Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Cessna Cj4 N614SB missing after takeoff from Burke lakefront Airport in Cleveland
Six on board, lost radar contact soon after takeoff , coast guard has been searching waters throughout the night. Few details are available (www.foxnews.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
1/10/2017 - update - Investigators are searching a debris field about the size of a football field. (100 yards long 50 yds wide) 4 main dive sites are being searched. They have found rear tail section, 1 engine, seats, front wheel, front cockpit section (roughly 8ft x 5ft) and sections of windows from the front cockpit. Human remains have almost been found and through DNA testing, determined them to be from a male. A total of 170 pieces have been recovered to date. They estimate 1-3 additional days to recover debris. They were unable to dive on Tuesday because of rough seas.The cockpit voice recorder was flown to DC, but no information has been provided as to its contents.
Thank you for providing the update. I have been looking a couple of times a day for an update. Have recordings of the tower and departure control conversations been made available?
nothing yet. I will post when available. They did disclose that the audio of the entire flight was recovered.
Someone said the Cj4 has no blackbox but does have a CVR. Hopefully, this will shed some light on this tragic accident.
First and most importantly condolences to the friends and family of the crew and passengers aboard this flight. Having followed the 92 comments so far in this dialog, several things occur to me.
Total hours and ratings don't always tell the story of a pilot's competence. I believe that the quality (type of aircraft and real world flights), frequency and currency of the time are a major factor. Many years ago I was at FlightSafety Wichita taking an initial simulator course for a Cessna 421C. My professional pilot simulator mate had some 3700 hours and had already served as a single pilot PIC for 40 or 50 hours prior to FlightSafety. He crashed three times trying to hand fly a simple IFR approach to minimums. He realized that an autopilot failure during his recent flight hours might have cost him and his corporate executive partners their lives. Yes, he had the hours and the requisite hours but most of those hours were spent as an instructor in good weather.
I have read numerous comments stated as fact that made assumptions not in evidence. Yes, I do think that people who make assertive comments ought to have the background knowledge to justify those utterances. There are, in fact, many accidents in private jets that have occurred in the past several years that had two man professional crews so to assume (even to state in no uncertain terns) that this accident would not have occurred with a second pilot aboard is absurd. Is is possible and even likely, that a safety or mentor pilot could have prevented the outcome but it is also possible that a mechanical failure of some sort led to the result.
I would like to emphasize that flying a light jet with state of the art avionics is substantially less complicated than flying a high performance pressurized turboprop. The systems are simpler and the work load reduced. This is something that I believe the FAA should address. I know for a fact that the incidence of accidents in MU2s specifically have been greatly reduced since the FAA instituted a training requirement for that airframe.
Lastly, I'd like to address the general insurance company approach of requiring some number of hours with a mentor pilot following a new type rating. I suspect that this was not required in the transition from a Mustang to a Citation since the airframes are so similar. Of course a new type rating was required and from what I see in this aircraft flight history on FlightAware, it appears that he completed that earlier in December. I would submit that it would be appropriate for insurance companies to address more than just the "type." I personally believe that the type of avionics should get more attention. For many years, the avionics were pretty consistent when going from one type of airplane to another. With the proliferation of flight systems like the Garmin 1000, Garmin 3000, Pro Line 21, etc, there is a major learning curve associated with a transition from one system to another. I believe (don't know for a fact) that this pilot was probably transitioning from a Garmin 1000 system in his Mustang to a Pro Line 21 system in the CJ4. I believe that required flight experience should include time with a mentor pilot until the new avionics package is completely intuitive to the PIC. The work load that this pilot probably experienced based on the conditions for this flight was probably very high and any hesitation could be very distracting. That did not exist in the old days when most of the avionics was consistent from one aircraft to another.
Yes, this is a fairly "simple" jet to fly. But the work load based on conditions - avionics, manual boots, alcohol windshield - was probably extremely high for someone without much time in that specific aircraft with that specific avionics package. Yes, I also wish that he had elected to stay the night but, at a minimum, we should learn from this accident.
May they Rest In Peace.
Total hours and ratings don't always tell the story of a pilot's competence. I believe that the quality (type of aircraft and real world flights), frequency and currency of the time are a major factor. Many years ago I was at FlightSafety Wichita taking an initial simulator course for a Cessna 421C. My professional pilot simulator mate had some 3700 hours and had already served as a single pilot PIC for 40 or 50 hours prior to FlightSafety. He crashed three times trying to hand fly a simple IFR approach to minimums. He realized that an autopilot failure during his recent flight hours might have cost him and his corporate executive partners their lives. Yes, he had the hours and the requisite hours but most of those hours were spent as an instructor in good weather.
I have read numerous comments stated as fact that made assumptions not in evidence. Yes, I do think that people who make assertive comments ought to have the background knowledge to justify those utterances. There are, in fact, many accidents in private jets that have occurred in the past several years that had two man professional crews so to assume (even to state in no uncertain terns) that this accident would not have occurred with a second pilot aboard is absurd. Is is possible and even likely, that a safety or mentor pilot could have prevented the outcome but it is also possible that a mechanical failure of some sort led to the result.
I would like to emphasize that flying a light jet with state of the art avionics is substantially less complicated than flying a high performance pressurized turboprop. The systems are simpler and the work load reduced. This is something that I believe the FAA should address. I know for a fact that the incidence of accidents in MU2s specifically have been greatly reduced since the FAA instituted a training requirement for that airframe.
Lastly, I'd like to address the general insurance company approach of requiring some number of hours with a mentor pilot following a new type rating. I suspect that this was not required in the transition from a Mustang to a Citation since the airframes are so similar. Of course a new type rating was required and from what I see in this aircraft flight history on FlightAware, it appears that he completed that earlier in December. I would submit that it would be appropriate for insurance companies to address more than just the "type." I personally believe that the type of avionics should get more attention. For many years, the avionics were pretty consistent when going from one type of airplane to another. With the proliferation of flight systems like the Garmin 1000, Garmin 3000, Pro Line 21, etc, there is a major learning curve associated with a transition from one system to another. I believe (don't know for a fact) that this pilot was probably transitioning from a Garmin 1000 system in his Mustang to a Pro Line 21 system in the CJ4. I believe that required flight experience should include time with a mentor pilot until the new avionics package is completely intuitive to the PIC. The work load that this pilot probably experienced based on the conditions for this flight was probably very high and any hesitation could be very distracting. That did not exist in the old days when most of the avionics was consistent from one aircraft to another.
Yes, this is a fairly "simple" jet to fly. But the work load based on conditions - avionics, manual boots, alcohol windshield - was probably extremely high for someone without much time in that specific aircraft with that specific avionics package. Yes, I also wish that he had elected to stay the night but, at a minimum, we should learn from this accident.
May they Rest In Peace.
Don't some of you old time,high time ATP's, and anybody else here that really "gets it", wish that some of the low time guy's we keep readin about crashing, read this site? Haven't recognized a name yet in the accident reports. Thank you. In this uber rich environment, anybody can sit in the left seat, even if you have to buy the airplane! It ain't about the clubs. I have been preachin "rent a pro" in real life, as well as on this site for years. Seems to fall on deaf ears. You would think the insurance industry would get it after payin for all the execs. and families/employees. The airplanes are cheap. When "things go bump in the night", and you ain't been doin this too long, things can go badly. And I guess that's when the insurance guy says, "He had a great insurance form". And my condolences. Again.