It appears they were following the VELEB1 VFR route which follows the motorway E.
Looking at the map there is no prescribed minimum altitude (at least on the map) but there are plenty of mountains which are labled right under it. Near the crash site, there is a range of mountains which have elevations of 3700-3900 ft. Consequently, the minimum crossing altitude rounded up to the next 1000 ft would be 5000 ft, which is also what apparently is indicated at SkyDeamon.
9A_LDSH wrote:
For sure some kind of 9A VFR guide can be made.
Nobody will object to some sort of a VFR guide being written by people who know the area and make it public, after it’s peer read and found accurate. Why not, that is a pretty good idea for anywhere. People usually read a lot before they go flying. I do.
However: The skills and knowledge acquired by a PPL needs to be adequate to the privilege granted. Which means, people who have acquired a PPL need to be aware of certain basics. One of those is a minimum flight altitude over obstacles such as mountains or whatever else is in the way. The other is being able to determine if weather is suitable or not. And thirdly, they need to be capable of operating their airplane within it’s limitations. There is more but this is the relevant bit.
Overflying any terrain and following any prescribed or recommended route means a minimum safe altitude to do so must be determined. If a continuation of flight on or above that is not possible, then this usually means diverting. Here, right at the crash site, there is a mountain which is 3700 ft high. So the minimum to overfly this should not be below 1000 ft AGL which, rounded up to the nearest 500, should be 5000 ft. At 5000 ft over this ridges, you have lots of options if something goes wrong. Even better to fly higher. The way I know Croatia’s ATC, they are highly accommodating.
Looking at the route available from FR until Maribor, the crew flew extremely low the whole way, between 2500 and 3600 ft AMSL. If they continued that low (to my knowledge, there is no track available) they were very obviously way too low for the route they chose.
I don’t know if the windshear hints you give was a factor, but again, the higher you are, the less you will die of a windshear. That is a universal thing, not Croatia specific. Clearly, if there was a strong Bora, it can cause quite some mayhem. But with a strong Bora, even more so, the higher you are, the less it is a problem or at least it will be recoverable, particularly in a Cirrus where you can pull the shute if you are high enough.
The question which interests me in this accident is why did the crew fly that low the whole way. IMHO it is not only uncomfortable to do that, it nullifies to an extent their biggest out of dodge card (the shute) and it put you in a situation that whatever happens you have no time to react.
If we can find out whether there is a systematic problem in the training of pilots resulting in them to be discouraged or scared of flying higher, then we have a reason to demand action. Even if the 4 accidents you quote would have some similarity which all of them fell foul of, we’d have a reason to make it known. So far however, I fail to see that.
A couple of complaints received so far regarding this topic, with one guy demanding removal of his “account” (nonsensical for EuroGA as there is no “account” and his profile was empty, and no posts), so please cool it a bit.
FWIW, my view is that one always gets a load of accidents when good wx arrives, because many GA pilots pack up flying totally for the 6 “winter” months.
But many people are affected by crashes. I can think of several who gave up flying when their friends died in crashes (coincidentally all featuring SR22s) and the number of pilots in Croatia can probably be counted on one’s fingers.
People need to be careful, especially if not flown a plane for months.
IME of many flights there, Croatian ATC is mostly outstanding and very accommodating. I once flew LJLJ-LDDU and ended up climbing VFR to FL140, to remain VMC on top 
Nothing was ever said.
Today, another crash in France. Takeoff from Langogne Lesperon (LFHL), one of the highest elevation public airfields in France, and grass. 5 persons on board (albeit 3 children)…
What plane was it?
For sure some kind of 9A VFR guide can be made
It would mainly say “ensure you have obstacle clearance at all times”. Not something taught in the PPL in flat-land parts of Europe… But Croatia is not anything special if one actually reads the map. Nearly all flying can be done along the coast.
TB20, according to ASN.
OK, so they failed to lift off, from a 3330ft elevation AD, 883m grass. Oh well… Lots of people do this stuff.
@Peter, you are right cool a bit is right approach,
especially for some German gentleman-s present on topic.
@Mooney_Driver consider to track the flights of other PH planes in group, taking off
similar time from Maribor.
Peter wrote:
It would mainly say “ensure you have obstacle clearance at all times”. Not something taught in the PPL in flat-land parts of Europe… But Croatia is not anything special if one actually reads the map. Nearly all flying can be done along the coast.
My example here about UL taking off with more than 20+ kt tail wind was example from LDSH taped in April 2023. with
3x CCTV, It was bora wind, changing the direction with gusts, the pilot choice was clearly wrong because
of wind and overgrown trees (obstacle) on private ground out of airport.
For example the LDSB is almost that elevation of LFHL, with cliff on the one side. One day we may map all incidents
around that airport. Even the EMSA lost one of 1 m euro toy there https://www.emsa.europa.eu/newsroom/press-releases/item/4794-emsa-drone-operating-in-the-strait-of-gibraltar-area-for-multipurpose-maritime-surveillance.html
etc.
Plenty of material to write about…
I took my training in Canada, in an area where it is very flat and the mountains are about as far away as the Alps are from the Netherlands. There was a lot of emphasis on weather, as well as mountain flying and weather effects in the mountains. I was in a club, and they regularly promoted trips to the mountains with 3 students and an instructor to get real experience. Not compulsory for the PPL, but as a way to build experience and time for new licence holders. Clearly, anyone doing a PPL in the Netherlands will graduate with zero real-life mountain flying experience. One can’t build 5’000 hours of flying experience in all geographies and weather in a PPL course.
Flying a Cirrus across Europe under 3500’, possibly at 180kt+? Wow, that sounds almost like misuse of a tool. Sure, there could be reasons, but continuing through the Alps low-level sounds like someone who is possibly either very experienced in the environment or not up to the task. The coastal islands of Croatia are hilly, but with all that water there is a lot of room to maneuver. Inland is a different story east of Istria toward Zagreb as well as down the long thin part of the country which has a number of 5000’ ranges parallel to the coast. Given the reported weather, one wonders if judgement and planning was given the deserved time and attention. Of course, it’s easy to criticize based on speculation.
Sebastian has a good suggestion. At least one nordic country has a good guide on VFR flying in the country, and I’m surprised that more countries don’t do likewise. Any pilot venturing into new territory can benefit from local information, whether it be related to regulations, habits, geography, or weather. That’s far more useful and puts the responsibility where it belongs …. on the pilot. More regulation is definitely not the solution.
9A_LDSH wrote:
@Peter, you are right cool a bit is right approach,
especially for some German gentleman-s present on topic.
If you’re referring to me, you should understand I’m not German. And I also have the strength of mind to call out your virtue signalling for what it is – because either you are trolling us as a forum and aren’t a pilot, wanting to restrict those few privileges we enjoy, or you are just a virtue signaller.
I’m cool as a person, but I will not sit idly by whilst someone demands knee-jerk actions to be taken, especially when that someone knows neither what the cause of the accidents were, whether they were linked nor whether the action said troll is demanding is proportionate and will actually be effective in preventing future recurrence.
To conclude: As I said before: you should perhaps wait until the reports are out and then, if there is a common denominator, call for action.
But to call for action without knowing whether said action would be effective is just asking to impose more rules, regulations and limitations on perhaps one of the most heavily regulated and restricted hobby available to mankind. I enjoy my freedoms. I don’t need people like you demanding further restrictions on them because, according to you, we can’t be trusted.
Sebastian_G wrote:
Why not publish some “Flying (VFR) in Croatia” guide
This is exactly what the Norwegian CAA did some time ago, and have updated it ever since. The reason was that an disproportionally large number of foreign pilots crashed and burned, typically VFR into IMC, CFIT and loss of control. I have never flown in Croatia, but I guess, coastal mountains, clouds and turbulence are the same all over
