MU2 Emergency severe icing ATC Part 1
Uploader Comments (airnautic)
All Comments (13)
-
Its Jesse who was with Grant the other night, i sent the link to my old man, thats some crazy stuff man, alot of idiots on here with no knowledge about flying trying to say pilot error, i think maybe these fools need to relize typing on a computer and learning about planes is a little different then flying! but none the less that is some crazy shit
-
to all you guys who think you know what happwned, i know the pilot personally, it was not lack of training, they were flying in a blizzard, and flew into a cloud which caused the engines to ice up. tey immediately turned around and that uniced 1 of the engines. it was not the pilots fault or the planes, just the weathr
-
@maxflight777...hunterTS4 is absolutely correct. The problem, however, was the lack of proper pilot training. There is nothing whatsoever flawed about this aircraft. It's rock solid, safe, and is required (as any aircraft is) to be flown correctly, which is even more critical since it is a high performance turbine aircraft. The MU-2 has a history of being very popular with the untrained and inexperienced "owner-operator crowd" which produced a recipe for higher rate of accidents.
-
Re comment about controllers POV. In a declared emergency, the controllers job is to assist the pilot. Other controllers can handle other sector traffic. The PIC is and copilot (if there is one) are the final authority on safety of flight. What caused the emergency is immaterial at this point.
I agree that in this instance both ATC and Flight Crew were professional, and that had a large effect on the successful outcome.
-
@maxflight777 flawed design? you dont know what you are talkin about sir. there are nothing wrong with the mu2 line . they determined pilot training to be the cause of the crashes taking place.
-
Many pilots fail to see this aspect from a controllers view".... what the heck?
Why should the controller view be considered .... these guys were in trouble -( in an aircraft of " flawed" design - see the history )
Unable to maintain altitude , with presumably full power on - it must have been terrifying. the controller did a great job ... but I don't understand your comment!
-
In Aust apart from a type rating, one needs to atend a CASA ground school of acft systems first before effecting the endorsment The aero is good but, it needs people knowing its unique systems to fly well Also the voice was of a profession pilot, short to the point and not a page long detailed story The other point Having spent a day at Sydney with the APP/DEP cells, there is a lot of coorination between controllers and other sectors Huston being told the flight isn't happening
Good morning gents,
please see comments page of part 2.
The PIC explaines in detail what has happened, so no speculation neccessary.
b.r.
Wolfgang
airnautic 1 month ago
Many pilots fail to see this aspect from a controllers view, one pilot in one aero while the one controller has several aircrat in the sector The comment that the heaters were turned on I wonder if the electrics had failed (No DME) and a portable comms unit maybe So the propes did have any power to excite the heaters The idea of having a type rating as PIC is to handle the problems better than the overall flying of the aero
DaveFRyannn 4 months ago
@DaveFRyannn
electrics for sure did not fail, you can hear this on the background noise of communication. Handhelds sound different and problems with the electric would have been declared.
airnautic 4 months ago