A British Royal Air Force demonstration pilot was both lucky and good during a Welsh airshow performance on Aug. 28. Red Arrows Squadron Leader Gregor Osten—aka Red 6—was making an opposition pass in his Hawk T1-A jet with his counterpart Red 7 at 400 MPH just 100 feet off the ground when he spotted a seagull at the last nanosecond in his peripheral vision.
Or I suppose more precisely “Let’s give it a year and see what changes”. I’d like to think the changes will be an improvement, but that’s not a guarantee…
Unrelated, it would be helpful if when I click on the “Log in to comment” link, it redirects me back to what I was trying to comment on instead of the user profile page, and forcing me to go back to the main page to re-select the article I was trying to comment on.
Thank you for your years of service at the NTSB. You exerted a significant positive safety influence on me personally even in the years prior to your NTSB service. Your contributions to my sector of GA were significant particularly through your active contributions to us at Bombardier Safety Standdown. You redefined professionalism for many of us in that sector. Your influence will live on well past your service with the NTSB. Again, thank you.
Let’s see. “Give it a year…” A lot can happen in a year. People will definitely die in crashes that are shrugged off by this administration as “insignificant” while we wait. What exactly is the purpose of the FAA and the NTSB if not to help minimize or eliminate death in the air? What exactly are our government employees doing? Shouldn’t they be working at the tasks private industry cannot perform. I’m sorry, but this incompetence is really unacceptable.
Gary - here’s a work-around to the login issue: if after clicking the logon link and entering your credentials, you hit the browser back arrow a couple of times, you’ll be back at the story you wanted to comment on. You’ll need to refresh the page (F5 on a PC). HTH
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
Barry Goldwater was a smart man. In today’s “woke” world, that alone would make him “an extremist.”
For aviation, at least, Sumwalt was the best chairman ever. But, neither he, nor his successor, can change the systemic problems at the NTSB that have developed the past 20 years, or so. Hiring practices and qualifications, for starters. Now, there are too many investigators, especially at the field offices, that are not well trained nor motivated. Too many avoid traveling to the accident site when they can, if for no other reason they have not been conditioned to carnage.
And, so it goes.
The Kobe Bryant investigation was good, because it was handled from headquarters with a go-team, and with a very capable IIC (he has been there long enough to be considered “old school.”)
Had Sumwalt still been at the helm, a go-team sent to Truckee would have been more likely.
All same Canada at times in the past several decades.
I do say recent accident reports appear quite thorough recently.
An engineer built a business on investigating crashes after investigators had finished. Often finding much more. Very detailed work, for insurance companies and other involved parties.
The official report on PW314, B737 in Cranbrook in 1978, is weak, for example.
And down under, it took a doctor querying Australia’s agency about the crash of a single engine seaplane flown by a very experienced pilot to get the cause out.
The doctor asked if bodies had been tested for CO poisoning.
Erps, no, we are rushing to do that now.
Indeed, pilot and front seat passenger both had signs of CO poisoning.
Leak in an exhaust manifold plus improperly reinstalled plate in firewall.
If you have watched the NTSB board meetings on General Aviation over the last 2 years you will have seen that a rough road is opening up. Ms. Homendy has repeated bashed GA on the CT. B-17 crash, the Bryant S-76 crash, the Hudson River photo helicopter crash, and others. She has not taken a positive approach to fix issues but a snide attack on everyone. Member Landsberg has done little better even with his extensive aviation background. But that is only the tip of the iceberg. There are few solid investigations of any aviation accident. While the FAA does about 87 percent of the investigations they are only concerned with the 9 areas they regulate. The rift between the NTSB and the FAA continues to widen. Both are part of the DOT. Lets see if Secretary “Pete” can get some harmony between everyone. The General Aviation crowd who need guidance not bickering.
I’m wondering if the use of NTSB results in court shouldn’t be reconsidered for GA. It would be different if there was anything new in GA, but there isn’t really. If the FAA would stop their innovation tax, it might make more sense, but as it is now, what’s the point?
The agencies needs a dose of their own sour medicine and swallow a big gulp of SMS (safety management system). Do a Tap Root on their weaknesses. They have a systemic bureaucratic problem that needs resolved by using the same techniques and programs they push down my throat. Maybe they can resolve their problem in “FOUR YEARS”??? …and the Flight Instruction Rules too.
All same Canada at times in the past several decades, but I do say recent accident reports appear quite thorough.
An engineer built a business on investigating crashes after investigators had finished. Often finding much more. Very detailed work, for insurance companies and other involved parties.
The official report on PW314, B737 in Cranbrook in 1978, is disappointing, for example.
And down under, it took a doctor querying Australia’s agency about the crash of a single engine seaplane flown by a very experienced pilot to get the cause out.
The doctor asked if bodies had been tested for CO poisoning.
Erps, no, we are rushing to do that now.
Indeed, pilot and front seat passenger both had signs of CO poisoning.
Leak in an exhaust manifold plus improperly reinstalled plate on firewall.
Problem I see with GA accidents is the resources to investigate them.
But the three ‘GA’ crashes you list were caused by deficiencies in piloting and/or maintenance and/or operator not paying attention to risks.
Yes, as were many crashes in full airline operations.
And more broadly, security authorities ignoring risks - as I detail regarding the attacks by terrorist warriors on September 11, 2001 in http://www.moralindividualism.com/prior.htm. And airlines were not on the ball.