Collision on Final (Johnson Creek, Idaho, 2013)

[Garfly]

Another YouTube video of an accident where CTAF comms was a factor:

 

 

NTSB report:

 

https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20130628X45644&ntsbno=WPR13FA296A&akey=1

 

Pilots of America Forum:

 

 

Mid air Crash at Johnson Creek Video.

 

Excerpt:

 

"Silvaire said:

 

If I were to make a wild guess I'd say that the guy in the Arrow thought the first plane that did the fly-by was the Tri-Pacer.

 

Dav8or commented:

 

Looks that way to me too. It looks like everyone was setting up for low passes for the friends and the guy with the camera. I'm assuming there were radio calls and it's likely the Arrow looked out his window saw the red and white Pacer (?) and thought he was following that guy. Completely un aware that the guy making the calls and whom he thought he was following, was really much closer and lower.

 

A case of mistaken identity.

 

Whenever there is a crash, pilots like to work hard to lay blame on another pilot. That way they can pat themselves on the back and tell themselves that the crash pilot was sub standard and that the mistake made would never happen to them, therefore their version of GA flying is perfectly safe. It's just lying to yourself. This accident could have happened to any pilot reading this thread, myself included.

 

The take away here is a change in radio communications. (assuming there were any) We all need to adopt the EAA Airventure style of identifying airplanes in the pattern. Your tail number is worthless, the color of your plane can be very useful. So, something like- "Johnson Creek traffic, red and white Tri Pacer turning final, Johnson Creek."

 

I am completely one of the ones that needs to make this change. I was not taught this technique and I was trained in a class C airport under Bravo so ATC was a part of every flight. In addition, I flew IFR exclusively for many years. The habit of identifying yourself with the last three of the N number is natural and hard to break, but again, this information is worthless in the untowered traffic pattern. I really need to get used to the sound of myself saying, "Byron traffic, yellow and green Mooney..."

 

Dav8or, Aug 16, 2013"

 

 

[Kiwi]

Very sad outcome.

 

Kiwi

 

 

[Camel]

I can't believe he could not see the other aircraft, let alone radio broadcast ! This scares me from ever going flying again to think someone could not see the other aircraft on an approach like that ! Amazing and very sad ! Watched it many times and cant believe he could not see the other plane ahead !

 

 

[Garfly]

The ATSB published a comprehensive report on a similar accident at Latrobe Valley a decade or so back.

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2786333/ao2007065.pdf

 

 

 

[BirdDog]

WOW! That's hard to watch! And to think, simple radio calls may well of prevented that from happening. I have been wondering why the guys filming it were not on the radio telling of the situation. I was told to always have a hand held on your belt when walking around the airfield, as you can hear everything that's going on, and you may need it in an emergency.

 

Whenever I am at the field, prepping or washing the plane down etc, my radio is on and with me.

 

Very sad indeed. :(

 

 

[Garfly]

Yeah, there was discussion along those lines on the Pilots of America forum (#1 above) but I've often wondered what exactly one would/should/could say on a handheld radio faced with that situation.

 

Whatever comes to your mouth in the moment, it'd need to be super quick and super clear ... but how and what precisely?

 

Obviously, it's no good if you blurt out words based on what's clear from your own POV: " ... suggest higher aircraft goes around!"

 

But also, it's likely you wouldn't be able to identify the two aircraft clearly enough to make their relative positions understood by each of them based on your words alone. "Who does he mean? Me?"

 

I suppose, the best you could say would be "Safety alert! XXXX traffic. Two on short finals together!"

 

But even then, the danger is that you could end up precipitating the very thing you're trying to prevent.

 

Very tricky situation. Better hope it never happens.

 

P.S: For those of us with ballistic 'chutes installed, this excerpt from the ATSB Latrobe Valley accident report (above) might give pause:

 

"The instructor in UGO reported continuing the circuit and, while on the downwind leg, noting that there appeared to be two aircraft in close proximity on final approach to runway 09. Shortly after, EUI and the Avid collided on the final approach to runway 09. The Avid was reported to have spiralled to the ground almost vertically, while the pilot of EUI continued the approach and landed safely. Subsequent examination of the wreckage of the Avid revealed that it was equipped with a ballistic parachute recovery system; however, the system was not deployed and had not been armed prior to the flight."

 

 

[BirdDog]

Yeah - I was thinking the same thing.... What would I say. But similarly, like you, I would have probably announced calmly that there appears to be 2 aircraft on final, and hope that they react appropriately.

 

I don't think I would have said nothing though, and simply watch it unfold, and if you look and listed to that video, there was in fact a bit of time, as one of the guys comments that this could get ugly. :(

 

 

[Garfly]

Yes, in this case with about 6 seconds between "this could get ugly" and impact - given the usual "this can't be happening" cognitive delay (for both ground observers and then the listening pilots) - there might just have been time for a shouted "Two on finals! Two on finals! Two on finals!" (And a whispered 'Hail Mary' that the intervention will help not hinder.)

 

 

[kgwilson]

From the time the guys filming noticed that there looked to be a problem to the time of impact was only 9 seconds. Even if they did have a radio, putting down the camera and grabbing the radio would have taken all this time. If the person had the radio to hand while the friend was filming, there would have been only 5-6 seconds available to make the call after reaction time is taken in to account.

 

 

[M61A1]

I can't believe he could not see the other aircraft, let alone radio broadcast ! This scares me from ever going flying again to think someone could not see the other aircraft on an approach like that ! Amazing and very sad ! Watched it many times and cant believe he could not see the other plane ahead !

What's hard to believe? The lower aircraft would have been completely obscured by the nose of the one above and behind. It would have been impossible to see without x-ray vision. Good argument for a slipping turn approach though, it improves forward vision, but also then obscures traffic on the outside of the turn.

 

 

[Camel]

What's hard to believe? The lower aircraft would have been completely obscured by the nose of the one above and behind. It would have been impossible to see without x-ray vision. Good argument for a slipping turn approach though, it improves forward vision, but also then obscures traffic on the outside of the turn.

Watch carefully, he ran up its behind not on top ! I think his eyes were painted on !

 

 

[Thruster88]

If you read the accident report a third party radio call is a major factor, you can see the tripacer start to climb just before impact

 

 

[Garfly]

Thruster, are you referring to the NTSB/Johnson Creek report or the ATSB/Latrobe Valley one?

 

Anyway, there is that suggestion in the Australian one.

 

 

[Thruster88]

Thruster, are you referring to the NTSB/Johnson Creek report or the ATSB/Latrobe Valley one?Anyway, there is that suggestion in the Australian one.

The NTSB Johnson creek

 

 

[Garfly]

Ah, yes, I see the bit you mean:

 

"The pilot further stated that he turned final and announced his position on the CTAF, and that as he crossed the river north of the runway, he heard someone transmitting on the CTAF that "someone was too close" and began to abort the landing. Subsequently, the airplanes collided and impacted terrain."

 

 

[M61A1]

He was ab

 

Watch carefully, he ran up its behind not on top ! I think his eyes were painted on !

Yeah, I watched it several times. The only time the aircraft in front would have been visible is when it was too late. Pretty much descended right through him.

 

 

[boleropilot]

I've seen a case where a Cessna turning downwind had not sighted a Tecnam ahead of him on downwind - they were aware of each other and the Cessna pilot had called "traffic not sighted".

 

I was approaching to join downwind so I had a perfect view of both aircraft. For some reason the Cessna was not on his normal wide circuit so after he turned off crosswind he would not have been able to see the Teccy, he was slightly higher so his view was blocked by the instrument panel. I called "Cessna on downwind at Boonah, the Tecnam is at your 12 o'clock low". In hindsight (as noted above) that could have caused a problem with how both pilots reacted.

 

What happened was that the Cessna pilot turned left and the Tecnam pilot turned right - there was no discussion because at that point they were both very concerned. Problem is that they both could have turned left (or right).

 

I've added a landing light and a strobe to my Drifter in the hope that I can avoid exactly this kind of stuff.

 

BP