NTSB released prelim report on 2013 Alaska Trooper crash

[touchdownjm]

Friend of the family of the pilot. I do not have any experience flying, but they were able to recover the flight recorder w/ all the data. Would anyone care to give there opinion on what could have happended based on the data recovered?

 

The first link is the flight recorder data that was recovered, the 2nd link is the entire release of the records, and the 3rd link is an updated article of the incident. He was flying at night and apparently light snow was falling, so first guess by everyone was there could have been icing involved.

 

http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F55000-55499%2F55245%2F549781.pdf

 

http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/hitlist.cfm?docketID=55245&CFID=192849&CFTOKEN=64583417

 

 

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/20140203/ntsb-releases-information-fatal-2013-alaska-state-trooper-helicopter-crash

 

[WolftalonID]

I see some very informative graphs, but there seems to lack engine performance graphs to really know more details. I am not familiar with data recorders or their read outs, so I couldnt say by that information what was happening.

 

However there did seem to show a run up, a flight path that zig zaged alot, either from the S/R grid, or terrain. The end of the flight showed some rapid changes in attitude control. This could have been from machine performance issues such as icing, or engine failure, and looks like there may have been an auto entry or several in rapid succession? Not having torque graphs to coorilate makes that a pure guess.

 

The other issue if not the machine could have been IMC weather, and a really disoriented pilot...but that too is a guess, not knowing the pilot, area, weather potential etc.

 

Either way...there was some desperate flight maneuvers near the end of te recording graphs.

Edited February 6, 2014 by WolftalonID

[Spike]

 

Friend of the family of the pilot. I do not have any experience flying, but they were able to recover the flight recorder w/ all the data. Would anyone care to give there opinion on what could have happended based on the data recovered?

 

The first link is the flight recorder data that was recovered, the 2nd link is the entire release of the records, and the 3rd link is an updated article of the incident. He was flying at night and apparently light snow was falling, so first guess by everyone was there could have been icing involved.

 

 

Unless a subject matter expert whose expertise lies with interpreting the data provided, the information you are asking for here on VR will be highly speculative. As such, you should be careful where you seek information of this kind of nature if your purpose is to find “answers” to what happened. Furthermore, I knew the pilot and through the few conversations I had with him, I found him to be a pilot with a conservative approach to his job and would never had classified him as a pilot with a “Alasaka bush pilot” or “hero” mentality. In short, I found him to be a pro of the highest level...

Edited February 6, 2014 by Spike

[aeroscout]

The end of the data seemed to me to show the aircraft still at altitude. If that is when the end came for the mishap aircraft that would seem to me to indicate in flight break up. That would be consistent with icing severe enough to cause asymmetrical shedding, accompanied by the requisite vibrations that could shake an aircraft apart.

[helonorth]

 

 

Unless a subject matter expert whose expertise lies with interpreting the data provided, the information you are asking for here on VR will be highly speculative. As such, you should be careful where you seek information of this kind of nature if your purpose is to find “answers” to what happened. Furthermore, I knew the pilot and through the few conversations I had with him, I found him to be a pilot with a conservative approach to his job and would never had classified him as a pilot with a “Alasaka bush pilot” or “hero” mentality. In short, I found him to be a pro of the highest level...

He asked for speculation. You put "answers" in quotes, but no where in the post did he ask for "answers". I'm sure the guy was a very good pilot, but doing day and night, single pilot, single engine high altitude rescue work with volunteers? I'm sorry, but if you do that long enough, you will crash.

[touchdownjm]

Thanks for the replies, there was also this link from the NTSB, from the GPS that plotted the course and when he did the turn.

 

On page 7......

 

http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F55000-55499%2F55245%2F542777.pdf

 

 

[Nearly Retired]

Soooo...he was in the sh*t and trying to get back out of it. All that wandering around...low airspeed, sharp turns, altitude changes... At night?? Tells me something was SERIOUSLY f-ed up. Eventually he lost control and crashed. Wouldn't be the first pilot; won't be the last. Sad.

 

Aviation is terribly unforgiving of even the slightest mistake.

[helonorth]

I will speculate on what happened. The last two minutes of the onboard recording device shows abrupt and large changes in pitch, airspeed, heading and roll. Looks to me like spatial disorientation considering it was night and snowing.

[Wally]

Pop the location into Google Earth- remote, mountainous, night time, no moon and probably overcast at around a 1000'- DARK!- temps near freezing and maybe, snowing/raining "like a son of a gun" according to a witness in the vicinity. Pick one: spatial disorientation; maneuvered into a hill; icing, even inflight breakup; or it could be something else entirely.

 

FLI (graphed) is a composite of NG, T4 and TQ. A 10 indication is 100% of one of those limits at nominal, which may or may not be a limit in the existing conditions. Example- 100% NG will show a FLI "10" even though the takeoff limit might be higher. Lots of FLI outside of takeoff and landing indicates a busy pilot...

 

I am SO glad I don't do rescues.

[Spike]

He asked for speculation. You put "answers" in quotes, but no where in the post did he ask for "answers". I'm sure the guy was a very good pilot, but doing day and night, single pilot, single engine high altitude rescue work with volunteers? I'm sorry, but if you do that long enough, you will crash.

 

The OP stated he was “Friend of the family of the pilot.” In my line of work, we call that a “clue”. Furthermore, he didn’t pick up a “volunteer”. He picked up another State Trooper and unless you are familiar with Alaska State Trooper policies and procedures, the Trooper picked up could have been the most experienced rescue person on the search, especially in Alaska. And, Talkeetna is 348 MSL and in my book, that’s not “high altitude”.

 

Special disorientation? Maybe, that said, what about mechanical failure, or lighting strike, or bird strike, or UFO encounter, PAX going 5150, Icing… The list is endless and why the NTSB exists (even though they are human and subject to error like the rest of us). Internet bloggers will speculate all day long…. Why? Cuz that’s what their good at……

Edited February 6, 2014 by Spike

[Spike]

Speculation aside, it’s apparent the NTSB found something worth reporting and couple this with the facts of the incident, there will be changes at the AST ASU…… Sadly, but as usual, people had to die before someone would listen…..

[Azhigher]

The GPS graph reminds me a lot of the graph I saw at basic indoc of an astar pilot who went imc and got disoriented. That being said as Spike pointed out the list of things that could have caused the aircraft to do what it did is endless.

 

I am SO glad I don't do rescues.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

[helonorth]

I read the docket and they interviewed a plumber that was a volunteer that had flow hundreds flights with the accident pilot (and others) doing SAR. He was also onboard during a previous crash with the accident pilot. It sounds like it was SOP. He states he wasn't formally trained and mostly self-trained. That was a clue for me as to what kind of operation they were running. If you read the docket, the accident pilot was none too impressed with the operation, either. That a trooper was onboard rather than a volunteer is probably incidental to the accident, anyway (I will again speculate this had nothing to do with it). Are you also saying they didn't routinely operate at high altitudes? In Alaska?

 

No one is trying to tarnish the man's reputation here. I don't know what the OP's motive is, but I really don't care, either.

[Spike]

Frankly, I don’t want to know what the OP’s motivations are because I do care. I care about all pilots and their families. The fact is, we are all connected to this industry and therefore, should be respectful not to speculate with anyone who was simply doing their job. And, while some of us have the experience to reason why things happened, here on the internet, we can’t control the speculators who’ve never worked a day in this business which tends to muddy the waters and, in the worst case, provide fodder for the ambulance chasing attorneys…..

 

Yes, AST do fly high altitude, but from what I read in this instance, it wasn’t the case…. However, without getting into too much detail, by the information provided, you hint to the elements of the error chain…

 

Either way, to my understanding, all Alaska pilots become search pilots at one time or another. That is, ad-hoc searches would be considered the norm….

[Flying Pig]

Agencies trying to run SAR ops with minimally trained volunteer aircrew members is sadly more common than people migh think.

[helonorth]

I don't think speculating on the cause of an aircraft accident is any worse than wondering whether Billy Bob was lit up or going to fast or the tire blew when he hit that tree and killed everyone. The lawyers don't need us to help them, either. There are plenty of "experts" that will say anything they want in court. I don't know what a helicopter does when it's iced up, but I do know what it does when the pilot loses it in IMC. And it looks just like that graph.

[HeliNomad]

How common are these aftermarket types of recording equipment found on ships like this?

[heligirl03]

My understanding is that the Appareo is now standard equipment on at least the B3e right out of the factory. I spoke with them at HAI last year and it appeared the system is capable of far higher function than many operations actually enable or process...likely a financial consideration. Impressive data compilation, analysis, and presentation though, for better or for worse.

[WolftalonID]

I read a different article on my twitter feed yesterday.... Showed by video recording of the flight, a goggles down inadvertent entry into IMC conditions with heavy snow falling. I didn't see the video just read the article about the video released. I dont fly NVG, but from the lack of dept. instrument training since the pilot had joined the dept. in 2000 or 2001? And no formal on going NVG training, only prior service training, and a dept. checkout to approve the pilot to use them......

 

Then reading about the added difficulty of going from goggle to instruments, and the very likelihood of causing spacial disorientation from lack of instrument training and lack of instrument training with NVG, and the lack of regular proficiency training by the dept. then the picture of the last few minutes get much more clear......not much speculation there to be had.

 

I am instrument rated, and when I go a few months without flying under the hood especially at night under the hood, those first few minutes, my head is spinning like MAD while I focus on trying to "believe" my instruments over my head. Those who have done this know, and those of you who do fly NVG into IMC would relate even more so.

 

If you do fly NVG......would you consider going IFR on a whim under the goggles and expect to hold a steady stick if you haven't been doing so for a while?

Edited February 7, 2014 by WolftalonID

[palmfish]

You do not "go IFR under goggles." If you encounter IIMC you transition to the instruments same as you would without goggles. A goggle flight in a sparsely populated area, even on a clear night, would involve looking at the instruments underneath the googles at least as much as outside with goggles.

 

Talkeetna is basically a big flat unpopulated valley. At night, there are very few visual references. I wouldnt fly in the area at night unless I was at relatively high altitude or using NVG's (or both). I certainly wouldnt do it in marginal VFR.

 

I agree that it looks like spatial disorientation, but its only speculation. The large rapid changes in pitch, roll, power, etc. could be a result of the pilot trying to fly while troubleshooting an emergency (FADEC might explain the power fluctuations). Could be the pilot had a medical emergency while on the controls. The information about the weather conditions certainly points to spatial disorientation and/or IIMC, but i think the accident investigators are best qualifiied to reach a more definitive conclusion.

[aeroscout]

Holding a steady stick in IIMC is no assurance of safety.

[touchdownjm]

Wolftalonid, can you post the link to the article.you were referring to on Twitterer? Thanks

[WolftalonID]

http://www.adn.com/2014/02/03/3305296/ntsb-releases-documents-on-alaska.html

[Wally]

I read a different article on my twitter feed yesterday.... Showed by video recording of the flight, a goggles down inadvertent entry into IMC conditions with heavy snow falling. I didn't see the video just read the article about the video released. I dont fly NVG, but from the lack of dept. instrument training since the pilot had joined the dept. in 2000 or 2001? And no formal on going NVG training, only prior service training, and a dept. checkout to approve the pilot to use them......

 

Then reading about the added difficulty of going from goggle to instruments, and the very likelihood of causing spacial disorientation from lack of instrument training and lack of instrument training with NVG, and the lack of regular proficiency training by the dept. then the picture of the last few minutes get much more clear......not much speculation there to be had.

 

I am instrument rated, and when I go a few months without flying under the hood especially at night under the hood, those first few minutes, my head is spinning like MAD while I focus on trying to "believe" my instruments over my head. Those who have done this know, and those of you who do fly NVG into IMC would relate even more so.

 

If you do fly NVG......would you consider going IFR on a whim under the goggles and expect to hold a steady stick if you haven't been doing so for a while?

 

That's frequently how we do IIMC scenarios in recurrent training, the check pilot will power off your goggles and require an instrument recovery. What I don't mention is that I wear my googles high enough that I'm watching the panel anyhow far enough out that I can see around them...

 

I don't expect that wearing NVGs improves or detracts from instrument proficiency but having that obstruction of an important part of visual field would slow an unplanned transition to the gauges.

[Spike]

If you do fly NVG......would you consider going IFR on a whim under the goggles and expect to hold a steady stick if you haven't been doing so for a while?

 

While flying a helicopter, doing anything on a "whim" is ill-advised….