Channel BannerChannel Banner
Ln-xGi1zRjALn-xGi1zRjA

I Investigated a Routine Flight Gone Horribly Wrong!

682,947
Socialcounts.Org
Enter Fullscreen (f)
23,128
likes
1,574
comments
daily view 0
monthly view 0

Share

Live Analytics

Comments 0

I Investigated a Routine Flight Gone Horribly Wrong! Analytics Table

Income Estimates for I Investigated a Routine Flight Gone Horribly Wrong!

Based on this YouTube video's total view count of 682K views and industry-standard rates, the estimated total earning is $478 - $1.36K through ad revenue. Historical data is not yet available to calculate daily, weekly, or monthly averages.

About I Investigated a Routine Flight Gone Horribly Wrong!

Explore I Investigated a Routine Flight Gone Horribly Wrong! with 682,947 views, 23,128 likes, and 1,574 comments. Experience the impact of this video content that has captured audience attention.

🌏 Get Exclusive NordVPN deal + 4 months extra here β†’ https://nordvpn.com/pilotdebrief It’s risk-free with Nord’s 30-day money-back guarantee! ✌️ Hey, it's Hoover! I've got a weekly letter for you on the patterns that keep killing pilots. Free β†’ https://pilotdebrief.com/pattern On a February morning in 2024, a Hawker 900XP departed Grand Junction for a required post-maintenance stall test and climbed into forecast moderate icing β€” both pilots on board would die in a flat spin near Westwater, Utah. The jet, operated by Clay Lacy Aviation, had just rolled out of West Star Aviation following a four-year inspection that required removal of the wing leading edges and TKS de-icing panels. Before that airplane could return to revenue service, the Pilot's Operating Manual demanded a stall check β€” flown in VMC, below 18,000 feet, with all external surfaces free of ice. The crew knew the conditions on the field. They had discussed sleet and "storm" conditions with maintenance personnel before they ever taxied out. Instead of waiting for clear air, the crew climbed through IMC and forecast moderate icing, leveling at 20,000 feet β€” about 2,000 feet above the prescribed test altitude β€” and set up the maneuver above an undercast. Engine and airframe anti-ice were off. They never used the ice detection spotlight to verify the wings were clean after the climb, and an icing study later showed that even a two-minute encounter in those conditions could have cut the maximum coefficient of lift by up to 40 percent and reduced the stall angle of attack by as much as 6 degrees. When they decelerated for the first check, the stick shaker and the aerodynamic stall arrived at essentially the same moment β€” the contamination had erased the warning margin the system was designed to provide. The airplane snapped right. The crew's response β€” full left aileron, full power, full aft column β€” aggravated the stall into a flat spin from which they could not recover. The NTSB also faulted the manufacturer's documentation and training pipeline: the structural repair manual and POM offered only broad qualifications for who could fly this test, and simulator training built around stall avoidance had not prepared either pilot for a real departure from controlled flight in this airplane. The probable cause was the flight crew's decision to conduct the post-maintenance stall test in icing conditions, combined with the manufacturer's lack of adequate training and experience requirements for crews performing the test, with the crew's failure to comply with the POM's cloud clearance, altitude, VMC, and ice-free-surfaces conditions cited as contributing. The pattern here is not a mystery malfunction. It is a check-the-box test flight launched into conditions the procedure specifically prohibited, flown by a crew the manufacturer had not adequately prepared for what an unacceptable stall in this airplane could actually look like. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ JOIN THE DEBRIEF CREW ON PATREON Ad-free videos and exclusive analysis From $5/month: https://patreon.com/pilotdebrief ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ SOURCES NTSB Accident ID: WPR24FA083 Status: Final Final Report: https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/193761/pdf Docket: https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket?ProjectID=193761 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ABOUT PILOT DEBRIEF Pilot Debrief is hosted by Hoover, a retired F-15E pilot and current pilot for a major U.S. airline. Every video on this channel analyzes publicly released NTSB final reports, factual narratives, CVR/FDR transcripts, and docket evidence to extract practical safety lessons for general aviation pilots. We do not speculate beyond the evidence. We do not blame pilots for being human. We debrief the decisions and the systems, not the people. ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ Sponsorships and brand partnerships: [email protected] #PilotDebrief #NTSB #AviationSafety #IcingConditions #StallRecovery

About YouTube Real-Time View Count

With SocialCounts.org’s view counter, track your YouTube video’s live view count and YouTube likes count in real time with fast, reliable updates.

Watch every YouTube video live view count rise with our real-time YouTube views trackerβ€”built for accuracy and minimal delay.

Follow YouTube real time views as they happen, using our dedicated view counter for YouTube videos.

Get up-to-date live view count on YouTube and see real-time growth with SocialCounts.org’s smart tracking tools.

Embed Widget

Parameters:

  • fullscreen=true - Fullscreen counter
  • graph=true - Live graph chart
  • counter=0/1/2 - Select counter (0=likes, 1=views, 2=comments)
URL

Click to copy the embed URL to your clipboard