Crashes in the News - Thread

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
15,069
Location
Port Townsend WA
I think the tower told someone (maybe Cirrus) to keep your speed up.
Not the Cirrus, tower told the Metroliner to maintain speed.
It's weird, the video ADS-B shows the Cessna 172 tracking direct to 17 left in front of the Metroliner instead of his runway 17 right where he landed. Maybe those runways are so close it's hard to line up exactly if VFR with no ILS?
 

radfordc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,442
Cirrus was flying correctly. It's indicated airspeed was 130 kts which was a TAS of 142 kts at the DA of 7500 feet. As the Cirrus turned on base the tail wind boosted it's ground speed to 167 kts. Basic airplane stuff, guys.
 
Last edited:

radfordc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,442
Not the Cirrus, tower told the Metroliner to maintain speed.
It's weird, the video ADS-B shows the Cessna 172 tracking direct to 17 left in front of the Metroliner instead of his runway 17 right where he landed. Maybe those runways are so close it's hard to line up exactly if VFR with no ILS?
25kt tailwind on the base leg.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
9,400
Location
USA.
Going into Cleveland , Ohio one time when it was very busy with my Cherokee. Another airplane with a very close N number kept taking my instructions. Controller had a hard time working it out with the workload.
 

flyinut

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2008
Messages
51
Location
GLD
Maybe the numbers have changed since I’ve flown one - but the 22’s I’ve flown were 100/90/80.

I really didn’t like the way they (Cirrus PIC) flew - Not a good “feel.”

I definitely do not think it was the Swearingen’s fault.

MWD

Cirrus was flying correctly. It's indicated airspeed was 130 kts which was a TAS of 142 kts at the DA of 7500 feet. As the Cirrus turned on base the tail wind boosted it's ground speed to 167 kts. Basic airplane stuff, guys.
 

Bill-Higdon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,376
Location
Salem, Oregon, USA
 

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
2,017
Location
Canada
You know that it is a bad fire when forest fire fighters are the first on scene.
 

dwalker

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2021
Messages
271

mcrae0104

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
3,932
Location
KBJC
I definitely do not think it was the Swearingen’s fault.
It's most certainly not the Swearingen's fault. In a subsequent video, Gryder found the controller at fault. I'm having trouble with that. Someone more experienced or who knows better than I do can correct me, but, isn't it true that in Class D, ATC is not responsible for separation--only to call out the other traffic--and that pilots remain responsible to "see-and-avoid"? I can't see the controller having responsibility, as he might've only had a second or two to react if he had seen the Cirrus overshoot in real time.

Gryder also cites the fact that private pilot training doesn't include opposing bases (unless of course you happened to train someplace with parallel runways) as if this somehow excuses the Cirrus overshooting final.
 

Voidhawk9

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
583
Location
Timaru, NZ
Someone more experienced or who knows better than I do can correct me, but, isn't it true that in Class D, ATC is not responsible for separation--only to call out the other traffic--and that pilots remain responsible to "see-and-avoid"? I can't see the controller having responsibility, as he might've only had a second or two to react if he had seen the Cirrus overshoot in real time.
Correct, traffic information only, not separation in this case. Of course, if the controller notices a situation developing, they should take action, and indeed this one did, though there wasn't time to make a difference in such a case.
 

Voidhawk9

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
583
Location
Timaru, NZ
Gryder also cites the fact that private pilot training doesn't include opposing bases (unless of course you happened to train someplace with parallel runways) as if this somehow excuses the Cirrus overshooting final.
Private pilot training, or indeed any pilot training cannot possibly cover every possible eventuality. It is assumed that once you reach the necessary level of proficiency, the pilot will be able to adapt and learn as they go throughout their flying career.

For example, if ATC points out another aircraft is approaching to a parallel runway, it is assumed that the pilot will be smart enough not to fly into that traffic's known and very simple flight path!

That said, I have observed myself that some schools 'standards' are set at a level that will permit them to 'pass' the required number of students etc. There is financial incentive for their students to pass, otherwise that income goes away. I have literally seen instructors send student solo immediately after running the aircraft off the runway on landing (while dual!).
The same school used to have training that went 'above and beyond' the minimum requirements in order to ensure their pilots were the best-trained and equipped possible. But all that stuff was stripped out over the years by the bean-counters - I know, I was working there as it degraded, and found myself 'off-side' with management for insisting on courses of action regarding my student's training that would provide superior outcomes, vs saving every penny. Nothing crazy or unnecessary, just sensible decisions that were better for the student and their training, at a small cost to the company's potential profit, such as not carrying out flights in unsuitable conditions or times. It cost me my job in the end.
 
Top