LOWZ has Metar via austrocontrol wx. Login rq:
https://www.austrocontrol.at/flugwetter/index.php?id=438&lang=de
thanks for posting the location. That hasn’t been a circling approach, as I have guessed as well initially, but a missed approach, gone wrong.
The eastbound visual departure pattern turns left, flying east of the lake to the north and then over the lake… It looks as he has done that and not followed the missed approach which demands to climb and fly straight ahead. Weather was very bad, but not for long before. He had a webcam view with flyable weather when he departed and just tried it despite deteriorated conditions. Very sad.
I don’t think any vfr routing was flyable. The area was in cloud.
And: Flying straight ahead would lead pretty much to the mountain/crash location, which is why the IFR missed approach is a right turn to 085.
LOWZ has Metar via austrocontrol wx. Login rq:
That’s atrocious… Another “European State Secret”. How many people know that?
He had a webcam view with flyable weather when he departed
Do we know that? The wx was even worse earlier in the day. I was watching it because I was waiting for the snow to stop. This is the picture around the time he might have looked before departure
I’ve been there a few times. Somebody crazy could have done a landing straight-in, with no missed approach / go-around planned. But a circle to land is tight. What was the wind at the time? Do we also know if he was flying the IAP? That bit will come out in the report, one day…
Amazing they got anybody out of the wreckage. What a totally daft pointless crash.
My condolences to family and hope the daughters would hold tight to the life and get well soon. I felt very bad and sad , because witnessed so many events like this in the past. Of course we cannot know the whole situation without the final report. On the other hand, this is very dangerous area, with very tight minimums. What I can tell the human is the most limited and vulnerable piece of the famous “SHELL” concept and unfortunately in the middle. Knowing your limits is the best evasive action.
Very sad hope the kids will recover. That there were survivors is a miracle. Looking at the published IAP. The missed point @ 4.2 Very hi minima, after that only a heading to guide you through a narrow valley. Misjudgment in wind drift and missed heading? Having a couple of RNAV missed points to guide you through the valley may have helped in case of wind drift… Even in reasonable weather a challeging approach. What leads a father to take this kind of risky decisions with two kids on board ..? Very very sad.
If we just look at what we know:
- Weather was clearly below both VFR and IFR limits for this airfield – therefore it doesn’t really matter if the flight was VFR or IFR
- Impact area is east of the field pretty exactly on the extended runway centerline. It’s tricky to understand how he got there: If he was VMC at MAPt, the better “escape route” from a missed landing in LOWZ is a left turn towards the lake. Enough space and climb gradient should not be an issue in a SR22T. If he was still IMC at the MAPt, he should have been significantly further south on the missed approach.
- Impact area is consistent with flying a traffic pattern for runway 08 and just getting a couple of 100m further to the east.
Now here’s my part of pure speculation:
- Pilot was trying to do an IFR approach on runway 08
- Given the overall weather situation, there was likely some tailwind component (which is quite relevant as we see later)
- At MAPt we can (for the benefit of the doubt for the pilot) assume he was just in VMC with SCT-BKN clouds around him. So let’s assume he could continue legally.
- Now comes the catch: The Descent from the MAPt to the runway in LOWZ is 6,5% – That’s 800ft/min at 120kt! Runway is “only” 700-something meters.
- Energy management in SR22 is tricky – esp. in these situations. 10kt too fast at MAPt and there’s little to no chance that you can reduce speed enough during descent for a landing at this short runway. (Disclaimer: I’ve never flown the LOWZ approach in a Cirrus myself – but I have flown Cirruses and I know how this approach feels in my Malibu that in comparison brakes like a barn door when gear is extended)
- Now take the marginal weather, some tailwind, high pilot workload in single pilot IFR and it’s not at all surprising, that the first attempt does not work out
- Instead of a proper missed approach (which is also tricky from a position low overhead the runway), pilot tries a traffic pattern for a second approach.
- He enters some of the SCT/BKN clouds at the worst possible position…
Malibuflyer wrote:
- Now comes the catch: The Descent from the MAPt to the runway in LOWZ is 6,5% – That’s 800ft/min at 120kt! Runway is “only” 700-something meters.
- Energy management in SR22 is tricky – esp. in these situations. 10kt too fast at MAPt and there’s little to no chance that you can reduce speed enough during descent for a landing at this short runway. (Disclaimer: I’ve never flown the LOWZ approach in a Cirrus myself – but I have flown Cirruses and I know how this approach feels in my Malibu that in comparison brakes like a barn door when gear is extended)
I can’t say about other Cirrus models, but energy management in SR22T is not that tricky. It has a big composite propeller which acts as a very effective brake. Flap retraction speeds at 150/110 kt help as well. If 4 nm from the threshold (MAP is 4.2 nm from touchdown), it’s not a problem at all to bleed off the speed (even from 150 kt would work) at the same time descending at 6.5%. When you are in VMC. I guess it’s more tricky if you don’t see the runway and the terrain ahead.
172driver wrote:
I think you don’t quite grasp the concept of PIC. It’s not the airport’s role to tell a pilot what he/she is allowed to do.
I do know that but it appears to me that in certain situation the PIC is not the person to be in the best position to judge a situation at this kind of airfields. The operator however sitting on the airfield and having considerable experience there, can see if the situation is such that any attempt to fly to the airfield must put those attempting it in clear and present danger. This was clearly the case yesterday. In this kind of situation, what if the operator declares the airfield QGO and therefore closed? Actually, this being an IFR airport, he could simply set the arrival rate to zero at CFMU and nobody would get a slot there. But that is at best a work around .
The METARS for Zell are Autometars so their value is questionable at the very least. However, it is a total scandal that they are not distributed to the international channels. DWD’s Flugwetter APP does have it however, I will check if we do at the office tomorrow and also if I can get yesterdays METARS out of there.
@Malibuflyer: good analysis. I guess one of those two scenarios happened. Which does not change the fact that he should never have started an approach there if he had the information that the wx was below minimum. If I am not mistaken, that would even be the rule in such a case.
How is the missed approach shown on the G1000 screen?
Vref wrote:
Very sad hope the kids will recover. That there were survivors is a miracle. Looking at the published IAP. The missed point @ 4.2 Very hi minima, after that only a heading to guide you through a narrow valley. Misjudgment in wind drift and missed heading? Having a couple of RNAV missed points to guide you through the valley may have helped in case of wind drift… Even in reasonable weather a challeging approach. What leads a father to take this kind of risky decisions with two kids on board ..? Very very sad.
The missed approach is a track not a heading. The only way to fly it is in GPS/NAV mode. Quite straightforward with G1000. But it relies on going missed at the MAPt. If not you will be north of the missed approach track.
