Mooney down at ORF

"The Cessna sized Mooney"


Really.....do we all compare to Cessnas now? Is that the standard?


Any word if he was in an IFR plan?
 
Unit74 said:
"The Cessna sized Mooney"


Really.....do we all compare to Cessnas now? Is that the standard?


Any word if he was in an IFR plan?
Click to expand...

:mad2::mad2::mad2:

I'm sure he was on an IFR plan given the conditions.
 
Looks like he went missed and tried twice to get in to the alt.
 
Henning said:
I'm always surprised when people choose to fly in conditions like this.:(
Click to expand...

Right after my checkride I flew in those conditions, but now I'd want a thorough[1] IPC before I'd attempt it.

[1] One that makes me sweat bigtime!
 
Bill Jennings said:
Right after my checkride I flew in those conditions, but now I'd want a thorough[1] IPC before I'd attempt it.

[1] One that makes me sweat bigtime!
Click to expand...

I want a turbine twin. I wonder what his avionics were? SVT makes crap conditions a lot easier.
 
Henning said:
I'm always surprised when people choose to fly in conditions like this.:(
Click to expand...

The listed owner holds a PP(A) with no IR, though has an A&P.
Maybe just got rated?
 
RotorDude said:
The listed owner holds a PP(A) with no IR, though has an A&P.
Maybe just got rated?
Click to expand...

:dunno: No clue, doesn't make much difference to the point though, this is part of decision making beyond the rating.:(
 
Henning said:
:dunno: No clue, doesn't make much difference to the point though, this is part of decision making beyond the rating.:(
Click to expand...

If you are properly rated, proficient, and current, with lots of experience shooting low approaches in IMC, your odds for success are pretty high.
If you are VFR-only trying to land in low IFR, your odds for failure are just as high.
Low experience or proficiency, few recent low approaches, all conspire against you even if you are properly equipped and rated. So it's up to the pilot and his/her judgment, like all flying in general.
 
timwinters said:
It's what the average Joe knows.
Click to expand...

flyingcheesehead said:
No, it's what the below average reporter knows.
Click to expand...

More times than I can count when talking about flying small planes with random people their reply is usually "You mean like aCessna?"... which I then try to educate them and let them know that Cessna makes some larger planes too.. Doing my part to educate the public!
 
Henning said:
I'm always surprised when people choose to fly in conditions like this.:(
Click to expand...

What part? The ceilings or the visibility or the weather or the combination? or is it because he didn't have a good alternate?

Wonder if he encountered any of that freezing rain or icing yesterday. It was quite a mess, and still is.
 
Henning said:
:dunno: No clue, doesn't make much difference to the point though, this is part of decision making beyond the rating.:(
Click to expand...
True, although it leads to an interesting question -

According to the news, there were 4 people onboard (two confirmed dead so far). Don't know if they are family/friends..etc.

If he was not-IR, how does insurance handle the aftermath? He would have been operating illegally (filed IFR without a rating). Does insurance pay?
 
RotorDude said:
If you are properly rated, proficient, and current, with lots of experience shooting low approaches in IMC, your odds for success are pretty high.
If you are VFR-only trying to land in low IFR, your odds for failure are just as high.
Low experience or proficiency, few recent low approaches, all conspire against you even if you are properly equipped and rated. So it's up to the pilot and his/her judgment, like all flying in general.
Click to expand...

There is more to the decission, there is why you are flying and is the increased justified? Also he had 3 people with him he is responsible for.

Was this at least a TKS Mooney?
 
JasonM said:
What part? The ceilings or the visibility or the weather or the combination? or is it because he didn't have a good alternate?
Click to expand...
Everything combined.

Assuming the pilot was the registered owner, he was over 70, flying in crap weather in the middle of the night/wee hours of the morning.

That is the kind of stuff you find young kids hauling cancelled checks in.
 
FWIW, from my inner ORF circle, it was not the registered owner flying.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Everything combined.

Assuming the pilot was the registered owner, he was over 70, flying in crap weather in the middle of the night/wee hours of the morning.

That is the kind of stuff you find young kids hauling cancelled checks in.
Click to expand...

What model was it? I'm assuming one of the later models considering four on board.
 
Is this common? Don't recall hearing it before.
Following the crash, the precision approach path indicator for runway 23 was placed out of service at the FAA's request so it could be checked.
Click to expand...

Edit: FA radar track does seem to show him right on the centerline, though their airspeed plot seems buggy/erroneous (for the other approaches too).
 
Last edited:
RotorDude said:
Is this common? Don't recall hearing it before.
Click to expand...
Not sure why they would check the PAPI. I would think they would want to flight check the GS if anything since he kept going low on the approach from what I've heard. I haven't listened to the liveATC feed, but apparently approach told him a couple times that he was low.
 
RotorDude said:
Someone said above he may not have been the pilot, per inside info. So we need to wait and see.
Click to expand...


It will be interesting to see the findings. Considering his history of fuel starvation incidents, I am curious to hear the details.
 
JasonM said:
There is a liveATC post on that link. Listening now..
Click to expand...

I'm 18 minutes into it. He was given altitude warnings, off course warnings and even had his approach clearance cancelled by the controller because he was so far off of the localizer.

At 21 minutes into the transmissions, the controller is asking about fuel state and why he is having problems staying on course.
 
Last edited:
Marauder said:
I'm 18 minutes into it. He was given altitude warnings, off course warnings and even had his approach clearance cancelled by the controller because he was so far off of the localizer.

At 21 minutes into the transmissions, the controller is asking about fuel state and why he is having problems staying on course.
Click to expand...

Eesh, this does not sound like someone prepared for IMC.
 
Henning said:
Eesh, this does not sound like someone prepared for IMC.
Click to expand...

At 25 minutes he is indicating precession on his "gyro" and is asking for radar vectors on the localizer.

If the owner is indeed flying this, not having an instrument rating would certainly explain it. He reportedly had two passengers. Wonder if either were instrument rated pilots.
 
Marauder said:
I'm 18 minutes into it. He was given altitude warnings, off course warnings and even had his approach clearance cancelled by the controller because he was so far off of the localizer.

At 21 minutes into the transmissions, the controller is asking about fuel state and why he is having problems staying on course.
Click to expand...

Here is the track. The approaches don't seem perfect, but not vastly off the final approach courses afaict (at least the final one).
 

Attachments

  • crash.png
    crash.png
    658.4 KB · Views: 105
Two fuel starvation accidents? Wow
1994 Fuel Starvation

Doing two night legs out of Key West for home with 3 passengers is a bit much.

The winds were favorable and perhaps the weather was too until close to the final destination.
 
Bill Watson said:
Two fuel starvation accidents? Wow
1994 Fuel Starvation

Doing two night legs out of Key West for home with 3 passengers is a bit much.

The winds were favorable and perhaps the weather was too until close to the final destination.
Click to expand...

I'm confused, I thought it was 3 pax with a pilot from the first reading, but subsequent reading, combined with the fact that it's an F on a long haul makes me think it's 3 SOB total. I don't think you can do 4 and full fuel in an F.
 
Henning said:
I'm confused, I thought it was 3 pax with a pilot from the first reading, but subsequent reading, combined with the fact that it's an F on a long haul makes me think it's 3 SOB total. I don't think you can do 4 and full fuel in an F.
Click to expand...
you are right
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top