Plane crash has occurred in Philidelphia; Jan 2025

[Astro14]

So, both crew members on that Viking knew the plane had a history of a warning light going off triggered by the catapult launch because it had happened several times before.

Distractions are a huge threat.

I fly ( not as much anymore ) with former CF18 pilots , they have talked about the numerous, detailed memory items that they have to know. Yep, they also talk about having to write them down , exactly the way it’s supposed to be worded.

I review a few time critical emergencies in my car before I park for work.

I will suggest that you operate at a level of professionalism that is rare in the industry.

Many pilots don’t review procedures, memory items or limitations, until they’re coming up for their annual check.

Few pilots are as prepared as you are.

Further, many pilots have thousands of hours but have learned little, because it is from reflection and analysis of the experience that learning happens, not from the experience itself.

So, it is entirely possible that this crew was very experienced, but also inadequately prepared for an emergency, like vertigo in the clouds.

It may be hard for you and I to envision that lack of preparedness, because we are different, but it would not surprise me if that ends up being the case here.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I will suggest that you operate at a level of professionalism that is rare in the industry.

Many pilots don’t review procedures, memory items or limitations, until they’re coming up for their annual check.

Few pilots are as prepared as you are.

Further, many pilots have thousands of hours but have learned little, because it is from reflection and analysis of the experience that learning happens, not from the experience itself.

So, it is entirely possible that this crew was very experienced, but also inadequately prepared for an emergency, like vertigo in the clouds.

It may be hard for you and I to envision that lack of preparedness, because we are different, but it would not surprise me if that ends up being the case here.

There are a lot of lazy pilots , like you said, who only start thinking about stuff because an evaluation is coming up.

I don’t study for any type of evaluations ( except do the exam they give us ) , I just show up. We are already supposed to be ready in case any of that stuff happens on a real flight. I am talking about not “ studying” what kind of scenario ( we will lose an engine, then we will have this failure next type of anticipation ) we might get. Most pilots do, they all have intel from other pilots what will happen in the sim, or very close. Same with pilots upgrading to Captain , they have heard every sim script possible. Some upgrading pilots even complain they had a harder script than others.

I try my best to be prepared all the time by reviewing stuff periodically and reviewing stuff on my 2 hour drive to work ( not the entire drive obviously, about 15 minutes ).

Even the best, fully prepared pilots can make mistakes but at least they tried to do everything possible to avoid them.

I am sure you are the same way Astro, I can tell.

I have simulator next week and are studying more because some new stuff has been introduced that is new for us.

For good or bad, they see the real me every sim, and line check.

I do not do any training, but I have mentored pilots upgrading but I decided the other day I am not doing it anymore for pilots who only want to know everything ( they were supposed to know as an FO ) last minute because they want the status and Captain pay.

Because I am an experienced pilot, I like to try and figure out the cause of an accident knowing I might not have reacted any better but I am still curious what caused it and why they reacted that way.

Even the best , most experienced pilots can have accidents.

Perfect storm, big block of Swiss cheese day.

Arrogance is also dangerous.

 

[Dave Hess]

There are a lot of lazy pilots , like you said, who only start thinking about stuff because an evaluation is coming up.

I don’t study for any type of evaluations ( except do the exam they give us ) , I just show up. We are already supposed to be ready in case any of that stuff happens on a real flight. I am talking about not “ studying” what kind of scenario ( we will lose an engine, then we will have this failure next type of anticipation ) we might get. Most pilots do, they all have intel from other pilots what will happen in the sim, or very close. Same with pilots upgrading to Captain , they have heard every sim script possible. Some upgrading pilots even complain they had a harder script than others.

I try my best to be prepared all the time by reviewing stuff periodically and reviewing stuff on my 2 hour drive to work ( not the entire drive obviously, about 15 minutes ).

Even the best, fully prepared pilots can make mistakes but at least they tried to do everything possible to avoid them.

I am sure you are the same way Astro, I can tell.

I have simulator next week and are studying more because some new stuff has been introduced that is new for us.

For good or bad, they see the real me every sim, and line check.

I do not do any training, but I have mentored pilots upgrading but I decided the other day I am not doing it anymore for pilots who only want to know everything ( they were supposed to know as an FO ) last minute because they want the status and Captain pay.

Because I am an experienced pilot, I like to try and figure out the cause of an accident knowing I might not have reacted any better but I am still curious what caused it and why they reacted that way.

Even the best , most experienced pilots can have accidents.

Perfect storm, big block of Swiss cheese day.

Arrogance is also dangerous.

How many times a year do you have Sim training ?

 

[Astro14]

We are in the sim every 9 months, in the case of a typical pilot. But “in the sim” is 3-4 days of training, including simulator, ground school, and every 18 months, operating the emergency equipment, like aircraft emergency doors, fire extinguishers, life vest, smoke hoods, etc.

Pilots who have been identified as needing a bit of extra training are in the sim every 90 days, until their performance meets expectations.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

How many times a year do you have Sim training ?

Every 6 months for the simulator, once a year for an online evaluation ( my FO gets displaced by a check pilot who acts like an FO and evaluates me on a regular flight with passengers to see how we operate ).

Each 6 months sim involves 2 days.

 

[Robster]

Cessna Caravan 208EX pilot here. . . not a terribly complex aircraft, but we get FlightSafety recurrent training (sims) every other year, and local evals every year, plus TKS anti-ice training / refresher annually. It seems sufficient IMHO, given our mission tempo--everyone is pretty fresh.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

Cessna Caravan 208EX pilot here. . . not a terribly complex aircraft, but we get FlightSafety recurrent training (sims) every other year, and local evals every year, plus TKS anti-ice training / refresher annually. It seems sufficient IMHO, given our mission tempo--everyone is pretty fresh.

Curious about the TKS anti ice system.

What cautions does Cessna say about operating the Caravan in ice and how effective is that system at dealing with heavy ice?

 

[Robster]

With TKS, the C208 is approved for flight in known icing. It's a very effective system--leap years ahead of deice boots. It's an anti-ice system, not a de-ice system. It should be activated before you get into icing conditions, however it will REMOVE some ice from leading edges. The TKS system on the 208 spreads the fluid across the propeller, windshield, leading edges of the wings, tail surfaces and most of airframe--pretty much the whole airplane is covered with fluid once activated for a few minutes. Personally, I've not flown our aircraft in icing that would be considered severe, but I'd expect it to work better than boots in those conditions. The training will tell you that severe icing would constitute an emergency and to exit those conditions ASAP. Like any deice / anti-ice, it can be overwhelmed.

I've been following the recent Alaska crash. It's been claimed that that would be the first Cessna 208EX airframe lost due to icing, if that ends up being the case. The accident aircraft would have been heavy--10 passengers with bags would put that at just about max gross, if not over. To be dispatched into known icing, the aircraft would need a minimum of 12 gallons of TKS, which would have been sufficient for that flight, but if icing were severe, the flow-rate would likely have been set to HIGH, depleting the fluid quicker. Early reports indicated that the aircraft was in a hold near the destination while waiting for the runways to be cleared. I don't know how long it was in the hold, but if I were investigating that incident I'd look closely at TKS amount at departure, position of the switches etc.--it may have run out of TKS. Just my two cents.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

With TKS, the C208 is approved for flight in known icing. It's a very effective system--leap years ahead of deice boots. It's an anti-ice system, not a de-ice system. It should be activated before you get into icing conditions, however it will REMOVE some ice from leading edges. The TKS system on the 208 spreads the fluid across the propeller, windshield, leading edges of the wings, tail surfaces and most of airframe--pretty much the whole airplane is covered with fluid once activated for a few minutes. Personally, I've not flown our aircraft in icing that would be considered severe, but I'd expect it to work better than boots in those conditions. The training will tell you that severe icing would constitute an emergency and to exit those conditions ASAP. Like any deice / anti-ice, it can be overwhelmed.

I've been following the recent Alaska crash. It's been claimed that that would be the first Cessna 208EX airframe lost due to icing, if that ends up being the case. The accident aircraft would have been heavy--10 passengers with bags would put that at just about max gross, if not over. To be dispatched into known icing, the aircraft would need a minimum of 12 gallons of TKS, which would have been sufficient for that flight, but if icing were severe, the flow-rate would likely have been set to HIGH, depleting the fluid quicker. Early reports indicated that the aircraft was in a hold near the destination while waiting for the runways to be cleared. I don't know how long it was in the hold, but if I were investigating that incident I'd look closely at TKS amount at departure, position of the switches etc.--it may have run out of TKS. Just my two cents.

Thanks.

Yeah, I was wondering if they had enough of that anti ice fluid.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

Preliminary NTSB reports is out but doesn’t say what they think may have caused the crash.

CVR wasn’t working and probably hasn’t worked for years they said

NTSB sent the EGPWS ( terrain warning ) to the manufacturer to see if they can retrieve useful information from it.

If the CVR wasn’t working for years, what’s that say about the maintenance if it’s true.

 

[JavierH19]

Preliminary NTSB reports is out but doesn’t say what they think may have caused the crash.

CVR wasn’t working and probably hasn’t worked for years they said

NTSB sent the EGPWS ( terrain warning ) to the manufacturer to see if they can retrieve useful information from it.

If the CVR wasn’t working for years, what’s that say about the maintenance if it’s true.

And they said their planes always got everything they needed and were in tip top shape, yeah right.

"After extensive repair and cleaning, the 30-minute-long tape-based recording medium was auditioned to determine its contents," the report states. "The CVR did not record the accident flight and during the audition it was determined that the CVR had likely not been recording audio for several years."

I wonder how they were able to determine it hadn't worked in years, that'd be neat to know.

 

[pilottravis]

And they said their planes always got everything they needed and were in tip top shape, yeah right.

"After extensive repair and cleaning, the 30-minute-long tape-based recording medium was auditioned to determine its contents," the report states. "The CVR did not record the accident flight and during the audition it was determined that the CVR had likely not been recording audio for several years."

I wonder how they were able to determine it hadn't worked in years, that'd be neat to know.

They are generally designed to capture the last 30 minutes of flight then overwrite themselves. It might have still had audio captured from a flight years ago going through the after landing checklist and shutdown instead of possibly some expletives and impact.

 

[y_p_w]

They are generally designed to capture the last 30 minutes of flight then overwrite themselves. It might have still had audio captured from a flight years ago going through the after landing checklist and shutdown instead of possibly some expletives and impact.

Older style would probably be using endless-loop magnetic tape (think old 8-track cartridges). I could see the tape breaking or jamming.

I would think modern recorders are using some sort flash memory. Not sure if they've ever used hard drives for this purpose. But it's pretty easy to have maximum durability with flash memory these days by sacrificing capacity. What would they even need? Just uncompressed mono audio with reduced frequency range would be all that's needed. It would theoretically last hundreds of years of continuous use, although it could still fail randomly.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

And they said their planes always got everything they needed and were in tip top shape, yeah right.

"After extensive repair and cleaning, the 30-minute-long tape-based recording medium was auditioned to determine its contents," the report states. "The CVR did not record the accident flight and during the audition it was determined that the CVR had likely not been recording audio for several years."

I wonder how they were able to determine it hadn't worked in years, that'd be neat to know.

I don’t know how the NTSB came to that conclusion but I know they are very careful what they say so they have a strong reason to come to that conclusion.

 

[John105]

And they said their planes always got everything they needed and were in tip top shape, yeah right.

"After extensive repair and cleaning, the 30-minute-long tape-based recording medium was auditioned to determine its contents," the report states. "The CVR did not record the accident flight and during the audition it was determined that the CVR had likely not been recording audio for several years."

I wonder how they were able to determine it hadn't worked in years, that'd be neat to know.

how does anybody know if the airbags on their cars even work? After 1,2,3,4,5....10,11...20,21,22.... years? The only thing that's in place is a warning lamp. What if it doesn't work? There was a Takata scandal that's been settled, but this doesn't necessarily mean airbags are now functional and not lethal....

 

[y_p_w]

how does anybody know if the airbags on their cars even work? After 1,2,3,4,5....10,11...20,21,22.... years? The only thing that's in place is a warning lamp. What if it doesn't work? There was a Takata scandal that's been settled, but this doesn't necessarily mean airbags are now functional and not lethal....

Not sure if it's commonly done with an endless loop tape. Or how it could self-test.

The problem with Takata was functionally very different than problems with audio recordings.

 

[loneryder]

I for one appreciate these explanations from you experienced pilots. As someone who has never been in the cockpit of a large plane, it is very difficult to understand why these crashes occur. I understand a little better now.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I for one appreciate these explanations from you experienced pilots. As someone who has never been in the cockpit of a large plane, it is very difficult to understand why these crashes occur. I understand a little better now.

Thanks.

To be honest, I can’t really come up with a reason why it crashed except for reasons that are extremely rare but hard to imagine in my mind.

Problem is, without any CVR information, I would be very surprised what the NTSB can tell us about why it crashed given no distress calls to ATC were made and the plane impacting the ground the way it did.

It always helps pilots if they have experince on the type of aircraft involved in the accident but sometimes things are obvious to pilots with no experince on the type that is involved in an accident.

It’s like the B737 crash in South Korea, I simply do not know enough about the B737 to even seriously try to envision what the pilots were dealing with other than fact the pilots hit birds and decided to do a go around for some reason.

 

[loneryder]

Thanks.

To be honest, I can’t really come up with a reason why it crashed except for reasons that are extremely rare but hard to imagine in my mind.

Problem is, without any CVR information, I would be very surprised what the NTSB can tell us about why it crashed given no distress calls to ATC were made and the plane impacting the ground the way it did.

It always helps pilots if they have experince on the type of aircraft involved in the accident but sometimes things are obvious to pilots with no experince on the type that is involved in an accident.

It’s like the B737 crash in South Korea, I simply do not know enough about the B737 to even seriously try to envision what the pilots were dealing with other than fact the pilots hit birds and decided to do a go around for some reason.

I was mainly talking about the disorientation phenomenon and what you have to deal with. I’’ve wondered ever since JFK Jr flew into the ocean. Couldn’t comprehend it.
I remember when Korean airlines had the most crashes in the world. After extensive investigations they found that because Korea is such a deferential society that co-pilots wouldn’t say anything to the pilot if they noticed something wrong. They gave them extensive training to change that dynamic. Or maybe it was just an excuse.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I was mainly talking about the disorientation phenomenon and what you have to deal with. I’’ve wondered ever since JFK Jr flew into the ocean. Couldn’t comprehend it.
I remember when Korean airlines had the most crashes in the world. After extensive investigations they found that because Korea is such a deferential society that co-pilots wouldn’t say anything to the pilot if they noticed something wrong. They gave them extensive training to change that dynamic. Or maybe it was just an excuse.

I actually know a pilot who lost control and killed himself and several others due to disorientation after flying into snow showers below clouds ( No instrument rating ).

A cold front had gone through and although it was mainly clear, the airmass was unstable and snow squalls were around.

I taught him how to fly and read about it in the newspaper while buying coffee at a restaurant.