[Limelight69]

Wow. Crazy sad. So avoidable. As a pilot myself it’s hard to imagine the thought process here. That’s a lot of low altitude maneuvering in an underpowered aircraft with a lot of drag going on.
Even if you’re set on returning to the same airport, get yourself to altitude, clean things up and get set up for a proper approach. But knowing Charlotte was only 32 miles away where you had a towered airport and “help” makes it even more sad.

[Nobuddy]

Originally Posted by Limelight69

Wow. Crazy sad. So avoidable. As a pilot myself it’s hard to imagine the thought process here. That’s a lot of low altitude maneuvering in an underpowered aircraft with a lot of drag going on.
Even if you’re set on returning to the same airport, get yourself to altitude, clean things up and get set up for a proper approach. But knowing Charlotte was only 32 miles away where you had a towered airport and “help” makes it even more sad.

Only thing that makes any sense to me is flying without a legal second and not wanting to get caught.

[Limelight69]

Originally Posted by Nobuddy

Only thing that makes any sense to me is flying without a legal second and not wanting to get caught.

Valid point

[60sstuff]

Maybe I missed it, but has anyone had a discussion on the possibility of an engine failure and how that may have happened on take off.

This seems to be the reason this plane needed to turn back and with 7 people, luggage and full load of fuel the single working engine just wasn’t enough power to deal with situation.

[Limelight69]

Originally Posted by 60sstuff

Maybe I missed it, but has anyone had a discussion on the possibility of an engine failure and how that may have happened on take off.

This seems to be the reason this plane needed to turn back and with 7 people, luggage and full load of fuel the single working engine just wasn’t enough power to deal with situation.

It does sound like it was an engine failure but assuming the remaining engine was performing nominally they could have made it back safely. There could be more to the story and way off base here. But at face value it does look like some poor decisions by the PIC might have led to this unnecessary tragedy.

[hurryinhoosier62]

Originally Posted by Nobuddy

Only thing that makes any sense to me is flying without a legal second and not wanting to get caught.

550s CAN be flown WITHOUT a co-pilot. Ever heard of Cessna Citation 551, better known as the Citation II SP( Single Pilot)?

[Nobuddy]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

550s CAN be flown WITHOUT a co-pilot. Ever heard of Cessna Citation 551, better known as the Citation II SP( Single Pilot)?

What does that have to do with this 550 and this pilot?

[hurryinhoosier62]

Originally Posted by Nobuddy

What does that have to do with this 550 and this pilot?

The 551 IS the same aircraft as 550; same systems…zero difference except for being limited to flying under 30,000 feet and the PIC having to stay on O2 the entire flight above 12,000 ft AGL. Citation IIs CAN be flown in a single pilot operation.

[Nobuddy]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

The 551 IS the same aircraft as 550; same systems…zero difference except for being limited to flying under 30,000 feet and the PIC having to stay on O2 the entire flight above 12,000 ft AGL. Citation IIs CAN be flown in a single pilot operation.

Well of course someone CAN, just not legally in a 550. Which is one reason why someone might choose an uncontrolled airport rather than one with full services.

[hurryinhoosier62]

Originally Posted by Nobuddy

Well of course someone CAN, just not legally in a 550. Which is one reason why someone might choose an uncontrolled airport rather than one with full services.

LEGALLY. You just have to stay below 30, 000 ft, wear oxygen 100% of the time you are above 12,000ft and can’t operate on Part 135. Not familiar with the FARs? 551s ARE 550s. They are certified for single pilot operations. Any other questions? I take it you have a LIMITED background in general aviation?