DEADLY DILEMMA : Partial Panel in IMC Leads to Tragic Loss of 3 Lives!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 фев 2025
- Aircraft Information
The accident involved a 1973 Beechcraft V35B Bonanza (registration N440H), a privately owned aircraft with a total airframe time of 6,166 hours. The aircraft was equipped with a Continental IO-520 engine and had no backup vacuum pump.
Flight Details
The pilot was conducting a personal cross-country flight under instrument flight rules (IFR) from North Myrtle Beach, SC (CRE), to Plainville, CT (4B8). While en route at 7,000 feet, the aircraft experienced a vacuum pump failure, causing the loss of associated gyroscopic instruments and parts of the instrument panel. Despite the failure, the pilot continued toward the destination airport due to favorable weather conditions compared to alternatives.
Sequence of Events
During radar vectors for a GPS approach to the destination, the aircraft entered instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). The pilot reported a loss of control and additional instrument failures. The air traffic controller provided weather conditions for a closer airport and offered the pilot an option to land there, but no further communication was received. Radar data showed the aircraft made erratic altitude and course deviations before the crash.
Crash Details
The airplane broke apart in flight due to overstress during an uncontrolled descent. Debris was found scattered along a 0.4-mile-long path in Syosset, NY. Metallurgical analysis revealed that the vacuum pump's rotor and vanes had separated due to contact with the housing. Although debris ingestion could not be ruled out, the rotor’s wear was attributed to prolonged use beyond the manufacturer’s recommended service life.
Pilot Factors
The pilot was instrument-rated and experienced spatial disorientation in IMC conditions with a partially functioning instrument panel. Toxicology tests revealed low levels of diphenhydramine and zolpidem in the pilot’s system, but no evidence suggested these medications or his severe coronary artery disease contributed to the crash.
Probable Cause and Contributing Factors
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) identified the probable cause as the pilot's loss of airplane control in IMC with a partial instrument panel following the vacuum pump failure. Contributing factors included the pilot's spatial disorientation and the operation of the vacuum pump beyond the manufacturer’s recommended six-year replacement interval.
#atc
#planecrash
If you like our contents please SUBSCRIBE to our channel
/ @flight_follower
All videos are licensed under Creative Commons or used under YT quidelines of 'Fair Use'i do not own or claim any video. credits goes to respective owners. if you have your videos used and want to make a change email me. so that we can solve the issue.
The ATC audio is downloaded from Liveatc.net
Email us at
notify.flightfollower@gmail.com
Just declare the emergency guys!! Get all the help you can.
ATC on the ground could be a little more interested than an NYC traffic cop writing a ticket. Makes me sick
If you are still running a vacuum system these days, you really should install a backup electrical attitude indicator. I think the FAA should make it an airworthiness item for IFR flight. Vacuum systems suck -- no pun intended.
This is a real tragedy- if he had stream gauges and loses vacuum pump in IFR conditions it serious emergency. Takeaways: immediately announce an emergency ( without having to be prompted.) Don’t use jargon like “partial panel” because most ATC are not pilots and in this situation clearly didn’t understand the significance of saying “ partial panel loss.” Ask for PAR approach: this is where ATC can provide you with longitudinal and lateral guidance ( like an ILS) to the runway. Don’t attempt a partial panel approach in solid IFR conditions- you will likely get spacial disorientation and die. Insist that ATC provide you with a PAR approach.
You get tested on partial panel approach during ifr training and on the check ride. Like many things it’s something you have to train and always be prepared for. That being said we’re not perfect and imc unfortunately doesn’t forgive mistakes.
if you can still maintain wings level and do safe turns then yes a PAR is possible but if you're in VMC and have instrument failure, maintain VMC! If ATC vector you in cloud and you lose your last instrument then their vectors won't help, you will lose control.
@FSXairpilot yes, and a partial panel approach is only if you have instrument failure in IMC and have no other choice. If you can get VMC, maintain VMC, do not reenter cloud to do a partial panel approach. If you lose your other instrument it is very bad. A precautionary landing in a field VMC is preferable to partial panel.
The guys on the ground had no idea of the extent of this emergency.
Because he didn't tell them...
Old try to make the audio stereo. But thanks for creating this.
That Jesus from the lady says alot
That controller doesn’t have a clue how airplanes operate. Find the guy a place with good weather within his fuel distance.
Dumbest communication ever
That's why it's the pilot's responsibility to make him understand. Pilot reluctant to declare an emergency? That would tell me he doesn't think he's in trouble.
???? Controllers (there were at least two) did everything they could possibly do for him. They first kept asking "Are you declaring an emergency?", and the pilot kept ignoring that question, and instead kept saying "I have partial panel", which is rather meaningless. It could mean, loss of HSI, or VSI, or altimeter, or airspeed indicator. Some of those are not meaningful challenges (VSI), some of them could be a challenge (altimeter), and how bad the situation is will depend on whether the pilot is in VMC or in the clouds.
Once he eventually agreed to declare emergency, controllers kept offering vectors to the nearest airport, to which the pilot kept asking to continue onto his destination.
The main mistake was descending into clouds, which is a major challenge when you have neither directional gyro, nor attitude indicator (due to loss of vacuum). It becomes very stressful, trying to keep the wings level by only using turn coordinator.
There are several free mobile apps for smartphones that take advantage of the phone's built-in attitude sensor and GPS. These apps can simulate the instrument panel, providing altitude, vertical speed, ground speed and heading using GPS data, and showing attitude (artificial horizon) using the built-in sensors. When all fails on an airplane, just open your smartphone and launch that app. While you should never use it for everyday flying, as it isn't precise enough, in an emergency like this one, it can save lives. Attitude and heading indicators are accurate enough to allow you to control the plane and get it out of the clouds.
The first time my instructor made me fly on instruments alone I did fine by using only the turn and bank indicator.
Learn to use the compass. An increasing reading indicates a right turn, decreasing a left turn. The same applies to the DG. Practice this in VFR conditions until it's second nature.
This guy may have been lying about the 'partial panel', hoping ATC could get him out of the deadly corner he flew himself into.
It sounded like the only ATC that took the situation seriously was the supervisor that came in after it was too late. Granted, ATC may not know that a VFR flight heading in to IFR conditions with a "panel failure" that would at best leave them with limited instruments is bad news, but maybe they should. It's not too much to ask for people in their positons to use common sense to recognize basic things like that and they certainly shouldn't be badgering the pilot for being in an emergency situation. Is it okay for ATC to be that clueless and careless?
The first ATC (at Kennedy) kept asking "are you declaring an emergency?", and the pilot kept ignoring the question and responding "we have partial panel". While controllers do have the authority to declare an emergency on behalf of pilots, this one didn't because the pilot kept refusing to accept emergency, and kept trying to go to Hartford. By all information available, it seemed that the pilot has full control of the aircraft and can still safely fly it to his destination. And as long as he is in VMC (above the clouds), he is safe.
The problems started quite soon after he descended into clouds. While he initially reported that he lost directional gyro (as a consequence of the loss of vacuum pump), this also caused the loss of the attitude indicator. On top of the clouds, this wasn't an issue, he could see the horizon in front of him. Once in the clouds, this became a major issue, and there are very few ways to keep the aircraft properly oriented without a working attitude indicator (and a working directional gyro). Turn/bank coordinator might offer enough clues to keep wings level, and magnetic compass can provide heading information, but this is extremely challenging and stressful.
There really wasn't much the controller could do here. He asked, multiple times, "are you in emergency?", then when emergency was eventualy declared, he offered to guide him to the nearest airport for landing. ATC did everything they could for the pilot, but controller could NOT fly the actual plane for him.
Is it ok for the pilot to be that clueless and careless? Even after the supervisor came on, the pilot still was reluctant to declare an emergency.
@ To be fair, at that moment, he was above the clouds, in VMC, and could see the horizon, so loss of vacuum was not necessarily an emergency (he still had magnetic compass for heading). But once he was in clouds, that was it. He quickly forgot how to keep wings level using turn coordinator, and probably ended up in a spin.
@@vasicp You talk big talk. You never been in an airplane an know you are in a bad spot. That's why the ATC on the ground could be a little more interested than an NYC traffic cop writing a ticket. Makes me sick seeing pathetic victim blaming.
@ This is strange. Did you really read my comments? Nobody is blaming the victim here. What I'm saying is, there was really nothing more that ATC could do here. They can NOT fly the plane. They can only offer vectors to the nearest airfield, once the pilot DECLARES the emergency. And if the pilot doesn't want to land right away, they can just help clear the way for the pilot in distress, which is exactly what ATC did.
By the way, I AM a pilot (amateur).
Ouch. This was all mixed to the left channel. Please review your product with headphones before publishing!
As a CFII, this makes me very sad. Sooo incredibly survivable, even with complete vacuum failure.
Why is this the only channel that has a low muffled sound ridiculous!!
Don’t get into an airplane with a pilot that is not instrument rated
This had nothing to do with his rating. His instruments failed due to age and there was no backup.
He was instrument rated, did you watch the video?
I’ve been doing this for awhile. This person was not able to pilot a plane by instrument reference. A loss of vacuum doesn’t make the plane crash. He had a turn / bank indicator and a compass. Along with an airspeed indicator , a competent pilot can get below a 700 ft ceiling. I do feel for him and his loved ones.
@@777pilotforfun Nope, you are wrong.
I should know better than trying to educate a libtard