The non-instrument-rated pilot contacted flight service to inquire whether the conditions for his 15-nm flight, planned for about one hour later, would be suitable for visual flight rules (VFR) operations.
He received an abbreviated briefing that included only the current conditions at both his departure and destination airports, both of which reported VFR conditions. He subsequently departed on the flight about three hours later.
About 10 minutes after takeoff in the Columbia Aircraft LC-41, after entering the controlled airspace of the destination airport, the pilot contacted air traffic control (ATC) and stated, “I need your help, sir.”
The controller queried the pilot as to his location, heading, and destination, and he replied with his destination, stating, “I just don’t have visibility.”
The controller asked the pilot whether he was declaring an emergency and advised that the destination airport was under instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). The pilot did not respond.
The pilot then stated that he would return to his departure airport and was advised by the controller to “squawk VFR.” The pilot acknowledged, and no further communications were received from him.
Radar data showed that the airplane, about the time of the last radio transmission, entered a descending right turn that continued until ground contact near East Patchogue, N.Y. Such a flight track is consistent with a somatogyral illusion known as the “graveyard spiral.”
Given the reported weather conditions in the area about the time of the accident, the pilot’s statement that he was experiencing reduced visibility, the fact that he did not hold an instrument rating, and the radar flight track of the airplane, it is likely he experienced spatial disorientation and a subsequent loss of control as a result of his continued VFR flight into IMC.
The extent to which the pilot may have used the airplane’s automation, including the autopilot system, could not be determined.
Recorded weather data and statements from pilots flying in the area about the time of the accident indicated that, although the departure airport was experiencing visual meteorological conditions, IMC prevailed for much of the area surrounding the destination airport. These conditions had not been forecast until just before the airplane’s departure.
Had the pilot received the forecast from flight service when he received the current weather, he would only have been informed of low-level scattered clouds at his destination.
Despite the discrepancy between the forecast and actual conditions present on the day of the accident, it should have been apparent to the pilot upon takeoff that the cloud ceilings and visibilities were below VFR minimums as the flight progressed.
Additionally, he could have obtained the automated weather report at the destination airport via radio shortly after departure, which would have informed him that the airport was experiencing IMC.
However, the pilot’s communication with ATC suggested that he was not aware of the weather conditions at his destination.
If he had declared an emergency and stated that he was not capable of instrument flight rules flight, he would have been provided priority handling and greater assistance from ATC.
Although he did indicate that he was experiencing reduced visibility conditions, he did not declare an emergency and did not provide any specific information about the conditions he was experiencing or his limitations as a non-instrument-rated pilot. In the absence of this information, the controller likely assumed that the pilot was able to maintain VFR flight and return to the departure airport as stated without any further assistance.
The NTSB determined the probable cause as the non-instrument-rated pilot’s encounter with instrument meteorological conditions and his decision to continue visual flight rules flight in instrument conditions, which resulted in a loss of control due to spatial disorientation.
NTSB Identification: ERA14FA292
This June 2014 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.
Well 15 NM is not all that long a distance so there must have been some indication of what the weather ahead would have been if an objective observation had been made. Still the Columbia LC-41 is an expensive and sophisticated aircraft so why was the pilot not instrumented rated to take advantage of all the capability? This does not really sound that much different then from the other days subject where the non-Instrument rated pilot owned a Mooney. You have to walk before you can run and the best approach is to learn in a simple aircraft prior to moving forward with an advanced aircraft. Maybe an IFR ticket was in the future but heading off into poor weather without the resolve to turn around before they got into trouble does not reflect on the judgement that would be applied there. Bottom line is it is just sad that the pilot did not exercise better judgement and live to fly another day regardless on how much they wanted to get to that other airport that day.
The pilot waited to long and then departed off into the wild blue. Like TomC stated, why not check the weather again before departure. Look for weather trends if you don’t know how to read the reports yourself. I use to fairy new equipment from ICT many without radios even. We only flew day time for insurance reasons. And we always checked the weather along the route ahead of us. Just land check in if you have to. Several time we ended in the dark but at least we had a good idea what was going on.
It is all too easy to say “Not my job”, but is it right? The pilot stated in his initial call that he needed assistance and ATC gave him none. Shameful. Of course the pilot was responsible for his predicament, but is that a reason to let him die?
Pilots are very reluctant to declare an emergency if there is any other way to resolve the problem. The pilot chose to attempt a return to his departure airport. Why? ‘Cause nobody wants to get caught up in the FAAs paperwork and punishment grist mill. If that could be put aside to where declaring an emergency was not a punishable event, pilots would be much more willing to declare an emergency and ask for priority handling. The pilot stated the problem. Another solution would be for ATC to declare this to be an emergency situation taking that decision making away from the pilot, and giving him priority handling into a landing. Instead of looking for a solution, we just say, “The pilot made the choice, so he chose to die.” As John says, ATC was no help at all. Been in a similar situation myself trapped VFR over the top with the clouds tops rising to where I could no longer stay above them. As usual, when I asked for assistance, ATC was of no help what-so-ever.
“ATC was of no assistance what-so-ever”. That leaves three possibilities 1) ATC did not care; 2) ATC was afraid of litigation if their advice went badly; 3) ATC did not feel competent to provide any input that could be of help. So regardless it was not the job of ATC to help, just keep everyone safely away from you and you never should have gotten yourself into that situation. Those are the hard facts, like it or not.
So Sarah A is a mind reader of ATC and knows exactly the three possibilities? Stuff happens Sarah and some day it may happen to you also, so don’t be so all knowing. There was a high hour pilot examiner killed within the past month at our local airport. How many hours do you have that makes you the all knowing expert? If I’m not mistaken ATC works for us, the taxpayers, and common sense should have told this ATC worker this pilot needed help, regardless of whether or not he declared an emergency. This is one of the great tragedies with our country today; no one taking any responsibility or using common sense.
Filling out paperwork beats dying. And they have made very clear that most often, when you declare there won’t even be any paperwork. If in doubt, declare and seek help! Don’t die because you’re afraid of the FAA.
What a sad story. ATC wasn’t any help.
I’m sure ATC would have been glad to help if the pilot had only asked. It’s not ATC’s job to take control of the situation.
Clearly the pilot lacked training. He requested current weather conditions 3-hours before his flight without requesting forecast or updating current weather before he launched.
The pilot said “I need your help sir”. The controller knew it was IMC conditions at his location. ATC don’t wait till someone declares an emergency, step up and provide help when a pilot says I need your help. Very disappointing outcome for all involved.