One of the things I get sick of hearing about are GA crashes resulting from pilots doing things they shouldn't be doing, either because it doesn't suit the type of airplane they are flying (eg aerobatics in a Baron), it is illegal (buzzing your buddy's house), or simply beyond their abilities (use your imagination).
I love this quote from Aviation Safety Foundation chief Bruce Bruce Landsberg; his litmus test if something you are about to do is a good idea or not:
"Try this on your passengers the next time you take to the sky: 'OK, gang, I'm about to try a maneuver that I haven't practiced and have had no training in. The aircraft is prohibited from this type of maneuver, and it's never been tested by the manufacturer." (Depending on the type of maneuver, you can add, "We're going to fly really close to the ground and well below legal limits.") Then say, "There's also a good chance that we could all die if I mess this up, but if I pull it off it will be way cool! So, are you in?'"
or as I've heard Jeb Burnside from Aviation Safety Magazine say (paraphrased):
"Before you decide on a certain action that may jeopardize the safety of the flight, think about how you will explain your actions and thought process to the NTSB investigator (if you survive to do that)"
edit:
this is what I'm talking about. Obviously, it goes without saying that I do not know all of the circumstances, but here is a news story regarding a crash of a Cirrus, where before take off the pilot states to the briefer in his abbreviated briefing that he was, "hoping to slide underneath it then climb out."
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/cirrus_prokop_jury_award_ntsb_crash_200512-1.html
Some of the NTSB reports findings: It was nighttime, wind gusts to 22 kts, he was going fast, and flying at 100' AGL. As well, AIRMETs for IFR conditions and turbulence were in effect at the time of the accident. The NTSB's summary?
"Spatial disorientation experienced by the pilot, due to a lack of visual references, and a failure to maintain altitude. Contributing factors were the pilot's improper decision to attempt flight into marginal VFR conditions, his inadvertent flight into instrument meteorological conditions, the low lighting condition (night) and the trees."
I'd have to say that would seem to me to be 100% pilot error, not the fault at all of the manufacturer or school. Of course it had NOTHING to do with the fact he should not have been flying that day, and EVERYTHING to do with the manufacturer not holding his hand. It is this seeming belief in the U.S. that no one should be held accountable for their own actions that boils my blood. Now this lawsuit will result in adding to the yet ever spiraling liability costs of flying, all due to someone trying to take advantage of an opportunity, and, for some reason I can not figure out, why here in America, it is so hard for someone to say, "Yeah, I screwed up and it is my fault".
Here are the NTSB reports in their entirety:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20030122X00087&key=1
http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=CHI03FA057&rpt=fa
Bruce Landsberg from the Air Safety Foundation commented on this as well:
http://blog.aopa.org/asfblog/?p=194
No comments:
Post a Comment