TBM Crash May Implicate ATC

[Kelvin]

Tons? How much? How many in this model? President of the owners means that he is really proficient? With all that knowledge he still did not declare an emergency and get down quickly.

Oh...how quick we judge others...is 300 hours a year tons of time for a non professional pilot?

I cannot answer your question...at this point, I don't know anyone who can...

Note: PA46---TBM700---TBM850---TBM900 time...

Hypoxia is a killer...

Snip
Larry and Jane Glazer were my friends. They grew up in Rochester, NY and went to school with my wife Bonnie. We socialized during our family trips to ROC, especially after Larry and Jane became pilots and airplane owners. They were MMOPA members when they owned a PA-46. They came to our conventions and safety seminars. They later bought and flew Socata TBM-700 and TBM-850 airplanes and flew about 300 hours/year. Bonnie and I dined and stayed at their home this June 22, during a family visit to Rochester. He was President of the TBMOPA. We compared experiences with the 2 associations. We talked about families, flying, training, safety, and their new TBM-900. It was a great time.

Another snip
Wise words of others...
Hypoxia researcher Dr. Paul Buza (will be speaking at the convention next month) says that at the time of the TBM pilot's initial transmission requesting lower he was probably already mildly to moderately hypoxic even though his speech sounded normal. He says he sees this all the time in the chamber training, and he will discuss this in detail at the convention along with some videos of this phenomenon. I was taught that judgment is lost first, and this crash appears to confirm that concept and maybe explain why he didn't declare an emergency and immediately descend.

 

[N801BH]

On a Multi million dollar TBM, you would figure they could interface "bitchin Betty" to scream when the cabin loses pressurization.. She surely screams when you get anywhere close to the ground during landings........

 

[MAKG1]

It amazes me sometimes how much people underestimate hypoxia.

Yes, the pilot did some really stupid stuff.

However, the first noticeable symptom of hypoxia is that it makes you dumb as a box of rocks.

It's plausible (though there is no evidence one way or the other) that the pilot couldn't figure out how to pull the throttle. Yes, hypoxia makes people THAT stupid.

There are a ton of amusing astronomer stories about wild stupidity at substantially lower altitudes.

From a PBS blog about a visit to ALMA in Chile (el. 16000):

Scientists working at ALMA call this a “summit moment,” where the lack of oxygen starts to affect your ability to think and communicate clearly. Every scientist we spoke with had a story: One bilingual scientist lost the ability to translate words; another tightened a screw for a full five minutes only to realize he was unscrewing it; others complained of feeling dizzy, lightheaded and taking unintelligible notes.

It happens to everyone, albeit not always in the same manner, and it's very real. The insidious part is that you often don't realize it's happening to you until afterward.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Yeah hypoxia is bad, guess what if you are pic and you let hypoxia get you then you screwed up. The guy seems to have been the poster child for the GA flying magazine sells, he still screwed up. This one is all pilot error.

 

[Ted]

On a Multi million dollar TBM, you would figure they could interface "bitchin Betty" to scream when the cabin loses pressurization.. She surely screams when you get anywhere close to the ground during landings........

Every airplane is built with something we will ultimately find can be improved. That's why they update planes with new ones that have new features.

I agree, this should be easy.

 

[47PILOT]

Ok, we all get the fact that the "pilot" screwed up. There is clear evidence of that at the bottom of the ocean.
What myself and I think a few others here are trying to say is that there was a real possibility that, for whatever reason, the pilot was overcome by hypoxia before his brain could process what was happening.
True he could have been aware of a pressurization problem early enough to take corrective action, and simply didn't take it seriously enough and reacted to slow. I guess we will never really know the answer to that question, but i would like to think that a pilot with his experience didn't make such an irresponsible decision, and there was more to it than that. Yea I know, bad decisions are made by pilots every day, but I think this was something different

 

[ClimbnSink]

No he screwed up. Not a drunken buzz job gone wrong so we don't want to believe it. But the pilot screwed up just like you and I can.

 

[47PILOT]

No he screwed up. Not a drunken buzz job gone wrong so we don't want to believe it. But the pilot screwed up just like you and I can.

We'll there you have it. The one who knows all has spoken.
Who needs NTSB when you can provide all the answers. I guess we're done here

 

[ClimbnSink]

We'll there you have it. The one who knows all has spoken.
Who needs NTSB when you can provide all the answers. I guess we're done here

All bow before the NTSB. How often do they get it right? Besides if anyone if overly fond of blaming pilot error it is the NTSB.

 

[47PILOT]

All bow before the NTSB. How often do they get it right? Besides if anyone if overly fond of blaming pilot error it is the NTSB.

Yea, your right. From now on let's just read about an accident, and go by whatever information is provided, no matter how accurate or inaccurate, and make our own final determination.
Your funny

 

[Rob P.]

Ok, I stayed out of this thread because I thought I'd made myself perfectly clear in my earlier posts and it had devolved to "did not"; "did to" childish rhetoric.

But, after reading some of the stuff here all I can say is; really?

I can get it was CAUSED by pilot error. Yep, the guy screwed up. For whatever reason (hypoxia, negligence, or stupidity) he screwed up.

What I do not get is all the posts about how ATC isn't "supposed to read minds" or can't "fly the airplane instead of the pilot." Really guys? Sarcasm I can understand but that sort of stuff is wacky.

NO ONE EVER said that ATC should fly the plane. NO ONE EVER said that ATC should have been able to read the pilot's mind. Saying so mulitple times just shows that whomever is posting that drivel is making up stuff just so that they can blame the pilot.

Which we ALL know is where the blame ultimately rests.

THE POINT that those of us who are saying differently is that ATC failed in their mission.

READ MINDS? How about using common sense? TOO BUSY? How about paying attention when mental warning signals start going off? What warning signals? The ones that SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAUGHT but apparently weren't. Or were ignored for reasons yet to come to light.

Because, as we all know, the blame rests on the failure of the pilot to fly the plane. Everyone else is blameless. Because only the pilot can fly the plane. Everyone else can just go on about his merry way and ignore the plane falling out of the sky after his request for help is denied.

I find it axiomatic that the word "help" often is said in sentences instead of in 1 short 4-letter word. If you can't recognize that, you have no business being on the other end of the communication line. And, if your TRAINING doesn't incorporate that concept, your training is deficient.

Yep, the pilot screwed up. He did. But ATC failed miserably in this case as well.

To paraphrase the tapes:

Pilot: "Center, we have a potential problem and need to descend..."
ATC: "Negative pilot. Just continue on..."

And you think that's OK? Really?

 

[BG305]

This is where the pilot screwed up. He asked ATC to decend when he had an obvious problem that a lower altitude should have fixed. 1 Aviate( fly the plane) 2 Navigate
(plan and direct the route or course of a ship, aircraft, or other form of transportation, especially by using instruments or maps.) 3 Communicate( call ATC and let them know why you held to do # 1 and 2).

It seams the pilot sarted the process at the end and this led to his death. BOTTOM LINE. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ASK ATC PERMISSION TO DEVIATE FOR THW SAFETY OF THE FLIGHT.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Ok, I stayed out of this thread because I thought I'd made myself perfectly clear in my earlier posts and it had devolved to "did not"; "did to" childish rhetoric.

But, after reading some of the stuff here all I can say is; really?

I can get it was CAUSED by pilot error. Yep, the guy screwed up. For whatever reason (hypoxia, negligence, or stupidity) he screwed up.

What I do not get is all the posts about how ATC isn't "supposed to read minds" or can't "fly the airplane instead of the pilot." Really guys? Sarcasm I can understand but that sort of stuff is wacky.

NO ONE EVER said that ATC should fly the plane. NO ONE EVER said that ATC should have been able to read the pilot's mind. Saying so mulitple times just shows that whomever is posting that drivel is making up stuff just so that they can blame the pilot.

Which we ALL know is where the blame ultimately rests.

THE POINT that those of us who are saying differently is that ATC failed in their mission.

READ MINDS? How about using common sense?

To paraphrase the tapes:

Pilot: "Center, we have a potential problem and need to descend..."
ATC: "Negative pilot. Just continue on..."

And you think that's OK? Really?

Bad paraphrasing...
Pilot: center we have a bad indication, request descent to 18000
ATC: descend to FL250, I'll get you lower when I can

You are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.

At no time did he indicate use the E word, or use problem, or use the immediately, or any other word to convey the situation required an abnormal response

 

[roncachamp]

To paraphrase the tapes:

Pilot: "Center, we have a potential problem and need to descend..."
ATC: "Negative pilot. Just continue on..."

And you think that's OK? Really?

That's quite a bit of paraphrasing. The pilot asked for lower and was given lower.

 

[Dr. O]

We don't know for sure
We will never know for sure
In my own mind his judgement was impaired from hypoxia long before he asked for lower the first time (swag, based on no facts)
Watch the training films of military pilots in the chamber with their O2 masks off and copying a clearance. They all said afterwards they thought they were fine - except the clearance they wrote down was gibberish

I long ago decided that if I sense there is a problem and I need higher, lower, left, right, faster, slower, whatever, I will just do it.
I will call ATC if and when I have time.

I believe in the big sky theory. Just because I am 500 feet higher or lower, turning 90 degrees, or whatever, I do not anticipate an instantaneous crash. The FAA can fight with me later .

 

[Henning]

Do these new TBMs have any sort of CVR or DFDR on there to record data for this sort of purpose? I'm assuming not as it's not required, but it would likely help figure out what happened.

I don't think I hear people disagreeing that the pilot screwed up. Of course, lots of pilots have screwed up, and there's been a lot of effort to change systems to help prevent the opportunity for screwing up.

Example: Henning's gear up. He stated no gear warning horn in his 310D. The 310N I fly has a gear warning horn that goes off when the throttles are pulled back to idle. On the 310R, not only is there a gear warning horn with throttles at idle, but it will start blaring if you select flaps full down and still have the gear up. Yeah, pilot error, but you can design the plane with human factors in mind to help reduce the probability of a human error.

Actually, turns out the gear horn was just non functional, they missed it on annual. This is another reason I normally do owner assist annuals, I just didn't have the time this time.

I doubt the TBM has a CVR, but with most glass panels, they seem to be able to pull data from them like a quasi DFDR.

 

[Henning]

Oh...how quick we judge others...is 300 hours a year tons of time for a non professional pilot?

I cannot answer your question...at this point, I don't know anyone who can...

Note: PA46---TBM700---TBM850---TBM900 time...

Hypoxia is a killer...

Yeah, by the time you notice it in speech, they're near done.

 

[N801BH]

]Actually, turns out the gear horn was just non functional, they missed it on annual[/B]. This is another reason I normally do owner assist annuals, I just didn't have the time this time.

I doubt the TBM has a CVR, but with most glass panels, they seem to be able to pull data from them like a quasi DFDR.

Hmmmm... I can't wait to see the outcome the FAA has on the A&P and IA who signed off on that annual... Care to name names??

 

[MooneyDriver78]

I believe in the big sky theory. Just because I am 500 feet higher or lower, turning 90 degrees, or whatever, I do not anticipate an instantaneous crash. The FAA can fight with me later .

If I'm on a victor airway, I would at least turn 10 degrees left or right...todays navigation systems can be awfully precise.

 

[gismo]

Have you *ever* missed or forgot something when flying, or misinterpreted what was happening with your airplane?

WHAT ARE YOU, STUPID?!?

I guess the answer to both questions is yes. And only human.

 

[Kelvin]

I doubt the TBM has a CVR, but with most glass panels, they seem to be able to pull data from them like a quasi DFDR.

The data the G-1000 collects is impressive...

I used to collect it and look at it on http://cirrusreports.com/

 

[weilke]

The data the G-1000 collects is impressive...

I used to collect it and look at it on http://cirrusreports.com/

Not sure how much of that data will be retrievable after 12 months salt water bath. The ntsb has done some Interesting work reading out chips that had all their feet burned off, if the plane is raised, maybe they can reconstruct the g1000 data as well.

 

[Dave Theisen]

Could the controller picked up on what was really going on, maybe, but you really can't blame him based on the info he was given. All the pilot told him was he had a "wrong indication" and needed to get down to 18,000'. To say that the controller should have immediately recognized he was hypoxic and cleared him down to 10,000 based on that info is ridiculous. Even if the pilot didn't declare an emergency, if he at least used the word "pressurization", he might have gotten a little more attention. I can think of several "wrong indications" that I might want to leave FL280 for FL180 because that would probably be enough to get me out of IMC or icing conditions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kelvin]

Not sure how much of that data will be retrievable after 12 months salt water bath. The ntsb has done some Interesting work reading out chips that had all their feet burned off, if the plane is raised, maybe they can reconstruct the g1000 data as well.

Yeah...the data is collected on a SD card...I have no idea how moisture/submersion would affect the card...

 

[Jaybird180]

Hmmmm... I can't wait to see the outcome the FAA has on the A&P and IA who signed off on that annual... Care to name names??

I seriously doubt the IA signed off and noted 'I forgot to check the gear horn.' Most likely he will say, 'Everything was ship shape when I signed off on it.'

 

[Rob P.]

Could the controller picked up on what was really going on, maybe, but you really can't blame him based on the info he was given. All the pilot told him was he had a "wrong indication" and needed to get down to 18,000'. To say that the controller should have immediately recognized he was hypoxic and cleared him down to 10,000 based on that info is ridiculous. Even if the pilot didn't declare an emergency, if he at least used the word "pressurization", he might have gotten a little more attention. I can think of several "wrong indications" that I might want to leave FL280 for FL180 because that would probably be enough to get me out of IMC or icing conditions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is where people seem to be going wrong and making up facts no one is suggesting except the naysayers. Everyone seems to be saying that because the controller couldn't recognize exactly what the problem was, he was OK to do nothing.

ATC didn't need to know EXACTLY what the problem was. That there might be a problem & the pilot NEEDing a change in flight level should have been enough to trigger some sort of action by ATC.

What the TBM got was, essentially, nada.

Which means that there is no procedure &/or no training, or the controller blew it.

I love all the "well, the pilot should have just descended and then dealt with the fallout..." stuff. Really? Just push the yoke over and rapidly descend in the busiest airspace in the world without clearance? Over all those shoot down airplanes that deviate without clearance first and ask questions later type airspaces?

The fallout we'd be discussing had that happened would be shrapnel not paperwork.

I guess it comes down to this: Would YOU personally be comfortable with that controller on the line with you if YOU had a problem and needed something "unconventional"? This is not asking if YOU are capable of handling the "potential emergency" you are dealing with. This is asking if YOU are OK with needing something from THAT GUY and he's asleep at the switch and tells you that you can't do what you're planning on, or needing to be, doing?

Are YOU ok with that?

 

[Palmpilot]

What the TBM got was, essentially, nada.

That's quite an exaggeration.

 

[RotorAndWing]

This is where people seem to be going wrong and making up facts no one is suggesting except the naysayers. Everyone seems to be saying that because the controller couldn't recognize exactly what the problem was, he was OK to do nothing.

ATC didn't need to know EXACTLY what the problem was. That there might be a problem & the pilot NEEDing a change in flight level should have been enough to trigger some sort of action by ATC.

What the TBM got was, essentially, nada.

Which means that there is no procedure &/or no training, or the controller blew it.

I love all the "well, the pilot should have just descended and then dealt with the fallout..." stuff. Really? Just push the yoke over and rapidly descend in the busiest airspace in the world without clearance? Over all those shoot down airplanes that deviate without clearance first and ask questions later type airspaces?

The fallout we'd be discussing had that happened would be shrapnel not paperwork.

I guess it comes down to this: Would YOU personally be comfortable with that controller on the line with you if YOU had a problem and needed something "unconventional"? This is not asking if YOU are capable of handling the "potential emergency" you are dealing with. This is asking if YOU are OK with needing something from THAT GUY and he's asleep at the switch and tells you that you can't do what you're planning on, or needing to be, doing?

Are YOU ok with that?

Yet another one that " doesn't get it".

 

[Jaybird180]

Seems like this has become another hi wing vs lo wing debate.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Are all you 'ATC screwed up' guys cowards expecting some ATC hero stuff to bail you out when your pilot stuff is lacking?

 

[olasek]

What the TBM got was, essentially, nada.

Far from true.

 

[Kelvin]

Just push the yoke over and rapidly descend in the busiest airspace in the world without clearance?

Central NC isn't exactly the world's busiest airspace...

Over all those shoot down airplanes that deviate without clearance first and ask questions later type airspaces?

I am not sure how many planes have been shot down due to deviating into restricted airspace here in the US...but I don't get out much...can you perhaps point me to that number?

 

[roncachamp]

This is where people seem to be going wrong and making up facts no one is suggesting except the naysayers. Everyone seems to be saying that because the controller couldn't recognize exactly what the problem was, he was OK to do nothing.

Where you're going wrong is asserting that the controller did nothing.

 

[Zeldman]

Yet another one that " doesn't get it".

Yes, very obviously.

Saying ATC is responsible for this flight is like saying the police are responsible for your driving.

 

[Jimmy cooper]

It's handed down from days of old on board ship. The pilot ( captain) is ultimately in charge. As it should be. Other wise it becomes Abbott and Costello. The ATC did exactly what was requested.....as he should have. The pilot was -is responsible and that's the way it will play out. The pilot, like the pilot in buffalo, like the pilots in the French debacle screwed up badly. To say the ATC fellow should have behaved as a den mother is absurd. That's not his job.

 

[olasek]

and he's asleep at the switch and tells you that you can't do what you're planning on, or needing to be, doing?

Are YOU ok with that?

Wrong question. Yes, I would be perfectly comfortable with THAT GUY because I wouldn't be asking him for permission if I had to do something in an emergency, so I would be fine with any controller even one that was asleep, literally. If you still fail to grasp this concept - either read this thread in it's entirety or get yourself a pilot's license and learn how the system works, and it was designed this way for a reason to remove any ambiguity who is responsible for what.

 

[N747JB]

Last week I told ATC I wanted a block altitude from FL190-210 for cloud clearance, if they could do it fine, if not it was going to be bumpy. Should she have cleared me to 230 to make sure I was OK? No, her options were basically yes or no!
My experience with ATC over the last 30 years is they will try to do what you ask and it's my responsibility to tell them what I need or want.

 

[JeffDG]

Yeah...the data is collected on a SD card...I have no idea how moisture/submersion would affect the card...

Might be recoverable if you went down in a lake, but salt water will destroy it pretty quickly.

 

[Rob P.]

Yet another one that " doesn't get it".

Oh, I get it. In my real life I teach beginner and advanced firearms as well as CCW training. I carry a firearm every day. In MY WORLD, if someone screws up, people die. As a result, safety is top priority and no one EVER gets to ignore an "indication of a problem."

So, yeah, I really get it.

What you don't get is that when bad things start to happen, people are supposed to act. That's called stepping up. When you are the "go to guy" you are putting yourself in the position of BEING the guy who is supposed to step up. Sometimes, when that person fails to step up, other people die. After that, someone is supposed to investigate and then make changes in procedures so that it doesn't happen again.

I have lots of personal stories to illustrate this point but I think I've made myself clear enough. But then;

Apparently, in the the flying world, that doesn't happen. Instead it's blame the dead guy, twist and ignore facts, and generally make up stuff while guzzling a beer or 3 and thanking God it wasn't you.

Which, incidentally, it couldn't have been because you are perfect and infallible.

Which mindset then leads to the inevitable comments like this one:

Are all you 'ATC screwed up' guys cowards expecting some ATC hero stuff to bail you out when your pilot stuff is lacking?

You should consider telling the surviving family members your little "joke." Maybe they'll find it funny. Maybe not. I'm betting they won't.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Oh, I get it. In my real life I teach beginner and advanced firearms as well as CCW training. I carry a firearm every day. In MY WORLD, if someone screws up, people die. As a result, safety is top priority and no one EVER gets to ignore an "indication of a problem."

So, yeah, I really get it.

What you don't get is that when bad things happen, people are supposed to act. That's called stepping up. Sometimes, when people fail to step up, other people die. After that, someone is supposed to investigate and then make changes in procedures so that it doesn't happen again.

Apparently, in the the flying world, that doesn't happen. Instead it's blame the dead guy, twist and ignore facts, and generally make up stuff while guzzling a beer or 3 and thanking God it wasn't you.

Which, incidentally, it couldn't have been because you are perfect and infallible.
.

Trying to equate a pilot error accident to concealed carry is, well, just stupid.

You obviously don't have much aviation experience (it shows) and you obviously don't understand pilot-controller communication.

You're not impressing anyone with the gun crap, really.