Ops-Normal.org

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/so ... y-n1094016

A few more bodies than seats and also WX.

PP

Who was the PiC?

.

Haven't seen PIC named, but he didn't survive.

Sounds like press-on-itis.

Read from another aviation website that the aircraft was parked overnight in freezing conditions and no deice facilities available, so between suspected ice covering and ***** weather the decision to take off was not wise,

The rich in the western US are, in my experience, somewhat prone to deciding their schedules are more important than Mother Nature. It's why I stopped flying for one of them.

It also seems that they had two more butts than seats. Per Pilatus website max pax for the PC-12 is 10 plus 1 pilot. There were no infants (less than 2 years old) on board.
I guess rules and common sense do not apply to some.

PP

Well, if you are going to break the rules, might as well break all of them. Too much weight, less lift, more drag...I'm guessing there must have been power trouble also.

12:26 p.m. – Plane departed Chamberlain Municipal Airport on runway 31 (there is no air traffic control tower at the airport).

12:35 p.m. – Automated weather station recorded conditions at the airport, which was under a Winter Storm Warning at the time. Winds were north/northeast at 7 MPH, there was half-mile visibility with moderate snow and icing. According to the report, there was a low-level wind shear and clear air turbulence conditions. Cloud OVC005, temp 33F, dew point 33F. Just perfect icing conditions, and there had been mixed precipitation at about freezing for the previous 18 hours, including light snow, drizzle, and mixed.

https://w1.weather.gov/data/obhistory/K9V9.html

That's why I asked about PiC. There are a lot of kids out there desperate for hours who don't want to lose their job by going up against the Boss over weather. It may be they had an inexperienced pilot or perhaps the Boss had a rating. I guess the Pilatus is less than 12,500 pounds but it would still count as a "complex" aircraft.

.

No mention of any non-family member on the aircraft so one of the family must have been flying it. One report specifically mentions that the name of the pilot has not been released.


.

boing wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:11 am

No mention of any non-family member on the aircraft so one of the family must have been flying it. One report specifically mentions that the name of the pilot has not been released.

Apart from the questionable aviation related judgement in undertaking a flight in such conditions one has to question the corporate governance that allowed so many senior corporate executives from these companies to fly together on one aircraft.

This sad case is slightly reminiscent of this accident in that it killed literally the whole board of directors of a company. An unauthorized/non-standard NDB approach was made in IMC by the instrument rated commercial pilot and co-pilot under pressure from the company director to get to a meeting when a diversion to a local alternate with a standard ILS approach would have saved the day and everybody's lives.

Italtile PC-12 crash

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-release ... 91202.aspx

PP

From TOP:
It appears that the pilot was 48-yr-old Kirkland Rigby Hansen. Database shows medical current and:

Quote:
PILOT/PRIVATE - AIRPLANE MULTIENGINE LAND
PILOT/PRIVATE - AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND
PILOT/PRIVATE - INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE

PP

Permission vs. clearance

One media source stated that the FAA gave the pilot permission to take off. In reality it is just an IFR clearance. Can't locate the source at the moment.
Slightly better reporting from CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/02/us/south ... index.html

PP

PHXPhlyer wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 03, 2019 5:35 pm

Permission vs. clearance

One media source stated that the FAA gave the pilot permission to take off. In reality it is just an IFR clearance. Can't locate the source at the moment.
Slightly better reporting from CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/02/us/south ... index.html

PP

Commander's decision. Clearly no company SOPS! Just because you can doesn't mean to say you should.

https://aviationweek.com/awin/icing-ad- ... atus-pc-12

I have been in the situation once where we had sufficient fuel for an instrument approach, visual circuit and divert. There was no pressure to land at destination. The weather was that sort of goldfish bowl, little definition but the Captain saw the runway on overshoot. Rather than a visual circuit which was impracticable he went for a further instrument contrary to his brief.

We had no vote and that was probably true of this accident. Our captain (I hesitate to say skipper*) got away with it.

*skipper a captain whom you trust implicitly.

None of the reports that I have seen have mentioned the number of Pax and the number of seats!

ian16th wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:27 pm

None of the reports that I have seen have mentioned the number of Pax and the number of seats!

Such questions were a definite issue in this PC-12 crash...

PC-12 Butte Crash

That’s not to say that this decision was meaningless. Taking off 600 lbs. over maximum gross weight and with 4 passengers too many does suggest a casual disregard for the airplane’s limitations. While the Pilatus will haul a lot of weight, 600 lbs. is hardly a rounding error.

The NTSB have issued an update on the case at hand in this thread.

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-release ... 91202.aspx

Butte Crash

During the turn, the pilot lost control of the airplane and crashed into a cemetery

Well, at least he saved somebody some bother.