Folks,
unfortunately another mid air accident occured today at Schwäbisch Hall (EDTY) where a SR20 collided with a Dallach Fascination UL. Both airplanes crashed and both pilots were killed. According to press reports, both were on approach to land at the time of the accident.
Aviation Safety Net Coverage and the entry for the Dallach.
This comes 3 months approximately after a PA28 collided with a SAR helicopter near Speyer.
Truly sad. My thoughts are with those involved.
I was in the hangar, working on my plane, and I heard emergency service sirens. When I got home i was shocked to read the reason why.
With EDTY being my home field, I’d like to understand this accident more. The weather yesterday was beautiful, and good VFR. So different to the PA28/SAR where a descent through cloud was involved.
But let’s wait for more facts.
italianjon wrote:
different to the PA28/SAR where a descent through cloud was involved.
Where did you get that from?
This link goes to ASN with further links off it:
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=204941
My comment about decent through cloud is a simplification, the events were more complicated, reflected in the information linked above. But weather player a factor in the PA28/SAR event.
Yesterday the weather was solid VFR – I witnessed the weather personally. I doubt the weather played a role… But I risk entering speculation.
italianjon wrote:
But weather player a factor in the PA28/SAR event.
That was an initial assessment which is most probably wrong, at least where a “descent through cloud” was involved. They were VFR and came from Basel along the Rhine valley which was VMC all the time.
In searching for data to backup my statement, I think the final report for the PA28/EC135 isn’t released yet. Therefore it was wrong of me to make it in the way I did. It fuelled speculation.
Looking through the ASN link I posted, it’s a lot of news articles, and we know how accurate they can be.
We should wait for the detailed final and official reports.
The only reason it is worth pointing out that weather was not (likely) a factor in either of the two is that (a) lookout is very fallible and (b) still important.
I really hope that the one good thing coming out of these tragedies is a more sensible attitude in the flying community and the regulators towards mandatory low-cost collision avoidance. These accidents are completely unnecessary, and other than most of the other fatal incidents (VFR-to-IMC, CFIT, out of fuel) are not easily mitigated by the pilot alone, it requires the community to act.
I support those sentiments fully and agree fully. The lookout isn’t ideal but nothing really substitutes a bloody good look out.
Things like Pilotaware and other traffic things are good, but have limitations (directional effects on antenna etc) and so are not 100% but offer more tools. But as you say the community and collective working together are the largest factors.
Cobalt wrote:
the regulators towards mandatory low-cost collision avoidance.
Amen!
It is a travesty that in particularly this field we today have several non-compatible systems working against each other. Part of this of course is European refusal to use ADS-B for something useful like in the US. If people could get weather, traffic and so on via ADS-B then the “oh, there is something in it for me” effect would make a lot more people buy into this technology.
Right now, all we can do is use inofficial devices which in themselfs are good enough but do not give the whole picture and are not made for the purpose.
Most mid-air collisions are near airfields, which is perhaps not so surprising given that airplanes all need to come together a a limited number of points on the ground.
While I’m all for technology, but I don’t believe mandating something is a magic bullet. I think the focus needs to be kept on a) the Mark-I eyeball and b) communication especially around airfields. Adding technology could possibly even result in an increase in accidents due to less look-out, especially if everyone isn’t on the same page technology-wise. Having said that, I agree that offering something that benefits GA and not just ATC, at a price affordable for everyone from gliders up, would find an uptake even without mandating it.
I fly out of a grass strip with significant aircraft density, especially on a nice day, without any ATC. The discipline is very high and drilled into the students from day one. Everyone listens up, speaks up and says who they are, where they are, and their intentions…… starting from 10 miles out when arriving. When anyone is unsure about the location of another aircraft, it is queried. This approach has saved a lot of peoples’ hides around the world.
