Flight school sued for $50,000,000

[ShadowFlight]

The pilot acknowledged the transmission, read back the altimeter setting, and reported that he was at an altitude of 800 feet. There were no further communications from the pilot, and the airplane's last radar target was observed at 1517:39, at an altitude of 600 feet.

The airplane impacted trees and came to rest in a wooded area, about 1 mile from the approach end of runway 16. The terrain around the accident site sloped upward from the Kensico Reservoir, and contained trees that were about 75 feet tall.

Seems odd that they were below DH about one mile from the end of 16. Maybe trying to duck under? Or was the CFI that far "behind" during the approach that the GS was creeping away from them with no correction? Who knows.

It's unfortunate two people died for reasons that could be considered "avoidable".

Rest in peace...

SF

 

[aeronautic1]

Bone Heads

These ab-initio flight schools are preditory at best. "You want to be an airline pilot (right now!) in the least amount of time (experience!)? Give us $26K and we'll make your aviation dreams come true." They do not care about the quality of instruction given, only the bottom-line. And the bottom-line is, if it ain't flyin', it ain't revenuin'. This is not the first AF instructor to kill a student and destroy an airplane (e.g. Ft. Lauderdale accident/buzzing a house) and will not be the last. Too bad there was no CVR. It is my bet that the PF was also the PIC, and there was only one onboard that day. What better way to pad your IFR time than on someone else's dime. RIP student pilot.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050428X00521&key=1

 

[Milkdud99]

Anyone else notice somthing wrong with his medical????

 

[Fly_Chick]

Yeah, the CFI's medical was valid on third class priviledges through March 2005. According to the AIN article, he was 45 at the time of the crash.

 

[aeronautic1]

Oops

However, He Crashed On April 23rd 2005. If March 2003 Was The Date Of Last Issuance, Then His Private Pilot Medical Was Expired, No? For Flight Instruction, He Is Required To Hold A Second Class, Is That Not So?

 

[Nolife]

Very sad

Correct me if I'm wrong but with my private students I always thought along the lines that the 3 hours instrument was just so they could turn around in the clouds without losing complete control and also to show them how hard it is. I always told my primary students that if they flew into clouds without being rated they would die.

I also figured that they wouldn't learn much watching me fly the approach which at 200 & 1/2 I'd be doing. I'm not sure if I'd take an instrument student up in 200 & 1/2 unless they were very good. Not much room for error there. And flying the approach from the right seat would be annoying as well.

 

[groundpointsix]

However, He Crashed On April 23rd 2005. If March 2003 Was The Date Of Last Issuance, Then His Private Pilot Medical Was Expired, No? For Flight Instruction, He Is Required To Hold A Second Class, Is That Not So?

Nope. Only required to hold a 3rd class. As it was explained to me, as an instructor I'm being hired to teach, not to fly the airplane. In fact, if the student is capable of acting as PIC (not the case here) you don't even need a medical. Assuming the instructor was under 40, he's still got another 11 months on his medical before it expires.

 

[aeronautic1]

All this talk...

... about medicals made me pull mine out. When did they go to a 36 month medical? It has been forever since I was a private pilot and I seem to remember that they were every 24 months for 3rd. (Excuse me while I go and drain my colostomy bag)

In any case, the PF/PIC/CFI (all the same guy) at HPN and the company policy of encouraging the CFI to take a pre-solo (30+hours?) student up (oh, I can hear it already, "we told them not to go...") in less than marginal weather should be charge with accessory to murder. Okay, maybe a little melodramatic, but that's all I have to live for today; you young whippersnappers.

My heart goes out to the families of the student and the unfortunate and inexperienced CFI. Remember, airplanes don't kill people. Only people in airplanes doing things beyond their capabilites kills people.

 

[Lowpass]

Correct me if I'm wrong but with my private students I always thought along the lines that the 3 hours instrument was just so they could turn around in the clouds without losing complete control and also to show them how hard it is. I always told my primary students that if they flew into clouds without being rated they would die.

I also figured that they wouldn't learn much watching me fly the approach which at 200 & 1/2 I'd be doing. I'm not sure if I'd take an instrument student up in 200 & 1/2 unless they were very good. Not much room for error there. And flying the approach from the right seat would be annoying as well.

And that first paragraph is exactly why to do some student pilot training in actual if possible. If they see how demanding it can be, they'll have a lot more respect for it. I always point out that with a hood, you can still at least get an idea of which way is down. In IMC, they're forced to actually do part of the required 3 hours of instrument time. And everyone is amazed at how different the actual is.

If it is possble, I'll take them up in actual. But I explain that I'll run the radios, set everything up, they just fly. They are the auto pilot. This way all they have to focus on is the basic maneuvering, and maybe track a VOR needle if they are managing the first. Using the auto pilot concept, just have them set you up for the approach as much as they can handle, and then say before FAF tell them you have the airplane since it's a lot more critical. It gives them a few minutes of watching where you can at least explain what you're doing.

I don't make it mandatory, but it is something I push for when the weather isn't so great. It's always been a productive experience. Of course don't go if you've got monster winds etc. And keep your personal mins if need be.

 

[sky37d]

I did most of my instrument training, in actual. However, for my private, it was all simulated. There would be some advantage to doing actual, but for a PPL, the scenario is turn around. No more than that. Don't proceed. How many "continued VFR in IMC" accidents happen every year.

On the medical. If they guy's medical was expired, which it certainly seems to have been, he could continue to do instruction if the "student" was able to be PIC. This student hadn't soloed yet, so obviously not capable of being PIC.

IT's a sad day.

 

[Milkdud99]

On the medical. If they guy's medical was expired, which it certainly seems to have been, he could continue to do instruction if the "student" was able to be PIC. This student hadn't soloed yet, so obviously not capable of being PIC.

IT's a sad day.

If their was a private pilot (seeking actual instrument training) and an instructor (who didn't have a medical), "actual" training could not take place because the private is not rated for instrument conditions, so the PIC would have to fall down to the instructor, who cannot act as PIC because he doens't have a medical.

All in all just a sitty situation

 

[cale42]

It will never cease to amaze me how people feel compelled to condemn others without knowing the whole situation or the people involved. I did a lot of my training at American Flyers and want to point out a few things.


1. Their 141 syllabus is designed so that the solo is the very last thing a student pilot does before taking their private ride. Even the best student, who could solo at 8 hours does 30 hours of training including X-C, night and hood work before soloing. So in that program a 30 hour student who hasn't soloed isn't a red flag.

2. When I trained there I often trained 8 and 10 hour days that involved 4-6 hours of flight time. Thats less than what many professional pilots fly and certainly less than most other professional jobs demand, just because you don't like to fly that much doesn't mean other people aren't cut out for it.

3. Getting a PVT student in actual is IMHO one of the most useful things you can do. No amount of hood time can prepare them for the overwhelming spatial disorientation if they were to get in a cloud. On a soft IFR day, 600 or 800 ft ceilings and 2 miles i will certainly do a short flight with them to show them what its like. Will still use the hood to accomplish BAI and unusual atts, but nothing compares with seeing what it is really like.

It was a tragic accident and there were definitely some questionable decisions made(personally LLWS in clouds scares the daylights out of me), but just because some parts of the flight were out of some peoples comfort zones on this board doesn't make it wrong.

cale

 

[Iceman21]

It will never cease to amaze me how people feel compelled to condemn others without knowing the whole situation or the people involved.

Name one reason why a 32 hour student, pre-solo or not, should have a lesson in 200 OVC and 1/2 mile vis and I will cease condemnation. There is simply no reason for a student of that type to be flying in that type of weather. He was a paying passenger at best.

1. Their 141 syllabus is designed so that the solo is the very last thing a student pilot does before taking their private ride. Even the best student, who could solo at 8 hours does 30 hours of training including X-C, night and hood work before soloing. So in that program a 30 hour student who hasn't soloed isn't a red flag.

It is a very well designed syllabus, but that is not what the topic is about.

2. When I trained there I often trained 8 and 10 hour days that involved 4-6 hours of flight time. Thats less than what many professional pilots fly and certainly less than most other professional jobs demand, just because you don't like to fly that much doesn't mean other people aren't cut out for it.

Agreed.

3. Getting a PVT student in actual is IMHO one of the most useful things you can do. No amount of hood time can prepare them for the overwhelming spatial disorientation if they were to get in a cloud. On a soft IFR day, 600 or 800 ft ceilings and 2 miles i will certainly do a short flight with them to show them what its like. Will still use the hood to accomplish BAI and unusual atts, but nothing compares with seeing what it is really like.

See above, where does hard IFR fit in here, as experience by the gents that that met earth below the glideslope?

It was a tragic accident and there were definitely some questionable decisions made(personally LLWS in clouds scares the daylights out of me), but just because some parts of the flight were out of some peoples comfort zones on this board doesn't make it wrong.

If you cannot see that this flight was a flight that should have never left the classroom then there is some ADM missing from your curriculum. I know AF, trained there, and worked there and I understand why this flight happened but that doesn't mean it should have.

 

[cale42]

Iceman.. Please note that nowhere in my post did I say that this flight should have happened. My comments were aimed at the people who felt that the flight should not have happened because it was a "bad student" or because taking a PVT student in actual is wrong.. and many of the comments on the thread seemed accusatory about those topics. I was just responding to that aspect of the thread.

However I will also not sit and second guess whether a flight should have happened or not. Probably it was not a flight I would have made, but since I wasn't making the decision at the time I can't say that for sure. It is a personal frustration of mine how quick we(humans.. and even more so pilots) are to judge people when we weren't there or in the situation.

cale

 

[Milkdud99]

Probably it was not a flight I would have made, but since I wasn't making the decision at the time I can't say that for sure. It is a personal frustration of mine how quick we(humans.. and even more so pilots) are to judge people when we weren't there or in the situation.

cale

Probably????? why cant you say for sure??? i for sure wouldn't take a GA aircraft up where it would be tough to get back to the field. 200' ceilings!! kinda tough to get back into the airport if they drop even 1 foot

just because some parts of the flight were out of some peoples comfort zones on this board doesn't make it wrong

yes, most people have their own comfort zone and some people don't know theirs, i dont know the instructor on board, but it is my guess, and it is a GUESS, that he wasn't too bright, first by not having a valid medical, second for thinking about going up that day, and third for acutally going up. it seems that he could be overconfident, which its the overconfident ones that get people hurt.

(disclaimer) all ihave said was a GUESS dont get ur panties tied in a knot! LOL

 

[Iceman21]

I do know for a fact that there were more factors involved here than just weather, though those factors do not outweigh the needs of a student at anytime in my eye's.

And that is a reason why I don't work there anymore.

 

[cale42]

Milkdud,

While I certainly support every pilot having their own personal minimums, there is absolutely nothing wrong with taking a GA aircraft up in IFR minimums if the pilot is comfortable and trusts the airplane. I fly 172's when there is 200' ceilings, and I will continue to do so. The airplanes I fly are well equipped fully IFR airplanes with dual vacuum pumps and mostly with moving map GPS to enhance situational awareness and they are on a maintenance program I fully trust. If ceilings drop 1 foot as you mention that is why I have an alternate. I beleive any pilot who wants to do this for a living should be comfortable at IFR minimums. I have personally flown a number of flights where I never broke out on the practice approaches, you go missed and go try somewhere else.

The LLWS is a whole other situation that has to be separately addressed, but there are many pilots who fly a whole variety of GA aircraft right down to IFR minimums, nothing crazy about it.

 

[flatspin7]

Having worked for American Flyers as a CFI (I am not going to say when and where-not HPN) there were multiple times when I was pressured to take a private student up in some fairly low IFR conditions... I did it one and realized it just banged the student around ind really didnt do much for the student--- The 3 hours of IFR time for a private should be focus on BAIF and getting out of IMC--- approaches may be introducted but there is no way and no benefit to take a student out to get his a$$ kicked in 200-1/2.

A new private student (pre-solo) should not be kept in the air for more than 2 hours any way-- any more than that and they really stop learning. They have other problems with their accelerated courses--- making unrealistic promises and then cutting corners to get students done.

Part 141 self examining authority --- turns a "check ride" into a "we wont fail you" event--- I have seen students walk out the door of that place with a private who had no business being near and airplane.. ie- I refused to sign him off and some else did behind my back.

P.S. An accident like this while tragic isnt a shock. The student had no clue what he was in for. American Flyers had it coming.

 

[irapilot]

cale42,

Quick question, more of a thought, really. You are in a C-172R on the ILS to RWY 16 at HPN. It is 200 and 1/2. Your student is in the left seat so you are sitting in the right with a somewhat crooked view of the panel. You have just crossed FARAN at 2000 MSL and your engine begins to display high oil temp, low oil pzr and starts to clank loudly. You begin to have trouble holding altitude. You are around 14 miles from the airport. What is your plan? What do you do?

 

[sky37d]

As I see it, the issue isn't 200 and 1/2. You can't pass the checkride if you can't do that. The issue isn't what is your personal comfort level.

The issue is does a primary student really learn anything when you go spend the entire flight in IMC. I would think, that repeated exposure to IMC is good, but only to demonstrate what it is like, and then go back and get out and talk about it.

To plan a flight with a primary student that is completely IMC, seems silly.

Also, you bring up a valid point, that the instructor is really handicapped flying a precision approach to minimums from the right seat.

The lawsuit alleges that AF did silly things, 2 people lost their lives, and AF should not do those things.

Remember, many of the rules we have about flying come from someone else's death. Hopefully, we will all learn from this one, and not become another statistic.