Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

What a piece of Junk

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
The only inoperative items listed are the marker beacon, ADF, and a light in the #2 VOR navhead. Sounds like a lot more, but if you read the report, it's the same things mentioned several different ways. That's three items, none of which should have appreciably impacted his operation.

It's a little like the time honored jag about the airplane crashing because the pilot failed to file a VFR flight plan...the real cause here was that the pilot ran into a mountain. He reported, and was tracking a VOR radial. His instruction was to descend on that radial to intercept the ILS. His victor nav equipment was working. Worst case scenario he intercepts it and flies it to minimums based on his altimeter...he might not see fixes along the ILS based on lack of the marker beacon or NDB...but flying the ILS shouldn't have been an issue.

What was an issue was the pilot's failure to not his location properly. He reported himself at 11.9 miles, when in fact he was more than 24 miles out, and impacted the hillside at the 24 mile mark. He was given a descent clearance based on his reported position; his reported position was incorrect, the descent clearance premature, and his death the result.

I see no evidence in that short report of any problems other than a marker beacon and ADF. And the light. What else do you see?
I do think it leads you to believe there was probably a lot more wrong with that plane than what was written up. Rattler71
Why bother with a formal accident investigation when speculation is the order of the day?

The report lists specific malfunctions, and nothing more. Had another malfunctioning item been apparent and germain to the investigation, one might suppose it would have been mentioned.
How would it have been apparant if there were other problems with the plane?
That's kind of the whole idea of the accident investigation. That's why it's called an investigation. An investigator examines wreckage, flight paths, switch positions, radio tapes, whitness reports, debris fields, etc, and comes to a conclusion based on the facts in evidence. These facts are then combined into a report.

I see little value in guesswork, or reading into the report what is not there.
Yes, I am familiar with the definition of "investigation".

The pilot obviously knew how to track a VOR or read a DME. The fact he was so far off his stated position would lead me to believe there were other things wrong.

Just trying to have a discussion here. If you don't like discussing something not in a formal report, then don't post anymore in this thread.

I didn't realize it was a fantasy thread about what might have occured. I suppose that could range from the innocuous snake on the cabin floor to an alien abduction that went terribly wrong...he reported out at 11.9 miles, but was teleported back to 24 miles.

Or it could just be that he got it wrong. That happens sometimes.

What does gripe my cookies is speculation. That all powerful guesswork, supposition is the halmark of unprofessionalism. Sort of a National Enquirer mentality. I heard this, so-and-so said that. What if's. Suppose. The report clearly says this, but I think it really should have said that, therefore...

You did start the thread by asking "Man, did anything in this airplane work." You didn't start it by asking what else had failed (Nor can anyone provide that answer, and the professional dedicated accident investigators who formulated the report didn't find more to add, either). You then provided a link which indicated three minor items were inoperative...hardly the basis for asking if anything was working.

Apparently you're looking for the sensational dirt. As the report is all there is to go on, I'd say you're wasting your time. But it's your time to waste. I won't trouble you in this thread further.

I'd hate to see your analysis if four things were inoperative.

Latest resources