Life Guard Accident in Hawaii 12/16/2022

FlyingAccountant said:
The guy had some interesting type ratings. It gives you a feel for his career trajectory, or lack thereof.
Click to expand...

Yeah makes you wonder what happened

The pilot held an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate with a rating for multiengine land andRotorcraft-helicopter, with commercial pilot privileges for airplane single-engine land andairplane single-engine sea, and type ratings on the B-737, EMB-145, and LR-60.
Click to expand...
 
Found within his personal effects at the accident site was a handwritten note addressed to the pilot. It advised he should not be “forced to fly through the clouds by any person in the back” It was confirmed the author of the letter was the pilot’s next-of-kin and was written in March of that same year.
Click to expand...
I kept reading. Oh boy

Then this:

1731738243109.png


Pretty obvious attitude had failed
 
Opinions about the single engine will be what they will be, but one of the many things I appreciated doing this same flying in the PC12 was it had full redundancy in the avionics.

As a side note, the last airplane where I practiced actually flying an approach on the peanut gyro was way back in 172s for CFII. Anyone on the KA90 know if, given that it apparently has only a single VG to drive the CA instruments, it’s common to do much training/checking flying by the FO side instruments?
 
Roger Roger said:
Opinions about the single engine will be what they will be, but one of the many things I appreciated doing this same flying in the PC12 was it had full redundancy in the avionics.

As a side note, the last airplane where I practiced actually flying an approach on the peanut gyro was way back in 172s for CFII. Anyone on the KA90 know if, given that it apparently has only a single VG to drive the CA instruments, it’s common to do much training/checking flying by the FO side instruments?
Click to expand...
I did a tiny bit of training. Just enough to check the box.
 
Roger Roger said:
As a side note, the last airplane where I practiced actually flying an approach on the peanut gyro was way back in 172s for CFII.
Click to expand...
In my four 121 types and multiple recurrents, none have required flying off the standby gyro/ISIS/attitude. But sure as ess if the main thing goes black, eyes will go to the opposite side and standby.

What's also kinda impressive is the amount of data the feds got off this flight. Cameras, sound, etc. Dang
 
Skåning said:
In my four 121 types and multiple recurrents, none have required flying off the standby gyro/ISIS/attitude. But sure as ess if the main thing goes black, eyes will go to the opposite side and standby.

What's also kinda impressive is the amount of data the feds got off this flight. Cameras, sound, etc. Dang
Click to expand...
Well, too there are a whole lot more redundancies of sensors and screens in even a guppy than this KA. You could lose an attitude source in the 73 and get full functionality on both sides back pretty easily. And you have another dude or dudette to take controls from the person who’s lost the attitude source, so I get why it isn’t hit in training.
 
Skåning said:
In my four 121 types and multiple recurrents, none have required flying off the standby gyro/ISIS/attitude. But sure as ess if the main thing goes black, eyes will go to the opposite side and standby.

What's also kinda impressive is the amount of data the feds got off this flight. Cameras, sound, etc. Dang
Click to expand...
I found out that this report was out at a get together with some of my old coworkers (ok, ok, we were playing dungeons and dragons. Go ahead, take my lunch money). The topic came up of “what would (insert former 135 shop here) think of cockpit cameras?”. Since all they operate in this program anymore is the Lear 45 which I’m fairly certain has an FDR we kinda figured it would be redundant.

The striking similarity to the accident near Kake, AK does make one wonder about that one as well.
 
Roger Roger said:
Well, too there are a whole lot more redundancies of sensors and screens in even a guppy than this KA.
Click to expand...
Absolutly, but the att had and (or?) autopilot had failed on the several previous flights in the same phase of flight. So you'd think it would be something the PIC would be ready for, or at least a diminished startle factor. Not an easy situation for the saviest of pilots, but the whole sequence was still a head scratcher.
 
Skåning said:
Absolutly, but the att had and (or?) autopilot had failed on the several previous flights in the same phase of flight. So you'd think it would be something the PIC would be ready for, or at least a diminished startle factor. Not an easy situation for the saviest of pilots, but the whole sequence was still a head scratcher.
Click to expand...
I thought it was the MFD which had failed several flights prior and had no record of maintenance or an MEL applied and was still inop on the accident flight. Yet another thing stacking the deck when the attitude quit.
 
9 checkride failures = Corpie gonna corp. It’s almost like there’s a correlation between numerous checkride failures and fatal pilot error crashes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top