Mooney down in Hayward CA

[thinwing]

2 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

More like life on the edge is consistent with launching into low sky’s, high terrain and at night in a high performance airplane with very little experience in the airplane and not yet more than a students permit.  Definitely on the edge.

It’s about hubris...and my time with skydiving folks has taught me to expect (“full speed ahead,party on!,Go for it!nothing can hurt me!Your regret never living life to the fullest” attitude )while I viewed or helped to scrape up human remains by the side of the runway,attended memorial services with the common refrain...well at least he died doing what he wanted to do.Call me prejudiced ,but all the credible evidence from witnesses points to another pointless accident.I am also pretty close to pointing the finger at his CFI for signing off solo flights of this nature in the first place.I will offer abject apology to this CFI if investigation proves the flight illegal,that this student wasn’t signed off for class B ,night operations with multiple reporting stations with in 50 nm reporting IFR or marginal Vfr that night.Guys like this come in full of steam ,hell bent for it and can be amazing sticks,but it was the CFI job to rein him in if need be.A student pilot flying in Friday’s conditions was a death wish waiting to happen!

o

 

[jaylw314]

15 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

I agree the FAA would speak with the CFI. But it would depend on if the CFI had endorsed him for this flight and, if he did, what limitations did he place on the student. I don't think its fair (or common) for us to be held accountable for student actions if they are operating outside of their endorsements.

-Robert

A problematic student could still find ways to kill himself and others that aren't spelled out in the endorsements, such as buzzing the airport or flying too low.  Technically he's not outside the endorsement (although violating 91.13 among others).  Would or should a CFI be accountable for such behavior from their students?  I imagine there's not a good "yes" or "no" answer to that.  If the CFI had seen a pattern of unsafe behavior in a student and failed to confront that behavior, give feedback and develop a corrective action plan, yes, I think some degree of accountability should be there.  If the CFI did that (and had it documented and/or witnessed), it's hard to imagine there could or should be any accountability.

Realistically, of course, most such instances are not preceded by obvious signs of a pattern of unsafe behavior, in which case I'd agree that no, CFI's should not be held accountable for unsafe behavior without objective warning signs.

[ArtVandelay]

The FAA has spent a lot of time lately hammering on aviation decision making and trying to break the chain of these accidents.  It seems like this individual did not have much "fear" or was an adrenaline junkie (not said in a bad way).  Not being a CFI, is there guidance from the FAA on how to teach and reinforce the ADM with students like this?   

1. I don’t think you can teach common sense.
2.The student can memorize the acronyms but in the end they have to ask themselves what can go wrong, and be somewhat critical of their own skills, when we’ve been trying to instill confidence in those skills.

It’s like that video posted (here or BT) that a pilot video himself losing control in IMC, and not thinking twice about it.



Tom

[Niko182]

23 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

1. I don’t think you can teach common sense.
2.The student can memorize the acronyms but in the end they have to ask themselves what can go wrong, and be somewhat critical of their own skills, when we’ve been trying to instill confidence in those skills.

It’s like that video posted (here or BT) that a pilot video himself losing control in IMC, and not thinking twice about it.



Tom

You have the link to the video?

also...
There are old pilots and bold pilots. not many of both however.
 

[Danb]

What strikes me is the MSer who has an intimate problem or issue with the group discussing a potential chain of events that may have been broken thereby possibly contributing to a fatal accident.

I personally don’t feel any one is being disrespectful to the deceased pilot.

As a group this should be a strong learning experience.

A few above expressed what and why analyzing the event is helpful possibly saving just one other pilot.

Im not pointing fingers at anyone within the forum.

I personally joined the forum in an effort to learn more about the brand Mooney, 

this is an occasion ever so sad should be analyzed and hopefully learned from.

many of us seem to take things personal, it’s not about us but about learning to be the best we can 

 

[Sabremech]

21 minutes ago, Danb said:

What strikes me is the MSer who has an intimate problem or issue with the group discussing a potential chain of events that may have been broken thereby possibly contributing to a fatal accident.

I personally don’t feel any one is being disrespectful to the deceased pilot.

As a group this should be a strong learning experience.

A few above expressed what and why analyzing the event is helpful possibly saving just one other pilot.

Im not pointing fingers at anyone within the forum.

I personally joined the forum in an effort to learn more about the brand Mooney, 

this is an occasion ever so sad should be analyzed and hopefully learned from.

many of us seem to take things personal, it’s not about us but about learning to be the best we can 

 

The same MS’r is having more issues on FB discussing this accident. The ignore function here works great. 

[MBDiagMan]

6 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

It's one thing to speculate on decisions that lead to obvious actions. The young pilot did take off in fairly sketchy weather conditions, after dark.

It's a whole other thing to speculate on someone's motives. That the only reason we discuss this is so we can feel better about ourselves. That is truly unconscionable. You can not know anyone's motives other than your own and to think you do is very inappropriate.

I try to think of every possible action that could have resulted in this accident. And I like to discuss this with other pilots who have the wealth of experience and can think of things I wouldn't have thought of. All of this is in an effort to build up the database in my mind of all the things not to do. Or all the things to take note of.

One item of note that I'd not thought of regarding this accident, is the complex airspace overlying this area. I think to myself that if I was flying that same route, would I have been more concerned about not busting Class Bravo, that I'd forget about the rising terrain? It's useful for all of us to think about this stuff.

If it offends you, tough. Now that you're assigning nefarious motives to us, I'm a lot less concerned that you're offended.

There is MUCH to be gained from discussion, even speculation regarding an accident.

About a year or so ago, there was a fatal accident in the Mooney community that involved a serious pitch up shortly after take off.  In the course of the discussion that it a possibility was seat rails.  It was clear that this was simply speculated as a possibility, and probably not the cause, but it led to a serious and informative safety discussion regarding seat rails.  Very soon after this discussion, I had the pleasure of meeting Paul (the poster quoted above) and we had a very productive discussion about seat rails.  There was a LOT of awareness shared among the Mooney community about this subject, a serious one.

As I recall, the cause of that particular accident turned out to be medical, but the discussion that resulted may very well prevent an accident somewhere along the line.  I fully expect that the gentleman who lost his life would not feel disrespected if he knew that productive safety discussion resulted from it.

The accident discussed in this thread, as all accidents discussed here, result in positive discussion albeit considered morbid by some.  There is no law, at least not yet, that prevents discussion of an accident before the Federal agencies complete their investigations.

My $0.02,

[Yetti]

I am sticking with he was right of course.   I am sure someone will disagree,  but I am sticking with it.

[Bob_Belville]

ISTM that it may well turn out that since the (student) pilot bought his own plane and had the keys to it that there might not be a single CFI whose approval he sought or respected. This gentleman would not be the first aircraft owner who flaunted rules. Until an accident happens the lack of a current medical, flight review, annual inspection, etc. usually will go undetected. The FAA has never carded me nor do I recall that the insurance company has asked for proof of what I reported to them.

[ArtVandelay]

You have the link to the video?

also...
There are old pilots and bold pilots. not many of both however.
 

Skip to about 33:00 for the scary part.


Tom

[Niko182]

The rules in aviation are there for a reason. A lot of the rules where created in correlation with an accident that happened in the past.
If this guy would have stuck to the rules, he'd probably still be alive today. I'm not bashing trying to bash the guy, but there are multiple
reports of people around the area stating, that
1. It was IFR
2. It was raining
3. freezing levels where low
4. It was night time in an area where even a lot of IFR pilots won't depart out of that airport.

You have to just look at this guy and wonder what he was thinking when he went WOT on the runway to takeoff.
a lot of reports saying he used the plane to travel from home to the bay area every weekend.

- Its a Friday evening
- In the bay area after a long day of work.
- Lives in livermore
- Most likely wants to go home after a long week of work

Sounds a lot like gethereitis.

[MBDiagMan]

Yes Bob, I fully expect that there are more rogue pilots than most people think.  A number of years ago, a young family man bought a Beech Sierra in a hangar next to me.  He took lessons for a few weeks and started flying it to job sites hundreds of miles away.  One day I saw him put his 8 or 9 year old son in the plane and go.  This sequence of events happened in a ridiculously short amount of time to a point that it would have been impossible for him to be even close to his Private.  At least I never saw him go in marginal weather.  I moved away not long after all this so I am not sure where it all went, but it sure appeared that his mode of operation was simply to buy a plane and fly.  This was a remote field, so he very well could still be flying rogue.  In fact given his apparent demeanor, I expect that he still is flying rogue if he is still flying.

[David_H]

Mooney, Bonanza, Cessna, Cirrus, Piper, HP, Complex... none of that really makes any difference when a poor departure decision is made. The motives and circumstances really make no difference once the no-go point has passed.

There is not a recovery procedure available for a poor departure decision. I think about this every time I line up with the runway and do my last heading check with the Compass, DG, and RW numbers painted in front of me.

[Bob_Belville]

Yes Bob, I fully expect that there are more rogue pilots than most people think.  A number of years ago, a young family man bought a Beech Sierra in a hangar next to me.  He took lessons for a few weeks and started flying it to job sites hundreds of miles away.  One day I saw him put his 8 or 9 year old son in the plane and go.  This sequence of events happened in a ridiculously short amount of time to a point that it would have been impossible for him to be even close to his Private.  At least I never saw him go in marginal weather.  I moved away not long after all this so I am not sure where it all went, but it sure appeared that his mode of operation was simply to buy a plane and fly.  This was a remote field, so he very well could still be flying rogue.  In fact given his apparent demeanor, I expect that he still is flying rogue if he is still flying.

I had a A&P/IA friend years ago... he maintained my Mooney... who owned a PA24-400 (not Clarence!). He did not have an IR but used the system using fictitious tail numbers. After I quit flying in 1990 I heard that he used the Comanche to fly drugs in from Columbia. He wound up committing suicide when the Feds were closing in on him. For some, rule keeping is for suckers.

 

[MBDiagMan]

Yes, I’ve known people with that attitude.  For me, I am completely incapable of making myself do anything illegal, immoral or unethical.  I am the kind of sucker that this guy loathed.

[ShuRugal]

In the course of the discussion that it a possibility was seat rails.  It was clear that this was simply speculated as a possibility, and probably not the cause, but it led to a serious and informative safety discussion regarding seat rails.  Very soon after this discussion, I had the pleasure of meeting Paul (the poster quoted above) and we had a very productive discussion about seat rails.  There was a LOT of awareness shared among the Mooney community about this subject, a serious one.

I added "Adjust and secure seat" to my pre-takeoff checklist as a reminder to make sure the seat is firmly latched before every takeoff.

Hypothetical discussions inspired by real world events definitely have a valuable place in developing good safety culture.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[Andy95W]

1 hour ago, ArtVandelay said:

 

Skip to about 33:00 for the scary part.


Tom

D-bag and master publicity seeker at it again.

[kmyfm20s]

1 hour ago, ArtVandelay said:

 

Skip to about 33:00 for the scary part.


Tom

 

The I’ve watched this video several times. I wanted to figure out how he could be so out of wack. The vertical speed indicator alone would have scared the poop out of me. What I did notice was the AI on the pilot side was way less responsive than the copilot side and both turn and bank indicators where accurate.  So if he was only referencing the pilot AI he should have cross reference the instruments as we were all taught.

[ragedracer1977]

2 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

 

Skip to about 33:00 for the scary part.


Tom

When I heard a 414 went down in Socal last week, I was sure it was gonna be this guy

[thinwing]

He was too busy congratulating himself...finger waving ,excessive yak for the camera..broke out in xstream attitude...prob with his rear passengers screaming

[bradp]

19 hours ago, RobertGary1 said:

2) Myths persist forever. We all know of numerous accidents in which everyone knows what caused it. Except when you go back and read the final NTSB they're wrong. Is that a positive learning experience? Off the top of my head a couple accidents in which pilots are shocked when you tell them they are wrong. 1) We had an A36 crash on take off from our field killing 2. Everyone said he took off with a tailwind. The NTSB determined it wasn't a tailwind but unexpected sheer. So pilots run through the coals for no reason 2) DC-8 crashed killing all. Initial speculation was that cargo was not tied down correctly and the ground crew were blamed. But almost no one knows that the actual cause turned out to be a mechanical failure with the elevator. I feel so bad for that innocent ground crew. Years later when you tell a local group of pilots this they are very surprised. 

@RobertGary1 I perceive a lot of your hesitation to “debrief” these types of incidents has to do with either a family’s potential reading into the conversation or some sort of personalization on behalf of either pilots in the thread (“couldn’t be me”) or blame in your example of a ground crew.  Assignment of blame and responsibility are different.  One of the concepts of safety culture process is it’s not personal blame- it’s rather speaking to the presence of something in a system that needs to be amended.  

Yes for us flying around SP owner operator part 91 it’s individual decision making but that doesn’t mean we don’t have a system.  My system is my process of risk analysis/ management, maintenance program, use of technology aids, use of other system aids such as ATC to complete a safe flight.  Fix the system and the weakest link (more often than not what lives between the headset speakers) follows.  

Sometimes myths are more powerful and / or useful than fact.  To counter each of your examples above  - 1) the A36.  Useful to think about tailwinds during takeoff or landing- definitely.  But I bet nobody took off from your field with a tailwind for a long time after.  Also useful to understand convective versus non convective LLWS and prevailing wind direction during departure.   Taking off with a crosswind and encountering a WS with a tail wind can be just as dangerous as departing with a tailwind in the right circumstances.  Look we all learned two things despite the NTSB final reporting one.  And one of those things was a myth in the case, but important for the safety culture nonetheless. 

I can only say thank you to the unfortunate pilots that have given everything so that I may lean something and not repeat what they did.   We are (at least on a forum like this - participation in which, lo and behold, is associated with a lower accident/incident rate) probably all students of NTSB reports to some extent.  We also know when they are helpful and... importantly that they have limitations just like everything else.  

2) Cargo crews were probably particularly cognizant about the importance of loading and securing schedules.  Perhaps 135 / 121 operators put out a safety alert / changes procedures if they found weaknesses in their own system despite what the NTSB final said.  It’s notnabout “those idiots” it’s about what can I / we learn.  Supposition is not a bad thing. You just have to remove the personalization, ie  “I / everyone blame(s) XYZ” part.  Innocent ground crews everywhere know that they do critically important work.  Our process is not about guilt and blame its about learning.  

 

Here’s a pic of me and my family flying west of Altoona PA. Current/ proficient and relatively experienced flying in the Alleghenies.  A student of local NTSB reports.  Three terrain alerting systems on boards.  Encountered a snow squall and lowering ceilings en route to coastal VA.  Icing in the clouds. Rising terrain of the Alleghenies ahead. A siren song for gethereitis recognized. We turned north toward lower terrain and found much better weather and a safe route for crossing 50 nm away.  Ended up driving back from Virginia.  We’ve all been close.  It’s lessons from this guy that drive home the importance of disciplined  ADM, and I’m thankful for that.  

 

@RobertGary1 Given some commonalities in at least three recent accidents (Yorba Linda C414), Mt Diablo and the Palm Springs Cessna relating to ADM/CFIT and or LOC, I’d be curious - if Jerry W (video above) came to you for a BFR today how would you approach his dangerous attitudes and reinforce his good habits.  I’m sure you wouldn’t assign blame. You’d just want him to learn.  How would you approach his difficult personality traits?  Clearly Jerry could learn something from the C414 crash despite the NTSB report not being out.   

 

And if of any of my fellow pilots on Mooneyspace or elsewhere sees me doing anything stupid or dangerous, please correct me before the NTSB factual.  

[thinwing]

Brad ,thanks for posting pics...now imagine that same flight at night

[larrynimmo]

After 15 hours of dual instruction in a Piper Warrior I purchased a Mooney M20J. (even before solo) I first soloed in the Warrior, but I really wanted to fly the Mooney.  

My $2,500 insurance required me to have 15  hours of dual on the Mooney before I Soloed in it, and then at least 10 Hrs of Solo before any passengers.  My CFI limited me to have 5+ miles visability, 3,000' ceiling (except for traffic practice at my local towered field)  no more than a 7 knot crosswind component, 25knot area...except for when he specifically signed me off for solo cross country flights.   I never soloed at night until I got my ticket.

I ended up having about 40 hrs total in the Mooney before I got my ticket.  At no point in my training did the fact that I was flying a "complex" plane ever made flying difficult.

Owning a M20J, the hardest part for me has always been trying to make every landing perfect....even today I focus my energies on that task.

I make these statements to qualify a few facts....1.  while the Mooney is a complex plane...its not really that complicated to operate,  but it is faster

2.  night flying (in some parts of the world) is considered IFR, and if you are rural, ...how many CFI's will sign off a PP student to fly at night?  not mine

3.  as a student my VFR minimums were more restricted than that of a private pilot.  Good that I did have restraints placed on me.

Not unlike most Mooney pilots I have a thirst for information on details that help to enrich the flying experience, dealing with the maintenance, mechanical issues, and avionic upgrades ...that's why I come to this site.  Sadly, I also come here to learn from other persons failures, crashes, and just simple bad luck...just as I watch the YouTube videos on GA crash investigations....because I want to learn what happened and why, with the hope I can use this information so that I keep from taking unnecessary risks, and to be better prepared for the emergency situation that we all hope will never happen.

Regardless of what the NTSB summizies, I doubt this incident will not be considered to be "single point failure"

[DonMuncy]

At the time, maybe a tough decision. In hindsight, or all logic, an easy decision. One way gets you a visit with the FAA, the other possible death.

[Shadrach]

On 2/11/2019 at 6:32 PM, Niko182 said:

You have the link to the video?

also...
There are old pilots and bold pilots. not many of both however.
 

I know quite a few but they don't wear it on their sleeves. Most are still very methodical in what they do. One of them is nearly 90 and is still a better stick and rudder guy than most with half his mileage.