The BlancoLirio channel has a report on it and oddly the “return” flight track passes directly over the Montebello (MOL) VOR, so precisely that it implies that it was part of a flight plan. Doing so could also have been a simple coincidence as part of being in DR mode, however.
“…the Citation, which is not equipped with autothrottles that would have automatically initiated a descent to execute the approach.” Does that mean if the aircraft had been so equipped it could have descended into the heavily populated area surrounding the destination airport?
If the pilot’s responses ceased only 15 minutes into the flight, it might be that the pressurization system did not fail, but that it was never turned on? I read that hypoxia can occur in minutes, and at the 15 minute point the aircraft was already at 30k feet.
Pressurization system is normally on even during takeoff. The system would have to be deliberately turned off by the pilot for this to happen. During normal flight there would be no reason to do so.
In typical media fashion, a key item in the story nationwide was the attempt to attach some dire significance to the “delay” in scrambling fighters to intercept, implying that was both a dire national security concern and a lost opportunity to have prevented the accident.
The later Gulfstream airplanes have this feature. The auto-descent is to a preselected altitude, typically 10,000. Then, if it is hypoxia the crew should recover.
Mark, who is suspecting hypoxia; the masses of armchair investigators or the real investigators?
Loss of communication as early as 15 minutes into this flight caught my eye immediately as something potentially other than hypoxia. The small private jet owning community should not be waiting for the final report on this one to have serious conversations with their inner souls about how much they are really saving by conducting single pilot operations. Even with highly experienced pilots as is the case here, they are breaking the redundancy chain. At a minimum, they should have this conversation for the sake of the next, and the next, and the next 2 year old they put on board.
Why do rich clients skimp on having a second pilot onboard a complex aircraft flying in a complex airspace?
In the Payne Stewart Lear jet crash, the pilots stopped responding to ATC less than 15 minutes after departure - both pilots in a 2 pilot crew.
The cause is yet to be determined. My question is since this plane was NORDO since 15 minutes after departure and had been heading dead center toward the DCA TFRs for no less than 20 minutes, why did the military wait so long to scramble the jets, and why did they just feel the need for speed as it was already way past Washington?
In my mind, this splatters egg all over the DCA defenders faces.
Don’t even get me started on ALL the erroneous headlines about the “private plane violating restricted airspace”.
That depends on the client. A lot of clients I have flown actually want that second pilot on board. According to the DO of a company I flew for, the increase in insurance coverage for single pilot pt 135 jet ops was easily the same amount of money as paying the salary for a first officer. So there may not be that much of a cost saving operating single pilot. I think the single pilot operation was geared more toward owner/operators of those jets certified for that.
Most (all?) large-cabin long-range business jets are equipped with Emergency/Automatic Descent Mode (EDM or ADM, depending on the manufacturers nomenclature). Above a certain altitude, say 30,000’, the system is armed to recognize a sudden drop in cabin pressure. The autothrottles reduce power to idle, the autopilot turns the plane 90-degree to the left and descends to (usually) 15,000’. It will level off there and increase thrust to maintain 250 KIAS until (hopefully) a pilot is able to take back control.
Unfortunately, this airplane type has neither autothrottles nor EDM/ADM. Because of this, pilot intervention would be necessary for the plane to begin a controlled descent from 34,000’. Once captured/level, selecting a lower altitude and commanding a vertical mode are required to descend, even in airplanes equipped with autothrottles.
Pretty safe to say that pilot incapacitation (hypoxia or medical) is to blame in this tragic accident.
Nope. The Citation technically had not violated DC airspace. It was flying at a reported 34,000 ft. AGL. The DC restriction is only applicable for flight under !8,000 ft. AGL.
In the Payne Stewart crash it was reported that the crew had been flying several legs with the crew emergency oxygen depleted. Without the oxygen, no number of crew members could have saved the flight.
This is small jet. There is no door between the passengers and cockpit. I think passengers probably would have noticed the pilot slumped over the controls for 3 hours.
Concerning the turn back after reaching destination.
When I taught IR, I always suggested that a Departure Instrument Approach be added to the end of the FMS route. If an emergency occurred after take off, the pilot flying could access the approach with a simple button press.
In this accident, was the departure approach added to the flight plan and caused the autopilot to reverse course after overflying the destination and then fly back to the departure airport?
“Also, the Citation apparently followed the lateral track of an instrument approach, turning toward and then overflying its destination, New York Long Island McArthur Airport (KISP). But it flew the “approach” at 34,000 feet and continued on a consistent track until apparently running out of fuel and spiraling to the ground at a high rate of descent.”
I disagree with your track analysis.
The airplane followed the flight plan/cleared path. The last part of the plan was SARDI DCT CCC DCT KISP. The airplane smart turned from SARDI-CCC to CCC-KISP, it didn’t line up with an approach. After passing KISP it followed an extended, great circle path from CCC-KISP. If you put that on ForeFlight, and put KISP-0A9 on there as well you’ll see a divergence of about 1º. It is simply an incredible coincidence that it is so close.
I think my theory satisfies Occam’s Razor as well.
If you zoom in on the final part of the straight leg and the spiral on ADS-B Exchange you’ll see it didn’t not directly overfly MOL. Close, but not to it.
See my comment below and tell me what you think?
That makes sense. I will rewrite that section to replace “instrument approach” with “flight-planned path.”
Thanks.