ABC's John J. Nance
Aviation Expert on the Kennedy Crash Investigation - July 16, 1999

July 21, 1999 - The wreckage of John F. Kennedy Jr.'s airplane, with Kennedy's body still aboard, has been found. ABCNEWS' aviation expert John J. Nance joined us with an update on the ongoing investigation and recovery operations. Below is a transcript of the chat.

Moderator at 2:04pm ET
ABCNEWS Aviation Analyst John J. Nance now joins us. Please tell us the latest on the Kennedy crash investigation.

John J. Nance at 2:05pm ET
As of the present hour, the wreckage of John Kennedy's airplane has been found, a substantial portion of it is intact to the extent that it's in one place, Kennedy's body is either being brought to the surface of has already been brought to the surface, and while the search continues for Carolyn and Lauren Bessette, Senator Kennedy is proceeding to the recovery ship, presumably for identification purposes.

The wreckage will almost undoubtedly all be within the same area, as will the remains of the 2 sisters, provided the aircraft did not break up in flight. I would expect that by this afternoon's NTSB briefing, we'd have a clearer picture of the status of the recovery effort.

It was interesting in the extreme to have the additional radar data presented by the NTSB yesterday evening because if further reinforces the probability that spatial disorientation and a loss of control are major factors in the last of this accident sequence.

Lisa from [32.97.239.23], at 2:09pm ET
Could the other two bodies be in another part of the aircraft? Was JFK Jr. still in the pilot seat? When the aircraft came apart could the passengers been separated or possibly thrown out?

John J. Nance at 2:12pm ET
While only the recovery team can tell us precisely where John Kennedy's body was found in the wreckage, there is one thing about the placement of the seats in the aircraft to keep in mind. While I am not sure that Kennedy's aircraft had this optional seating, many Saratogas have the pilot and copilot seats followed by two seats facing backwards and a third row of two more seats facing forward, forming a sort of "club seating" arrangement in the back. The cabin is sufficiently narrow that climbing between the back seating area and a front co-pilot seat is all but impossible.

So the question inevitably arises, Did the two sisters stay in the back to talk while John flew? If so, the fact that their remains are located separately from the occupant of the pilot would make perfect sense.

Only if the aircraft came apart in flight would the occupants have been ejected. If this aircraft hit the water intact, as it more than likely did, the remains of all three will have settled to the bottom in the same general area, but not necessarily within the tangled remains of the fuselage.

John Kennedy's remains were apparently found by use of a remotely operated submersible vehicle, and it is unclear whether divers have personally been able to examine all the wreckage found at that site. This could explain the delay in the location of the other remains.

springking from [156.46.121.97], at 2:17pm ET
I've been watching Mr. Nance on TV and I am very impressed with his knowledge and, more importantly, his ability to present factual info without resorting to pure conjecture.

John J. Nance at 2:18pm ET
I really appreciate that comment. But when you cross a veteran pilot with years of broadcast experience and associate him with a superlative news organization as we have at ABC it becomes a teamwork effort in every way.

Tom: from NYC from [12.15.226.26], at 2:19pm ET
Isn't if fair to assume whether JFK suffered spatial disorientation or not, the fact that he would feel heavy G forces -- from a dive -- would indicate that evasive action would be needed?

John J. Nance at 2:23pm ET
Tom, that is an astute question. Unfortunately, the point at which a badly disoriented pilot is likely to become aware that something is very wrong because of excessive G forces (force of gravity) or because of rising air speed and associated slipstream sound is a point at which many thousands of feet may be needed vertically for a recovery of the airplane to level flight. We have indications that this "excursion" from stable flight began around 2200 feet and had accelerated to a nearly 6000 foot per minute descent rate which, by 1100 feet above the water, would be all but unrecoverable before hitting sea level. The problem, you see, is the onset phase of a spatial disorientation upset, not the last phase in which the desperate nature of the problem becomes apparent.

Dana from [209.208.149.178], at 2:24pm ET
At what point in the descent would it have become apparent that the situation was dire -- i.e., was this the classic "we're going down" scenario, or, as speculation suggests, did the aircraft just unwittingly and confusedly get flown into the sea?

John J. Nance at 2:27pm ET
Dana, let me add to that previous explanation by saying that the hallmark of a spatial disorientation episode is its insidious nature. The first phase is one in which the airplane is unknowingly allowed to bank and perhaps begin a descent to an extreme before the pilot becomes aware. There may be only a few seconds for the pilot to recognize the problem and decide on the right control inputs, or, in the case of what we call a "graveyard spiral" the pilot may never know that he's turning and descending because he is not trained to watch his instruments and because the few outside visual cues have erroneously convinced him that he is still flying straight and level. In this circumstance the pilot can, and too often does, fly into the water never knowing that anything was wrong.

Tom: from NYC from [12.15.226.26], at 2:31pm ET
The age of technology still has not provided a seamless way of automatic recovery from "graveyard spins." Do you foresee anything positive (in aviation safety/technology) developing from this particular tragedy?

John J. Nance at 2:34pm ET
Obviously we're discussing future aviation safety matters when we discuss deriving something positive from this tragedy, but in that vein, I do indeed expect that the long memory of this accident that we will collectively retain can help many future private pilots and experienced pilots as well keep track of the reality that over-flying your training and capability or not using the best of pilot judgment techniques and self discipline are sure ways to get you to the edge of a similar situation.

This will be true even if this accident involved something completely outside of John Kennedy's control because we have a clearer set of questions about pilot decision making and judgment that remain a cautionary tale.

JM from [137.246.34.153], at 2:37pm ET
Does that plane have an autopilot? I realize that the proximity of the airfield and his preparations for the upcoming approach would have meant that if there had been one it would have probably been turned off at this point. But if he had realized he was disoriented could have he turned the autopilot back on?

John J. Nance at 2:44pm ET
Insightful question and a good point. Yes, the Saratoga has an autopilot, and my guess is that it was indeed turned off during the descent as John Kennedy approached the island, but before he began turning and maneuvering. What you have touched on here regarding use of the autopilot to stabilize things is very important because the essence of the discipline we teach these days (called Crew Resource Management) is that you use all available resources, including your equipment, to unload you as a pilot from as many distractions as possible, especially when you have critical decisions to make in a rapidly changing situation. Provided the autopilot did not somehow go berserk and set up this accident, snapping it on and using it to make a stable, level turn back to the west to better visibility would have almost assuredly prevented this result.

When we have 2 pilots in a cockpit, the technique that works is for the decision maker (the pilot in command) to stop being John Wayne and turn over control of the airplane to his copilot (or autopilot) leaving the pilot more unloaded and able to make better decisions. It is very telling to me in this accident sequence that just prior to what became a death dive, John Kennedy's aircraft was observed to be climbing slightly and turning to the right. This indicates a pilot flying manually with distracted attention who is inadvertently putting a small amount of back pressure (climb) and right bank command into the control yoke, yet because he can see nothing clearly outside does not realize that he is no longer in level and straight flight. The final sequence of a right turn and accelerating dive most likely occurred the same way.

Lisa from [216.76.114.1] at 2:45pm ET
When will the wreckage be pulled out? Or has it been already?

John J. Nance at 2:46pm ET
The Navy is in the process of bringing part of the wreckage to the surface, and I would expect that the majority of it will be recovered within the next 48-72 hours.

John from [216.1.220.3] at 2:47pm ET
What does it mean to not have the license to fly by instruments? And, under the circumstances - darkness & fog - was he in violation of these rules?

John J. Nance at 2:50pm ET
The simple answer is that if you do not have an Instrument Rating, you are limited as a pilot to flying only when you have sufficient outside visual cues and visibility to conduct the flight safely in what we call VMC (Visual Meteorological Conditions). This does not mean that you cannot use your instruments - including your artificial horizon (ADI) - to keep the airplane straight, level and steady on course. But it does mean that they may not be used as your primary means of keeping the airplane upright and safe.

As far as we currently know, given the officially reported visibility conditions at Martha's Vineyard airport and his departure airport, John Kennedy was operating legally in flying under visual rules. Visual rules do not guarantee that visibility can't get worse along the way. Good pilot judgment is what should be applied in such circumstances to turn the pilot around and scrub an intended flight that would place the aircraft in a seriously deteriorating visual situation.

Moderator at 2:54pm ET
Thanks for joining us today. Any final thoughts?

John J. Nance at 2:57pm ET
Principally, we must remember that the pilot in this case bore no earmarks of being a daredevil or a reckless individual. John Kennedy was simply a pilot with a minimal amount of experience who was passing through the realm that each and every pilot has traversed, in which the necessary ingredient of confidence is often very difficult to distinguish from overconfidence. In addition, I'd like everybody to keep in mind that what probably has claimed the lives of John, Carolyn, and Lauren is something that even the most experienced 747 captain could fall victim to with an unfortunate combination of circumstances coming together on a dark night in a small airplane. You must not simply dismiss this as bad judgment. It explains nothing and demeans John Kennedy.

Moderator at 3:26pm ET
Thanks for your time today John.

Back to top or previous page