Accident near Dunkerque.

[airazurxtror]

Two aircraft from Koksijde have collided à Les Moëres, near Dunkerque (France) this morning around 11h.
One of them was a Ce 172 OO-WAO (two wounded), the other being a VL3 (two casualties).
In french :
http://www.lavoixdunord.fr/actualite/L_ ... plan.shtml
http://www.dhnet.be/infos/faits-divers/ ... rance.html

[aerobel]

reg'n of the VL3 involved was OO-G55. The authorities will give more information on monday.

[airazurxtror]

In "De Zondag" of today :
Marc Wouters, of the West Aviation Club of Koksijde :
- the two victims of yesterday were in their early twenties of age, the pilot had a good record, and she had already logged some 150 - 200 flight hours. The weather conditions were near perfect, with very good visibility. The VL3 was brand new, christened at the Koksijde flying club only one and a half month ago.
- there are about one thousand ULM pilots in Belgium. Usually, there are on average 2 people per year killed in an ULM accident. This year, so far we are already at 11casualties! "Het is onbegrijpelijk" says Marc Wouters ...

[jan_olieslagers]

As a low-time ultralight pilot: I am afraid it is not so very much ununderstandable (or should that read "incomprehensible"?), some possible contributing factors have been pointed out several times before. The present rate of fatal accidents is certainly very worrying. My main hope is on the upcoming EASA ELSA regulations. Unfortunately we cannot count on their coming in effect soon - they still have to be ratified at EASA level, and after that the individual countries must integrate them in their national law and regulations. In the meanwhile everybody, ULM pilots in particular, should be much more careful. We really can't afford our reputation going ever lower, it is hard enough to keep our present privileges up as it is.

[Lyulka]

When checking the website of the club http://www.westaviationclub.be/de%20vloot.html , I read that the plane was equipped with a chute.
Any idea if this was deployed?

[regi]

When checking the website of the club http://www.westaviationclub.be/de%20vloot.html , I read that the plane was equipped with a chute.
Any idea if this was deployed?

Maybe the pilot was not capable to do something anymore because of the impact ?

[teddybAIR]

This accident once again stresses the importance of the 90/10 rule that states that 90% of a VFR pilot's attention should be outside to scan the plane's environment. I'm a soon to be PPL pilot and have already experienced several situations that required corrective action from my side in order to prevent that a situation would evolve to a "too close for comfort" experience.

For those who have little experience in flying: you should know that it is very hard to see a plane that is flying several km's away without knowing it's exact position. By the time you have a visual on the traffic, there is often very little time left for traffic avoidance. That is why instructors keep stressing the importance of see and avoid.

When I used to fly gliders at EBDT, all our gliders were equiped with FLARM, a relatively cheap solution that gives the pilot an auditive and visual warning when the seperation between your aircraft and another aircraft that is equiped with FLARM is compromised. Why make this type of equipment mandatory for all VFR aircraft?! I realise this is probably a naïve question and that there must be certain logic objections, but the question remains: what hinders the implementation of a FLARM alike solution? cost? I agree it comes at a certain cost, but if the return is 11 casualties avoided per year, we should certainly start considering this seriously.

best regards,
bAIR

[jan_olieslagers]

@Regi: for as little as I understand, the accident happened at the destination airfield LFAK, so they must have been very low, too low for a chute to be of any use. But we were to get official info today, let's wait for that.

@bAIR: FLARM is a nice initiative, but seems to be a private venture of one company, not under any official regulation or control. A bit too reminiscent of a certain PC software supplier... Sooner or later we will all be carrying mode-S transponders*, this would be a better base for collision avoidance IMHO.


*(OO-TMS already has one, did you know?)

[Gliderpilot]

Systems like FLARM (or ADS-B/TCAS, which is far more familiar in powered airplanes, and even mandatory for all aircaft with MTOW>5,700kg) can only prevent midair collisions, but will help very little when you lack proper airmanship.
Although I'm questionning if these devices would have been helpfull in this case, but let's wait for the accident report before we make any conlusions...

[Propwash]

@Regi: for as little as I understand, the accident happened at the destination airfield LFAK, so they must have been very low, too low for a chute to be of any use. But we were to get official info today, let's wait for that.

Just another tragic high/low wing 'see and avoid' accident?

[tolipanebas]

With more information about the accident now known, it seems it's one of those accidents which finds its roots in overconfident pilots trying out things which they aren't trained for nor have the skills (and knowledge) for.

I am not going to bash all PPL (or even just ULM) pilots since you need to start somewhere and I've been there too, but guys (and girls) allow me to give you one advice: understand your personal limitations and remember one isn't an experienced pilot if one only has a couple of hundreds of flight hours...

You may very well be regarded as quite something in your club and by your friends, but remember that on the grand scale of aviators, your flying skills are very very elementary at best and you're definitely not trained to do any formation flying, semi-IFR flying or pseudo-aerobatic maneuvers.

Enjoy leisurely excursions around the church tower from the familiar airfield you've been trained at and take your brother or father with you if you please, yet leave the more complicated missions for what they are: a step above and beyond your personal training level. All too many lives have been lost recently because overconfident people absolutely wanted to do aerial photography, wanted to fly in weather requiring the use of instrumentation and radio-navigation or do aerobatic maneuvers just to show off!!!

[teddybAIR]

With more information about the accident now known, it seems it's one of those accidents which finds its roots in overconfident pilots trying out things which they aren't trained for nor have the skills (and knowledge) for.

I'm sorry, but may I ask hat more information you are referring to?
Thx in advance!

[Poeli]

I read in the newspaper they were doing a 'photo flight', the people in the Cessna were taking photo's of the people in the VL3. And somehow they must have hit each other...

[airazurxtror]

http://www.lavoixdunord.fr/actualite/L_ ... -hom.shtml

The passenger in the Cessna wanted to make photos of her girl-friend, who was the ULM pilot. In order to get better pictures, the two airplanes went nearer each other and collided.
I am no pilot, but I have often heard that flying in formation is not as easy as it seems ...

[Propwash]

I am no pilot, but I have often heard that flying in formation is not as easy as it seems ...

Correct

A extensive 'safety' briefing and Air to Air radio communication is extreme important, don't use to much ailerons and don't bank more than 20° etc.

Note: if you have to deal with a first or low timer, let him/her only fly straight and level (same heading and altitude) ahead with the sun (if any) over the chaseplane (photoplane).

Random basic guidelines HERE and HERE

[tolipanebas]

That's all very nice, but really, formation flying should not be tried by people who did not receive proper training, period!

Ever been in the cockpit of a plane flying formation?
You'd be surprised by the skills and precision required to remain as close as possible to, but not ahead of the plane you're following, let alone not to hit it accidentally!

Somebody who's only flying a few times a year simply isn't having the skills required for all this, certainly not if he/she is low on total hours and without ever having had a proper briefing nor any practical training, so just don't try it.

I'd say that's the main rule to remember here for PPL pilots: know your limitations and respect them; if you want to expand your limits and improve your skills, take some training first, don't just experiment. Your life is worth more than a bruised ego and the price of a couple of professional intruction lessons, I should think!

[Propwash]

Ever been in the cockpit of a plane flying formation?

Yeb,

I have flown my last 'photo' formation flight just over a week ago and in the past I've flown formation in IMC too.

But you're right, regardless of ticket (PPL, CPL or ATPL) nobody should experiment formation flying without extensive briefing and flight instruction

[Gliderpilot]

I agree with all above that formation flying should not be tried by experimenting on your own...

However I do not agree that 'unexperienced' pilots with 'low hours' are unaware of the dangers of (formation) flying, and therefore should not do it.
Being a PPL holder myself, with less than 100hours, I am capable of doing formation aerobatics. And yes, I am properly trained.

[Propwash]

Glider Flying is the most pure form of flying

In general, glider pilots have better stick and rudder skills.

I think, we can't compare real aviators (glider pilots) with moped (ULM) pilots.

[teddybAIR]

I wholeheartedly agree with tolipanebas and cannot understand statements like the one from Gliderpilot.

Sorry Gliderpilot, but I feel obliged to tell you that someone should warn you that you might just be overestimating your competencies here. I'm in the same situation as you - low timer ppl - and cannot imagine that someone who has less than 100 hrs TT can have the competencies required to comfortably fly in formation.

I'm curious to know what you mean when you say that you are "properly trained". Please enlighten me on how someone who has less than 100 hrs (what is the recency of those hours and on which types did you fly them, by the way?) can have the competenties to fly in formation without significantly compromising safety?

I wasn't even aware that there are specific trainings for formation flying (included in aerobatics course maybe)? And cannot imagine that they would give such a training to someone that has less than 100hrs TT if even a simple VFR night requires at least 100hrs TT and 60 hrs PIC.

Fly safe!
bAIR