Ibra wrote:
I see you have +20 points in the route, that is a lot to keep track ofLow level VFR navigation skills are less to do with with ‘novice’ either you a local guy or you are not
Over navigating moving maps at low levels make it even worse even with a planned route plotted, you get load of illusions from screen zoom +/-, so best to keep a simpler route of 3 heading/distance/times loaded in the back of your mind in case
If you fly +3000ft higher on a ‘gin clear day’ you should see +10km full way through that pass with max 2 or 3 ref points at the time?
I agree
you only need to have enough altitude and take the right valley. Not complicated at Simplon (even if the pass is still hidden)
For the rest, look outside!
SD is of no use to the contrary the time lost to consult is a trap
Here it is said that the pilot must be before the plane never behind
Ibra – All points taken. Indeed, nothing is much good unless you are going to do it at ‘pass highest point’ (know as reference altitude in GAFOR speak) plus say 2000 feet and get to that safe altitude in good time.
Like many have speculated this could well be a factor in this tragedy. I would like to know what method of ‘pass navigation’ was been used – simple by chart plus moving map plus mark one eye ball or with some sort of GAFOR overlay as well.
Is the exact (official) Lat / Long impact point know. Interested to see how far off ‘GAFOR’ it was – if at all.
I just ‘knocked up’ that SD Simplon route (clicking via the GAFOR route) to try and understand this tragic accident – I did not have to ‘click’ as many waypoints as I did. Could have done fewer, but less precise
Your SD display with ‘switched on red’ does indeed help highlight the correct turns, but for me I would still like the official GAFOR on display – go as far to say ‘mandatory’ for me.
I will try my SD with the ‘switched on red’ and the GAFOR route displayed at the same time.
.
Ibra wrote:
I think you can plan a simpler route at 8500ft without much worry about the 5 wrong valleys?
I agree. Long ago (before tablets and when GPS was still in its infancy) I took the Simplon route in the other direction in a Piper Lance with only a paper map for navigation — and making 150 knots. I don’t recall the level, but it was somewhere around FL80-FL100. I didn’t find it difficult at all — and that was only my second crossing of the Alps. (My first crossing was a few days earlier going south through the Lukmanierpass.)
Things became more interesting after the Simplon pass. I had planned to turn right into the Grimselpass, but that valley was unexpectedly blocked by clouds, so I had to make a quick decision to divert down the Rhône valley and go north past the eastern end of Lake Geneva.
WarleyAir wrote:
Ibra – All points taken. Indeed, nothing is much good unless you are going to do it at ‘pass highest point’ (know as reference altitude in GAFOR speak) plus say 2000 feet and get to that safe altitude in good time.
Like many have speculated this could well be a factor in this tragedy. I would like to know what method of ‘pass navigation’ was been used – simple by chart plus moving map plus mark one eye ball or with some sort of GAFOR overlay as well.
Is the exact (official) Lat / Long impact point know. Interested to see how far off ‘GAFOR’ it was – if at all.
I just ‘knocked up’ that SD Simplon route (clicking via the GAFOR route) to try and understand this tragic accident – I did not have to ‘click’ as many waypoints as I did. Could have done fewer, but less precise
Your SD display with ‘switched on red’ does indeed help highlight the correct turns, but for me I would still like the official GAFOR on display – go as far to say ‘mandatory’ for me.
I will try my SD with the ‘switched on red’ and the GAFOR route displayed at the same time.
GAFOR is not a navigation or planning system
GAFOR is a weather forecast on the road
the opening of the investigation gives no information. It will probably be necessary to wait 2 years before knowing its information
Thanks Gigi for pointing that out once again. It’s worrying to see how many (it seems, especially rather unexperienced in the mountains) PPL pilots seem to “clamp” themselves to these GAFOR routes. Needless to say, sticking to these GAFOR routes is not necessarily safe, just as flying other routes is not necessarily unsafe.
From what we know, this accident very likely was not a weather related accident, (but rather one having to do with flight tactics). So, all the talk about GAFOR really has little relevance.
boscomantico wrote:
So, all the talk about GAFOR really has little relevance.
It has a lot of relevance if the pilot though that the GAFOR reference altitudes were minimum safe altitudes for the routes — and there is some evidence that he did at least at one time.
I think it would be useful to analyse how this accident could have been avoided, starting from the position this pilot was actually in:
On the last point, the product gets used to find some airfield while avoiding CAS. Most have it configured in a certain way and leave it like that. And for VFR flight around the UK that is all you need.
It is a key point on strategy that one should climb to the safe altitude well before reaching the terrain that requires it. Related advantages are (a) you burn off some fuel before reaching the terrain; (b) there is less chance of an engine failure if in level cruise; (c) you have more speed when reaching it, so better able to deal with downdraughts. But almost nobody – living away from mountains – knows this. This pilot was a keen reader of EuroGA but I don’t recall this gem being posted clearly before.
Can someone who flies this aircraft type see how far it will climb when left full rich? I find it hard to believe it would stop at 7000ft or so, even at ISA+15.
It has a lot of relevance if the pilot though that the GAFOR reference altitudes were minimum safe altitudes for the routes — and there is some evidence that he did at least at one time.
Sure. What I was saying is that it really had nothing to do with the weather forecast of the GAFOR (which is what GAFOR IS all about). If the accident was caused by the pilot still (despite our discussion) not understanding that the GAFOR’s reference altitude was NOT a safe passing altitude, then that was a general planning / comprehension error. If it was caused by stating the climb too late, it was a tactical flying error.
Peter wrote:
Can someone who flies this aircraft type see how far it will climb when left full rich? I find it hard to believe it would stop at 7000ft or so, even at ISA+15.
I’ve flown a fully loaded PA28-181 at FL100 in ISA+10 conditions — density altitude was slightly above 11 000 feet. This was no problem, although the climb rate was down to about 250 fpm at the end.
It’s inconceivable to me that an Arrow, which has basically the same airframe, retractable gear, and 20 additional horsepower would perform worse even if the MTOM is some 90 kg higher.
Peter wrote:
On the last point, the product gets used to find some airfield while avoiding CAS. Most have it configured in a certain way and leave it like that. And for VFR flight around the UK that is all you need.
In the UK, if you can’t fly in class A, you still need to play a lot with SD settings to plan IFR/VFR while avoiding to hit terrain, obstacles, CAS, IMC and freezing altitude?
Obviously, when IFR/VFR in VMC you are only concerned with CAS but it is still difficult except for the usual business at your home airfield and even that I am not sure 
