ASN Wikibase Occurrence # 44203
This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information.
If you feel this information is incomplete or incorrect, you can
submit corrected information.
Date: | Wednesday 8 February 2006 |
Time: | 16:42 |
Type: | Cessna 172RG |
Owner/operator: | Scandinavian Aviation Academy, Inc. |
Registration: | N9531B |
MSN: | 172RG0859 |
Year of manufacture: | 1981 |
Total airframe hrs: | 5429 hours |
Fatalities: | Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2 |
Aircraft damage: | Destroyed |
Category: | Accident |
Location: | El Cajon, CA -
United States of America
|
Phase: | En route |
Nature: | Training |
Departure airport: | El Cajon, CA (KSEE) |
Destination airport: | Brown Field, CA (KSDM) |
Investigating agency: | NTSB |
Confidence Rating: | Accident investigation report completed and information captured |
Narrative:A Cessna 182Q and a Cessna 172RG, were operating in class D airspace and departed from the same airport. The Cessna 172RG was operating under instrument flight rules as an instructional flight (IFR) and receiving radar service from an approach control facility, while the Cessna 182 was operating under visual flight rules (VFR) and had been released from communication with air traffic control. The pilot undergoing instruction in the Cessna 172RG was most likely wearing a view limiting device which tasked the certified flight instructor seated in the right seat to serve as both an instructor and a safety pilot. The Cessna 172RG departed first, performing a right 260-degree turn over the airport and was assigned a southwest heading by the controller. The Cessna 182Q departed to the west and made a left turn, while climbing in a southeasterly direction. The heading assigned to the Cessna 172RG put it on a direct collision course with the Cessna 182Q, with a collision angle of 40 degrees. Following a discussion with the controller about the pilot's intentions upon completion of an approach, the controller instructed the Cessna 172RG to fly heading 190. The pilot read back, "One nine" and no further transmissions were received from the Cessna 172RG. In class D airspace, there is no specified separation requirement between VFR and IFR aircraft. However, controllers still have a responsibility to be vigilant for potential collisions between aircraft under these circumstances. This accident occurred after the controllers in communication with the Cessna 172RG had received a sustained conflict alert involving the Cessna 172RG and Cessna 182Q (operating on a VFR transponder code), but failed to recognize or resolve the conflict. Comparisons of the calculated convergence angles of the two airplanes showed that for an 85th percentile male seated in the left seat (Cessna did not create pilot view angles for pilots seated in the front right seat), the Cessna 172RG pilot was about 15 degrees outside of the right view angle and the Cessna 182Q pilot was within about 6 degrees of the left view angle.
Probable Cause: The pilots of both airplanes failure to maintain an adequate visual lookout due to their relative flight paths, which limited the available visual cues. Factors were the failure of the air traffic controller(s) to issue a conflict alert to the Cessna 172RG after repeated visual and aural warnings of an impending collision and the task load of the certified flight instructor.
Sources:
NTSB:
https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20060215X00204&key=1 Location
Revision history:
Date/time | Contributor | Updates |
28-Oct-2008 00:45 |
ASN archive |
Added |
21-Dec-2016 19:24 |
ASN Update Bot |
Updated [Time, Damage, Category, Investigating agency] |
05-Dec-2017 09:03 |
ASN Update Bot |
Updated [Operator, Total fatalities, Total occupants, Other fatalities, Source, Narrative] |
The Aviation Safety Network is an exclusive service provided by:
CONNECT WITH US:
©2024 Flight Safety Foundation