Kobe Bryant killed in helicopter crash

[Adrian123 1,015]

6 minutes ago, Dave_YVR said:

when his eyes were needed out the windows to fly the aircraft

His "eyes" should have been on the instruments in those visibility condituions and I don't agree TAWS would have made things worse.

[Dave_YVR 970]

If IFR then yes, eyes on the instruments makes sense. Down in the murk in hilly terrain, well WELL below any IFR minimum altitudes it's eyes outside and scanning the basics instruments.

[jmdriskell 178]

Last report I saw was that the chopper wasn't IFR certified.  Don't know but in any event, it was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

Jim Driskell

[BlueStar 323]

20 hours ago, jmdriskell said:

Last report I saw was that the chopper wasn't IFR certified.  Don't know but in any event, it was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

Jim Driskell

The helicopter and pilot were IFR qualified.  

The charter company was certified as  Part 135 - VFR only.

[jmdriskell 178]

I saw that later, but it still doesn't justify this mess.

Jim Driskell

[MartinRex007 390]

We won't know until the NTSB releases their report, but a decent rate of 2,000 fpm and speed of 175 knts in hilly and foggy conditions just doesn't make sense, unless as mentioned above the pilot became extremely disoriented and basically lost control of the AC.

[jalbino59 114]

3 hours ago, BlueStar said:

The charter company was certified as  Part 135 - VFR only.

I think this was mis-stated and mis-understood.  It was a Part 135 flight (charter/commuter domestic} operated under VFR flight rules.  As I understand the FAA regulations, "Part 135 VFR ONLY" is not a thing, unless the aircraft themselves are not equipped and tested for IFR flight, or the pilot is not IFR certified and current, neither of which seems to be the case.     

[BlueStar 323]

7 hours ago, jalbino59 said:

I think this was mis-stated and mis-understood.  It was a Part 135 flight (charter/commuter domestic} operated under VFR flight rules.  As I understand the FAA regulations, "Part 135 VFR ONLY" is not a thing, unless the aircraft themselves are not equipped and tested for IFR flight, or the pilot is not IFR certified and current, neither of which seems to be the case.     

Do you know what the  OPSPEC for Island Express Helicopters was?  

[jalbino59 114]

13 hours ago, BlueStar said:

Do you know what the  OPSPEC for Island Express Helicopters was?  

No, this is why I prefaced my statement with "I think" and "as I understand".  I was relating my understanding of the FAA regs, not the company policies. Do you have first hand knowledge of the operator?

In addition, OPSPEC for part 135 operators make no mention of "VFR-ONLY" that I can see.  I may be wrong. https://rgl.faa.gov/regulatory_and_guidance_library/rgfar.nsf/farsbysect?openview&count=-1&restricttocategory=part+135

 

Edited February 2, 2020 by jalbino59

[188AHC 2,138]

Bluestar is correct.

The company was a part 135 operation but was limited to VFR only operation. However, the pilot and aircraft were both IFR compliant.

The VFR operation might have been the result of the owners wishes or an insurance requirement.

 

[jalbino59 114]

3 hours ago, 188AHC said:

The company was a part 135 operation but was limited to VFR only operation.

What is the authority (part and subpart) that limits a 135 operator to VFR? I'm not saying this is incorrect, I'm just curious.  

[188AHC 2,138]

2 hours ago, jalbino59 said:

What is the authority (part and subpart) that limits a 135 operator to VFR? I'm not saying this is incorrect, I'm just curious.  

Did you read what I said? It can be a rider. 

[jalbino59 114]

14 minutes ago, 188AHC said:

Did you read what I said? It can be a rider. 

I read your entire post.  I quoted the part that I was seeking clarification on.  I still remember when I first received my ticket, many years ago my instructor told me to remember you should never stop being a "student" pilot.  I'm sorry if my curiosity hurt your senses.

[BlueStar 323]

4 hours ago, jalbino59 said:

What is the authority (part and subpart) that limits a 135 operator to VFR? I'm not saying this is incorrect, I'm just curious.  

The OPSPEC.     

[W2DR 1,860]

Help me understand this. Both the pilot and the aircraft are IFR certified. But the pilot in almost zero visibility conditions sticks to VFR because of some part 135 regulation? Doesn't sound right to me................

Edited February 4, 2020 by W2DR
kant spel