Mooney down NJ

[Marauder]

2 hours ago, M20Doc said:

The parrot was checking the bank angle and AoA.

Clarence

It looks to me the parrot was talking him through the landing.

[Guest]

Just now, Marauder said:

It looks to me the parrot was talking him through the landing.

"Mike, Polly says go around, the number 2 LoC is full scale"

Clarence

[jonhop]

I fly primarily into two fields in Socal and they both consistently scare the crap out of me. One is controlled KSEE and the other is non-controlled F70. The most scary is the non-controlled airport. I have repeatedly been cutoff by those that want to save time and money over personnal safety to fly straight in, while I take the time to maneuver for the 45° downwind entry. This occurs all the time by training aircraft that take off just before me at my home field... At least they got the AWOS and had the wind right... On one occasion I had just announced upwind on takeoff that was quickly followed by an announcement on final for the opposite runway on an approach in extreme clear. Needless to say I had to do some communicating and an early turnout but there was no excuse for a straight in approach to a fairly busy non-towered airport in great weather. Here's a thought, get the wind and circle to land... I had to tell that pilot the wind direction and that there were three other aircraft in the pattern... Sheesh! Each crash I read about--especially after I just purchased my J--bums me out and makes me rethink my decision to fly to visit family just north of me. 30 minutes by air or 2.5 hours by car... It's tough but crashes are certainly a factor. Each time I get bumped in the pattern or have to do a 360 turn for spacing or start frantically looking for another airplane who just announced the same position as me after I've been calling out my position for 15nm while we approach a non-towered airfield is depressing. I have a hard enough time keeping my composure driving every day with inconsiderate a$$hats... Please don't bring the road rage to the skies! Common courtesy goes  a long way... https://www.aopa.org/-/media/files/aopa/home/pilot-resources/asi/safety-advisors/sa08.pdf?la=en

Regards, 

Jon

[Hank]

While those power lines are taller than what I'm used to landing over, they're pretty far from the runway. Maybe I'm spoiled by learning and basing my Mooney at a 3000' non-towered field, or flying into a nearby 2000' grass field, or moving to a 3200' non-towered field with a full-length taxiway, or visiting Mom & Dad at a very bumpy, rough, uphill 2770 x 40 field . . . I've never flown in or to NJ or Sky Manor, but it doesn't look or sound difficult to me. I almost never reach the end of either of my home field runways unless I want to; in fact, I usually make the taxiway turnoff about 1000' from either end now that I'm based where one is available, with only minimal, light braking.

Wind can mess up any landing. Tailwind landings are awful in my Mooney, I've done two--one when Flight Service told me which way the wind was favoring (they were wrong, now I don't take anyone's word except for ATIS and AWOS), and one when ATC offered me a different runway on about a mile final. After my floating, floating, crabbing, floating, landing at the end and cussing under my breath finally exited the runway, they used opposite direction! Ain't no fun there!

I'm sorry these folks had a much worse experience. I will be at the Mooney Summit this weekend and make a contribution for their families, and extend an earnest prayer that the Summit's outreach isn't needed for a long time.

what is the momentary sound, kind if like "wha--" just after the helicopter calls departure, and before he makes a mayday call for the Mooney down? A link to the (edited) LiveATC audio recording is posted at the top of P. 3.

[bradp]

Maybe someone with sharp eyes and a good monitor might be able to tell what the flap and gear positions were at the time of the incident.  That might be a factor ....

[PTK]

12 hours ago, Shadrach said:

Stabilized Schmabilized. If you're going into a short field, be ready to drop all the flaps and go into a full cross controlled descent if needed. Hanging on the prop for 3 miles making delicate adjustments to throttle and pitch does not make for a proficient pilot.

"Short field" is relative. What length runway a given pilot is accustomed to and his/her skill level. Its also relative to the airplane. Personally for the Mooney I don't consider Sky Manor a short field. 

Now speaking of the airplane, the POH has a set of charts that show how much ground roll is needed in a given set of conditions.

Which brings me back to my original questions:

When do we, (as in we collectively in GA), look and scrutinize closely at who can rent what airplane? When do we seriously look at currency, total time, and time in type? When do we look at our pilot training model and see if it can be improved? Do we need desperately to be discussing this or am I overreacting? Does anyone with a ppl and a checkout have the right to rent an airplane and go? Would it be an infringement on our freedom to ask some hard questions?

I think we need a GA-wide discussion. If we're serious about decreasing these accidents maybe we need to make some changes. Otherwise we'll continue to have fatalities like these.

[Hank]

Peter--

Who can rent a particular plane is determined by the owner of the plane, and that person will most likely defer to the requirements of their insurance company. As in many other things, aviation is driven and regulated effectively by the insurers. We do not need Federal Regulations governing minimum / recent experience levels for airplane rental, unless you want to effectively shut down the rental segment of GA. As Reagan like to say, the most frightening words a person (or business) can hear are, "Hello, I'm from the government and I'm here to help." We already have all the "help" we need from the FAA, we surely don't need any more!

[bradp]

Unfortunately I think I answered my own question about gear and flaps.  The gear was down and it appears that the flaps are up.  That will degrade climb performance significantly.  Combine with tail wind and a very late go around.... It's at least a link.  

[Shadrach]

4 hours ago, PTK said:

Short field" is relative. What length runway a given pilot is accustomed to and his/her skill level. Its also relative to the airplane. Personally for the Mooney I don't consider feeling Sky Manor a short field. 

Now speaking of the airplane, the POH has a set of charts that show how much ground roll is needed in a given set of conditions.

Which brings me back to my original questions:

When do we, (as in we collectively in GA), look and scrutinize closely at who can rent what airplane? When do we seriously look at currency, total time, and time in type? When do we look at our pilot training model and see if it can be improved? Do we need desperately to be discussing this or am I overreacting? Does anyone with a ppl and a checkout have the right to rent an airplane and go? Would it be an infringement on our freedom to ask some hard questions?

I think we need a GA-wide discussion. If we're serious about decreasing these accidents maybe we need to make some changes. Otherwise we'll continue to have fatalities like these.

 There will always be an accident problem. However, generally speaking the accident rate has been falling since the dawn of aviation. On the whole we get better every year with a few outliers here and there.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but I speculate that this incident is similar to many other Mooney incidents in terms of the biggest contribution to the cause. Where it differs from the typical scenario is that the end result was likely a low level stall/spin as opposed to a low-speed departure off the end of the runway. 

How do we combat this collectively? By providing easy access to a strong community with sound advice and mentoring! I would venture that many folks, myself included, have gotten far more information in terms of piloting finesse and skill acquisition from the aviation communities in which we engage then we ever did from a practical test or check ride. I don't feel like the Feds had a huge hand in developing my skills. To be sure regs are needed, but they can't apply to all situations all of the time. It's a pilot's responsibility to rate their own performance critically and seek more type/mission specific knowledge.

I've been on and off this forum for nearly 6 years and before that there was the red board and the Mooney mailing list.  Regulation will never match tribal knowledge for helping pilots master their machines. The Internet has helped a great deal with access to information and has also allowed the "collective" to correct bad information.  

I myself have become a bit of an airspeed evangelist. Every make has its own reputation and lore; Mooneys seem to have a reputation as quirky to land. Much of it is undeserved. There is no reason for a Mooney to eat up 1000' of runway in the flare. There is no reason to fly an approach at 1.5Vso. Under normal circumstances, there is no reason to land a mooney with power on (even a touch). Yet you will find folks doing and advocating all of the above and more.  The few videos I've posted here were made to provide a contrast to misinformation. As a group it's our job to weed out the bad info and generate the useful and accurate tribal knowledge that will help new to Mooney pilots. There is a lot of it here already, but you can't force folks to seek it.

2900' isn't a short field, but it's an  A-Game operation for some. Many pilots on this board would forgo this field in favor of something over 4000 because it feels tight or low margin. In truth, it is low margin for someone who has little airspeed discipline and who's SOP is to fly to the threshold of a 5000'+ runway at 80Kias and chop the power. A Mooney is not a STOL aircraft, but they're far more capable at getting down and stopped than most of the pilots that fly them.

[gsengle]

And your post is an excellent segue to HIGHLY recommend that every Mooney pilot participate in at least one MAPA PPP program. This is the training that can help to prevent these sorts of accidents.

http://www.mapasafety.com/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PTK]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

Peter--

Who can rent a particular plane is determined by the owner of the plane, and that person will most likely defer to the requirements of their insurance company. As in many other things, aviation is driven and regulated effectively by the insurers. We do not need Federal Regulations governing minimum / recent experience levels for airplane rental, unless you want to effectively shut down the rental segment of GA. As Reagan like to say, the most frightening words a person (or business) can hear are, "Hello, I'm from the government and I'm here to help." We already have all the "help" we need from the FAA, we surely don't need any more!

Yes Hank I agree. The owner determines who can rent their plane and uses insurance guidelines. The question then becomes how adequate are typical insurance requirements? As an example are 400 hours tt with 10 hours as pic in make and model enough for the Mooney? 

I don't think it is. 

(I'm using examples for the sake of discussion. Not specific to the individual pilot in this accident.)

[gsengle]

The reality is that there are some questionable private pilots out there flying, period. You can pass the check ride without really "getting it". Not saying that's the case here, of course, but you can get away with a lot in say a Cherokee getting your private... Mooney on a short field, not so much.

Time in type doesn't really tell you much imho. Some pilots don't get better... I'm not sure of the solution though, other than an FBO evaluating your skills....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Alan Fox]

14 minutes ago, PTK said:

Yes Hank I agree. The owner determines who can rent their plane and uses insurance guidelines. The question then becomes how adequate are typical insurance requirements? As an example are 400 hours tt with 10 hours as pic in make and model enough for the Mooney? 

I don't think it is. 

(I'm using examples for the sake of discussion. Not specific to the individual pilot in this accident.)

So Pete , How many hours did you have , When you started flying  Mooney ,   I started Flying Mooneys with a hundred or so hours , in a rental situation , and guess what , I and everybody else that rented survived it .....I guess if you have it your way everybody will be flying Warriors until they hit a thousand hours......

[tigers2007]

I've witnessed first hand a pilot that rarely turns on his transponder. Granted, this is in a "remote" area but there is still transient air traffic and student activity. He is good with the radio and calling out his location, etc for the patterns but the transponder issue made me question the value of buying all of this fancy ADSB equipment. The surveillance radar near me doesn't pickup anything below 3500' anyways so UAT/TIS/etc broadcasted traffic probably would never be received anyways.

[kevinw]

As we all know correct airspeed is crucial when landing a Mooney and someone who occasionally rents this type of aircraft probably doesn't understand this completely. That said, a Mooney probably isn't an ideal rental plane. I came from a Piper Archer and transitioning to the J took  some time. I received 10 hours of dual but I don't think I was comfortable and proficient until about 25 so I didn't take passengers until then. From there I got better and better just like everyone else and now I have about 200. My point to all of this is the Mooney is a different animal and an unforgiving beast. I told my instructor once if I fly the airplane the way I was taught, there are no problems. You can get away with a lot in an Archer because it hides your mistakes but in a Mooney there are consequences and unfortunately this is one of them. Prayers to the family; this is terrible.

[PTK]

8 minutes ago, Alan Fox said:

So Pete , How many hours did you have , When you started flying  Mooney ,   I started Flying Mooneys with a hundred or so hours , in a rental situation , and guess what , I and everybody else that rented survived it .....I guess if you have it your way everybody will be flying Warriors until they hit a thousand hours......

Not 1000 hours but maybe 400.

 

 

[cnoe]

21 hours ago, PTK said:

 

Sooooo... back to my original question: When do we, (as in we collectively in GA), look and scrutinize closely at who can rent what airplane? When do we seriously look at currency, total time, and time in type? When do we look at our pilot training model and see if it can be improved?

First of all I'd like to express my condolences to the family, friends, and witnesses of the tragic incident at Sky Manor.

And without passing judgement on Peter's musings I thought a couple of observations might be in order.

I don't see in the recent Nall Reports any breakdown of accidents that identify what percentage involve "rentals" as opposed to "owned" airplanes. Are we operating on the assumption that rental planes crash more frequently than owned? And if so do we know that "pilot error" is higher in rentals, or could it be that "mechanical failure" is perhaps higher in rentals? I don't know the answer to these questions.

Also, the AOPA is making great efforts to grow the pilot population bringing back "rusty" pilots as well as by strongly promoting "flying clubs" and "partnerships". So I believe it would be accurate to include flying-club pilots as "renters" for statistical purposes.

Now, if it is demonstrated that this entire class of pilots (non-owners) is over-represented in the number of pilot-error accidents then it may be appropriate to revisit rental policies and guidelines. But so far I haven't seen any such evidence either way.

These are just thoughts that come to mind.

[Cruiser]

accident

• : a sudden event (such as a crash) that is not planned or intended and that causes damage or injury

• : an event that is not planned or intended : an event that occurs by chance

 

We call them accidents for a reason. I don't know the pilot or his/her passengers. I do know for certain that when they got in the plane and departed on this flight they never intended for it to end the way it did.

We can speculate all we want and disagree on our opinions and each one of us will say "I would never........." as I am sure this pilot did. We don't make mistakes on purpose.

The major difference between the professional pilot and GA pilots is training. More and frequent training is the key. 

[kevinw]

Just now, cnoe said:

First of all I'd like to express my condolences to the family, friends, and witnesses of the tragic incident at Sky Manor.

And without passing judgement on Peter's musings I thought a couple of observations might be in order.

I don't see in the recent Nall Reports any breakdown of accidents that identify what percentage involve "rentals" as opposed to "owned" airplanes. Are we operating on the assumption that rental planes crash more frequently than owned? And if so do we know that "pilot error" is higher in rentals, or could it be that "mechanical failure" is perhaps higher in rentals? I don't know the answer to these questions.

Also, the AOPA is making great efforts to grow the pilot population bringing back "rusty" pilots as well as by strongly promoting "flying clubs" and "partnerships". So I believe it would be accurate to include flying-club pilots as "renters" for statistical purposes.

Now, if it is demonstrated that this entire class of pilots (non-owners) is over-represented in the number of pilot-error accidents then it may be appropriate to revisit rental policies and guidelines. But so far I haven't seen any such evidence either way.

These are just thoughts that come to mind.

Those are good observations. I would be very interested to see a breakdown of accidents and what percentage are owners versus renters. It's my belief that most renters fly less frequently than owners. This is based on my personal experience and from other pilots I know. I fly my plane about once a week. One reason is to keep the engine lubed but the other is to stay sharp. When I was renting I tried to get up once a month and that didn't always happen and it showed in my piloting skills. Ownership for me made me a better pilot.

[cnoe]

Following up on the rental question...

FWIW: from yesterday's AOPA Aviation eBrief poll... drawing no conclusions...

 

[201er]

5 minutes ago, kevinw said:

When I was renting I tried to get up once a month and that didn't always happen and it showed in my piloting skills. Ownership for me made me a better pilot.

Yes but on the flip side, I'd bet owners are more likely to get complacent. At least the renter has some third party oversight. "Hi Bob, so you want to take 345H out? Did you get a briefing? Weather's not looking so great. Oh, you're just going to stay in the pattern and land before the weather comes in? Ok. Be careful out there."

On the other hand, the Dentist can get in his airplane and go do something deadly stupid without talking to a soul...

[PTK]

47 minutes ago, cnoe said:

Following up on the rental question...

FWIW: from yesterday's AOPA Aviation eBrief poll... drawing no conclusions...

 

Good to see there's a discussion beginning to happen and data starting to be accumulated and analyzed.

 I'd be very interested to know of those 24.3% what airplanes are they renting and what is their tt and time in make and model. 

[Danb]

52 minutes ago, 201er said:

Yes but on the flip side, I'd bet owners are more likely to get complacent. At least the renter has some third party oversight. "Hi Bob, so you want to take 345H out? Did you get a briefing? Weather's not looking so great. Oh, you're just going to stay in the pattern and land before the weather comes in? Ok. Be careful out there."

On the other hand, the Dentist can get in his airplane and go do something deadly stupid without talking to a soul...

MIKE I HAVE NO CLUE BUT WAS THINKING THE OPPOSITE

[PTK]

1 hour ago, Cruiser said:

accident

• : a sudden event (such as a crash) that is not planned or intended and that causes damage or injury

• : an event that is not planned or intended : an event that occurs by chance

 

We call them accidents for a reason. I don't know the pilot or his/her passengers. I do know for certain that when they got in the plane and departed on this flight they never intended for it to end the way it did.

We can speculate all we want and disagree on our opinions and each one of us will say "I would never........." as I am sure this pilot did. We don't make mistakes on purpose.

The major difference between the professional pilot and GA pilots is training. More and frequent training is the key. 

There are accidents and there are acts of negligence.

Someone said earlier that an owner relies on insurance guidelines in deciding who can rent his plane. Insurance companies have a very different definition of accidents. They assign responsibility and enforce it with real teeth that bite. It is not enough to simply say "I'm so so sorry! It was an accident!

[kevinw]

56 minutes ago, 201er said:

Yes but on the flip side, I'd bet owners are more likely to get complacent. At least the renter has some third party oversight. "Hi Bob, so you want to take 345H out? Did you get a briefing? Weather's not looking so great. Oh, you're just going to stay in the pattern and land before the weather comes in? Ok. Be careful out there."

On the other hand, the Dentist can get in his airplane and go do something deadly stupid without talking to a soul...

Very true but now we're talking about smart decision making versus proficient piloting skills that come with flying more often. I think a good owner will still utilize the opinion of a CFI, especially if it's a go/no go decision based on weather. I take full advantage of the free advice of my 10,000 hour CFII.