Cirrus Fatal yesterday and I learned something about Class B floors

[PeterNSteinmetz]

So I have watched this air Safety accident report before. What strikes me odd was the statement about FAA policy dictated denying flight following foe the surrounding airports of the Phoenix TRACON. Why is that?? Is that true?? The class Bravos near me must be more accommodating.

A number of contributing causes in that accident:

Pilot was flying night VFR without an IFR flight plan on a dark moonless night.

Flight did not follow the instrument departure procedure.

Departure overlapped a shift change at the tower of the departure airport.

Floor of the bravo is low relative to terrain there. A CFI flying with me recently commented on how uncomfortably low it was, even during the day.

I believe Phoenix approach was told to be more accommodating after this of requests for clearance through the bravo, but it is still hard to get if they are landing to the west as this right in the approach corridor.

Evidently the aircraft was not legally airworthy. That likely did not directly contribute to the crash, but may have indicated a lax safety culture, though they had never had a prior incident or accident.

 

[3393RP]

The mountains around there can be killers... this guy died avoiding the Phoenix Bravo in a twin commander

I remember when that happened.

It was a particularly awful CFIT crash with the children being involved. They had been picked up at Falcon by their dad for Thanksgiving weekend.

 

[IK04]

I used to fly out of LAS at night Northbound. The general rule is to follow US 95 Northwest until either 10,000 feet or Indian Springs, then turn West to face the desert and the High Sierra mountains beyond, enroute to the bay area...

Direct Beatty VOR worked great to get out of the Vegas airspace and into LA Center's coverage.

IFR departures required some pretty good climb rates, so VFR was easier. Arrivals were super easy, since you could see where you were going for 100 miles...

 

[Clip4]

A number of contributing causes in that accident:

Pilot was flying night VFR without an IFR flight plan on a dark moonless night.

Flight did not follow the instrument departure procedure.

Departure overlapped a shift change at the tower of the departure airport.

Floor of the bravo is low relative to terrain there. A CFI flying with me recently commented on how uncomfortably low it was, even during the day.

I believe Phoenix approach was told to be more accommodating after this of requests for clearance through the bravo, but it is still hard to get if they are landing to the west as this right in the approach corridor.

Evidently the aircraft was not legally airworthy. That likely did not directly contribute to the crash, but may have indicated a lax safety culture, though they had never had a prior incident or accident.

The primary cause was improper preflight planning.

 

[weilke]

I remember when that happened.

It was a particularly awful CFIT crash with the children being involved. They had been picked up at Falcon by their dad for Thanksgiving weekend.

Iirc the return leg was unexpectedly flown by a mechanic/pilot who had come along for the trip. Dad was in the back to deal with some emotional issues by one of the kids.

 

[Dana]

By the way, why don't more people earn and fly with an IFR flight plan.. it seems like so much extra work to avoid the bravo's, be on your own, for what ultimately is (in my opinion) a less safe and higher workload flight.. not that IFR guarantees safety.. but you wouldn't be monkeying around avoiding airspace.. you just go where they tell you (basically)

Cost/benefit ratio, interest, temperament. An IFR panel would cost more than my entire plane. Avoiding airspace is rarely a factor in the kind of flying I do. And while I think I'm a pretty good stick and rudder guy, and deal with complex systems all day at work (I'm an engineer), I know I don't have the temperament to be a good IFR pilot... and that's OK with me.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

The primary cause was improper preflight planning.

They had flown the same flight a week before and flew in and turned it around very quickly, so likely no serious consideration of the flight plan whatsoever.

 

[Clip4]

They had flown the same flight a week before and flew in and turned it around very quickly, so likely no serious consideration of the flight plan whatsoever.

if the previous flight was also at night, sounds like they ran out of luck on #2.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

if the previous flight was also at night, sounds like they ran out of luck on #2.

I believe a critical difference was the timing of the call for the turn from runway heading. Previously that had occurred very quickly and the flight path was west of terrain. The controller shift change on the second flight caused a delay and so simply turning to the heading led straight into terrain.

For night VFR, I follow the instrument departure procedures unless I know the area extremely well and am watching very very carefully.

 

[Clip4]

I believe a critical difference was the timing of the call for the turn from runway heading. Previously that had occurred very quickly and the flight path was west of terrain. The controller shift change on the second flight caused a delay and so simply turning to the heading led straight into terrain.

For night VFR, I follow the instrument departure procedures unless I know the area extremely well and am watching very very carefully.

You still gotta do the preflight planning. It doesn’t get much flatter than Key West.
https://www.aopa.org/training-and-s...rship-tether-severs-cessna-wing-killing-three

These balloons are also located at:

• Deming, New Mexico
• Eagle Pass, Texas
• Fort Huachuca, Arizona
• Lajas, Puerto Rico
• Marfa, Texas
• Matagorda, Texas
• Morgan City, Louisiana
• Rio Grande City, Texas
• Yuma, Arizona

 

[PaulS]

You still gotta do the preflight planning. It doesn’t get much flatter than Key West.
https://www.aopa.org/training-and-s...rship-tether-severs-cessna-wing-killing-three

And you need a plan to handle when it doesn't go to plan.

 

[3393RP]

You still gotta do the preflight planning. It doesn’t get much flatter than Key West.
https://www.aopa.org/training-and-s...rship-tether-severs-cessna-wing-killing-three

These balloons are also located at:

• Deming, New Mexico
• Eagle Pass, Texas
• Fort Huachuca, Arizona
• Lajas, Puerto Rico
• Marfa, Texas
• Matagorda, Texas
• Morgan City, Louisiana
• Rio Grande City, Texas
• Yuma, Arizona

That's pretty wild. Just looking at a photo of the aerostat offers no clue it's twice as big as the Goodyear blimps, is stationed at 8,000', and is tethered by a 1" cable under 2,400 lbs of tension.

The impact probably didn't move the cable much at all while serving as a very effective guillotine.

 

[Warmi]

A simple “synthetic vision” display ( which are really cheap and plentiful among non-certified avionics ) or even an iPad with audio alerts running a synthetic vision app could have prevented this.
Given that the entire earth surface is available in digital form as a height map for free , this sort of cheap alerting system should be available to everyone flying.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I agree a circular cutout around that peak would have helped.

I know I’m wrong, but at first glance I might mistakenly assume that flight in that sector at 6,500 was safe. Throw in a little fatigue or inattention and I think that chart sets the stage for tragedy.

Same here. I learned something from this thread.

A Maximum Elevation Figure of 8500 ft is depicted for that quadrangle. The use of MEFs for night flights standard student training.

8500' certainly is shown, and close to the mountain, too. MEFs might be standard student training, but I still appreciate the reminder.

 

[IK04]

You still gotta do the preflight planning. It doesn’t get much flatter than Key West.
https://www.aopa.org/training-and-s...rship-tether-severs-cessna-wing-killing-three

These balloons are also located at:

• Deming, New Mexico
• Eagle Pass, Texas
• Fort Huachuca, Arizona
• Lajas, Puerto Rico
• Marfa, Texas
• Matagorda, Texas
• Morgan City, Louisiana
• Rio Grande City, Texas
• Yuma, Arizona

I flew out of Amelia/Morgan City and there was no tethered balloon there, nor is there one depicted on any aeronautical chart.

Is that an old list?

 

[Clip4]

I flew out of Amelia/Morgan City and there was no tethered balloon there, nor is there one depicted on any aeronautical chart.

Is that an old list?

I don’t know the date of the list.

 

[luvflyin]

.....Yup! That giant blue "8,5" is a good indicator that staying below a 6,500 foot shelf will likely be unsafe.....

FWIW, the MEF there is “7,5”. You should be using the Terminal Area Chart when flying in the air it covers rather than the Sectional. The TAC MEF Grids are half the size of the Sectionals.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

FWIW, Las Vegas is the worst place I've ever tried to deal with in terms of getting through the Bravo, and I ended up having to skirt under the Bravo along the south side at night. I believe I flew right past this mountain, though I could see it thanks to the bright lights of the city. Still was NOT a fun experience trying to avoid both the airspace and the terrain while trying repeatedly to get on with the LAS controllers.

 

[PaulMillner]

You have to be careful around the LA area. There are many Charlie and Bravo here that can look misleading on the charts but give very little (if any) terrain clearance

Las Vegas isn't exactly the LA area. And Las Vegas Approach is part of the problem...

why don't more people earn and fly with an IFR flight plan... you wouldn't be monkeying around avoiding airspace... you just go where they tell you (basically)

Danger! With Las Vegas Approach, even on an IFR clearance, you need to maintain your own terrain awareness.

Two years ago, I departed Henderson NV, south of Vegas. I'd filed IFR. When giving my clearance, Las Vegas Approach asked me to maintain my own terrain clearance. OK, fine, it was severe clear... I can do that.

On departure, they assigned me a southbound heading... I asked the controller, "You're going to turn me before I hit that mountain?" "Yeah," he replied. "That's the idea."

Well... no. As I proceeded southbound, the terrain was getting larger in the windscreen. Finally, I advised the controller I was turning 10 degrees right to avoid terrain.

He screeched at me, "If you can't maintain your own terrain clearance, you shouldn't accept the clearance!"

Well, dude, I *am* maintaining my own terrain clearance, by deviating 10 degrees to the right... you're the guy that assigned me the heading into a rock!

They vectored me around hell's half acre, eventually, restricting my climb to keep my out of the Bravo... I was definitely getting the delay lesson not to file IFR with Vegas if I wanted expeditious handling.


I wrote it all up for the NTSB, because I thought it represented poor handling. I received a phone call from an NTSB investigator in DC... he indicated that the NTSB had heartburn with how Vegas Approach handled these kind of IFR, kind of not clearances... and that the NTSB would, again, make a recommendation to the FAA that this kind of handling be avoided. But he told me not to expect any change, as Vegas Approach has their own ideas on how to handle their airspace.

Caveat pilot!

 

[PaulS]

Las Vegas isn't exactly the LA area. And Las Vegas Approach is part of the problem...



Danger! With Las Vegas Approach, even on an IFR clearance, you need to maintain your own terrain awareness.

Two years ago, I departed Henderson NV, south of Vegas. I'd filed IFR. When giving my clearance, Las Vegas Approach asked me to maintain my own terrain clearance. OK, fine, it was severe clear... I can do that.

On departure, they assigned me a southbound heading... I asked the controller, "You're going to turn me before I hit that mountain?" "Yeah," he replied. "That's the idea."

Well... no. As I proceeded southbound, the terrain was getting larger in the windscreen. Finally, I advised the controller I was turning 10 degrees right to avoid terrain.

He screeched at me, "If you can't maintain your own terrain clearance, you shouldn't accept the clearance!"

Well, dude, I *am* maintaining my own terrain clearance, by deviating 10 degrees to the right... you're the guy that assigned me the heading into a rock!

They vectored me around hell's half acre, eventually, restricting my climb to keep my out of the Bravo... I was definitely getting the delay lesson not to file IFR with Vegas if I wanted expeditious handling.


I wrote it all up for the NTSB, because I thought it represented poor handling. I received a phone call from an NTSB investigator in DC... he indicated that the NTSB had heartburn with how Vegas Approach handled these kind of IFR, kind of not clearances... and that the NTSB would, again, make a recommendation to the FAA that this kind of handling be avoided. But he told me not to expect any change, as Vegas Approach has their own ideas on how to handle their airspace.

Caveat pilot!

Well that blows, WTF?

 

[hindsight2020]

Las Vegas isn't exactly the LA area. And Las Vegas Approach is part of the problem...



Danger! With Las Vegas Approach, even on an IFR clearance, you need to maintain your own terrain awareness.

Two years ago, I departed Henderson NV, south of Vegas. I'd filed IFR. When giving my clearance, Las Vegas Approach asked me to maintain my own terrain clearance. OK, fine, it was severe clear... I can do that.

On departure, they assigned me a southbound heading... I asked the controller, "You're going to turn me before I hit that mountain?" "Yeah," he replied. "That's the idea."

Well... no. As I proceeded southbound, the terrain was getting larger in the windscreen. Finally, I advised the controller I was turning 10 degrees right to avoid terrain.

He screeched at me, "If you can't maintain your own terrain clearance, you shouldn't accept the clearance!"

Well, dude, I *am* maintaining my own terrain clearance, by deviating 10 degrees to the right... you're the guy that assigned me the heading into a rock!

They vectored me around hell's half acre, eventually, restricting my climb to keep my out of the Bravo... I was definitely getting the delay lesson not to file IFR with Vegas if I wanted expeditious handling.


I wrote it all up for the NTSB, because I thought it represented poor handling. I received a phone call from an NTSB investigator in DC... he indicated that the NTSB had heartburn with how Vegas Approach handled these kind of IFR, kind of not clearances... and that the NTSB would, again, make a recommendation to the FAA that this kind of handling be avoided. But he told me not to expect any change, as Vegas Approach has their own ideas on how to handle their airspace.

Caveat pilot!

This. Exactly this. And when you depart VFR it's gonna be "remain clear of Bravo" for all my brothers, as you would expect.

 

[luvflyin]

Las Vegas isn't exactly the LA area. And Las Vegas Approach is part of the problem...



Danger! With Las Vegas Approach, even on an IFR clearance, you need to maintain your own terrain awareness.

Two years ago, I departed Henderson NV, south of Vegas. I'd filed IFR. When giving my clearance, Las Vegas Approach asked me to maintain my own terrain clearance. OK, fine, it was severe clear... I can do that.

On departure, they assigned me a southbound heading... I asked the controller, "You're going to turn me before I hit that mountain?" "Yeah," he replied. "That's the idea."

Well... no. As I proceeded southbound, the terrain was getting larger in the windscreen. Finally, I advised the controller I was turning 10 degrees right to avoid terrain.

He screeched at me, "If you can't maintain your own terrain clearance, you shouldn't accept the clearance!"

Well, dude, I *am* maintaining my own terrain clearance, by deviating 10 degrees to the right... you're the guy that assigned me the heading into a rock!

They vectored me around hell's half acre, eventually, restricting my climb to keep my out of the Bravo... I was definitely getting the delay lesson not to file IFR with Vegas if I wanted expeditious handling.


I wrote it all up for the NTSB, because I thought it represented poor handling. I received a phone call from an NTSB investigator in DC... he indicated that the NTSB had heartburn with how Vegas Approach handled these kind of IFR, kind of not clearances... and that the NTSB would, again, make a recommendation to the FAA that this kind of handling be avoided. But he told me not to expect any change, as Vegas Approach has their own ideas on how to handle their airspace.

Caveat pilot!

What exactly was the Clearance you got? Was that heading assigned on the ground to fly after departure? Or did they vector you to it after departure? What was your assigned altitude? Was it below mountain?

 

[dtuuri]

What exactly was the Clearance you got? Was that heading assigned on the ground to fly after departure? Or did they vector you to it after departure? What was your assigned altitude? Was it below mountain?

I second these questions. It sounds a lot like the infamous "magic words" boilerplate was maybe misunderstood, in which case I feel his pain.

 

[Tantalum]

IFR with Vegas if I wanted expeditious handling.

That's bonkers, and quite infuriating.. so do they make the Southwest guys jump through the same hoops and play musical mountains, or they actually treat them with a modicum of respect?

 

[danhagan]

So I have watched this air Safety accident report before. What strikes me odd was the statement about FAA policy dictated denying flight following foe the surrounding airports of the Phoenix TRACON. Why is that?? Is that true?? The class Bravos near me must be more accommodating.

The only rude controllers I've ever talked to were PHX. I used to fly to California quite a bit, and they had a habit of turning eastbound traffic SE towards Gila Bend, then spewing " you're out of my cover area, squawk VFR frequency change approved" after they PUT you there. In short, you're with ABQ center, hand off PHX then back to ABQ center or Tuscon APP if heading back to Texas. Could never get a Class B transition landing any of the outlying fields - the corridors weren't handy or I would have used them.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

The only rude controllers I've ever talked to were PHX.

Do you remember how long ago that was? After the crash in the Sups, this was supposed to be improved.

I have occasionally been cleared through the Bravo in the past 3 years. A sort of inverse problem which drives my son crazy is for a while they would give you a clearance which required going through the Bravo, but not say the magic words “you are cleared into Bravo”. Though even that seems better lately.

 

[mryan75]

Last night a Cirrus apparently flew straight into a mountain just north of Las Vegas.

Lots of comments on COPA so far. The pilot was experienced, familiar with the area and a former ATC controller, which makes the accident hard to explain.

One thing which struck someone - and me - as odd was that they would establish a floor to Class Bravo with a mountain sticking up into it:

(The red circle is a TFR for the accident site)

Maybe this is common, but it seems potentially dangerous to find a mountain right where you’d be maneuvering beneath a Class Bravo shelf.

Tragic, regardless.

A number of years ago two CAP pilots with a combined total of 50,000 flight hours did the same thing on a night orientation flight. One of them was showing the G1000 in a CAP plane to the other. Heck, may have been the same mountain. The air, much more so than the sea, is unforgiving of inattention, or something like that...

 

[mryan75]

By the way, why don't more people earn and fly with an IFR flight plan.. it seems like so much extra work to avoid the bravo's, be on your own, for what ultimately is (in my opinion) a less safe and higher workload flight.. not that IFR guarantees safety.. but you wouldn't be monkeying around avoiding airspace.. you just go where they tell you (basically)

Some pilots who easily have the skill and intelligence to do so simply have no interest in the IR, even some who do a lot of cross-country flying. I could never understand why.

 

[Palmpilot]

A number of years ago two CAP pilots with a combined total of 50,000 flight hours did the same thing on a night orientation flight. One of them was showing the G1000 in a CAP plane to the other. Heck, may have been the same mountain. The air, much more so than the sea, is unforgiving of inattention, or something like that...

That crash is puzzling because the G1000 has a feature that shows potentially conflicting terrain in yellow or red.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

I fly an 01 and there is no terrain alerting or even awareness in the system.

well....that there is a prollum.

 

[danhagan]

Do you remember how long ago that was? After the crash in the Sups, this was supposed to be improved.

It's been a couple of years, but was AFTER the SUP MTN crash ... reason I remember was that my Tiger was scheduled for work with the gentlemen that passed in that accident.

Some pilots who easily have the skill and intelligence to do so simply have no interest in the IR, even some who do a lot of cross-country flying. I could never understand why.

In my area, there might be one flyable IMC day per year ... the others contain ice, lightning or severe microburst activity ... I rather be UNDER looking for downpour activity rather than IN with a time delayed weather depiction.

 

[dbahn]

Some pilots who easily have the skill and intelligence to do so simply have no interest in the IR, even some who do a lot of cross-country flying. I could never understand why.

As someone who has had the IR for 35 years I can assure you that the rating itself is no assurance that you can file IFR. There's currency and proficiency that needs to be maintained, including current charts (which admittedly is easy now with Foreflight but was often a problem with paper subscriptions for a limited area and no time to get them by mail). Also, with the IR you are exposed to some hazards like ice and embedded thunderstorms that you likely wouldn't be if VFR.

 

[Tantalum]

Two things:

1.) No one is claiming that talking to ATC guarantees safety.. however, in general, being in contact with ATC does give you some options you wouldn't have outside of contact.. there are many examples out there with ATC going above and beyond to help stricken planes.. even if that comfort is purely psychological, having your wits about you has a material impact on the safety of flight

2.) Having an IR is not a guarantee of safety either, however, someone who has an IR rating, has demonstrably gone through more training than someone VFR only.. and if they're on a flight plan they're likely spending most of their time on an airway, not dodging airspaces and flying by the wits of their pants


https://www.faa.gov/news/safety_briefing/2018/media/SE_Topic_18-11.pdf
-60% to 70% of CFIT pilots did not hold an instrument rating
^great article. and shows that IFR is no proof of safety for sure, however many of the IFR accidents are related to IFR procedural mistakes, etc.

 

[Tantalum]

Some pilots who easily have the skill and intelligence to do so simply have no interest in the IR, even some who do a lot of cross-country flying. I could never understand why.

I'm right there with you..

I rather be UNDER looking for downpour activity rather than IN with a time delayed weather depiction

with the IR you are exposed to some hazards like ice and embedded thunderstorms that you likely wouldn't be if VFR

You are not required to fly IN the clouds when you are IFR and if you don't like what you see out the window you speak up.. you can fly VMC IFR and you are blessed with, for free:

-someone on the other end of the radio who can
--help you find alternates
--will give you priority handling in an emergency
--knows where you are (at least roughly), and can send help if you go MIA

-you have additional training on precision flying
-you have additional training on reading charts, interpreting weather, etc.
-to be legal you are maintaining additional currency standards that you won't have just doing the 90 day landings thing
-not dodging airspace
-some additional traffic advisories
-can fly published procedures that will keep you safe from obstacles

^you miss out on all those things when not talking to anyone. And if you have an issue you are stuck scrambling for frequencies. You *can* be flight following.. but in my experience flight following is nice but you get nowhere near the level of service as you do when IFR.. several times I've been forgotten. Flight following is load limited

 

[Timbeck2]

My point is, just following a controllers instructions will not keep you alive.

Fine, you buttmunches do what you want. I didn't want to talk to you anyway.

{stomps off in a huff...kicks dog on the way out

 

[Pilawt]

The only rude controllers I've ever talked to were PHX.

Do you remember how long ago that was? After the crash in the Sups, this was supposed to be improved.

Five years ago I would have agreed with Dan. But since moving here three years ago I have been pleasantly surprised by how accommodating PHX has been. Several times I've gotten Bravo clearances for a direct VFR route, without even asking for it. This is despite the additional burden on ATC from the recent proliferation of local puppy mill schools and their solo ESL students. Some of those controllers have the patience of Job.

 

[Palmpilot]

...Also, with the IR you are exposed to some hazards like ice and embedded thunderstorms that you likely wouldn't be if VFR.

The day I got my instrument rating, I suddenly realized that I was now licensed to fly into all kinds of trouble!

 

[Tantalum]

Plenty of VFR and non instrument rated people fly into situations they shouldn't be in

Most GA accidents are not IFR related..

to assert that instrument flying is more dangerous because you are legally allowed to fly into a cloud is dubious

 

[dbahn]

Plenty of VFR and non instrument rated people fly into situations they shouldn't be in

Most GA accidents are not IFR related..

That's a correlation that may have nothing to do with causation. It's pretty clear that IFR pilots are generally better trained, regardless of whether they are flying IFR or VFR, and I think the pure number of VFR only pilots is higher.

I don't remember the percentage, but there are quite a few IR rated pilots who die from VMC into IMC, so the rating itself doesn't always solve the problem.

to assert that instrument flying is more dangerous because you are legally allowed to fly into a cloud is dubious

No, my point was that even with an instrument rating you are not legally allowed to fly into a cloud if you are not current, and it's fairly easy to fall out of currency if you don't fly IFR a lot. I do agree that flying on an IFR flight plan has a lot of advantages, but I still avoid ice and embedded thunderstorms at all costs, which sometimes means staying low and going VFR.

 

[Tantalum]

That's a correlation that may have nothing to do with causation. It's pretty clear that IFR pilots are generally better trained, regardless of whether they are flying IFR or VFR, and I think the pure number of VFR only pilots is higher.

I don't remember the percentage, but there are quite a few IR rated pilots who die from VMC into IMC, so the rating itself doesn't always solve the problem.



No, my point was that even with an instrument rating you are not legally allowed to fly into a cloud if you are not current, and it's fairly easy to fall out of currency if you don't fly IFR a lot. I do agree that flying on an IFR flight plan has a lot of advantages, but I still avoid ice and embedded thunderstorms at all costs, which sometimes means staying low and going VFR.

certainly, the IFR world opens up a whole new set of opportunities but with it also risks

A fairly high percentage of IMC CFIT is from IFR pilots, yes, but I think that's more due to hubris.. "I'm IFR, I know how to fly in the clouds and keep the plane upright" .. but how many vmc into IMC loss-of-control accidents are from IFR pilots?

At the end of the day, flying has its risks.. because general aviation lacks the strict standardization that the commercial guys follow it's very hard to equate or quantify how safe general aviation actually is.. TantalumAirlines <> dbahnairlines..