Thread by @chasingray

The NTSB has released the docket & factual report for the Nov 2019 plane crash in SD that killed 9 and injured 3. This is going to be mostly about the pilot's failure to fully deice the aircraft but I've got additional thoughts. 🧵 nytimes.com/2022/05/09/us/…

This was a corporate aircraft flying corporate officers & family who had been hunting at a lodge for several days. More on those folks & the company can found in this ID article. eastidahonews.com/2019/11/kyani-…

The pilot had 2300 hours. He was a multi-engine, IFR pilot flying a single-engine PC12 aircraft. According to docs with the investigation, he worked for the company. He & another pax flew in the night before the crash. They were out the next morning brushing off the plane.

Everything about this witness statement & the deicing is bad. They could not reach the tail.

I'll say it again - they could not deice the tail.

Several outlets are reporting the a/c was overweight. (The report says about 107 lbs over.) More importantly, it was loaded 3.99-5.49 inches aft CG. When you add that to ice on the tail you get a predictable nightmare scenario - a/c stall on takeoff, which is what happened.

We need to talk about pressure, however. This is a fairly low time corporate pilot. The CVR has some interesting interactions between the PIC and the airport manager who was plowing. He told the PIC not to go. (RDO1 = the pilot, APT = mgr)

More between the manager & PIC. (The PIC had obtained an IFR clearance via cell phone to depart - there is no tower at this airport.) Now we also have a passenger chiming in - HOT-1 is the PIC talking to everyone else.

The airport manager was so frustrated.

And then we've got this. They took off & realized right away they were in trouble. (HOT2 was the front seat passenger.)

He couldn't pull it out - no one could. Aft loaded, tail heavy from ice. He knew right away.

From a witness, on conditions at the airport.

From the factual report. This is just....

And here's the weather from the factual. A more detailed report is in the docket. But, you get the picture from this.

There are no interviews with a corporate flight dept in the docket. I have no idea if this pilot just answered directly to the passengers or anyone else. He told the lodge owner they had to go back that day. The report does not ask why he said that. This will be pilot error.

I don't understand why the pilot chose to takeoff in these conditions but I can't help but think it was not entirely his decision - or even partly his decision. Part 91 corporate flying often takes decision-making out of the cockpit. And there's nothing that will change that.

At the very least I wish the NTSB would question the corporate officers/mgmt & any existing flight dept to determine how the decision-making process occurs. They did not do that here (it appears) and that seems like a missed opportunity to shed some light on a big problem. /end