Barry97F, Well, here you are-- injecting reasoned, well thought-out situational awareness into a comment thread that clearly does not call for it. Well said, sir!!
While airspace redesign must be considered a contributing factor; as with all aviation accidents this one was a culmination of a lot of seemingly minor gaffes. Three excited children peppering their pilot dad with questions... taking a little too much time between scans of the VSI... trim not just exactly right... etc. Aviation is unforgiving of even the most minor of transgressions. The most direct route to tragedy is via the most trivial of short cuts. Well said Mr. Stedjarati, the lesson that must be taken from the tragedy of this family is that there is never a moment of relief from the responsibilities of PIC; be you on the ground or in the air.
My sympathies to the families of these two brave souls. That being said, I offer a couple of discussion points. 1. machines do not know how old they are. They only know their current state of maintenance. The newest machine will always fail when the owners of the machine decide to save money by cutting back on a maintenance schedule. With the proper commitment to maintenance a machine will last forever. 2. The article states that it appeared that the wingtip hit the ground. If that were the case and the pilot's aircraft got hit by a significant heat thermal from the fire, no amount of "new" would have kept that plane from making contact with the terrain.
May God have mercy on their souls.
gds
