Профиль

I have both an undergrad & grad degrees from UAF - the Northern Studies dept is where I first researched a/c accidents. My husband got a degree there, his father also (he founded & ran one of AK's largest engineering/survey firms), his aunt (who became a teacher in a Noorvik) & a niece. We ❤️UAF.

I know I may sound cold, but if a Part 135 crew cannot fly without GPS - and cannot hold an assigned altitude - then we have a bigger problem then what the military may be doing. If they can't handle lack of GPS, what if they lose autopilot? Or lose an engine? Are they capable of commercial ops?

What concerns me is the circumstances for this accident. The crew failed to hold their assigned altitude. They had an accurate NOTAM for the GPS but appeared to be struggling without it. Their decisions are their own; as a Part 135 crew, they should have been able to fly without GPS.

Same for me. (The 80s!)

Roselawn. That crash was so horrific.

I was thinking about how much the accident stats have changed for Part 135 in Alaska between the 1990s and now. Weather reporting and more navaids have made a massive difference.

If you cannot fly in the conditions then you divert and/or return to base. That aircraft was at 13,000 feet (it was supposed to be at 12,000 but failed to hold the altitude). If they were struggling without the GPS then you return. It does not matter if it is a medevac. They made bad decisions.

These guys were Part 135 pilots in a King Air. They couldn't hold their assigned altitude and they couldn't fly without GPS. That company has a lot to answer for.

Especially the big accounts. @hcrichardson.bsky.social and @atrupar.com have both reposted that article on the New Mexico medevac crash. If you do not routinely read NTSB reports or what it means to hold an altitude or how you can land without GPS, you don't know enough to understand what happened.

I agree.

I don't think you are wrong - what I'm seeing more and more in accident reports points in that direction.

Yep - it reminds me of the attitude last year after the midair and PA medevac crash and Bering Air flight 445. I called it a hysteria problem then.

Yeah - I don't know what the writer means there but if he is referring to ILS then...wow.

Technology makes flying easier. It helps. But at the end of the day, a pilot has to be prepared to fly the aircraft even if you lose the technology. Even if you lose an engine. Or both engines. Or hydraulics. It has happened. I wonder what this crew would have done in those situations.

I would imagine! Mine would have come unglued! ha!

There was a NOTAM. Pilots are required to check for NOTAMs prior to departure. This is basic. The crew blew past their assigned altitude by 1,000 feet. That would bust them on a checkride. No excuse. None. If a Part 135 crew can not land without GPS they should not be flying commercially.

So frustrating.

Pilots check NOTAMs prior to departure. The NOTAM, as listed in the Prelim, informed them the GPS "may not be avbl". They knew they might have to shoot a non-GPS approach or land under VFR. Further, they blew past their assigned alt by 1,000 ft which would bust you on a checkride. This is on them.

Yes and yes. Part 135 is what I know - esp in Alaska. But this is...well, this level of dependence (as it appears in the Prelim) is really stunning and frustrating. I hope the NTSB has some informative interviews with this company & the POI because I have a ton of questions.

I've been following your thoughts on this accident for several days, Mike. (I've been more focused on Bering 445, which is much more my geographical area of interest & had a final report last week.) I agree with the points you've been making on the lack of GPS, the NOTAM, etc.