• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Oops, darn it...

Obviously the Cirrus over shot and speed could have been a contributing factor, the previous controller could have told him to keep the speed up. If the Cirrus had started to correct being a low wing would have been a visibility challenge.

ATC does not fly the airplane, and when was the last time you heard a controller tell you to keep your speed up on base?

The Cirrus pilot not only overshot HIS final approach course, he overshot the safety area between the runways, AND he flew through the final approach course for the parallel runway. That’s just gross incompetence. Would get you busted on any practical test, checkride or flight review, for heavens sake.

There is simply no excuse for this kind of behavior. One of the problems we’re seeing locally, or at least we hear about, is the “mix” of jet and “little airplanes”. Every time something like this happens, all us “little airplane pilots” get another black eye. It’s in our best interest to condemn this kind of stuff, and demand better of our peers.

That starts with flight instructors.

MTV
 
I will agree with Mike. I don’t know why everyone is making excuses for the Cirrus pilot. He’s between two 172’s so no need to keep the speed up, plus you don’t hear that on the tower tape. There is a lot of responsibility placed on us as pilots, especially when around other traffic, so we need to step up, put our big boy pants on and be responsible. He’s on a parallel runway, been there before, supposedly has traffic in sight, yet flys through two runway center lines. Take your pick; head down, incompetent, distracted. In VFR if you tell the tower you have the traffic in sight, they believe you, make sure you do, images on screens don’t count.
 
I still use "No Joy" and "Visual." It is effective and concise communication. That is why the military uses it. Beats, "I am looking." What else would you be doing? ATC knows what it means. It is how I was trained. Works for me.

The controller called out traffic on two aircraft for the Cirrus. His response was not clear as whether he saw both of them. The best answer in my plane would have been, Tallyho Cessna, No Joy Metroliner. One short burst that clears it up.
 
What is the experience of the Cirrus pilot and his time in it and total time. Time in last 30 days.

I will agree with Mike. I don’t know why everyone is making excuses for the Cirrus pilot. He’s between two 172’s so no need to keep the speed up, plus you don’t hear that on the tower tape. There is a lot of responsibility placed on us as pilots, especially when around other traffic, so we need to step up, put our big boy pants on and be responsible. He’s on a parallel runway, been there before, supposedly has traffic in sight, yet flys through two runway center lines. Take your pick; head down, incompetent, distracted. In VFR if you tell the tower you have the traffic in sight, they believe you, make sure you do, images on screens don’t count.
 
Now if only we had an Automatic Dependent Surveillance–Broadcast type system these accidents wouldn’t happen!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Maybe its where I fly. But I have been told, and hear, keep your speed up till faf or 5 mile final, or closer quite a lot. 230 kts in the pattern, 200 till 1 mile final. Mixing jet traffic with piston traffic is always going to be challenging. I still enjoy flying little planes and that possibly helps me.
Will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says. Something needs to change at APA specifically, this is a known problem there.
I get the remark about adsb. I don’t like it especially in the airport environment. Eyes need to be outside.
 
We won’t get to see it but I’d pay to see the recorded data off the (likely) G1000 panel on the Cirrus. Location, speed, bank angle, et al is all there in the data card for review.
My guess based on his ADSB track out and in, his excessive speed put him in a pretty good bank angle while overshooting the turn to final. If so likely the right wing sliced open the metro like a sardine can, although I haven’t noticed an missing wingtip in the crash photos.
The ADSB points are quite spaced out but the intersect appears to be 50-70 degrees.

Edit : After looking again at more images I don’t believe it was a wing that hit the Metro. Both look quite intact. Left main gear doesn’t look affected so that leaves prop, nose gear and right main as the likely contact. But, my point in looking at this is while the pilot may have seen the metro at the last second and leveled/pulled up... there is a also high probability that he never saw it in time to roll out of a bank angle that would have been steep enough to make final for either Runway. Sooo... where was he going? It’s a gross error as others have stated.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org
 
Last edited:
I still use "No Joy" and "Visual." It is effective and concise communication. That is why the military uses it........ The best answer in my plane would have been, Tallyho Cessna, No Joy Metroliner. One short burst that clears it up.

Tallyho, visual, & no joy sound sporty, but I'm not sure that the FAR/AIM lists those as appropriate responses for civilian flying.
"Traffic in sight" & "no contact" however are listed in this glossary.

Pilot Controller Glossary (effective 4/03/2014) (faa.gov)
 
I am well aware of the AIM. May be "sporty" to you but it works. The AIM is a guideline. As I said, ATC knows what it means. Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools. It pisses me off to hear, "I am looking." Is that in the AIM?


Tallyho, visual, & no joy sound sporty, but I'm not sure that the FAR/AIM lists those as appropriate responses for civilian flying.
"Traffic in sight" & "no contact" however are listed in this glossary.

Pilot Controller Glossary (effective 4/03/2014) (faa.gov)
 
We won’t get to see it but I’d pay to see the recorded data off the (likely) G1000 panel on the Cirrus. Location, speed, bank angle, et al is all there in the data card for review.
My guess based on his ADSB track out and in, his excessive speed put him in a pretty good bank angle while overshooting the turn to final. If so likely the right wing sliced open the metro like a sardine can, although I haven’t noticed an missing wingtip in the crash photos.
The ADSB points are quite spaced out but the intersect appears to be 50-70 degrees.

Edit : After looking again at more images I don’t believe it was a wing that hit the Metro. Both look quite intact. Left main gear doesn’t look affected so that leaves prop, nose gear and right main as the likely contact. But, my point in looking at this is while the pilot may have seen the metro at the last second and leveled/pulled up... there is a also high probability that he never saw it in time to roll out of a bank angle that would have been steep enough to make final for either Runway. Sooo... where was he going? It’s a gross error as others have stated.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org

Or, the Cirrus pilot never even noticed the WRONG runway, was still plowing along on base, AND never saw the Tube.

based on the damage, he sure wasn’t in a significant bank angle. I’m betting he didnt even know where the airport was.

Good grief!

MTV
 
Tallyho, visual, & no joy sound sporty, but I'm not sure that the FAR/AIM lists those as appropriate responses for civilian flying.
"Traffic in sight" & "no contact" however are listed in this glossary.

Pilot Controller Glossary (effective 4/03/2014) (faa.gov)

I am well aware of the AIM. May be "sporty" to you but it works. The AIM is a guideline. As I said, ATC knows what it means. Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools. It pisses me off to hear, "I am looking." Is that in the AIM?

I will say that as a civilian pilot with absolutely zero military experience, the only time I've heard "no joy" is in Top Gun when Maverick chased Jester below the hard deck. I mean, I can figure out what it means, but again, as a civilian pilot, I appreciate clear language. Just my experience, but hearing "I'm looking" tells me that they don't have me in sight yet and that I'd better be cautious until the other pilot verifies that they have me in sight.
 
I guess to some “tally ho” and “no joy” works, maybe sounds cool..........brings back memories of a current or former time. Despite not knowing the origins of the phrase (due to being a civilian pilot) I guess we all know what it means. But one has to be wound up pretty tight if “I’m looking”, “still looking” is not concise enough. I’m wound tight but I could care less what anyone says as long as they say something.......ok...as long as it’s not “Yeah, I’m still looking for the traffic on base over Muldoon ah ah ah yeah I think I gottem......say again their position again tower?”. Maybe a “not in sight” maybe even a “no joy”........and a “Thar she blows!” once seen.

Seriously after looking at the damage on that San Antonio Sewer Tube Metroliner, that is a lucky guy. I flew Metros for PenAir a couple a decades ago and developed a mostly hate but kinda love relationship with that plane. One tough bird.
 
Regardless of who is at fault, this picture clearly shows where the primary structure is located in the fuselage, below and including the floor. Without knowing the dimensions of either plane it appears that perhaps the main gear of the Cirrus sliced the fuselage with the wing tip hitting the fin. If the Cirrus had been just two feet lower then ???????????????
This pilot is one very lucky fella!

Denver_Midair_crash_Key_Lime.png
 
I am well aware of the AIM. May be "sporty" to you but it works. The AIM is a guideline. As I said, ATC knows what it means. Rules are for the guidance of wise men, and the blind obedience of fools. It pisses me off to hear, "I am looking." Is that in the AIM?

IMHO radio phraseology should be clear to everyone, not just controllers.
We (used to) have some RV formation guys --maybe ex-military, maybe not-- around here,
they liked making "two mile initial" and "360 overhead break" calls.
They knew what they were talking about, but a lot of other pilots didn't--
including me back about 20 or 25 years ago.

FWIW "tallyho" seems more like something you should say at a fox hunt, not in an airplane.
But to each their own.

fox hunt.jpg
 

Attachments

  • fox hunt.jpg
    fox hunt.jpg
    15.3 KB · Views: 924
Last edited:
If the Cirrus pilot wasn’t looking out the window for traffic then why didn’t he see the traffic on the avionics?

I have flown with a few owners of high performance singles here around Denver and very different way of flying with focus on the avionics rather than looking outside even in VFR conditions all the way to final.

I would assume the traffic was being displayed.
 
If the Cirrus pilot wasn’t looking out the window for traffic then why didn’t he see the traffic on the avionics?

I have flown with a few owners of high performance singles here around Denver and very different way of flying with focus on the avionics rather than looking outside even in VFR conditions all the way to final.

I would assume the traffic was being displayed.
Exactly, I've been bellyaching about pilots paying more attention to their instruments than looking out the window for more than half a century. It seems the more gadgets in the panel, the less they look out the window. I'll not bore you with numerous personal observations.
 
I flew Metro's 41 years ago. That picture had me digging in my basement looking for my manuals. Obviously those elev. cable runs are below the main deck but I was curious just exactly where they run. Tough airplane for sure. I worked for Air Midwest out of Wichita, we called the Metro the Kansas Concorde. Alcohol water injection and JATO in the tail.....woohoo.
 
If the Cirrus pilot wasn't looking out the window (and maybe he was), why didn't he see the traffic on his avionics????

Well, maybe he was staring at his iPad on his lap, and didn't see the tiny little icon that represented the Metro. Maybe he WAS looking out the window, trying to figure out where "His" runway was, ie: Looking the opposite direction of the approaching Metro.

Operating to parallel runways is all about discipline.....each pilot has to draw an imaginary line, and determine that they will not cross that line under any circumstances.

Of course, said pilot also needs to know how to SAFELY turn his or her airplane, so as to avoid LOC on the base to final turn, which is not uncommon.

But, as evidenced by that photo that Pete posted, that Cirrus driver wasn't in a bank when he hit the Metro. He may have simply been lost.....

MTV
 
Latest “speculation” is that because of his perfect base to final arch in a shallow bank, he may have been flying the autopilot.
 
Last edited:
Latest “speculation” is that because of his perfect base to final arch in a shallow bank he may have been flying the autopilot.

I don't keep up on these things, but can you actually program a VFR pattern approach into the nav system for the auto-pilot? That thought gives me the heebees.
 
I don't keep up on these things, but can you actually program a VFR pattern approach into the nav system for the auto-pilot? That thought gives me the heebees.

I’ve seen it done on 737 FMS. I assume any nav system that can set waypoint, speed and altitude can do it. Some folks like typing I guess.
 
I’ve seen it done on 737 FMS. I assume any nav system that can set waypoint, speed and altitude can do it. Some folks like typing I guess.

Yeah, after I posted I realized I could map out a nice course on Garmin Pilot. If I had an autopilot, it would follow it, I guess.

Still gives me the heebees, lol. Wouldn't an autopilot disengage or otherwise freak out if it can't follow a tight enough turn to final, though? Or maybe waypoints were way off?
 
People.....He had blown through his assigned runway, AND the parallel runway, and was still essentially wings level.

Autopilots are smarter than that.

Good Grief!

MTV
 
People.....He had blown through his assigned runway, AND the parallel runway, and was still essentially wings level.Autopilots are smarter than that.Good Grief!MTV
Right. I don't know much about autopilots but trying to get my head around what he may have been doing.

He was supposed to be following a Cessna to the right runway. Instead he sets up a perfect intercept for the Metroliner on the left runway. From the tracks it doesn't look like he was trying to line up with any runway.Was he sightseeing? Was he lost and confused? Fiddling with gadgets?

The whole thing makes my hair stand on end.

I did some student flying at Gillespie in El Cajon back in the smoggy early 80s. Parallel runways. It was hammered into us not to cross the centerline of the assigned runway. Instructors, ATC, even lineboys....
 
B7153015-04A3-4FDB-BD3B-12415C3908BF.jpeg
This was as close as I could find. Seemed like I saw one with flights of three on final at OSH with the chutes popped.
 

Attachments

  • B7153015-04A3-4FDB-BD3B-12415C3908BF.jpeg
    B7153015-04A3-4FDB-BD3B-12415C3908BF.jpeg
    138.1 KB · Views: 166
I will be part of the mass Mooney arrival at Kosh this year, hope there is no crap going on with our flight.
 
Back
Top