- Published on: 2025-06-02
- With: Thomas Friesacher, Maximilian Kunz
- Duration: approx. 48 minutes
✈️ What is this episode about?
Training, Twin, and Fallacy: This episode covers the crash of a Diamond DA42 Twin Star (OK-ZZK) near Trenčín, Slovakia—a multi-engine training flight with an instructor, student, and two passengers that ended in an uncontrolled descent just minutes after takeoff.
Alex provides the Hard Facts regarding the aircraft, operator, FADEC data, flight path, and the conclusions of the official investigation report. Tom explains why technology and weight and balance can be within limits—and yet an accident still happens when human factors, training context, and cognitive biases intertwine.
Together, Max and Tom go behind the scenes of the investigation: Day-one deployment, FADEC forensics, comparison flights, energy management reconstruction—and the journey from an individual investigation to concrete Safety Recommendations for training organizations, instructors, and authorities.
Goal: To understand why “good crews” can make wrong decisions in a training setting, how plan continuation, normalization of deviance, and authority gradients in the cockpit take effect—and how organizations can develop resilient Safety Cases and training modules from these insights.
🔊 Listen now
🕒 Chapter markers
- Multi-engine training environment, MEP check flight, crew setup with instructor, student, and passengers, framework conditions at Trenčín airfield.
- Alex’s Fact Block: Aircraft, Operator, Flight Mission
– DA42 Twin Star, FADEC propulsion, ATO setup, flight program, weight and balance within permissible limits. - Flight Path & Data Profile – From Climb to Loss of Control
– Takeoff and traffic pattern, data from radar and FADEC, power reduction to idle, loss of airspeed, vertical speeds up to ~9,000 ft/min, lack of effective recovery. - Day One & Accident Site: The Field as a Data Space
– Initial investigation measures, incident command logic, transition from rescue to evidence preservation, wreckage pattern as a data source for later reconstruction. - FADEC Forensics & Comparison Flight
– Deformed FADEC units, cooperation with the BFU and manufacturer, reading the memory, comparison flight with a reference DA42, validation of RPM and power profiles. - Human Factors & Training Context
– Time pressure, syllabus completion, passengers on board, instructor-student roles, authority gradient, and decision-making logic in the traffic pattern. - Cognitive Biases in the Cockpit
– Confirmation bias, plan continuation bias, normalization of deviance, overconfidence, and tunnel vision as typical mental traps in training flights. - Cause, Contributing Factors & Safety Recommendations
– Official cause of the accident, contributing factors from the report’s perspective, focus on training, organization, instructor qualifications, and the use of flight data. - 3D Visualization & Safety Case Work
– Use of data, timeline, and 3D reconstruction to visualize the flight path, transfer into training, SOP reviews, and safety cases. - Recap & Takeaways for Crews, ATOs, and Authorities
– Consolidation of lessons learned, derivation of concrete management bullets for training, governance, and safety culture.
🧭 Contents & Highlights
- Human Factors in the Training Setup
– Why training flights are structurally high-risk operations, how performance pressure, time pressure, and authority gradients become relevant to accidents—and the role played by clear briefings, limits, and abort criteria. - Hard Facts Instead of Gut Feeling
– Alex summarizes the investigation report in clear fact blocks: aircraft, operator, flight profile, weight/balance, FADEC data, flight path, cause, and safety recommendations. - FADEC Forensics & Comparison Flight as Game Changers
– How deformed FADEC units are forensically secured, read, and verified with a comparison flight—and why this clears the way to focus on human and organizational factors. - Cognitive Biases as Invisible Risk Drivers
– Confirmation bias, plan continuation, normalization of deviance, and overconfidence—explained through a real case, not as buzzwords: How mental biases work in the cockpit when training profiles become ambitious and margins get thin. - Day-One Logic of the Investigation
– Stabilization, role clarification, securing the data stream: How an accident site functions as a temporary data space and why precise documentation is the foundation of every subsequent reconstruction. - From Analysis to Management Tool
– How concrete Safety Recommendations for ATOs, instructors, and authorities emerge from a single accident—and why data, visualization, and human factors insights should be seen as business-critical assets today.
🗂️ Bonus content (for supporters) 🔒
- Human Factors Case Card DA42 OK-ZZK (PDF)
- Instructor Briefing Template "High-Risk Training"
- FADEC Data Cheat Sheet
- CRM & Authority Gradient – Practical Guide
🗣️ That's what the crew says
"Technology being within limits is no guarantee of safety—what matters is how profile, pitch, and power are managed in the cockpit."
- Thomas Friesacher
"Cognitive biases are not a theoretical university topic; they are the reason why even good crews can go over the edge during training flights."
- Maximilian Kunz
📌 Shownotes & Contact
- Shownotes & Literature: www.maydayfiles.com (Production: AeroXpert Visuals)
- Backstage clips: YouTube – Maydayfiles
- Questions/Suggestions: redaktion@maydayfiles.com
