Youtube Pilot and her dad perish in TN

Status
Not open for further replies.
MIFlyer said:
Your first sentence is objectively false, in this case. Though it may be “not hard to use” in most cases, in this case, it possibly was
Click to expand...
IDK. I feel that's like saying a steering wheel in a car is easy to use in most cases. But if I'm just too lazy to learn how to turn it, then the steering wheel CAN be hard to use.
Is it the steering wheel being hard to use, or is it that I didn't take the basic, minimal time required to use it properly?
 
MauleSkinner said:
The fact that someone is unwilling or unable to learn something doesn’t make it hard to use.
Click to expand...

"Hard to use" is a relative characteristic. If someone is unable to learn to use it, for that person it is indeed hard to use.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
Is it the steering wheel being hard to use, or is it that I didn't take the basic, minimal time required to use it properly?
Click to expand...

Again, it might be relative.

I recall a car when I was young that didn't have power steering. My dad and I could handle it fine in maneuvering around a parking lot, but my mother didn't have enough strength to turn it well when entering or backing out of a parking space. For her, the steering wheel was hard to use.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
Maybe. But if more CFIs had said "sorry, but you need your head in the flying game because you lack the skills and focus to safely operate this faster, more complex Debonair -- and I should NOT be having to do any PIC tasks for you" then perhaps it would have clicked with her that she needs to improve.

Sure, any one CFI might be giving her feedback she doesn't like and she can hire/fire at will, but if you hear it from enough people, you start to take it to heart. In the end if she wants to ignore everyone, sure that's her prerogative.
But a crap instructor can definitely hasten your demise if they don't point out to you "hey, I shouldn't have to get the gear for you... or the flaps... or help you with the A/P... or tell you which runway we need to go to... or point out the airport for you.". But by playing a role in her game of reality-denial where she's doing great in her training and getting ready for her IR checkride, you are providing a totally false sense of security to her in her abilities.

And knowing the student can switch CFIIs willy-nilly b/c she doesn't like you as an instructor doesn't abdicate responsibility of the instructor to give potentially life-saving feedback.
Click to expand...
Well said!
 
Half Fast said:
"Hard to use" is a relative characteristic. If someone is unable to learn to use it, for that person it is indeed hard to use.
Click to expand...
But unless you actually make that qualification, it isn’t.

And even if you do make that qualification, it’s only hard for that person because of something specific to that person, not the 430W.
 
Half Fast said:
"Hard to use" is a relative characteristic. If someone is unable to learn to use it, for that person it is indeed hard to use.
Click to expand...

My 2¢…

When I redid the panel in my Tiger, I installed a 430. Later, my Cirrus had 2. I did a lot of Private, Instrument and Transition training in other folks’ Cirrus’ and flew for AirShares Elite Cirrus’ equipped with dual 430’s. I may have around 1,000 hours all in flying with 430’s. I think I got pretty good with them, both using and teaching.

With that background, I think the 430’s have a miserable UI and are hard to learn. If you’re using them constantly and are proficient, you can get by. But even then, it can get confusing. I remember shooting multiple approaches with students, and often getting quite confused when attempting to activate - or suspend - a given approach to start another. To get what you want intercepting a leg, sometimes DIRECT-ENTER-ENTER is what you want, other times it’s DIRECT-DIRECT-ENTER. And God forbid you choose the wrong one. And given an impromptu heading to intercept a course or radial, the procedure to establish a new leg as part of your flight plan is far from intuitive.

Evidence of the difficulty is a thread just started titled “Need help with G430W”. I think it exemplifies the problem.

www.pilotsofamerica.com

Need help with G430W

So I was flying today from KABQ to KAEG in Cessna 172 with Garmin 433W. I entered and loaded a flight plan into Garmin. I was first doing some touch and Goes at KAEG because they (ATX) would not let me do a practice ILS-22 approach and then requested a practice hold and ILS at Ranway 3, but I...
www.pilotsofamerica.com www.pilotsofamerica.com

To be clear, I‘m not saying it’s impossible to get good with a 430. Just that it is hard to gain and maintain proficiency with one.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
But unless you actually make that qualification, it isn’t.

And even if you do make that qualification, it’s only hard for that person because of something specific to that person, not the 430W.
Click to expand...

"Easy" and "hard" are always related to a person when used in this sort of context. I found differential equations to be easy but many people don't.

In terms of the 430W, for example, we might describe it as simple or complex if we want to have a description that's relative to other devices, rather than being related to a person.
 
Half Fast said:
"Easy" and "hard" are always related to a person when used in this sort of context. I found differential equations to be easy but many people don't.

In terms of the 430W, for example, we might describe it as simple or complex if we want to have a description that's relative to other devices, rather than being related to a person.
Click to expand...
The original context of it in this thread was relative to other equipment, so not related to a person. But that’s still “easier” or “harder”, not “easy” or “hard”.
 
MauleSkinner said:
The original context of it in this thread was relative to other equipment, so not related to a person.
Click to expand...

Which was my point. It's bad use of terminology. "Hard" or "easy" has to do with the user.

If a device is complicated or confusing, a person may find it hard to use. Another person might still find it easy to use. The device can be described in terms of complexity relative to competing devices.

But this is getting waaaay OT so I'll let it lie.
 
FastEddieB said:
With that background, I think the 430’s have a miserable UI and are hard to learn. If you’re using them constantly and are proficient, you can get by. But even then, it can get confusing. I remember shooting multiple approaches with students, and often getting quite confused when attempting to activate - or suspend - a given approach to start another. To get what you want intercepting a leg, sometimes DIRECT-ENTER-ENTER is what you want, other times it’s DIRECT-DIRECT-ENTER. And God forbid you choose the wrong one. And given an impromptu heading to intercept a course or radial, the procedure to establish a new leg as part of your flight plan is far from intuitive.
Click to expand...
Consistency is one the foremost principles of good UI design for avionics. Another is clear feedback, delivered with consistency. FWIW, being a retired old buzzard I haven't flown with Garmin, but I have one of their watches. It has a dog's breakfast of functions, arranged by Random Designs, Inc.
 
Half Fast said:
Which was my point. It's bad use of terminology. "Hard" or "easy" has to do with the user.

If a device is complicated or confusing, a person may find it hard to use. Another person might still find it easy to use. The device can be described in terms complexity relative to competing devices.

But this is getting waaaay OT so I'll let it lie.
Click to expand...
@MIFlyer trolled, and we bit. ;)
 
MIFlyer said:
I guess the counter evidence is two dead pilots in this thread?

Clearly over reliance on hard to use automation did not help her.

In my case, it felt like learning the gns was more difficult than the actual ifr theory so I quit. I don’t want to spent precious hours and dollars mastering how many times to wink, click and stamp my foot the gns expects to get to a different place in the ui


I don’t have an objection to steam, but feel training would be incomplete without gps mastery in today’s airspace.

I recognized my limit, that it was a burdensome distraction, as the subject may have also since she was literally flying to the avionics shop to junk it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I disagree, not knowing how to click buttons does not make you not know how to fly a plane.
 
MauleSkinner said:
@MIFlyer trolled, and we bit. ;)
Click to expand...

Honestly, I wasn’t trolling, but I was glad to see some reflection later in the thread where there is acknowledged level of difficulty driven by avionics that were exacerbated by lack of prep, lack of training, etc of the pilot in question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have not flown with Jenny or her flight instructor.

Watching edited videos is a very limited view.

It is my observation that many learners imagine that because someone is a certificated flight instructor they will provide quality flight instruction.

My experience has been the quality of flight instructor varies and it is hard for a learner to identify what is important.

Some learners resist learning the culture of aviation and risk mitigation.

They are focused on learning how to manipulate the controls and pass their tests.
 
I learned a lot from this thread. I'm not the type to make videos and stuff, and I see how important it is to keep your mouth shut and study. Until you master the art of flying you really have no business making aviation content. What do you know? Nothing.
 
The theme in all her videos is she’s behind the airplane. She may have used checklists and just edited those out before publishing, but we don’t see consistent use. She has all the portable electronics and is spending way too much time with them. She passed a runway not knowing where she was. Look at previous flight tracks and you see no steady speeds or altitudes. She appears to be dependent on the autopilot, and that is dangerous for many reasons. She appears to know how to work the 430 GPS, but not the autopilot.

I don’t understand the fixation on the electronics. This diverted her attention and she regularly fell behind the airplane. This accident is incredibly sad and didn’t need to happen. Prayers to the family, and let this be a reminder to everyone to fly the airplane. Aviation is serious business and unforgiving.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
Damn. Quite the crater, debris field, and chopped-trees leading to the crash site. A lot of kinetic energy on that path down.

Still no cause, but that sounds like it certainly could be someone on the wrong end of a malfunctioning autopilot.
Click to expand...
Actually from her other videos it sounds like a correctly functioning autopilot used incorrectly.
 
Is 5° of trim tab deflection a lot? What are the limits of travel?

There are multiple videos on her channel in which she accidentally trims the wrong way.
 
dmspilot said:
Is 5° of trim tab deflection a lot? What are the limits of travel?

There are multiple videos on her channel in which she accidentally trims the wrong way.
Click to expand...
Per the type certificate data sheet for a Debonair, trim tab up max deflection is 10°, max down is 21° (increases to 27° down for 1966 and later models).

Note: I do not know if the direction of deflection listed is the same as the direction of the nose. Down deflection could be nose-up and vice-versa. A Bo pilot may need to confirm.
 
The faint radio transmissions from her declaring an emergency and her dad were so harrowing in the report. RIP.
 
So, without electric trim, the autopilot by itself could not do anything with the plane’s trim. If it was drastically out of trim, it had to have been put there by the pilot with the trim wheel, right?

I thought in a small GA aircraft, regulations said a pilot should be able to override even a maximum amount of nose up or nose down trim with a reasonable amount of force. Do I have that wrong?
 
FastEddieB said:
So, without electric trim, the autopilot by itself could not do anything with the plane’s trim. If it was drastically out of trim, it had to have been put there by the pilot with the trim wheel, right?

I thought in a small GA aircraft, regulations said a pilot should be able to override even a maximum amount of nose up or nose down trim with a reasonable amount of force. Do I have that wrong?
Click to expand...
There may be something like that in current certification, or the previous Part 23. CAR3, I don’t think so.
 
Lawson_Stone said:
There has already been a link posted to a video (Blancolirio) giving a very clear explanation of how she mis-understood the auto-pilot and how it relates to the plane's trim, and how she evidently did not understand how it worked.
Click to expand...
Saw that video earlier. She may have been trying to stop what she perceived as the "autopilot causing her to climb" by cranking in manual nose down trim. That's what makes this so maddening. She may not have 1) known how to turn the autopilot off; or 2) decided to manually override it in her way of thinking. The only scenario that makes sense is a bizarre mindset that is frightened to fly without the autopilot yet at the same time refusing to learn how to fly with it when resources are available, e.g. factory customer support or qualified instructors.
 
FastEddieB said:
regulations said a pilot should be able to override even a maximum amount of nose up or nose down trim with a reasonable amount of force. Do I have that wrong?
Click to expand...

MauleSkinner said:
There may be something like that in current certification, or the previous Part 23. CAR3, I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
FYI: Both 3 and 23 have established flight trim requirements to include specific maximum control stick/wheel force values. Its the autopilot cert requirements (in both) that have an "overpower" the system requirement.
SixPapaCharlie said:
if once the videos are viewed by the authorities do they ever come out and say here's the play-by-play of what was seen on the video?
Click to expand...
While its not common, if a video or photo evidence is directly connected to the Probable Cause they have included a narrative and even stills in the Public Docket to substantiate the findings.
 
Is carbon monoxide poisoning a possibility?
 
Haven't watched the video,and don't care to. I'll only comment on autopilot and manual trim. If you have an autopilot and set and trim it for an fpm rate of climb, as the airplane climbs and mp and power decreases, the a/p will continuously increase pitch to maintain the rate, dangerously reducing airspeed and putting the aircraft way out of trim for the inattentive pilot. Disconnecting the a/p at that point can cause a rapid and violent pitch change.

Same goes for descents and power changes. My 60-2 alerts to the out of trim condition with a tone and annunciator. Easy for distracted pilot unfamiliar to get a real surprise IMC. Not sure it should cause a LOC when vfr. No idea if that was a factor in this case or not. The latest a/p's with airspeed climbs are a real improvement, IMHO.
 
FastEddieB said:
If it was drastically out of trim, it had to have been put there by the pilot with the trim wheel, right?
Click to expand...

Sorta.

Assume a plane is trimmed for level flight at max cruise and then the autopilot is engaged with altitude hold. After a while, the pilot reduces throttle, perhaps a lot, to slow the plane. The autopilot pitches the plane up to hold altitude, the plane slows and settles back into stable flight at a slower speed.

With no electric trim, the autopilot is now fighting the previous trim setting but the pilot doesn’t necessarily know it. If the pilot disengages the autopilot, the pilot will then have to fight the trim as the autopilot had been doing. Otherwise, the plane will pitch downward immediately.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Yes, but IIRC the allowable forces are significantly higher in CAR3.
Click to expand...
Thats not what I recall but its been a few hundred brain cells ago. Can't search at the moment but I'll see if I can find that info when I can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top