Plane crash caught on video

[porsche4life]

Originally Posted by pcardude

The plane had a parachute?

Newer cirrus planes have a chute that can be deployed to save the pilots ass if it's pulled in time.

[Jeff Alton]

Originally Posted by porsche4life

Newer cirrus planes have a chute that can be deployed to save the pilots ass if it's pulled in time.

Its not there for pilot errors, its there predominantly for mechanical failure... or loss of thrust by other means....

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by Pazuzu

Can someone verify that she was actually an inexperienced pilot? The news this morning said that she had just RE-recieved her licence, which makes me think that she had experience, then let it lapse, then started back up again.

I have not kept up with the news since, so maybe that was clarified since then.

From what I can find, it looks like her first and only medical was in October of 2014, and the plane was purchased/cert'd 8 months prior in February of 2014. So, she may have opted for the factory "buy and fly" PPL training from Cirrus directly (just a guess there). If that is the case, it's likely that most/all of her time was in that particular A/C.

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by Jeff Alton

Its not there for pilot errors, its there predominantly for mechanical failure... or loss of thrust by other means....

Yep, this.

Also, they are really only useful at altitudes above 500 ft. under "normal" circumstances, or above 1000 ft. in a spin (which the A/C in question appeared to be in).

There wasn't even an attempt to pull it here, as you can see the ballistic cartridge fire on impact in the video.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Paul K

RIP.

Anyone else offended by the fact that you have to watch an ad before the video will start? I'm seeing more & more of this on news websites. Not good etiquette in my book.

What a horrible thing to watch. It happened so fast, first a shadow, and wham.

I'm not offended. Annoyed is a better way to put it. I don't mind ads that allow you to click through them if you aren't interested, but I bypass a lot of content on these mandatory ads because I just close the link and move on.

[Otter74]

Boy, that was a tough video to watch. I am not a pilot, by my GF's dad, who is a retired commercial pilot and current GA pilot, said:

"What the heck was she doing going into Hobby? Common sense says find a
less congested airport. They obviously had money, flying what they were in.
Money does not equate to skill! She should have popped the parachute right
over the field. It's the I'm in over my head answer in a plane like that. Sure
would have given Southwest fits."

Originally Posted by red-beard

That is precisely what I'm saying. Do you think an inexperienced pilot should be using a major commercial airport. She made 3 attempts to land. She could not tell which runway was which. She caused commercial airliners to go around.

Ellington field is 5 miles away. Longer runways and no commercial traffic. Which would make more sense?

[flipper35]

I did not see any fuel leakage after the crash.

[pdxfj]

Sad that it happened but fortunate she missed the propane tanks since the resulting explosion would have likely killed the other people walking by the minivan on the left side of the screen.

I don't fly, but agree that it's a lack of skill. A very good friend of mine fly's a Lancair 360 and has landed at major airports numerous times while sandwiched between commercial aircraft. IIRC the last was at Las Vegas International. Yes he could have landed at N. Las Vegas or Hederson Executive, but given he was staying on the strip and has the experience and hours, it is not an issue for him.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Pazuzu

Can someone verify that she was actually an inexperienced pilot? The news this morning said that she had just RE-recieved her licence, which makes me think that she had experience, then let it lapse, then started back up again.

I have not kept up with the news since, so maybe that was clarified since then.

She was licensed sometime in 2014. No one has stated the number of hours

[red-beard]

Audio recording between pilot and Hobby Airport sheds light on...

OUSTON - When you listen to the audio recording between the pilot and the controller at Hobby Airport, there are two things that stand out: The pilot is not familiar with the layout of Hobby Airport and she certainly doesn't sound like a very experienced pilot.

In fact, at one point, the tower was trying to slow down incoming air traffic to give her space, but as you can hear, it just wasn't working.

More News Headlines
Plane crash rattles workers near Hobby Airport
3 dead in small plane crash near Hobby Airport
United Airlines flight to Houston delayed after blown tire causes fire
Passenger taken off plane after kicking, screaming
Weather tracking planes land in Galveston for 2016 NOAA Hurricane Awareness Tour
Landing is the hardest part of flying and the pilot of the single-engine plane was clearly having trouble.

11 minutes before the crash:

PILOT: "So am I turning a right base now? 52g."

TOWER: "52g, roger. Just, um, maneuver back for the straight in. I don't which way you're going now so turn back around for runway 35."

The pilot makes at least three attempts to land at Hobby, but simply can't align the plane with the runway or find the right altitude for approach

-- even when controllers clear the airspace.

TOWER: "I think you're too high, Cirrus. You might be too high. You are clear to land. There will be no other traffic runway 4, so this one will be easy."

But it wasn't, and there seems to be miscommunication as the traffic controller and the pilot trade runway 35 for runway 4 and then go back to 35.

TOWER: "Clear to land."

PILOT: "Trying to get down again. 4352g."

TOWER: "No problem."

Two minutes before the crash, essentially meaningful communication from the pilot stopped, which is a problematic situation when a 737 is inbound.

TOWER: "Um, it is going to be a little bit tight with one behind it so when you get on that downwind stay on the downwind. Advise me when you have that 737 in sight. We'll either do 4 or we might swing you around to 35."

TOWER: "Uh ma'am, uh, ma'am, uh, straighten up! Straighten up!"

It is clear the pilot cannot land the plane.

PILOT: "Turning around for 35. I'm so sorry for the confusion. 4252g."

TOWER: "That's OK. We'll get it."

The pilot of the plane was a fairly new pilot. It's not known how many hours she had under her belt, but she first became licensed in 2014.

2016 Click2Houston/KPRC2

[herr_oberst]

I have a question.

In the event something like this happens and the pilot is in over his or her head, but he or she manages to land safely, will the FAA take any disciplinary action, or make restrictions on his or her license?

[cgarr]

Its too bad! Just did my BFR last light, as PIC sounds like there was too much listening to controllers than just flying the damn plane. Cant follow instructions that you feel unsafe

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by herr_oberst

I have a question.

In the event something like this happens and the pilot is in over his or her head, and he or she makes it down safely, can and does the FAA take any disciplinary action, or make restrictions on his or her license?

That is a very interesting question. I hope some of the experienced controllers respond: Based on the initial reports she didn't seem to break any rules...what would the FAA have done had she managed to land safely?

I made a really stupid mistake in tower controlled airspace...really stupid and actionable on the controllers part. I fessed up immediately and told him I would switch to airport ops freq and give him my information.

He said that I should be more careful, fly safe and try to not do it again. I never did.

The young lady needed, if she had the gas, to be vectored out of the pattern for some straight and level flight, a bit of a respite. This was day VFR for the love of god. Most young pilots made prideful mistakes.

Aviate, navigate, communicate.

[flipper35]

Experience and competency are not always related. She may have had 50 hour or 500 but she clearly was not competent to fly in there. She could have diverted, she could have asked for vectoring from the tower assuming they have radar coverage.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by flipper35

Experience and competency are not always related. She may have had 50 hour or 500 but she clearly was not competent to fly in there. She could have diverted, she could have asked for vectoring from the tower assuming they have radar coverage.

She had to have the right equipment, transponder Mode C, etc., to even be in the Hobby airspace so they could have sent her away and followed her progress.

Trust me, the controllers did all the right things.

One of the the things I used to do as an instrument check pilot, standardization pilot, NVG instructor pilot, maintenance test pilot, etc. when things would get a bit salty is get straight and level, get a few minutes to orient then get back in the game.

She needed to know what to ask, to focus on on anything other than gethomeitis to Hobby.

[red-beard]

She was headed to the Texas Medical Center. Hobby is about 7-8 miles away, though the WORST section of Houston. Ellington Field is just outside the Beltway, a bit over 5 miles away.







The last photo is one I've been using for a Solar Install on the roof of the Hardware store!

[red-beard]

[cashflyer]

Originally Posted by herr_oberst

I have a question.

In the event something like this happens and the pilot is in over his or her head, but he or she manages to land safely, will the FAA take any disciplinary action, or make restrictions on his or her license?

It's hard to say what the FAA would do. Years ago, a "pilot deviation" would result in a request for you to call the tower (or visit the tower) and get a tongue lashing from the chief controller on duty. A few years ago, the FAA changed that policy to "mandatory occurrence reporting". Now ATC (the tower) is supposed to file a report on any pilot deviation, and you can expect a phone call from an Operations Inspector from the FAA.

Depending upon what you did, and what plausible excuse you can muster up, you could get a stern talking-to, a letter in your 'permanent file', a temporary suspension of your license, or even a permanent revocation of your license.

Probably one of the likely options, somewhere between the letter in your file and the permanent revocation, is what they call a 709 ride. This is an FAA order for you to take a "check ride" with an FAA inspector. Based on the outcome, you could go on your way or you could be suspended while you take remedial training.

Reigel Law Firm, Ltd., an Aviation Law Firm

[cashflyer]

I've been flying for almost 20 years. (not non-stop, though)
I've held a commercial license for 18 of those.

But I have not flown in a high traffic density area in a long time. The last time was in 2012 when I brought a helicopter out of the Houston area - and I had a copilot with me to share the workload.

Recently I had to repossess a helicopter in Charlotte. And I hired a ringer. I knew I would be in over my head with my rusty skillset.

Unless they release the data, we will never know how much Class B time she had. We are looking at this with an incomplete knowledge of her experience.

She was taking family members to the cancer center to visit with other family members. Her mind may have not been in the game. And for sure, when things started going south, she had to contend with those passengers who were looking to her for a safe arrival. Situations like this go to **** in a hurry, no matter who you are.

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by flipper35

I did not see any fuel leakage after the crash.

Watch the video closely. You can see it spill out over the car's windshield and vaporize after the tanks rupture on impact.