Learning from NTSB reports

[Roger Long]

I believe that reading accident reports is an important safety activity.
I've learned about a lot of things to avoid and anticipate.

This one is a must read for every pilot. Don't tell yourself you know
better than that. It could happen to anyone.

http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1

--
Roger Long

[Jake Brodsky]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:57:53 GMT, "Roger Long"
m> wrote:

>http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1

At least they died with a smile on their faces...


Jake Brodsky,
PP ASEL IA, Cessna Cardinal N30946, Based @ FME
Amateur Radio Station AB3A

[Ben Smith]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message .. .
> I believe that reading accident reports is an important safety activity.
> I've learned about a lot of things to avoid and anticipate.

This made me think of something else... Does anyone in the group feel that
pilots that are 'wired' (to the internet) are safer than ones who are not?
I think that in general I'm a much safer pilot after reading many years of
past discussion on usenet, and sifting through NTSB reports. I couldn't
imagine having aviation as a hobby, only being exposed to 'hangar talk' for
advice.

I was once ridiculed (by a high time ASMEL) for using the full checklist in
my 172. The comment was, "after hundreds of hours, you just know it all by
heart". About pre-flighting - I've also heard: "I'm the only one that fly's
this plane, so it's the same as how I left it"... That same day, I saw him
go around single engine. His right engine came back to life after switching
to the aux tank. (As the other tank was contaminated with oxygen).

Do any CFI's in the group point their students to the NTSB and usenet
archives?

--
Ben
C-172 - N13258 @ 87Y

[Robert Moore]

"Roger Long" wrote
> This one is a must read for every pilot. Don't tell yourself
> you know better than that. It could happen to anyone.

I survived my "Mile High Club" initiation. Of course it was in
a B-707. Ahhh!...the good old '60's. :-))

Bob Moore

[Tony Cox]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in
message .. .
> I believe that reading accident reports is an important safety activity.
> I've learned about a lot of things to avoid and anticipate.
>
> This one is a must read for every pilot. Don't tell yourself you know
> better than that. It could happen to anyone.
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1
>
> --
> Roger Long
>
>

I'm addicted to NTSB reports too. Here's one we can all have
a good titter at (no fatalities). What can they have been thinking??
Love the sand in the back to make absolutely sure they were
overweight.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001211X11000&key=1

--
Dr. Tony Cox
Citrus Controls Inc.
e-mail:
http://CitrusControls.com/

[Peter R.]

Ben Smith ) wrote:

> About pre-flighting - I've also heard: "I'm the only one that fly's
> this plane, so it's the same as how I left it"...

If only that were true. Nest building bugs or birds, loose fuel caps in
rain, hot pitot tubes that block themselves with the foam of refueling
stairs, lights that burn out, flat tires, alternator belts that break, low
oil, blocked static ports, bolts that back off trim tab bars, and spinners
with a reputation to split that live up to their reputation are all
possibilities that can happen while leaving it. :)

--
Peter R.















----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Ron Natalie]

"Roger Long" m> wrote in message
.. .
> I believe that reading accident reports is an important safety activity.
> I've learned about a lot of things to avoid and anticipate.
>
> This one is a must read for every pilot. Don't tell yourself you know
> better than that. It could happen to anyone.
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1
>
> --
Let this be a lesson to you: Qualifying for the mile high club and simulated instrument
flight do not go together.

[Teacherjh]

>>
Qualifying for the mile high club and simulated instrument
flight do not go together.
<<

The lesson is to read carefully. They thought they were supposed to be doing
STIMULATED instrument flight.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Peter R.]

Ron Natalie ) wrote:

> "Roger Long" m> wrote in message
> .. .
> > I believe that reading accident reports is an important safety activity.
> > I've learned about a lot of things to avoid and anticipate.
> >
> > This one is a must read for every pilot. Don't tell yourself you know
> > better than that. It could happen to anyone.
> >
> > http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1
> >
> > --
> Let this be a lesson to you: Qualifying for the mile high club and simulated
> instrument flight do not go together.

I wonder who was wearing the hood?

--
Peter















----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Dave Butler]

Ben Smith wrote:

> His right engine came back to life after switching
> to the aux tank. (As the other tank was contaminated with oxygen).

Huh?

[Ron Natalie]

"Dave Butler" > wrote in message ...
> Ben Smith wrote:
>
> > His right engine came back to life after switching
> > to the aux tank. (As the other tank was contaminated with oxygen).
>
> Huh?
>
Certainly was uncontaminated by fuel.

[Brad Z]

I think he was making a joke refering to the fact that his tank was filled
with air rather than fuel. Damn lineman.


"Dave Butler" > wrote in message
...
> Ben Smith wrote:
>
> > His right engine came back to life after switching
> > to the aux tank. (As the other tank was contaminated with oxygen).
>
> Huh?
>

[Robert Perkins]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:57:53 GMT, "Roger Long"
m> wrote:

>I believe that reading accident reports is an important safety activity.
>I've learned about a lot of things to avoid and anticipate.
>
>This one is a must read for every pilot. Don't tell yourself you know
>better than that. It could happen to anyone.
>
>http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1

Such activity could wreak havoc on your balance moment calculations, I
should think.

Rob


--
[You] don't make your kids P.C.-proof by keeping them
ignorant, you do it by helping them learn how to
educate themselves.

-- Orson Scott Card

[Dave Butler]

Brad Z wrote:
> I think he was making a joke refering to the fact that his tank was filled
> with air rather than fuel. Damn lineman.

Oh, OK, I missed the smiley. It's like the Boeing 307 that went in the drink
because of "air in the fuel lines" (says the NTSB).

Remove SHIRT to reply directly.
Dave

>
>
> "Dave Butler" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Ben Smith wrote:
>>
>> > His right engine came back to life after switching
>>
>>>to the aux tank. (As the other tank was contaminated with oxygen).
>>
>>Huh?

[Michael]

"Ben Smith" > wrote
> Do any CFI's in the group point their students to the NTSB and usenet
> archives?

I certainly don't think much of having my students read NTSB archives.
I've been flying long enough to have had direct, extensive personal
knowledge of a few accidentes that ended up in the NTSB reports. In
every single case, the NTSB report was missing data crucial to
understanding what really happened. Certainly my experience is
limited to just a handful of cases, but I have no reason to believe
the other light GA accidents were investigated any better. After all,
nobody has any particular incentive to cooperate with the
investigation, and many people have good reason to lie or keep quiet.
The resources are just not there to figure out what really happened
when some little airplane crashes.

As for usenet, it's certainly better than the NTSB investigations
because at least most people are telling the truth. However, you have
to understand that usenet aviation groups, like hangar flying, are
primarily for the entertainment of the participants and any education
that occurs is incidental. My experience is that 80% of what you will
hear in hangar flying sessions or read here on usenet is going to be
wrong. The trick is to figure out WHICH 80% - because the other 20%
is stuff you need to know.

Michael

[Roger Long]

Whoa! Lighten up. Did you read this report?

(Good point of view though for another time:)

--
Roger Long

Michael > wrote in message
om...
> "Ben Smith" > wrote
> > Do any CFI's in the group point their students to the NTSB and usenet
> > archives?
>
> I certainly don't think much of having my students read NTSB archives.
> I've been flying long enough to have had direct, extensive personal
> knowledge of a few accidentes that ended up in the NTSB reports. In
> every single case, the NTSB report was missing data crucial to
> understanding what really happened. Certainly my experience is
> limited to just a handful of cases, but I have no reason to believe
> the other light GA accidents were investigated any better. After all,
> nobody has any particular incentive to cooperate with the
> investigation, and many people have good reason to lie or keep quiet.
> The resources are just not there to figure out what really happened
> when some little airplane crashes.
>
> As for usenet, it's certainly better than the NTSB investigations
> because at least most people are telling the truth. However, you have
> to understand that usenet aviation groups, like hangar flying, are
> primarily for the entertainment of the participants and any education
> that occurs is incidental. My experience is that 80% of what you will
> hear in hangar flying sessions or read here on usenet is going to be
> wrong. The trick is to figure out WHICH 80% - because the other 20%
> is stuff you need to know.
>
> Michael

[G.R. Patterson III]

Michael Nouak wrote:
>
> What a great way to go!

Well, it may be a great way, but I'd prefer a little later in life. Say, about
150? (If I can still qualify for the MHC at that age, I probably won't be ready
to go then either).

George Patterson
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something that can be learned
no other way.

[EDR]

In article >, Peter
R. > wrote:

> I wonder who was wearing the hood?

Or which one had their hand on the stick?

[Brian Burger]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Dave Butler wrote:

> Ben Smith wrote:
>
> > His right engine came back to life after switching
> > to the aux tank. (As the other tank was contaminated with oxygen).
>
> Huh?

Tank was empty, I think he meant.

Brian.

[Peter R.]

EDR ) wrote:

> In article >, Peter
> R. > wrote:
>
> > I wonder who was wearing the hood?
>
> Or which one had their hand on the stick?

<rim shot>

--
Peter















----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Les Gawlik]

Yeah, but which one could log PIC?


"Teacherjh" > wrote in message
...
> >>
> Qualifying for the mile high club and simulated instrument
> flight do not go together.
> <<
>
> The lesson is to read carefully. They thought they were supposed to be
doing
> STIMULATED instrument flight.
>
> Jose
>
> --
> (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Teacherjh]

>>
Yeah, but which one could log PIC?

> >>
> Qualifying for the mile high club and simulated instrument
> flight do not go together.
> <<
>
> The lesson is to read carefully. They thought they were supposed to be doing
> STIMULATED instrument flight.
<<

The dog on top, of course.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[John Ousterhout]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:57:53 GMT, "Roger Long"
m> wrote:
>
>http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?ev_id=20001212X18632&key=1

No doubt it dived from 5,280 feet AGL.

- J.O.-

[Ron Natalie]

"Les Gawlik" > wrote in message ...
> Yeah, but which one could log PIC?
>

Do you get any logging possibilities for being the sole manipulator of the pilot in command?