As a retired airline pilot I can tell you many stories of us sitting on the ramp waiting for the weather to improve only to see these doctor types taking off in their bonanzas thinking they are invincible.
When they don’t even know how to talk on the radio it is pretty apparent. Plus no airline pilot I know takes off into a line of thunderstorms IMC without radar when twenty plus jets waiting for the line to pass.
Oh yeah for sure. “Hard work and determination have enabled me to be a successful individual... therefore I will apply that same hard work and determination to overcome the forces of nature!” Doctors, businessmen, professionals, celebrities... there’s a reason why so many of them meet their end in an airplane after bad decision making. And woe to the pimply faced instructor or seasoned pilot who tries to talk some sense into them or get them to wait it out. They have all the gizmos and a high performance airplane and an important meeting or an important date in another time zone that they simply can’t miss.
@@FarmerTed so because they dont talk on the radio, theyre automatically not pilots? Youre using lack of sny evidence to conclude that they must not be pilot.
Grim Shaw, if you don’t know I can’t help you. They are pilots because they are flying, but that doesn’t make them proficient instrument pilots. If you can’t even communicate with tower or departure control effectively and they (the controller) has to repeat basic commands. If they are stupid enough to fly into weather airlines won’t. Yeah they are making poor decisions! I think my 20000 hrs can deduce that. But hey what do I know.
"Hey, I got my small single engine aircraft pilot license! Want to go for a ride with me?" Is the average person going to say no? Probably not, and why should they? All they know is that they're being offered a plane ride from a "trained, certified" pilot/family member.
@@CGoody564 I was forced to fly in a small single engine aircraft...once. Haven't done it since. Never will again. So this average person will say no every time.
I knew the pilot on one of these episodes. He got his whole family killed over Bakersfield by flying into IFR conditions without an instrument rating..
The button you use is called fly the plane , the second you start to depend on automation is the second you just got into very dangerous territory for your life
@@wojciechmuras553 Probably not if your autopilot has issues. Although one hopes that the autolevel function in the Cirrus has nothing to do with the autopilot, for redundancy.
In these series. One common theme seem to be pilots with more money then experience, getting over their head. The traits emphasized for business success, seem to be the same traits that gets you killed in GA.
The traits emphasized for business success really only work in the business world. The people who succeed most in the business world have realized that those traits don't even work well in business.
@ Ted Exactly. No smart businessman is going to go full speed ahead into something he hasn’t researched or doesn’t have a return. But some people do just that and beat the odds, pat themselves on the back, and think everything in life works that way... until they are dead.
It also seems what makes you a good Dr does not make you a good pilot. Then again it may be as simple as planes are expensive, Dr.s make a lot of money so many Dr.s own planes.
I think successful people get in these situations because it's the same reason they are successful enough to acquire such aircraft. They have a "can do and nothing can stop me attitude" which helped them in business but fails to apply in aircraft. There are some things that truly can't just be tackled head on.
Some individuals have a zoom focus. Until the problem he prioritized was understood by him, the other more important variables escaped him. It's a personality trait many people have, not only successful people.
I'm from Kansas, and I remember when this accident happened. He was a prominent person, and it was all over the news. I wasn't too interested in aviation at the time, so I didn't think much about *why* it happened. Now, watching this video, I'm absolutely astounded that such an inexperienced pilot would pack his family into a plane he was barely familiar with and try to fly them halfway across the country. What were he and his wife thinking?
This is the precise sequence of events that ended with Bonanza pilots pulling off their own tails. Loss of control in IMC, excessive speed, excessive bank angle, breaking out of the cloud, seeing the ground rushing up and....pulling on the yoke. The results were identical. Robin
I've flown a couple PC-12, a series 9, and a series 10. Both pretty old by today's standards. One thing I hated was that they would kick off the autopilot at the slightest bump of turbulence. They could be frustrating machines to fly at times. I suspect the accident pilot either was too distracted to hear the autopilot disconnect tone, or he was unfamiliar with the sound of the tone and didn't recognize it.
This is exactly what happened in my mind. I think the biggest thing that we can all take away from this as if you're in heavy turbulence or if you're in unusual attitude makes slow gentle corrections.
The older PC-12 Autopilot was useless in any kind of turbulence. I always joked it only wanted to fly VFR leaving the IFR flying up to the real pilot. Never understood why Pilatus didn’t address the problem.
As an aviator with 34 plus years and the usual ratings with many different types in my log I can tell you this with some credibility....for those of us that never fly anything other than light singles or twins...transitioning into any different aircraft takes time, patience, and different skills. To make this applicable to the non millionaire owner for instance...going from a certified factory Cessnapipergrumanaireknickeretcetc to a DIFFERENT performance aircraft be it a Wittman Tailwind to a Kit Fox type performer takes preferably a competent check out pilot in the type or something very similar NO MATTER how much experience or time one has. It does not have to be a bird capable of flight levels or 300 knots to bite you. " Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous but to an even greater degree than the land or the sea, is terribly unforgiving of ANY carelessness, incapacity or neglect" ... not my quote. Doran Jaffas
I don't know enough about the information available to determine the crash but my first impression is that isn't there the possibility that the pilot became incapacitated during the IMC flight and the passengers were unsure of what to do? Would explain the autopilot test button press which may have been a passenger who thought that's what he had pressed earlier to enter autopilot. It would explain why there is no radio contact and also why someone tried to pull up the nose only once the aircraft entered VFR conditions and they could see they were going down? I just fail to see how he would have ignored the bank angle, air speed and altitude indicators.
He was in IMC, was not particularly experienced in IMC, was not necessarily even current in IFR (the video doesn't mention that from what I recall but what they do say would imply that he's not) and seemed to believe he had an instrument problem. It may not be that he didn't notice the bank, but that he didn't believe it, which is pretty typical for pilots inexperienced in IMC.
@@ModernClassic that's a really scary thought... like they could have been at 1g the entire time and with no external references.... but still you have multiple artificial horizons which should be running off of independent sensors i think, and its not like he had 0 IMC experience.
Why do you need experience when it has autopilot? Well here's a good example. Too many of these stories. Like this guy. Only flew with autopilot. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-F_wWMPUnNWY.html
@@adamw.8579 The comparison I was thinking was Chevy S-10 to 18-wheeler. A PC-12 is a very high-performance aircraft, but it's also a cargo plane - as witnessed by the huge door in the back you can load pallets into with a forklift.
I don't think its right to call this a "transitioning to other aircraft" scenario. The fact is that the pilot had not really flown for 5 years, and had lost all the sensible habits that one needs to be safe. Such as: Something unexpected happens (AP disengage in this case) FIRST confirm plane is flying steady and boring, THEN try to fix the anomaly. In IMC and something is happening? LOOK at horizon, Airspeed, Altitude. only once you know you are steady, attend to the other stuff. And keep glancing at the horizon, airspeed and altitude!
@Armando Silvier No, it would not. An aircraft in a bank does NOT cause a hanging string to veer off to the side. Nor does it cause your body's balance sensors to feel that you are canted to one side. That is WHY you need to check your instruments so faithfully.
@@flavor12346 HUnnybun..... "Horizon" refers to the INSTRUMENT ON THE CONTROL PANEL!!! Also called attitude indicator. When in IMC and someone tells you to check your altitude, you DON'T look out the window and estimate how far the ground is. When in IMC and someone tells you to check your horizon, you DON'T look out the window and try to figure which part of the white/black nothing out there is ground and which is sky. YOU LOOK AT THE INSTRUMENTS! I *really* hope you are not actually a pilot. ever.
seriously, most of these guys too, you find out they have absolutely ZERO simulator time. As people who love flying, I mean, not this rich guy buy himself anything type, but people who study and can tell you everything about flight put themselves in bad situations, un-survivable situations in simulators THOUSANDS OF TIMES. my mentor was an aerobatics coach for 30 years, after being an air guard reserve men and a commercial pilot. You always pursue what scares you, start everyday with a flame out or an electrical fire in bad icing in IFR. simulate everything you can so that when it comes to it, you can lean on those experiences. simulators are high fidelity for a reason, they work for training certifications for a reason. In this day and age it is almost unthinkable that someone would forego that tool and not build their skills everyday. I fly at least 10 hours a day everyday in "near to life" simulators for training. I post games and mil spec but train in the real stuff. You can literally spend your entire day in a cesna in one of the most expensive and crowded airspaces in the world for about 60.00 dollars one time. To me, flight is a huge responsibility. I wouldn't even trust myself to go up cold, let alone, wantonly skirting my better judgement.
Cruise altitude is sometimes viewed as a non critical phase of flight which is a total misconception as real dangers can occur. There is a great peril when you upset the balanced aerodynamic forces that occur at cruise and the lack of density in the air complicated recovery. Most flight training is done in controlled environments at low to medium altitudes and training dictates prompt recovery as a standard. however in situations like this, the centrifugal and other forces of upset plus distractions like reaction of passengers [ wife, children ] can complicate the focus required. Efficiency occurs when an aircraft operates close to its service ceiling but in the region, vigilance is important. Don't kick back in the cockpit at cruise altitude, it may be fatal. Always adequately supervise your aircraft.
it had to be spatial disorientation without him even realizing it, but once he could feel the massive g forces starting to build, maybe he put 2 and 2 together...
But they seldom do. Case in point: The overwhelming majority of automobile drivers think that their skills are "above average" - a statistical impossibility.
I got a student pilot that complaints about how slow and uncool learning to fly in the C172. He brags about how much money he makes and how important time is to him. He is buying the PC12 with a business partner and plans to use it for business travel. I dropped him at lesson 2. Professionals that treat aviation merely as a mean to an end often end up badly. Their egos will be their undoing.
I was discussing buying a plane when I was a student. Budget had ne looking at things like 172s and Cherokees. I mentioned a Mooney might be possible to an instructor. He advised against it to start, referring it and other higher performance planes as doctor killers. People with more money than experience can get in over their heads easily.
Should have bought an Edge 540 And if you weren't born with the dream to fly / Don't. Everytime some small business owner or doctor gets an airplane to make things easier, it doesn't end well.
That statement is BS. Many crashes happen to doctors or business owners because they use the aircraft as a mode of transportation, not as a toy. Statistics need to be understood to not jump to wrong conclusions. Flying is mainly a necessity like driving a car and has generally little to do with the "dream of flying". The sky is not reserved for wannabe Mavericks or Sullys only.
OMG. This happened to me, almost with fatal consequences. I reached my first solo flight training on one Cessna 172. That plane had detents for each flap setting. The first click down was 10 degrees. The switch stayed in that detent until you wanted more flaps at which point you went to the next detent. My second solo they gave me a different Cessna 172. Unbeknownst to me, that 172 had a flap switch like the one that was responsible for this accident. Once you put it in the down position the flaps ran out to 40 degrees unless you returned the switch to its original position. I'm getting ready to turn base. This is my second solo flight. As trained I push the flaps button down one setting. I'm now turning base and the plane violently pitches into a nose up attitude and my speed dropped precipitously. As I was in the circuit turning base I was "low and slow". Thankfully the first 20 hours of training was so effective that I reflexively pushed the nose down and added a ton of power trying to figure out what was going on. The plane stabilized and I landed still not knowing I was at flaps 40. This really scared me. If I had done what it looks like a number of other pilots have done in that situation, pulled the nose up further to stop losing precious altitude, I have no doubt I would have gone down in a stall spin crash just outside the airport. It really scared me. I flew a couple more times, but decided being a pilot was not for me.
JFK made a very similar error in judgement, stepping up from mostly 172 time to a Piper Saratoga and turning down help from another pilot who offered to fly with him.
I’m a student pilot, when they got to the part where the pilot realized that he was diving my training was yelling DUMP the throttle get slow! I’m definitely going to take this story into account whenever I have a long absence in my flying. Skills deteriorate, extra diligence is of the upmost importance. It may be good to review emergency situations for 10 hours flying time at least before taking on passengers again for long flights.
I don't know if it's easy to dump the throttle and get slow in that beast at that airspeed and altitude. You can do that in a small Cessna, sure, but this airplane will break through Vne in a vertical dive very quickly, and there's no much you can do once it's developed I'm afraid. I'm not a jet pilots, and I know large commercial airliners can do it, but I imagine a precise and immediate reaction is needed, you can't wait 40 seconds and do nothing.
@alk672 I've flown in a Pilatus PC 12. Once you reduce the throttle to idle, the prop produces a good amount of drag. You also don't want to be producing any thrust in recovering from this unusual attitude because it prolongs the recovery and risks overspeeding the airframe.
Aviate (or simply put fly the bloody airplane) Navigate (Am I close to mountains, or other high structures I could potentially collide with) Communicate (Let ATC know you have an issue) This applies whether you are flying a Cessna 125 or a Boeing 777
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, in that order. Along with taking advice from more experienced pilots and being current, proficient and confident in the aircraft type.
Such a sad story, but necessary one to be told. If I've learned anything from these air disaster vids it would be to never rely too heavily on avionics.
It’s not just about transitioning, but in this case his lack of recent aviation experience done him in. And apparently way over his head (and his skills)!
From the NTSB report N950KA - "The NTSB Performance Study indicates that the maximum positive load factor of 4.6 occurred at 1234:08, while the NTSB Electronic Device Factual Report indicates that the maximum recorded airspeed value of 338 knots recorded by the EIS occurred at 1234:14. The next recoded airspeed value 1 second later was noted to be zero. Simultaneous to the zero airspeed a near level altitude of 15,292 feet was noted." "The separated section of right wing impacted and breached the fuselage, causing one passenger to be ejected from the airplane."
There was a shockingly similar crash more recently near Reno NV. Same aircraft model, same IMC conditions, same increasing bank angle, and same circular descent to ground.
As so many have said fly the aircrat. Any time the AP starts banking you in trouble. The AP has disconnect or the in put data is wrong like switching from GPS or VOR or Heading bug First step disconnect the A P and then hand fly the aircraft At times it's hard to give at vice but for new pilots never rush take your time and wlatch some of those aircraft aftermath reports It may just save your life and if you new and can afford it for the first year of flying try to do one night of touch & go's per week It will help
I think you made a great point about a pilot who doesn't have a great handle on the aircraft compensating with the autopilot. It's a temptation a lot of us could have. And then when the automation goes wrong in IMC, a bit of panic sets in and the focus goes totally to trying to get it back. Meanwhile, the plane attitude changes go completely unnoticed due to the IMC, and splat! A dead family. I've actually thought about that quite a lot as I have contemplated getting into a higher performance platform. It occurred to me that I might rely too much on autopilot before the skill set is completely there. I know I'd be tempted to take the easier route - that's why this video hit home with me. Good cautionary tale. Thanks for the video! I'll be thinking even harder now....
Given the 'rusty instrument rated pilot' failed to notice his turn and altitude indicator and the extreme bank and loss of altitude, basic instrument flying was not performed. The first problem was not getting currency instrument training. The pilot would also have been smarter to fly in good weather for at least 100 hours (possibly no real destination, just practice) to get cockpit management down pat before trying to use the aircraft on an actually flight that may have included IMC..
The airlines went through a phase of automation accidents when the planes started following lines on a screen programmed through flight computers. Something unexpected would happen, and the pilot would start pawing at the autopilot or typing into the FMC, leaving the airplane to continue on it's merry way into some serious Chuck Yeager attitudes than an MD-80 has no right to be in. They called these pilots "children of the magenta line" and reorganized their training to stop it. Broadly speaking, they were very successful. Pilots of respectable airlines are now trained to respond to automation anomalies by turning the automation off and flying the airplane, THEN troubleshooting the issue only once everything is under control and stable. If that means hand flying it all the way to the numbers like a DC-3 while the PNF holds the suicidal trim wheel in a death grip, you do that. Anything but being a front-seat passenger.
I don't get it. It's just around average of 60 hours flying to get your PPL and flying solo or with family/friends. He had 750 hours of experience. How much hours would be appropriate? From my understanding, he just didn't had enough experience in IMC and didn't maintain hes flying skills. Probably was overconfident?
because he went to a company like flightsafety and got a checkout which is to the same level that corporate and other professional pilots must accomplish for their insurance companies
I remember this on the local news. Sadly as one of the wings folded in, it ripped a hole in the side of the fuselage and one of his kids was sucked out of the aircraft.
The problem with what the pilot did wasn't that he started to troubleshoot the autopilot before he flew the airplane. The problem was that he wasn't even watching the flight instruments at all. He probably didn't realize the airplane was even in a bank at all at the time the AP disconnected, otherwise he would definitely handfly first to either level the wings or establish the heading that the autopilot was turning to. He thought the wings were level without looking at the instruments. It's difficult to imagine flying in IMC without scanning the panel, but there is no other explanation for what happened. The pilot was so reliant on automation he wasn't even looking; it's an equivalent of trusting your Tesla autopilot so much that you're watching a video while driving instead of looking out the window of your car. Generally speaking, the number of accidents in light jets where the pilot crashes the moment the autopilot disconnects in IMC for the first time ever is truly alarming. I don't know if a private pilot who only flies occasionally can ever be truly ready to fly at 300 knots in IMC, I really don't.
From the ntsb accident report: During the right descending turn, while about 15,511 feet and 338 knots (about 175 knots above maximum operating maneuvering speed), the pilot likely applied either abrupt or full aft elevator control input, resulting in overstress fracture of both wings in a positive direction. The separated section of right wing impacted and breached the fuselage, causing one passenger to be ejected from the airplane. Following the in-flight break-up, the airplane descended uncontrolled into an open field.
So he was pretty much headed straight (very steeply) down when he pulled back on the yolk. Besides just being gentle about the yolk pull, what else should he have done to get out of the situation? ClayZ is not a pilot and he wonders.
Question for anyone out there. I've never flown an airplane in my life and have no intentions of ever doing it, but these videos are endlessly interesting to me so I watch a ton. Any questions from me, a guy who knows nothing: Does anyone know why this plane crashed. Why would he disable autopilot or was it disabled some other way? How could the bank angle get so steep without the pilot noticing? Seems obvious to someone like me but I've never flown an airplane before nor do I intend to. What purpose, if any, would it serve to test the autopilot before attempting to recover from the steep angle? Lastly, would this steep decent have been recoverable had he not applied the full aft elevator input? Could he have saved the flight had he eased into it or was it already too late? Thanks again.
Here are likely answers: 1) pilot prolly turned off autopilot because his inner ear and other senses were screaming at him that he was straight and level… the general term is ‘vestibular illusion’, and is deadly deadly deadly in imc when pilots doubt their instruments. 2) if you can’t see the horizon or another fixed reference point, it is nearly impossible to know your orientation in space; human inner ear not evolved for 3 dimensions. 3) to recover from the dive, he should have a) reduced power b) leveled wings c) graaadddduuuualllllyyy pulled back on yoke
So in this accident, what happened when he pulled back on the yoke? I wish you would explain more why his actions caused the plane to crash and what to do to avoid this from happening. Was he upside down when he pulled back?
+US MC at minute 2:53 the narrator states that the airplane's airspeed was about double the maneuvering speed of the aircraft. If an airplane is above its maneuvering speed, any abrupt changes in flight controls will cause structural damage to the airframe. In this case, the pilot should have decreased engine power to idle, and slowly pulled up from the nosedive, to make sure he doesn't put excess load on the airframe.
Yes, and even in cases where the airplane has survived the pull-out from the dive structurally, the pilot's structure may not do so well as the G-force exerted can result in a loss of consciousness. Sometimes that may only last for seconds, but there may not be any seconds to spare in that circumstance. This is more typical in smaller but heavily-built aircraft like aerobatic or fighter types, the latter providing pressurized support to the pilot under this stress to avoid blood pooling in the extremities away from the brain. I seem to recall a case from many years ago of a high-performance, low-wing single being pulled out of a dive producing an estimated 7+ G's, the pilot went out cold, but was somehow still flying when he regained consciousness and he managed to land safely. The airplane, however, had a considerably increased dihedral and many of its wing rivets were popped--probably written off.
Just to supplement your answer, even experienced aerobatic pilots have been known to put themselves to sleep by pulling a little two hard. (Some manoeuvres are known as "sleepers" because of that.) I know of at least two probable cases. Even so, if you snap the wings off, as this case appears to have done, you might as well be asleep at impact. (No sense in dying scared.)
Mohammed Altuwairgi I believe that rolling wings level then pulling out gently would be the best course of action. Pulling back on a banked aircraft just increases the G forces without changing the decent. Agreed about putting the throttle to idle though.
Not common enough. The rich live in luxury while the rest of us practically live in a third world nation, devoid of healthcare, buried in student loans, and without any hope for retirement. The rich should all buy high performance aircraft and take their families on trips daily. It'll give the rest of us cause for celebration.
The problem with the Carenado PC12 is that it is a mk1 or legacy of which very few still fly, I wish they would have offered the NG or NGX. We manage a small fleet of PC12s it is my all time favourite type, it breaks my heart to see one go in for any reason.
Stephen Black of course. Every pilot knows this. But when you’re in the cockpit, in imc, and suddenly see yourself banked 100 degrees over diving towards the ground, your immediate reaction may not be to do the logical thing. Be careful, don’t fall into the trap of thinking that you’re immune to making the same bad decisions as other pilots.. cheers
Maybe icing did happen to this aircraft and ailerons started reacting to that icing and that caused the roll. The AP couldn't correct the severe banking and disconnected. Instead of correcting the attitude manually, this pilot chose to troubleshoot the AP. This tells you something: The pilot was not comfortable hand flying this aircraft and wanted the AP to do the flying for him. By the time he realized the AP is not going to come back online, he finally took control and did the worst thing he could've done, that is to pull back hard on the yoke, stalling and the inevitable spinning of the aircraft.
That this pilot refused to take an experienced pilot for at least 20 or more hours demonstrates the problem of the "V-tailed Doctor Killer", the Bonanza. For a period of time, the Bonanza was the plane of choice of busy, successful people who could afford the best airplane. These people were used to being in charge and not taking "no" for an answer. So they would take their new Bonanza into conditions that even a more experienced pilot would shy away from. I saw this at my home airport when a doctor with his family flew into a small, unlit airport airport at night and crashed, killing them all. Of course, it had nothing to do with the pilots being doctor or that the aircraft was a Bonanza. They were just rich and arrogant people thinking they could do anything better than other people. We still have a similar problem but they are no long usually doctors and there are many more advanced aircraft to choose from. There are thousands of business owners and IT professionals making tons of money and buying the fastest, hottest airplanes available. The pilot in this video chose the Pilatus, a very fine airplane but it was above his ability. Simulator training is good but for an inexperienced pilot, it isn't enough. If you can't afford proper training and a second pilot if it is a night or weather trip for 20-100 hours or so when stepping up in aircraft, or when your proficiency is waning, you can't afford the aircraft.
the first and last step is always "fly the aircraft" during an Emergency procedure. seems like this pilot only tried to diagnose and ignored instruments until it was to late. hindsight is 20/20 but proper instruction and understanding of EPs is always an importance
Every other case study involves the death of an entire family-father, mother, children. Sometimes even the family dog. God, this is depressing. What would it be like, watching the terrain fill the windshield, to know you are taking your family with you? That horrific realization, at least, wouldn’t last very long.
He probably was joining the mile high club with the other half on board. Once he realized a/p disengaged he tried to press the AP bottom again, but his fingers missed it and pressed the nearby Test bottom. The rest is history.
Actually, it's far better than the CSB reports. Those certainly are valuable, but the information in these videos is not only pertinent to general aviation, it's valuable to other activities. For example, I analyze paddling close calls and fatalities and also wilderness travel incidents. There are many common threads - often called heuristic traps - that span all of these activities. Complacency, for example, and hubris, and failure to back off the plan when circumstances change. AOPA sets a very high bar, and as a safety guy, I find their reports inspirational. I'm not a pilot, yet here I am, watching and learning.
I watched the eye witness video of this plane going down, it was terrible. This guy is worried about auto pilot instead of just hand flying it and worrying about the auto pilot later. One of the boys was actually ejected from the airplane during the break up sequence and found 1/4 mile to 1/2 mile away from the crash scene.
Ronald (pilot, 45) and Rebecca Bramlage (43) were killed in a plane crash in Polk County along with their children, Brandon, 15, Boston, 13, Beau, 11, and Roxanne, 8. Kansas State University's basketball arena is named after Ronald Bramlage's grandfather, and Rebecca Bramlage was the president of the Junction City Board of Education. - Kathryn's Report.
This happened to a friend of mine.....transitioned from a single eng 210 to twin eng Aerostar....killed himself and two others.....he owned the a/c a week.....and had just received his multi certification.....
i would like to learn something from this, he said the worst thing to do was to pull up. what is the best thing to do then? I'm sure put the engines in idle but what else, landing gear down or what?
I'm wondering how come NTSB was able to determine from FDR data which buttons the pilot pressed on the autopilot and when, but somehow the autopilot didn't record the reason for disconnect. That's... suspicious.
Crash almost looks survivable. I imagine the impact G's were not... wonder how many he pulled on impact? I really enjoy these videos even though I've never flown. Thank you.
Mike Kelley, you're exactly right. BUT think about this: he didn't even need a "Crackerjack Pilot." He just needed an extra set of eyes, and ears, and hands, and mouth for backup. At his level of experience (because of lack of flying and training), he could not have been completely comfortable in performing all duties solo. He needed a safety pilot but had the ill-fated mindset that he didn't need to heed to the advice of the older, wiser pilot. Instead of paying big bucks for a TopGun, if you're instrument rated and at least current, then you or I could have easily and competently fulfilled that task. He knew the basics of the flight management systems. We could keep the aircraft straight and level, monitor ATC, track a course, avoid weather. Piece of cake. But no, he wants to do it all himself. When the problem arose, it took over the entire mission into one killer distraction. He took his eyes off the attitude indicator. He apparently stopped scanning, as must be done. It only takes a few seconds to end up in an unusual attitude. Why? Probably fooling around with all of those million dollar avionics, or trying to read the Pilot Operating Handbook to figure out why the priceless indispensable autopilot shut itself off. If he had been flying like he was taught, with his hand on the yoke, it might have been different. Conclusion: very poor judgment, poor performance, lack of being willing to accept help, very sad indeed.
I have long thought that the same confidence and even arrogance that leads people to do well in professions on the ground can doom them in the air. It's always such a shame when they take their families with them when they crash.
I would look up the ethics on undercutting qualified pilots. It is very frowned upon to offer your piloting services for less than the going rate. Because then all it does is bring wages down for the rest of us. Pay your dues, get qualified, then get paid your worth. Wages are finally going up because of this. Also never, ever, ever take a flying job for free. That is the worst black X you can get on your resume if you have hopes of becoming a professional pilot.
I hope that TEST button requires holding down for seconds instead of instantly testing. With a 25 degree bank it figures he manually turned kicking off the autopilot. Then wanting autopilot back possibly he went to press for a HALF BANK standard for IFR which could make autopilot unavailable for awhile confusing matters.
I'm not a pilot, I just think it's an interesting topic and want to learn. But theres one thing I can't understand. In these videos, every guy that gets in over his head stepping up to a more powerful aircraft ALWAYS has like 11 children with him when it crashes....
Non pilot here. What was the best course of action once the plane was so fast and flying straight down? Did the airframe/wings break when he pulled back? Im just guessing but maybe reduce to idle and slowly level? Or was he in an un-winnable situation because of excess speed?
The ink on my PPL is still wet. But my training for a nose down attitude is to power to idle, level the wings, then begin to pull back on the yoke. Pulling all the way back first could put you in a death spiral. Put your phone in a nose down and tilted attitude. Now just pull the nose up inline with the screen. That's not going to be good. Your going to lose lift (stall) and spiral. Now try again, but first flatten the phone, then pull the nose up. You will get even lift on both wings. Also, pulling all the way back at that airspeed (double the maneuvering speed) will cause structural damage. Maneuvering speed is the max airspeed in which flight controls can be fully deflected without risk of damage. Within maneuvering speed, the plane will stall before being damaged. Both of these dangers combined is what the narrator meant by "predictable outcome." (Or whatever the exact term he used.)
It is all too common for pilots of the new fangled "automated wonders" to try to get the Computer to again fly the aircraft rather then hand flying it through what ever rough spot you've put yourself in! I can hear my old Instructor now; "FLY THE DAMN PLANE"!!!!!
So he pulled up when the plane was to fast and that caused the elevator to break or something? What would the correct course of action be if someone knows
Disclaimer: I’m not a pilot, but have binge-watched these accident case studies. :0. I think he should have pulled the throttles all the way back to slow the plane, leveled the wings, and then as gradually as possible, pulled back the yoke.
@@randomschmo5778 depends on the airspeed ,bank angle and abruptness at the point where he started to recover with the controls . He may have passed the ‘ point of no return ‘ already---no-one can say . As you can see the wings were still with the wreckage albeit damaged a bit , but the empennage [ tail plane ] was gone . This is why the NTSB knew it was pulled off when too much back yoke was applied by the pilot . Once the tail was gone the aircraft would tumble head over heels but the really heavy forces on the wings would be reduced somewhat , not enough to damage both though . Apart from that ,though ,your sequence of actions would be what was necessary to recover . Too many pilots pull back before leveling the wings and it’s this that finishes them with the tail gone .
The wonderment is how individuals can purchase really costly aircraft. Is it old family money, inheritance or parents funding it. It would be interesting to know!
Pulling sharply out of a high speed dive in a regular plane crumples it like a tin can. What is the correct action? Drop the throttle, level the wings, and gently add small back pressure? Just curious how to prevent damage.
@@mursie100 The wings will level themselves. An airplane naturally wants to fly straight and level because of center of gravity. You turn the yoke to level the wings. Pull or push to climb or dive.
One more irony to the Platus aircraft, only months before it happened over New York a family of four and a family friend were also killed minutes after take off from Teterboro airport flying into rime icing conditions, the aircraft was equipped for it however the right separated from this Pilatus aircraft a splashed across a multi-line highway killing all on board...
Can someone explain the physics please of how pulling back when going too fast will snap the wings please. Like it makes sense but i don't necessarily understand it super well
There’s a limit to what any airframe can withstand. Pulling back when going TWICE the rated speed is like a rocket trying to make a sharp turn, or a driver on the interstate cranking the wheel.
I don't see why this was possible. Unless the aircraft is broken, pretty much anyone can be taught in minutes to keep the plane level on the instruments. You keep the wing tips on the lines, the ball in the middle, and the altitude indicator from moving. As long as that's the case, it'll fly until it's out of fuel.
RonALD Bramlage, 45, flew the plane and died along with his wife becky, age 43, and their 4 kids. the oldest of which was 15. he sadly ended up killing his family because of his lack of knowledge of the aircraft and its systems. Money can buy you awesome things, but just because you can buy them does not mean you are ready to own and fly them. The true story is that he barely passed his checkout in the aircraft. Hence the reason he needed more lessons during the training. He was not ready to fly IFR at those speeds and altitudes afforded to him by the palatus. I mean who performs an Autopilot systems check as your aircraft enters an unusual attitude. The abrupt G load following the pull back on the controls severed the wing tip which then breached the cabin causing one of his children to be sucked out of the aircraft at 11,000 ft. The rest of them died on impact. A creepy note to this story is that the aircraft was previously owned by a law firm. The same firm that Defended Casey Anthony. And after the child killer was acquitted this is the aircraft that was used to take her into hiding.
It doesn't seem to have been made perfectly clear.. did the wings get overloaded and fail? Maybe that's an odd question idk. There may be be a high tech (or even low tech) way to limit control input at high speed, idk. Seems you'd really only need control limits on the elevator. I can't think of what else could be meant by 'double the aircraft's maneuvering speed at that altitude'. Frankly I didn't know there was such a thing as a maximum maneuvering speed, just too large of elevator inputs at high speeds. Am I missing something?
It seem this this plane could use a bit more dihedral effect or an adjustment to the vertical stabilizer surfaces, reduce the power-on spiral divergence.
