Accident Review Cirrus Metroliner Centennial Airport CO
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 вер 2024
- Accident Review: Cirrus-Metroliner Mid-Air Centennial Airpot, CO
VASAviation UA-cam:
/ victor981994
FlyWire Patreon
/ flywire
FlyWire is about exploring flight and the freedom this incredible experience brings us on a personal level. Flying has always captured the imagination and excitement of living life to its fullest. Hi, I'm Scott Perdue. In a former life I flew the F-4 and F-15E, more recently I retired from a major airline. I've written for several aviation magazines over the years, was a consultant for RAND, the USAF, Navy, NASA as well as few others, wrote a military thriller- 'Pale Moon Rising' (still on Kindle). But mostly I like flying, or teaching flying. Some of the most fun I had was with Tom Gresham on a TV show called 'Wings to Adventure". We flew lots of different airplanes all over the country. Now with FlyWire I want to showcase the fun in flying, share the joy and freedom of flight and explore the world with you. Make sure you subscribe if you want to go along for the ride!
#Pilot #Fly #Flying #Fly yourself #aviation #Flying Training #Learn to Fly #adventure
Memberships: / @flywirescottperdue
Website: www.flywire.on...
Merch Links: T-Shirts, My Novel: www.flywire.on...
Twitter: @FlyWireO / flywire.online
Facebook: / flywireonline
I fly the SR22T and I can tell you VERY BLUNTLY that at 160kts on base even Chuck Yeager wouldn't be able to turn final....100kts downwind, 90kts base, 80-85kts final....straight from the University of Cirrus.
Love the way you put it in the end...I taught my kids the same thing about driving..."assume that all of the other driver's are going to do the dumbest thing they can, because if you don't, they'll kill you when they do."
It’s the hard one to get through to people. It makes driving a lot less fun, but you have to be planning for the other person to make a mistake, and how to avoid. And yet I se envy day people pull out turning left , crossing traffic that is signaling a right turn. Never,ever, trust a damn signal.
I’m a retired multi million mile semi driver and that exact type of thinking saved my butt MANY times. Good advice…
I taught several different driving programs and I would always tell my kids “think like you are playing a game and people and others cars are everywhere trying to make you crash”. In still that thought process and you greatly increase safety awareness.
I used to drive motorcycle, that kind of thinking saved me lots of times!
Perfect recap. You and Juan seem to be the only ones out there are interested in the learning curve rather than the blame game. Thanks for the indepth explanation.
Agreed there is another guy on UA-cam who shall go nameless that has gone completely into the blame game and conspiracy theories.
@@nwrain21
Yes there is and I appreciate Scott and Juan for being the voices of reason.You gain no knowledge from criticism.
@@nwrain21 Ironically he lives in a glass house ;-)
@@nwrain21 oh dear. You’ll get over it 🤌
@@nwrain21 So you are like those snowflakes at NTSB that cannot fly at all and get overpaid evaluating crashes from airplanes they cannot fly. Are you another one of the Overpaid Incompetent in US gov.
Cessna 251 was on his first solo flight btw. You can find pics online of his solo shirt. N65251 is the full tail number. His instructor wrote "traffic to follow" with the Cirrus and his chute depicted. At least everyone walked away.
Simply more than amazing that the Metroliner held together…And, Your review is excellent and spot on. Thank you.
Scott while the Cirrus reported traffic in sight after the Metroliner callout and many of us assume it was supposed to be for the Metroliner, the tower controller never asked him to report the Metroliner in sight, the only traffic he asked to report was the Cessna. This is where non-standard phraseology bites hard.
FINALLY someone is talking about how crazy fast the sr22 was going. Great recap and excellent analysis. Thank you Scott!!
Great analysis, Scott. I think that the Cirius pilot was only acknowledging that he saw the Cessna. I don't even think the metroliner was in his mind even though ATC mentioned that plane. Those guys were definitely lucky that day.
That was my thought exactly. I don't think the Cirius pilot was ever actually aware of the Metroliner inbound to the parallel runway.
@@Stephen-Harding Well, he was told about the Metro too. But the clods (Including the CFI on board) were so behind the airplane and asleep at the wheel, or stick in this case. LOL..
By the time the Metroliner was mentioned on the frequency the Cirrus was using, I think the Cirrus was banked to where they just couldn't see it.
I did my flight training at Centennial and have flown all the patterns at KAPA many times. The Cirrus pilot was told to fly towards the west shore of the reservoir and then told to look for the metro and follow the Cessna. The Cirrus pilot did not fly all the way to the west shore, did not find the metro and was going way too fast. Everyday hundreds of planes land on those runways together and the controllers do an amazing job for such a small amount of room with so many takeoffs and landings.
We've all heard of the "Miracle on the Hudson." This should be the "Miracle at Centennial." Another great analysis, Scott.
Had a demo flight in an SR 22 Cirrus with a company pilot in the right seat. We overflew a busy GA airport, and the demo pilot was all about pointing out all the traffic displayed on the Cirrus' bright screens.
"Yeah," I told him. "I can see them out the window." He never looked outside.
Relying on the Cosmic View in IFR conditions is fine. Relying on it in VFR conditions, or when sharing airspace with VFR traffic, is not at all fine. I could go along with using the heading bug to reinforce proper lineup on final (just as I would dial up the approach, even in VFR conditions), but actually using the autopilot while in the pattern seems lazy and dumb. Add the Cirrus pilot choosing a ridiculous airspeed for the pattern and the only things preventing an accident were luck and a vigilant controller. Neither can be counted on, and neither was on hand that day.
Yup. I lived in Alameda CA and listened to the parallel approaches to SFO on many occasions. If I had a dollar for every time I heard "He's for the left, you're for the right. Maintain visual separation, 28 right, cleared to land." And if you don't get them in sight, you don't get to land.
Jeez, I don't know how I missed the fact that the two aircraft were being handled by separate towers on the previous coverage that I watched on this accident.
Same here.
@@EliColner Same. I heard the male and the female, but I didn't realize they were on different frequencies and that the involved pilots would only be hearing one controller or the other, and not hearing the other involved pilot.
Because the scanner recordings make it seem like one frequency.
When you get this analysis, with one frequency isolated, its a completely different picture being communicated to the pilots and towers vs the combined recording of both frequencies.
Metroliner still needs a Cirrus logo victory badge. Too bad it will not fly again.
Wasted.. As the Cirrus is too.
retired ATC here with 12 years in VFR towers ( and with parallel simular ops at FTW) and 16 years at ZFW... I'll say... this is the #1 concern with, and downfall of parallel VFR operations and split frequencies. I'll add inexperienced ATC or less than ideal. Thankfully everyone survived. BUT, big sky theory breakdown here and though it's all on the pilots ultimately, ie, the Cirrus, ATC put them in conflict. That there could/would be a conflict on final, especially with winds aloft, absolutely be anticipated and trained for. NEVER ever drive planes at one another without complete situational awareness for all concerned. .. and then.. verify compliance, with binocs preferred, but at a minimum with Dbrite. Cirris pilots, just like Bonanzas, Mooneys, Pilatus, Dukes.... they are 80% more likely to fly waaaay too fast and always deserve close observation. A overshoot on base was absolutely predictable here. Good review Scott.
Thanks Lloyd- excellent comments!
I dont know, my home port is a major cirrus sales and service center. We had a mid air ourselves in 2014. I see a lot of cirrus frames in maintenance bays for a whole lot of stupid. I dont know of its rookie pilots with too much money, overconfidence from glowing screens, or just what happens when people say computer take the stick. Mid airs may fortunately be rare, but four of every five light birds i see with some kind of rash incident is a cirrus. That cant be a coincidence.
This is a really interesting comment, firstly may I say thank you for sharing your knowledge and let me add something. Firstly, I need to say that I'm not a pilot or ATC although I have a deep interest in aviation and I was an engineer, so I try to apply that thinking or problem solving to things when I am thinking about these types of situations.
When I first saw the video on VAS, I wasn't aware that there were two towers. It's very helpful that Scott has made it clear in this video that this is the case. In response to this, my first thoughts are that surely given the lateral separation of the runways there has to be communication and co-operation between them both. Talking of separation, it seems odd to me that there isn't an SOP where approaching aircraft are separated longitudinally (obviously they could not be separated by height on glide slope in my understanding? Correct me if I'm wrong please).
Further to this, that aircraft joining the pattern are staggered so as to feed them in with separation. This would allow for different approach speeds, allowances for turbulence and would create safe space for aircraft overshooting joining the final leg or if they had to leave the approach due to an unstable approach etc.
This would also have the effect of streamlining the work of the controller allowing them to pay that little more attention to each aircraft, and also take some pressure of them. Valuable assets if there are less experienced pilots in the pattern.
Does any of this make sense? Or is this already the case, and things were just missed? Happy to learn more from those who know. Thanks again
@@restojon1 Good questions. ( long reply) It's not two towers, but split local controllers, the ones talking to airborne acft. Both ATCS would be in the same cab and able to coordinate with one another directly. Your idea on altitudes on final to preclude something like this are not off, per se, but ideally, that's up to the pilots involved, ie, if advised there is a acft turning base for the parallel and is not guaranteed to not cross in front of you, the Metroliner might have slowed or added altitude or descended if ATC issued altitude of the base leg acft. The metroliner was in the best position to adjust since the Cirrus had the tailwind and speed on base, if only he'd known of the Cirrus by ATC callout or if he had a TCAS to alert him.
The number one thing is complacency or routine by ATC and pilots, plus a lot of pilots kinda get used to ATC at any tower seeing or anticipating everything. So separation in VMC , airborne in the pattern is still ultimately the pilots' responsibility. No doubt it likely didn't occur to either controller they were risking a midair. Running a split operation precluded both aircraft from active listening so neither pilot was independently aware of one another like usual operations. Good pilots listen to everything and try to ensure they know where other acft are, especially in situations like this; converging traffic to parallel runways. Mid airs like this are incredibly rare, ie, the big sky theory, and had the tower not been using two freqs, the pilots involved, much less a single controller working both, would have precluded this . It isn't even clear to me listening to the tape that the Cirrus pilot actually affirmed the Metroliner traffic call and not repeated the following the Cessna call. It's easy to 2nd guess, and there was likely a lot going on in the towercab we will never know about; ie, workload, distractions at the wrong moment, etc, .. this was just a very unfortunate accident with the best outcome possible for the two acft involved.
As to your speeds and staggering, etc, there are many techniques available for controllers to have acft with performance disparities follow one another, and also pilot disparities fly acft in ways you don't expect. Controllers at these type airports learn very quickly to adjust.. and really, you never know until you observe how a pilot is flying or how their talking. Not all Cirrus's fly the same, just like all Honda Civics drive the same. Hope that answers your questions and not too long winded.
One controller was far better than the other
Scott, your analysis is dead on and very well expressed. Your experience and professional opinions are why I'm a Patron. Excellence every time.
The survivors are more than lucky. Am delighted with the non-earthquake (fault) perspective. Learning from one’s mistakes in a professional and non-judgmental environment is essential.
Really nice analysis. I've watched several other videos about this incident (including VAS) and you tied-together everything with a lot more root cause understanding.
Looking at this accident it would make good sense, and I would think should have been a standard procedure, to have the SR 22 extend his down wind leg so as to make his turn to base behind the metro liner. With the runways that close it is very easy to overshoot the turn to final.
Outstanding video, Scott. As a pilot with a similar career as you, the comment about thinking that "everyone in the air and sometimes on the ground" is trying to kill me is very appropriate. Like riding my motorcycle, I believe that "I am invisible and no one can see me" has saved me in the air and on the ground many times. Pretty much all check lists and SOP's are written in blood because someone was injured or killed, therefore we attempt to avoid another one by making it a part of the checklist or SOP. Pattern speeds, altitudes and voice reports are there for that reason. In this accident there are many data points of not following procedures. Three pilots were very lucky, as well as ground personnel not being injured or worse. This is an outstanding teaching moment for all hands. Thanks again, Scott.
Thanks Skip!
I love your channel Scott. Ignore the Cyrillic- this happened at, while not my home airport, immediately next door (I fly out of KBJC- rocky mountain metro). Amazing to see this video so soon.
Excellent analysis Scott. I totally agree with your comments. Keep up the great work, the aviation community needs level headed, logical analysis of accidents in order to learn how not to repeat them. Thanks again.
A couple of points
1) Kudos to the pilot that reported the absolute midair, and reported the location of the downed plane - it was his first solo!
2) I heard the Cirrus pilot was in a checkout ride with an instructor onboard - why didn’t the instructor scold him for “you are about to overshoot 17R - DONT”
3) given the layout of the parallel runways (being under all sorts of minimums) there should not be simultaneous ATCs - in my opinion
I am a Cirrus pilot and former owner. I never used the autopilot in the pattern, it sounds ridiculous.
It is
It is so hard to describe how fortunate these participants were. Just wasn’t their day to depart.
Wasn't their day to arrive either...
I wouldn’t cheapen the metro jockies handling of his own situation. My instructor once told me, never stop flying till you dead or the damn thing stops moving!
@@mikewaterfield3599 I don't take it as cheapening, the metro pilot was cool as could be and lucky as can be at the same time.
@@HairHelmet no question, closest i ever got to an emergency was losing an alternator, and that got my nerves up a little. I worked on an excel last summer that took a buzzard to the left wing bad enough to puncture the fuel tank. Point is im always impressed how calm the pros stay in situations like that.
@@HairHelmet Lol. You beat me to it.
One fun thing of interest is that the 172 in the pattern which was relaying position reports on the Cirrus post-accident was on his first solo flight.
Yeah, that kid did a great job!
Good analysis, Gunny. I think the Cirrus pilot stopped turning the airplane to final, perhaps in a final attempt to locate the Metroliner that he knows is under his belly, somewhere. You've seen enough turn circles to know that is not just excessive airspeed opening up his turn radius. I think his SA is in the toilet at that point. Would have also helped if he had called out "metroliner in sight," and not just "traffic in sight." Frankly, I have doubts he ever got tally on the Metro.
Prior to the final report that SR22 messed up, he massively overshot the final at high speed. Was he watching his TCAS, probably not.
I understand that the Cessna 251 pilot was flying his first solo flight! What a thing to witness!!!
Love to have heard the MetroLiner pilot’s reaction once he got out of the plane.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Cirrus pilot was so task saturated that he never hear West ATC mention the Metroliner and he was only focused on the Cessna ahead of him. I wouldn't be surprised if he was a low time Cirrus pilot and the plane got way ahead of him, without him recognizing it. As for the towers, I think complacency (the trap people fall into when things go too right for too long) got the better of them. Nicely done, Scott. Thanks.
I agree the Cirrus pilot was probably task saturated and had pretty much lost SA. In the USAF we’d say he had his head up and locked.
This may be the best breakdown and explanation of this incident I've heard yet. I really appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge and thoughts with us. I'm really looking forward to meeting you Scott.
Thanks Kevin, I appreciate that!
Hi Scott, this bring back memories. KAPA was my "home airport" when I still lived in the US. I learned to fly there. This is 20 years ago so I wouldn't know what, if anything, changed, but awareness of overshooting was something controllers always pointed out *and* CFIs drilled into you. In fact, I remember my instructor teaching me that at Centennial you *undershoot* the turn and then slip to align. Precisely because of the proximity of the runways. It is/was a fantastic airport to learn, though with a steep learning curve. Second busiest GA in the USA, stacked under KDEN class B and Springs class C just a stone-throw to the south. You learned situational awareness and pattern discipline the hardcore way!
Cessna 251 is a student pilot doing his first solo by the way. He did a good job also.
Excellent analysis as usual, Scott!
I initially thought majority of blame is on ATC, for not forcing separation of the aircraft on final for the parallel runways. But now I see the really dumb speeds the Cirrus was doing on downwind and base - and the extreme overshoot that would have occurred if not for the collision - so substantial blame should be placed on the Cirrus pilot as well as ATC.
However, it is unacceptable in my view to have this kind of dual controller situation, not forcing spacing on parallel runway approaches - with only 700 feet between them! As you point out this is not SOP for airliners.... all the west controller needed to do was tell the Cirrus to extend his downwind for a short time to ensure his base turn was behind the Metroliner.... (ATC does have radar - don't they?)
Good lesson Scott. Extremely happy that there was no fatalities in this crash! The metro liner did an outstanding job getting that plane down on the ground with such amount of damage.
What disturbed me most about this accident, regardless of what each pilot should have seen or done, is that neither pilot ever saw the other, as evidenced by the fact that neither pilot took evasive action. The Metroliner pilot did not even realize a midair had occurred. The Cirius pilot explicitly acknowledges the Cessna, but not the inbound Metroliner, although ATC thinks or assumes he has. And the Metroliner only says he's "looking". ATC seemed to be satisfied that all was under control because he/she had issued a notice, and received a response, but a response of "I'm looking" is not an affirmation of "I see" the traffic.
Apologies, at aprox. 3:21 the Cirius pilot does give an acknowledgement of "traffic in sight" in response to the ATC mention of the Metroliner.
It's a shame the controller didn't just have the Cirrus extend its downwind leg until the Metroliner was abeam the Cirrus, and then clear the Cirrus to land. By that time, the Cessna would probably already be on the ground and the Metroliner would have been well ahead of the Cirrus as it rolled out on final. (Having said that, the Cirrus should never have ended up left of the runway centerline like that, regardless of where the other traffic was.)
There are several factors surrounding this accident. Several contributed, but really only one caused it.
A) Two tower controllers on different frequencies for each runway even though they are only separated by 700 feet. (That may not be a good idea, but it didn't cause it.)
B) An acknowledgement by the Cirrus pilot that he had the Metroliner in sight even though that's doubtful. (Perhaps if he had, it would make a difference, but it's still not the cause.)
C) Excess speed on downwind (and base) by the Cirrus pilot. (A contributing factor, but not the cause.)
D) Poor separation/staggering of traffic by the west side controller who could have extended the Cirrus on downwind until the Metroliner was no factor. (Poor sequencing, but not a cause.)
E) The Cirrus pilot allowing his plane to not only overshoot the centerline of 17R, but also the centerline of 17L, and where it flew into the path of the Metroliner (which was where it was supposed to be at the time). (This is the one true cause.)
While I do think the controller made some errors in decision making and judgement by clearing the Cirrus so soon when there was potentially conflicting traffic on final for the parallel, it was solely the decision of the Cirrus pilot to operate the Cirrus in the pattern at speeds making it difficult to stay on his side of the airport if turning base and final, AND his decision to initiate that right hand turn at such high speeds anyway. Even if all things remained the same prior to the turn onto base, the Cirrus pilot had to have known he was fast when he was given his clearance to land and should have continued his downwind leg and bled off sufficient speed prior to beginning the turn to base. This would have accomplished two things that would make this midair collision not happen: (1) it would allow the Metroliner to pass abeam prior to the Cirrus turning - causing it to not be a factor, and (2) it would have allowed a much tighter radius turn that would more easily keep the Cirrus right of the centerlines to 17L and 17R prior to rolling out on final.)
Excellent analysis. Autopilot in the VFR pattern is beyond my comprehension. Personally I never turn downwind to base until I am sure I will rollout behind parallel traffic.
Your last thought shared , kept me alive while riding motorcycles on the street
I used to say that riding a motorcycle cycle was good training for a new fighter pilot.
I was thinking exactly the same too
Ha,ha the essence of defensive driving.
@@FlyWirescottperdue I have a Honda Shadow and a K Ninja. I love to practice the 3 C's that help been a good pilot. Care, Coordination and Cajuns. Well, airplanes get another C... For CASH.. Plenty of cash for them..
A couple thoughts. Anytime you’ve got runways that close together traffic should be staggered. I also noticed on the airport diagram that 17L and R thresholds are not aligned (17R landing zone is further downfield). If both airplanes are on a 3 degree glide slope the Cirrus should have been higher than the Metro.
I’m pretty curious is separation would have been maintained better had the cirrus not been going twice the speed it should have
He was told to follow traffic in, he saw that traffic, he did not seem to be closing on that traffic, and the turn was not as sharp which might have given him more time to accelerate if the wind was pushing. I think the guy focused on following the guy and lost track of a lot of other things as long as he didn't start to close on the guy he was following. This landing side by side where you can wave at the other plane while you land seems close to an air show maneuver, they don't know if the small plane pilot has done such a landing and has thousands, hundreds, or tens of hours as a pilot.
Very well said sir. I have not followed this too much because of a local incident that hits a lot closer to home. I have been obsessively searching and waiting for a preliminary report on that one. Phenomenal video, thank you
Good afternoon from SE Louisiana 12 Jun 21.
I like you. Easy to watch and relaxing. Thanks
Thanks for watching!
Incisive review, Scott.
The holes in the Swiss Cheese all lined up on that day!
Errors in piloting and controlling should hopefully result in lessons learned for all concerned.
But just what was that Cirrus pilot thinking with such a high circuit speed?
Best wishes from the UK.
The best analysis I have heard so far on this incident.
DJ in the U.K.
Interesting and instructive, like all your videos. Thank you.
Great initial analysis; to the point and without the additional drama one of the other accident channels uses in an attempt to “be popular”.
Keep it up.
I’m still putting 25% on the west controller and 75% on the Cirrus pilot. I’ve said from the beginning that the Cirrus was way too fast on downwind..
The controller's 25% was a gift from the incompetent pilot.
Great breakdown. This is the 3rd video I’ve seen about this mishap. You definitely give an outstanding, direct and uncompromising opinion. I like the “trying to kill you” mantra. I’ve taught it many times as a emergency vehicle operations instructor and police field training officer. That mantra is vital in the air as much as on a freeway.
It's what's kept me alive as a motorcyclist of nearly 30 years road riding on UK roads, and damn there's a lot of murderers out here... they don't know they are murderers, but still...
Thank you for your service my friend
Good job Scott, I just realized I live just down the road from you at Granbury.
We go there all the time!
Concise and clear analysis Scott. Thanks. Lessons for all concerned.
TPA for a Cirrus is 6800’ at KAPA. The Cirrus was 500’ above TPA on downwind and descended during the base turn, picking up speed. Autopilot in the pattern seems unlikely to me. I don’t know what happened on this day but on most days the west controllers are vigilant to overshoots and the east controllers are good about advising of traffic for the parallel.
Well presented, thank you
I recently completed my PPL training at an airport with parallel runways and I don't recall any discussions about procedures. There are times we are going head to head on base legs and turning to final at the same time; not my idea of fun. Big difference though, one controller manages both runways, so there is a lot more cross communication and situational awareness.
Locally when we use the parallels there taking the long left direct and the short right on right hand traffic. Its not perfect but it seems to work. It also helps that were separated enough to be more like conjoined airports than conventional parallels.
I got my Private at a Naval Air Station with parallel runways. While we were far apart we were always warned about too wide turns to final and crossing the centerline. It helped when working on my Commercial & Instrument at WFAT.
One tower operation. TCAS on metroliner, Traffic advisory on Cirrus. Heavy. KDEN- MULTIPLE TOWER FREQUENCIES IN USE. Maybe one controller should control 2 runways. However tricky and dynamic at KDEN
TCAS doesn't work this low to the ground. Not sure what altitude it turns off but it has to before the plane gets too low or it would be overwhelmed with aircraft on the ground.
And Wichita emotionally wrecks me when I'm 1 dot off on a practice ILS with parallel runways. I do appreciate it though as I cry in the corner.
Great recap, glad everyone survived
The die was cast when Cirrus picked up the 20 knots from his already ridiculous pattern speed. No way to make the turn to centerline from his downwind track at that speed. It was like he was deliberately speeding up to hit the Metroliner. Clearly no one in the Cirrus was paying attention to speeds, traffic or the location of the centerline. No attempt to avoid. Like he was sending a text message or something. Unreal, but this stuff happens all the time.
Metroliner is a strong product
I think this was a spot on review of what happened and why. Clearly the Cirrus pilot was in the wrong first with flying way to fast, overshooting his runway, and not flying the plane depending maybe on auto pilot instead of looking at where he was flying too and observing other reported aircraft in the vicinity and verifying same. Pilot error. ATC could have done their job better making sure everybody was on the same page. Luckily post collision everything turned out well, just a miracle everybody survived.
It may seem easy to blame the Cirrus pilot, but listening to the ATC audio with the other tower muted really emphasizes both the ambiguity and complexity of the situation here.
A good point, Scott regarding the failure to emphasize the importance of not overshooting final. Many years ago I went for a refresher/training flight after a long flying layoff. I was clear to a final on the left of a pair of very similar runways to those at KAPA. There was a strong crosswind which I failed to correct enough for and I found myself way too far over toward the right runway ... the tower controller warned me about this ... which of course was embarrassing but well justified. Later I queried my CFI what the tolerances were and I was surprised to learn that there really were no specific limits since close the runways were together (about 300 feet horizontal separation) it was strictly up to the tower controller and good pilot sense. Two different controllers aiming aircraft at each other at the same altitude, and then leaving them on their own to fend for themselves does not seem like good controller work to me.
look up No Transgression Zone in the AIM
@@calden137 I did, thanks. Did YOU read it? This has nothing to do with VFR approaches to runways only 300 feet apart. And the AIM procedures always require radar and tower controller supervision. This has nothing to do with the "catch as can can/see and be seen" VFR procedures in use at so many VFR towered airports like KAPA. KPUB is another good example where simultaneous VFR operations are carried out in a rather"willy-nilly" manner. "Ya'll be careful out there and don't hit nobody,ya hear"?
@@davestarr7112 yeah, that is one application. Look at ch.4 section 3, that concerns a vfr pattern. Simple depiction of the areas and legs of the pattern (Fig 4-3-3).
The first thing that came to my mind when I first learned about this accident is why wouldn't the controllers have the cirrus fly an extended downwind for just a mile or so before turning base? I can understand minimum sep at O Hare with commercials but why have them so close at an airport like this? Clearly there was more to this but just one thought.
Agreed. It is easy to count on the system and blame the poor Cirrus pilot
@@tyronevanwyk3652 I was that poor Cirrus Pilot. You could see my mansion at the 11 o clock position and my huge yacht at the south shore of that lake . Poor me, poor me..
Scott thank you for the most important part of your review. The last part---you are responsible for your own safety when flying VFR. Too many like the " I have the right of way" attitude that just leads to a dangerous situation. The ATIS will have the information about simultaneous operations in progress on parallels. The reason I believe the east controller did not tell the metroliner as precipitated by the cirrus being issued traffic, " then reporting that traffic in sight". The west controller would have told the East Controller " my traffic has your traffic" or something like that. Yes she should have issued the traffic. The controller did not issue number 2 for the runway, as follow is appropriate via the 7110.65. The west controller at that distance may not be able to ascertain if the cirrus is wide on base or not. Things that a controller should not have to say to a pilot... When that pilot has been told about other airplanes on the parallel. 1) do not hit the guy you said you had in sight 2) do not fly through the final of the parallel runway... because of the guy you said you had in sight landing on that runway.... I have more than 30 years as a pilot,, and 32 years as an air traffic controller in several busy VFR tower, and Class B airports...
I agree the attitude of "I have the right of way" causes lots of otherwise avoidable accidents. It's like a pedestrian automatically stepping into a crosswalk without knowing if the approaching driver has seen them just because they have the right of way. As a cop, I'm often told this by pedestrians on near-misses at intersections. I always say, "Yes, you had the right of way. If the driver hit you he'd be at fault. But I don't think that would be of much comfort to you when you're lying in a bed in the trauma center or worse."
And the epitaph on the tombstone read: "I had the right of way."
Excellent analysis. I really enjoyed this video, it helps us learn from this accident so we can be safer.
With an unexpected tailwind on base and a fear of the dreaded overbank caused spin on the base to final turn this scenario seems inevitable.
Setting up two airplanes side by side that close is an accident waiting to happen.controllers should make sure aircraft on final are staggered.
Difficult but necessary. If the controller would’ve said Cessna extend downwind or “ I’ll call your base” this accident would’ve been avoided.
Looks like a case of right hand not knowing what the left is doing.
An EXCELLENT REVIEW...5 star !
Bullet dodged only because of the chute. Like to see a summary on all the Cirrus chute deployments related to if there was a place to land. Obviously this case the plane was not flyable after impact.
VAS Aviation is an excellent resource. The UA-cam aviation analyst community should be paying him when using his work. I hope he is looking into this.
Great video Scott! I just can't believe how lucky these pilots got. This could have been so much worse.
Well done, Scott! Thank you.
Great recap!!
Can’t imagine what went through the metro-line pilots mind at first glance of what used to be an airplane 😱
I’d bet the first thing he did after seeing his damaged plane was kiss the ground!
One of the gaps in my primary training was a clear understanding that when I tell the controller I have the “traffic in sight”, I’m now full responsible for visual separation with the other aircraft. Early on, I was much too casual in reporting “traffic in sight” and advising ATC when I “lost visual”. I assume my primary training was typical and most new pilots don’t grasp the magnitude of their responsibility for maintain visual separation when they call, “traffic in sight”.
I share your concerns about the west controller’s non-standard phraseology. But, when the west controller heard “traffic in sight” twice from the Cirrus pilot, he mentally handed off separation to the Cirrus pilot and moved on to other tasks. I also suspect, from the speed issues and tone of his voice, the Cirrus pilot was behind the airplane and didn’t mentally understand the additional traffic point out. It seems like some procedure changes that interleave parallel traffic in busy class D airspace might have be worth considering.
Thanks for excellent analysis.
Thank Scott great report!
Why would the controller allow the Cirrus to turn in front the Metroliner which was on a stabilized final approach to its own runway? The safest thing to do was to extend the down wind leg of the Cirrus until both aircraft pass each other and then direct the Cirrus to turn right to base leg.
Great analysis Gunny - Several things stick out to me watching the events unfold. I wouldn't have trusted the Cirrus pilot to see and avoid while wing up turning to final on a collision course with close parallel traffic (I know - hindsight 20/20). Reminds me of rejoins to "close" from rear cockpit in a former life and losing lead due to wing-up intake obscuration. Seems the right thing for controller would have been to direct Cirrus to extend downwind a bit then turn to base (in sight of opposing traffic nor not). The damage to the 17L aircraft - had to be a shocking post flight walk-around,
No kidding!
Amazing insult and recovery of both aircraft. A fraction of a second either way would’ve doomed the Metroliner for sure, possibly the Cessna. Thankful both pilots survived this.
Scott, your description of airmen operating under the assumption is exactly how my dad, not an airman but a gruff old “dogface” veteran (and I say that with love and admiration) taught us kids how to drive. “Assume everyone else is driving drunk. It’s up to you to get home safely!”
Had the Cirrus been about 3 feet lower in altitude (or the Metroliner been 3 feet higher), I think this would have definitely been fatal for all aboard both airplanes. It's miraculous it turned out the way it did and both pilots (and passenger(s) in the Cirrus) could walk away afterwards.
Excellent analysis and teaching moment.
While it's true that ATC could have done more, the Key Lime flight on final for the parallel was called out to the Cirrus so he should have been aware that, even more than usual, he needed to not overshoot. A video on another not to be named channel implied that the Cirrus pilot could be excused for the overshoot because of a strong west crosswind. I found that to be ridiculous. That's exactly why we practice S turns across a road and turns around a point in primary training. There's simply no excuse for any of the airmanship of the Cirrus pilot and I absolutely fault him for the accident. No one is perfect and I have made mistakes in my flying and there, but for the grace of God.... Still, the accident is on him. Edited to addM all that said, I’m very glad the both those in the Cirrus and they Key Lime pilot survived.
He needed to make visual contact and maintain seperation. That was a huge mistake.
The Cirrus pilot knows GRM as much as i know 10 speed transmissions.
It's always a nice feeling to roll out on final perfectly on centerline. But it's always better to undershoot final than to overshoot final. This is absolutely crucial when parallel runways are involved. If in doubt, go with the undershoot every time. There will be no conflict with traffic and it's perfectly safe and easy to fly final on a slightly off-set track down to the runway on the side that's farthest from the parallel runway.
Well said as always. Thank you sir
Thanks Scott. 🇦🇺👍
Great job, Scott.
"there was like a thud at the back"
I also can't see fault in the Metroliner.
Two tower system with different frequencies, I think contributed.
Pilots not hearing what is going on with aircraft in close proximity, because they are not on the same frequency.
Last comment about everyone is trying to kill you is how you have to drive as a motorcycle rider as well.
The Cirrus said traffic in sight but overflew his pattern into the Metroliner. I’ve landed at PBI and was never on the centerline of the right GA runway till touchdown being aware of the consequences
Do you not think it's likely the cirrus pilot second "traffic in sight" was referencing the Cessna, in his loss of SA it seems possible he didn't understand what he was supposed to see.
Could be, but the radio call was ‘additional traffic...’
Excelent analysis Scott.
Good analysis. Thanks.
Two controllers sharing parallel runways, bad idea! If both pilots heard transmissions to both aircraft this would have helped. But basically the controller failed to “ensure separation”, the PRIMARY duty of ATC! And yes, I have worked this situation, actually at triple parallel runways at DEN Stapleton Airport. The controller failed, that simple.
Great job Scott
Thanks again - great video
SR 22 is the new V tail
With the a bonus parachute for another layer of false sense of security!
Exactly!
@@scottp.5161 Just make an aircraft out of nothing but parachutes & sell them to Drs and lawyers.
Thank you very informative
As far as I know, we haven’t heard from the Cirrus pilot publicly, but I just wonder if when he acknowledged the traffic a second time if he was actually acknowledging the Cessna traffic twice and not the metro liner as tower announced. Secondly, i wonder if the color of the metro liner blended in too much with the ground cover below and the Cirrus pilot simply couldn’t see the metro liner? ( I’m not excusing the mishandling of his flight path). After all, the military uses camouflage for a reason and key lime green accidentally may have had the same effect against a the bright green golf course grass below.
As to your first point, I think the answer is yes that he was referring to the Cessna on the second acknowledgement of seeing the traffic. As for the color of the Metroliner, I don't think that was a factor. It's a fairly solid green (as opposed to the brownish terrain), had white wings and was shiny. It's really the relative movement of something moving over thr ground that catches the eye. In this case, the Cirrus was in a right hand turn while the Metroliner was off it's left wing. The Cirrus's raised left wing would have likely blocked the Metroliner from view by that point. I don't think he ever saw it or realized it was there until the impact.
I could be wrong (I am just a private SEL pilot), but one factor is that the Cirrus, being a low wing A/C, and in a bank could not see the other aircraft. FWIW
True, Kent and I believe I said that in the video.
@@FlyWirescottperdue Oh, OK. Guess I missed it.
I think there should be only one Tower control for both runways. Period!