Mooney down KSAF

[ottorecker]

https://www.abqjournal.com/1250791/small-plane-crashes-near-santa-fe-airport.html

Anyone have any information?

[LANCECASPER]

Not much more in this article: http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/one-dead-in-plane-crash-near-santa-fe-airport/article_9cbaeb03-6147-5f55-979e-d3dc7d6940a4.html

[GDGR]

No contact with tower, fire destroyed aircraft. Probably going to be a while.

[DualRatedFlyer]

The FAA just updated their 10 day lookback preliminary accident report

https://www.asias.faa.gov/apex/f?p=100:96:2473323548152::::P96_ENTRY_DATE,P96_MAKE_NAME,P96_FATAL_FLG:27-NOV-18,MOONEY

Looks like N113TA

 

[Shadrach]

That plane has been mentioned here before.

Still listed for sale.

https://www.commonwealthaircraft.com/1966-mooney-m20c-2185.html

Edited November 27, 2018 by Shadrach

[Shadrach]

@afward, did you ever look further into buying this aircraft?

[orionflt]

looks like it was bought by Nelson flying service in Aurora CO.

[LANCECASPER]

10 hours ago, orionflt said:

looks like it was bought by Nelson flying service in Aurora CO.

Just recently - the FAA transfer took place 7 days before the accident.

https://flightaware.com/resources/registration/N113TA

The last flight on Flight Aware was back in 2010. Not sure what recent maintenance it had but fuel hoses can become brittle, etc

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N113TA

And it was recently advertised as "out of annual" on Commonwealth - which specializes in repo RV, aircraft, boats.

 

[Comet]

The local news has identified the pilot.

 

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/ntsb-to-investigate-small-plane-crash-near-santa-fe/5158131/?cat=500

[Marauder]

Anyone know if he was on MooneySpace?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[carusoam]

Notice for @mike_elliott a Mooney has gone down, with a loss of life... Pilot details are known. But not yet known to be an MSer...

Best regards and prayers,

-a-

Start with this one...  

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/family-describes-man-who-died-in-santa-fe-plane-crash/article_8c97f3bd-2364-5247-8f05-ea4bb36e86cb.html

 

https://www.abqjournal.com/1250791/small-plane-crashes-near-santa-fe-airport.html

https://www.kob.com/new-mexico-news/ntsb-to-investigate-small-plane-crash-near-santa-fe/5158131/

https://www.koat.com/article/officials-identify-pilot-killed-in-santa-fe-plane-crash/25312755

 

 

[afward]

@Shadrach, my wife liked the price but after I'd explained how much work (and money) would be involved in getting it "trustable", she quit bringing it up.  It would appear I wasn't wrong, which is a bit of a curse at times like this.

I don't usually post on these "plane down" threads since I've nothing constructive to add, but as always: Prayers for the family and my condolences.

[Shadrach]

1 minute ago, afward said:

@Shadrach, my wife liked the price but after I'd explained how much work (and money) would be involved in getting it "trustable", she quit bringing it up.  It would appear I wasn't wrong, which is a bit of a curse at times like this.

I don't usually post on these "plane down" threads since I've nothing constructive to add, but as always: Prayers for the family and my condolences.

You made a sound decision, best to be thankful that you did and leave at that. We don't know what caused the incident. Mechanical problems may have had no roll in the crash. Thanks for speaking up as I know it can be uncomfortable to find yourself oddly linked to a tragic situation like this. 

[afward]

Fair enough.  I was going off what he daughter was quoted as saying and the fact that the plane itself had been sitting for a long time outdoors but you're right, it might have been mechanically sound all the way to the ground.  Not sure which option is worse to contemplate...  Either way it is a tragic loss and it is really awkward to have even considered (from afar) the very plane in question.  I do appreciate you reaching out to check on me, though.

[Cyril Gibb]

EDIT:  correction found by @Marauder - NTSB had helicopter registration in error

On Aug 9 2008, Mooney N113TA registered to Mack Sidney

On Jan 30 2010 Flightaware had an M20 N113TA flying in Arizona

On May 13 2010 the FAA reported a helicopter crash with registration N113TA

Now we have a Mooney N113TA crashing in New Mexico.  Perhaps the helicopter was totalled and the N number was still available, so they reused it to avoid repainting the numbers.  However, that means either the plane was flying out of registration, or it was sitting for 8 years.  Bad karma for that N Number.

So, the unfortunate guy was making a cross country night flight over mountainous inhospitable terrain with a plane that was new to him and hadn't flown in 8 years.  What could possibly go wrong?

Edited November 28, 2018 by Cyril Gibb

[Shadrach]

46 minutes ago, Cyril Gibb said:

On Aug 9 2008, Mooney N113TA registered to Mack Sidney

On Jan 30 2010 Flightaware had an M20 N113TA flying in Arizona

On May 13 2010 the FAA reported a helicopter crash with registration N113TA

Now we have a Mooney N113TA crashing in New Mexico.  Perhaps the helicopter was totalled and the N number was still available, so they reused it to avoid repainting the numbers.  However, that means either the plane was flying out of registration, or it was sitting for 8 years.  Bad karma for that N Number.

So, the unfortunate guy was making a cross country night flight over mountainous inhospitable terrain with a plane that was new to him and hadn't flown in 8 years.  What could possibly go wrong?

We don't know how much restorative work was done to the plane prior to departure. We know it sat for a long time and that is all.. Could have been flying behind a fresh OH or factory new engine with everything inspected and in order or it could be a pencil whip special...I would not want to be the IA that signed the logs. Sad situation coupled with an interrogation by the Feds coupled with the internal question of "could I have prevented this".

What I don't understand is why folks don't use flight following. Certainly there are short local trips where I don't bother, but I know from memory who to call in the event of an emergency.  I would feel naked on an XC trip away from familiar airspace without it. Not likely that it would have changed the outcome of this accident but at least it would not be shrouded in mystery.

[Marauder]

1 hour ago, Cyril Gibb said:

On Aug 9 2008, Mooney N113TA registered to Mack Sidney

On Jan 30 2010 Flightaware had an M20 N113TA flying in Arizona

On May 13 2010 the FAA reported a helicopter crash with registration N113TA

Now we have a Mooney N113TA crashing in New Mexico.  Perhaps the helicopter was totalled and the N number was still available, so they reused it to avoid repainting the numbers.  However, that means either the plane was flying out of registration, or it was sitting for 8 years.  Bad karma for that N Number.

So, the unfortunate guy was making a cross country night flight over mountainous inhospitable terrain with a plane that was new to him and hadn't flown in 8 years.  What could possibly go wrong?

Yeah, something was funky with the registration history of this plane. I found the 2010 helicopter accident. https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20100513X55340&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=CA and tracked down the details. It looks like the helicopter accident actually involved T133TA and the report was in error. The serial numbers match from the FAA database.

From the registration history, it looks like Skyrod Aviation Services Inc. did not renew after the 3 year renewal done in 2004. Someone by the name of Sidney E. Mack was listed as the registered owner from 2008 until 2015 when the FAA set it for cancellation. Then the new registration showed up in November.

[Sabremech]

20 hours ago, Shadrach said:

We don't know how much restorative work was done to the plane prior to departure. We know it sat for a long time and that is all.. Could have been flying behind a fresh OH or factory new engine with everything inspected and in order or it could be a pencil whip special...I would not want to be the IA that signed the logs. Sad situation coupled with an interrogation by the Feds coupled with the internal question of "could I have prevented this".

What I don't understand is why folks don't use flight following. Certainly there are short local trips where I don't bother, but I know from memory who to call in the event of an emergency.  I would feel naked on an XC trip away from familiar airspace without it. Not likely that it would have changed the outcome of this accident but at least it would not be shrouded in mystery.

Pretty bold statement placing blame on the IA when little is known. 

[RobertGary1]

15 minutes ago, Sabremech said:

Pretty bold statement placing blame on the IA when little is known. 

Not sure he’s blaming the IA just pointing out when you sign the annual and there is a crash the faa shows up at your door. 

-Robert

[Danb]

Sabremech my thoughts exactly 

[steingar]

21 hours ago, Shadrach said:

What I don't understand is why folks don't use flight following. 

Because in the age of ADSB it doesn't do anything for you.  You see what they see.  It is just giving you the responsibility of listening for your tail number.  I keep my number 2 comm on Guard.  Something happens I'll sqawk a Mayday.

[EricJ]

44 minutes ago, steingar said:

Because in the age of ADSB it doesn't do anything for you.  You see what they see.  It is just giving you the responsibility of listening for your tail number.  I keep my number 2 comm on Guard.  Something happens I'll sqawk a Mayday.

ADS-B and a 406MHz ELT with GPS input and you're pretty well covered.   People may be responding to the ELT before ATC notices you're not responding to radio.

[Sabremech]

1 hour ago, RobertGary1 said:

Not sure he’s blaming the IA just pointing out when you sign the annual and there is a crash the faa shows up at your door. 

-Robert

Not exactly true. Having been involved with an airplane that crashed with fatalities, they don't knock on your door but request you bring the log books to the FSDO for them to review. As long as the logbooks were in order and correct and no blaring signs of maintenance negligence is found during the investigation, there is no interrogation by the Feds.

[DualRatedFlyer]

50 minutes ago, steingar said:

Because in the age of ADSB it doesn't do anything for you.  You see what they see.  It is just giving you the responsibility of listening for your tail number.  I keep my number 2 comm on Guard.  Something happens I'll sqawk a Mayday.

Good SOP keeping the #2 on guard.  I also like to keep it monitored incase I pick up an ELT I can report it.  Satellites arent tracking the 121.5 anymore.  Keep in mind though ADSB isnt the save all. 

The ADSB mandate isnt required until 2020. Lots of folks operating without it until then which basically means users are only getting a false sense of security in terms of traffic.  ADSB coverage can also be spotty to downright unavailable at various altitudes depending on geographic location.  In the accident area, ADSB coverage isnt solid-ish until 3000ft AGL.  In the event you crash, they could theoretically track your ADSB reported altitude down to 3000ft (in the general accident area) - assuming they knew to even start looking for you. 

Using flight following and calling a mayday gets someone looking for you immediately.  They can also report traffic that is non-ADSB equipped, but showing up on their radar, coordinate with emergency services, clear runways, turn on lights, give vectors, clear traffic, advise on runway lengths/direction etc etc that ADSB cant do, nor can 121.5 - while allowing you to focus on flying the airplane.   

Keep in mind that after 2020 you can still operate in tons of areas without ADSB.  This means lots of folks may not upgrade - so we will still have that false sense of traffic security. 

I personally dont see ADSB replacing flight following, but thats just my 2c

[Shadrach]

On 11/29/2018 at 7:14 AM, Sabremech said:

Pretty bold statement placing blame on the IA when little is known. 

 

23 hours ago, Danb said:

Sabremech my thoughts exactly 

Given that one of you has made an unqualified accusation and the other supported it with a metoo, let's look at what I said.

We don't know how much restorative work was done to the plane prior to departure.  - Nope, no blame here nor assignation of cause.

We know it sat for a long time and that is all... None here either.

Could have been flying behind a fresh OH or factory new engine with everything inspected and in order or it could be a pencil whip special... No blame or cause assigned here either, just a statement of possibilities.  The acknowledgment that pencil whippers exist is not in any way assigning blame. That they exist is unquestionable and that fact has been pointed out on these very forums by many qualified IAs.

I would not want to be the IA that signed the logs. I'm not an IA but if I was, learning that an airplane I recently returned to service crashed and burned would be a very sad event.

Sad situation coupled with an interrogation by the Feds coupled with the internal question of "could I have prevented this". See previous explanation above, If I lost a customer to crash I would be deeply saddened regardless of circumstances.  Fatal VMC crashes that occur under unknown circumstances typically get thoroughly investigated.  I personally don't like dealing with the FEDs anymore than needed.  I have personally seen an investigation that found no violation turn into a fishing expedition that was costly, uncomfortable and ultimately yielded nothing but a waste of tax dollars and discomfort for the pilot involved (not me).  The IA that returned this aircraft to service is going to be a part of the investigation.  I stand by the notion that that is not an envious any of us would prefer not to be a subject in the investigation of a fatal crashg.  Furthermore, anyone with an once of self reflection would be mentally going over the inspection and maintenance they performed that returned the aircraft to service...that’s not assigning blame, that's assigning the characteristics of a normal human being.

I have actually been the one saying let's wait for the whatever facts are available and not assume a mechanical failure (plainly viewable in previous posts).  The only bold statements I've seen in this thread are from David who accused me of something without qualifying it and Dan who decided to bandwagon along with him.  It's an interesting case of the ability of seemingly intelligent people reading a common language to see things that were never written nor implied. I too have been known to say things that rub people the wrong way. It's why I always try to qualify my statements with evidence. 

Edited November 30, 2018 by Shadrach