ATC at Fault in Pan Am Seminole Crash
- Thread starter aloft
- Start date
I thought one of the pilots was a CFI from PanAm. Wouldn't the CFI be already be instrument rated. I lookde through some of hte other ntsb reports and could not find any that said instrument rated private pilots, but maybe I missed them. Another thing is when I am doing practice approaches with a safety pilot I do have an IFR squawk in my transponder, so would that not be considered an IFR flight plan? Just questions bouncing around in my head.
[ QUOTE ]
...Another thing is when I am doing practice approaches with a safety pilot I do have an IFR squawk in my transponder, so would that not be considered an IFR flight plan? Just questions bouncing around in my head.
[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you specifically request an IFR clearance you are probably just squawking a discrete code for identification purposes only. You're still VFR, doing practice instrument approaches.
...Another thing is when I am doing practice approaches with a safety pilot I do have an IFR squawk in my transponder, so would that not be considered an IFR flight plan? Just questions bouncing around in my head.
[/ QUOTE ]
Unless you specifically request an IFR clearance you are probably just squawking a discrete code for identification purposes only. You're still VFR, doing practice instrument approaches.
[ QUOTE ]
The reason I asked the question is on my initial call up to ground it would be:
FCM ground,Cessna 5088q at Tbird w/B requesting an IFR clearance for practice approaches starting with the XXXXXX.
Maybe I'm mixing words, just wondering how ATC views it.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you ask for it that way ("requesting an IFR clearance") and ATC responds with something like "Cessna 5088Q is cleared to FCM via radar vectors blah blah blah", then you're on an IFR flight plan. Magic words are "ATC clears" with a destination or clearance fix, altitude, etc.
You might want to consider not actually asking for an IFR clearance if the weather is good enough to do your approach work in VMC. If you're actually on an IFR plan, then all the standard seperation requirements come into play for ATC. If you're VFR flying practice approaches ATC can be more creative at fitting you into the flow. Really, though, a lot of it depends on the traffic and ATC workload at your particular location.
Your mileage may vary.
The reason I asked the question is on my initial call up to ground it would be:
FCM ground,Cessna 5088q at Tbird w/B requesting an IFR clearance for practice approaches starting with the XXXXXX.
Maybe I'm mixing words, just wondering how ATC views it.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you ask for it that way ("requesting an IFR clearance") and ATC responds with something like "Cessna 5088Q is cleared to FCM via radar vectors blah blah blah", then you're on an IFR flight plan. Magic words are "ATC clears" with a destination or clearance fix, altitude, etc.
You might want to consider not actually asking for an IFR clearance if the weather is good enough to do your approach work in VMC. If you're actually on an IFR plan, then all the standard seperation requirements come into play for ATC. If you're VFR flying practice approaches ATC can be more creative at fitting you into the flow. Really, though, a lot of it depends on the traffic and ATC workload at your particular location.
Your mileage may vary.
Maximilian_Jenius
Super User
Dunno bout anyone else on this board but I live like 10 mins. from DVT.
Didn't know anyone involved in the accident but still totally scares the sh*t outa me.
Cause I'm soon to resume my IFR flight training here ina few weeks.
Everyone knows the risk involved with flying planes but still kinda shakes you up to hear that people are fatally injured while aspiring toward there dream.
More especially if you live like 10 mins. away from the flight training academy where the individuals trained.
Matthew
Didn't know anyone involved in the accident but still totally scares the sh*t outa me.
Cause I'm soon to resume my IFR flight training here ina few weeks.
Everyone knows the risk involved with flying planes but still kinda shakes you up to hear that people are fatally injured while aspiring toward there dream.
More especially if you live like 10 mins. away from the flight training academy where the individuals trained.
Matthew
Lima_Charlie
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
I heard that the ATC accidentally gave the call sign of a regional airliner. People from other parts of the country are also very unfamiliar with the terrain just east of San Diego - it's very high.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am Pan Am'er and here is what I know. There were 2 Pan Am aircraft w/ similar call signs. 304PA, the one that crashed, took a descent clearance that was inteneded for another '4PA. Somehow the 2 Private ME Instrument rated pilots descended into the mountain. From the pictures I have seen, it doesn't look like they "pulled up" for any length of time. From what I have heard, the sky was severe clear. The pilot at the controls, "usually" is wearing the Foggles, and the right seat is the Safety pilot. Niether pilot is a CFI. The flight was filed IFR to give the 2 Private pilots IFR experience.
Unfortunately, this incident paints an ugly picture about what can happen when you lose positional awareness.
I heard that the ATC accidentally gave the call sign of a regional airliner. People from other parts of the country are also very unfamiliar with the terrain just east of San Diego - it's very high.
[/ QUOTE ]
I am Pan Am'er and here is what I know. There were 2 Pan Am aircraft w/ similar call signs. 304PA, the one that crashed, took a descent clearance that was inteneded for another '4PA. Somehow the 2 Private ME Instrument rated pilots descended into the mountain. From the pictures I have seen, it doesn't look like they "pulled up" for any length of time. From what I have heard, the sky was severe clear. The pilot at the controls, "usually" is wearing the Foggles, and the right seat is the Safety pilot. Niether pilot is a CFI. The flight was filed IFR to give the 2 Private pilots IFR experience.
Unfortunately, this incident paints an ugly picture about what can happen when you lose positional awareness.
Maximilian_Jenius
Super User
Why would one be under foggles at night?
Wouldn't darkness be the same as simulated instrument?
Lastly if this is reg. practice for IFR training then know that I haven't gotten that far in my training.
Matthew
Wouldn't darkness be the same as simulated instrument?
Lastly if this is reg. practice for IFR training then know that I haven't gotten that far in my training.
Matthew
Mavmb
Well-Known Member
Well ATC was at fault, but so were the pilots. There were two Pan Am aircraft with the tail numbers both ending in 4PA. They were following each other. The wrong Papa Alpa responded to the call to descend while the other one kept going. It seemed to be a very confusing situation.
There were no instructors on board just private multi students. The whole story is discussed in the Pan Am thread here, "hopefully not one of yours." Condolences to the families.
There were no instructors on board just private multi students. The whole story is discussed in the Pan Am thread here, "hopefully not one of yours." Condolences to the families.
I_Money
Moderator
I remember speaking to one of the CFIs about getting the flight school to have a call sign for airport presence, much like UAL, AA does. He said that student pilots have enough to worry about just using the radio, let alone every callsign sounding the same - he said once you fly for the airlines then you are ready to handle that.
[ QUOTE ]
Well ATC was at fault, but so were the pilots. There were two Pan Am aircraft with the tail numbers both ending in 4PA. They were following each other. The wrong Papa Alpa responded to the call to descend while the other one kept going. It seemed to be a very confusing situation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let's keep in mind all about what Lima Charlie commented on. "Loss of positional awareness." It doesn't matter whether you're IFR, VFR, IMC, VMC, it is the crew/PICs job and responsibility to know what's under them terrain/elevation-wise at ALL times. Period. Know where you are and what's under you, whether you're on-airway or off-airway. It can be done either way. The pilots flew the aircraft into the terrain, CFIT. The way I see it, ATC may have been contributory to the accident, but the pilots ultimately have the responsibility to know what's under them, and what clearance they can accept or not accept (especially with similiar callsigns around). There was an incident in 1972 at Williams AFB. A T-38 solo pilot was working the night radar pattern, VMC. Coming off a low approach for the 30C ILS, PHX TRACON gave the T-38 a right turn to 030 with a climb to 3000'. TRACON was busy with traffic into PHX, and the controller forgot about the T-38. The T-38 impacted the 3312' west face of the western edge of the Superstition Mountains. Yes, ATC forgot about the T-38, but in VMC, even night VMC, the pilot should've known what terrain was in front of him, and should've queried ATC accordingly, or noting his DME from the field, climbed accordingly and squawked emergency, if unable to get a call off in time, or if the freq was busy.
The wreckage still rests on the west face of the Superstitions, and can be seen both from the air, and from the ground in Apache Junction when the afternoon sun is just right.
Well ATC was at fault, but so were the pilots. There were two Pan Am aircraft with the tail numbers both ending in 4PA. They were following each other. The wrong Papa Alpa responded to the call to descend while the other one kept going. It seemed to be a very confusing situation.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let's keep in mind all about what Lima Charlie commented on. "Loss of positional awareness." It doesn't matter whether you're IFR, VFR, IMC, VMC, it is the crew/PICs job and responsibility to know what's under them terrain/elevation-wise at ALL times. Period. Know where you are and what's under you, whether you're on-airway or off-airway. It can be done either way. The pilots flew the aircraft into the terrain, CFIT. The way I see it, ATC may have been contributory to the accident, but the pilots ultimately have the responsibility to know what's under them, and what clearance they can accept or not accept (especially with similiar callsigns around). There was an incident in 1972 at Williams AFB. A T-38 solo pilot was working the night radar pattern, VMC. Coming off a low approach for the 30C ILS, PHX TRACON gave the T-38 a right turn to 030 with a climb to 3000'. TRACON was busy with traffic into PHX, and the controller forgot about the T-38. The T-38 impacted the 3312' west face of the western edge of the Superstition Mountains. Yes, ATC forgot about the T-38, but in VMC, even night VMC, the pilot should've known what terrain was in front of him, and should've queried ATC accordingly, or noting his DME from the field, climbed accordingly and squawked emergency, if unable to get a call off in time, or if the freq was busy.
The wreckage still rests on the west face of the Superstitions, and can be seen both from the air, and from the ground in Apache Junction when the afternoon sun is just right.
RiddlePilot
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
They didn't descend into the marine layer at 5500 feet, and not over a ridge. Nevermind the fact that the report says VMC prevailed. And while MEA and MOCA may not tell you, MORA certainly will. With the limited information available, I come up with the following plausible situation. One pilot is under the hood, and the other is watching the PF's scan. Neither is looking outside throughout the descent. Bang. Sad on all fronts. Avoidable, yes. Something from which to learn.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh, descending into marine layer is still quite plausible, though. The accident report is kind of vague, considering that the layer is usually pretty dang thick this time of year. But I digress.
The most probable reason they didn't see it is the darkness. Let's let the NTSB do their work though.
They didn't descend into the marine layer at 5500 feet, and not over a ridge. Nevermind the fact that the report says VMC prevailed. And while MEA and MOCA may not tell you, MORA certainly will. With the limited information available, I come up with the following plausible situation. One pilot is under the hood, and the other is watching the PF's scan. Neither is looking outside throughout the descent. Bang. Sad on all fronts. Avoidable, yes. Something from which to learn.
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh, descending into marine layer is still quite plausible, though. The accident report is kind of vague, considering that the layer is usually pretty dang thick this time of year. But I digress.
The most probable reason they didn't see it is the darkness. Let's let the NTSB do their work though.
Grabo172
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
And while MEA and MOCA may not tell you, MORA certainly will.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly... the PILOT should have known the MORA and followed it. It guarentees 1000 ft of clearance... and the PILOT should never accept a clearance that would put the safety of the flight in question...
Controllers aren't perfect, and niether are pilots. Usually one will catch the other's mistake, but when both fail, this is what happens...
just my opinion.
And while MEA and MOCA may not tell you, MORA certainly will.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly... the PILOT should have known the MORA and followed it. It guarentees 1000 ft of clearance... and the PILOT should never accept a clearance that would put the safety of the flight in question...
Controllers aren't perfect, and niether are pilots. Usually one will catch the other's mistake, but when both fail, this is what happens...
just my opinion.
TallBoy85
Well-Known Member
Actually MORA is a total grid box where most MEAs inside the latitude/longitude box are lower that the MORA, OROCA, or Gride MORA if that's what we're talking about. However if you fly to Vegas which is really surrounded by mountains, then the controller will issue altitudes at the MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitudes). Pilots may query ATC at any time to ask what the MVA is for their sector. Just remember the MVA sectors are tiny compared to the MORAs.
I hope we can all really learn a lesson from the tragedy. Our safety and our decisions to be made in the cockpit are ultimately ours only.
Everyone be safe out there.
I hope we can all really learn a lesson from the tragedy. Our safety and our decisions to be made in the cockpit are ultimately ours only.
Everyone be safe out there.
Mr_Creepy
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
The pilot at the controls, "usually" is wearing the Foggles, and the right seat is the Safety pilot. Niether pilot is a CFI. The flight was filed IFR to give the 2 Private pilots IFR experience.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm way off base, but the way I read the regs is that the PIC must be instrument rated in order to file IFR.
Wouldn't they say two private, instrument rated pilots if that's what they meant?
The pilot at the controls, "usually" is wearing the Foggles, and the right seat is the Safety pilot. Niether pilot is a CFI. The flight was filed IFR to give the 2 Private pilots IFR experience.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm way off base, but the way I read the regs is that the PIC must be instrument rated in order to file IFR.
Wouldn't they say two private, instrument rated pilots if that's what they meant?
ready2fly
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm way off base, but the way I read the regs is that the PIC must be instrument rated in order to file IFR.
[/ QUOTE ]
JT, perhaps you missed this part of his post:
[ QUOTE ]
Somehow the 2 Private ME Instrument rated pilots descended into the mountain.
[/ QUOTE ]
According to that, they were BOTH instrument rated and were merely practicing approaches.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Agreed with all who say that the PIC should have been aware of what was under them.
Either way - sad for all involved.
R2F
Maybe I'm way off base, but the way I read the regs is that the PIC must be instrument rated in order to file IFR.
[/ QUOTE ]
JT, perhaps you missed this part of his post:
[ QUOTE ]
Somehow the 2 Private ME Instrument rated pilots descended into the mountain.
[/ QUOTE ]
According to that, they were BOTH instrument rated and were merely practicing approaches.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Agreed with all who say that the PIC should have been aware of what was under them.
Either way - sad for all involved.
R2F
sigmanu499
New Member
The other thing is ATC has MVA (minimum vectoring altitude), I think it gives 1000 feet and 3 miles clearance. So i wonder what socal was doing vectoring an aircraft below that.
Lima_Charlie
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The pilot at the controls, "usually" is wearing the Foggles, and the right seat is the Safety pilot. Niether pilot is a CFI. The flight was filed IFR to give the 2 Private pilots IFR experience.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm way off base, but the way I read the regs is that the PIC must be instrument rated in order to file IFR.
Wouldn't they say two private, instrument rated pilots if that's what they meant?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes both private pilots were Instrument Rated. The were on one of many "Route" flights which the school has everyone fly inorder to build up Multi time. Typically all the flights happen at night, as the seminoles are busy most of the daytime hours w/ private multi students.
[ QUOTE ]
The pilot at the controls, "usually" is wearing the Foggles, and the right seat is the Safety pilot. Niether pilot is a CFI. The flight was filed IFR to give the 2 Private pilots IFR experience.
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm way off base, but the way I read the regs is that the PIC must be instrument rated in order to file IFR.
Wouldn't they say two private, instrument rated pilots if that's what they meant?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes both private pilots were Instrument Rated. The were on one of many "Route" flights which the school has everyone fly inorder to build up Multi time. Typically all the flights happen at night, as the seminoles are busy most of the daytime hours w/ private multi students.