Neil11/Ace Air 51

I read that earlier. Sounds like there were a lot of assumptions made by the controller, but at the same time the crew should have caught that. I wouldnt be surprised if fatigue was a factor.
 
ASpilot2be said:
I read that earlier. Sounds like there were a lot of assumptions made by the controller, but at the same time the crew should have caught that. I wouldnt be surprised if fatigue was a factor.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised that the MSAW didn't catch the controller's attention. It's also surprising that given the MFD and dual 430s nothing showed the terrain well enough to catch either pilots attention. However it's been a while since I've flown with a 430 and IIRC it gives enough nuisance warnings that many people fly around with it inhibited. I think true TAWS like our aircraft have shouldn't give nuisance warnings during standard IFR ops.
 
Roger Roger said:
I'm surprised that the MSAW didn't catch the controller's attention. It's also surprising that given the MFD and dual 430s nothing showed the terrain well enough to catch either pilots attention. However it's been a while since I've flown with a 430 and IIRC it gives enough nuisance warnings that many people fly around with it inhibited. I think true TAWS like our aircraft have shouldn't give nuisance warnings during standard IFR ops.
Click to expand...
The Garmin terrain feature sucks. If I depart and am going across a body of water the terrain warning will go off. The only thing out there is a small island.
 
Sounds kind of bad for a 38 year old at 85%. Wow

Also its contradictory that the controller stated he was surprised when the flight descended below 054 as he wouldn't expect right after issuing a "at or above 20" clearance to the fix. Technically speaking I understand his statement that they should have held higher as the published hold was 043.
 
Capt. Chaos said:
Man, know him since his back country guiding days, he was in shape and had way healthier lifestyle than most.
Click to expand...
Sounds hereditary. I've seen people that smoke, drink, and lead an "unhealthy lifestyle" live into their 90s... Meanwhile people who take care of themselves by eating clean and working out get cancer in their 30s. Life doesn't seem to discriminate unfortunately.
 
Of course they are going to pin some blame on the captain for not avoiding terrain, but the controller said maintain at or above 2000' and that's exactly what he did. Reading through it gave me a chill.
 
I can think of dozens of times in my instrument flying when I accepted a similar clearance without double checking things (especially altitude) that needed to be adjusted because of what was "published". Fortunately someone else corrected me, or I broke out early enough, or I managed to catch the error on my own. But it is very easy to see myself in that cockpit doing exactly what they did. I'll raise my glass to their memory and keep their unfortunate fate in my thoughts as I fly.
 
Cal Goat said:
I can think of dozens of times in my instrument flying when I accepted a similar clearance without double checking things (especially altitude) that needed to be adjusted because of what was "published". Fortunately someone else corrected me, or I broke out early enough, or I managed to catch the error on my own. But it is very easy to see myself in that cockpit doing exactly what they did. I'll raise my glass to their memory and keep their unfortunate fate in my thoughts as I fly.
Click to expand...
Flying in a non-radar environment, if I ever got an altitude that wasn't published, I would always ask for clarification. There's a couple of arcs that come to mind that I hate how they would clear you below the published altitude for the arc and then "cleared approach". Never felt comfortable with it despite the assurance that the MVA was what I was assigned.
 
z987k said:
Flying in a non-radar environment, if I ever got an altitude that wasn't published, I would always ask for clarification. There's a couple of arcs that come to mind that I hate how they would clear you below the published altitude for the arc and then "cleared approach". Never felt comfortable with it despite the assurance that the MVA was what I was assigned.
Click to expand...

Probably not going to happen very often, but I imagine you can always say "unable" or request p/d. If you want what's on the plate, ask for what's on the plate, especially non-radar.
 
Cal Goat said:
I can think of dozens of times in my instrument flying when I accepted a similar clearance without double checking things (especially altitude) that needed to be adjusted because of what was "published". Fortunately someone else corrected me, or I broke out early enough, or I managed to catch the error on my own. But it is very easy to see myself in that cockpit doing exactly what they did. I'll raise my glass to their memory and keep their unfortunate fate in my thoughts as I fly.
Click to expand...
I had a controller clear me to an IAF 1500' feet below the minimum altitude for the initial segment of that approach (and 500' below that for the intermediate). It took me a second longer than I would've liked to catch that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top