Victoria MN crash last year

[hoot777]

Any word out there on the results of the NTSB investigation.  Curious Mooney guy wants to know. 

[1980Mooney]

12 minutes ago, hoot777 said:

Any word out there on the results of the NTSB investigation.  Curious Mooney guy wants to know. 

NTSB CAROL (data base) still shows it in the "Preliminary" stage.  These things take 1.5-2 years.

N9156Z crashed August 7, 2021.  

Report_CEN21FA360_103651_10_27_2022 9_47_40 AM.pdf

Kathryn's Report: Mooney M20M / 257 TLS Bravo, N9156Z: Fatal accident occurred August 07, 2021 in Victoria, Carver County, Minnesota (kathrynsreport.com)

Edited October 27, 2022 by 1980Mooney

[LANCECASPER]

On 10/27/2022 at 8:36 AM, hoot777 said:

Any word out there on the results of the NTSB investigation.  Curious Mooney guy wants to know. 

I think we're all very interested in this one. A lot of speculation, but it looks like it could have been a disorientation/unusual attitude due to a bad attitude indicator or vacuum failure followed by over correction on the controls and over stress on the airframe. I'm looking forward to lessons learned on this one.

Probably best to keep the comments on the post below so they are all in one place.

 

 

[jlunseth]

I have to say, this one hit home for me. FCM, where the pilot was going, is my home base and the folks at Thunderbird Aviation, my home FBO, had spoken to him several times that week. He was on an approach I have flown several times, including just the week after the incident, that was frankly a little spooky. It is not an unusual or difficult approach, flat country to the west of FCM, tower is very good and always helpful. Very hard to understand how disorientation would have had the result it did in the very short period of time it did. Sorry for the family.

[carusoam]

This would be the one accident report that is worthy of going to the front of the line….

A good Mooney…

Flying in ordinary weather…

Piloted by a worthy pilot…

Experiences destructive forces beyond what has ever been recorded before, under these conditions…

 

Best regards,

-a-

[steingar]

Only Mooney wing to break outside a thunderstorm.

[T. Peterson]

I am curious as to whether the airplane had a single vacuum operated attitude indicator.

[hoot777]

Still waiting for results on this one.  Makes me want to get one of the new electric attitude instruments.  Still need the vacuum for my step and my hi tech Brittany autopilot.  It still works. 

[LANCECASPER]

8 hours ago, T. Peterson said:

I am curious as to whether the airplane had a single vacuum operated attitude indicator.

That's what it looks like, at least a few years earlier. 

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/1207543/n9156z-1991-mooney-m20m-bravo

[T. Peterson]

5 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

That's what it looks like, at least a few years earlier. 

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/1207543/n9156z-1991-mooney-m20m-bravo

I see only one AI. If it tumbled in IMC that could get ugly real quick. When I bought my airplane I added a back up electric AI before I even took delivery. Needle, ball and airspeed is a nice theory, but not for this pilot. Of course many are much better than am I, but for me, and knowing my personal limitations, a back up AI is not optional.

Thanks for digging up those pics.

[T. Peterson]

On 11/4/2022 at 5:45 AM, hoot777 said:

Still waiting for results on this one.  Makes me want to get one of the new electric attitude instruments.  Still need the vacuum for my step and my hi tech Brittany autopilot.  It still works. 

Back up AI is a beautiful thing. A proper instrument scan is 80% on the AI. At least that was what I was taught many years ago. 

[jlunseth]

I flew around for many years with one vacuum AI. Practiced partial panel often, it is ugly. As a result of this accident I now have belt and suspenders - dual reversionary 275’s plus a backup vacuum. It was a route and approach I fly and thin stratus conditions we often see here. If there is a benefit from the accident, it moved me off the dime on backup AI’s.

[M20F-1968]

Three AI's since my rebuild:

One in G600

One 3" Vacuum

One 2" Electric Mid-Continent

Back-up alternator - RAT

John Breda

[A64Pilot]

Partial panel isn’t hard at all if you practice it, just take a soap dish, the kind with suction cups and cover it and practice, actually it’s probably good to have a cover for the AI, to cover the thing if it’s bad.

Unusual attitude recovery without an AI can be ugly, but standard rate turns without one can be taught and actually is easy once you get over being so depending on the AI.

If I and every pilot that goes through Ft Rucker can fly a helicopter without an AI, an airplane is easy. My normal level instrument cross check only has me referencing the AI.

Maybe I was taught wrong

[jlunseth]

I don't think you were taught wrong, but the fly in the ointment for me is that partial panel needs to be in relatively quiet conditions. If you get in turbulence or strong up and down drafts even without much turbulence, it is pretty easy for things to get out of control without an upset. You can pretty much forget about plus or minus two hundred feet. Been there done that a couple of times, it was awhile ago, don't want to again. Would rather do what I can as the owner to make sure I will always have a working AI.

[LANCECASPER]

28 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

Partial panel isn’t hard at all if you practice it, just take a soap dish, the kind with suction cups and cover it and practice, actually it’s probably good to have a cover for the AI, to cover the thing if it’s bad.

Unusual attitude recovery without an AI can be ugly, but standard rate turns without one can be taught and actually is easy once you get over being so depending on the AI.

If I and every pilot that goes through Ft Rucker can fly a helicopter without an AI, an airplane is easy. My normal level instrument cross check only has me referencing the AI.

Maybe I was taught wrong

Of course practicing it is easy. Every instrument student does that and partial panel is even taught to private students before IFR training. Most pilots do well during practice with an instrument covered and an instructor sitting next to them. But history has shown that when it happens for real, in IMC, with loved ones on board and everything on the line the reaction is different. Plus when attitude instruments and vacuum pumps fail, many times the attitude tumble is gradual and the airplane ends up in an unusual attitude before it is fully identified.

That was exactly the reason for FAA AC 91-75 almost 20 years ago.   https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC91-75.pdf

Soon after reading that circular for the first time I ordered an electric AI with ball to replace my turn coordinator. I had a vacuum pump fail twice and an attitude indicator fail in a previous airplane. (Mooney 231 - all three failures)

In the case of this accident, very likely it was the overreaction after getting into an usual attitude that caused the airframe failure.  Having an additional attitude indicator to compare may have identified the problem earlier. However maybe the NTSB results will show something completely different.

[Jerry 5TJ]

From the CFI’s seat I often feel classic partial panel instrument training isn’t worth the learner’s time.  When their plane’s upgraded panel has 3 or sometimes 4 AI, with several independent power sources, it makes more sense to train for more likely problems than partial panel.  

I have flown many hours in IMC with one mechanical attitude gyro powered by one vacuum pump, but I don’t plan to do so ever again.  

[A64Pilot]

I think often the level of proficiency degrades after training, often the longer past training the worse it gets, unless you fly IMC often without an Autopilot.

I think several are severely autopilot dependent and that an AP failure is an Emergency as opposed to an annoyance.

If this crash was spatial disorientation I’d bet likely as not it had nothing to do with instrumentation, many have rode one into the ground with one form or another of vertigo, but this aircraft was wings level at the time of the crash? Isn’t that unusual for spatial disorientation?

Just have to wait for results

[donkaye]

40 minutes ago, Jerry 5TJ said:

I have flown many hours in IMC with one mechanical attitude gyro powered by one vacuum pump, but I don’t plan to do so ever again.  

I agree and won't teach instruments in actual conditions unless the  plane is equipped with a backup AI.  For the availability and cost nowadays, there's no reason to take the risk of flying needle, ball, and airspeed anymore.

[N201MKTurbo]

26 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

I think often the level of proficiency degrades after training, often the longer past training the worse it gets, unless you fly IMC often without an Autopilot.

I think several are severely autopilot dependent and that an AP failure is an Emergency as opposed to an annoyance.

If this crash was spatial disorientation I’d bet likely as not it had nothing to do with instrumentation, many have rode one into the ground with one form or another of vertigo, but this aircraft was wings level at the time of the crash? Isn’t that unusual for spatial disorientation?

Just have to wait for results

A Rocket owner once asked me to be his safety pilot for some approaches. In the middle of one I pulled the circuit breaker for the autopilot. The plane started falling out of the sky and he just sat there confused poking at the autopilot. He had no idea what to do and took the hood off and recovered visually. It took him about 5 minutes to figure out what happened. He asked me if I pulled the breaker. I said yes. He began to chew me out up one side and down the other. He said he would never let me in his airplane again. I was fine with that, I didn’t want to fly with him either. 
 

The funny thing is, when he sold his plane, the broker hired me to ferry it.

[T. Peterson]

18 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Partial panel isn’t hard at all if you practice it, just take a soap dish, the kind with suction cups and cover it and practice, actually it’s probably good to have a cover for the AI, to cover the thing if it’s bad.

Unusual attitude recovery without an AI can be ugly, but standard rate turns without one can be taught and actually is easy once you get over being so depending on the AI.

If I and every pilot that goes through Ft Rucker can fly a helicopter without an AI, an airplane is easy. My normal level instrument cross check only has me referencing the AI.

Maybe I was taught wrong

You are a much more accomplished pilot than am I because for me PP brings on a cold sweat!

[A64Pilot]

13 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

You are a much more accomplished pilot than am I because for me PP brings on a cold sweat!

It would me too now, but I used to practice it often when I flew IMC a lot, I flew most of it in a Maule with no AP, a Maule isn’t the best instrument bird, the 210 on the other had was an excellent IMC aircraft, a Mooney is somewhere in between.

I no longer fly IMC, wouldn’t do it enough to maintain proficiency.

I believe if we fly IMC we need to be comfortable with partial panel, technology can only be trusted just so far, if your dependent on the AI you might not figure out it’s slowly failing until too late.

But airplanes are easy, they are positively stable in pitch and yaw, and neutral in roll, a helicopter on the other hand is negatively stable in ALL axis, let go of a helicopters controls and very soon it will be out of control. An airplane on the other hand wants to fly and if not interfered with by unusual events or a deliberately incompetent pilot will fly. (Harry Reasoner)

Once you master a helicopter an airplane is easy

[T. Peterson]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

A Rocket owner once asked me to be his safety pilot for some approaches. In the middle of one I pulled the circuit breaker for the autopilot. The plane started falling out of the sky and he just sat there confused poking at the autopilot. He had no idea what to do and took the hood off and recovered visually. It took him about 5 minutes to figure out what happened. He asked me if I pulled the breaker. I said yes. He began to chew me out up one side and down the other. He said he would never let me in his airplane again. I was fine with that, I didn’t want to fly with him either. 
 

The funny thing is, when he sold his plane, the broker hired me to ferry it.

I think you may have taken some liberty there that you should not have, but your point is well taken. We have become way too autopilot dependent.

[Schllc]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

He had no idea what to do

This was the biggest concern I had when I did the Cirrus school. 
it consists of four or five flights and what equates to an IPC. You have an after action review with the instructor after each flight. After every flight his only comments were that I should engage the AP sooner on takeoff and later on approaches.

When we did the approaches under the hood, I kept disconnecting the autopilot, and hand flying because I wasn’t familiar with the format of the g1000 in the cirrus.
When we would land he kept fussing at me for turning off the autopilot. I told him that it was the only way I could prevent over saturation due to the unfamiliarity with the platform. He said that was wrong and I need leave the AP engaged longer and engage it sooner on takeoff. 
I didn’t bother arguing with him, even though I could not think less of that theory. 
I think every pilots backup should be stick and rudder skills, but what do I know …

[N201MKTurbo]

55 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

I think you may have taken some liberty there that you should not have, but your point is well taken. We have become way too autopilot dependent.

For the last 40 years or so, my friend and CFI would do IPCs and safety pilot for each other. We were always screwing with each other trying to get the other one wrapped around the axel. Things were always failing. I have always thought that was a good thing, especially with autopilots and IFR. People always worry about the engine failing, but for a few people I've flown with, the autopilot failing in IMC would lead to almost certain death. IMHO if you can't hand fly IFR, you shouldn't be in the clouds.

I did my ATP check ride in a plane without an autopilot. Well it had one and it worked, but we marked it INOP so I didn't have to demonstrate how to use it. For the same reasons @Schllc stated above.

I usually take my Stratus and IPad on airline flights. You can tell from the lines it draws if the airplane is on autopilot or not. I think about 20% of the legs I watch are hand flown. Use it or lose it.