Investigators Say Student Pilots Should Be Flagged

Hi,

In article ,
Peter wrote:
However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do with
the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was presumably well
known.

I'm not too sure of this. If you read the full report, I think it's said
that there was a change of ATC personnel between the time the student took
off, and when he landed.

I could be mis-remembering of course.

Andy

Andy Hawkins wrote in
:

Hi,

In article ,
Peter wrote:
However, in my none too humble opinion, it has nothing whatsoever to do
with the cited accident--in which the student pilot's status was
presumably well known.

I'm not too sure of this. If you read the full report, I think it's said
that there was a change of ATC personnel between the time the student
took off, and when he landed.

I have to agree with Peter on this one.

A specific set of unique and random circumstances caused an unfortunate, but
unique and random accident. There is no call to start create regulations to
protect from this specific set of unique and random circumstances from ever
happening again.

The change of ATC personnel is yet another contributing but random
circumstance that is not likely to be repeated with any frequency demanding a
regulation.

"Andy Hawkins" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I'm not too sure of this. If you read the full report, I think it's said
that there was a change of ATC personnel between the time the student took
off, and when he landed.

I could be mis-remembering of course.

Andy

My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff happens"
and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time an
accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will die;
but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.

However, I did only scan the report on line, which never results in my best
performance; so I have now printed it. I have a rather long gap in my
schedule later today, and will read it in its entirety.

Peter

Hi,

In article ,
Peter wrote:
My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff happens"
and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time an
accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will die;
but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.

While that's true, and adding more and more 'rules' isn't necessarily going
to help, it can't be harmful to have a standardised method for inexperienced
(not just student) pilots to identify themselves as such to ATC and other
pilots.

'Heathrow Tower, Tyro G-ANDY base' isn't much more to say, and can convey
this inexperience without too much extra effort.

Military fields already have a mechanism for doing this (the 'Tyro' above is
the military term). Extending this to civilian air traffic seems as good a
way as any to me.

I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated factors
in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
bad.

Andy

"Andy Hawkins" wrote in message
...
Hi,

In article ,
Peter wrote:
My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff
happens"
and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time
an
accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will
die;
but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.

While that's true, and adding more and more 'rules' isn't necessarily
going
to help, it can't be harmful to have a standardised method for
inexperienced
(not just student) pilots to identify themselves as such to ATC and other
pilots.

'Heathrow Tower, Tyro G-ANDY base' isn't much more to say, and can convey
this inexperience without too much extra effort.

Military fields already have a mechanism for doing this (the 'Tyro' above
is
the military term). Extending this to civilian air traffic seems as good a
way as any to me.

I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated
factors
in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
bad.


How about squawking "1201" for student pilots?

Hi,

In article ,
Ken wrote:
How about squawking "1201" for student pilots?

That would only work in airspace where you'd normally squawk VFR. Certainly
around the airfield I'm learning at, we don't.

Andy

Andy Hawkins writes:

That would only work in airspace where you'd normally squawk VFR. Certainly
around the airfield I'm learning at, we don't.

What do you squawk instead?

Hi,

In article ,
wrote:
Andy Hawkins writes:

That would only work in airspace where you'd normally squawk VFR. Certainly
around the airfield I'm learning at, we don't.

What do you squawk instead?

What the tower tells you to.

Andy

"Andy Hawkins" wrote

I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated
factors
in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
bad.

I hate to speak ill of the dead, but wow! How far away from ready are you
to solo, if all it takes is a distraction to keep you from advancing the
throttle from idle, when you are not trying to land?

It should be so automatic, that distractions should not be an issue. When
things were not happening (like climbing) it should not be hard to notice
that your engine was making no noise, right?

I am truly sorry this young man died. It sucks that things piled up on him,
and non standard procedures took place. Part of training has to be
expecting the unexpected, but above all, fly the plane. That did not
happen.

I think that he was not ready to solo. More drilling on unusual situations
needed to take place, without a doubt. The big thing that needed to be
taught is fly the plane. Always. Without fail. No matter what.
--
Jim in NC

"Andy Hawkins" wrote in message
...
Hi,

In article ,
Peter wrote:
My point, which Judah phrased much better, was simply that "stuff
happens"
and it makes no sense to add more regulations and complexity every time
an
accident or incident indicates a possible gap in the rules--or to try to
find or enact a crime that might fit every situation. All of us will
die;
but, if we expend less effort fretting about unusual causes, most of us
would live more complete and enjoyable lives before our death.

While that's true, and adding more and more 'rules' isn't necessarily
going
to help, it can't be harmful to have a standardised method for
inexperienced
(not just student) pilots to identify themselves as such to ATC and other
pilots.

'Heathrow Tower, Tyro G-ANDY base' isn't much more to say, and can convey
this inexperience without too much extra effort.

Military fields already have a mechanism for doing this (the 'Tyro' above
is
the military term). Extending this to civilian air traffic seems as good a
way as any to me.

I do agree though, there appear to have been a lot of small isolated
factors
in this accident that just all came together to make its consequences so
bad.

Andy

Well, I did use some of that idle time to read the entire report.

The proposal at the end of the report seemed to make the Student/Tyro call
sign a recommended standard for all student solo flights, which would
suddenly end when the private pilot certificate was issued. IMHO, that is
an egregious idea for at least two reasons: 1) it is just one more example
of the worse of the "Nanny State" and 2) it suddenly ends exactly when the
new pilot is first exposed to the distraction and responsibility of
passengers.

However, the call sign recommendation was my only criticism of the report,
which was remarkably thorough and complete--expecially for a single aircraft
accident with only the pilot aboard and no injuries on the ground.

Interestingly, it appears that the student pilot did absolutely nothing with
the exceptions of pulling back on the yoke and of turning--and too far and
to an incorrect heading. Apparently, according to the rather thorough
reconstruction, he flew the approach with approximately 20 degrees of flaps,
carb heat on and 1700 rpm. Although the tachometer froze showing 900 rpm,
the additional findings and commentary suggested that the power was never
changed from the approach to impact--in other words, in addition to not
removing carb heat and to not retracting the flaps, the student never
throttled up...

All in all, an unusual chain of events. As you said, a lot of small
isolated factors.

Peter