Fatal in Hayden Feb 19, 2012

KHDN is honestly more benign than many in the hills, but the vis and the overall weather pattern was "intense snow". I believe I posted that they got 27" in a single day, down the road a bit at the ski area, right? Ski area numbers are always a little "padded" so Tony can comment on the actual amount, but it was significant. That's a full blown (pun intended) winter storm you're flying into there Bucky...

I always cringe when I see the "pros" pop up in the threads about flying up there and with bravado say they've "flown in worse" while in the exact same post pointing out that they'd be illegal to fly the approach under 135. There seems to be a touch of that killer, "I'm a REAL pilot" attitude in those posts. People with nice gear like a 414 who already probably have a bit of machismo themselves, read that stuff and think... "My bird can handle that", even when THEY can't, and smear themselves all over the side of a mountain.

There's a point where you just wait it out somewhere warm and dry. Yesterday was a day like that.

I haven't looked at today's wind numbers up there, but judging by the wind down here this morning, you'd have wanted to wait until after noonish/1PMish to launch out of Denver that direction today, too. The weather systems that produce the big snows are usually 24 hour events... and once the plows clear the runways and taxiways, you're often looking at a gorgeous sunny day with mountains of snow piled up next to the runways and taxiways and VERY smooth air for flying.

Lots of flatlanders think our IFR is the same as the clag that hangs around "back home" for days, even weeks, on end. Maybe that's one of the reasons the locals here are more willing to "hang it up and fly tomorrow" when it comes to the mountains... 48 hours of continuous stormy weather is a huge intense storm. 24 hours is more common. Waiting a day usually means a great trip. Wait until right before the next band of snow, and it'll be bumpy and really uncomfortable with mountain wave/up and downdrafts as the next pressure system lines up in the line of waves of weather.

Doc B's "rational" numbers-based decisions -- I like those. Those are the folks we don't hear about on the news around here. The number of times I've heard that there's once again been a crash at a high-altitude airport, and then heard the word "Texas" or other flatland locations for the point of departure, I can no longer count on all fingers and toes.

On a national (world-wide) web board, there will always be a ton of "awww, shucks... that'd be easy in my ol' warhorse!" posts from the non-locals... and we locals just continue to cringe at how silly it is to take the risk of weather-flying up in the rocks.

The stuff really does clear out fast, folks... land somewhere here on this side of the rocks or over in Grand Junction, hunt down a CFI and ask 'em. They'll give you a straight answer about whether a particular day is go or no-go from a local's perspective if your destination is one of these fine airports.

The major mountain airports in Colorado have nice big runways and aren't "backcountry" at all... but they aren't forgiving in bad weather. "Bad" includes high winds on an otherwise gorgeous VFR day. The heavy of heart locals are just tired of folks from elsewhere killing themselves for no good reason.

Sure the mountain towns are great, but stop off for dinner at Perfect Landing at KAPA and ask for a CFI or a CFI's phone number... you'll enjoy dinner and we won't be looking at the wreckage on the mountainside for the next 10 years on a slope too steep to pull out anything other than your body.
 
Fearless Tower said:
True, but remember, for the non-aviation types who watch the news, HDN is the Steamboat airport..when folks book and airline ticket to go to Steamboat, HDN is where they go.
Click to expand...

I have always been disappointed that I never bought a ticket on Rocky Mtn to the now-Walmart parking lot, Avon STOLPort on the Dash-7. That must have been quite an E-ticket ride.
 
Inverted said:
This is why anything you say regarding this matter should not even be taken into consideration. In the hills lol, what hills? Go shoot an approach into Butte then we can talk about hills, oh wait you wouldn't...
Click to expand...

Like I said, go fly into HDN then we'll talk. I used to live in Butte.
 
Earlier there was some discussion about the 414 being /A. If you look on Flightaware they filed all kinds of equipment including many /G in no particular order. It's probably reasonable to assume the aircraft was /G equipped (who knows if it was working).

On flatlanders:

Every time I think of a family coming up to the mountains to go skiing and "having" to get in. I think of this ad piece from Cirrus and the attitude that goes with it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_unp6aIHk98

Dangerous and yet common attitude IMO.
 
denverpilot said:
KHDN is honestly more benign than many in the hills, but the vis and the overall weather pattern was "intense snow". I believe I posted that they got 27" in a single day, down the road a bit at the ski area, right? Ski area numbers are always a little "padded" so Tony can comment on the actual amount, but it was significant.
Click to expand...

Yes the snow total was accurate as reported. Steamboat tends to be pretty honest, they even reported dumps of 1/4 inch this year :)

The other thing to remember is that all snow storms are different. This was a warm storm dropping large quantities of large flake snow. This creates a very dense wall to try to see through.


Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
 
Alexb2000 said:
Earlier there was some discussion about the 414 being /A. If you look on Flightaware they filed all kinds of equipment including many /G in no particular order. It's probably reasonable to assume the aircraft was /G equipped (who knows if it was working).
Click to expand...

The prior flight was /A, that was why I mentioned it.

Still, there is no RNAV approach into that airport that works with 1/4 mile vis and 400' ceiling.
 
Morne said:
The prior flight was /A, that was why I mentioned it.

Still, there is no RNAV approach into that airport that works with 1/4 mile vis and 400' ceiling.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Mentioned just for additional info.
 
Interesting thread. This crash has been huge news down here, since the family is from Corpus Christi.

Turns out I have met the pilot. He and his wife run the little airport in little Refugio, TX, which was one of our "let's get out and explore Texas airports" tour stops last year. Super nice, old-school airport FBO, complete with dogs, cats, and old-fashioned hospitality -- even on a Sunday afternoon.

I was surprised to read that the pilot was over 80 years old. I would not have guessed that he was over 65.

A shame, all around.
 
Since I have flown the actual airplane and know the pilot and his qualifications, I will attempt to put some of these misconceptions to rest. The airplane was RNAV equipped, don't always trust what flight aware says, hell half the time they get the type wrong. The pilot was 75, not over 80 as some had stated. He was a very experienced pilot with well over 40,000 hours. He had over 250 trips across the Atlantic, more than half in single engine aircraft. He has flown on every continent, including many years in Alaska, Canada, Europe and Africa as a bush pilot. He had over a 100 flights into and out of Courchevel airport. I'm not exactly sure what constitues a "flatlander", but I am reasonable sure he wasn't one. As far as the weather, none of us was there at the time, so we don't know. However, the owner of the airplane, who was sitting in the back, said they circled the airport a few times and could see the runway before they iniatied the approach. I know at times like these we all want to play expert, but lets wait until the facts are known before we start passing judgement.
 
Probably never know what went wrong in those last minutes. Heard this on the news:

"Steamboat Springs — An investigator with the National Transportation Safety Board said Wednesday that the Cessna 414A that crashed short of the runway at Yampa Valley Regional Airport in a snowstorm Sunday afternoon did not have its landing gear down when it crashed into a snow field, killing two people and injuring four others.
“We don’t know yet if (the pilot) was still maneuvering or intending to land. There are many reasons why it would still be up,” lead NTSB investigator Jason Aguilera said Wednesday."....................

http://www.steamboattoday.com/news/2012/feb/22/ntsb-investigation-hayden-plane-crash-focus-weathe/
 
Who knows what happened but this is definitely something to watch out for if you fly IFR in the mountains.
YVRA officials said the weather changed dramatically as Vandervlugt neared the runway, with visibility reportedly changing from 10 miles to zero in a matter of 16 minutes as a snow squall moved over the airport.
Click to expand...
That's not really uncommon in the mountains as sometimes snow squalls move in and out of the area. Also the weather sensed and reported over the airport may not be the same as the weather out there on the approach. I've ended up missing approaches even after a favorable ATIS or ASOS.
 
murphey said:
And how many times have *some* people on this board and others (usually newbies) pooh-pooh'd us when we start explaining about mountain flying in the Rockies, even in nice weather. Afterall, they've read Sparky's book and gone thru the AOPA on-line mountain course, right?
Click to expand...
They "pooh-pooh" it for a good reason. There's a certain level of risk to flying in Colorado, and every time I talk to you or Nate about it, you blow everything way out of proportion and basically present it as if some kind of magical juice is involved. See the discussion of La Veta where Nick had to get involved. Once one starts flying it for real, it turns out there's no magic, just the normal judgement, plus the basic knowledge you dismissed above. And using the example of the 414 crash for keeping up the tune is wrong. The particular kind of crash happens in the flatlands all the time when someone bits off more than he can chew. We just had a thread about a Cirrus driver who continued into worsening IMC last month.
 
I've never said there was any "magical juice" involved.

I've said that it's unforgiving because typical aircraft performance is already weak and the vast majority of pilots fly their aircraft squarely in the center of the performance envelope.

They're completely surprised and unprepared for a 3000' takeoff roll in a Skylane, for example.

Contrarily, I was completely unprepared for Jesse to tell me to "climb like you mean it" on a dark overcast night over Nebraska.

Hell, I never see 2000 FPM on my VSI, ever. ;)

I *am* climbing, man! Oh wait... look at all that extra airspeed. I guess I can pull the nose up farther. ;)

There's a reason why CPA calls their course "Mountain Flying - High Altitude Airport Operations" and not just "Mountain Flying".

Flying at your airplane's service ceiling, or near it... is something all pilots do/try eventually. That part's easy.

Doing it between rock walls with no margin left to climb out, is mildly different.

It's the folks going into and out of the *airports* that typically get "bit". That and those who think they can fly in under storns.

Flying *over* the Rockies isn't as tricky as picking a safe path down into them -- and through them -- and dealing with the weakened performance while down in the valleys, headed to or from the airports.

Add Mountain weather. Lots of wrecks up there attest to just how few options you have left when a good downdraft of 2000 FPM hits you.

With care, and real understanding of your aircraft's limitations, flying in the Rockies is just as "safe" as flying anywhere else. The "care" that was likely missing in this accident was a lack of respect for the weather combined with the aircraft's lack of performance, both combined with operating an aerial missile in a confined space.

It's just like other flying, alway know your "out".

It's defintely not rocket science, but in IMC up there, you're already one or two links in an accident chain along -- before you even start the approach.

That's all.

It's no worse than doing approaches at night in Nebraska under an overcast. You've just accepted that you've added an additional risk and adjust appropriately.

The unexpected wind effects are usually the last link in the chain.

One of my instructors recounts the story of passing over the top of Hagerman Pass in a 172RG close enough to the rock face that, in his words... "We were close enough that I think we'd have hit the rocks, if the gear had been down."

That same instructor has crossed that pass 100 or more times in similar aircraft, teaching students, and always flew the standard Mountain profiles of climbing near the downwind side of the valley utilizing ridge lift, have at least 1000' AGL before committing to a crossing, approach on a 45 degree angle to minimize time in the turn if downdrafts are encountered, all the textbook stuff...

He still came within a few feet of a crash. Hagerman requires that you have a small period of time where you're completely committed to the crossing and turns won't help.

It's just that it's sometimes unpredictable. You learn technique to minimize the risks but you still respect that Mother Nature still reaches up and Smites at least one airplane out of the sky up there every year.

Can you kill yourself in other ways in an airplane? Sure. No problem. Even at sea level DA or below.

There's just a few little things you don't quite believe until you've seen them happen... like watching your VSI go from pegged up to pegged down during a pass crossing and not a bump of turbulence.

Your Mountain CFI will tell you to emphasize looking at your VSI during a ridge crossing, but you won't really know WHY until you've seen the thing pegged down, and the visual clues that you're descending like a rock, just aren't there -- outside the window. You'd see it too late to turn out and recover.

People don't need any superhuman qualities to fly in the rocks. They just need a little extra knowledge transfer from those who've been doing it a long time.

Some even survive teaching themselves and have brown stains in their shorts to prove it. Mountain training just adds to your bag of tricks.
 
Hi all,

I just read the prelim for this accident and here's my two cents, FWIW

First of all, a 414 is plenty of airplane to fly into and out of HDN.

Based on the 1515 report of wind 310/8, the ILS was a fine choice. Having a slight quartering tailwind on a 10,000 ft runway is not a problem.

As long as the pilot had plenty of fuel to hold/proceed to alternate, wasn't picking up excessive ice, etc, there was no reason that I can see to break off the approach. Wx was above mins when he started the approach and even if it dropped below while on the approach, you can still continue and take a look. Planes don't crash simply because the vis drops. This was a Part 91 flight, but to answer an earlier question, once a Part 135 is FAF inbound, they can continue if vis drops below mins.

Anyway, there are 3 outcomes for an ILS. Missed approach, straight in landing, or circle to land if authorized.

There were many times in the winter when I continued after vis dropped below mins and easily landed (legally). One of the drawbacks to the ASOS/AWOS equipment is ground blizzards can "blind" them when it's really good vis at the runway.

So, everything appeared normal when he reported on CTAF he was on final approach. (I would assume this meant established on the ILS.)

Unless they were picking up a load of ice (more on that later) there was no reason not to continue to DH, miss, and hold or proceed to their alternate. Again, depending on fuel.

Now, the strange stuff:

Not mentioned in the NTSB report, but mentioned in the newspaper article, the gear was found in the up position. Three possibilities: he forgot the gear on GS intercept, it didn't work, or he left it up because of a heavy load of ice. (I had a friend pick up so much ice on approach in a Cheyenne, he was afraid to put the gear down until the very last second before touching down) Who knows.

The airplane owner was in the back and he said they circled twice to the left. Since the pilot sits on the left side, you wonder if he saw something and tried to circle to keep it in sight. It wouldn't be the first time a pilot wandered from SOP/regs to make it "work".

When I first read the news article, I thought maybe they had run out of gas. But, the owner said the engines were running before the crash.

Just my thoughts..grain of salt..
 
Kiloalphadriver said:
Not mentioned in the NTSB report, but mentioned in the newspaper article, the gear was found in the up position. Three possibilities: he forgot the gear on GS intercept, it didn't work, or he left it up because of a heavy load of ice.
Click to expand...
Or a fourth possibility....that he had circled hoping to get a clear shot at the runway and the visibility went to crap so he initiated a go-around and lost it. Not saying that is what happened, but under those conditions, I can definitely see a single pilot botching a go-around.
 
Hi Fearless,

One of the problems with trying to discuss something on a message board is the definitions can become obscured.

"Circling" and "Circling to land" can mean two different things.

Let's look at the options for this ILS approach:

Once passing REVME inbound on the loc, you can descend from 9500 to 8700 and wait for GS intercept. Now, if you notice from either a AWOS update or a unicon wind check, that the wind was picking up out of the west. At this point, you may elect to stop your descent at 7780 and plan for a "circle to land" 28.

(Notice that the circle to land vis minimums are less by 1.25mi then the ILS mins? Very usual and important for planning)

Many times I have flown into an airport where most of the instrument approach was in VMC, but the airport was not in sight due to a snow shower.

Since the wreckage was found less than 100 yards from the approach end of 10, one possibility is that he saw the ground, but not the airport due to the passing snow shower, and decided to "wait it out". hence, the two left circling turns. He may have lost control of the aircraft while doing this maneuver. (The owner in the back said he thought they had "stalled") He could have accel stalled trying to maintain a tight radius, or just got too slow. Who knows..

This type of maneuver is not the same as a "circle to land" and was not legal.

I flew my entire 27yr pro career single pilot. The last 20 of those years only in King Airs. Most of my trips were in and around the Rockies. I had frequent stops at ASE, TEX, JAC, GUC, EGE, 20V, and HDN. I executed many missed approaches at minimums in all kinds of weather and at night, and never once thought because I was alone, it would lead to "botching" one..

Guess I was one of the lucky ones..:hairraise:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top