W-Five

[CLguy]

Widow thanks for clearing up the confusion regarding the engine seperation. It certainly makes more sense to me now, if that is possible!

Like I said earlier my donation is on the way! Good luck!

[Widow]

Please read Hayton's report on the first page of this thread to understand why the float maintenance is important. It is very precise and informative. I have a letter from TCCA reporting what they found and that they are proceding with an enforcement action. It didn't come with any kind of disclaimer ... I think I've posted parts of it before ...

Also remember that both floats were still attached to the aircraft while on the ocean floor (I have video) - they broke off during recovery. One wing had broken right off and still lies on the ocean floor.

And by the way - a big THANK YOU to all of you who have or are making donations to our recovery/trust fund.

[Widow]

It's too bad that it didn't work out with Nuytco for you...

For what it's worth though Phil is THE man in the submersible field - any reason they won't send a manned submersible? Or is it just expense?

They did use a manned submersible. But they wouldn't work with a marker and they didn't bring equipment with which to track where the sub was underwater, and there was no video feed to the surface. Made it virtually impossible to find the engine since he was working with about 8-10 feet of visibility, would sit down, wait for the silt to settle, use the sonar, move, sit, wait, and so on.

[Bede]

I just watched that W5 edisode.

My hat's go off to you Kirsten. What you are doing is takes incredible courage and perseverence.

[Widow]

Here's a good one. Seems the Civil Aviation Safety Inspectorate (OH&S), closed their file without further investigation on June 20, 2006 because: "the TSB determined no further investigation for cause will be undertaken on this occurrence; there were no witnesses to the occurrence; and there is no confirmed cause of death of (the pilot)."

Anyone else have a problem with this??? See what five deaths being a Class 5 Occurrence has resulted in? I think I shall be writing to the Minister of Labour now.

[Cat Driver]

"the TSB determined no further investigation for cause will be undertaken on this occurrence; there were no witnesses to the occurrence; and there is no confirmed cause of death of (the pilot)."

Maybe TC thinks the pilot and the other three passengers deliberately crashed that airplane in a manner that everyone could get out, then they left your husband to die because he was not part of the plot?

The more I read about the conclusions these idiots come to the happier I am that I no longer work in aviation in Canada.

If as Merlin Preuss and Cannon claim Canada is a world leader in aviation regulation, just imagine how fu.ed up the rest of the world must be.

[Edo]

The Beaver attitude indicator operates off an engine driven Vacuum pump. No engine=no vacuum= no attitude indicator. No way you glide down through fog without an attitude indicator and keep it upright.

This is an excellent point, CID mentioned it too but I feel it really bears repeating. On a checkout I try and make sure that the pilot knows what powers what instruments.

Knowing it is one thing, I know the systems but can honestly say that in 2000+ hours of float flying no one every stressed that there will be no attitude indicator after an engine failure. I guess I did not picture the full scenario in my mind either, always assumed a VFR glide would be possible.

Another huge point for me is best glide into a headwind will not result in the optimal distance covered, add the headwind componet to the glide speed!!

This forum can be like reading accident reports; try to take something away from it that may save your ass someday.

In the future any check ride/systems discussion I do will include this specific point. - anyone doing company checks please stress this point as well.

Thanks.

[Widow]

Now I'm going to go back to the failure of the emergency procedures, because I don't want anyone to ever make this fatal mistake again.

In the recent VI Air accident, we saw a working system - when the aircraft did not report in, another pilot was immediately dispatched to the location of last contact - and arrived at the accident site within minutes of SAR who had been contacted immediately by a witness to the crash. Had there been no witness, the other aircraft would have been on the scene and able to help within an acceptable period of time. With this kind of immediate concern, it is reasonable to make the assumption that this operator would have contacted SAR within it's prescribed (by the ops manual) time frame had no evidence of the missing aircraft been found. At least I would hope so.

In the case of MJM, the ops manager states on the W-Five episode ""I was busy, I came down, I fueled that plane up and got in the air right away. It's an emergency..."

Sounds good, but let's examine what he told me when he visited the wreckage along with an RCMP officer and the owner of the AMO (I had a digital voice recorder in my pocket):

K: Jim, may I ask what time (dispatcher) first got in touch with you?
J: When I came in the office from the clinic...
K: You were at the clinic?
J: I was at the medical clinic, getting my annual medical ... 11:40- 11:45, and um, told her to make the calls, I'm going looking. I got in the plane ...
K: So how come nobody made the calls then?
J: I was out flying at 12:05, I gave instructions to ...
K: To (dispatcher)? To "make the calls"?
J: Well, she was making calls at the time, I don't know if she understood me clearly when I said that...
K: Well it sounds as though she didn't, since nobody called SAR until after 2 o'clock.
J: I went up at 12:05 and started looking ...
K: OK...
J: I got back, I had a trip, two guys in Thompson Sound later on, and I decided to go do it. I said "make the calls" (indistinguishable)
J: I went up and asked him what time, he said "You were here from 10:30 to 11:30". I got into the truck, went back down, found out Arnie was overdue. I said, "make the calls, I'm taking the Cessna up" and went looking. I was airborne 12:05. I went by the route I thought he would be taking, and went up to Thompson. Got the guys, came back. When I came in the office, (ex-MJM pilot) was there...

This was well past 2pm and SAR had now been contacted.

Later, he said "...thinking that we didn't hear from him, with other plane's around, he mustn't have had time... Jim Hayton's theory may be right."

When you add to this that the dispatcher had begun her com search at 11:15 (what she told JRCC) and that the ops manager told one of the family members he had to wait for the guys at Thompson to finish in the shower before they could return, it really makes one wonder how much of an emergency he really thought this was.

Please, please, please ... if you determine that one of your aircraft is overdue (in a required or expected call-in) or missing consider this the same as it having exceded it's ETA. Do not wait until after a small scale search is completed if this time-frame excedes the guidelines of your emergency checklist. Assume everyone has survived but is injured.

TC AIM - SAR 2.0 states:

As soon as information is received that an aircraft is overdue, operators or owners should immediately alert the nearest RCC or any ATS unit, giving all known details. The alerting call should not be delayed until after a small scale private search. Such a delay could deprive those in need of urgent assistance at a time when it is most needed.

[Widow]

(Thanks CD) From CADORS 2005P0345:

Occurrence Type: Accident Occurrence Date: 2005/03/01
Occurrence Time: 1800 Z Day Or Night: day-time
Fatalities: 1 Injuries: 0
Canadian Aerodrome ID: CAE3 Aerodrome Name: Campbell River
Occurrence Location: Campbell River, B.C. Province: British Columbia
Country: CANADA World Area: North America

Reported By: NAV CANADA AOR Number:
TSB Class Of Investigation: 5 TSB Occurrence No.: A05P0039

User Name: Velasco, MED
Date: 2005/03/04
Further Action Required: No
O.P.I.: System Safety
Narrative: Update from COMOX SEARCH HQ: The search for the Beaver aircraft C-GAQW has been called off as of 1600H 03 Mar 2005 and tranferred over to the Campbell River RCMP. Update from TSB: Without the recovery of the aircraft, they have nothing to work with hence possibly may not upgrade the investigation to Class 3. Update from System Safety: Investigation lower than Class 3, no MINOBS.

User Name: Pike, Lisa
Date: 2005/03/09
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: System Safety
Narrative: Changed the status of the occurrence to an accident.

User Name: Pike, Lisa
Date: 2005/03/24
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: System Safety
Narrative: Update from the TSB: This accident will remain a class 5 investigation. (information only)

[carholme]

Widow;

My contention with the wording is that if nobody is at the base where the a/c departed, the operators or owners may not be aware until the following morning that an a/c is missing, yet according to the wording above, would have complied with the intent.

I believe and in our company we follow the procedure that when the a/c is away, there must be someone on site to take any update calls from the a/c or changes in planned routing which will affect the ETA. That person is also on site at the ETA to ensure procedures are enacted in the event the a/c does not arrive and that RCC is notified. Our Satphone has been invaluable for updates or wx diversions but there has been the occasional time when I have been that close to making the call. It worries me sick to call out those resources but I will do it if the a/c does not arrive. I would rather turn back search aircraft than spend the rest of my life wondering why I didn't act.

We have seen two fatal accidents in the last few years where this very scenario was played out, in one case, assuming that the a/c had landed somewhere and was probably ok when in fact the pilot died and the pax was close to death. Notification of a missing a/c was made the following day.

Regards

carholme

[Widow]

You know what Carholme, I keep forgetting that a commercial aircraft can have passengers in the air (or not accounted for at a base somewhere) and there not be a responsible person on dispatch/flight-following duty. How could that responsible person leave without being assured of the safety of the pilot et al? More public misconceptions.

Oh wait, I get it. He's a good pilot, we don't need to worry about him. Nothing could go wrong except maybe some sudden bad weather which he/she can handle, or maybe an engine failure. And engine failures don't cause this kind of accident anyway.

[Widow]

Just discovered that the W-Five episode "A Routine Flight", about our quest for the engine is being re-aired this week - without warning to us!

So, if you are in the west you can still watch it tonight at 7pm on CTV, or across the country tomorrow at 1pm local time.

[Lurch]

Just discovered that the W-Five episode "A Routine Flight", about our quest for the engine is being re-aired this week - without warning to us!

So, if you are in the west you can still watch it tonight at 7pm on CTV, or across the country tomorrow at 1pm local time.

Watching it right now

Don't know if it has been stated all ready but when they talked to the TSB inspector about "pilot error" and he kept giving the smerk I just wanted to smack him

Lurch

[Widow]

Reminder: floats were not sheared off in the accident - they were still attached on the ocean floor. They came off on recovery. Pictures available.

[Widow]

The follow-up W-Five episode to "A Routine Flight" has been scheduled for December 29th, 2007.

The episode, titled "Kevin's Quest", continues the chronicle of the families' efforts to find answers, focusing on the recent recovery of the engine from C-GAQW, the aircraft whose loss also resulted in the loss of our loved ones, Arnie Feast, Fabian Bedard, Dave Stevens, and Kevins' brothers, Doug and Trevor Decock on the 28th of February, 2005. The story will air the second half of the program.

We hope you will join us in watching "Kevin's Quest".