ATC descent clearance into terrain
- Thread starter MarineNav
- Start date
avi8tor
Well-Known Member
Yea it was a Pan Am training flight out of deer valley and crashed in Julian, Ca. ATC told them to descend down to 5,200', and they hit a ridge line at 5,500'
Preliminary Report
Preliminary Report
I'd hate to monday morning quarterback because the only information that I know is that ATC gave them a descent, which they accepted, and the Seminole subsequentially impacted terrain.
I guess when in doubt, you can always ask "Confirm 5200'?"
Don't let ATC kill you. He might get fired, but you're going to die.
I guess when in doubt, you can always ask "Confirm 5200'?"
Don't let ATC kill you. He might get fired, but you're going to die.
Wasn't this the one where there may have been callsign confusion in regards to similiar callsigns, since there was one or two other PanAm Seminoles talking to the same ATC? The Prelim states "in response to an ATC instruction", not whether it was an ATC instruction intended for that flight. In any event, knowing what's under you at all times is paramount. In that sense, Sectionals aren't only for VFR.
CaptainMatt
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Wasn't this the one where there may have been callsign confusion in regards to similiar callsigns, since there was one or two other PanAm Seminoles talking to the same ATC? The Prelim states "in response to an ATC instruction", not whether it was an ATC instruction intended for that flight. In any event, knowing what's under you at all times is paramount. In that sense, Sectionals aren't only for VFR.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I recall correctly, you are right Mike. There was two PanAm Seminoles going to the same place.
Wasn't this the one where there may have been callsign confusion in regards to similiar callsigns, since there was one or two other PanAm Seminoles talking to the same ATC? The Prelim states "in response to an ATC instruction", not whether it was an ATC instruction intended for that flight. In any event, knowing what's under you at all times is paramount. In that sense, Sectionals aren't only for VFR.
[/ QUOTE ]
If I recall correctly, you are right Mike. There was two PanAm Seminoles going to the same place.
[ QUOTE ]
A little bit off topic here but when I was hanging around the airport once, ATC gave a SWA 737-700 clearance to takeoff while a 172 was a little more than 5 miles out to land. Why would they do that or was it a mistake?
[/ QUOTE ]
It's SWA you're talking about here....they were probably well off into their takeoff roll before the 172 landed. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
A little bit off topic here but when I was hanging around the airport once, ATC gave a SWA 737-700 clearance to takeoff while a 172 was a little more than 5 miles out to land. Why would they do that or was it a mistake?
[/ QUOTE ]
It's SWA you're talking about here....they were probably well off into their takeoff roll before the 172 landed. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Acadia
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
A little bit off topic here but when I was hanging around the airport once, ATC gave a SWA 737-700 clearance to takeoff while a 172 was a little more than 5 miles out to land. Why would they do that or was it a mistake?
[/ QUOTE ]
A 5 mile final in a 172 means there is almost enough time for two departures prior to it reaching the numbers!
A little bit off topic here but when I was hanging around the airport once, ATC gave a SWA 737-700 clearance to takeoff while a 172 was a little more than 5 miles out to land. Why would they do that or was it a mistake?
[/ QUOTE ]
A 5 mile final in a 172 means there is almost enough time for two departures prior to it reaching the numbers!
CapnJim
Well-Known Member
Yuma Approach cleared me to 1,200 on a night IFR flight plan about 10 miles outside of Yuma. Thank god I was VMC, because the only way I saw the ridgline was when the lights of the city started disappearing in a jagged, mountain shaped line. My student was under the hood, and responded instantly with throttle and pitch when I started yelling "PULL UP PULL UP!!". I have no idea how close we actually came to that mountain, nor do I remember what exactly I said to approach after the excitement was over, although I'm sure it was not very complimentary. I do know that the emplyoyees of that base are a bunch of young reservists who are obviousy not capable of the responsibilty. NTSB reports confirm that at least 2 F-18s have collided with terrain at night while on with Yuma Approach. Makes you wonder how many more pilots will have to die before someone puts the hammer down.
Having had that experience, I now refuse to fly recips in mountainous terrain below MEA at night or IMC. Once you've been burned like that, you can never put your life in someone else's hands again.
On a positive note, the father of the family I was staying with in Yuma was a Marine Corps Captain, and was also in command of the little fellas working the scopes that night. After relating the story to him, I was satisfied that justice was served having has some experience with the discipline capable of being meted out by Marines.
Having had that experience, I now refuse to fly recips in mountainous terrain below MEA at night or IMC. Once you've been burned like that, you can never put your life in someone else's hands again.
On a positive note, the father of the family I was staying with in Yuma was a Marine Corps Captain, and was also in command of the little fellas working the scopes that night. After relating the story to him, I was satisfied that justice was served having has some experience with the discipline capable of being meted out by Marines.
[ QUOTE ]
Yuma Approach cleared me to 1,200 on a night IFR flight plan about I do know that the emplyoyees of that base are a bunch of young reservists who are obviousy not capable of the responsibilty. NTSB reports confirm that at least 2 F-18s have collided with terrain at night while on with Yuma Approach. Makes you wonder how many more pilots will have to die before someone puts the hammer down.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whoa there, hoss, those are pretty scathing and broad allegations. I've worked with NYL RATCF many a time, both in civilian flying and military. Their GCA folks are some of the best I've seen, and I received a PAR down to 100' one night after NYL became my second divert for WX and I was on min fuel vectors on one of 6 days a year that place gets hard WX. I also know that the civilian TPA there is 1,200, and all aircraft are to be established at 1,200 within 5 nm from the field so as not to conflict with the 1,700 TPA for the mil jets; and they generally issue pilots-discretion from about 10 miles out, so you weren't being vectored for an approach, you must've been given a descent for a visual approach. I don't know your case personally, and ATC does make mistakes, but the controllers there are far from "untrained reservists".
And night below MEA or in IMC is no problem, we did that every night in Afghanistan, it's just up to the pilot to know where he's going and what's under him, using ATC as an assistance and not a crutch. It's can be done, it's a little more work, but if ever the mission justifies the risk, with a little planning and a lot of SA it isn't impossible.
Curiously, why would the NTSB have reports on military F/A-18 crashes in relation to an military ATC facility? That's outside their scope of investigation.
Yuma Approach cleared me to 1,200 on a night IFR flight plan about I do know that the emplyoyees of that base are a bunch of young reservists who are obviousy not capable of the responsibilty. NTSB reports confirm that at least 2 F-18s have collided with terrain at night while on with Yuma Approach. Makes you wonder how many more pilots will have to die before someone puts the hammer down.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whoa there, hoss, those are pretty scathing and broad allegations. I've worked with NYL RATCF many a time, both in civilian flying and military. Their GCA folks are some of the best I've seen, and I received a PAR down to 100' one night after NYL became my second divert for WX and I was on min fuel vectors on one of 6 days a year that place gets hard WX. I also know that the civilian TPA there is 1,200, and all aircraft are to be established at 1,200 within 5 nm from the field so as not to conflict with the 1,700 TPA for the mil jets; and they generally issue pilots-discretion from about 10 miles out, so you weren't being vectored for an approach, you must've been given a descent for a visual approach. I don't know your case personally, and ATC does make mistakes, but the controllers there are far from "untrained reservists".
And night below MEA or in IMC is no problem, we did that every night in Afghanistan, it's just up to the pilot to know where he's going and what's under him, using ATC as an assistance and not a crutch. It's can be done, it's a little more work, but if ever the mission justifies the risk, with a little planning and a lot of SA it isn't impossible.
Curiously, why would the NTSB have reports on military F/A-18 crashes in relation to an military ATC facility? That's outside their scope of investigation.
CapnJim
Well-Known Member
Never said they were "untrained reservists", and didn't mean to make that implication. I said they were young and careless. I was on a visual descent, I was more than 10 miles out, and I even requested confirmation that they wanted me at 1,200. It wasn't PD- it was 'descend and maintain 1,200'.
You are right though, It wasn't the NTSB that I heard that report from-- it was on the news. The pilots are just as dead though, and after the experience I had it's hard not to think that ATC had some hand in it.
You are right though, It wasn't the NTSB that I heard that report from-- it was on the news. The pilots are just as dead though, and after the experience I had it's hard not to think that ATC had some hand in it.
[ QUOTE ]
A little bit off topic here but when I was hanging around the airport once, ATC gave a SWA 737-700 clearance to takeoff while a 172 was a little more than 5 miles out to land. Why would they do that or was it a mistake?
[/ QUOTE ]
Try listening to somewhere like BOS Tower on liveatc you'll find that they give take-off clearances when there is jet arrivals on 3 mile finals!
A little bit off topic here but when I was hanging around the airport once, ATC gave a SWA 737-700 clearance to takeoff while a 172 was a little more than 5 miles out to land. Why would they do that or was it a mistake?
[/ QUOTE ]
Try listening to somewhere like BOS Tower on liveatc you'll find that they give take-off clearances when there is jet arrivals on 3 mile finals!