Border crash MVA vectoring

A few months ago there was a thread about a Mexico/US border crash, VFR to IFR, competing 7110.65 references, NTSB blamed controller in report.

Any way I can access that thread? I can't seem to find it through search.

Thanks

I finally found the right word combination on google to get the plane number, N30DK, and that got to me to "The Conscience Factor" post.

alright i read the abbreviated report.

the Lear was a VFR departure. what could the controller possibly have said that would transfer the terrain responsibility from the pilot to the controller. i figure the pilot departed VFR then switched to the departure controller to request his IFR clearance already airborne. i'm too lazy to look it up but there is a rule in the book that says a pilot of a VFR pop-up aircraft requesting their IFR in the air is required to maintain their own terrain and obstruction clearance. there again, what could the controller possibly have said that would shift that responsibility from the pilot to the controller.

he must've said something like, "Lear 12345, i realize ur responsible for your own terrain and obstruction clearance, however i'll take on that responsibility since your below the MIA...i know captain it sounds really silly but that's just the way it's going to be"

how absurd does that sound...i'm really interested to hear why the safety board ruled the way they did.

__________________

I think the controller issuing the heading is what got him. He assigned a heading when he should of suggested one to remain clear of terrain. The MVA was 5000. Also, the report says that the ceiling was 2100 ft. but the controller told the pilot to expect his clearance climbing through 5000. So, basically, there is a VFR popup, looking for IFR, below the MVA. The VFR aircraft is given a heading and expected to climb through the clouds VFR??? The pilots were probably saying "What the hell is going on?" They probably expected to be given a climb and a clearance and since they were not formally issued a climb, they maintained VFR. The report also says that the controller finished his day shift and returned for his mid without any sleep. The MSAW was going off the entire time. Pilots deserve better than this!!

alright wait...the MVA was 5000, the aircraft was at below 2100. why issue a heading? "Lear 12345 leaving 5,000 cleared to XYZ airport via/or as filed." why the heading? the aircraft was VFR. if there was a ceiling at 2100 how in the hell did the pilot expect to get above the clouds? the clouds were only 1000 feet above basic IMC. why even depart Brown field VFR if there was no real way to stay VFR or get above the clouds.

sounds to me like the pilot made a poor decision departing the airport in marginal weather VFR and expecting the controller to save him by issuing him his IFR below while he was below the MIA/MVA. the controller screwed himself by issuing the heading, i'm not debating that. but why issue the heading?? i don't get it. it's the pilots responsibility.

lesson learned all. know the rules and never buy off on something because a pilot screwed up by taking off VFR in marginal weather probably knowing there was no way to get above the clouds. the pilot was probably trying to bypass a delay on the ground for his IFR so made a poor decision to just get on his way and depart VFR damn well knowing he was going to encounter IMC really quickly. apparently in mountainous terrain to boot.

__________________

The article says, according to the CVR, the pilot tried 4 times to contact FSS and approach on the ground but got no response so he departed VFR. I dont understand the heading either. All I can guess is that the airport is on or close to the Mexican border hence, the controller was offline making the point out to Tijuana approach.

I also reread the article and the controller did say "maintain VFR." A heading can be assigned below the MIA to a VFR aircraft so, the controller did nothing wrong there. It would be the pilot's responsibility to advise the controller if he was unable to maintain VFR or if the heading puts the aircraft in danger. No doubt, the controller deserves an honorable mention but I think he was doing the same thing we all have done. VFR popup calls for IFR, he continues climbing VFR, you make the point out, aircraft reaches the MVA and is cleared on course, contact whoever, So Long! It is one of those situations that is basic and turned ugly.

I don't think the controller knew their was a ceiling and expected the aircraft to continue climbing. The CVR also revealed the pilot yawned 6 times in 4 minutes. Basically, it was poor service and poor flying.

Anybody know what happened to the controller??

The NTSB conducted a sorry, biased, possibly incompetent investigation into that crash. You can't be expected to be proficient in ATC application/interpretation by picking up a copy of "Air Traffic Control For Dummies" from the local bookstore on your way to an accident site! Which that sorry investigation the NTSB conducted seems to indicate they did...

I believe the controller was about as culpable in that incident as McDonalds would be serving a fatty, artery-clogging cheeseburger to a fatal head-on car crash victim the morning of the crash.

Anyway, I'm finishing up some research and in a couple weeks I hope to present what I've found.

I'd like to see a copy of that. Will you post?

I wouldn't mind reading your work on this Tommy. U mind posting when ur done. Or i can slide u my email if u prefer to just email it privately or something like that.

__________________