Cessna 414 down in Yorba Linda

Doc Holliday said:
You have them on this forum.
Click to expand...
DutchRoller said:
There’s one in particular that I think at minimum is exaggerating his service if not outright lying about it.
Click to expand...

Well, we know that good ol' Daniel Bernath was lying about it, because someone came here and told us who his military picture actually was. :rofl:

But who else? Call 'em out! (And be prepared to eat crow if they can post their DD-214 in response...)
 
Commeeee on! Don't be a wimp :p . Call em' out. Or PM me the details.

17bcf438a9fcbf0a3af0fd7205d62708e8df72f1e44eb62910fa42005ea24f3f.jpg
 
Last edited:
Bill Jennings said:
The elevator flutter looked a little disconcerting to me, but I suppose it's not a thing to worry about?
Click to expand...

From a technical standpoint, I don't believe that is "flutter" we're observing, rather just the spoiled air coming off the wing buffeting the horizontal stab. I can't speak to the amplitude of the movement, but a lot of GA airplanes have a substantial amount of movement of the horizontal stab when approaching a stall, as well.
 
Hacker said:
Plenty of people that expected me to have one and would have attended, but I had my own reasons for not wanting anything.
Click to expand...
Same here. Not the part about people attending, but otherwise, same.
 
DutchRoller said:
There’s one in particular that I think at minimum is exaggerating his service if not outright lying about it.
Click to expand...

It is useful to use caution when going on witch hunts based on information posted in a web forum.

On another forum, I received a PM from another member who felt that something I'd posted meant I was some kind of poser:
You are quite obviously NOT a current or former commissioned officer, or fighter pilot, or there is no way you would have reacted the way you have in this thread.

You may think you are fooling others, but it is all too obvious.

Former enlisted technician? Thank you for your service.

But stop talking down to others as though you are something else.
Click to expand...

What followed was an amusing discussion, since what this gentleman claimed was incorrect to put it lightly. Yet, he was entirely steeped in the conviction of his belief right up until I provided ample evidence of my credentials.

So, as the saying goes, make sure you know the answer before you ask the question out loud.
 
Hacker said:
It is useful to use caution when going on witch hunts based on information posted in a web forum.

On another forum, I received a PM from another member who felt that something I'd posted meant I was some kind of poser:


What followed was an amusing discussion, since what this gentleman claimed was incorrect to put it lightly. Yet, he was entirely steeped in the conviction of his belief right up until I provided ample evidence of my credentials.

So, as the saying goes, make sure you know the answer before you ask the question out loud.
Click to expand...
I couldn’t find the thread but a former poster (short-lived) here accused me of being fake, until it was revealed that he was a fake and disappeared. He’s the only one here I’ve seen that was an obvious fraud. They usually stand out because the have to draw attention to themselves.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
To clarify I was referring specifically to the pilot and not so much the plane. At some point the airplane will have a structural failure due to speed, but in general it seems that if the pilot attempts recovery, it's common to pull too hard and thus rip the wings/tail off (in this case both happened at some point, of course we don't know whether there was a LOC first or second). I certainly believe that upset recovery training/aerobatic training would help and that's something I've been wanting to do. If you look at when Wayne Bower's partner crashed their 340 in the late 80s, the plane impacted the ground intact at something around an 85 degree nose down angle. The pilot just got completely disoriented (according to the ATC audio he stated a gyro failure) and whether or not he tried to get out of it, he didn't succeed. But he also didn't rip any of the control surfaces off like what we saw happen in this 414 crash.

The additional problem you have IMC is that if you've gotten disoriented and flipped over/upsidedown and you have steam gauges, you may also be at a point where your gyros have tumbled and are now misleading/useless. That makes matters worse because now you're in the clouds, in an unusual attitude, your AI is useless, and you're basically looking at your altimeter to try to figure out which way is up.

One possible scenario is that he lost control, end up in a steep dive, and then pulled too hard once he got into VMC and realized what was going on. By that point it would've been too late.

I've always liked this video, showing a stall test for a Boeing 717:


If you look, you can see that they lost a lot of altitude, went WAY overspeed, but managed to recover without ripping the airplane apart from what was essentially a straight nose down attitude. They were also in VMC, with instruments that did not tumble, and remained calm, cool, and collected, following the procedures. Note they didn't move too quickly on the controls, specifically to make sure not to rip anything apart.
Click to expand...

I could watch that video 100 times, I probably just watched it 5 times, awesome.
 
PaulS said:
I could watch that video 100 times, I probably just watched it 5 times, awesome.
Click to expand...

I've probably watched it at least 50 over the past few years.

The American Airlines series of videos that cover "children of the magenta line" and others are quite good as well. I've been watching those. Although I'd seen some of them before, there were a few lessons in there that are more applicable now flying the MU-2.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I've probably watched it at least 50 over the past few years.

The American Airlines series of videos that cover "children of the magenta line" and others are quite good as well. I've been watching those. Although I'd seen some of them before, there were a few lessons in there that are more applicable now flying the MU-2.
Click to expand...

Although it is frequently (and in my opinion, ignorantly and incorrectly) maligned, the entire AA Advanced Aircraft Maneuvering Program video series (including the controversial unusual attitude video) is *excellent*.
 
Hacker said:
Although it is frequently (and in my opinion, ignorantly and incorrectly) maligned, the entire AA Advanced Aircraft Maneuvering Program video series (including the controversial unusual attitude video) is *excellent*.
Click to expand...

I agree. There are some things in there I disagree with (we're pilots, isn't that what we do?) and some things that obviously are less applicable to light aircraft vs. big heavy jets, but I think it's all worth watching. He was an excellent teacher and presented the material well.

The use of rudder for roll/directional control in some cases is also proper procedure in the MU-2 because of the characteristics of spoilers vs. ailerons.

The children of the magenta line presentation is what I've been saying for years, and I think if anything it applies more in GA world where we have people who are flying <100 hours per year, and doing autopilot on at 200 and off at 200. If you never fly the airplane, you'll never know how to fly the airplane.
 
Stan Cooper said:
ABC News is saying Antonio Pastini had changed his name from Jordan Isaacson, and never served in the Marine Corps as he claimed.

I just don't get why people lie about having served in the military. Weird.
Click to expand...
Stolen valor. I worked at WPAFB for a number of years, and had to constantly tell people I was a civilian.
 
Red Air Rambo said:
One of my Commanders actually did fly the 0-1 in Vietnam...He hated it, he said they gave him the choice between that and the backseat of an F-4...He wanted to fly and not ride....I don't know if I would have made the same...lol


Now I can go back to lurking, I've posted more in two days than the last 7 years.
Click to expand...

You should post more.
 
All this talk about fraud has me nervous. I just want to go ahead and state that I am not a real doctor before any accusations come out. I don’t make this claim so no worries.
 
One day we had an F4 pilot show up at my unit http://www.176thahc.org/, wanting to go fly with us. I let him ride in my UH-1H on an ash and trash run, nothing unusual. He sat in the jump seat and was delighted to see how the Army boys went about their day. I could tell he was itching to ask, and finally it came out, "could I try flying this thing?". I was the aircraft commander, looked at the peter pilot and he said no problem, and climbed out of the right seat after the F4 guy had cleared the jump seat. Then the F4 guy got strapped in, plugged in his helmet, and we were in business. I explained the collective to him, and he quickly figured out the pedals and cyclic. On we went, straight and level through the late afternoon Vietnam sky with a flight crew of diversity...

He did really well, holding airspeed and altitude with no trouble. Then the game changed with approach back to the helipad. I said drop some collective and slow down to 40 knots. He did great. Then over the fence I said you can approach to a hover. That started gracefully before the ground level aerobatics began. I was almost sorry to take over, he was doing so well. Congratulated him after the flight and you couldn't wipe the smile from his face. Never did give me a F4 ride, though.
 
Last edited:
One of the most humiliating aviation experiences of my life was attempting to hover an MH-60. The pilot in the other seat was quite amused with my performance.
 
Hacker said:
One of the most humiliating aviation experiences of my life was attempting to hover an MH-60. The pilot in the other seat was quite amused with my performance.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I had high hopes for the Phantom driver -- he was such a pro in cruise and maneuvering flight. But down at the bottom we went every which way and I could see his eyes getting big.
 
Pilawt said:
It's reported he departed KFUL at 2139Z. Ceilings were around 4000 broken, 5000 overcast, so he had to go through stuff to get to the 7800' where the plunge reportedly began. But for some reason I've yet to hear about an IFR flight plan, destination, or anything about ATC communications leading up to the anomaly.
Click to expand...
I watched the initial NTSB press conference and the question was asked if he was in communication with atc and the lady at the podium said no. I thought I read the METAR at the time was 3,000 ovc and I don’t see any radar track on flightaware. If he were IFR he would have been in contact with atc and had a code. It would seem he may have decided to punch a hole through the overcast. Who knows what happened once in the soup.
 
Rod Boone said:
I watched the initial NTSB press conference and the question was asked if he was in communication with atc and the lady at the podium said no. I thought I read the METAR at the time was 3,000 ovc and I don’t see any radar track on flightaware. If he were IFR he would have been in contact with atc and had a code. It would seem he may have decided to punch a hole through the overcast. Who knows what happened once in the soup.
Click to expand...

You don't really need to be instrument rated and fly IFR if you have an autopilot, right? :frown2::mad2:
 
flyingcheesehead said:
You don't really need to be instrument rated and fly IFR if you have an autopilot, right? :frown2::mad2:
Click to expand...
I was thinking about this seriously the other day....

If you have a functioning autopilot... and a working integrated GPS that you know how to use then the rating is really just a technicality if everything goes right.

It's the not everything going right part where the rating and experience come in.

Got me wondering how many people out there are flying around through the soup that have more dollars than sense.
 
dtuuri said:
It sounded like normal circling to me. YMMV.
Click to expand...

right. Normally, one would continue their outbound course. You would hear the plane fade in, fly over, fade out as is continued eastbound. But it didn't. why?
 
ircphoenix said:
I was thinking about this seriously the other day....

If you have a functioning autopilot... and a working integrated GPS that you know how to use then the rating is really just a technicality if everything goes right.

It's the not everything going right part where the rating and experience come in.

Got me wondering how many people out there are flying around through the soup that have more dollars than sense.
Click to expand...

Some level of VFR pilots operating in IMC was pretty common in the airports surrounding where I learned to fly. Harder to do out of a towered airport for obvious reasons. There was often low ground fog so the most common was people taking off in close to 0/0. One person I gave one lesson two, later busted a Presidential TFR, and eventually died in a LOC crash in IMC, was known for typically taking off in 0/0 without an IFR flight plan or clearance, or an instrument rating. One PoAer reported flying along in the clouds and seeing a Bonanza right over his plane that was squawking 1200 (or transponder off entirely).

It's not smart. That said, I don't recall ever hearing of a mid-air caused by it, just VFR into IMC LOC crashes, so it's not a risk I generally worry about. I'm more concerned about a mid-air on a beautiful cloud-free day, and the statistics back that up.
 
ircphoenix said:
If you have a functioning autopilot... and a working integrated GPS that you know how to use then the rating is really just a technicality if everything goes right.

It's the not everything going right part where the rating and experience come in.
Click to expand...
That's not only true of the autopilot. There are plenty of non-instrument-rated pilots who tempt fate by flying the attitude indicator through a layer now and then. When everything goes right, that works out okay. But if the layer is thicker than you expect, your body's accelerometers start to take over from trusting the attitude indicator or you focus on it to the exclusion of other important instruments, and then you run into trouble.

Thanks to all of the logical fallacies that humans fall for, each time it goes right and you don't die becomes a stronger belief that it will all go right next time, as well. Then one time it doesn't go right and you most likely die because you're in a situation in which trained, rated, and experienced instrument pilots who declare an emergency and get help from ATC have a significantly less than 100% survival rate: hand flying on a partial panel for a sustained period of time in solid IMC. And you are too scared or embarrassed to talk to ATC about your emergency, if you even recognize it to be an emergency after years of treating the actual emergency of being VFR in IMC as a non-event.

</soapbox>
 
ircphoenix said:
If you have a functioning autopilot... and a working integrated GPS that you know how to use then the rating is really just a technicality if everything goes right.
Click to expand...

Everything doesn't go right. The perfect flight hasn't taken place since Kitty Hawk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted
iamtheari said:
....if you even recognize it to be an emergency after years of treating the actual emergency of being VFR in IMC as a non-event....
Click to expand...
Not being a pilot, this brings up a question in my mind. Assuming there is no incident or accident resulting from a non-IR pilot flying into IMC, what is the likelihood you will get caught doing it? Is there any way that the FAA will ever know?

I think of people driving quite excessively over the speed limit. They may be able to do so many times before getting caught. Just wondered if the same is true with flying.
 
Fallsrider said:
Not being a pilot, this brings up a question in my mind. Assuming there is no incident or accident resulting from a non-IR pilot flying into IMC, what is the likelihood you will get caught doing it? Is there any way that the FAA will ever know?

I think of people driving quite excessively over the speed limit. They may be able to do so many times before getting caught. Just wondered if the same is true with flying.
Click to expand...

Let’s break that into different cases:
1. Non IR rated pilot flies through a cloud. Unless you hit something, no chance.
2.Non IR files IFR plan or popup, and flies approaches. I gotta believe computers can catch the discrepancy, 80% channce of being caught.
3.IR pilot who is not current, files and fly approaches...like #1, no chance if you don’t have an accident.


Tom
 
Fallsrider said:
Not being a pilot, this brings up a question in my mind. Assuming there is no incident or accident resulting from a non-IR pilot flying into IMC, what is the likelihood you will get caught doing it? Is there any way that the FAA will ever know?

I think of people driving quite excessively over the speed limit. They may be able to do so many times before getting caught. Just wondered if the same is true with flying.
Click to expand...

Well, it depends on where you're departing to/from. If you're flying from podunk-to-podunk, you probably won't get caught (ADS-B equipment changes that a bit). If you takeoff or land at an airport under IMC, they're going to have some questions for you.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Well, it depends on where you're departing to/from. If you're flying from podunk-to-podunk, you probably won't get caught (ADS-B equipment changes that a bit). If you takeoff or land at an airport under IMC, they're going to have some questions for you.
Click to expand...

If airport has a tower, then you would need a popup, then I agree.
If non tower, who is going to know?


Tom
 
Fallsrider said:
Not being a pilot, this brings up a question in my mind. Assuming there is no incident or accident resulting from a non-IR pilot flying into IMC, what is the likelihood you will get caught doing it? Is there any way that the FAA will ever know?

I think of people driving quite excessively over the speed limit. They may be able to do so many times before getting caught. Just wondered if the same is true with flying.
Click to expand...
You're much more likely to get caught for speeding in the middle of nowhere than for flying VFR into IMC, unless you try to fly VFR into an airport with a control tower with reported conditions far below VFR minimums.

Also, I would say that it's more like driving drunk than speeding because your risk doesn't go up linearly but rather it skyrockets by orders of magnitude compared to the legal alternative. And just like driving drunk, by which I mean on the order of .30% BAC, it's easy to fall into complacency because you got away with it and survived when you drove at .08% or maybe .15%, maybe .20% another day, etc. That cloud layer that you could see through was easy enough, so why not try a little thicker one? Okay, you got through 500 feet that time, so what's another 1,000 feet?
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
2.Non IR files IFR plan or popup, and flies approaches. I gotta believe computers can catch the discrepancy, 80% channce of being caught.
Click to expand...

I would give that about 0% chance of being caught unless there's a problem.

The system is not set up to purposely go out and try to catch people. Personally I think it is a good thing overall but like anything there are two sides to it.
 
ircphoenix said:
I was thinking about this seriously the other day....

If you have a functioning autopilot... and a working integrated GPS that you know how to use then the rating is really just a technicality if everything goes right.

It's the not everything going right part where the rating and experience come in.

Got me wondering how many people out there are flying around through the soup that have more dollars than sense.
Click to expand...

But then if you add in a parachute, you have it all covered.

:eek:
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
Let’s break that into different cases:
1. Non IR rated pilot flies through a cloud. Unless you hit something, no chance.
2.Non IR files IFR plan or popup, and flies approaches. I gotta believe computers can catch the discrepancy, 80% channce of being caught.
3.IR pilot who is not current, files and fly approaches...like #1, no chance if you don’t have an accident.


Tom
Click to expand...
Makes sense. As in any other part of life, there are always those who will bend or break the rules to get their wants and desires. And a part of that is sometimes just being too lazy or not wanting the inconvenience of staying within the rules (e.g., flying through a cloud versus taking the time to go around it).
 
iamtheari said:
....Also, I would say that it's more like driving drunk than speeding because your risk doesn't go up linearly but rather it skyrockets by orders of magnitude compared to the legal alternative. And just like driving drunk, by which I mean on the order of .30% BAC, it's easy to fall into complacency because you got away with it and survived when you drove at .08% or maybe .15%, maybe .20% another day, etc. That cloud layer that you could see through was easy enough, so why not try a little thicker one? Okay, you got through 500 feet that time, so what's another 1,000 feet?
Click to expand...
Sounds like a fair comparison.
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
If airport has a tower, then you would need a popup, then I agree.
If non tower, who is going to know?


Tom
Click to expand...
Right, that's what I was implying. If you've got no tower on either end, you're probably fine. If you have to land at a towered airport, someone's going to grab a tail #.
 
This begs the question, of all the accidents as a result of IMC, what % were PP only, what were IR who weren’t current.


Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top