Google Earth Community: InternetSAR.org: Search for Ron Boychuk

I think Internet SAR is a great idea, but I have some suggestions to improve it.

(1) The GE forum thread is far too long and filled with unsorted posts with non-descriptive headings. No one has time and patience to read it all. It would be better to run a moderated or edited forum on the InternetSAR website with carefully constructed topics. Any valid information from the forum should be compiled into the briefing.

(2) It is necessary for searchers to have ready access to reliable information so that they can be effective. Good information informs and guides a search, and it maintains the morale of the searchers. Some of the material is vague and conveys the impression that there are two levels of access: the 'real' search team, and the members of InternetSAR. I understand that is probably not the reality, but it is the impression conveyed.

(3) Good information is mixed carelessly with bad. By bad, I mean any media report and all speculation. The media is horrendously, laughably poor in reporting any technical matter and must be almost completely disregarded. A separate thread should be created for any information derived from the media and labeled with a disclaimer like "CAUTION: Media Reports. For Entertainment Purposes Only." Information derived from media reports must be excluded from the briefing.

(4) The mission briefing should be written by someone who is familiar with aviation accidents (sorry, Ken). This is where the most effort should be expended. Some of the material that is missing from the briefing is:

- What time did the pilot depart Calgary/Springbank?
- Were there any stops en route prior to Revelstoke?
- What was the arrival time in Revelstoke?
- What was the source of the Revelstoke departure time? How precise is it?
- What was the takeoff weight the aircraft?
- How much fuel did the pilot take on at Revelstoke?
- What were the aviation weather conditions and forecast that would have been available to the pilot at the time of departure?
- Did the pilot receive a weather briefing?
- With whom, and at what precise time was the flight plan filed?
- Were there any changes to the flight plan?
- Was the pilot instrument-rated?
- What was the actual aviation weather at reported at each of the local airports for the expected duration of the flight? (Vancouver weather and non-aviation weather reports are almost irrelevant.)
- Did the pilot make any position reports en route?
- If so, how and to whom and at what time precisely? (One of the forum posts says that he reported over Spence's Bridge. If that is true, the the time of that report is the most important piece of information we could have. If the report is spurious, the searchers must be emphatically told to disregard it.)
- What were the positions and times of the radar plot? We must have raw data, and all of it that is available. One poster said that the radar plot was made by a U.S. border patrol aircraft. If so, they will have a wealth of data. There can be no conceivable reason that it would be unavailable to us.
- What are the procedures for avoiding an incursion into the Vancouver TCA that would have been available to the pilot, given his skill, qualifications, terrain and the weather?
- What was the pilot's personal schedule for the days after his flight? Was there time pressure to arrive?

For an example of the quality and quantity of information required, check out this amateur site. There is an excellent radar plot with times, positions and altitudes.

Most importantly, the source of each piece of information must be clearly stated. If eyewitness information is given, the aviation and technical background of the witness must be given. An airport worker who thinks an engine sounds odd, for example, may have almost no experience (having left Starbucks last week for a better job at the airport), or may be a private pilot working on an ATP rating. It makes an enormous difference.

(5) The Images. We need to know the technical details of the images. When were they taken? What was the angle? What was the sun position? What was the ground cover? (Is it snow? It looks like snow, but who knows?) Is the border overlay correct? (If the border overlay is correct, then the images available are almost certainly not where the aircraft is located, based upon the available information. Since the information itself is poorly categorized and incomplete, there may be a good reason for searching that area.)

My own wild-assed speculation, based upon the available information, is that the pilot must have realized that he could not make Qualicum before dark via the north or south VFR routes. This would have been a major concern for a non-IFR pilot and would have been foremost in his mind, particular if the weather seemed to be improving. Ergo, he would have necessarily planned to stop at an en route airport for the night (which one has the best possibility of overnight accomodation?) If that is so, and the wind was truly 30kts from the west, then an in-flight loss of control due to a rotor (or CFIT due to unexpected deterioration of the weather) en route to an overnight stop would be the most likely.

Alternatively, the pilot could have made the decision to fly direct, which would have got him into Qualicum at close to sunset. The likely outcome of that decision is an inadvertent flight into IFR conditions, with subsequent disorientation and in-flight breakup, or, less likely, again a CFIT due to weather deterioration during letdown to avoid the Vancouver TCA.

In either case, the imagery does not cover the area that should be searched.

With better information, I could make a much better and more accurate wild-assed guess, and search the area predicted. So could everyone else, with the likely outcome being eventual success.

B.

Post Extras