Airpac accident at Bayview Apt.

[trybysky]

Anyone heard about what happend in Skagit Co. Washington with the Airpac accident?

 

[Launchpad]

Just what was said in the news. Cleared for the approach, and that was it. Found the plane 2 days later.

YO-

 

[Rogue5]

http://www.avweb.com/newswire/12_02a/briefs/191340-1.html

January 9, 2006
Air Show Pilot Dies Hauling Freight

By Russ Niles

Newswriter, Editor

Described by colleagues as "one of the top three or four performers" in the business, air show pilot Eric Beard, 48, died Friday when the Piper Seneca he was flying crashed in fog about 400 yards short of the runway at Skagit Regional Airport near Burlington, Wash. Beard was perhaps better-known for flying a rare Yak-54 nicknamed Russian Thunder in air shows all over the world. On Friday he was flying for Airpac Airlines, a Seattle-based cargo company. He worked part-time for Airpac and also worked for Boeing. His last transmission to Whidbey Island approach was normal and there was no indication of an emergency, according to Tom Peterson, air search coordinator with the state department of transportation. "He was supposed to call once he got on the ground," Peterson told KOMO News. "They did not hear from him and the people waiting for him on the ground reported that he didn't call in or make it." Beard is survived by his wife Diane and four children. Beard held two degrees from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and worked for NASA on both the space shuttle and Titan rocket programs. He began flying aerobatics in the early 1980s and performed for 13 years, including appearances at EAA AirVenture and other major shows. The Yak-54 is one of seven aircraft purpose-built for aerobatics in 1996 by the Yakevlev Design Bureau. Fred Rosenfelder, the air boss for three major Seattle-area air shows, said that not only was Beard a top performer, he was a meticulous pilot. "He always knew his routine. He was meticulous with the safety of his routine and if it wasn't right, it wouldn't happen," Rosenfelder said.​

 

[chrisrj83]

I took off out of skagit about a half hour before it happened, and the weather at the airport wasn't good at all, but out over the bay it went up to about 2000 ceilings and good vis, not sure exactly what happened but maybe went visual over the bay and then got disorentated trying to land vfr??

 

[81Horse]

-- ... not sure exactly what happened but maybe went visual over the bay and then got disorentated trying to land vfr??

You should have stopped at the "not sure exactly what happened" part. Let's let the accident investigators figure it out.

 

[chrisrj83]

I'm not trying to piss anyone off, and I don't know what happened.... but I do know that the conditions were much worse than auto was calling them, and there was no way to shoot an ndb approach without going missed.

 

[81Horse]

-- I'm not trying to piss anyone off, and I don't know what happened....

I understand. Still, I think speculating -- especially on a public forum -- is bad form. Others here may disagree.

-- but I do know that the conditions were much worse than auto was calling them, and there was no way to shoot an ndb approach without going missed.

Well, I know the area well myself. I personally wouldn't draw any conclusions based on a ninety-minute old pirep. Maybe your surmise is correct, but maybe it's not; and it's very likely no one will ever know for sure. Furthermore, I don't know that all other possible factors (mechanical or structural failure, pilot health and fatigue, and so on) have been ruled out yet; do you?

 

[chrisrj83]

Well, I am sorry to anyone who I might have offended with my prior post.

 

[81Horse]

chrisrj83, no offense taken, and no apology necessary. If you hear more details about the accident, I would be interested to hear about it.

 

[chrisrj83]

ntsb preliminary report

On January 6, 2006, about 1950 Pacific standard time, a Piper Seneca PA-34-200T, N36107, was destroyed after colliding with trees and terrain at the Skagit Regional Airport (BVS), Burlington, Washington. The airplane is registered to Airpac Airlines of Seattle, Washington, and was being operated as "Airpac 32" a domestic non-scheduled cargo flight operated under the provisions of Title 14 CFR Part 135. The airline transport pilot, the sole occupant of the airplane, was fatally injured. Instrument meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The flight originated at Bellingham, Washington, (BLI) on an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan, approximately 20 minutes prior to the accident. The pilot's flight planned destination was BVS.

The 1950 METAR weather observation at the Skagit Regional Airport was, in part, visibility 5 statute mile; broken clouds at 100 feet AGL (above ground level); overcast skies at 800 feet AGL.

The published minimum descent altitude for the straight-in NDB runway 10 approach at Burlington is 1,240 feet above mean sea level (1000 feet AGL). The published minimum visibility for a straight-in NDB approach is 1-1/4 mile.

 

[81Horse]

Thanks for that.

 

[FlyBunny]

chrisrj83, didn't you hear what 81 Horse said?
You should've stopped when SHE/HE told you to!


This person would be a treat to fly with in a two-person crew, wouldn't it? As per her/his advice, majority of NTSB 'Final Reports/Conclusions' would never have been published, which are indeed bases on conjectures and speculations.


It's OK to at least think and share thoughts about what could've happened. I have a friend who worked there few years ago and the CP was always patting pilots on the back who were willing to take up the flight that another pilot thought would be unsafe. CP would even tell others that the person who decided not to fly wasn't a 'good instrument pilot' and that 'was intimidated with low IFR'.


Just look at the fact that this guy (supposedly very safe pilot who always did the right thing) got himself killed shooting an approach when he should never even had tried it (Broken at 100’ AGL - now that's a ceiling, isn't it). Here we're talking 800' AGL ceilings and the MDA is 1,000' AGL. We should discuss this and try to learn from his mistakes. Even if you say his engine might have stopped; he should not have even tried this approach: Weather was below minimums!


My conjecture is that he knew the weather, knew it was below minimums (Part 135 can’t shoot an approach unless you have ASOS/AWOS on the field or current WX report, I believe), went below the mins (1,240 MSL), didn’t see anything, kept going down and lost track of the altimeter…I’m sure we’d find out there’s more to this though. This has happened many times before and sounds like a classic going below minimums to try to get a ground contact and forgetting that the published minimums are there for a REASON.


But, I'm sure, the Airpac CP most likely thinks of him as a 'very good instrument pilot' who gets the job done.


The people I truly feel sorry for are his family!

Oooopppss…81Horse is by now, I’m sure, quite offended.

 

[Launchpad]

Not to get into a pissing contest, but only visibility for the approach is required. On a very general statement, your probably not going to get in on a 800' non precision MDA with a 100' report... It's very common in the NW to have 100' broken at one and clear skies on the other, doesn't hurt to try. Might get in, might not.

As far as what happened.... Who knows, but I wouldn't want people speculating on my behalf-

Peace out-

 

[81Horse]

Flybunny, you don't know your FAR135 regs, and you're wrong about the majority of NTSB reports and conclusions being based on "conjecture."

However, I'm not offended. I'm not even surprised. Nobody piles on dead pilots like other pilots. There are several active threads here demonstrating this sad truth.

And Launchpad is correct -- the actual weather conditions in the NW can change minute by minute. Pilots who won't even go take a look (if the vis is above minimums) will be spending an awful lot of time hangar flying instead of flying.

Yes, it looks like a classic accident; but other factors may be involved that would shed some light. I didn't know Russian Thunder, but on general principle, I always object to total speculation about accidents.

 

[BAT31]

Flybunny, et al-

Since you decided to throw in a second hand "endorsement" about the chief pilot of Airpac, allow me to throw in a first hand one:

I worked at Air Pac as a pilot for almost 2 years. The chief pilot was the same as the current one. There has never, EVER, been a better supervisor of flying that a pilot could work for. Now that's just based on my opinon, 11 years of flying for two different military services, part 135 flying, and part 121 flying. I'm certainly not super experienced, but I've worked for a few chief pilots, DOs, etc. The chief pilot you speak of always backed up the decisions of his pilots. ALWAYS. Did some guys not like flying in low weather and turbulence? Sure. They soon left. Single pilot IFR in the Pacific NW is not a place for those who "can't do" or "won't do". Sorry if that hurts feelings, but sometimes the truth hurts. Maybe your friend was "intimidated by low IFR" as you state. I hope he left. Hopefully he's flight instructing in Arizona where its CAVU most days.

The reality is that serving the customer is what keeps the business going in professional aviation. Whether you are performing military or civilian duties. Pilots sometimes forget that they aren't "the show". Sometimes flying is comprised of long days and uncomfortable situations that are still LEGAL. To add to that, read up on you 135 regs bud.

Speculate all you want. Don't trash a chief pilot who has gone out of his way for years to support the line pilot. I hope I always have a boss like him and I wish the Air Pac guys and gals the best of luck in this unfortunate time.

B31

 

[chrisrj83]

Not to get into a pissing contest, but only visibility for the approach is required. On a very general statement, your probably not going to get in on a 800' non precision MDA with a 100' report... It's very common in the NW to have 100' broken at one and clear skies on the other, doesn't hurt to try. Might get in, might not.

As far as what happened.... Who knows, but I wouldn't want people speculating on my behalf-

Peace out-

I agree, and I don't know how many people here fly into bayview on a regular basis, but the asos there is alomost never right, and has been known to call low vis and ceilings when in fact it's clear.

 

[Hand Commander]

It's OK to at least think and share thoughts about what could've happened. I have a friend who worked there few years ago and the CP was always patting pilots on the back who were willing to take up the flight that another pilot thought would be unsafe. CP would even tell others that the person who decided not to fly wasn't a 'good instrument pilot' and that 'was intimidated with low IFR'.

I've dealt with the CP many times in the past as a ramp rat and have known several people who have flown for the company. This is the first I've ever heard of someone talking bad about the guy. From my experiences and hearing about the experiences of many others, I'll have to agree with BAT31 in saying this guy is an exceptional individual and people who come into contact with him thoroughly enjoy working for him. The flying environment is not for everbody, but for those who pursue it, its a great gig. Maybe your pal didn't have the sand.

 

[FlyboyPhil]

BAT31 is right, I spent 18 months at Airpac and was never asked to do anything illegal or push the minimums. The chief pilot is supportive and the owner is focused on safety. Wait for the NTSB to make their determination before you blame Airpac or the pilot, if at all.

BAT31, tried to PM you but it's disabled, Think we were there at the same time, Phil N. here.. D? there?

 

[BAT31]

PN-

Good to hear from you bro. Yep, it is me ..... or it is I, or whatever. I turned on that PM option. Shoot me an email when you get a chance.

B31

 

[Calvin]

One of the earlier posts said it he was found 2 days later, not true. He was found at first light the following morning, so maybe 12 hours. Thick fog and very low ceilings where the order of the night, hard to see anything, let alone a small twin in the trees.

 

[trybysky]

Just another positive throw at Airpac... I work with a few guys that came from Airpac and they have nothing but good things to say about Rog. If the pilot pushed the approach, it wasn't forced on him. Besides, a pilot with that kind of experience knows how to tell management where to stick it when it comes to pushing the limits for the company. I have no idea what happened, I wont pretend or guess what did. It's just too bad it happened. My thoughts and prayers with the fam and folks at Airpac.

 

[TheDogsBollocks]

Just another positive throw at Airpac... I work with a few guys that came from Airpac and they have nothing but good things to say about Rog. If the pilot pushed the approach, it wasn't forced on him. Besides, a pilot with that kind of experience knows how to tell management where to stick it when it comes to pushing the limits for the company. I have no idea what happened, I wont pretend or guess what did. It's just too bad it happened. My thoughts and prayers with the fam and folks at Airpac.

I must concur with the positive statements made in regards to Airpac, I have spoken to many of their pilot's and I have not heard anything negative in regards to the Chief Pilot or the company itself, let's wait for the NTSB to determine what happened-if it can.

 

[twott driver]

I will throw my 2 cents worth of endorsement for Rog and the Airpac operation.

A great guy personally and an excellent CP (despite being a Canadian!), a superb bunch of pilots, and some of the best IFR flying experience to be had.

Training is first rate, safety is a top priority, and not once in my time there did I feel pressured to take a flight. In fact, I would say it was exactly the opposite.

The aircraft were always well maintained, and the maintenance was proactive. As an example, it's not often freight companies will replace the 2nd vacuum pump that is still working after the other crapped, just because they know from experience that it is likely to fail soon too from the added strain.

My thoughts have been with Roger and Gregg and the rest of the Airpac family.
Go well Eric.

Flybunny, you're a wannabe dipsh!t who needs a good hiding.

 

[sleddriver71]

Flybunny, you clearly don't know anything about Roger. I flew with him for several years at Airpac. Not only was he always behind the pilots and NEVER pressured anyone to fly if the weather was below minimums, he made that job more fun than it should have been. I don't imagine I'll ever have the pleasure to work with someone like him again, he's one of a kind.

 

[100-1/2]

Seriously? Sled?

6 year old thread? I want the last 3-minutes of my life back.
Does Flybunny even exist anymore?

100-1/2

 

[sleddriver71]

Seriously? Sled?

6 year old thread? I want the last 3-minutes of my life back.
Does Flybunny even exist anymore?

100-1/2

I could care less about the 3 minutes you wasted, piss off.

 

[TMMT]

I could care less about the 3 minutes you wasted, piss off.

Whats the point of that?

 

[BornAgainPagan]

Seriously? Sled?

6 year old thread? I want the last 3-minutes of my life back.
Does Flybunny even exist anymore?

100-1/2

Seriously? 100-1/2?

You knew it was old and you still spent 3 minutes of your "valuable" time reading it? And then complain?

 

[BornAgainPagan]

I could care less about the 3 minutes you wasted, piss off.

Really? You could care less? For me, I couldn't care less about the 3 minutes he wasted.

 

[GG747]

I am wondering if the airplane had some sort of malfunction that would make him try that approach in that type of weather. An electrical fire for example would make me try an approach that I normally wouldn't try. For myself, I'll just read the NTSB report when it is available.