Michigan 182 fatal accident in Florida

If the weather was as reported in that linked accident page, landing short, then reevaluating the next morning may of been the correct choice.

Most of us have some form of cockpit weather, if not AWOS & ATIS tell the story once in range. We could also back up to the preflight weather checks. He should of had plenty of fuel.
 
I've only watched 3-4 of Dan Gryder's aircraft crash analysis videos; therefore, I don't feel strongly one way or another about him and his videos. In this particular video, Dan is making some really specific assumptions (speculation) about the minutiae of a particular pilot's life, habits, pilot training and experience which I believe would require Dan to have been a close friend of the the pilot, and not just someone who recently became acquainted with the pilot as the result of performing a post crash investigation. Dan repeatedly stated that the pilot drove the airplane straight into the ground, first starting at 5:00 of the video: "I can tell you how this airplane hit. This airplane drove straight into the ground, and there was no stall in this airplane. There was no stall in this airplane." Well I think we all know that a low altitude stall frequently results in an airplane diving straight (or almost straight) into the ground, and that could also explain the airplane's almost vertical impact. If a low altitude stall is what occurred, it would not be a CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain) as Dan claims.

Dan may be right, or Dan may be wrong on this one. I guess we'll all know eventually what happened here, other than a tragic loss of life. R.I.P.
 
Capngrog said:
Dan may be right, or Dan may be wrong on this one. I guess we'll all know eventually what happened here, other than a tragic loss of life. R.I.P.
Click to expand...
The one thing we COULD agree on is that he's right that the FAA initial report looks just plain sloppy. If Dan can gather as much information as he did, there's no reason 3 professionals paid for by our tax dollars couldn't do better.
 
Last edited:
RyanShort1 said:
The one thing we COULD agree on is that he's right that the NTSB initial report looks just plain sloppy. If Dan can gather as much information as he did, there's no reason 3 professionals paid for by our tax dollars couldn't do better.
Click to expand...

Which NTSB report are you referring to? This occured three days ago. There is no report that I know of, other than a preliminary FAA notification.
 
Jeez how does he get info about how this guy did on his IFR written or checkride?? Must know his instructor or something. The details Dan has on this guy makes it seem like he knows the pilot 1st hand. But he does make some solid arguments based on aggressive claims. his recommendations are sound though and as a low time IFR pilot, his assertions reenforce good ADM and point out bad ADM.
there is room for some argument for some incapacitation though.
 
sarangan said:
Which NTSB report are you referring to? This occured three days ago. There is no report that I know of, other than a preliminary FAA notification.
Click to expand...
You’re right, FAA initial, but you knew what I meant.
 
Capngrog said:
I've only watched 3-4 of Dan Gryder's aircraft crash analysis videos; therefore, I don't feel strongly one way or another about him and his videos.
Click to expand...

I watched some early on, but decided there were better things to do.
 
benyflyguy said:
Jeez how does he get info about how this guy did on his IFR written or checkride?? Must know his instructor or something. The details Dan has on this guy makes it seem like he knows the pilot 1st hand. But he does make some solid arguments based on aggressive claims. his recommendations are sound though and as a low time IFR pilot, his assertions reenforce good ADM and point out bad ADM.
there is room for some argument for some incapacitation though.
Click to expand...
Dan has no qualms about getting in touch with those involved, provided they are still breathing. I consider him as entertainment, though he's likely right more often than not.
 
DG's explanation of how he flew that other guys Cessna so proficiently and landed up side down in the corn was my favorite.

I did view a couple of others previously, but they came no where near that one for demonstrating his personal perfection, both as a pilot and an analyst of accidents. That particular event was not an accident. He simply committed to a short field landing demonstration into a field that was shorter than his skills could perform. Less damage would have occurred if he had continued, and just ran into some corn at low speed.
 
Chain of events folks. If there was an autopilot problem, it was just one link in the chain. Low IFR, night, questionable pilot proficiency, poor ADM and risk management were all in play.
 
geezer said:
DG's explanation of how he flew that other guys Cessna so proficiently and landed up side down in the corn was my favorite.

I did view a couple of others previously, but they came no where near that one for demonstrating his personal perfection, both as a pilot and an analyst of accidents. That particular event was not an accident. He simply committed to a short field landing demonstration into a field that was shorter than his skills could perform. Less damage would have occurred if he had continued, and just ran into some corn at low speed.
Click to expand...
But... the guy who's Cessna it was, basically said Dan did do a good job...

 
I liked his take on Trevor Jacobs and the way Trevor fooled everyone but DG. If you haven't seen it it's really a hoot! Surprise ending ... :loco:
 
I don’t know Dan personally, but despite some good technical analysis, he seems to make a lot of presumptive statements about the pilots and their state of mind in a lot of his videos. In some cases he may be right, in others, maybe not. In my AF civilian career, I have done a couple of mishap investigations, and making some of the statements Dan makes, I’m not sure I would be so presumptive. Wonder how he has learned so much about the pilot and why he flew the 11 minute flight? How does he know the AP altitude hold was an issue the pilot was aware of or even checking out on the 11 minute flight? Does he know the pilot? Did he interview or talk to other folks at the pilots home airport? Lots of presumptions without any evidence to support them.
 
AlphaMike said:
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2022/03/cessna-182q-skylane-n182xt-fatal.html


Say what you want about Dan, but I think he might be right on this one.
Click to expand...

He seems to know the pilot, the mechanic, the condition of the autopilot including at what time the spouse showed up for the flight etc.. If he really knows all that information first hand, then great.
RyanShort1 said:
You’re right, FAA initial, but you knew what I meant.
Click to expand...

Yes, I knew what you meant, but what threw me off is your statement that "3 professionals paid for by our tax dollars couldn't do better". I don't know how many people and tax dollars it took to produce the preliminary notifications, but the report contains exactly what it is supposed to contain. I am not saying NTSB does a great job, but anyone who claims to have done a comprehensive analysis three days after the accident using flightaware data and tv newsclips is blowing smoke. The discussion thread on kathryn's report is more insightful than listening to one guy express his opinion on youtube.
 
sarangan said:
Yes, I knew what you meant, but what threw me off is your statement that "3 professionals paid for by our tax dollars couldn't do better". I don't know how many people and tax dollars it took to produce the preliminary notifications, but the report contains exactly what it is supposed to contain. I am not saying NTSB does a great job, but anyone who claims to have done a comprehensive analysis three days after the accident using flightaware data and tv newsclips is blowing smoke. The discussion thread on kathryn's report is more insightful than listening to one guy express his opinion on youtube.
Click to expand...
Dan's video directly contradicted the initial report which was in the video around 3:21... which really begs the question of the collection phase.
 
I have a Stec 55x and he is correct on the porpoising without warning. I found the best way to avoid this is slow the plane down and dirty the plane up with the gear a couple of miles before U get to the IAF, letting the autopilot stay caught up. Once it captures the glide slope, normally nails it with minimum throttle play but in the back of the mind, expecting the unexpected
 
Last edited:
When Gryder's video showed the ADS-B track overlaid on a straight line as the aircraft approached the destination airport, it revealed.the terrible error the pilot made in thinking his eleven minute loop around home base before setting out to Florida proved the autopilot was functioning properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top