Bummer, another Mooney down

[MikeOH]

5 hours ago, jlunseth said:

Reminds me a little of the Victoria MN crash of a few years ago where the NTSB reported that the pilot was not instrument current. What makes people think that is ok somehow?

Yeah, that is the real question, "What was the pilot thinking???". Decades of reading accident reports and the best I can come up with is some combination of misplaced optimism and overconfidence.

My 'reading between the lines' on this one is that the pilot determined there wasn't any 'weather system' or turbulence and that all he had to contend with was a thin marine layer less than a 1000 feet thick. Departing out of Camarillo is completely flat and not far from the Pacific coastline.  While not current he was instrument rated.  I speculate he felt confident that he could climb wings level straight out (pretty much the DP for RWY26) for less than a minute and be VMC.  His self confidence was fatally misplaced, unfortunately.

[MikeOH]

2 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

So what . . lol?

61.113 describes the privileges and limitations of a Private Pilot Certificate. You don't get to exercise those privileges without a valid medical, including Basic Med(ical). Instead of going through the Special Issuance process, which he never received, you can't just find a doctor that doesn't know your medical history and lie on the medical history portion of the Basic Med app and now have a valid medical.

The relevant cause of flying without being instrument current, although stupid,  is superseded by the fact that he wasn't legal to even exercise his privileges to fly in severe clear VFR weather.

I am the last person in the world that thinks that insurance shouldn't cover common mistakes that are made that result in an accident - that's the whole purpose of having it. However I don't think it's too much to ask that the insured actually be a pilot who is legal to fly the airplane.

Do you think the insurance should still be valid if someone lies and says they have a Private Pilot Certificate, but actually doesn't?

We're going round and around on this.  I don't know much clearer I can be: the violation/mistake/whatever should be CAUSAL to the accident, not merely an excuse for the insurance to deny payment.  Again, the lack of a valid medical was completely UNRELATED to the cause of the crash.

To your extreme example, no I don't think the insurance should pay for a 'pilot' that NEVER had a certificate or medical and falsely obtained insurance; pretty simple to argue that without ever having held any certificate he was completely unqualified, had never been qualified, and the accident was CAUSED by lack of appropriate skill.

I'm honestly beginning to think this debate for you is more about 'crime and punishment' for someone who you think lied rather than insurance coverage for an airplane crash.  If so, there's really no point in continuing.

[LANCECASPER]

10 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Yeah, that is the real question, "What was the pilot thinking???". Decades of reading accident reports and the best I can come up with is some combination of misplaced optimism and overconfidence.

My 'reading between the lines' on this one is that the pilot determined there wasn't any 'weather system' or turbulence and that all he had to contend with was a thin marine layer less than a 1000 feet thick. Departing out of Camarillo is completely flat and not far from the Pacific coastline.  While not current he was instrument rated.  I speculate he felt confident that he could climb wings level straight out (pretty much the DP for RWY26) for less than a minute and be VMC.  His self confidence was fatally misplaced, unfortunately.

Also we don't know for sure that his pacemaker/defibrillator didn't fire in the high stress environment of taking off in a 400 ft ceiling with no recent instrument time.  If it did go off that would help to explain the meltdown after take-off.

[Pinecone]

18 hours ago, Shadrach said:

I try not to ascribe duplicity to any situation where ignorance or dare I say, stupidity will suffice...unless I have firsthand knowledge that suggests otherwise.  I did not know this pilot, but I also find it hard to believe that he did not understand that the undisclosed medical conditions for which he received treatment were disqualifying without an SI.  However, I never underestimate people.  I met Mooney owner just last week with a beautiful 201 that he said "cruises at 180-190kts, depending on the wind".  He did not pick up on my confused look at all. The conversation did not last much longer but what remained of it convinced me that I often over estimate intellect.

Sometimes I really wonder.  I overheard a conversation between several certificated pilots about stalls.  NOT ONE has any idea what a stall was and how to make it happen or not.

[Jerry 5TJ]

On 4/23/2024 at 12:45 PM, RescueMunchkin said:

If you're referring to aircraft insurance, wouldn't the pilot being not legal to fly be a cause for the insurer to refuse any kind of payment?

The only case of insurance denying a claim due to pilot false representation (claiming to hold a valid medical, claiming to have completed policy-mandated annual recurrent training) that I personally know of (and I know only because I knew both the pilot and the lawyer representing the insurer) was due to the pilot’s pattern of willful misconduct and not simple neglect or innocent errors.  With two fatalities and total loss of a nice Citation the potential claims were not small, either.  

Generally speaking, insurance companies do pay regularly for the dumb pilot stuff we keep doing.  

[Stubby]

It kind of shocks me that he was able to receive/renew coverage without a valid certificate or medical. I had to submit copies of both when applying for coverage. One would think insurance providers would want to do their due diligence to make sure they know who they're covering. Heck, even my auto carrier checks my driving record every so often. 

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, LANCECASPER said:

Also we don't know for sure that his pacemaker/defibrillator didn't fire in the high stress environment of taking off in a 400 ft ceiling with no recent instrument time.  If it did go off that would help to explain the meltdown after take-off.

I was in the ER once and one of the patients in the waiting rooms defibrillator went off. I had no idea what was going on until the doctor told me what it was. I can't imagine flying in good VFR with that happening.

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, Stubby said:

It kind of shocks me that he was able to receive/renew coverage without a valid certificate or medical. I had to submit copies of both when applying for coverage. One would think insurance providers would want to do their due diligence to make sure they know who they're covering. Heck, even my auto carrier checks my driving record every so often. 

Perhaps it "shocked" him too . . lol      (Sorry I couldn't let that one go . . )

[Stubby]

4 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Perhaps it "shocked" him too . . lol      (Sorry I couldn't let that one go . . )

That's a terrible joke... I love it! haha