Peter wrote:
I don’t think a “classic CFIT” (flying into a rock while having a cup of coffee, etc) has ever been done in reasonable VMC
Wasn’t that exactly what happened to jgmusic?
The thread is here. No; I don’t think he flew into a rock while doing nothing useful. I think he entered the canyon without having first climbed well above its base, and ran out of climb rate (perhaps assisted by sub optimal engine management) against rising terrain.
Whether this is a big factor in France I don’t know. They certainly have terrain there – a former hangar mate of mine, N2195B, piled his family in near Vercours, flying VFR in solid IMC – but I wonder where a substantial amount of flying is done in the mountains, and done by pilots not familiar with it.
On a biennial “Flight with an Instructor”, in a rental aircraft, I think he deliberately asked me to fly below the actual stall speed, at a safe altitude, and observed as I responded to stall indications and avoided a full stall. 
If scudrunning, you must be prepared to put the aircraft down before vis gets too low.
The turning radius of a light aircraft is less than many people think if a little height is lost. Steep turns at low level are much safer than flying into terrain, and only in the UK are they more dangerous than flying into controlled airspace. 
Airborne_Again wrote:
Wasn’t that exactly what happened to jgmusic?
I was thinking exactly the same.
“The turning radius of a light aircraft is less than many people think if a little height is lost”
At 130kts, radius is about 4000ft at rate 1 and 1500ft at 45deg, yes with slowing down and taking height gain/loss one can make 180 turn radius ridiculously low but not while maintaining cruise speeds
Increasing bank angle while unloading wings and losing height does reduce turn radius as long as airspeed is kept balanced to maintain 0G-1G and stays low, say less than 1.5*VS0 otherwise the turn radius will just blow up !
Wingovers achieves lowest 180 turn back radius, my guess about 200ft for any SEP, something along: you are at 130kts cruise, gentle pull up 30deg (or 45deg) up to slowdown, turn 60deg bank (or 90deg), let nose drop 30deg(or 45deg), regain speed back to cruise while leveling the wings, all this can be done inside any certified aircraft flight enveloppe AFAIK (0G-1G and 60kts-130kts and 60deg bank), the real problem is having good horizon or ground features to do a good one, usually not what one would get easily inside a valley, even at 600agl over flat land one rarely see any bit of the blue sky while doing this
“I don’t think a “classic CFIT” (flying into a rock while having a cup of coffee, etc) has ever been done in reasonable VMC”
Yes but what is reasonable VMC, out of clouds? 500ft agl and 1.5km visibility? 1000ft ceiling and 5km visibility? all these could get anyone in trouble while doing 150kts cruise bellow MSA, unless they can show consistent 3000fpm on cruise for whole 1min, not sure there are that many SEPs that can do that? Extra300 does barely show that starting at sea level…
The other face of it is climb or turn performance at slow speeds (e.g. density altitude, lean, prop), if your aircraft is barely showing 100fpm on route MSA then you are probably done anytime you find yourself bellow (you don’t know aircraft ceiling on the day for sure unless you just have test it or happy to wage on some number), then the only option is a turn back
I am not sure if short field takeoff accidents count as “VMC CFIT” but something can be learned from failing to clear 50ft obstacle with 2000ft runway (reaching VS0 half-down the runway is the easy bit, making 3deg climb gradient after is very tough )
Yes if flying in 1500m vis you could be aiming at a rock and not be able to turn around fast enough, but how common is this in the subject of this thread?
There were 3 Bonanzas in the US which flew in formation into a box canyon and all 3 crashed at the end, reportedly leaving three neat aircraft shaped piles of ash at the bottom. But I don’t think this is relevant to the situation under discussion, which is basically a load of very low currency pilots, who under the ever vigilant guard of the aeroclub president (I got into really hot water over that thread, although probably everything turned out to be accurate in some places ) fly largely in CAVOK conditions, and crashing for no “good” reason.
I’ve watched the video and the idea, as far as I understand is not to get everyone to CPL. In fact, what they suggest is that pilots asks an instructor to train on specific items that could save their lives. And they do acknowledge that these items could be different from one pilot to the next. I have not read the PDF yet, but what they say in the video is that it contains a list of the possible items that could kill you, and each pilot can pick and choose from this list and ask an instructor to train specifically these items. One item could be aborted take off for example as they mention in the video, which I think is interesting since it is not very often trained.
In short, if a pilot does feel like he needs more training on steep turn or stalls, that what he should ask an instructor to train for, but if reading trough the list he realizes that he should train EFATO and aborted take off, then he should train this.
I hit a fence on an aborted take-off. I should have shut down the engine immediately I decided to abort.
I’ve heard the local school telling ATC the wanted an aborted take-off, but don’t know if they shut down the engine.
PS after reading many accident reports, I think I made the right decision to abort, after lift off. No injury, and flew her out with minor repair a few days later. At that time I was still believing in what I’d been taught regarding climbing straight ahead. I should have started drifting right immediately I was airborne. Almost 27 years ago.
In 2019, we had fortunately a large decrease in GA fatalities. From 30 in 16 crashes in 2018, we fell to 6 deaths in 3 accidents from what I gather.
