2 Dead near Santa Barbara, 182 headed to San Diego

N801BH said:
Like it or not, that is part of living in a free society.... ya got to take the good with the bad....
Click to expand...

No, it isn't.

Living in a free society means you can't jail someone for being a jerk.

It absolutely, positively, does NOT mean we must tolerate it.

Don't be a jerk, and don't hide behind false "freedom" to justify it.
 
sdflyer said:
I understand that accident curiosity take over and ethics doesn't apply. As for me it's hard to see 38F wreckage and realize that someone lost life. I'd rather have my plane crashed and whoever was flying it walked away.

I've been trying to process all that for couple days now. Unfortunately, constant reminders don't make it easy. I guess one way to find out it to experience it yourself..
Click to expand...

Sometimes karma is a real mother ****er, and both of these guys bought themselves lives of bad karma. Don't sweat it, it's not on you.
 
MAKG1 said:
No, it isn't.

Living in a free society means you can't jail someone for being a jerk.

It absolutely, positively, does NOT mean we must tolerate it.

Don't be a jerk, and don't hide behind false "freedom" to justify it.
Click to expand...

Have to say I agree with the sentiment.
And appreciate you taking a stand to encourage the kind of community you'd like to enjoy here.
 
JGoodish said:
I've flown single-engine many times over mountainous areas at night, and I did not consider those flights to carry a material risk greater than any other night flight . . . While you're free to set your own personal limits, by adopting your limits I wouldn't be able to take ANY night flight in my area of the country.
The reality is that the additional risk can be mitigated or eliminated with proper planning and sound judgment.

JKG
Click to expand...

Sorry, you obviously forgot that Dav8or ranks every night flight as unacceptably risky, with a possible exception for multi-engine aircraft, conveniently ignoring the statistics that twins are much more dangerous than singles. Ask your insurance company or read Richard Collins.

Now Dave may make an exception for airline flights at night, I don't recall any discussions going that far.

As for this, I'm sorry that someone lost what appears to have been a nice 182. The published backgrounds of the two occupants do seem quite sketchy, but not enough so for me to relish their passing. A sad event overall.
 
Thanks everyone for understanding. I will keep you posted as soon as find out result of official investigation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Henning said:
Sometimes karma is a real mother ****er, and both of these guys bought themselves lives of bad karma. Don't sweat it, it's not on you.
Click to expand...

Sadly though, he's also getting a huge punishment to go along with theirs. Losing a plane is bad enough, I can't imagine all the things running through your head knowing it could have been any one of the club members flying it, or you. :(


Day, Night, whatever, engine failures often don't end with a nice greaser of a landing.
 
StinkBug said:
Sadly though, he's also getting a huge punishment to go along with theirs. Losing a plane is bad enough, I can't imagine all the things running through your head knowing it could have been any one of the club members flying it, or you. :(


Day, Night, whatever, engine failures often don't end with a nice greaser of a landing.
Click to expand...

That's why sailors and pilots can't afford to be ****ing people over, too much opportunity for karma to pay you back. It's an airplane, it can be replaced. You can't play the "It could have been..." game in life otherwise you end up paralyzed, unable to do anything because no matter what it is, people die doing it.
 
MAKG1 said:
It's not hard to find acceptable terrain in that area. US101 is usable over almost the entire route as an emergency landing site. You just have to care to follow it.
Click to expand...

Agree. I go SBA->SLO and there's plenty of road, or fields. Follow the 101 and 154. Don't go into Los Padres. Remoteness galore.

(note I did not read the linked articles, only this thread)
 
May they rest in peace.

I agree that the risk of flying at night over mountainous terrain is unnecessary when there are safer alternatives. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. The prop will stop spinning eventually if you put in enough time.
 
vfrfellow said:
Agree. I go SBA->SLO and there's plenty of road, or fields. Follow the 101 and 154. Don't go into Los Padres. Remoteness galore.

(note I did not read the linked articles, only this thread)
Click to expand...

I fly KCMA-SLO on average 3X a month. I wouldn't consider most of 154 not a good spot to land, very narrow with tall trees on both sides, not all but a lot of the road. Between Lake Casitias and Lake Cachuma where the plane was found options are very limited in the daytime, I would personally never fly that route at night.
 
Sorry for your loss. Yikes.

How does insurance work for something like this?
 
MAKG1 said:
It's not hard to find acceptable terrain in that area. US101 is usable over almost the entire route as an emergency landing site. You just have to care to follow it.

Just popping over the 4000 foot peak just north of the city just means you are in too much of a hurry. The oil spill TFR tops out at 1000. Overfly it, and fly a whopping 5 miles out of your way to follow the road.
Click to expand...

I guess I too will say my piece on this thread. My reason is that this route of flight is very familiar to me.

I am curious why you thought SBA to be the destination. V-27 does make sense in that regard. However, to all points south for a VFR flight, or unless vectored by SB TRACON (while I should avoid saying that never happens I would say it would only be for a brief time for traffic separation), the more direct route would be at least east of Cachuma dam and probably direct from FIM VOR.

All my flights from anywhere SoCal to SBP were FIM -D-> KSBP or, as I said, as far west as Cachuma dam before turning NW, depending how I felt. In this respect, to follow 101 north of SBA was way out of the way. Besides, the only place I have consistently seen rotor clouds or experienced CAT anywhere along the coast south of Point Sur was that coast from Gaviota out to Point Arguello. I made a habit of avoiding that section. In fact, arriving to SBA from SBP I would swing to the east to drop in from Lake Cachuma.

Yes, quite literally I prefer that rugged terrain to the localized weather phenomena which is found W-NW of SBA. I understand this boils down to individual preferences of each pilot. I am not saying I am right or my route is best. But in the interest of perhaps you knowing something I do not I wonder if you care to elucidate your reasons to follow 101 even unto the tunnel.

BTW: I used to try to make a perfect straight-in to SBA RWY 29 from Filmore VOR. All I can say is I came close a couple of times. This was for VFR flights, day or night notwithstanding.

Yes, deep condolences to the families of the departed and to sdflyer.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
It's not hard to find acceptable terrain in that area. US101 is usable over almost the entire route as an emergency landing site. You just have to care to follow it.
Click to expand...

Do you find US 101 to be an acceptable landing site at night?? Maybe in the day you can find the decent parts of the median to plop down in, but at night you're just going for it. Mixing it up with wires, signs, cars, trucks... and who knows?
 
Hank S said:
Sorry, you obviously forgot that Dav8or ranks every night flight as unacceptably risky, with a possible exception for multi-engine aircraft, conveniently ignoring the statistics that twins are much more dangerous than singles.
Click to expand...

You got it partly right. I do avoid night flight as much as possible. I don't have to be anywhere that bad. I might take a chance by myself, but with a passenger, not likely without them being fully briefed on the real concerns of the flight.

Sorry, I have read various pilot forums and talked to people in aviation long enough to know that these piston engines of ours quit a lot more than many people, or the official stats like to admit. Night time is a bad time for that to happen. Mountains is a bad place for that to happen. Piston + night + mountains = bad place for me. YMMV.

Where you got it wrong was, I am fully aware of the piston twin engine accident stats. I am no advocate for them either in general. They can be very safe if the pilot is truly proficient. Many are not, but tell themselves they are.

I for one know that given my lifestyle at this time, I would be nowhere near proficient. There is no way I would buy a twin. I'll take my chances with a dead stick vs. a VMC roll over, or a one engine decent into terrain at 100+ mph at this point. If I were retired, had loads of money, flew a whole bunch and went for recurrent training more often than every two years, I might sign on for a twin.

Now Dave may make an exception for airline flights at night, I don't recall any discussions going that far.
Click to expand...

I do make an exception for most airlines. Their record is exceptional and speaks for itself. Day or night, rain or shine. I will fly on any reputable airline anytime, anywhere. There are many foreign airlines I will not fly on though. Some of their records are much, much worse.
 
According to this LA Times article, the pilot did not have a valid medical and was facing a revocation hearing.

I hate to add to the aircraft owner's woes, but isn't it incumbent on someone to check a pilot's certificate and medical status before renting?




Before the crash Aug. 6, Martz was facing a fourth revocation proceeding on allegations that he falsified his FAA medical certificate related to two drunken driving convictions in 2013 and 2014. He surrendered the document in June during the agency's investigation.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-adv-santa-barbara-crash-20150816-story.html
Click to expand...
 
3393RP said:
I hate to add to the aircraft owner's woes, but isn't it incumbent on someone to check a pilot's certificate and medical status before renting?
Click to expand...

Not an owner issue but the club, since it was a club airplane. In larger clubs, the owner often has little visibility on the qualifications of the individual renters, the club staff handles vetting of individual pilots. I don't know how PCF works, but in Plus One (another big club in San Diego), if your medical and Flight Review aren't current, the scheduling software won't even let you schedule the airplane.

Unfortunately, if the guy had been a member and had a key to the airplane, it wouldn't prevent him from taking it anyway. Id be surprised if he was authorized to use the airplane.
 
StinkBug said:
I also know the owner of the club but haven't talked to him in a few days.
Click to expand...

As do I. I find it unfathomable that he would have let this guy anywhere near his club.
Martz inquired about getting into our partnership not too long ago. We found out who he was and politely said no.
 
jkaduk said:
As do I. I find it unfathomable that he would have let this guy anywhere near his club.
Martz inquired about getting into our partnership not too long ago. We found out who he was and politely said no.
Click to expand...
The latest news is that the FAA was in the process of issuing his 4th revocation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top