2 Mooneys Touch Mid-Air Inbound to OSH?

[RogueOne]

On 7/30/2019 at 12:21 PM, Andy95W said:

If it'd been two Cirrus aircraft two chutes would've been popped resulting in 2 hull losses.  That would have changed it from an incident to accident.

First mention of Cirrus.  Page 1.  What Andy said was factual.  THEN everything that followed ensued.

[jetdriven]

The thread was garbage?  So we are supposed to sit quietly and wait for 18 months before talking about this?  4 people came within a hairsbreadth of getting killed and a million dollars of aircraft destroyed. 
You guys should tell that to Beechtalk, they have a whole section called “crash talk”. 
everyone there uses their real names too, and the forum is moderated.  Much more high level discussion carried on there. Perhaps if someone shared the photos of a smashed wingtip and rudder over there, something could be learned from this. From the Beech site.  

[RogueOne]

On 7/30/2019 at 2:11 PM, Tom said:

Paging the safety mod (even if not in the safety forum).

There's a transparent double standard here when it comes to safety discussions.  I'm sorry if I lack the requisite tact or demeanor to be more effective in promoting at least this subject, but I submit that my logic is sound.

Where an "our type" vs "their type" incident occurs, an overwhelming "it's their type" bias occurs where the sarcasm (against "their type") really distracts from lessons to learn. Sarcasm as they say should be a garnish, not the main course.  Now even still when an "our type only" incident occurs...the "their type" jabs erupt.  With lots of "likes."  What kind of serious safety culture is this?  Our type is literally a dying breed yet still the "their type suck" sentiment still comes out....as the other type expands in numbers.  A real Freudian defense or something.

Moreover...on the "those we know vs strangers we don't" double-standard:
A fellow pilot can be laid up critical in a hospital and people will speculate away; a relative fender bender occurs and all hands are to keep quiet for fear of a certificate action.  Really???

"Real" pilots who know how to act "properly" don't need a chute nonsense spews out while one of our kind is laid up critical ill in the precise circumstance where a chute invariably would have greatly increased the chances of walking away from the incident.  Where is the chorus of the "chutes are for people who can't fly properly" when people are laid up in the hospital?  Well, they're on this forum saying that pilots who operate properly don't need a chute, and they're getting multiple likes.  What absolute nonsense.

I'm sorry that my advocacy for chutes, tone, whatever is deemed unwelcome, redundant, over the top...but all the chutes-are-for-pussies posts continue to flow out with multiple likes.  This double-standard stuff needs to stop.  It does nothing to engender a safety culture. 

Page 2 pot stirring to force factor 10.  “Itshow” ensues...

[RogueOne]

14 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

The thread was garbage?  So we are supposed to sit quietly and wait for 18 months before talking about this?  4 people came within a hairsbreadth of getting killed and a million dollars of aircraft destroyed. 
You guys should tell that to Beechtalk, they have a whole section called “crash talk”. 
everyone there uses their real names too, and the forum is moderated.  Much more high level discussion carried on there. Perhaps if someone shared the photos of a smashed wingtip and rudder over there, something could be learned from this. From the Beech site.  

Glad you didn’t really block me Byron.  I mean that.  Garbage because we are not going to know until we know so conjecture and talk about lithium and chutes on Mooney’s is a waste.  Byron, come on with the names.  You know who I am, what I do, where I live and what plane I fly.  You know my family as well because I speak of them on a regular basis.

I guess Beech owners are just smarter.  I am glad you find solace amongst them.

[RogueOne]

20 minutes ago, jetdriven said:

The thread was garbage?  So we are supposed to sit quietly and wait for 18 months before talking about this?  4 people came within a hairsbreadth of getting killed and a million dollars of aircraft destroyed. 
You guys should tell that to Beechtalk, they have a whole section called “crash talk”. 
everyone there uses their real names too, and the forum is moderated.  Much more high level discussion carried on there. Perhaps if someone shared the photos of a smashed wingtip and rudder over there, something could be learned from this. From the Beech site.  

I told everybody EARLY AND OFTEN what happened (chain of events) that resulted in my gear up almost 15 years ago.  You were snarky and mean spirited then and now.  I completely understand why pilots involved (that have the potential for legal action against them and their freedom to fly) reserve their words for official review.

Very little has been said about recreational formation flying hazards on the thread.  I am about reducing risk exposure.  The idea of flying formation for “fun” is alien to me.  Others?  Have at it.  Am I surprised that an incident (that could of been catastrophic) occurred?  NOPE.

[RogueOne]

Government mandates “things” on a regular basis.  If you think the government mandating an end to certain aircraft (because they don’t have X, Y and or Z). I think you need to open your ears and eyes people.

[RogueOne]

For the “good of the people”...

In the best interest of the public...

Citizens need protection...

Do something...

[Andy95W]

54 minutes ago, RogueOne said:

First mention of Cirrus.  Page 1.  What Andy said was factual.  THEN everything that followed ensued.

Oh crap.  That means I started the next 13 pages that took this downhill.

[Hank]

2 hours ago, jetdriven said:

The thread was garbage?  So we are supposed to sit quietly and wait for 18 months before talking about this?  4 people came within a hairsbreadth of getting killed and a million dollars of aircraft destroyed. 
You guys should tell that to Beechtalk, they have a whole section called “crash talk”. 
everyone there uses their real names too, and the forum is moderated.  Much more high level discussion carried on there. Perhaps if someone shared the photos of a smashed wingtip and rudder over there, something could be learned from this. From the Beech site.  

Yes, all of our Caravan members want us to sit quietly and wait for however long the FAA takes. No pictures of bent metal have been shared here and no information has been divulged, although the Official Statement was redone to explain that two planes actually touched in flight (from the original "there was an incident").

No information, no photos, no discussion--completely shuts down the opportunities for the rest of us to learn anything from the real events and its myriad possible causes. But we've been invited to next year's Caravan training to see the improvements. 

This is now the second time that I'm withdrawing from this thread, having been told already by non-communicative "informed persons" that I don't know what happened. Because I wasn't there, and those who were ain't saying. 

[gsxrpilot]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

This is now the second time that I'm withdrawing from this thread,

[Hank]

36 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

It's called "the tar baby effect."  But I ain't Brer Rabbit!

[steingar]

The only reason I have been vocal is what I was hearing from Caravan members (we're all highly trained and professional) I knew wouldn't jive with the powers that be who are going to decide if the Caravan flies again.  However, the latest missive (3 times from an Advanced member.  Why he's advanced and I'm not I don't know, I do have an PhD and all) really does allay my concerns, especially if the Caravan is run as professionally as  posters here seem to profess.

[Becca]

On 8/13/2019 at 9:04 PM, chriscalandro said:

http://www.mooneycaravan.com/news/updateonmooneyincidentatmooneycaravan19july2019

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2012/07/plane-crash-at-eaa-airventure-airplane.html

Updated Statement Relating to Incident During Mooney Caravan to Oshkosh XXII, 21 July 2019

posted Aug 5, 2019, 3:42 AM by Ashley and Maria Neboschick   [ updated Aug 5, 2019, 3:45 AM ]

As many of you know, we had an incident during Mooney Caravan 2019.  During the en route portion of the flight, a slowdown occurred during a rejoin to fingertip maneuver.  During this same time period, an en route course change also occurred in the direction of the rejoining wingmen. As such, an overrun occurred and both pilots took corrective action. After landing it was noted that contact had occurred.  No other elements of the formation were placed in danger by the incident.   Currently, a team of Caravan individuals is analyzing the event in order to come up with procedural recommendations. This team is in the process of gathering and reviewing all available information. While our internal investigation is not yet complete (and will not be until the NTSB makes their analysis and recommendations public), there are several takeaways that we are working on for future Caravan operations.   These recommendations will likely include more thorough training, more focus on emergency procedures and emergency calls, as well as more detailed written emergency  procedures. Please be patient with us as we try to decipher the information, and come up with meaningful conclusions. It is important that the NTSB report comes out prior so that we can incorporate all data into a thorough Caravan safety report.

 

This post has a lot more information in it that was previously released.  Good start as well as the willingness to share the results of the i investigation!  I understand waiting until the NTSB, but presumably if the NTSB report takes too long the leaders will have to make a decision on those safety improvements before the next caravan.

As to the text .. It says that the wingman over ran the lead aircraft, and the lead aircraft had correct course during that time exacerbating the situation. 

It says the two airplanes did execute some sort of avoidance maneuver. What’s the standard caravan avoidance maneuver if one loses site of the other in a situation like this?  Seems like those procedures would be fully in place already - but if not, room for immediate improvement.   If procedures exist, were they followed or why not?  If followed, why was there still contact?  Is this situation trained/briefed?  If so, did both pilots actually have that training/briefing?  All questions I look forward to learning about.  Is there air to air comm so wing pilot can notify lead he’s fallen out of formation or lost site?

this line is interesting: “After landing it was noted that contact had occurred.” 

 

Surely the two pilots knew contact occurred before landing?

 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Becca

[jaylw314]

7 minutes ago, Becca said:

Surely the two pilots knew contact occurred before landing?

I knew someone who took out a couple runway lights and destroyed a Cherokee wing without realizing.  He flew home, and we only noticed the damage at the next club meeting.  I thought he was going to puke when he noticed the damage for the first time...  The spar was damaged and the wing ended up needing replacement, so not a small impact, either

[bill98]

On 8/14/2019 at 9:18 AM, RogueOne said:

For the “good of the people”...

In the best interest of the public...

Citizens need protection...

Do something...

Wonder how many knots we would all gain if we reskinned our Mooney's in Rearden Metal  

[Sabremech]

Is the NTSB really involved with this incident since the damage was minor and no injuries to anyone on board either aircraft? Seems like this can be handled by the FAA as NTSB resources are spread quite thin. 

[Yetti]

I think this one goes here

https://www.pnj.com/story/news/military/2019/08/15/blue-angels-planes-touch-midair-during-practice/2023673001/?fbclid=IwAR3hDQw1MumBdQLv3sCr73JK8r2yHLzHR84G3HOmQ1zF2s3Q-5Z86TBIT1I

 

[bradp]

Yes NTSB will because it’s a midair collision even though it doesn’t meet the definition of reportable accident they we all learned about oh so long ago.  

[jetdriven]

its a reportable incident under CFR 830

 

[bob865]

I wrote a whole think about how bad I thought this thead was, but opted to delete and just ask my question instead.

Now, those of you who fly formation please help me understand what happened.  As I read the Caravan update, it sounds like it was a case of task saturation.  Does this sound right?  What is a rejoin to fingertip maneuver? Why would they have been “re-joining.”  What could have caused two maneuvers to happen at the same time to create a task saturation condition?  Why would a slowdown and a direction change at the same time cause an incident? 

[Gary0747]

Did I read previously that Mooney Caravan had gradually tightened up the formation to professional standards from a much looser formation over the years. If so I wonder if all the participants were really capable of the tighter formation standards?   I assume this is being evaluated as part of their RCA? Also how does the Mooney formation tightness standard compare to the other brand caravans?  

[Yetti]

18 minutes ago, Gary0747 said:

Did I read previously that Mooney Caravan had gradually tightened up the formation to professional standards from a much looser formation over the years. If so I wonder if all the participants were really capable of the tighter formation standards?   I assume this is being evaluated as part of their RCA? Also how does the Mooney formation tightness standard compare to the other brand caravans?  

The standards are in the Mooney Caravan manual.   https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxtb29uZXljYXJhdmFufGd4OjczNmIwNmFkNjhlNzhmZGE

[ilovecornfields]

Page 7

”Formation flying is perhaps some of the most challenging and potentially dangerous flying in civil aviation.” Yikes! I guess I’m not crazy to not want to do it.

[skydvrboy]

On 8/15/2019 at 2:03 PM, jaylw314 said:

I knew someone who took out a couple runway lights and destroyed a Cherokee wing without realizing.

My instructor was flying with a student when the student did something similar.  They took out a fence and fence post with a wing at a private grass strip and destroyed the wing.  Neither noticed the impact or damage until back at the home base airport after departing the aircraft.

[Gary0747]

It says finger tip formation is no less than 3 feet of Clearence?    I would need a higher minimum.