luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
And past a VDP if there is one. Having visual ‘cues’ doesn’t mean you have everything in sight.
Radar contact lost with GA airplane approaching RDU
- Thread starter MarcoDA40
- Start date
And past a VDP if there is one. Having visual ‘cues’ doesn’t mean you have everything in sight.
chemgeek
En-Route
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 3,103
- Display Name
Display name:
chemgeek
From the audio, it sounds like the pilot experienced difficulty reprogramming the GPS to accept the GPS 32 approach, and had maybe selected the incorrect IAF at one point. Once on the approach, the pilot transitioned to a visual approach prematurely causing loss of positional and altitude awareness. An unspecified issue with configuring the autopilot was an additional distraction which affected ability to maintain assigned altitude during the initial part of the approach.
This accident is another reminder to use and fly the full approach at night to the MAP or VDP to ensure visual acquisition of the runway environment. The pilot reported only the airport beacon, and not the descent angle lighting or runway environment prior to transitioning to visual approach, a highly risky maneuver. ATC could not have predicted the difficulty the pilot would have transitioning from the original runway to the GPS 32 approach, but quickly got their hands full.
This accident is another reminder to use and fly the full approach at night to the MAP or VDP to ensure visual acquisition of the runway environment. The pilot reported only the airport beacon, and not the descent angle lighting or runway environment prior to transitioning to visual approach, a highly risky maneuver. ATC could not have predicted the difficulty the pilot would have transitioning from the original runway to the GPS 32 approach, but quickly got their hands full.
benyflyguy
En-Route
Him reporting seeing the beacon seems odd when there was probably a sea of lights around that airport. Maybe he was disoriented by something else??
I agree ATC could not predict he would have trouble with the runway switch but they did realize he was in trouble.
Sad. Sounded like A nice guy. Well equipped plane. Shouldn’t have happened.
Might not have been as proficient as needed to be for that night. Nighttime IFR/IMC is a different beast.
I agree ATC could not predict he would have trouble with the runway switch but they did realize he was in trouble.
Sad. Sounded like A nice guy. Well equipped plane. Shouldn’t have happened.
Might not have been as proficient as needed to be for that night. Nighttime IFR/IMC is a different beast.
Ghery
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 10,944
- Location
- Olympia, Washington
- Display Name
Display name:
Ghery Pettit
Amen. I don't like the gtn650 for the same reason. We have one in the club's 182. One of our 172s has a 430W and I greatly prefer that.
woodchucker
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2014
- Messages
- 1,840
- Display Name
Display name:
woodchucker
If you can literally see the PAPI you won't hit anything if you know how to fly. Yes, I try to keep two or three white, but at night on a visual if you can see the PAPI and come up short there has either been a major pilot or plane malfunction. Also, you won't always have PAPI or other indicators for some airports at night, and sometimes they are not 100% accurate. Just use good pilotage on a night visual. Your advice is sound, but not really applicable to this instance. In particular, aiming for the numbers isn't a bad thing. Gives options if you know how to fly and recover a bad approach/landing.
Obviously something went well sideways in this one. Nothing to do with glide slope.
Agree. That's why God created glideslopes.
Kritchlow
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2014
- Messages
- 7,884
- Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
Respectfully, I could not disagree more.
1) If one’s skills are so poor that they cannot stay on the PAPI, they should not have a certificate.
2) Just because every runway does not have a PAPI or electronic glide slope is no reason not to use one when there is one.
3) Not accurate? I think you are mistaken there.
I believe once in my life I have seen a notam stating it was inaccurate, but it was indeed published.
4) Pilotage? Possibly a misuse of the term here.
5) The advice to fly the glideslope is extremely applicable here. Obviously if there was mechanical issues there may have been no choice.
6) Aiming for the numbers is not usually a good idea, especially at night. I believe, unless landing on a very short runway, it limits options, not gives options.
benyflyguy
En-Route
It was in the kathryns report link on the first page of this thread
It is, but be aware that it is a 10 minute condensation of about an hour. That's going to automatically make things happen much faster than they did in real time. I've downloaded the raw audio from LiveATC but haven't had a chance to put it together.
I've also seen the FlightAware track and it's scary. I'm really hoping the NTSB can shed some light (or at least enough information for "better" speculation on why a simple switch of approaches ended up being an apparent trigger of so much loss of situational awareness.
benyflyguy
En-Route
I have to look at he tracking on flight aware.
Bill Watson
En-Route
Perhaps the most we can hope for there is the NTSB stating that there seemed to be a loss of situational awareness.
I’m thinking that most of us already know how potentially easy it is to lose situational awareness, at night, in and out of the muck, dealing with an unexpected change at the end of a long day. If you are a pro, it’s probably a POC. If a recreational or less frequent user of the system, it can be a challenge. You usually come out a bit more proficient and experienced, unless you don’t.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Lindberg
Final Approach
Hopefully being too compliant didn't contribute to this crash, but it wouldn't be the first time. POA regularly comments about how the PIC has to fly the plane and should always be ready to say, "Unable," or make a request. But even here, when I asked how to tell ATC I'd like to do something different from their usual, I was told that I was the problem and needed more training. It doesn't look like it, but I hope this pilot (or any pilot) didn't ignore a quiet voice out of fear what ATC or anyone else might think.
Last edited:
Changing approaches, especially GPS approaches, takes about 10 seconds. It's something which happens, especially at airports with jet traffic and multiple approaches. It should be something practiced. My impression from the truncated audio is that it happened pretty far out. That's what I am trying to verify with the full audio.