Two days ago a VFR flight attempted an approach to Stuttgart EDDS that was fogged in. Both pilots (pilot and passenger) survived, so we will be able to read the full story some day.
Open questions:
Why did the pilot approach an airport, where prior to entering the control zone he must have been aware of the weather conditions – because at least the controller must have told him so. The airport must have been in Low Vis operations.
Why did the controller let him enter the control zone where quite definite no VMC conditions were met, not even for special VFR. (potential answers: either the controller stated that the pilot must not enter clouds, or the pilot wasn’t even in contact with ATC. In my experience ATC in Germany is quite to the point and proactive when it comes to bad weather)
Was the pilot overconfident, because the aircraft was equipped with a Garmin G1000 set of displays? Cockpit photo may be found here Motorflugschule (scroll down a bit and look for the aircraft registry)
Was a time pressure involved? Fuel state? Or a lack of night rating (landing was in dawn already).
Because he very likely declared an emergency.
Pity we won‘t get the ATC files before the report comes out, in about 5 years time.
UdoR wrote:
Was the pilot overconfident, because the aircraft was equipped with a Garmin G1000 set of displays?
Groan…
I was asking myself the question how on earth they could even have gotten as far as they did in those conditions… well, that picture explains it.
Was looking at the tracks of that day of the 172 and can only guess for now – low training level, little weather knowledge, low fuel, homegeteritis, no ATC contact = most probably called emergency and got down as such. They had many options to prevent the result, but obviously chose to give it a chance.
Many things to learn even now:
Know your weather
Look up the actual weather
Get fuel whenever possible
Don’t fly into known shit
Divert early if marginal
Get help from ATC early
.
.
.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Groan…I was asking myself the question how on earth they could even have gotten as far as they did in those conditions… well, that picture explains it.
[ removed ] I feel that people are actually less confident if they don’t have a decent understanding of their avionics. Looking at this accident, I believe they didn’t know too much about the airplane’s system. If you look at the track they flew, you will see that they didn’t make use of all that equipment at all. They flew a several miles long base just like one would do if VFR and cleared to land runway 25. They easily could have flown an ILS or RNP approach and at least would have crashed into the runway instead of the airport fence. But then we of course don’t know about their fuel and panic level.
Or the pilot’s ratings…
Peter wrote:
Or the pilot’s ratings…
I’m a VFR only pilot holding a LAPL(A), but i know enough of the avionics installed in the aircrafts i fly to set up the AP in ALT HOLD and APR Mode. Vectors to final and ILS should be not a problem at all using a capable AP. But surely i can’t predict how i’ll react in case of a real emergency related to unintended flights into IMC.
I think a basic understanding of the installed avionics and, if applicable, the AP, is essential for all pilots.
Clipperstorch wrote:
feel that people are actually less confident if they don’t have a decent understanding of their avionics. Looking at this accident, I believe they didn’t know too much about the airplane’s system. If you look at the track they flew, you will see that they didn’t make use of all that equipment at all.
I was wrong there anyway. My suspicion at a first glace of the picture of the panel was that it had Synthetic vision and that they tried to land it using that. Reading some of the newspaper coverage sais they actually did hit the runway but went off it and ended up hitting the fence from the inside but ended up outside the perimeter.
So my reasoning was how did they ever manage to get there in the first place? With this RVR and all, it is very unlikely they ever saw the runway but still managed to end up on it, at least initially.
Clipperstorch wrote:
But then we of course don’t know about their fuel and panic level.
Yep. Otherwise there were enough options available in VMC to go to. As they are thankfully both alive we might eventually learn what they thought.
sw1969 wrote:
I think a basic understanding of the installed avionics and, if applicable, the AP, is essential for all pilots.
Absolutely. They really should. But quite a few don´t.
However, that does not give any VFR pilot an excuse to try stuff they are not trained for.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
However, that does not give any VFR pilot an excuse to try stuff they are not trained for.
Of course not, but it’s always a good idea to get some training how to use the systems with an instructor and practise some procedures under the hood.
I think a basic understanding of the installed avionics and, if applicable, the AP, is essential for all pilots.
It certainly is a good idea, but…
I can observe a certain trend nowadays, certainly spurred by some YT vids, and the availability of cheap IR equipment installed on the most basic of trainers.
My piece of caution is always the same, an AP is only as good as the operator, and an AP can and will disconnect itself for many a reason, the first one being turbulence, maybe when its use would be the most in demand…
The basic formula for cloud flying is not the AP, but know how to keep the blue and brown in their respective positions, navigate and maintain situational awareness, all whilst hand flying. Once, and only once this is acquired, should the AP be engaged as the necessary monitoring and programming skills, including procedures, have been acquired.
