Crash - T-28 hits a Cessna 152 at Compton KCPM

[DXB]

57 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

Thats so sad in a way as it was his fault.  

No way to know what exactly happened here from the info available or if the T28 pilot was acting recklessly. Add  blinding sun in our eyes as we land to a communication mix up on anyones' part (e.g. wrong frequency,  wrong stated runway or position, radio quit working, headset audio intermittent), and I worry any of us could end up like the T28 pilot. 

[apenney]

I've definitely been on the wrong CTAF frequency before.  

[Ned Gravel]

1 hour ago, apenney said:

I've definitely been on the wrong CTAF frequency before.  

me too.  There but for the Grace of .........

[ArtVandelay]

We all make mistakes, but hopefully there wasn’t a malicious one made by the T28 pilot.


Tom

[bonal]

This just sucks for everyone. Rest in peace 

[Marauder]

Based on the video, I am sure the sun played a role in this accident but what CTAF communication did or didn't occur will be an important factor. Every year, for a few days, my airport runway lines up perfectly with the setting sun and it completely obliterates forward visibility down the runway. I also wonder if TIS-B might have help with awareness. My ADS-B solution has a TAS & TIS-B capability and I know if a plane was in front or behind me on a runway, it would alert me to this.

 

[orionflt]

3 minutes ago, Marauder said:

Based on the video, I am sure the sun played a role in this accident but what CTAF communication did or didn't occur will be an important factor. Every year, for a few days, my airport runway lines up perfectly with the setting sun and it completely obliterates forward visibility down the runway. I also wonder if TIS-B might have help with awareness. My ADS-B solution has a TAS & TIS-B capability and I know if a plane was in front or behind me on a runway, it would alert me to this.

 

Maybe with the new ADSB systems, but I know I usually lose TIS-B below 500ft AGL 

[jaylw314]

2 minutes ago, Marauder said:

Based on the video, I am sure the sun played a role in this accident but what CTAF communication did or didn't occur will be an important factor. Every year, for a few days, my airport runway lines up perfectly with the setting sun and it completely obliterates forward visibility down the runway. I also wonder if TIS-B might have help with awareness. My ADS-B solution has a TAS & TIS-B capability and I know if a plane was in front or behind me on a runway, it would alert me to this.

 

Today is the spring equinox, when the sun sets true west everywhere on earth (well, maybe except the north/south poles).  Many of the runways in the LAX area are lined up due west or nearly so.

[Marauder]

43 minutes ago, orionflt said:

Maybe with the new ADSB systems, but I know I usually lose TIS-B below 500ft AGL 

If both planes were ADS-B out and in capable, ADS-B would be between plane to plane and if they were "in" equipped would have visible and possible heard aural warnings. My plane has TAS capability and that helps when a plane is transponder equipped but not ADS-B out capable. 

When you lose TIS-B what you are losing is the ADS-R from the ground based stations reporting ADS-B targets back to you. If two planes are both ADS-B out capable, any "in" device will display below 500'.

Edited March 21, 2019 by Marauder

[jaylw314]

14 minutes ago, Marauder said:

If both planes were ADS-B out and in capable, ADS-B would be between plane to plane and if they were "in" equipped would have visible and possible heard aural warnings. My plane has TAS capability and that helps when a plane is transponder equipped but not ADS-B out capable. 

When you lose TIS-B what you are losing is the ADS-R from the ground based stations reporting ADS-B targets back to you. If two planes are both ADS-B out capable, any "in" device will display below 500'.

Unless one is ADS-B out via 1090ES and the other via UAT

[orionflt]

15 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

Unless one is ADS-B out via 1090ES and the other via UAT

and neither of those planes would probably install more then the minimum requirements. 

[Marauder]

Brian - here is an example of ground traffic on my solution. I was 350’ above the ground. I am getting air to air ADS-B and a ground to air ADS-B from the brown target on the ground. That plane denoted by a brown target (being pointed to by the red arrows on my PFD and MFD) was actually on the taxiway and not the runway. They were also headed towards me (their target shape showed their direction of travel).

The nice thing about the Lynx system is it is smart enough to know which targets pose a legitimate risk and will only issue an ATAS aural warning in those situations.

Most (if not all) “in” units are able to display both 1090ES and UAT. The “out” portion can be UAT below FL180 and is required to be 1090ES above. My L-3 unit will see both. I am 1090ES out equipped.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Hank]

13 minutes ago, orionflt said:

and neither of those planes would probably install more then the minimum requirements. 

Me, neither, which in my case is Nothing.

My student long XC brought me back tonland directly into the low March sun. Took two tries, but managed to see the runway and set her down with only a small audience. Has happened a few times since, just one more thing to watch out for. Just like thin fog in the flare . . . .

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, orionflt said:

and neither of those planes would probably install more then the minimum requirements. 

I don't know, I think the kind of person who can own or operate a vintage aircraft probably can afford to and would want to install stuff like ADS-B and other basic electronic gizmos just for quality-of-life.  I imagine it would be pretty stressful flying aircraft designed 70 years ago, and an owner would probably prefer comfort and safety over authenticity.

[Hank]

22 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

 I imagine it would be pretty stressful flying aircraft designed 70 years ago, and an owner would probably prefer comfort and safety over authenticity.

When was the M20 TCDS approved? 1950-when? Over 65 years ago . . . . Are you nervous and stressed when you get in your cockpit?

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

When was the M20 TCDS approved? 1950-when? Over 65 years ago . . . . Are you nervous and stressed when you get in your cockpit?

OK, I was thinking more the WWII warbird types.  And yes, I would be stressed even in a Mooney if I had to fly IFR cross-country with this panel.  

On the other hand, I found a few T28 cockpits that look like this.

 

 

So clearly, some people are not averse to putting new stuff in T28's