I worked with some Piper guys years ago and they were complaining about the Malibu crashes that were happening. Seems that the owners basically said "I paid a million dollars for an all-weather aircraft and by God I'm going to fly it through thunderstorms" which is what caused the vast majority of the accidents. NOBODY in their right mind fly's ANYTHING through a thunderstorm! Another guy testified in a crash suit where the elevator had come off much like what was shown in this video. He did a demonstration that the elevator and controls could withstand 6 times the maximum load before failure...but in closing arguments the prosecutor said 'You SAW how the tail FAILED'!! And the jury found Piper guilty and gave the plaintiffs a big award. Lay people don't seem to understand that things are built with limits and you MUST stay below them even though what is advertised in the Pilot Manual will have some headroom...don't push it!
Incredible lesson. You young pilots need to watch and re-watch every video Juan produces. It will keep you alive. I was USAF trained and had a long professional career but still learn something in every video.
Sadly with the amount of up and coming pilots I fear lessons described by Jaun just are not getting through and risks are taken with disastrous outcomes, take heed from an experienced knowledgeable pilot
Though I don't fly anymore (age, diabetes), I watch all of Juan's videos, sometimes thinking "I did that right" but often thinking "that could have happened to me". Thanks for all you do.
I tried flying in the 80s. Instructor was a crop duster. He signed me off on solo at 6 hours. He was impressed at how quickly I was picking up overall handling of the aircraft in the pattern and basic maneuvers. While soloing, I was showing off for friends and had two low altitude accelerated stalls and in both instances a couple weeks apart, they involved counter-intuitively diving the nose at the ground to gain airspeed and was able to pull out just feet above impact. I know it was stupid. I almost paid the ultimate price - *TWICE!* It was at that time, I realized I wasn't mature enough to attempt to continue flying and quit just before my scheduled written exam. I got married, raised a nice family and my wife an I enjoyed our careers til we both retired recently. Instead of thinking I should buy a plane now and try again - I bought Flight Sim for my computer and some controls and that will have to be the limit for my flying adventures, lol!
I had a young and bold college student for my first instructor. He signed me off for solo at 8.? Hours. I successfully completed the three take offs and landings with no problems, but if I was an instructor, I would never sign off a student for solo at 8 hours. Instructors have a huge amount of responsibility.
Hi Juan! I found this report fascinating. I spent ten years at Piper, eight of those on the PA-46 line and about two years installing the empennage. The main wing on this plane failed at the "splice" where the outer panels are joined to the center section. The separated portion of the empennage shown on the ground is the elevator trim tab and, roughly, one third of the elevator. Good reports. Keep up the good work.
I just finished watching the Columbo episode where the guilty lady took him up in her Beechcraft and got him sick and did a loop. I saw the tail no. and looked it up and it was just recently totally wrecked in Louisiana and sold for salvage. Bill
@@rainscratch I mean, it's not just pilots. There are also drivers or pedestrians who get struck by falling branches... for any mode of transportation, there's a "nope!" threshold :D
As a retired VFR pilot, and experiencing “situations” in my 3300 hours I was always aware of the maximum manoeuvring speed of the limited number of aircraft and aircraft types that I flew, however I did not realize that the lighter my plane was the manoeuvring speed decreased. I would have bet my house that the reverse was true but the graph proves otherwise. I never saw one of those graphs ( or studied it if I did actually see one). Thanks for the education and I hope I can pass it on and help someone else.
If I have it right it may be easier to grasp in terms of "involuntary" maneuvres. Weight has a dampening effect and so the same gust will toss a light plane around more (with more risk of exceeding G limits) than it would the same plane at a heavier weight. So lower weight needs more safety margin -> lower Va.
Manoeuvring speed is obviously the max speed at which you can make a full control deflection and stall before exceeding the limit load factor. When you're heavier you need a greater angle of attack just to maintain straight and level, so you're already flying closer to the critical AoA. You might be at 4° meaning only a 4x increase in lift produced if you increase it to 16°. At lighter weights you might be maintaining S+L at only 1° AoA and to reach a typical critical angle of 16°, that's a 16-fold increase in lift produced (given the lift formula - lift is directly proportional to AoA among other things). Not a very good explanation but that's how I think about it.
@@MalachiWhite-tw7hl Yes, he leaves his emotions out of the analysis. Although I am thankful I can also empathize with the passion and empathy of other pilots doing accident analysis on RUclips. Especially when the accidents are so totally avoidable.
My family's Malibu and pilot are somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of the Bahamas. Pilot flew into a Level 6 thunderstorm. A/C was equipped with a color Storm Scope. I'm not sure what he was thinking. A small GA aircraft is still a small GA aircraft, no matter how fancy and fast it is. They're fragile beasts. ALL weather should be avoided in them, no matter the marketing department's claims. This includes ice.
Back in 1977 my first flight instructor told me there are only 3 things to remember about flying...." Don't f**k with Thuderstorms, Don't f**k with Thunderstorms, and Don't f**k with Thunderstorms" ...amazing how I still remember that!!
I am a longtime meteorologist, corporate pilot, and active CFI. It is incredibly frustrating when weather is often the cause of so many GA accidents. We have better data than ever. In many cases, I think some pilots do not know what they don’t know. Your dissection of accidents is a good learning tool. I think pilots needs to pursue as much advanced weather training as possible - books, seminars, webinars, etc.
That sounds like the career I'd like to have had. But, I think the issue is the decision-making process of some people, rather than a lack of information. Some people are just going to take that risk and push it, regardless of the information they posess in a situation.
I’m a complete weather nerd, and it actually interesting to see how many pilots don’t have that initial interest or knowledge in weather. In general, your basic PPL and subsequent ratings really do teach a significant amount of weather knowledge (compared to your average lay person) but there’s always more to learn, as I’m sure you know as a meteorologist. But yeah, as far as knowledge/safety goes, diving deeper into weather will always make you a better pilot IMHO. It’s not even being able to identify current conditions, what you’re seeing outside the window, etc - it’s knowing what you’re GOING to encounter hours from now. I’d say the majority of weather-related incidents are people who went when they shouldn’t have, or didn’t have an adequate alternate route/plan. The beginning of those flights is always benign, but before you know it, you’re in trouble. As you stated, the information out there today is SO good - it’s nearly impossible to be totally blindsided by weather now. Something had to be ignored. 🫤
Many years ago I had a pristine 1982 Airconditioned and de-iced P-210. I test flew a New 1984 Malibu on an early clear Saturday morning - no wind and was smitten. At the time I had about 2,000 hours. I ended up purchasing a used 50 hour Malibu for $250K with fresh everything forward of the firewall (Piper was forced to replace engines), essentially a new plane. When I went to Wisconsin to pick up the plane it was gusty winds but clear weather. I quickly discovered that I gave up a perfectly good extremely stable P-210 almost paid off for a large mortgage on a Malibu as I had the crap beat out of me as those long wings picked up every bump in the sky reminding more more of the turbulence one feels flying a Cessna 152 in training. The next 600 hours of Malibu time was at times scary as the Autopilot would disengage in heavy turbulence, and I avoided any hint of bad weather. I flew quite often. After about 600 hours I became more 'one with the plane' and was more comfortable flying approaches to near minimums and as always avoided extreme areas of weather, but braved it a bit more. I became actually pretty good with the plane and would not hesitate to buy another, but it's a plane that will kill you quickly to pilots with less fear than me.
No substitute for time in the seat and in the air. Good decisions come from bad experiences which generally come from bad decisions. Old aviator wisdom (military or otherwise), "It's better to be standing on the ramp wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were standing on the ramp."
@@defendyourclam1682seems like a new pilot stays out of the weather because they don't have the experience for it, and an experienced pilot stays out of the weather because they've got the experience to know it's not worth it!
You're on you're own myr friend... No number of certificate's or qualification will get you out of trouble if things start going south... Experience counts for more than ticking all the boxes.... Hours alone isn't experience... Its hours....
I think that was your best explanation of maneuvering speed and how the weather can effect it. The bit about over correcting on the controls and wildly moving them back and forth and how that to can get you past maneuvering speed was also explained really well. If you ever do a top ten video list, this one definitely needs to be on it.
I was flying my 172-B from KPWA back to KDWH when a summer Supercell had just blown through. It was clear VFR about the time I hit the Red River and the vis was 40 miles. I started getting bumped really hard and slowed down to Va, I was busy keeping the wings level when Ft Worth Center asked me if I needed higher because I was several thousand feet above my assigned altitude. Keeping the inputs at a minimum had caused me to ride the Verga almost to service ceiling within a couple of minutes.
That brings back memories of summer flying over Nebraska with 100 mile vis and high lapse rates. The thermals are insane in anything with light wing loading: 1000+ fpm lift into the mid- to high-teens. Throttle back, hand-fly below Va, and mush along until you've had enough of the rodeo.
@@pplusbthrust If you know about how the weather works in detail, you'll generally know what it'll do even when it's invisible. Experienced glider pilots do this but 90% of powered pilots don't have the training/knowledge to. I'd easily say my glider flying was the single most useful aviation training I ever did. Pity the same stuff isn't required learning for powered pilots.
As the owner/pilot of a PA32, your explanation of the incident was spot on and I have been in situations like this. It's very easy to try to let the autopilot to continue to fly the airplane, but you need to let the airplane adjust to the turbulence. I think that even non-pilots would understand your explanation of Va speeds, etc. Great job as always.
Thanks for the reminders as always. I find myself with the autopilot off 80% of the time due to weather, Mtns etc. I was coming back from Santa Fe to Tucson in my 310 a couple of weeks ago and it was a bull-ride...Full shoulder strap, spine rattling hits etc. I looked at flight aware and I had several 100mph spikes...altitude drops were up to several hundred feet. Va baby. My excellent instructor drilled it into me years ago.
I am a 600hr non active commercial pilot who still loves to hear you break down into detail like you do!!! Flight instructors need to hammer this stuff into their students!!!
Juan Brown, how about this video and others of yours in a teaching set so that CFIs and new and old pilots can become aware of those dangers in flying stupidly. Flying for Idiots title
What's that old saw.. "an exceptional pilot uses his exceptional decision making to avoid using his exceptional piloting skills". Or the other old saw.. "the takeoff is optional, the landing is mandatory". I would think twice about flying in a weather system like that. Double that for night IFR, mountainous terrain, and icing. You need to add those factors up and throw in the towel, stay at the local hotel and wake up to fly another day.
With a huge influx of young poorly trained pilots trying to become airline pilots, we are going to see many more accidents caused by poor decisions and the need to prove to the boss they can do it. Young pilots have a hard time saying "NO".
I don't know. Maybe be the first to join the mile high igloo club. Lay back and let the weather do all the work. I love bad weather, keeps you alert as you bounce along. Ice... forget-a-bout-it!!!!
Juan, "why would you want to take your new airplane right through a weather front"? I've been asking myself that same question since 9/30/1966 when a great friend of mine picked up an ex high school sweetheart of mine and tried to fly back to College Station through a weather front. Flew it into the trees upside down. Getting somewhere has never been that important to me as it seems to be to others. Deepest condolences to family, loved ones and friends.
@@KuostA Larry was one of my best friends in HS. We played football together. Larry was a year ahead of me as was my girlfriend at that time (1962). I was a Junior. She left at the end of the school year and went to TCU in the fall. We had broken up by the end of the summer and my fancy turned elsewhere. Larry went to A&M in the Corps of Cadets program to serve in the Army after graduation. He got his PPL in the summer of 1962 and took me on my first flight. As well as many other classmates. I graduated in 1964 and went to SFAU in the fall of 64 on a football/track scholarship. Had not really been in contact with her or him after graduation. I dropped out of school after the first semester and got a job at the local airport as a lineman. Fueling, office work, oil changes, plane washing, grass mowing, etc. It paid a whopping $1.25/hr. I got my PPL shortly thereafter and built time flying fire patrol for the Tx Forestry Service until enlisting in the Marine Corps in Dec65. Fast forward to Sept 30, 1966 and I was home on leave before going to Nam when the crash happened. He had flown from College Station to our home town and picked her up so they could attend a pep rally that Friday night. They never made it. A cold front was fast approaching which he either didn't know about or thought he could get back to College Station in time. The orginal NTSB report said that a DPS Officer witnessed the plane descend out of the clouds at appx 200' on its back and strike the tree line upside down. I was a pall bearer for both funerals. Two lives cut short. I have lived a blessed life from God. I can't explain it. My wife and I moved back to my former home town 5 years ago. Lots of great memories and then there are some not so great.
@@easttexan2933 wow. thank u for the absolutely incredible story of your life. that was an incredible read. God bless you and your wife, hope you continue to have an incredible rest of your life. You've lived an extremely full, amazing life thus far! What did you do after nam?
@@KuostA As Tom Cruise said in "Jack Reacher"......remember you asked for this. In January 67 after discharge from the service, I went back to the airport in Nacogdoches where I worked and picked up right where I left off. Continued to fly fire patrol over east Texas building time. Then something happened: my wife to be and two of her dorm mates showed up at the airport to fly over the campus. Three years and two kids later and dropping out of college for the 2nd time, we moved to the Houston area and I found odd jobs for several years. My wife had a degree in education, so she taught school. My big break came in 1981. Prior to that I had believed on the name of Jesus for salvation and my life was taking a complete turn for the better because of that. I still wasn't doing all that well financially so in Jan 81 one sunday morning I went to the alter at the close of the sunday service and asked the pastor if he would pray for me to get a good job. A few weeks prior to this I had submitted an application to a local refinery. My application was slid under the stack just like everyone else before me. Looked to be a 100 or more for sure. Before the end of the week I was called for an interview and was hired. I give my heavenly Father all the glory for this because it wasn't anything I had done for sure. I spent 31 years at the refinery fractionating raw natural gas into Ethane, Propane, Isobutane, Butane and raw gasoline. I worked my way from base operator in 81 to chief operator in 87 to shift supervisor in 93, to Area Supervisor 2011, retiring in May 2011. If you're interested, you can google Enterprise Products, LLC. I worked at the Mont Belvieu, TX complex. Believing on the Lord Jesus, the Christ, was most important event in my life. I was dead in sin with no hope until a friend of mine invited me to come to church. From that day forward I knew that there is a God that loves me and made a way for me to love him back. If you have never had that happen to you, I encourage you to seek Him while he can be found. Bless you KuostA.
Great practical use of the vg diagram and discussion on knowing the basics of ac limits, Mr. Brown! It’s very sad to hear the pilot didn’t survive. But we can all learn from this unfortunate event. I’m going through CFI currently and have seen this diagram a hundred times recently. We’ve all seen it. This is a reminder to me how important it is to understand the fundamentals of flying a plane. And then apply it when flying any ac. And turn the AP off and hand fly when required!
Your videos are so informative and full of learning opportunities, not just for pilots but for anyone interested in aviation. There seems to be a common theme with a fair few of these accidents - Over-reliance on autopilots, especially in heavy weather. Your videos should be required viewing for anyone learning to fly. Keep up the great work.
Never flew a Malibu but I've heard they are very "slippery." I was in the TRACON one day when we handed one off to a local tower on a visual approach. ATC had to send him around and he crashed on the go around. To be blunt, I see low-time pilots with a lot of money killing themselves. The guy that crashed at my facility was a surgeon and a low-time pilot.
A common mistake made on go arounds with these things is to "radar" the power. When the airplane is slow there is not enough rudder to counter the torque of the TIO540 and the aircraft will torque roll. A go around in these types of aircraft requires a very measured and steady application of power.
I live just a few miles from the crash site, about 3 miles from the end of Rwy 02 at KCOU and can say with certainty that the wx conditions on the day of the accident were very bad, with tornadic and severe convective activity well into the evening. I used to be a member of the local Fire District that responded to this incident and myself have responded to a single engine aircraft accident just north of KCOU many years ago. i also worked at KCOU for 15 years. Seeing the aftermath one of these accidents first hand is an eye opener. I enjoy how objective you are about these accidents and don't sensationalize like others do. Keep doing what you do!
Maneuvering speed was critical in picking my BaronB58TC. Basically it is a non Pressurized P58. the Va for the P Baron and the 58TC is 170 kts, about the highest of all piston GA aircraft. In the mid teens where I flew the TC at approx 62% power at about 5,600# I would indicate 168kts, below maneuvering speed while having a TAS of 210-220 kts, burning about 32-33 gph. what an airplane!!!! It was the same FIKI airplane that I only operated the boots during an annual. a bit over 50 years ago I was asked by my instrument instructor during a localizer approach to CMA, What is a good IFR airplane? I replied this 182, it's sure rock solid. He said "No, Boeing 707, and never forget it.!" I haven't, so I'm still here to watch Juan.
@OfficialBlancolirov Juan, if that's really you, I do have your phone number and we have talked in the past (we have some mutual friends), I think about the accident of n7022G, a C340. We have a lot in common, including owning and riding many of the same great motorcycles. I am speaking at the Utah Aeronautics conference in a month or so about basically how to fly your airplane better and with less anxiety. I and my bro had a flight instructor who about 40 years ago was flying a Duke near Palm Springs (I think he was flying it on a 135 flight) and had an inflight breakup. Why it continues to occur is beyond me. By the way, that cfii of mine with the Boeing 707 comment, played great ragtime piano. I won't say his name but he was (is) instructing out of RBL up near you.
I love this channel. We get more info from you early than we get from the NTSB much later. I make sure my son in law , who is working toward the airlines , watches all of your videos. Great stuff. Keep it up.
Seems to be a string of fatal air crashes involving the autopilot systems allowing the aircraft to get into uncontrollable or excessive flying conditions. It seems like the pilots are not prepared to 'fly the aircraft' bucking bronco style in weather or known icing conditions. You wonder if the flying instructions related to autopilot are fully understood. There must be a mentality that to get out of trouble you turn autopilot on, when turning it off is how to gain real control again.
I flew a 172 into a line of thunderstorms and I did my best to stay at or below Va and gave up on trying to maintain altitude. I saw rate of climb beyond the ROC gauge both climb and decent. We got slapped hard enough to set off the ELT while making a 180 degree turn to get out. That made radio comms with Center impossible. I set the transponder to 7600 hit ident then to 7700. We landed at the nearest airport to wait out the weather and turn off the ELT. Got to fly very carefully to stay in one piece!! Helps to have good skills too. ERAU 80 CFIA&I ret.
A little weather analysis: at 1630z, roughly 35 minutes prior to the accident, there was a line of strong storms that were heading east of a COU-JEF line. To the west of that line, the NEXRAD showed virtually no echoes. However, by 1650z, a new cluster of storms formed in the wake of the initial line and completely filled in the clear spot, directly in the path of N451MA, which flew into the cluster. The radar composite showed some of the embedded storms indicating 45-55dBz echoes with tops to FL300-400 as of the 1700 and 1710z sweeps (accident at 1705z). There were AIRMETs for moderate turbulence from the surface to 120 and 180 to 390 (note the accident aircraft would have been between these). There was also a convective SIGMET for the entire northern half of MO for severe embedded thunderstorms from 200@55kts, tops above FL450, tornadoes, 2" hail, and wind gusts to 60kts possible. Several storms to the northeast were severe-warned. Icing charts indicated a high probability of icing and SLD at 150 over exactly the crash site, presumably associated with the thunderstorm activity. The wind aloft forecast for the time period at KCOU was 2058+02 at 120 and 2173-12 at 180 (note the temperature lapse of 14°C in 6000'). Stepping back a little farther, the aircraft had been on a direct line to the destination until 1650z, when it turned south, presumably to avoid a more mature squall line farther to the west, however, this put it into the path of the storms that would initiate minutes later. Going back even farther to 1300z (90 minutes before the 1438z departure), the convective SIGMETs were already in place, the thunderstorm forecast showed the squall lines going through the accident area at the accident time. SPC showed an enhanced convective outlook along the planned flightpath, and the icing forecasts were all in alignment with what happened a few hours later. However, the convective activity at that time was all west of Topeka and the downstream storms wouldn't begin to initiate, near the accident area, until closer to 15-16z. There is often a discrepancy between observed, mature weather and subsequent downstream initiation due to diurnal heating. One takeaway is that storms can and often do pop up well ahead of existing weather. Not sure whether the aircraft had onboard weather radar or was getting a (delayed) NEXRAD feed, which can make a big difference. But it went from no echoes to pretty ugly in a 10-20 minute span. Might also consider the 65-ish knot headwinds and how that plays into flying into developing weather. Love your content, as always, great review of the V-G diagram!
Very good, Juan, I learned something here I won't forget. The problem is I'm no pilot and have no access to an aircraft myself and so no possible incident involvement here myself - we need pilots who may be affected by such environment and experience to learn about this before they become but another sad case study. And that requires their involvement in the continual learning that you and your associates strongly advocate for. This episode certainly puts that message forward.
That was the BEST explanation of control failure I've ever heard. My short stint in A&P class (grad of avionics) touched on this but with no real comprehension. Thanks, Juan, for your insight and experience translated to dummies like me.
And also those many traffic camera and dash camera footage excerpts showing the culmination of police pursuit, road rage and highway stunting incidents showing examples of structural failure as vehicles briefly impact interstate and other highway infrastructure turbulence - boink or crash (rather than the better known aeronautical term of art 'keblammo') - and then the scraping, tinkling and screech of metal and plastic on steel timber and concrete finally then coming to a quiet rest amide the continuous traffic sounds.
What to say to: "Accept a block of altitude" at 9:57. When I went all seats occupied and full fuel through a cold front, after (1) asking if ATC could suggest vector through lighter part of the front, which amazingly they could do without me having to switch frequency to talk to weather service, and (2) Slowing to Va max. and although you pilots know this but it's so rare you might not have the calls at the tip of your tongue, so here ya go: (3) "Unable maintain altitude because of turbulence and heavy weight." (4) "Request block altitude." And ATC immediately gave me a max and min altitude. Presumably they then got anybody out of my way that they needed to. Worked perfectly, no problem.
Good points. I'd use "require" rather than "request" a block altitude and perhaps add "emergency". Bottom line, I'd be back below Va, making "global" [ie smooth, medium term] control inputs and accepting altitude deviations. It may be a case of having to put faith in the Big Sky Theory. Perhaps Juan could make an episode on how to handle this stuff in the real world.
You'll probably find there wont be many other aircraft around if you're in such bad weather that you need a block. Anyone potentially in your way would clearly be experiencing the same dyer situation also.
@@spdaltid Good idea, but maybe "pan pan pan", which is used for urgent situations that do not pose an immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself - like bobbling altitude in this case but no likelyhood of hitting the ground. Declaring an emergency is when something bad is likely: major system failure, sickness, low fuel, or flight safety situation.
Couldn’t agree with you more Juan! Inexperience causes more fatal accidents. As a retired captain/pic of several turboprop and jet aircraft…..I had “several” co-pilots (both experienced and inexperienced) insist on using the GPS/Nexrad/Downloaded radar instead of the “live” Radar! We need to understand that any downloaded radar “can be” up to the minute accuracy……but can also be “several” minutes old/delayed. Used “together” makes for awesome tools…….but “Live Radar” is always priority! Not saying this was the case in this accident but just wondering. Just my opinion of course. Early in my career I read about accidents in the AOPA magazine. Learning from others Juan! Great resource you provide! I’m thanking you for the rest of us.
I live about 40 miles away from this accident and I can tell you the winds were massive that day. It must have been a really terrible ride at altitude.
Another excellent video and great learning experience from the Juan Brown Aerospace & Flight University, always quickly reporting on the latest aircraft incidents/accidents. Thanks
Flying from Ohio to Maryland couple weeks ago in my Cardinal, I was explaining to my wife why I turned off the AP in turbulence (not as gracefully as you described it) and slowed down to VA. We rocked and rolled a little bit and it took us 20-25 more minutes than planned, but that was better than the alternative. It pays to hear this type of analysis from time to time, but I wish it weren't under these circumstances.
The cardinal was flying just fine, if he had taken it "straight ahead" Mcspadden attempting something other than "straight ahead"!to a power off landing killed that wonderful plane and the pilot.
Juan does a good analysis. I've flown a PA32 for just under 4000 hours in a country that doesn't have weather available by satellite and ATC that won't and say they can't advise on weather. Many times I have struck mountain wave, frontal and convective systems....both VFR and IFR. I have hauled the airspeed back to 90 and never exceed 100kt when it's severe. In my case I do disagree with Juan on AP use. My century 2000 was very docile, lagged and it worked so well in turbulence. I knew I had it right when the stall warning was going off occasionally. Swarf from previous avionics install would be found on the floor under the panel. Juan is correct. You've just got to ride it. I tell myself, go gently, throttle back, watch airspeed and don't pull and listen for the occasional stall warning. When that happens I'm confident I won't pull the wings off. I have just installed the Garmin GFC500 auto pilot and will see what it does in turbulence and whether I need to disconnect.
I really like all your videos a lot. Very informative and great analytics A way to keep informed us of all aircraft accidents. I like your humbleness that make your canal so attractive. Congratulations for the work well done.
Most aviation insurance companies won't insure you in one of these things unless you take a special course on how to handle the aircraft (essentially a type rating). A friend (BOS AA 737 Capt) has a side gig teaching one of these certified courses.
Do they have a simulator component in any of those courses to reinforce the edge cases. I wonder, also, if those simulator systems now have the capability to optionally measure the pilots vital signs (maybe so some of that polygraphic research might finally have a useful application) so an indication of how physiologically affected they became in the scenario playout.
Talking about gusts: the relevant airspeed is primarily vC (for the certification engineer), or vNO (for the pilot), which is typically higher than vA and independent of the actual flying weight at the moment. The structure is designed to withstand gusts up to vC/vNO. The checklist shown does not mention vNO. The footage shown indicates a failure of the horizontal tail attachment to the fuselage. The scenario presented could be one possible cause. The autopilot maneuvering above vA may cause structural failure as described, if it has sufficient authority, and it is for sure the right thing to do to disconnect the autopilot and relieve the structure of these additional maneuvering loads. I could, however, imagine other possible causes, without being familiar with that particular design and without judging their probability: Metal fatigue could have weakened some structural member to a point where the gust encountered caused it to fail. Corrosion could also have led to a similar weakening. Erroneous maintenance or repair would also be a possibility to be considered and to be investigated and hopefully ruled out by the thorough NTSB investigation.
Back in the mid-1980s, I was flying an E55 Baron for a banker as my first corporate job. We were flying from Lincoln, NE to Kimball, NE in the late spring and late afternoon. The weather was basically good except for a large, severe thunderstorm around North Platte that I deviated to the south to avoid in clear air. Out the SW side of the TRW was this black, ugly, horizontal cloud with what appeared to be possible rotation. I was flying parallel with this for maybe 20 miles and still had another good 20 miles before I really wanted to turn on course. Again, it was clear everywhere behind the storm, except for this nasty-looking cloud. My boss was getting really antsy and kept pointing towards home and saying you can go under that. If I recall, we were at 7,500 and the base appeared to be a thousand to fifteen hundred feet above that. I kept telling him we didn't want to mess with that, but he kept at me. I finally relented and turned on course, but I slowed the airplane down to at least 20 knots below the maneuvering speed which I think was about 155 kt. As we got right under the cloud all hell broke loose!! It was like hitting a brick wall going up and then going down and I did pretty much a wing over as I did a 180. The boss's wife, and a manager, were asleep in the back. The manager was a big guy and he bumped his head pretty good on the ceiling. My boss just looked at me and said he guessed I was right. Once we landed, and I crawled out of the airplane, I discovered the right inboard gear door just flopping in the breeze!! The sudden jarring of the airplane caused the gear to bounce enough in the wheel well to break the connecting rod to the door! I only had maybe 800 hours at the time and probably less than 150 hours of multi. I'm just glad I had enough experience and knowledge to slow way down before even trying to go under this thing. In all my flying after that, I never saw such a dark, nasty cloud out the back of a thunderstorm again. I surmised that it was very possibly a horizontal tornado. I don't know if those are actually possible, especially to extend around forty miles from the main storm, but it was one of those few seconds in a flying career you'll never forget!
Most excellent analysis. Reminds me of something I was told during my training: "There are two limitations to keep in mind while flying any aircraft: the pilot's limitations as well as the aircraft's. If you want to stay safe in light aircraft you need to know, and stay well within, both of these limitations.
Juan, you said exactly the same thing my first instructor, Bill, told me as a PP student in 1985 when I told him about struggling with turbulence on my first solo cross-country: slow down, gentle on the controls to stay upright, and request/accept a block altitude (I was using flight following) until things smooth out. It seems some of today’s pilots are bedazzled by the gee-whiz cool avionics in modern panels and forget (or never learn) the basic physical principles that govern all aircraft and ultimately determine the limits of safety and survivability.
Thank you for bringing clarity and facts to this one Juan. I am not a pilot, but I learn about flying every time I watch one of your videos. I also learn a lot about human nature.
Thanks. Learned something useful that I wasn't aware of. Sorry about the pilot though. I started flying in 1965 and know 11 pilots including 2 of my instructors who died in accidents since then.
I searched all 695 comments (at the time of this one) and despite several instances of "tornado," none consider the fact that the aircraft might have entered one. He was on the S side of a small, rapidly building cell, and if you watch Ryan Hall's livestreams, you know that on Tuesday, tornadoes a) had already been reported by the 12:05 (CDT, 1:05 EDT) start time of his stream, and b) formed from some of the smaller cells out in front of the main convection (supercells). I haven't had time to see if any tornadoes were reported in the area that day, but it often takes minutes for rotation to be recognized as sufficient to be causing at least a tornado aloft. Also, it takes many minutes for a circulation that's invisible in the clouds to reach the ground and generate a TDS (tornado damage signature). Aircraft encountering a tornado aloft is the first thing that occurred to be b/c of the high _ground_ speed (not airspeed) achieved with little or no loss of altitude. What can accelerate your aircraft by 70 knots in 17 seconds? Not an up or downdraft, for sure! The counterclockwise pattern of the last 3 FlightAware hits also makes me think "tornado aloft."
Reed Timmer posted something about that, pretty sure his team drove through the rain. I remember he was saying there was a TDS (he called it a Tornado Debris Signature - basically means the same, since tornadoes can cause damage).
Good investigative thinking... Never occurred to me. Would be very bad lucky but that's why you should always avoid wx like that right! It is better to avoid flying with luck, Good or bad .....
Always so much to learn from your content Juan, thank you for your expert analysis of yet another tragic incident. Condolences to the family and friends of the lost pilot 💔
As a non pilot, I’m always amazed with the amount of knowledge you have with so many types of aircraft, and the amount of data, science and physics one must know to keep said aircraft in the air at all times!
Hey Juan, it must be hard to report on so many fatal stories almost every day. I hope it doesn't get you down. Just know that the education you provide to pilots in every stage of their career is so important and valuable. Think off all the lives you have probably saved throthis education progam that you provide. Great work! Kudos to you!
A really good description plus the added graphical information. I really like the way you provide information in your videos. (I am not a GA pilot. Gliders only - where every landing is an emergency landing - there is no go around. As the old ex airforce instructor used to say - think and get everything in order so you stay within the design envelope of your aircraft).
Such a valuable input in this reporting information, not only applicable to aviation but also to the way we should approach any new technology in phases of life . Even the simplest of motor cars now have more technology that they need . And sadly drivers spend more time “playing “ with this rather than focusing on driving and above all they seem to “unlearn” basic safety focus! Even a bicycle seem to have way more technical advance systems , I point to e-bikes , also now fitted with a form of a “onboard” computer monitoring even your heartbeat ! Very important statement by previous writer , not essential to take off , but mandatory to land ! Any form of travel or transportation methods should apply this Motto - thanks for this channel - loads of life lessons - not only aviation
When i was young doctors were being killed in Bonanza’s. Now it’s Mailbus. Crossing a strong cold front is suicidal in a any single engine Excellent video
Have a friend that flew an older Continental powered Malibu for many years, a CFI used it once and overstressed the airframe, he refused to fly the aircraft again until it was repaired. the tell tail sign was that the paint had cracked around the rivets on both wings and horizontal stabilizer. A wonderful aircraft that should only be flown by the knowledgeable owner.
In the old days, the main function of a pilot in rough weather is to maintain the attitude of the airplane. Autopilot off. Meaning flying with your hands and feet. Don't chase the instruments, maintain your attitude. Of course you must slow way down initially.
Juan, " . . . this is a slippery, single engine aircraft and it's a problem with owner-operators exceeding the design limitations of the aircraft, especially in bad weather." Reminds me of exactly the issue with the V-Tail Bonanza. Many, many v-tails structurally failed due to over-G the airplane while operating in the caution range or beyond. Hence, the v-tail received the moniker, Dr. Killer.
Outstanding description of basic aerodynamics that many pilots don’t understand. Lighter A/C weights equal lower maneuvering speeds and twisting forces acting on airframes at max G by combining control inputs, i.e. rolling & pulling.
I got into some serious turbulence in my light sport plane two days ago. I looked down at my airspeed indicator to verify maneuvering speed and paused for a second. Getting down to that speed meant I would stay in this stressful situation longer. I can honestly say I had a moment where I wanted to increase my speed to get out of it quicker. In my case it was only a passing thought and I did slow down. However, when your flying along I think it's hard for most pilots to imagine that this solid metal machine we are in is just going to "come from together" just because our airspeed is a little high. Even though you may know this logically, I think some pilots may not truly appreciate the reality. I think the idea of "getting out of it quicker" can be tempting for some, right up until a wing falls off.
Exactly my thoughts even though not a pilot. I use the maneuver of faster is better when passing traffic on the highway. Definitely, not a good thought to have while piloting an airplane.
I used to go to clubs with a girl named Marta. She'd be borderline DUI and drive home real fast, on the theory there'd be less chance of getting a DUI if she minimized her time driving.
The worst turbulence I’ve ever experienced as an airline pilot was in a BE20, or Beech 1900C freighter (go figure, a freight dawg), while transiting an early morning storm band from tropical storm Hortense between GSO and ISO (Greensboro and Kinston, NC) at 0630. Often the weather probe, this one was was the most memorable. Being 'self dispatched' as a FAR135 operator, all I had was DUATS back then, which was not bad for it’s day, but there were no PIREPS for the route. The Beech’s instrument panel was mounted on rubber grommets, which helped it bounce around at a frequency that the human eye can just barely follow in severe turbulence, which only increased the fatigue factor. I remember the young kid controller from the Seymour Johnson AFB GCA asking me, 'Sir, do you see a hook echo on your radar!?' Well, I did in fact transit a tornado, but Toto and I somehow made it. Probably because there was NO autopilot on said freighter, but my underwear didn’t survive 😅. Thank the Lord that I’m now flying an A350 that has a maneuvering speed of Mach .85
Totally agree with your advice on autopilot and Va. if flying in moderate or stronger turbulence you should hand fly the aircraft I’ve experienced strong pitch actions from autopilots in the PA46 while checking out customers in new Malibus at Piper. Also extreme roll maneuvers in Seneca III in turbulence created by thunderstorms often resulting in banks in excess of 70 degrees Somewhat of topic , I own Tesla Model 3 with FSD which used Heuristic code in controlling car in V11. This caused some scary situations in V11. To the point where I stopped using it. When I got V12 which uses Neural nets end to end the car performed like a human. It is now so good I let the car do all the driving Makes me wonder what the software engineers did or are doing to improve the reliability of software used in autopilots
That was a wicked storm. I am an experienced traveler and normally turbulence is barely noticeable to me, I believe on that day, the commercial flight I was on experienced moderate turbulence as bad as I have ever experienced from takeoff to landing and later that night, slightly diminished. On the outbound flight, the captain advised there would be no in flight service as the turbulence was going to be rough.
You always seem to scare the hell out of me Juan. Unfortunate for the pilot but I try to learn from each of these. Thanks for giving this a thorough review and re-educating us on the Vg diagram.
Our maintenance facility did an AE2A engine for a Malibu, and while i was doing the installation, the wealthy owner/pilot wasboasting about how good his avionic suite was, and how fast the aurplane was, and it was truly all weather capable. It struck me how these idiots think their money makes them invincible.
All the structural limits are determined by static load. If you fight the dynamic loading you add load factors to load factors (case) with an unknown outcome. It's very hard for a manufacturer to simulate that, and the basic numbers may appear OK to them anyway.
Two points I'd like to make here. This airplane was equipped with onboard weather radar. Did the pilot ever take any training on radar theory and limitations, or on using the particular unit installed in the aircraft? Second, there seems to be a widespread belief that datalinked weather uplinked to an aircraft is the best thing since sliced bread. Folks, speaking as a CFI and professional pilot, all these things give you is information. It's up to you through training and knowledge, specially of the equipment's and your own limitations to interpret it properly and put it to proper use.
This was such a huge problem that in 1991 the FAA issued an unusual AD prohibiting Malibu and Mirage pilots from flying IMC. There was an uproar, and it was changed a month later to a warning telling pilots to stop flying in to storms. A rigorous SCR followed, but nothing was found. Just bad pilots.
WHAT a graphic at 03:49. Only on the blacolirio channel. Incredible analysis. So many points. In case you missed it: MENTIONED: • point-to-point 3D model of ADSB and FlightAware a/c data • whether radar overlay showing satellite imagery of strong storm front between St. Louis & Kansas City (final a/c resting point) --> similar weather radar overly with similar accident • PA46 checklists indicating critical V_A max&min speeds • generic V-g diagram (which is repeatedly and repeatedly mentioned on this channel, worth taking some time to understand this **AND** s/c model of accident causation) showing "normal operating airspeed and g-load envelope" for aircrafts --> "You can stall an aircraft at any IAS and any attitude, but only ONE critical angle of attack." • analysis of checked maneuvers, but importantly, why using these in-flight could be detrimental to structural damage to a/c (AAL587 as irl ex.) • general sadness from blancolirio. He seems genuinely upset that this happened, seemingly, because he knows it could have been prevented.
I worked with some Piper guys years ago and they were complaining about the Malibu crashes that were happening. Seems that the owners basically said "I paid a million dollars for an all-weather aircraft and by God I'm going to fly it through thunderstorms" which is what caused the vast majority of the accidents. NOBODY in their right mind fly's ANYTHING through a thunderstorm!
Another guy testified in a crash suit where the elevator had come off much like what was shown in this video. He did a demonstration that the elevator and controls could withstand 6 times the maximum load before failure...but in closing arguments the prosecutor said 'You SAW how the tail FAILED'!! And the jury found Piper guilty and gave the plaintiffs a big award. Lay people don't seem to understand that things are built with limits and you MUST stay below them even though what is advertised in the Pilot Manual will have some headroom...don't push it!
People that buy these planes are usually self made millionaires, risk takers.
Flies*
I used to work for the Just Ice Dept. as a tech. and the cases get sealed so the next time there is no precedent...
„There is no reason to fly into a thunderstorm in peace time.“
@@MrMonoTraceror unless you’re NOAA or NASA maybe.
Incredible lesson. You young pilots need to watch and re-watch every video Juan produces. It will keep you alive. I was USAF trained and had a long professional career but still learn something in every video.
It’s highly likely that the pilots who need to watch this to learn from others’ mistakes - are not!
@@davidpowell7614 you make an excellent point: namely, the people who need to see these videos the most are also most likely not to see them.
Sadly with the amount of up and coming pilots I fear lessons described by Jaun just are not getting through and risks are taken with disastrous outcomes, take heed from an experienced knowledgeable pilot
Though I don't fly anymore (age, diabetes), I watch all of Juan's videos, sometimes thinking "I did that right" but often thinking "that could have happened to me". Thanks for all you do.
@wiliampotter2098 I agree with this wholeheartedly.
I tried flying in the 80s. Instructor was a crop duster. He signed me off on solo at 6 hours. He was impressed at how quickly I was picking up overall handling of the aircraft in the pattern and basic maneuvers. While soloing, I was showing off for friends and had two low altitude accelerated stalls and in both instances a couple weeks apart, they involved counter-intuitively diving the nose at the ground to gain airspeed and was able to pull out just feet above impact. I know it was stupid. I almost paid the ultimate price - *TWICE!* It was at that time, I realized I wasn't mature enough to attempt to continue flying and quit just before my scheduled written exam. I got married, raised a nice family and my wife an I enjoyed our careers til we both retired recently. Instead of thinking I should buy a plane now and try again - I bought Flight Sim for my computer and some controls and that will have to be the limit for my flying adventures, lol!
Your instructor was a psychopath...
6 hours...
1 hour taxing..
At least you were smarter than he was...
welcome to the comments Joe Biden!
Smartest guy of all-time. Congrats on the family and being alive bro.
I had a young and bold college student for my first instructor. He signed me off for solo at 8.? Hours. I successfully completed the three take offs and landings with no problems, but if I was an instructor, I would never sign off a student for solo at 8 hours. Instructors have a huge amount of responsibility.
"A mans GOT to know his limits." Wise decision.
Hi Juan! I found this report fascinating. I spent ten years at Piper, eight of those on the PA-46 line and about two years installing the empennage. The main wing on this plane failed at the "splice" where the outer panels are joined to the center section. The separated portion of the empennage shown on the ground is the elevator trim tab and, roughly, one third of the elevator. Good reports. Keep up the good work.
Interesting because according to the sale site - the left wing outboard section was replaced after a ground incident in July 2023
There are just weather conditions where staying at home and watching Columbo reruns is the best decision you can possibly make.
I just finished watching the Columbo episode where the guilty lady took him up in her Beechcraft and got him sick and did a loop. I saw the tail no. and looked it up and it was just recently totally wrecked in Louisiana and sold for salvage. Bill
TV weather reports should warn GA pilots to 'Stay Home' during storm events.
Unless you're a corporate pilot who can be fired for being "timid". It puts the pressure on.
@@rainscratch I mean, it's not just pilots. There are also drivers or pedestrians who get struck by falling branches... for any mode of transportation, there's a "nope!" threshold :D
@@arnenelson4495 Then find a different corp or a different profession.
As a retired VFR pilot, and experiencing “situations” in my 3300 hours I was always aware of the maximum manoeuvring speed of the limited number of aircraft and aircraft types that I flew, however I did not realize that the lighter my plane was the manoeuvring speed decreased. I would have bet my house that the reverse was true but the graph proves otherwise. I never saw one of those graphs ( or studied it if I did actually see one). Thanks for the education and I hope I can pass it on and help someone else.
same here.... totally opposite of what I had believed.
If I have it right it may be easier to grasp in terms of "involuntary" maneuvres. Weight has a dampening effect and so the same gust will toss a light plane around more (with more risk of exceeding G limits) than it would the same plane at a heavier weight. So lower weight needs more safety margin -> lower Va.
Still trying to process this..
@@tegrovi correct
Manoeuvring speed is obviously the max speed at which you can make a full control deflection and stall before exceeding the limit load factor. When you're heavier you need a greater angle of attack just to maintain straight and level, so you're already flying closer to the critical AoA. You might be at 4° meaning only a 4x increase in lift produced if you increase it to 16°. At lighter weights you might be maintaining S+L at only 1° AoA and to reach a typical critical angle of 16°, that's a 16-fold increase in lift produced (given the lift formula - lift is directly proportional to AoA among other things). Not a very good explanation but that's how I think about it.
Juan is always on point, accurate, knowledgeable and respectful with his analyses.
He's the best out there on RUclips.
@@MalachiWhite-tw7hl Yes, he leaves his emotions out of the analysis. Although I am thankful I can also empathize with the passion and empathy of other pilots doing accident analysis on RUclips. Especially when the accidents are so totally avoidable.
@@MalachiWhite-tw7hl Hoover is pretty good, Pilot Debrief
My family's Malibu and pilot are somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of the Bahamas. Pilot flew into a Level 6 thunderstorm. A/C was equipped with a color Storm Scope. I'm not sure what he was thinking.
A small GA aircraft is still a small GA aircraft, no matter how fancy and fast it is. They're fragile beasts. ALL weather should be avoided in them, no matter the marketing department's claims. This includes ice.
Sorry for your loss. All the equipment is meant to avoid weather.
God, that's awful. Do you have an N-number so we can read about it?
what does your family do?
At least it's not "My family, Malibu and pilot"....
Back in 1977 my first flight instructor told me there are only 3 things to remember about flying...." Don't f**k with Thuderstorms, Don't f**k with Thunderstorms, and Don't f**k with Thunderstorms" ...amazing how I still remember that!!
I am a longtime meteorologist, corporate pilot, and active CFI. It is incredibly frustrating when weather is often the cause of so many GA accidents. We have better data than ever. In many cases, I think some pilots do not know what they don’t know.
Your dissection of accidents is a good learning tool.
I think pilots needs to pursue as much advanced weather training as possible - books, seminars, webinars, etc.
That sounds like the career I'd like to have had. But, I think the issue is the decision-making process of some people, rather than a lack of information. Some people are just going to take that risk and push it, regardless of the information they posess in a situation.
I’m a complete weather nerd, and it actually interesting to see how many pilots don’t have that initial interest or knowledge in weather. In general, your basic PPL and subsequent ratings really do teach a significant amount of weather knowledge (compared to your average lay person) but there’s always more to learn, as I’m sure you know as a meteorologist.
But yeah, as far as knowledge/safety goes, diving deeper into weather will always make you a better pilot IMHO.
It’s not even being able to identify current conditions, what you’re seeing outside the window, etc - it’s knowing what you’re GOING to encounter hours from now. I’d say the majority of weather-related incidents are people who went when they shouldn’t have, or didn’t have an adequate alternate route/plan. The beginning of those flights is always benign, but before you know it, you’re in trouble. As you stated, the information out there today is SO good - it’s nearly impossible to be totally blindsided by weather now. Something had to be ignored. 🫤
@@EstorilEm Oh, I'm not a meteorologist, but wanted to be. Could not handle the substantial mathematics involved in getting such a degree.
@doppler19 what do you recommend for advanced weather training?
@@MalachiWhite-tw7hl Bro'!
Many years ago I had a pristine 1982 Airconditioned and de-iced P-210. I test flew a New 1984 Malibu on an early clear Saturday morning - no wind and was smitten. At the time I had about 2,000 hours. I ended up purchasing a used 50 hour Malibu for $250K with fresh everything forward of the firewall (Piper was forced to replace engines), essentially a new plane. When I went to Wisconsin to pick up the plane it was gusty winds but clear weather. I quickly discovered that I gave up a perfectly good extremely stable P-210 almost paid off for a large mortgage on a Malibu as I had the crap beat out of me as those long wings picked up every bump in the sky reminding more more of the turbulence one feels flying a Cessna 152 in training. The next 600 hours of Malibu time was at times scary as the Autopilot would disengage in heavy turbulence, and I avoided any hint of bad weather. I flew quite often. After about 600 hours I became more 'one with the plane' and was more comfortable flying approaches to near minimums and as always avoided extreme areas of weather, but braved it a bit more. I became actually pretty good with the plane and would not hesitate to buy another, but it's a plane that will kill you quickly to pilots with less fear than me.
As a low time pilot flying a complex single engine “slippery” airframe this makes the hair on my neck stand. Very humbling and insightful
No substitute for time in the seat and in the air. Good decisions come from bad experiences which generally come from bad decisions. Old aviator wisdom (military or otherwise), "It's better to be standing on the ramp wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were standing on the ramp."
Good. I always hated the student that had too little fear.
Stay out of weather as a “new pilot”.
@@defendyourclam1682seems like a new pilot stays out of the weather because they don't have the experience for it, and an experienced pilot stays out of the weather because they've got the experience to know it's not worth it!
You're on you're own myr friend...
No number of certificate's or qualification will get you out of trouble if things start going south...
Experience counts for more than ticking all the boxes....
Hours alone isn't experience...
Its hours....
I think that was your best explanation of maneuvering speed and how the weather can effect it. The bit about over correcting on the controls and wildly moving them back and forth and how that to can get you past maneuvering speed was also explained really well.
If you ever do a top ten video list, this one definitely needs to be on it.
RIP to the pilot. Thank you for explaining this tragedy so others can learn from it.
I think this video does rip the pilot.
Very clear explanation, thanks Juan & condolences to pilot's family and friends.
@@RetiredEEmy BIL had flown all over the US for many years. We'll just have to wait for NTSB and see what happened May he RIP.
I was flying my 172-B from KPWA back to KDWH when a summer Supercell had just blown through. It was clear VFR about the time I hit the Red River and the vis was 40 miles. I started getting bumped really hard and slowed down to Va, I was busy keeping the wings level when Ft Worth Center asked me if I needed higher because I was several thousand feet above my assigned altitude. Keeping the inputs at a minimum had caused me to ride the Verga almost to service ceiling within a couple of minutes.
The inverse is wind shear - both terrifying
Smart move.
Makes you wish you could see that air stuff and stay out of that nasty up and down part.
That brings back memories of summer flying over Nebraska with 100 mile vis and high lapse rates. The thermals are insane in anything with light wing loading: 1000+ fpm lift into the mid- to high-teens. Throttle back, hand-fly below Va, and mush along until you've had enough of the rodeo.
@@pplusbthrust If you know about how the weather works in detail, you'll generally know what it'll do even when it's invisible. Experienced glider pilots do this but 90% of powered pilots don't have the training/knowledge to. I'd easily say my glider flying was the single most useful aviation training I ever did. Pity the same stuff isn't required learning for powered pilots.
As the owner/pilot of a PA32, your explanation of the incident was spot on and I have been in situations like this. It's very easy to try to let the autopilot to continue to fly the airplane, but you need to let the airplane adjust to the turbulence. I think that even non-pilots would understand your explanation of Va speeds, etc. Great job as always.
Thanks for the reminders as always. I find myself with the autopilot off 80% of the time due to weather, Mtns etc. I was coming back from Santa Fe to Tucson in my 310 a couple of weeks ago and it was a bull-ride...Full shoulder strap, spine rattling hits etc. I looked at flight aware and I had several 100mph spikes...altitude drops were up to several hundred feet. Va baby. My excellent instructor drilled it into me years ago.
I am a 600hr non active commercial pilot who still loves to hear you break down into detail like you do!!! Flight instructors need to hammer this stuff into their students!!!
Agree - but what if a lot of current crop of students have an invincible 'know it all' attitude?
@@rainscratch Yes, there are those. You can only teach as far as one is willing to be taught.
@kober2118 and that applies to ALL walks of life.
Juan Brown, how about this video and others of yours in a teaching set so that CFIs and new and old pilots can become aware of those dangers in flying stupidly. Flying for Idiots title
I truly believe you save lives with the work you are doing. Thank you so much.
What's that old saw.. "an exceptional pilot uses his exceptional decision making to avoid using his exceptional piloting skills". Or the other old saw.. "the takeoff is optional, the landing is mandatory". I would think twice about flying in a weather system like that. Double that for night IFR, mountainous terrain, and icing. You need to add those factors up and throw in the towel, stay at the local hotel and wake up to fly another day.
Frank Borman coined the first quote. Aeronautical engineer, Air Force test pilot, and Apollo astronaut. Truer words have never been spoken.
Maybe truer and more poignant if phrased:
"[a] takeoff is optional, [some] landing is mandatory."
With a huge influx of young poorly trained pilots trying to become airline pilots, we are going to see many more accidents caused by poor decisions and the need to prove to the boss they can do it. Young pilots have a hard time saying "NO".
I don't know. Maybe be the first to join the mile high igloo club. Lay back and let the weather do all the work.
I love bad weather, keeps you alert as you bounce along.
Ice... forget-a-bout-it!!!!
and educates him or herself on the limitations of the aircraft they are flying!!!
Juan, "why would you want to take your new airplane right through a weather front"? I've been asking myself that same question since 9/30/1966 when a great friend of mine picked up an ex high school sweetheart of mine and tried to fly back to College Station through a weather front. Flew it into the trees upside down. Getting somewhere has never been that important to me as it seems to be to others. Deepest condolences to family, loved ones and friends.
College Station, Robert Earl Keen & Lyle Lovett country. It amazes me what folks with the means and training to operate an aircraft will do sometimes.
wait, so a great friend of yours was going out with your ex hs gf? did u mind? rip to them, truly.
@@KuostA Larry was one of my best friends in HS. We played football together. Larry was a year ahead of me as was my girlfriend at that time (1962). I was a Junior. She left at the end of the school year and went to TCU in the fall. We had broken up by the end of the summer and my fancy turned elsewhere. Larry went to A&M in the Corps of Cadets program to serve in the Army after graduation. He got his PPL in the summer of 1962 and took me on my first flight. As well as many other classmates. I graduated in 1964 and went to SFAU in the fall of 64 on a football/track scholarship. Had not really been in contact with her or him after graduation. I dropped out of school after the first semester and got a job at the local airport as a lineman. Fueling, office work, oil changes, plane washing, grass mowing, etc. It paid a whopping $1.25/hr. I got my PPL shortly thereafter and built time flying fire patrol for the Tx Forestry Service until enlisting in the Marine Corps in Dec65. Fast forward to Sept 30, 1966 and I was home on leave before going to Nam when the crash happened. He had flown from College Station to our home town and picked her up so they could attend a pep rally that Friday night. They never made it. A cold front was fast approaching which he either didn't know about or thought he could get back to College Station in time. The orginal NTSB report said that a DPS Officer witnessed the plane descend out of the clouds at appx 200' on its back and strike the tree line upside down. I was a pall bearer for both funerals. Two lives cut short. I have lived a blessed life from God. I can't explain it. My wife and I moved back to my former home town 5 years ago. Lots of great memories and then there are some not so great.
@@easttexan2933 wow. thank u for the absolutely incredible story of your life. that was an incredible read. God bless you and your wife, hope you continue to have an incredible rest of your life. You've lived an extremely full, amazing life thus far! What did you do after nam?
@@KuostA As Tom Cruise said in "Jack Reacher"......remember you asked for this. In January 67 after discharge from the service, I went back to the airport in Nacogdoches where I worked and picked up right where I left off. Continued to fly fire patrol over east Texas building time. Then something happened: my wife to be and two of her dorm mates showed up at the airport to fly over the campus. Three years and two kids later and dropping out of college for the 2nd time, we moved to the Houston area and I found odd jobs for several years. My wife had a degree in education, so she taught school. My big break came in 1981. Prior to that I had believed on the name of Jesus for salvation and my life was taking a complete turn for the better because of that. I still wasn't doing all that well financially so in Jan 81 one sunday morning I went to the alter at the close of the sunday service and asked the pastor if he would pray for me to get a good job. A few weeks prior to this I had submitted an application to a local refinery. My application was slid under the stack just like everyone else before me. Looked to be a 100 or more for sure. Before the end of the week I was called for an interview and was hired. I give my heavenly Father all the glory for this because it wasn't anything I had done for sure. I spent 31 years at the refinery fractionating raw natural gas into Ethane, Propane, Isobutane, Butane and raw gasoline. I worked my way from base operator in 81 to chief operator in 87 to shift supervisor in 93, to Area Supervisor 2011, retiring in May 2011. If you're interested, you can google Enterprise Products, LLC. I worked at the Mont Belvieu, TX complex. Believing on the Lord Jesus, the Christ, was most important event in my life. I was dead in sin with no hope until a friend of mine invited me to come to church. From that day forward I knew that there is a God that loves me and made a way for me to love him back. If you have never had that happen to you, I encourage you to seek Him while he can be found. Bless you KuostA.
Great practical use of the vg diagram and discussion on knowing the basics of ac limits, Mr. Brown! It’s very sad to hear the pilot didn’t survive. But we can all learn from this unfortunate event. I’m going through CFI currently and have seen this diagram a hundred times recently. We’ve all seen it. This is a reminder to me how important it is to understand the fundamentals of flying a plane. And then apply it when flying any ac. And turn the AP off and hand fly when required!
Thanks! Great reporting and insight.
Your videos are so informative and full of learning opportunities, not just for pilots but for anyone interested in aviation. There seems to be a common theme with a fair few of these accidents - Over-reliance on autopilots, especially in heavy weather. Your videos should be required viewing for anyone learning to fly. Keep up the great work.
Never flew a Malibu but I've heard they are very "slippery." I was in the TRACON one day when we handed one off to a local tower on a visual approach. ATC had to send him around and he crashed on the go around. To be blunt, I see low-time pilots with a lot of money killing themselves. The guy that crashed at my facility was a surgeon and a low-time pilot.
A common mistake made on go arounds with these things is to "radar" the power. When the airplane is slow there is not enough rudder to counter the torque of the TIO540 and the aircraft will torque roll. A go around in these types of aircraft requires a very measured and steady application of power.
@@gerrycarmichael1391Sounds like poor/unrealistic engineering am I wrong?
Holy crap
@gerrycarmichael1391 good info
Why don’t surgeons carry stethoscopes?
Ans: they dont know how to use them.
I live just a few miles from the crash site, about 3 miles from the end of Rwy 02 at KCOU and can say with certainty that the wx conditions on the day of the accident were very bad, with tornadic and severe convective activity well into the evening. I used to be a member of the local Fire District that responded to this incident and myself have responded to a single engine aircraft accident just north of KCOU many years ago. i also worked at KCOU for 15 years. Seeing the aftermath one of these accidents first hand is an eye opener. I enjoy how objective you are about these accidents and don't sensationalize like others do. Keep doing what you do!
Maneuvering speed was critical in picking my BaronB58TC. Basically it is a non Pressurized P58. the Va for the P Baron and the 58TC is 170 kts, about the highest of all piston GA aircraft. In the mid teens where I flew the TC at approx 62% power at about 5,600# I would indicate 168kts, below maneuvering speed while having a TAS of 210-220 kts, burning about 32-33 gph. what an airplane!!!! It was the same FIKI airplane that I only operated the boots during an annual. a bit over 50 years ago I was asked by my instrument instructor during a localizer approach to CMA, What is a good IFR airplane? I replied this 182, it's sure rock solid. He said "No, Boeing 707, and never forget it.!" I haven't, so I'm still here to watch Juan.
@OfficialBlancolirov Juan, if that's really you, I do have your phone number and we have talked in the past (we have some mutual friends), I think about the accident of n7022G, a C340. We have a lot in common, including owning and riding many of the same great motorcycles. I am speaking at the Utah Aeronautics conference in a month or so about basically how to fly your airplane better and with less anxiety. I and my bro had a flight instructor who about 40 years ago was flying a Duke near Palm Springs (I think he was flying it on a 135 flight) and had an inflight breakup. Why it continues to occur is beyond me. By the way, that cfii of mine with the Boeing 707 comment, played great ragtime piano. I won't say his name but he was (is) instructing out of RBL up near you.
EXCELLENT report. The accident descriptions are always in a methodological and technical manner. Thanks very much. Greetings from Mexico City.
Juan, thank you for your videos. As a student pilot, I have learned so much from them. Please keep them coming.
I love this channel. We get more info from you early than we get from the NTSB much later. I make sure my son in law , who is working toward the airlines , watches all of your videos. Great stuff. Keep it up.
Seems to be a string of fatal air crashes involving the autopilot systems allowing the aircraft to get into uncontrollable or excessive flying conditions. It seems like the pilots are not prepared to 'fly the aircraft' bucking bronco style in weather or known icing conditions. You wonder if the flying instructions related to autopilot are fully understood. There must be a mentality that to get out of trouble you turn autopilot on, when turning it off is how to gain real control again.
I flew a 172 into a line of thunderstorms and I did my best to stay at or below Va and gave up on trying to maintain altitude. I saw rate of climb beyond the ROC gauge both climb and decent. We got slapped hard enough to set off the ELT while making a 180 degree turn to get out.
That made radio comms with Center impossible. I set the transponder to 7600 hit ident then to 7700. We landed at the nearest airport to wait out the weather and turn off the ELT.
Got to fly very carefully to stay in one piece!! Helps to have good skills too.
ERAU 80 CFIA&I ret.
A little weather analysis: at 1630z, roughly 35 minutes prior to the accident, there was a line of strong storms that were heading east of a COU-JEF line. To the west of that line, the NEXRAD showed virtually no echoes. However, by 1650z, a new cluster of storms formed in the wake of the initial line and completely filled in the clear spot, directly in the path of N451MA, which flew into the cluster. The radar composite showed some of the embedded storms indicating 45-55dBz echoes with tops to FL300-400 as of the 1700 and 1710z sweeps (accident at 1705z).
There were AIRMETs for moderate turbulence from the surface to 120 and 180 to 390 (note the accident aircraft would have been between these). There was also a convective SIGMET for the entire northern half of MO for severe embedded thunderstorms from 200@55kts, tops above FL450, tornadoes, 2" hail, and wind gusts to 60kts possible. Several storms to the northeast were severe-warned. Icing charts indicated a high probability of icing and SLD at 150 over exactly the crash site, presumably associated with the thunderstorm activity. The wind aloft forecast for the time period at KCOU was 2058+02 at 120 and 2173-12 at 180 (note the temperature lapse of 14°C in 6000').
Stepping back a little farther, the aircraft had been on a direct line to the destination until 1650z, when it turned south, presumably to avoid a more mature squall line farther to the west, however, this put it into the path of the storms that would initiate minutes later.
Going back even farther to 1300z (90 minutes before the 1438z departure), the convective SIGMETs were already in place, the thunderstorm forecast showed the squall lines going through the accident area at the accident time. SPC showed an enhanced convective outlook along the planned flightpath, and the icing forecasts were all in alignment with what happened a few hours later. However, the convective activity at that time was all west of Topeka and the downstream storms wouldn't begin to initiate, near the accident area, until closer to 15-16z.
There is often a discrepancy between observed, mature weather and subsequent downstream initiation due to diurnal heating. One takeaway is that storms can and often do pop up well ahead of existing weather. Not sure whether the aircraft had onboard weather radar or was getting a (delayed) NEXRAD feed, which can make a big difference. But it went from no echoes to pretty ugly in a 10-20 minute span. Might also consider the 65-ish knot headwinds and how that plays into flying into developing weather.
Love your content, as always, great review of the V-G diagram!
Very good, Juan, I learned something here I won't forget. The problem is I'm no pilot and have no access to an aircraft myself and so no possible incident involvement here myself - we need pilots who may be affected by such environment and experience to learn about this before they become but another sad case study. And that requires their involvement in the continual learning that you and your associates strongly advocate for. This episode certainly puts that message forward.
Thanks!
Thanks Snowgoose!
Placer Co Foresthill student pilot life long aviation enthusiast here. Happy to see a local boy on here. Subscribed.
Once again, excellent analysis Juan. From my ground school class over 4 decades ago , Re: VFR/IFR, " IF IN DOUBT, WAIT IT OUT.".
Thanks Juan. Hard lesson for sure. Please keep doing what you do. A lot of GA pilots watch your channel. You do make a difference.
That was the BEST explanation of control failure I've ever heard. My short stint in A&P class (grad of avionics) touched on this but with no real comprehension. Thanks, Juan, for your insight and experience translated to dummies like me.
I'm starting my ppl classes on Tuesday. Thanks for explaining that chart.
So many high performance cars crashed by those without the experience,talent and training to control them. I guess it's the same with aircraft ?
On the race track we say they "ran out of talent". Fortunately those accidents are rarely fatal.
It all comes down to decision making. My skills ain't great, but I limit my risk based on it.
And also those many traffic camera and dash camera footage excerpts showing the culmination of police pursuit, road rage and highway stunting incidents showing examples of structural failure as vehicles briefly impact interstate and other highway infrastructure turbulence - boink or crash (rather than the better known aeronautical term of art 'keblammo') - and then the scraping, tinkling and screech of metal and plastic on steel timber and concrete finally then coming to a quiet rest amide the continuous traffic sounds.
What to say to: "Accept a block of altitude" at 9:57.
When I went all seats occupied and full fuel through a cold front, after
(1) asking if ATC could suggest vector through lighter part of the front, which amazingly they could do without me having to switch frequency to talk to weather service, and
(2) Slowing to Va max.
and although you pilots know this but it's so rare you might not have the calls at the tip of your tongue, so here ya go:
(3) "Unable maintain altitude because of turbulence and heavy weight."
(4) "Request block altitude."
And ATC immediately gave me a max and min altitude. Presumably they then got anybody out of my way that they needed to. Worked perfectly, no problem.
Good points. I'd use "require" rather than "request" a block altitude and perhaps add "emergency". Bottom line, I'd be back below Va, making "global" [ie smooth, medium term] control inputs and accepting altitude deviations. It may be a case of having to put faith in the Big Sky Theory.
Perhaps Juan could make an episode on how to handle this stuff in the real world.
You'll probably find there wont be many other aircraft around if you're in such bad weather that you need a block. Anyone potentially in your way would clearly be experiencing the same dyer situation also.
@@spdaltid Good idea, but maybe "pan pan pan", which is used for urgent situations that do not pose an immediate danger to anyone's life or to the vessel itself - like bobbling altitude in this case but no likelyhood of hitting the ground.
Declaring an emergency is when something bad is likely: major system failure, sickness, low fuel, or flight safety situation.
Couldn’t agree with you more Juan! Inexperience causes more fatal accidents.
As a retired captain/pic of several turboprop and jet aircraft…..I had “several” co-pilots (both experienced and inexperienced) insist on using the GPS/Nexrad/Downloaded radar instead of the “live” Radar! We need to understand that any downloaded radar “can be” up to the minute accuracy……but can also be “several” minutes old/delayed. Used “together” makes for awesome tools…….but “Live Radar” is always priority!
Not saying this was the case in this accident but just wondering.
Just my opinion of course.
Early in my career I read about accidents in the AOPA magazine. Learning from others Juan!
Great resource you provide!
I’m thanking you for the rest of us.
I live about 40 miles away from this accident and I can tell you the winds were massive that day. It must have been a really terrible ride at altitude.
Must of been ….you think?
@@DrDeuteron Dean is only sympathizing; not being Captain Obvious.
Another excellent video and great learning experience from the Juan Brown Aerospace & Flight University, always quickly reporting on the latest aircraft incidents/accidents. Thanks
RIP. Life is fragile. Thank you Juan, this channel is fantastic
As a non-pilot still interested in aviation I find the comments enormously interesting.
They really are, aren't they?
Flying from Ohio to Maryland couple weeks ago in my Cardinal, I was explaining to my wife why I turned off the AP in turbulence (not as gracefully as you described it) and slowed down to VA. We rocked and rolled a little bit and it took us 20-25 more minutes than planned, but that was better than the alternative. It pays to hear this type of analysis from time to time, but I wish it weren't under these circumstances.
Was it a Cardinal that killed McSpadden?
@@MalachiWhite-tw7hlHe was in a Cardinal; I have no idea who killed whom.
The cardinal was flying just fine, if he had taken it "straight ahead"
Mcspadden attempting something other than "straight ahead"!to a power off landing killed that wonderful plane and the pilot.
@@flyerjack1548 Yeah, I don’t want to assign blame. I’ll just say that the plane rarely acts alone.
Thanks for showing the V-G. People need to understand one exists for everything that flies.
Juan does a good analysis. I've flown a PA32 for just under 4000 hours in a country that doesn't have weather available by satellite and ATC that won't and say they can't advise on weather.
Many times I have struck mountain wave, frontal and convective systems....both VFR and IFR.
I have hauled the airspeed back to 90 and never exceed 100kt when it's severe. In my case I do disagree with Juan on AP use. My century 2000 was very docile, lagged and it worked so well in turbulence.
I knew I had it right when the stall warning was going off occasionally. Swarf from previous avionics install would be found on the floor under the panel.
Juan is correct. You've just got to ride it. I tell myself, go gently, throttle back, watch airspeed and don't pull and listen for the occasional stall warning. When that happens I'm confident I won't pull the wings off.
I have just installed the Garmin GFC500 auto pilot and will see what it does in turbulence and whether I need to disconnect.
Well Stated. Fly safe sir!
I really like all your videos a lot. Very informative and great analytics A way to keep informed us of all aircraft accidents. I like your humbleness that make your canal so attractive. Congratulations for the work well done.
Thanks Juan, VERY clear and VERY important information !! Just too bad we have to have to be reminded this way.....
Great walkthrough Juan! Every Pilot needs to hear this information.
Another sad deal thanks for all the work you do in informing us to help prevent more tragedies
Most aviation insurance companies won't insure you in one of these things unless you take a special course on how to handle the aircraft (essentially a type rating). A friend (BOS AA 737 Capt) has a side gig teaching one of these certified courses.
Do they have a simulator component in any of those courses to reinforce the edge cases. I wonder, also, if those simulator systems now have the capability to optionally measure the pilots vital signs (maybe so some of that polygraphic research might finally have a useful application) so an indication of how physiologically affected they became in the scenario playout.
@Don.Challenger the courses I'm aware of are all taught in the plane but that doesn't mean there aren't sims.
You are correct in this case.
Misuse of an autopilot seems to be a common theme in a number of fatal GA loss of control incidents lately.
Would be good if the autopilot could be setup with the plane’s limitations, weather inputs and you also input the loads for each flight etc
Misuse of autopilot has always been a leading cause of inflight breakups. Been going on for 50 years.
My experience with RC aircraft is when the horizontal stab goes away, there is a strong pitch-down moment with a semi-symmetrical wing airfoil.
Talking about gusts: the relevant airspeed is primarily vC (for the certification engineer), or vNO (for the pilot), which is typically higher than vA and independent of the actual flying weight at the moment. The structure is designed to withstand gusts up to vC/vNO. The checklist shown does not mention vNO.
The footage shown indicates a failure of the horizontal tail attachment to the fuselage.
The scenario presented could be one possible cause. The autopilot maneuvering above vA may cause structural failure as described, if it has sufficient authority, and it is for sure the right thing to do to disconnect the autopilot and relieve the structure of these additional maneuvering loads.
I could, however, imagine other possible causes, without being familiar with that particular design and without judging their probability:
Metal fatigue could have weakened some structural member to a point where the gust encountered caused it to fail.
Corrosion could also have led to a similar weakening.
Erroneous maintenance or repair would also be a possibility to be considered and to be investigated and hopefully ruled out by the thorough NTSB investigation.
Back in the mid-1980s, I was flying an E55 Baron for a banker as my first corporate job. We were flying from Lincoln, NE to Kimball, NE in the late spring and late afternoon. The weather was basically good except for a large, severe thunderstorm around North Platte that I deviated to the south to avoid in clear air.
Out the SW side of the TRW was this black, ugly, horizontal cloud with what appeared to be possible rotation. I was flying parallel with this for maybe 20 miles and still had another good 20 miles before I really wanted to turn on course. Again, it was clear everywhere behind the storm, except for this nasty-looking cloud.
My boss was getting really antsy and kept pointing towards home and saying you can go under that. If I recall, we were at 7,500 and the base appeared to be a thousand to fifteen hundred feet above that. I kept telling him we didn't want to mess with that, but he kept at me.
I finally relented and turned on course, but I slowed the airplane down to at least 20 knots below the maneuvering speed which I think was about 155 kt. As we got right under the cloud all hell broke loose!! It was like hitting a brick wall going up and then going down and I did pretty much a wing over as I did a 180. The boss's wife, and a manager, were asleep in the back. The manager was a big guy and he bumped his head pretty good on the ceiling.
My boss just looked at me and said he guessed I was right.
Once we landed, and I crawled out of the airplane, I discovered the right inboard gear door just flopping in the breeze!! The sudden jarring of the airplane caused the gear to bounce enough in the wheel well to break the connecting rod to the door!
I only had maybe 800 hours at the time and probably less than 150 hours of multi. I'm just glad I had enough experience and knowledge to slow way down before even trying to go under this thing. In all my flying after that, I never saw such a dark, nasty cloud out the back of a thunderstorm again. I surmised that it was very possibly a horizontal tornado. I don't know if those are actually possible, especially to extend around forty miles from the main storm, but it was one of those few seconds in a flying career you'll never forget!
Most excellent analysis. Reminds me of something I was told during my training: "There are two limitations to keep in mind while flying any aircraft: the pilot's limitations as well as the aircraft's. If you want to stay safe in light aircraft you need to know, and stay well within, both of these limitations.
Thank you for videos. I learn a lot. Greetings from Sweden
Juan, you said exactly the same thing my first instructor, Bill, told me as a PP student in 1985 when I told him about struggling with turbulence on my first solo cross-country: slow down, gentle on the controls to stay upright, and request/accept a block altitude (I was using flight following) until things smooth out. It seems some of today’s pilots are bedazzled by the gee-whiz cool avionics in modern panels and forget (or never learn) the basic physical principles that govern all aircraft and ultimately determine the limits of safety and survivability.
Thank you for bringing clarity and facts to this one Juan. I am not a pilot, but I learn about flying every time I watch one of your videos. I also learn a lot about human nature.
Thanks. Learned something useful that I wasn't aware of. Sorry about the pilot though. I started flying in 1965 and know 11 pilots including 2 of my instructors who died in accidents since then.
I searched all 695 comments (at the time of this one) and despite several instances of "tornado," none consider the fact that the aircraft might have entered one. He was on the S side of a small, rapidly building cell, and if you watch Ryan Hall's livestreams, you know that on Tuesday, tornadoes a) had already been reported by the 12:05 (CDT, 1:05 EDT) start time of his stream, and b) formed from some of the smaller cells out in front of the main convection (supercells).
I haven't had time to see if any tornadoes were reported in the area that day, but it often takes minutes for rotation to be recognized as sufficient to be causing at least a tornado aloft. Also, it takes many minutes for a circulation that's invisible in the clouds to reach the ground and generate a TDS (tornado damage signature).
Aircraft encountering a tornado aloft is the first thing that occurred to be b/c of the high _ground_ speed (not airspeed) achieved with little or no loss of altitude. What can accelerate your aircraft by 70 knots in 17 seconds? Not an up or downdraft, for sure!
The counterclockwise pattern of the last 3 FlightAware hits also makes me think "tornado aloft."
Reed Timmer posted something about that, pretty sure his team drove through the rain. I remember he was saying there was a TDS (he called it a Tornado Debris Signature - basically means the same, since tornadoes can cause damage).
@Official b
Yeah we know you are a scsmmer. byeeeeee
Good investigative thinking...
Never occurred to me.
Would be very bad lucky but that's why you should always avoid wx like that right!
It is better to avoid flying with luck, Good or bad .....
@@GinaKayLandis Tornado Debris Signature is probably the correct version :)
Thank you for making these videos. I learn so much from each of them.
Good Day Juan. Back to another sad ending.
Thank You for excellent information & Best Regards.
Sobering thoughts…tks Juan.
Always so much to learn from your content Juan, thank you for your expert analysis of yet another tragic incident. Condolences to the family and friends of the lost pilot 💔
As a non pilot, I’m always amazed with the amount of knowledge you have with so many types of aircraft, and the amount of data, science and physics one must know to keep said aircraft in the air at all times!
always full of respectful appreciation for all you do.
Hey Juan, it must be hard to report on so many fatal stories almost every day. I hope it doesn't get you down. Just know that the education you provide to pilots in every stage of their career is so important and valuable. Think off all the lives you have probably saved throthis education progam that you provide. Great work! Kudos to you!
Nice job reporting/explaining this, as always!
Love the channel. Great work. You are saving lives!
Good data dive, Juan. Former Piper service center tech here. Plenty of folks dont respect the weather when flying these unfortunately
A really good description plus the added graphical information. I really like the way you provide information in your videos. (I am not a GA pilot. Gliders only - where every landing is an emergency landing - there is no go around. As the old ex airforce instructor used to say - think and get everything in order so you stay within the design envelope of your aircraft).
Thanks for your content, I’m really learning a lot.
Such a valuable input in this reporting information, not only applicable to aviation but also to the way we should approach any new technology in phases of life . Even the simplest of motor cars now have more technology that they need . And sadly drivers spend more time “playing “ with this rather than focusing on driving and above all they seem to “unlearn” basic safety focus! Even a bicycle seem to have way more technical advance systems , I point to e-bikes , also now fitted with a form of a “onboard” computer monitoring even your heartbeat ! Very important statement by previous writer , not essential to take off , but mandatory to land ! Any form of travel or transportation methods should apply this Motto - thanks for this channel - loads of life lessons - not only aviation
When i was young doctors were being killed in Bonanza’s. Now it’s Mailbus. Crossing a strong cold front is suicidal in a any single engine
Excellent video
Have a friend that flew an older Continental powered Malibu for many years, a CFI used it once and overstressed the airframe, he refused to fly the aircraft again until it was repaired. the tell tail sign was that the paint had cracked around the rivets on both wings and horizontal stabilizer. A wonderful aircraft that should only be flown by the knowledgeable owner.
I very much appreciate your sharing of your professional knowledge and expertise Juan
In the old days, the main function of a pilot in rough weather is to maintain the attitude of the airplane. Autopilot off. Meaning flying with your hands and feet. Don't chase the instruments, maintain your attitude. Of course you must slow way down initially.
Juan, " . . . this is a slippery, single engine aircraft and it's a problem with owner-operators exceeding the design limitations of the aircraft, especially in bad weather." Reminds me of exactly the issue with the V-Tail Bonanza. Many, many v-tails structurally failed due to over-G the airplane while operating in the caution range or beyond. Hence, the v-tail received the moniker, Dr. Killer.
Exact same issue.
Outstanding description of basic aerodynamics that many pilots don’t understand. Lighter A/C weights equal lower maneuvering speeds and twisting forces acting on airframes at max G by combining control inputs, i.e. rolling & pulling.
This is so informative! Great job, fantastic reporting!🌻🌼🐝 Keep it up 🙌
@OfficialBlancolirov I don’t think you are really him. I checked your profile and it’s empty 🙂↔️🙅♂️
That weather front smacked Metro Detroit yesterday. Was no joke at all. Godspeed, captain.
With all the flying experience I have I always learn from you Thanks you are the best You never stop learning from people like you
I got into some serious turbulence in my light sport plane two days ago. I looked down at my airspeed indicator to verify maneuvering speed and paused for a second. Getting down to that speed meant I would stay in this stressful situation longer. I can honestly say I had a moment where I wanted to increase my speed to get out of it quicker. In my case it was only a passing thought and I did slow down.
However, when your flying along I think it's hard for most pilots to imagine that this solid metal machine we are in is just going to "come from together" just because our airspeed is a little high. Even though you may know this logically, I think some pilots may not truly appreciate the reality.
I think the idea of "getting out of it quicker" can be tempting for some, right up until a wing falls off.
Exactly my thoughts even though not a pilot. I use the maneuver of faster is better when passing traffic on the highway. Definitely, not a good thought to have while piloting an airplane.
fast is slow and slow is fast
113 mph straight down got him out of it in a hurry. No thanks.
I used to go to clubs with a girl named Marta. She'd be borderline DUI and drive home real fast, on the theory there'd be less chance of getting a DUI if she minimized her time driving.
@@tbersags0278 Slow is smooth and smooth is fast.
The worst turbulence I’ve ever experienced as an airline pilot was in a BE20, or Beech 1900C freighter (go figure, a freight dawg), while transiting an early morning storm band from tropical storm Hortense between GSO and ISO (Greensboro and Kinston, NC) at 0630. Often the weather probe, this one was was the most memorable. Being 'self dispatched' as a FAR135 operator, all I had was DUATS back then, which was not bad for it’s day, but there were no PIREPS for the route. The Beech’s instrument panel was mounted on rubber grommets, which helped it bounce around at a frequency that the human eye can just barely follow in severe turbulence, which only increased the fatigue factor. I remember the young kid controller from the Seymour Johnson AFB GCA asking me, 'Sir, do you see a hook echo on your radar!?' Well, I did in fact transit a tornado, but Toto and I somehow made it. Probably because there was NO autopilot on said freighter, but my underwear didn’t survive 😅.
Thank the Lord that I’m now flying an A350 that has a maneuvering speed of Mach .85
So much appreciate the break down and explanations of these reports. So educational, it's a huge help in understanding the do's and don'ts.
Totally agree with your advice on autopilot and Va. if flying in moderate or stronger turbulence you should hand fly the aircraft
I’ve experienced strong pitch actions from autopilots in the PA46 while checking out customers in new Malibus at Piper. Also extreme roll maneuvers in Seneca III in turbulence created by thunderstorms often resulting in banks in excess of 70 degrees
Somewhat of topic , I own Tesla Model 3 with FSD which used Heuristic code in controlling car in V11. This caused some scary situations in V11. To the point where I stopped using it. When I got V12 which uses Neural nets end to end the car performed like a human. It is now so good I let the car do all the driving
Makes me wonder what the software engineers did or are doing to improve the reliability of software used in autopilots
That was a wicked storm. I am an experienced traveler and normally turbulence is barely noticeable to me, I believe on that day, the commercial flight I was on experienced moderate turbulence as bad as I have ever experienced from takeoff to landing and later that night, slightly diminished. On the outbound flight, the captain advised there would be no in flight service as the turbulence was going to be rough.
You always seem to scare the hell out of me Juan. Unfortunate for the pilot but I try to learn from each of these. Thanks for giving this a thorough review and re-educating us on the Vg diagram.
Goodness without you looking into this and providing solid evidence available gives me appreciation. Very approved researching I thank you.
Our maintenance facility did an AE2A engine for a Malibu, and while i was doing the installation, the wealthy owner/pilot wasboasting about how good his avionic suite was, and how fast the aurplane was, and it was truly all weather capable. It struck me how these idiots think their money makes them invincible.
All the structural limits are determined by static load. If you fight the dynamic loading you add load factors to load factors (case) with an unknown outcome. It's very hard for a manufacturer to simulate that, and the basic numbers may appear OK to them anyway.
Two points I'd like to make here. This airplane was equipped with onboard weather radar. Did the pilot ever take any training on radar theory and limitations, or on using the particular unit installed in the aircraft? Second, there seems to be a widespread belief that datalinked weather uplinked to an aircraft is the best thing since sliced bread. Folks, speaking as a CFI and professional pilot, all these things give you is information. It's up to you through training and knowledge, specially of the equipment's and your own limitations to interpret it properly and put it to proper use.
Juan's videos should be required for every pilot. Great job.
This was such a huge problem that in 1991 the FAA issued an unusual AD prohibiting Malibu and Mirage pilots from flying IMC. There was an uproar, and it was changed a month later to a warning telling pilots to stop flying in to storms. A rigorous SCR followed, but nothing was found. Just bad pilots.
I'm not a pilot or involved in aircraft at all , but i watch almost all your videos. Good channel sir
WHAT a graphic at 03:49. Only on the blacolirio channel. Incredible analysis. So many points.
In case you missed it:
MENTIONED:
• point-to-point 3D model of ADSB and FlightAware a/c data
• whether radar overlay showing satellite imagery of strong storm front between St. Louis & Kansas City (final a/c resting point)
--> similar weather radar overly with similar accident
• PA46 checklists indicating critical V_A max&min speeds
• generic V-g diagram (which is repeatedly and repeatedly mentioned on this channel, worth taking some time to understand this **AND** s/c model of accident causation) showing "normal operating airspeed and g-load envelope" for aircrafts
--> "You can stall an aircraft at any IAS and any attitude, but only ONE critical angle of attack."
• analysis of checked maneuvers, but importantly, why using these in-flight could be detrimental to structural damage to a/c (AAL587 as irl ex.)
• general sadness from blancolirio. He seems genuinely upset that this happened, seemingly, because he knows it could have been prevented.