florida jet crash 1/11/26

[rgmwa]

Some useful information from Juan Brown: 

 

 

[danny_galaga]

2 hours ago, BrendAn said:

I don't believe it is irrelevant. 

I think it shows a lack of concentration on the task at hand.

The important task at hand, the one that killed them, was ten minutes away. As far as we can know, as soon as she sent that text (I don't believe she was just sitting there texting during the whole flight), she would have been 100% on the ball. You have to remember she wasn't just some disinterested kid along for the ride. She wanted to be a commercial pilot her whole life, and made it happen. There's no way that text was just from boredom. Almost certainly she was feeling uneasy and busted one off, just in case.

 

It still could be that she made a mistake with the radar. Until this happened, I had no idea it was such a complicated task. But as Nev, and Juan in his video have explained, there's a hell of a lot going on to use it properly. But whatever the cause, a single text ten minutes before is irrelevant. 

[BrendAn]

27 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

The important task at hand, the one that killed them, was ten minutes away. As far as we can know, as soon as she sent that text (I don't believe she was just sitting there texting during the whole flight), she would have been 100% on the ball. You have to remember she wasn't just some disinterested kid along for the ride. She wanted to be a commercial pilot her whole life, and made it happen. There's no way that text was just from boredom. Almost certainly she was feeling uneasy and busted one off, just in case.

 

It still could be that she made a mistake with the radar. Until this happened, I had no idea it was such a complicated task. But as Nev, and Juan in his video have explained, there's a hell of a lot going on to use it properly. But whatever the cause, a single text ten minutes before is irrelevant. 

None of us were there to know how attentive she was. 

Texting is not irrelevant, it may or may not have contributed to the tragedy but either way it is not a good look for a professional pilot.

Also she was chastised by atc in may for requesting to climb into severe turbulence, they made her drop to 4000 to avoid it.

[facthunter]

I think you are Missing the Point a bit. I doubt any of them were adequately trained on the Operation of the radar to utiliise it to the fullest extent. Unless you do you can't thread your way through storm cells by avoiding them. Those cells can destroy Most Planes  and also make them Lose control.. so you are crazy to just go straight through one because of the RISKS. Then you need to be right on top of UPSET  recovery procedures. In severe conditions it also Pays to get lower to have a wider band of speeds available and reduce the Coffin Corner effect.  Few people realise how Narrow the safe airspeeds are. The Air is very thin at  these levels. You have very small Margins of error. Nev

[BrendAn]

https://youtu.be/T9zc137xCPc?si=O6Y0yN0j1sp5ZLYr

[T510]

1 hour ago, danny_galaga said:

The important task at hand, the one that killed them, was ten minutes away. As far as we can know, as soon as she sent that text (I don't believe she was just sitting there texting during the whole flight), she would have been 100% on the ball. You have to remember she wasn't just some disinterested kid along for the ride. She wanted to be a commercial pilot her whole life, and made it happen. There's no way that text was just from boredom. Almost certainly she was feeling uneasy and busted one off, just in case.

 

It still could be that she made a mistake with the radar. Until this happened, I had no idea it was such a complicated task. But as Nev, and Juan in his video have explained, there's a hell of a lot going on to use it properly. But whatever the cause, a single text ten minutes before is irrelevant. 

Spot on. She was the copilot, she may have even asked/told the PIC that she wanted to send a text and had his approval.

 

 

 

 

[BrendAn]

2 minutes ago, T510 said:

Spot on. She was the copilot, she may have even asked/told the PIC that she wanted to send a text and had his approval.

 

 

 

 

They were already in bad turbulence. Not a good time for that surely 

[facthunter]

Highly speculative and Most Unlikely as well. Nev

[danny_galaga]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

None of us were there to know how attentive she was. 

Texting is not irrelevant, it may or may not have contributed to the tragedy but either way it is not a good look for a professional pilot.

Also she was chastised by atc in may for requesting to climb into severe turbulence, they made her drop to 4000 to avoid it.

Was there a text ten minutes later, when they flew into that cell?

[danny_galaga]

47 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

They were already in bad turbulence. Not a good time for that surely 

Maybe not. But did a text, sent ten minutes earlier, cause the crash? No? Then it's irrelevant.

[Garfly]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zft2LIWuO7I

 

Excerpts from Ate Chuet's video above.

 

" ... I felt it was really important to make this video.  Over the last few hours we have read so many horrible things about the Lear Jet co-pilot and she has been widely defamed on social media. My goal today is to realign the velocity vector back towards reality. And so the heart of this video will be to talk about the 1,300 flight hours of a 20 year old co-pilot and the necessity of getting informed before judging." 

"And with the famous Brandolini's Law, as you know, it takes ten times more energy to refute a falsehood than to produce it.   ... For me, what saddens me about this story and the treatment we've seen on social media is that the time for reflection is fading. Every day it distances us a little more from our condition as citizens, pulling us back to our most primal nature ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 03:30 AM by Garfly

[BrendAn]

4 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

Maybe not. But did a text, sent ten minutes earlier, cause the crash? No? Then it's irrelevant.

You don't get my point. It's about the frame of mind and attitude of the pilots .  Were they 100 percent on the ball in those bad weather conditions. That's all.

Edited Thursday at 03:31 AM by BrendAn

[facthunter]

Wing sweepback makes the reaction to slipping very exaggerated and adds control difficulties The Yaw dampers work over time. I don't think many who don't fly there,  realise the Issues involved. It's why Airlines like experienced pilots , but Most of them don't train them as well as they Used to. Accountants have too much say. Training costs Money.  Nev

[danny_galaga]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

You don't get my point. It's about the frame of mind and attitude of the pilots .  Were they 100 percent on the ball in those bad weather conditions. That's all.

I get it. What I'm saying is that if all we know is she sent ONE text ten minutes earlier, what can you say about her frame of mind? You can't make a mosaic with one stone.

[danny_galaga]

From FB, one of Nathalias instructors

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BmAZ5cWfw/

 

In case you can't access:

 

"

I write these words unequivocally…

I was one of Nathalia’s first instructors and mentor.

She was without a doubt the most naturally gifted pilot I have ever taught, and I have been teaching for 40 years!!

That young lady was born to fly!

There was not a check ride that the examiner was not blown away!

When she did her Lear type rating, she had less than 1100 hours and she absolutely aced the PIC type rating and the examiner thought she had about 5000 hours!

I gave her numerous opportunities to fly different airplanes to include tailwheel and the Caravan.

When I gave her her Spin Endorsement for her CFI, we did so many spins that I started to become nauseous! Truth!!

I am saddened, because so many of the pilots in training today never wanted to become pilots and only want to become airline pilots!

As I did check rides, I saw this time and time again!

They had no passion for flying.

They only wanted to get to the airlines to make the big money…

Nathalia was PASSIONATE about flying!!!

She was a % natural born pilot!!!

I pray that she continues to fly amongst the clouds in heaven.

May she rest in peace and God watch over her. "

 

[facthunter]

I have not made any comment on the texting. it's a diversion. I'm Highlighting the Dangers of the situation they were in. Nev

[danny_galaga]

8 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I have not made any comment on the texting. it's a diversion. I'm Highlighting the Dangers of the situation they were in. Nev

No doubt. The to and fro is mostly Brendan and me.

[rgmwa]

Nice endorsement from the instructor. I’ve seen a lot of ignorant and disgusting comments on social media regarding her age, her sex, her qualifications and relative inexperience. Luckily a lot of other comments, often from very experienced pilots,  have praised the way she did her job in a horrible situation. I would not have held it together as well as she did. She did well and deserved better. 

[BrendAn]

3 hours ago, rgmwa said:

Nice endorsement from the instructor. I’ve seen a lot of ignorant and disgusting comments on social media regarding her age, her sex, her qualifications and relative inexperience. Luckily a lot of other comments, often from very experienced pilots,  have praised the way she did her job in a horrible situation. I would not have held it together as well as she did. She did well and deserved better. 

I wasn't saying she was a bad pilot,

I was questioning whether pilots should be texting in the environment they were in on that flight.  And the latest theory is they were trying to fly over the storm cell not through it but it was a lot higher than they realised.

Edited Thursday at 02:11 PM by BrendAn

[rgmwa]

I know. I wasn’t suggesting you were saying she was a bad pilot and I agree about texting not being a good idea in that environment even though I don’t believe it was a factor in what happened. 

[BrendAn]

15 minutes ago, rgmwa said:

I know. I wasn’t suggesting you were saying she was a bad pilot and I agree about texting not being a good idea in that environment even though I don’t believe it was a factor in what happened. 

No worries. 

[Thruster88]

18 hours ago, facthunter said:

I think you are Missing the Point a bit. I doubt any of them were adequately trained on the Operation of the radar to utiliise it to the fullest extent. Unless you do you can't thread your way through storm cells by avoiding them. Those cells can destroy Most Planes  and also make them Lose control.. so you are crazy to just go straight through one because of the RISKS. Then you need to be right on top of UPSET  recovery procedures. In severe conditions it also Pays to get lower to have a wider band of speeds available and reduce the Coffin Corner effect.  Few people realise how Narrow the safe airspeeds are. The Air is very thin at  these levels. You have very small Margins of error. Nev

Operation of the weather radar would be covered in the type rating training? 

 

Lear 60 has a maximum operating altitude of 51,000 feet so the margin at 35,000 would be significant? 

[facthunter]

Not enough to stay within them in a cell like that.  Even at low levels ordinary planes can  get airspeed variations of say 40 knots.. As I said there's 2 Pages of memory items (emergency) dealing with Upset recovery. You are in very severe turbulence in IFR and the Auto Pilot can't be relied on to Handle it. You JUST DON"T fly through those storm cells EVER.. The Weather radar is for AVOIDANCE. The MAX height you can fly at depends on your weight at the time. and with the radar you can have all the theory you want  but experience in real weather is of more benefit. You can't safely fly anything through those storm cells. In that Part of the World some of the Most vicious cells occur. It's not the size , It's the energy Intensity in it. Nev

[rgmwa]

Here's an update from Hoover:

 

 

[onetrack]

I believe this YouTuber has produced a very good analysis of the crash, and the piloting mistakes. And his bottom line is that the Learjet 60 is an exceptionally unforgiving aircraft when it comes to pilot error. Plus, the tail design is unchanged from the initial design, which utilised a shorter fuselage. I seriously doubt the NTSB will ever recover anything from the CVR though, that hole is just a bomb crater.