CAP Find New Mexico, PA-28

Started by bflynn, January 09, 2015, 01:27:07 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

bflynn

Unfortunately, aircraft found, both occupants had died.  God bless them and those who found them.

Does anyone know more?  I read the briefest of articles, which said that the 2 man CAP crew "flew in winter storm conditions" to locate the crew.  Since I'm pretty sure the ORM risk matrix would have nixed a flight into icing AND I know of no CAP airplanes certificated for flight into known icing except maybe in Alaska, what were the actual conditions?  Anyone know?

lordmonar

Quote from: bflynn on January 09, 2015, 01:27:07 AM
Unfortunately, aircraft found, both occupants had died.  God bless them and those who found them.

Does anyone know more?  I read the briefest of articles, which said that the 2 man CAP crew "flew in winter storm conditions" to locate the crew.  Since I'm pretty sure the ORM risk matrix would have nixed a flight into icing AND I know of no CAP airplanes certificated for flight into known icing except maybe in Alaska, what were the actual conditions?  Anyone know?
And that's the problem with CAP safety.   The ORM matrix does not nix anything.....a leader makes a judgement call based on all the factors.   ORM is a tool to help make that call....but it should not be making the call.

Sorry for the rant.

BZ NMWG.....condolences to the family of the crash victims.
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

The Infamous Meerkat

THANK YOU!!!

I can't count the times I've heard this fallacy of the ORM matrix... that it can kill any possibility of you doing your job in a moment is a ludicrous concept. You create controls to mitigate or 'manage' the risks associated with the task.The ORM cannot be too high, your ability to mitigate the risk within reason may just be too low.

Good work NMWG, glad you were able to find them. Unfortunately, you can't save them all.
Captain Kevin Brizzi, CAP
SGT, USMC
Former C/TSgt, CAP
Former C/MAJ, Army JROTC

JeffDG

Quote from: lordmonar on January 09, 2015, 04:27:26 AM
Quote from: bflynn on January 09, 2015, 01:27:07 AM
Unfortunately, aircraft found, both occupants had died.  God bless them and those who found them.

Does anyone know more?  I read the briefest of articles, which said that the 2 man CAP crew "flew in winter storm conditions" to locate the crew.  Since I'm pretty sure the ORM risk matrix would have nixed a flight into icing AND I know of no CAP airplanes certificated for flight into known icing except maybe in Alaska, what were the actual conditions?  Anyone know?
And that's the problem with CAP safety.   The ORM matrix does not nix anything.....a leader makes a judgement call based on all the factors.   ORM is a tool to help make that call....but it should not be making the call.

Sorry for the rant.

BZ NMWG.....condolences to the family of the crash victims.

Concur.  The ORM matrix is an input to a command decision by the Incident Commander in such a situation.

bflynn

Ok, so please correct my inexact wording to read "the ORM matrix should remind a prudent pilot  that flying into winter storm conditions is really stupid".

And note that apparently nobody knows what happened in New Mexico.

JeffDG

Quote from: bflynn on January 09, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Ok, so please correct my inexact wording to read "the ORM matrix should remind a prudent pilot  that flying into winter storm conditions is really stupid".

And note that apparently nobody knows what happened in New Mexico.

Yeah, what the press reports as a "winter storm" may cover a wide swath of conditions.

Flying in "snow" is not "icing conditions" for example.  Light snow with good visibility and high ceilings is VFR and completely acceptable.  High winds are also not necessarily a dangerous situation depending on terrain and altitude flown at.

I had the ORM matrix flag as "no-go" once when we were launching a plane on an electronic (ie. non-visual) search in IMC because the ceilings were below 1,000' (900').  Pilot had over a thousand hours experience in IMC, observer was likewise IR qualified and current.  Freezing level was close to 10k'.  No convective activity.  Regulations require ceilings to be above the level of an available instrument approach (in this case 200' with an ILS).  It was a completely safe operation.   Then the new ATIS came out with 1,100' ceilings and it went from "No-Go" to "Low" risk instantly.

PHall

Quote from: JeffDG on January 09, 2015, 02:24:32 PM
Quote from: bflynn on January 09, 2015, 02:14:59 PM
Ok, so please correct my inexact wording to read "the ORM matrix should remind a prudent pilot  that flying into winter storm conditions is really stupid".

And note that apparently nobody knows what happened in New Mexico.

Yeah, what the press reports as a "winter storm" may cover a wide swath of conditions.

Flying in "snow" is not "icing conditions" for example.  Light snow with good visibility and high ceilings is VFR and completely acceptable.  High winds are also not necessarily a dangerous situation depending on terrain and altitude flown at.

I had the ORM matrix flag as "no-go" once when we were launching a plane on an electronic (ie. non-visual) search in IMC because the ceilings were below 1,000' (900').  Pilot had over a thousand hours experience in IMC, observer was likewise IR qualified and current.  Freezing level was close to 10k'.  No convective activity.  Regulations require ceilings to be above the level of an available instrument approach (in this case 200' with an ILS).  It was a completely safe operation.   Then the new ATIS came out with 1,100' ceilings and it went from "No-Go" to "Low" risk instantly.

Happens that way in the "real" Air Force too. It's an ORM thing...

bflynn

Quote from: JeffDG on January 09, 2015, 02:24:32 PM
Flying in "snow" is not "icing conditions" for example. 

I'm going to focus on this because I think you might be giving the wrong impression to the uninformed. It's more correct to say that flying in snow might not be icing conditions. But it might be too.  I think it's worth considering what will they say afterwards...if you have an accident, aren't they going to say "What was he thinking, he brought it on himself"? 

I've been told commercial airlines deem it to be icing conditions when the temperature is 5C or less with any visible precipitation The reason is that if you reach 0C with visible precip, it IS icing conditions.  They do more extreme flying than we do and they're equipped for it.  Also, the temperature might be wrong, it's not exact.  There is some aerodynamic cooling in the low pressure zone behind the wings, the air will be a little cooler.  Their safety record is a lot better than ours, we could take a few hints from them.

Please, nobody say "oh, it's just snow, that's not icing conditions". How do you think the Warrior probably crashed in the first place? 

IMHO, if there is a reported icing level below 10,000 and there's snow, you're asking for trouble flying in it.  It is a higher risk activity, which the ORM matrix should highlight.

SarDragon

The OP quotes an article as saying "flew in winter storm conditions". Articles are often too general and inaccurate. Making assumptions about a five word quote from an unknown source seems to be a little unfair.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

JC004

Quote from: SarDragon on January 10, 2015, 06:45:57 AM
The OP quotes an article as saying "flew in winter storm conditions". Articles are often too general and inaccurate. Making assumptions about a five word quote from an unknown source seems to be a little unfair.

Precisely. 

bflynn

Quote from: JC004 on January 10, 2015, 10:03:58 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on January 10, 2015, 06:45:57 AM
The OP quotes an article as saying "flew in winter storm conditions". Articles are often too general and inaccurate. Making assumptions about a five word quote from an unknown source seems to be a little unfair.

Precisely.

Yup, that's the outstanding question still.

There's been a side discussion about flying in snow vs icing, both of which are related to but do not fully cover "winter storm conditions".

PHall

Quote from: bflynn on January 11, 2015, 01:45:46 PM
Quote from: JC004 on January 10, 2015, 10:03:58 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on January 10, 2015, 06:45:57 AM
The OP quotes an article as saying "flew in winter storm conditions". Articles are often too general and inaccurate. Making assumptions about a five word quote from an unknown source seems to be a little unfair.

Precisely.

Yup, that's the outstanding question still.

There's been a side discussion about flying in snow vs icing, both of which are related to but do not fully cover "winter storm conditions".

Well, usually with "Winter Storm Conditions" you usually have wind too. Which means blowing snow and visibility reduction.
The big question being how bad were the conditions?

Eclipse

#12
http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20150101X13628

The NTSB report says the plane was found at 0200 on 1 Jan 2015.

There was no precipitation on the 31st, and things were fairly calm in the evening, but picked up a little in the early AM,
though with winds still under 10Mph and "over cast".

However it was really cold and the dewpoint and humidity looks to be an icing issue, or would at least raise the numbers:

http://www.wunderground.com/history/airport/K0E0/2015/1/1/DailyHistory.html?req_city=Moriarty&req_state=NM&req_statename=New+Mexico


"That Others May Zoom"