Mid-air, KMEV Minden-Tahoe

catmandu

catmandu

Pattern Altitude
PoA Supporter
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
1,787
Location
Sierra Nevada
Display Name
Display name:
Catmandu
The FAA reports a single-engine Globe GC-1B Swift collided with a single-engine Cessna 206 midair near the Minden-Tahoe Airport killing the sole occupant on the Globe which fell from the sky on fire.

Meanwhile, KRNV reports there were two survivors who actually landed the other damaged plane!

Douglas County Sheriff Dan Coverly confirms one of the planes involved was Civil Air Patrol.

www.carsonnow.org

One dead, two survive mid air collision plane crash near Minden-Tahoe Airport - Carson Now

UPDATE 1:34PM: The FAA reports a single-engine Globe GC-1B Swift collided with a single-engine Cessna 206 midair near the Minden-Tahoe Airport killing the sole occupant on the Globe. Meanwhile, KRNV reports there were two survivors. Douglas County Sheriff Dan Coverly confirms one of the planes...
www.carsonnow.org www.carsonnow.org
 
Last edited:
FPK1 said:
Meanwhile, KRNV reports there were two survivors who actually landed the other damaged plane!
Click to expand...


While it's not common, mid air collisions don't always result in fatalities. True story - years ago I was driving the golf cart used to retrieve gliders after landing. I noticed fragments of what turned out to be aircraft pieces dropping around me, only to find that one of our gliders had collided with a low wing Piper as they each crossed over the runway to enter their respective runways (gliders used the opposite, right hand pattern). They both continued and landed safely. The glider had a notch cut in the wing root and the Piper had its vertical stabilizer bent backward, and no one was hurt. The glider pilot reported seeing the Piper at the last second. I never talked to the Piper pilot, but it's possible that he was above the glider and never saw it.
 
While see-and-avoid should be used, it simply does not work all the time. The 206 pilots knew the Swift was close by, but could not see him. I am glad for ADS-B.
 
MountainDude said:
While see-and-avoid should be used, it simply does not work all the time. The 206 pilots knew the Swift was close by, but could not see him. I am glad for ADS-B.
Click to expand...
…so the victim had ADSB out installed but did not like the idea of being “tracked” and thus hardly ever had it on …well…
 
Warmi said:
…so the victim had ADSB out installed but did not like the idea of being “tracked” and thus hardly ever had it on …well…
Click to expand...
I did not see that. If true, that is very sad.
 
Warmi said:
…so the victim had ADSB out installed but did not like the idea of being “tracked” and thus hardly ever had it on …well…
Click to expand...
I like the anonymous feature of UAT ADS-B. I'm still a bit surprised that it wasn't allowed for Mode S transponders when used for part 91 flights.
There's no need for all the GA haters and creeps to track every plane in the sky, with instant access to their names and addresses.
 
AV8R_87 said:
I like the anonymous feature of UAT ADS-B. I'm still a bit surprised that it wasn't allowed for Mode S transponders when used for part 91 flights.
There's no need for all the GA haters and creeps to track every plane in the sky, with instant access to their names and addresses.
Click to expand...
Seems just like social security numbers, ads-b is being used for unintended uses. Yeah, I wish the FAA would rework the ads-b system so that you can more easily hide your name and address from the general public.
 
Yet another example of someone dying needlessly due to unwillingness to use technological advances that make flying safer. It is fortuitous that the two people who did not share his hazardous attitude didn't have to die that day.

Unfortunately, this distrust of tech and longing for the "good ol' days" isn't limited to the stereotypical crusty old salts of aviation. When I was looking for DPEs for my IR ride, I spoke with one DPE who informed me that we would be flying the whole ride on ground-based nav. He added that his standard practice was to zoom in the moving map so that it was effectively useless. I interpreted this to mean that I may as well just be flying dual KX-155s. I asked why. He said that he didn't believe GPS was reliable for instrument navigation. I noped out of scheduling with that guy.
 
traumamed said:
Unfortunately, this distrust of tech and longing for the "good ol' days" isn't limited to the stereotypical crusty old salts of aviation.
Click to expand...
It's implied in Juan's video but there's no proof of that yet. I've had ads-b not show planes as well right away.
 
francisco collazos said:
It's implied in Juan's video but there's no proof of that yet. I've had ads-b not show planes as well right away.
Click to expand...
This is true. We don't know anything definitive, it's all speculation at this point. Hopefully, the avionics cluster didn't get completely torched and the NTSB will be able to ascertain the settings on the transponder. Unfortunately, the pilot's track record does raise suspicion for non-use though.
 
If the Swift had UAT such as the tailBeacon, it supports anonymous mode, so there is no reason why someone would not use it for their own protection.
 
AV8R_87 said:
I like the anonymous feature of UAT ADS-B. I'm still a bit surprised that it wasn't allowed for Mode S transponders when used for part 91 flights.
There's no need for all the GA haters and creeps to track every plane in the sky, with instant access to their names and addresses.
Click to expand...
The Mode S transponder TSO does not support an anonymous mode, but in the US, there is an FAA program that allows the assignment of a Privacy ICAO Address (aka PIA) so the transponder does not emit the ICAO identifier tied to the N number. Aircraft then use a third party callsign from one of four companies such as ForeFlight (example FFL1234). This blocks the N Number from being able to be derived by an ADS-B receiver, but still allows the normal ADS-B surveillance and traffic functions.
 
John Collins said:
The Mode S transponder TSO does not support an anonymous mode, but in the US, there is an FAA program that allows the assignment of a Privacy ICAO Address (aka PIA) so the transponder does not emit the ICAO identifier tied to the N number. Aircraft then use a third party callsign from one of four companies such as ForeFlight (example FFL1234). This blocks the N Number from being able to be derived by an ADS-B receiver, but still allows the normal ADS-B surveillance and traffic functions.
Click to expand...
Garmin ADSB out does this but only if you enable “anonymous mode” and your transponder code is set to 1200.
 
AV8R_87 said:
I like the anonymous feature of UAT ADS-B. I'm still a bit surprised that it wasn't allowed for Mode S transponders when used for part 91 flights.
There's no need for all the GA haters and creeps to track every plane in the sky, with instant access to their names and addresses.
Click to expand...
Well it does make it easier to send flowers when they die because they’re paranoid.
 
elvisAteMySandwich said:
Seems just like social security numbers, ads-b is being used for unintended uses. Yeah, I wish the FAA would rework the ads-b system so that you can more easily hide your name and address from the general public.
Click to expand...
You do realize nobody cares, right? Nobody is “tracking” your 1970s piston single.
 
You'll be surprised how nosy people can be.
 
francisco collazos said:
It's implied in Juan's video but there's no proof of that yet. I've had ads-b not show planes as well right away.
Click to expand...
This. I have ADS-B in my T6 and most of our flying museum planes have it.

Many flights, particularly pattern work or low altitude stuff don't show up on websites like FlightAware.
 
AV8R_87 said:
You'll be surprised how nosy people can be.
Click to expand...
While I’m generally pro-ADS-B, you’re right about that. There are some forums, blogs, and streams in which people will doxx the owner of an aircraft (regardless of whether they were flying), and put it all out there -to the point it starts showing up on Google searches.

Worse than that is when they dig into court records, social media, work history, political affiliation, etc, and start drawing conclusions about an accident based on that. It’s gotten out of control.
 
And at least CAP was up performing tax payer funded life saving necessities. Indispensable they are. Thanx!
 
slinger said:
And at least CAP was up performing tax payer funded life saving necessities. Indispensable they are. Thanx!
Click to expand...
Hey man, that's why when someone says "Thank you for your service" I reply with "It was my pleasure, thank you for your tax dollars!"

Some the best memories of my aviating life were taxpayer funded boondoggles, er, training! :rockon:
 
AV8R_87 said:
Mode S or UAT?
Seems like there are a lot more mode S receivers, compared to UAT.
Click to expand...
If you meant breakdown in the US for ADS-B Out for 1090ES vs UAT rather than "mode S receivers, compared to UAT", 1090ES ADS-B Out currently is 77% of the installed US fleet vs UAT ADS-B Out which is 23%. If you just look at fixed wing GA, then UAT is about 39% of the fleet.
 
No, I mean there are a lot more ground receivers for Mode S, feeding flightaware and other sites, compared to UAT receivers. That's why a lot of the UAT traffic isn't showing online.
 
I opined about something similar with the float plane collision in Florida some time back (float plane NORDO). This assumes that Blancolirio is correct and the Swift pilot turned off his ADSB. Just because you CAN doesn’t mean you SHOULD. The Swift pilot’s ridiculous paranoia killed him and nearly killed two other people (thereby infringing on their rights to life, liberty etc). I doubt the Fed or any one else could give a rats ass about where he or his vintage plane were. Of course it would be great for other pilots to know where he was especially when you’re entering a traffic pattern headed for disaster. It’s time to mandate ADSB and Radios. Our airspace is just too busy in these modern times for this nonsense. If you want a NORDO fly-in, no problem - have the airport put out a NOTAM so people can be aware. The airspace is exponentially more crowded than when I got my cert in 1986. You can’t fly around like it’s the good ol’ days when it isn’t. Even in Minden, NV.
 
Last edited:
Nick Geber said:
It’s time to mandate ADSB and Radios. Our airspace is just too busy in these modern times for this nonsense. If you want a NORDO fly-in, no problem. Have the airport put out a NOTAM so people can be aware. The airspace is exponentially more crowded than when I got my cert is 1986. You can’t fly around like it’s the good ol’ days when it isn’t. Even in Minden, NV.
Click to expand...
As an older pilot I don't want to agree with you, but I do.
 
There is a balance on ADSB visibility.

My last plane, Zenith, my wife and friends liked tracking me. It showed up everywhere.

My new to me Sportsman was owned be a public figure, so he locked down visibility of ADSB as much as he could. It is hard to find. ADSB Exchange will show it, mostly during flight. Most of the rest of the sites just say it is blocked. But I am visible to all traffic and ATC when I'm flying.

My wife doesn't like it as much. But, for now, I leave it as is. Nosy Nelly likely won't go to the trouble of finding me, but ADSB equipped aircraft and ATC can.
 
catmandu said:
Hey man, that's why when someone says "Thank you for your service" I reply with "It was my pleasure, thank you for your tax dollars!"

Some the best memories of my aviating life were taxpayer funded boondoggles, er, training! :rockon:
Click to expand...
I consider it a much better use of my tax dollars than what the vast majority of it is wasted on. :)
 
Last edited:
catmandu said:
Preliminary is out:

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/195128/pdf

The Globe Swift did not have ADS-B installed. The Swift pilot had ADS-B on when flying other airplanes.
The Swift pilot typically flew a tight pattern per prior ADS-B tracks, compared to the CAP airplane.
The impact evidence points to the Cessna below, and the Swift above.
Click to expand...
Adsb is such an easy add even to a plane with basic avionics. Needs to be mandatory. Agree that that the FAA needs to stop it being used for reasons other than air safety.
 
Are we going to mandate ADS-B IN? Otherwise, what is the point?

This was not caused by lack of tech. It was caused by poor airmanship. The Swift pilot flew an improper pattern entry. Rather than entering downwind at midfield, he entered at the worst possible point: where aircraft on crosswind are turning onto downwind.

High wing climbing, low wing descending, converging at 45 from head-on, each turning towards their blind spot. Could not write a more likely scenario for a midair.

I suspect if the 2nd pilot in the 206 had been looking outside for traffic while the pilot lifted his wing to clear the blind spot, instead of burying his nose in the iPad, they might have spotted the Swift.

ADS-B is not a close range maneuvering tool.
 
Last edited:
Respectfully... seems this indeed was 'caused' by the improper pattern entry... but it could (almost certainly) have been avoided by ADS-B Out in the Swift.
 
wayneda40 said:
Respectfully... seems this indeed was 'caused' by the improper pattern entry... but it could (almost certainly) have been avoided by ADS-B Out in the Swift.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, that's possibly true in this specific case because the Cessna pilots had their heads in the iPad.

But it could have been prevented by a bunch of other things that didn't happen, like the Cessna climbing closer to pattern altitude before turning downwind or not turning crosswind so early.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top