Flying the Margins: How One Pilot's Choices Stacked the Odds

Sometimes it’s not worth finding out if normal aviation variability will exceed your capabilities.

Max Trescott

Thursday, April 10, 2025 at 08:00 AM ET

Verified

Edited By:

Travis Tingle

A solid strategy when en route with poor weather everywhere is to divert early to someplace where the conditions are good. [Adobe Stock]

Key Takeaways:

A fatal Cirrus SR22 accident in challenging weather was influenced by the pilot's choice of an ILS approach, which required hand-flying the last 600 feet and the missed approach, unlike the available RNAV approach that allowed full autopilot use.
Multiple "normal aviation variables" stacked up against the pilot, including widespread poor weather, airport conditions barely above minimums, and an out-of-service approach lighting system which further increased visibility requirements.
The article suggests the pilot likely got slow and stalled during a hand-flown missed approach, a scenario that might have been avoided by using the RNAV approach with its continuous autopilot capability and underspeed protection, or by diverting earlier to better weather or delaying the trip.

See a mistake? Contact us.

Last month I wrote about my preference for RNAV approaches versus ILSs in most but not all situations. Earlier this year there was a fatal accident in a Cirrus SR22 in Bar Harbor, Maine, in which the pilot’s choice of an ILS versus an RNAV approach had a direct impact on the outcome.

In his book Pre-Accident Investigations, safety expert Todd Conklin wrote that “aviation accidents are the unexpected combination of normal aviation variability.” In this accident, if some variables were different, there could have been a more positive outcome. Instead, as you’ll see, the challenges this pilot faced kept stacking up.