Accident west of Brisbane 29/08/22.

[Teckair]

On the news tonight accident west of Brisbane plane departed Dalby and went missing. Three people dead,  wreckage scattered in inhospitable territory. The pilot was reported as very experienced as a well known identity. I am wondering what the weather was like in that area today. 

[Garfly]

33 minutes ago, Teckair said:

 I am wondering what the weather was like in that area today. 

According to the Brisbane Times:

"Three people have died near Brisbane after rough weather caused their light plane to fall from the sky."

[red750]

Three victims named. Story and video here.

[plugga]

13 hours ago, Teckair said:

 I am wondering what the weather was like in that area today. 

Saw screenshots posted elsewhere from local cameras connected to Windy; not good, few 100 feet ceiling in the valleys at best.

[turboplanner]

Looks like this one fits in the experienced pilot+business people who have to be somewhere + IFR closing to IMC.

 

Someone needs to bite the bullet and come up with a Feeder service, IFR passenger aircraft, maybe 20 pax with some freedom for local drop offs/pickups at affordable prices.

 

[onetrack]

I always struggle to get my head around CFIT's involving serious levels of fatalities, flown by "highly experienced, high hour, professionally respected" pilots. You'd think people of this age and experience, who are looked up to, would have better piloting judgement levels.

I always wonder about whether they were always constant risk-takers, living on the edge and zooming through hundreds of scrapes and near-misses - or whether they just become supremely confident with age and hours, their attitude coupled with a large degree of complacency, that means they think that they're so highly experienced and knowledgeable, that basic, rigid student rules, no longer apply to them. I believe the latter is more often likely to be the case.

[NT5224]

Saddened  to  read this. Condolences to the families of the deceased.

 

Alan

[Ironpot]

37 minutes ago, onetrack said:

I always struggle to get my head around CFIT's involving serious levels of fatalities, flown by "highly experienced, high hour, professionally respected" pilots. You'd think people of this age and experience, who are looked up to, would have better piloting judgement levels.

I always wonder about whether they were always constant risk-takers, living on the edge and zooming through hundreds of scrapes and near-misses - or whether they just become supremely confident with age and hours, their attitude coupled with a large degree of complacency, that means they think that they're so highly experienced and knowledgeable, that basic, rigid student rules, no longer apply to them. I believe the latter is more often likely to be the case.

One thing aviation has taught me is that you shouldn’t jump to conclusions and wait till the facts are established before making a judgement.

 

But I will find it unforgivable IF the pilot has conducted a Charter without filing a flight plan. The aircraft was down nearly 5 hours before the alarm was raised!?

[Kununurra]

“But I will find it unforgivable IF the pilot has conducted a Charter without filing a flight plan. The aircraft was down nearly 5 hours before the alarm was raised!?”

 

I wonder who was holding his SARTIME.

 

[KRviator]

9 hours ago, Ironpot said:

But I will find it unforgivable IF the pilot has conducted a Charter without filing a flight plan. The aircraft was down nearly 5 hours before the alarm was raised!?

Based solely on my experience with FlightAware and logging my flights, when I do submit a plan, it will capture and display that on FlightAware, showing among other things, the aircraft type and planned route. None of VH-EHM's recent tracked flights show that, suggesting, to me at least, no plans were filed for any of these flights, including the incident flight, though they have previously done so.

[red750]

Report relating to this accident published 19/12/22.

[onetrack]

I find it incredible that a pilot with nearly 14,000 hrs experience in his logbook, thought he could fly VFR in mountainous terrain that was covered in low cloud, at altitudes well below the even the average height of the mountains and hills.

 

He spent considerable time trying to wend his way through valleys, obviously highly confident that he could achieve a successful flight to his planned destination in those conditions.

The result of attempting to do this was pretty much a foregone conclusion, as soon as he started down this deadly path.

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2022/aair/ao-2022-041

[poteroo]

I'm not surprised that an experienced VFR pilot, (with IFR and extensive country experience), would try to find a way under the cloud, regardless of terrain. What I found concerning was that they tried again - a recipe for more determination to get through.

 

The other thing that I found concerning was that there was no flap deployed. If you are intending to look for a low level pathway, then you need to be able to give yourself more time to manoeuvre ie, use minimum radius turns.   The 182 is far more controllable at 70-75 kts and 20 flap.

 

A lesson for everyone here.  RIP.