A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

NTSB Preliminary report on HPN crash



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 5th 05, 03:14 AM
Peter R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default NTSB Preliminary report on HPN crash

Tom Fleischman k wrote:

If you want to read something really disturbing, this is it.


Is there something specific that is disturbing, or are you referring to the
entire report? I read through it and, while it is always disturbing when
an accident results in fatalities, I honestly didn't see anything that
stuck out as *really disturbing* such as drugs, alcohol, or a blatant
mistake. What did I miss?

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Ads
  #2  
Old May 5th 05, 03:27 AM
Steve S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

How about why is an instructor taking a primary student, he doesn't even
have a pp-asel, up in 200- 1/2 with a 0 temp/dew point spread?


"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Tom Fleischman k wrote:

If you want to read something really disturbing, this is it.


Is there something specific that is disturbing, or are you referring to
the
entire report? I read through it and, while it is always disturbing when
an accident results in fatalities, I honestly didn't see anything that
stuck out as *really disturbing* such as drugs, alcohol, or a blatant
mistake. What did I miss?

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----



  #3  
Old May 5th 05, 03:36 AM
Peter R.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve S wrote:

How about why is an instructor taking a primary student, he doesn't even
have a pp-asel, up in 200- 1/2 with a 0 temp/dew point spread?


That fact had been discussed heavily in this group already. I guess I was
expecting to read some additional information that was not already
mentioned in those long threads.

--
Peter













----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #4  
Old May 5th 05, 11:46 AM
Greg Farris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Maybe I'm missing something as well.
I fail to understand why everyone is making a big deal of this accident, and
the coverage it received in the press, when I don't see anything so unusual
about either.

Certainly the accident is regrettable, and it is highly likely that the final
report will come in with PIC error as causal and low IFR weather as
contributing. We'll wait and see, but this is most likely.

Taking a pre-PPL student up in these conditions for IFR training may be a poor
use of the student's time and money, but the CFI is PIC, and if he's current,
IFR with lots of experience and lots of recent time, there's nothing so
"shocking" about it.

If we're lucky, there will be something we can all learn from this accident.
But just as likely there will be a sum of circumstances that simply got the
better of the crew's resources. Poor judgement to go there under these
conditions? Probably - but then IFR is meant to fly in poor conditions, and
still leave your options open if it gets below minimums. When the facts are
all in, will we end up with the feeling they should have diverted elsewhere?
Maybe.

I think it's useful to discuss accidents - even typical accidents - as there
is something instructive in trying to understand how they let themselves get
in too deep (if this turns out to be the case); But I fail to see what is so
shocking or unusual about this particular accident, or the press coverage of
it.

G Faris

  #5  
Old May 5th 05, 11:48 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 4 May 2005 22:27:09 -0400, "Steve S"
wrote:

How about why is an instructor taking a primary student, he doesn't even
have a pp-asel, up in 200- 1/2 with a 0 temp/dew point spread?



Where does it say that a pilot needs a pp-asel in order to take
instrument instruction?


  #6  
Old May 5th 05, 11:53 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter R. wrote:

Tom Fleischman k wrote:


If you want to read something really disturbing, this is it.



Is there something specific that is disturbing, or are you referring to the
entire report? I read through it and, while it is always disturbing when
an accident results in fatalities, I honestly didn't see anything that
stuck out as *really disturbing* such as drugs, alcohol, or a blatant
mistake. What did I miss?


My reaction also. Fatal accidents are always disturbing in general, but
nothing in particular jumped out of this summary.


Matt
  #7  
Old May 5th 05, 11:55 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve S wrote:

How about why is an instructor taking a primary student, he doesn't even
have a pp-asel, up in 200- 1/2 with a 0 temp/dew point spread?


To show him what an instrument approach looks like? If the instructor
was qualified and current, this shouldn't have been a problem.
Descending below minimums is the problem, it doesn't matter who is
flying or who is in the right seat.

Matt
  #9  
Old May 5th 05, 12:10 PM
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 5 May 2005 06:57:16 -0400, "Steve S"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 4 May 2005 22:27:09 -0400, "Steve S"
wrote:

How about why is an instructor taking a primary student, he doesn't even
have a pp-asel, up in 200- 1/2 with a 0 temp/dew point spread?



Where does it say that a pilot needs a pp-asel in order to take
instrument instruction?

It's not a question of needing one, just that there is limited benefit, if
any, of instrument instruction to a student still learning basic attitude
flying, navigation etc.


Maybe the student just wanted to see what it was like. Sort of like
folks who take aerobatic rides, glider rides, balloon rides. Limited
benefit? Who can judge?


  #10  
Old May 5th 05, 12:53 PM
Gary Drescher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Steve S" wrote in message
...
How about why is an instructor taking a primary student, he doesn't even
have a pp-asel, up in 200- 1/2 with a 0 temp/dew point spread?


It's not necessarily unreasonable to show a primary student what LIFR is
like, if the student is interested in the experience. (I have a friend who's
a lapsed student pilot who wants to come along sometime when I shoot
approaches in IMC. I'm happy to oblige, and I'm not even a CFI.) The
reported winds were benign, and the reported ceiling and visibility were
adequate for the approach. It should've been easy for a competent instrument
pilot.

But given the low-altitude alert and the apparently continued low altitude
until impact, it seems conceivable that the instructor was actually letting
the student fly the approach, and failed to take control when the plane got
dangerously low.

--Gary


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for a See and Avoid NTSB report Ace Pilot Piloting 2 June 10th 04 01:01 PM
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 December 13th 03 12:01 AM
Wellston Crash Report Quote EDR Piloting 26 November 21st 03 11:50 PM
Report blames pilots in crash of two Navy jets Otis Willie Naval Aviation 0 September 26th 03 01:27 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.