I'm less than impressed with some CAP pilots, seen them do enough dumb shit just in the course of normal taxi-and-take-off ops at airports that I don't think they should be the whole show when it comes to search ops. That said, remind me again why the 121.5/243.0 ELT's are no longer monitored by satellite? The good thing about a 121.5/243 unit is that standard GA aircraft can keep an ear out for crashes by keeping a radio tuned to 121.5 when flying over remote country, and that everyone already has them. Why not develop the next-gen ELT's with built-in GPS tracking so that it could co-exist with the older-tech ELT's using 121.5, instead of requiring an expensive refit?

I don't think I can add anything to this discussion other than I am allmighty god sorry for your loss.

My suggestions as to help improve survival after the crash would be "educate not legislate" perhaps personal survival training would have helped your daughter? I don't know the circumstances of the accident so will not say more.

As a father, nearly the worst pain I have had was when one of my kids got hurt and I couldn't find someone to blame for it. I hope you can find some peace of mind.

I want to say thank you to everyone for their replies. I think it is important to note that I am searching for answers and trying to learn about a topic I know very little about. Here is a short version of the facts of the crash: The plane hit some trees, the wings did not come off like they should have at some point a fire started. The plane ended up nose down, vertical. Matt was trapped in the plane, the M.E does not think he died on impact, instead the M.E thinks he died in the fire. Trista somehow got out of the plane, unsure how, she had extensive burns and extensive damage to her legs, the M.E. thinks she died within 3 or 4 hours. This left my Shyann. Shy was largely uninjured in the crash, she had a couple of scrapes, bruises and very minor burns. The M.E. cannot give me a time of death, I have heard anywhere from 4 hours to 5 days. She was alone, my 9 year old angel died alone and cold in the wilderness, I am sure she was terrified. I did everything I could to get the national guard out there, it took nearly 6 days for this to happen. I was told by CAP to not go and look for her, I was told if I walked into one of their search grids they would pull assets out. If I hired a private plane they would pull their assets. They were allowing other pilots to help but only on a very strict limited basis. There were atleast 7 planes on the ground waiting to be allowed to help. At one point the CAP had a search grid of nearly 2400 square miles and had a plan been filed the search area would have been much much smaller. At one point CAP even took the word of a psychic and investigated his premonition. I do agree that PLB's are a good idea and should be a requirement. From what I have learned the 406 beacon is a good one and should be mandated. I do think that education is key, we are trying to launch a nationwide awareness program, trying to figure out how to get that started. I can see the freedom that flying offers and it is an very attractive thing. I do feel however that when children and passengers become involved that it changes the dynamics of the equation. My daughter and ex-wife paid for the lack of a proper beacon and no flight plan with their life. I now have a 4 year old son and a two year old daughter who don't understand where Shy went and now have to live the rest of their lives without their sister. There have been many crashes with similar outcomes where lack of a flight plan and poor beacons have cost people their lives. While I understand a plan is not needed when going for a drive, but honestly how many cars crash into a remote mountainous area that is difficult to access. I am in a difficult position, I understand the freedom aspect and the need to keep the dreaded government out of our lives, but this is a very real safety issue. If people cannot think and do these things for themselves then another sort of prompting is needed. This is where governmental regulation comes in. You guys have made an interesting point, knowledge is the key to solving this problem. Knowledge about the dangers of mountain flying, knowledge of the ineffectiveness of the older beacons, the Bullying mentality that I witnessed from CAP during this scenario. In the end, it is too late for shy and tris, but it is not to late to save another father and family from enduring the nightmare that my life has become. I do not understand the intricacies of flying, but I am learning about beacons, flight planning and flight tracking and I am stunned that these ineffective older beacons have not been phased out. I did not know when I said goodbye to Shyann that it would be the last time I would see her, or hold her, or hear her voice. I miss her terribly, my life has been shattered. So please if you have these older beacons replace them, if you fly please file a flight plan that way SAR atleast has an idea where to look, use flight following, let loved ones on the ground know the route you will take and when you should arrive. All of these things can save a life, please learn from my pain. My Shyann is gone, my angel, but if you are reading this you are still here. Its not to late. If we can save one life, it is all worth it. Sorry for the rant, but I feel strongly about this. Mark

ShysDad wrote:While I understand a plan is not needed when going for a drive, but honestly how many cars crash into a remote mountainous area that is difficult to access. ..... If we can save one life, it is all worth it.

I am sorry about your daughter. You do need to put this in perspective however. There have been incidents where a car has gone over an embankment and not found for a long long time. So, why is it so clear that a plan is not needed for driving? After all by your claim, if you can save just one life, then it should all be worth it to require a plan with monitoring and tracking in all driving vehicles. Wouldn't it? If you could just save one life by limiting all driving speeds to under 25 mph, it would all be worth it, right?

If you really want some regulation, how about passing a law that requires passengers to ask questions about flight plans, ELT, etc... Then, require the pilot to ask the passengers if they asked all the required questions before flight. If a passenger or parent of a passenger doesn't like the risk, then they have the option to not go on the flight...

An exchange would go something like this:

Pilot - Did you ask all of your required safety questions?
Passenger- Not yet. Have you filed a flight plan?
Pilot - No, and I don't intend to.
Passenger- Do you have a spot tracker or newer ELT?
Pilot - No, I just have the old 121.5 ELT. Do you still want to go?
Passenger - Yes, lets go!
OR
Passenger - No, I think I will stay home today...

because when a pilot accepts passengers, the pilot becomes responsible for their safety. And yes there have been cases of cars going off of embankments and it is tragic. But if the numbers are researched, there are far more small plane mishaps then of cars missing for days on end. I can see where this is hotly debated topic, I understand both sides of the argument. I research the NTSB database daily and I can see the number of crashes from small aircraft. If someone asked me if I was going to still board an aircraft without a proper beacon and/or flight plan I would not. This is where a concerted effort of requiring more effective beacons, better knowledge and flight plans or flight following can come into play. Like I said if a pilot wants to go without those and he flies alone, ok that's cool, but when passengers become involved especially children the dynamics change.

"I did everything I could to get the national guard out there, it took nearly 6 days for this to happen. I was told by CAP to not go and look for her, I was told if I walked into one of their search grids they would pull assets out. If I hired a private plane they would pull their assets. They were allowing other pilots to help but only on a very strict limited basis. There were at least 7 planes on the ground waiting to be allowed to help. At one point the CAP had a search grid of nearly 2400 square miles and had a plan been filed the search area would have been much much smaller. At one point CAP even took the word of a psychic and investigated his premonition".

Mark
This wreaks of incompetence and mismanagement, it tells of the mentality of we are doing it our way or you hit the highway. Unfortunately a flight plan I'm afraid would have yielded the same results seeing the same people would have been conducting the SAR with the same attitude. Had the search been timely and with cooperation of all assets and ententes, the outcome would have been different. Your beef should be with the people that hindered a search for an airplane that was within minutes of the departure airport.

You and me spend precious $ for CAP and other agencies we should be getting top $ results not excuses. And if she had of been in a plane with Steve Fosset this thread would not be going.

BTW I fly with a SPOT and a GPS linked 406 ELT I don't like filing a flight plan because I don't like getting the phone call from FSS 4-6 hours after I land asking me if I'd like to close my flight plan #-o

You don't go into a restaurant and ask them a ton of question on whether or not the food is spoiled or contaminated? Why I ask? The answer is simple, the restaurant bears the responsibility of making sure all safety precautions have been taken and the food is as safe as possible. This is state and federally mandated. Some positions carry inherently more responsibility than others. When passengers board a plane, their safety becomes the responsibility of the pilot. But we are getting off track. How can I become more involved with an awareness campaign to bring these issues to light. If this story is told, I think the effect can be tremendous. I do not want "big brother" involved anymore that anyone else. This is an important topic and I look forward to our discussions. For the record, my ex-wife was passionate and happy about flying and I now understand why. Thanks for your patience and honesty I appreciate it.

ShysDad wrote:because when a pilot accepts passengers, the pilot becomes responsible for their safety. And yes there have been cases of cars going off of embankments and it is tragic. But if the numbers are researched, there are far more small plane mishaps then of cars missing for days on end. I can see where this is hotly debated topic, I understand both sides of the argument. I research the NTSB database daily and I can see the number of crashes from small aircraft. If someone asked me if I was going to still board an aircraft without a proper beacon and/or flight plan I would not. This is where a concerted effort of requiring more effective beacons, better knowledge and flight plans or flight following can come into play. Like I said if a pilot wants to go without those and he flies alone, ok that's cool, but when passengers become involved especially children the dynamics change.

If you look at the database for car accidents then you might not want to ever leave your driveway. I understand your desire to make a difference but I think you're headed in the wrong direction with flight plans. I don't think we can stress enough how flight plans do not always fix the problem! Also cars do disappear and at times aren't found for a long time. I remember in several years back a guy dissapeared for days, then ended up finding him two weeks later. He was just 50ft off the freeway that was packed with traffic every day. Finally, when you look at the accidents on the NTSB site, make sure you filter from the ones that are small things....bent wings, belly landings/gear ups, or the things that in a car you wouldn't have to make a huge report, but in a plane you do. That'll eliminate a lot of the "crashes" that are really fender benders.

This is heart wrenching to read...and I heard a bit more from a person who heard from regional emergency resources along the same lines- there was prevention of participation of ready and willing resources very early, and the problem continued for nearly a week. As someone who suddenly lost a brother in the wilderness, with absolutely no reason to second guess or doubt the response of the SAR teams involved, I can still only only imagine the impact of these revelations on the depth of your loss.

A response to a 121.5 ELT beacon with a VFR flight plan only is still measured in days on average. Flight following or IFR flight plans reduce this response time to dozens of hours. FF and IFR plans are not available or practical in mountainous terrain.

The newer 406 ELT's and similar devices (PLB's, SPOTs, DeLormes, sat phones, etc) are the best real hope from technology for reducing response time. But the rest will remain an attitudinal issue with pilots to provide detailed information to others about their plans, and for the FSS to allow more detailed descriptions to be entered into a VFR flight plan. It makes either rescue or closure faster. 406's will become mandatory soon, and the prices (480-600 bucks) are more affordable than expensive and ineffectual SAR efforts, or the grief of loved ones.

If the CAP prevented the coordination of ready and willing resources (particularly ground) from participation in a search operation (and from multiple news, word of mouth, and your own accounts, this is precisely what happened), then several people need to get their careers out of the way and let more capable individuals or organizations work towards creating the kind of air SAR system worth granting incident authority to- CAP or no CAP.

Perhaps forwarding your experiences to an audience that includes the CAP or a prominent publication is something that might spur some reflection if not change. Embarrassment, shock, and testimony are unfortunately still more powerful tools for change than simple facts.

First off, my deepest condolences for you loss. I can't imagine the pain your going through.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am), but didn't the plane crash reasonably close to the airport of departure? The reason I ask is, why the 50 mile radius exception? If you file a flight plan and crash within 50 miles, are they still going to waste time in a 2400 mile area past the 50 mile mark?
Im with the previous posters on legislating 406 ELTs. But I also agree that the cost is very prohibitive. I would suggest tryig to find a way with the FAA to make it easier and cheaper for pilots to upgrade and make their planes safer. There are a lot of things we could do, but due to the lack of an STC and how hard it is to do a 337, makes it very tough and expensive.

[quote="ShysDad"]You don't go into a restaurant and ask them a ton of question on whether or not the food is spoiled or contaminated? Why I ask? The answer is simple, the restaurant bears the responsibility of making sure all safety precautions have been taken and the food is as safe as possible. This is state and federally mandated. Some positions carry inherently more responsibility than others. When passengers board a plane, their safety becomes the responsibility of the pilot. But we are getting off track. How can I become more involved with an awareness campaign to bring these issues to light. If this story is told, I think the effect can be tremendous. I do not want "big brother" involved anymore that anyone else. This is an important topic and I look forward to our discussions. For the record, my ex-wife was passionate and happy about flying and I now understand why. Thanks for your patience and honesty I appreciate it.[/quote]


Why have you not seriously addressed the incompidence of the initial SAR? Didnt the SAR know the proposed route of flight from the people that had advised them that the plane was missing. Had one of us made the same mistakes we would be civilly liable, why are SAR exempt?

Mark. I understand completely your passion in this pursuit. Your talking about 3 of my biggest passions. 1. My kids. 2. Flying. 3. Keeping the govt out of my life. I try to envision myself in your same shoes. And I would lean towards the thoughts that no matter what any of say we will not sway your opinion on what you feel you need to do. I stand strongly behind the government NOT making things better for us. They don't care about saving lives. Only more control. Reading the NTSb daily will give you a false sense of reality. In comparison to how much flying is going on daily and getting done safely. Tragedy will always still strike. Regardless of more laws and regs. Read daily death reports of all traffic fatalities for a little comparison on the odds. Like someone said. Driving 25 everywhere may save a life. The incompetency of the sar that took place is way more to blame than the lack of a flight plan. But I'm betting that will never be admitted to. We're not just saying it won't help this situation just for our own benefit. We're giving you real life facts. It's the same concept as gun control cutting down crime. Does not work and has been proven time and again. But it seems like a simple concept. Spoons don't make people fat!! It's a tough call to make but even if putting my child in a bubble for life would guarantee they're safety, I could not bring myself to it as much as I would want to for my sake. Your event is as tragic as they come. I have literally been in tears over it reading about it and placing myself in the situation mentally as much as possible. I would be in the same politicians ass over the way the sar went down. That is beyond excusable or acceptable. It is a crime. Reach out to some pilots that are experienced in this area. There's some with similar stories. Look for a legitimate way of reducing these events that will make a real difference. Spend your time,efforts and emotions in a way that will produce results. Please! I know you think this is the path your own or you wouldn't be going down it. If you want real results with a satisfying outcome dont look towards the govt. Get them to fix what's already broken b4 stacking on new laws that won't produce the outcome your looking for. Thank you for keeping an open mind and learning. And again. My prayers are with you.

Glidergeek wrote: I don't like filing a flight plan because I don't like getting the phone call from FSS 4-6 hours after I land asking me if I'd like to close my flight plan

Based on personal experience, in the most recent 2 cases where I either forgot in time to close or I didn't plan enough to avid being too remote to communicate with FSS in a timely manner, the FSS lit up the phones within 40 minutes of my close time. That's right on schedule (30 minutes overdue from what I've heard). And they didn't just make a few calls- they hammered all the airports on my route, called my contact numbers (other half), called on tips, etc. By the time I was able to call back within an hour overdue with a red embarrassed face, they were still calling, knew precisely where I was from the tips, and were going to call local establishments to drive over check to see if I had arrived on the field. This is the FSS...not the CAP.

The FSS takes it very seriously.

ShysDad, as a father of two I can only barely imagine the pain you are feeling. There are simply no words.

For me as a pilot who often flies with my family over wilderness areas, what happened to your family is the worst-case scenario that keeps me up at night.

That said, the solution, as others have mentioned, is readily available: 406 PLB's and ELTs, along with training all your passengers on how to activate them. In addition, as a family we regularly work through basic survival stuff such as fire making, shelter building and signaling when we're out camping. I'm much more confident today that my family would make it out should the worst occur to me.

To be honest, VFR flight plans are really an extremely lousy way to try to find someone. It's akin to telling SAR which haystack to look for the needle in at best. They wouldn't even know that there was a needle to look for for several hours.

Yes the crash occurred within 11 miles, however the destination point was far further than 50 miles so CAP really had no idea where to look. There is so much to this story, it would absolutely stun everyone here to know the details. We are addressing the SAR issues we have a team of lawyers investigating that very aspect. There are a ton of details, SAR is being investigated, police departments are being investigated, the lawyers are handling that aspect. I am just trying to get involved and help save others. The SAR had no idea of the route that Matt took, they searched several different paths, that is why I am suggesting the flight plans because then a general route would have been known. Yes there could have been a deviation, however CAP had no idea where to look because there were several paths that Matthew could have followed. In the end the aircraft was found 11 miles from the airport. 11 miles, had CAP had a clear direction, it could have been found with Shy alive. I am not done with CAP yet.

Mandatory flight plans will have the opposite effect you envision, unfortunately. Contemporary VFR flight plans don't require radar service or flight following, just a rough route on file and departure/arrival times. It's meant to give some indication of route so that the search can focus on a corridor most likely to contain the wreckage.

The trouble is, if the pilot diverts or changes his route of flight without notifying flight service, and goes down, the search focuses on the wrong area. A mandatory flight plan, especially for people who just like to grab a friend and buzz the mountains in circles, will be treated as a cursory nuisance and not provide location information any more valuable than what the pilot provides before the flight, which won't be much if he just wants to go where the wind takes him that day. The beacon technology is what should be focused on as it requires no second-guessing by searchers.

ShysDad wrote:How can I become more involved with an awareness campaign to bring these issues to light. If this story is told, I think the effect can be tremendous. I do not want "big brother" involved anymore that anyone else.

Alaska's a special case, because aviation is such a part of life, but even the FAA there is pretty progressive in matters of education. Check out the videos here: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/divisions/alaskan_region/flyalaska/ Most of the audience in the lower 48 isn't attuned with (or even aware of) travel by light plane, so this kind of education has to be targeted to pilots and airport terminals where passengers are likely to come across them.

One of my favorites is a poster at Columbia airport (O22) with a picture showing a plane full of a family bickering while the pilot is trying to shoot an instrument approach. That poster made more of an impact on my family than all of my pleas to be quiet. ("Wow. Maybe he really does need to concentrate . . . .") Similarly, high altitude airports have special warnings, reminders and equipment to caution pilots about density altitude.

My experience is that everyone goes to the john in the terminal/trailer before they get on board the airplane. You can't saturate everyone with doom and gloom warnings, but a few well-placed reminders on the way to the facilities could help jog pilots out of complacency and make passengers think to ask in in case they haven't been properly briefed. "Where's the ELT/How do I turn it on?" "Dress for the country you're flying over" "When In Doubt, Wait It Out" etc. I'm not suggesting some kind of macabre Burma Shave line-up, but truly, the messages need to be where the passengers see them. Just a thought.

CAVU

I do believe that the beacon technology is an invaluable asset to any search and rescue. However a "rough route" is precisely what would have helped in this scenario. CAP search a massive are looking for the plane, had they had a rough route the area might not have been so large. In addition the National Guard should have been out there day one, but were not because the CAP had no general area where they would have been. Once I complained enough (6 days worth) the National Guard and Sheriff's helicopters were dispatched. Blackhawks are equipped with FLIR which would have made location easier and faster. In the end a Sherriff's helicopter found the wreckage. The efforts were jumbled to say the least, but there are other variables that would have aided CAP.

Oregon180 wrote:To be honest, VFR flight plans are really an extremely lousy way to try to find someone. It's akin to telling SAR which haystack to look for the needle in at best. They wouldn't even know that there was a needle to look for for several hours.

Flight plans only tell SAR which haystack the needle thought it was going to be in before being forced to divert for weather or terrain, or just diverting by choice (the reason a lot of us fly in the first place). Since many crashes occur as a result of weather (bad weather, hot weather, wind conditions, etc.), the situation where the flight plan is the most "needed" (i.e, where a plane has crashed) is often the situation where the flight plan is the least helpful because the pilot has diverted from the originally planned route due to the same conditions which ultimately cause the crash.

By contrast, using a SPOT or PLB, my original intended route of flight (the only thing a flight plan captures) becomes irrelevant as soon as I divert, and my loved ones are provided with an ongoing update of my actual route, rather than the misleading idea that I must be along a (now-outdated) line on an map because I said so on the flight plan I filed before I took off.

I briefed my passenger this morning about how to push the 911 button on my SPOT. I have you and your daughter to thank for that improvement in my pre-flight briefing.

Excellent mark! Don't let up!!
The flight plan might have done them zero good past 1 mile other than keep them focused in an area where they definetly weren't! A pilot familiar with the areas, weather patterns, passes, etc. etc. would of bad a higher probAbility of finding them quicker due to experience. But as you are experiencing the bloated egos will prevail...with the power of the govt backing them!!! Your govt is already a huge part to blame in your loss. But I'm sure if let em keep stacking on laws and regs they'll eventually get it right.. Why do you think when people want real results they use private resources vs govt? When Ross Perot had his people rescued, he didn't call on govt. he called on private. Always produces better results. If sar was even contracted out it would be 10x efficient overnight. I would like to you see you get real results. That's why I keep putting in my .02 worth. Don't listen to the bs excuses these guys will keep feeding you to keep the mud off they're face. Dig deeper than flight plan. I'm curious if you would mind telling us where this idea came from in the first place? Might help us understand a little better. Hoping some more people with good sar experience will chime in and help out.