should we discuss fatal accidents?

[Pace]

The accident involving the Piper PA28 crashing in Ireland and the discussion about it in pprune was locked.

I have mixed feelings on this for the following reasons. Firstly I have lost five friends to flying so am not cut off from the feelings of relatives and pre judging the reasons for these crashes.

The prominant crash of the Citation from Biggin hill which went down into houses was very close to home. Why?

Because I actually flew that very citation before she was sold and flew in another citation with the Captain a few years ago who was killed in the crash of that jet.

Being so close to home and because I fly an identical 500 I wanted to know what would bring down a Citation with a competant pilot with what appeared to be a power loss.

It will probably be over a year until the investigators come up with their conclusions which may not be conclusive.

We are a pilot forum and going such a long time before the accident investigators come up with a conclusion means that we are in the dark for a long time.

Regarding the PA28 crash in Ireland for all we know the pilot may have had a fatal heart attack which caused the crash, but there were other signs around the flight which could be used to warn other pilots of certain possible dangers even if they were not the reasons for the tradgedy and for me discussing and disecting the possibilities can only be good.

Therefore I feel that pilots should explore the posssibilities because even if the truth is not arrrived at or certain theories are classed as speculatitve certain lessons can be learnt that may stop another pilot from going a simular way next week not after the conclusions are posted a year hence by the AAIB.

So what is the lesser of two evils in a PILOT forum. Say nothing other than offering condolences or pick what we have to pieces even if its speculative but highlights certain dangers to other pilots and makes them think?
I am sure we are all able at weeding out the trash and noting the relevant bits

I am not talking about the minority who get a kick from some one elses misery but using these accidents as a possible lesson and accident avoidance even if a year before the AAIB release the official conclusions.

One life saved has to be worth it?

What do you think?

Pace

[BRL]

If you have a look you will see the thread is now open.

You lot can discuss any incident until the cows come home.

What I don't agree with is the way that thread quickly panned out. People were killed and you lot were throwing mud at each other when the bodies had hardly even been identified. No respect whatsoever. I don't want to see that again in our forum.

Condolences on one thread, talking about how situations (incidents) happen on another.

[Pace]

You lot can discuss any incident until the cows come home.

What I don't agree with is the way that thread quickly panned out. People were killed and you lot were throwing mud at each other when the bodies had hardly even been identified. No respect whatsoever. I don't want to see that again in our forum.

But this is a pilots forum and as such any pilot could be the next accident statistic so anything but anything which comes from these threads which touches a chord and avoides another occurence by making people think even after a stupid post has to be positive?

Its not hard to ignore the mud throwing and pick up the bits which have a lesson.

Pace

[Pilot DAR]

I had mentioned on my thread on this theme, that in the case where an immediate safety concern is quickly identified following an action, and it is appropriate to get the infomation out to the industry fast, there is a mechanizm - the emergency AD, and it certainly gets used.

Other than that, we pilots already know all of the reasons planes crash. If it's a new reason, we'll find out fast, If it's an old reason again, we'll find out again. Stirring up emotions on top of it, at such an early phase following the event, is much more self serving in a bunch of pilots yammering on with no good cause. The learning form the mistakes can happen equally well later. It's the same lesson as before, just a different location and registration.

On the other hand, if we're talking a non-injury "look what that silly pilot did" situation, I feel differently - Learning can happen sooner!

Pilot DAR

[mark sicknote]

Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to learn them all yourself. That what makes this forum a useful tool to low hour PPL like me.

Best.

Sicknote

[172driver]

Totally agree with you, Pace. In fact, I'd go one further - ban all the phoney 'condolences, 'RIP' etc crap from people who in all likelyhood have never met the pilot (and/or pax) involved anyway.

What some people here apparently cannot get their head round to is the fact that speculating makes you think about a situation and thus makes you revisit your own beliefs, perceptions, knowledge. There have certainly been threads that sent me back to the books or to a discussion with a more experienced pilot or instructor. None of the 'condolences' BS ever has or ever will. Keep this pilot's forum.

[vanHorck]

I fully agree with BRL (moderator) that throwing mud at each other is simply not done on such threads! It brings an air of disrespect to a thread which is otherwise valuable as a learning tool.

Similarly, we should be careful not to throw mud at the P1/P2 of the flight.

There is a substantial difference between stating possible mistakes and stating such mistakes including derogatory terms, which unfortunately happens a lot here.

I will give an example:
"I feel this flight should have never taken off given the weather forecast"
or
"how stupid can you be taking off in such weather"

In other words, I believe it is quite ok to brainstorm about the causes of a crash but at the same time we should make sure we are respectful to all the readers especially the next of kin.

Someone here said: "It s a hard world out there". Well, it is, and it is up to us to soften it a bit, and the sarcasm that such attempts would serve no purpose is utterly misplaced on these threads imho.

This way we retain freedom of speech and we show common respect

[Pace]

ban all the phoney 'condolences, 'RIP' etc crap from people who in all likelyhood have never met the pilot (and/or pax) involved anyway.

172Driver

Whether we know the pilot or not they are part of our community and when any of these tragic events happen I am sure it fills us all with sadness.
It also makes us realise how unforgiving a mistress aviation can be and that one mistake can have disastrous consequences. We have all made mistakes we have gotten away with.

Sadly most aircraft crashes are due to pilot error. We can get into a state of feeling immortal and these tradegies do pull you up and make you think.
So I am not against people offering their condolences if thats what they feel they want to do but equally I do not feel comfortable with debate being stifled with the arguement that only the AAIB can work out what went wrong.

It is the debate on what "could have gone wrong" which mentally gets other pilots thinking about the accident and possible scenarios. That process of thinking about possible scenarios also makes the pilot think about their own flying.

If it was an aircraft failure then As pilot Dar said an AD will be released but aircraft failures rarely bring an aircraft down but the way they are handled often does.

Pilots should be mindful though of the tragic circumstances and write in a dignified way and to each other too. In a way that appreciates that our views are only speculation.

Pace

[Pace]

I will give an example:
"I feel this flight should have never taken off given the weather forecast"
or
"how stupid can you be taking off in such weather"

VanHorck

Your post says it all and it was those quotes which prompted me to say that infact pilots do takeoff in weather like that infact those of us that fly for a living dont have the luxury of choosing nice days and very much have to take what the weather of the day throws at us.

Flying over house sized waves in a single is something I would have done years ago but am more cautious about now. Flying in wind conditions where the downdraughts could be stronger than the potential for the aircraft to climb would also fill me with caution.

So on such a trip I would want a powerful twin with icing protection and backup systems. Many do use low powered singles. Flying is a risk and a lot of it is about risk management and that is the pilots call on what he feels comfortable with.

Sadly and for whatever reason those people have gone and nothing will change that but the rest of us are still here and I hope we keep it that way so anything no matter how small which can contribute to keeping us here has to be worth it.

Pace

[172driver]

Whether we know the pilot or not they are part of our community and when any of these tragic events happen I am sure it fills us all with sadness.

Pace,

Again, agreed. However, I still think most of these 'RIP' posts are utterly fake, more so as the likelihood of the family of the deceased reading this forum isn't too great. And just blowing condolences into the wind, IMHO, devalues them. I'd prefer if we could stick with discussions as to what may or may not have caused a particular incident/accident. Alas, as you rightly say, the vast majority are caused by none other than us

[Pace]

I have no idea what happened to that PA-28, though it is odd as it looks like it went in at a reasonably shallow angle and lowish airspeed, it 'looks' like it may have descended under control into the terrain.. but lets not speculate about that.

G-EMMA

But isnt that exactly what we should speculate about? Why because it is speculation and discussion of the possible causes of an aircraft going in at a shallow angle and lowish airspeed.

Whether we hit on the actual reason in that discussion is irrelevant but discussing all the possible reasons for an aircraft going in at a shallow angle and low airspeed is not.

Given strong winds and mountainous terrain and forgetting this particular accident one possibility would be a downdraft being greater than the aircrafts ability to climb.
We could then go into interesting and educational talks about wind and dealing with mountain flying.

Pace

[JEM60]

My daughter 'E'mail'ed me from Bristol. The pilot was her landlord for a time, and he was apparently a top guy. Although not connected with aviation, she was quite perturbed to hear critiscism so early in the proceedings, without the full facts. As someone else says, you don't know whose reading the forum.

[Rod1]

I am very firmly in the speculate all you can side of this. There was a mid air collision about a year ago which lead to many pages of speculation. The result for me was that I changed the way I operated out of my strip. A few weeks later I spotted some traffic using my new system which would have been a very real threat had I followed my old system. If we had all avoided the discussion till the AAIB report came out (still not out on this one) then I may not have been around to read it.

It is possible to speculate with a degree of sensitivity, but I do understand that relatives of the deceased would rather have no discussion at all. If I end my days in an aircraft accident please speculate all you can and stop anybody else doing the same thing.

Rod1

[Pace]

Jem60

I very much doubt anyone not into aviation would be reading this forum and if they did they probably would not understand half the stuff said I dont a lot the time

But it is speculation and not FACT and has to be treated that way. But to ban any speculation is against freedom of speech and to me does not achieve anything in a PILOT forum.

The way and the manner in which we talk about things and how we interact between each other for me is more important.
Here I am not just talking about accident discussions but any discussions where we are rude to another poster or treat someone like an idiot.
Recent accident discussions should be dealt with a bit of thought consideration and tact but in MHO equally should not be shelved awaiting an AAIB report 1 to 2 years down the line.

Pilots sometimes have to be shocked into examining their own flying and sometimes that is best achieved when an event is fresh rather than when its forgotten a year or more away.

Pace

[mark sicknote]

When I learned through "gossip" about a serious but fortunately non-fatal accident that occurred in one of the aircraft I fly, I immediately changed my style of flight management. I treat the aircraft with much more respect and the lesson will remain with me throughout my flying career.

Someone made a mistake and I have certainly learned from that. In commercial aviation, it is often fatal accidents that lead to changes being made.

Best,

Sicknote

[PPRuNe Towers]

The posts above from Pace and mark sicknote exactly reflect our policy and the reasons why it exists.

It gains two constant criticisms:

The wait for the report brigade.

(No we won't - ever. It doesn't change our behaviour or gain our interest. It only offers change at systemic, policy, airworthiness and technical level.)

And from those in some way 'close' to the victims(s) either directly or through imagined closeness.

These ocassions are the ultimate 'I learned about flying from that,' threads. The cartharsis of people reading with their own huge capital I in the wake of death and injury is the whole point and BRL is expected to expunge both the overly crass but more importantly the arses here who delight on dancing on the head of a pin showing off their so called debating skills.

For the regular, habitual duellers in nitpicking semantics and point scoring - you are missing the whole point of these threads. You will be dealt with accordingly.

Rob

[dublinpilot]

For me the speculation is good. I have learnt much from the discussions here in the past, and it has caused me to rethink some of the procedures that I use.

The only caution I would say is that we should attempt to discuss and speculate in an AAIB style......no criticism and no blame, just possible causes, their effect, and ways that we could seek to avoid it ourselves.

We can easily discuss the possibility that weather was a serious factor, what the weather was, what it's potential direct or indirect effects could have been, without criticising the pilot for taking off, or blaming them for a crash.

We can learn just as much without the blame and criticism. In fact we'll probably take the lesson in much better if we avoid the blame part.

dp

[englishal]

no criticism and no blame, just possible causes

But when the probable cause was the "pilots inability to maintain clearance above the terrain" can we discuss this?

I think we should - pilot error plays a role in 75% of accidents, and I tend to think that pilot error is the cause UNLESS there are other overriding factors.

In the case of the Citation at Biggin, we are pretty sure that this was contributed to by engine failure. However unless the engine failure lead to control difficulties, then this would probably be attributed to "the pilots inability to maintain altitude and directional control following an engine failure"....a Citation *should* be able to fly on one engine, which would be the reasoning behind this. This is a more complicated case which clearly had a mechanical failure and there are doubts. I don't know if they had control difficulties, the AAIB will determine that. I hope they did.

In the case of a PA28 ending up in a mountain - in good weather I'd guess they had a mechanical problem. Because of the weather on the day it is *very likely* the weather played a role. Weather typically doesn't cause planes to crash, the pilot's decisions in the way they handle the weather does. Fly through a thunderstorm and you don't have good odds. Elect not to fly and you have very good odds. Of course it could be conicidence and a mechanical failure AND bad weather may have occured, but this is less likely and then you could argue the route of flight - bad weather and hiogh ground don't mix, and if you have options to miss high ground, why weren't they taken?

So while not trying to criticise the pilot, sometimes it may be unavoidable to do so....But also remember that the Pilot has a duty of care to those he or she is flying, and it is not about "dissing" the dead but about trying to find out why the accident happened and what human factors were involved- hopefully any relatives who read these posts will realise this.

[Pace]

Enlishall

So while not trying to criticise the pilot, sometimes it may be unavoidable to do so....But also remember that the Pilot has a duty of care to those he or she is flying, and it is not about "dissing" the dead but about trying to find out why the accident happened and what human factors were involved- hopefully any relatives who read these posts will realise this.

That is a very valid point and one which is often missed. The passenegers rely totally on the pilot to determine whether a flight can be carried out safely regarding the aircraft and the pilots ability.

They in some ways are the victims and we have a large responsability to them in insuring that we not only fly within our limits but those of the aircraft.
Different horses for different courses and that applies to the pilot /aircraft combination.

I personally would question taking a light single across sea which was wipped up into 30 foot waves by strong winds although that factor played no part in the accident whether the winds caused downdrafts over the mountains which a low powered aircraft could not handle is a ? mark as maybe other causes.

In general I am wary of a single piston with a very low cloudbase. I am wary of a single over very rough seas where the chances of a successful forced landing and recovery diminish. I would be wary of flying an aircraft with a poor climbrate where I know the downdrafts could be greater than the capacity to climb. I am wary of a single at night or over fog.They are all increased risks which many are happy to take but do we have the right to take them for our passengers?

The above are not relevant to this flight although a couple could be.

Pace

[dublinpilot]

But when the probable cause was the "pilots inability to maintain clearance above the terrain" can we discuss this?

I don't have a problem with discussing such.

So while not trying to criticise the pilot, sometimes it may be unavoidable to do so

Agreed.

What I'm trying to get at is that there is a difference between:

"The pilot should never have attempted to fly over mountains with such winds. It's incompetent! I'd never do that!"

and

"Given the fact that the winds were coming from the XX direction, and with a wind speed of xx, it's likely that there would have been significant downdrafts on the lea ward side of the mountains. The performance on a XXX is not great at the likely weight of the aircraft, and it's quite possible, perhaps even lightly that the pilot would encounter downdrafts that the aircraft could not out climb on this particular route."

(Not a reference to the currently discussed accident, just an example).

The AAIB manage to attribute causes which include pilot error, without actually blaming or criticising the pilot (although it's often left open to the reader to see the criticism themselves).

dp

Ps. I don't have a problem with blame been apportioned to a pilot, but in fairness blaming someone on the basis of speculation is a bit much. Hypothetical speculation is fine, but criticism and blame based on it is unfair.