know but they may not venture far from base with those Cubs.

Edit: I mailed a friend that trained there and asked about altimeter and altitudes. Might know more than speculation.

Edit: Have a look at Brown's (F57) at the bottom of the Jacksonville Sectional. Lots of structures, plus surface based vessels and persons under overlying Class E at 700' AGL. 140 MSL floor with E base at 840 MSL. Throw in a 500' AGL clearance when not taking off or landing plus nearby airport (GIF) and then? CTAF 123.05.

Gary

mvivion said:

I agree. In aerobatic flight, it makes sense to set the altimeter to zero prior to launch so you don't have to do math while thinking about recovering from a maneuver such as a spin.

But, I've flown floats a lot and never considered setting the altimeter to zero, even around fairly flat country. So, I'm not sure why Brown's would do that unless they're concerned about overflights of homes, infrastructure, etc. With lots of houses, etc around there, they MAY have done that so their pilots don't have to do math to ensure they're at least 500 feet from people, places and things. And, the standard response to any accusation of low flight would be "nope, we set our altimeter to zero and it read 600 feet when we flew over your house...."?? I'll bet they get a lot of "low flight" complaints in that part of the world.

But, doing so could definitely cause additional confusion when flying around UNDER traffic patterns.

MTV

Click to expand...

Many years ago I got my SES in Michigan, we were instructed to set the altimeter to zero…as it was explained to me at the time…they do so for the reason you stated….staying 500’ from objects, persons, etc…also the unpublished elevations on all of the lakes made it difficult to know this info (pre electronic means)….now my phone and my iPad tell me how high I am both Msl and Asl. This from my old seaplane instructor.

algonquin said:

Sorry for the confusion, my statement was sarcasm.

Click to expand...

Sorry to have missed that. My apologies.

But hey, jumping to conclusions is just about the only exercise I get these days!

Steve Pierce said:

.... it was visual separation, which can be hard when some people's Cubs are painted camo.....

Click to expand...

This is what makes me wonder why some people paint their airplanes the way they do.
Camo is so things will blend in-- the last thing I want to do when flying in a busy airspace.
I can see painting your airplane olive drab if it's a Birddog or L21,
but there's a straight tail 182 in my area painted olive green (with a sharks mouth)--
if his engine quits & he goes down in the woods (of which there is a LOT of around here),
SAR will never spot the airplane.

From a fellow pilot that trained at Brown's:

"I don’t recall altimeter settings but I don’t think we ever went above 500 ft except to do a couple stalls and then just a little higher"

Gary
I don’t recall altimeter settings but I don’t think we ever went above 500 ft except to do a couple stalls and then just a little higher.

I did my SES at Brown’s back in 1993 and have returned many times for refreshers over the last 30 years. At a time they had a really mint J-3 on wheels that I got to fly from the Winter Haven airport with Jim Torphy and some solo flying too and separation was all about being aware that there are seaplanes routing in and out of Lake Jesse. I have always found them very professional but it was a shock to me to discover no radio the first time I flew with them ( here in South Africa no radio = no fly). That said I never had a near miss or anything like it whereas here, where radios are de rigeur, I have had several - sometimes multiple in one flight. People are often on the wrong frequency and despite the wonders of GPS are very vague about where they are. In the airspace around the airfield I fly from most we had a 4 fatality collision between two training 172s last year, both with instructors aboard. We have a permanent aerobatic box and aerobatic competitions and two years back we had not one but two 172s show up and bust the box during a competition and not on frequency! Bottom line is that instructional standards seem quite patchy and radios while useful are no fix all. Perhaps there’s a need to restrict the number of instructional flights in busy airspace?


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

Good outcome

https://www.kinyradio.com/news/news...ries-reported-in-knik-glacier-airplane-crash/

NX Cub clips the top of Patey's hangar, they walked away.
[video]https://www.abc4.com/news/central-utah/spanish-fork-plane-crashes-2-victims-walk-away-uninjured/[/video]

The plane was a mess. Surprised that they walked away. Post by Mike Patey.

Steve Pierce said:

NX Cub clips the top of Patey's hangar, they walked away.
[video]https://www.abc4.com/news/central-utah/spanish-fork-plane-crashes-2-victims-walk-away-uninjured/[/video]

Click to expand...

Well, that sure shortens up the search…..ouch!

MTV

So many questions. Tried the impossible turn? Glad they are ok but damn... Thats 2 CC that I know of in the last week and flying season is just getting started.

Practicing for Dubai 2.0?

From someone in the know.
Here is the story on the NX yesterday when people ask:

Pilot error. High DA, heavy airplane, tried to make it fly too soon. Might’ve cleared the building, but dumped the flaps to drop the nose, lost altitude as a result, and caught a wingtip on the roof edge, which spun the airplane around on on the roof, and the aircraft came to rest as you see it.

I was thinking more of a hangar buzz job gone wrong

Glenn

And the insurance rates go higher! Is this the first FX wreck?

Steve Pierce said:

From someone in the know.
Here is the story on the NX yesterday when people ask:

Pilot error. High DA, heavy airplane, tried to make it fly too soon. Might’ve cleared the building, but dumped the flaps to drop the nose, lost altitude as a result, and caught a wingtip on the roof edge, which spun the airplane around on on the roof, and the aircraft came to rest as you see it.

Click to expand...

Eddie Foy said:

And the insurance rates go higher! Is this the first FX wreck?

Click to expand...

No, a new guy PIO'd one and knocked the nose gear out on landing.