NTSB report on Chalk Mallard crash

[Ztex]

http://www.aero-news.net/news/commair.cfm?ContentBlockID=5f9bae6f-0943-4b69-b136-79ef2b01c9f9&Dynamic=1
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2007/aar-07.htm

The NTSB wants more special oversight on older airplanes....

FYI

[CAPFlyer]

The NTSB wants more oversight of "aging aircraft" that are flown by companies operating under Part 121, 129, or 135. There is nothing in there about Part 91 operations. This would have zero impact on warbird operations or inspections, no matter how they are certified.

BTW - most of the "aging aircraft" operators already have aging aircraft inspections and other more stringent maintenance, so I'm not quite sure what the NTSB is in such an uproar over. Flying Boats Inc failed to do proper maintenance, pure and simple, why must the NTSB find additional fault and demand maintenance be done that is already supposed to be done as part of the heavy maintenance checks?

[tom d. friedman]

the age of the findings is what bothers me!!!! near 2 years to come to a conclusion??? our tax dollars are at work

[King]

the age of the findings is what bothers me!!!! near 2 years to come to a conclusion??? our tax dollars are at work

It is typically 12 to 16 months for a fatal accident report to go to "Probable Cause". A high profile case gets more scrutiny and can go 16 to 24 months.

So far there are 47 NTSB assigned accidents this month alone. Yesterday alone there were about 11 accidents/incidents and some will go to NTSB. This last long weekend there were 35 accident/incidents with 6 being fatal. NTSB specialist do not only work fatal accidents.

So as you can see, the NTSB specialist have many, many other accidents on thier desk that they are in charge of and it takes time to get all of the facts together for each one. If they had 1 investigator for each accident and that was the only accident he/she worked, he/she could probably get it from "Preliminary" to "Probable Cause" in about 4 to 6 months.

[JDK]

Similar elapsed times seem to be the norm in the UK, and Australia. (Non federal democracy, federal democracy.) I'm not aware of any country that has an aviation accident investigation service that achieves a meaningful conclusion in less time* - of course there is an alternative - no proper investigation, or a 'blame the pilot' approach as undertaken in some, often third-world countries.

*Data welcome.

[Ztex]

There is nothing in there about Part 91 operations

I understand the advisory to be for "commercial" operators...but I am always leary of government "trickle down"

Just thought it would be of interest to this community.

Z

[JDK]

Just thought it would be of interest to this community.

It is, and appreciated.

[JohnH]

Thanks Ztex, very interesting, I don't get on the NTSB like I used to or even ANN. But I'm here several times a day.

John

[tom d. friedman]

james, very valid point as to the time factor & a solid investigation.

[Swiss Mustangs]

same time-frame here in Switzerland.....

for interested parties - link to the Swiss agency...

http://www.bfu.admin.ch/en/html/portrait.html

Martin

[Eric Friedebach]

Here’s the problem; people like Mary Schiavo come out and say things like this to the news media

"Mallards are museum pieces," Schiavo said. "There are planes in museums younger than these."

"The rule of thumb is that aircraft are built for a 20-year economic life," Schiavo said. "That doesn't mean they fall out of the sky after 20 years. But it does mean they need tender loving care."

[King]

Scary Mary at work!