PA-46 Malibu Down in Erie, CO KEIK - 3 Dead, 2 Injured

Let's let Ron figure this out himself. If he can't find it in the FAR/AIM (I did), then we'll help him out.

BTW, the section pertaining to standard traffic patterns at uncontrolled airports immediately precedes the section pertaining to right-of-way for conflicting traffic at differing altitudes.
 
And what does being the PIC mean to you exactly? Certainly would you include common sense, using your best judgement, following procedures, situational awareness and doing what is safe?

To land safety in a non-towered environment you rely predictability. That’s why patterns exist in the first place. At an uncontrolled field that has little to no traffic on a regular basis, there should be little problem with going straight in or other non standard approaches provided you announce your intentions and relay continual position reports and there is no conflicting traffic in the pattern or on the field. Period. Under a busier environment, the standard pattern should be adhered to at all times in addition to announcing your position in an effort to maintain a safe and smooth flow of traffic.

You should tune in the published radio frequency of the airport and determine which course of action to take dependent upon the level of activity you hear on the frequency. By listening and looking for the number of airplanes you see approaching and departing, your good judgement should dictate whether or not a non standard approach would be acceptable. And, if flying the pattern you should check that final is clear before turning from the base leg. This is basic airmanship. Being a PIC means doing what is sensible, safe and correct. It doesn't mean doing whatever you want to/feel like with no consideration of other variable factors or the traffic around you and it doesn't mean breaking the rules for your own personal desires. Control means you know exactly what you are doing and what the circumstances and traffic around you is, including on the ground. Every situation and every landing is different. Know your environment and choose based on that environment.

Thank you for your class in traffic patterns 101.
 
Or if he didn't move the mixture up at all and still had it leaned out, and opened the throttle all the way.

TIO-540's aren't simple engines to manage.
Well aware, have about 250 hours flying between a pair of them and an ungodly number of hours wrenching on those attentionloving sumbitches. Still, if a guy is going to drive around with 5 unsuspecting passengers behind a single one of those monstrosities one would hope he would be well versed in the arts of keeping that thing happy.
 
Mind sharing with us who told you that? And who told you that an aircraft on final has the right of way?

(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to
make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake
that aircraft.
 
(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to
make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake
that aircraft.

I taught at LNA, one of the busiest non-towered airports in the country. I've also flown into the Erie airport many times. If you value your life, use some common sense and realize that arguing about your right to barge in on a straight in final opposite the flow if traffic is just damn foolish and will get you killed someday.

I really doubt the accident pilot had that mindset. I bet he had the wrong frequency tuned, and had no idea what the traffic flow was at Erie.
 
Well aware, have about 250 hours flying between a pair of them and an ungodly number of hours wrenching on those attentionloving sumbitches. Still, if a guy is going to drive around with 5 unsuspecting passengers behind a single one of those monstrosities one would hope he would be well versed in the arts of keeping that thing happy.

You're a professional. Not everybody else is. The disconnect between what pilots (and people in general) SHOULD do and what they actually do is staggering.
 
You didn't cite a source in your paragraph and it doesn't match what I'm reading at FAA.gov which is this:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/aim0403.html
d. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the pilot of the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way over the pilot of the aircraft at the higher altitude. However, the pilot operating at the lower altitude should not take advantage of another aircraft, which is on final approach to land, by cutting in front of, or overtaking that aircraft.

In the context of this discussion - the traffic conflict between one aircraft that is taking off and another that is landing - the regs aren't clear. As @A Life Aloft said, use common sense. All things being equal, a landing aircraft is managing an abundance of energy on his descent to the runway, whereas a departing aircraft may be applying all of the energy he has while climbing away from it.
 
When drawing near a trolling line, just swim on by. Don't bite at the hook!

P.S. Wouldn't push it just to rub paint but an aircraft (along with others in the pattern) taking off into the wind, using the radios has right-of-way over someone not talking and landing with a 10kt+ tailwind....just sayin'
 
I really doubt the accident pilot had that mindset. I bet he had the wrong frequency tuned, and had no idea what the traffic flow was at Erie.

The pilot of the Malibu was a personal friend of two of my students. The pilot lived at Erie Air Park.
 
The pilot of the Malibu was a personal friend of two of my students. The pilot lived at Erie Air Park.

That doesn't preclude somebody from making a mistake. I've certainly done things like that a time or two! I very much doubt he had CTAF tuned up, traffic blaring away announcing their positions for 15, while he ignored everybody and went straight in against the flow.

Heck, just the other day I tried calling ops on guard... This guy may very well have done something similar, like still having APA tower still tuned or something.
 
That doesn't preclude somebody from making a mistake. I've certainly done things like that a time or two! I very much doubt he had CTAF tuned up, traffic blaring away announcing their positions for 15, while he ignored everybody and went straight in against the flow.

Heck, just the other day I tried calling ops on guard... This guy may very well have done something similar, like still having APA tower still tuned or something.

Ture, all that is possible. Maybe it was an fatal error. But it's not against the regs to land upwind. We've all been at a busy uncontrolled airport when someone did it. You sit on the ground while the yoyo has their moment be it confusion, stupidity or stubbornness.

Keep in mind witness statements says the engine was sputtering. Maybe he was landing opposite direction because he was an emergency.

One other thing strikes me as strange. A Cessna pilot in the pattern asked the departure if he was rolling yet. Sounds like the Cessna pilot may have been trying to stop the departure because he knew about the opposite direction arrival.
 
Last edited:
Something like this; although the PIC of the Part 91 aircraft was a retired airline captain.

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/1997/aar9704.pdf
Excellent example.

"the failure of the pilots in the King Air A90 to effectively monitor the common
traffic advisory frequency or to properly scan for traffic
, resulting in their commencing a takeoff
roll when the Beech 1900C (United Express flight 5925) was landing on an intersecting runway."

Exactly what I spoke about in my post on the previous page.
 
I believe the FARs or AIM state that traffic using the runway that favors the wind always has the right away. Meaning that you can legally land downwind, as long as you give way to other traffic. I dont have time to look it up right now, but Im sure I read something to that effect in the FAR/AIM a while back.
 
I believe the FARs or AIM state that traffic using the runway that favors the wind always has the right away. Meaning that you can legally land downwind, as long as you give way to other traffic. I dont have time to look it up right now, but Im sure I read something to that effect in the FAR/AIM a while back.
I don't think so but I'm willing to learn if you can quote something.
 
I'd think the deciding FAR would be something about the plane on final having the right of way over a plane on the ground.

IF arriving traffic isnt talking on the radio, landing with an 8g15 knot tailwind, landing againts the flow other traffic in the pattern (at least two others) and doing a straight in, I say he dont have a leg to stand on. Regardless, sad situation.
 
Back
Top