Ron Wanttaja wrote:

Hi Ron,

You raise some interesting points.

snip

All of them flew the plane. Some just didn't land without damage. I'm not
going to sit in my comfy office chair and say, "This guy four years ago
should have been able to land that plane safely...."

I 100 percent agree, Monday morning quarterbacking is much easier then
in the thick of things. So for us to make judgement is easier said then
done....

Take two brand-new 172s at identical locations. Have both engines suffer
connecting rod failures. Have both pilots wearing parachutes.

Pilot #1 says, "This sucks," and bails out. The plane crashes and is
totally destroyed.

Pilot #2 says, "I think I can land in that opening in the trees." Luck
isn't with him that day, and he lands a bit long and rolls the plane into
the trees. He's uninjured, but dings a wing.

Probable NTSB rulings:

Case 1: Probable cause was the failure of the connecting rod.
Case 2: Pilot error, with failure of the connecting rod as a factor.

I actually agree with your probable NTSB rulings. The error you point
out is that the pilot dinged the wing, not the engine failure. I don't
say it's "right" to fault the pilot, but it was the pilot's decision to
bring it back to terra firma and it was his decision that caused the
wing to get dinged. The strange part about what you bring up, is that
in case two, the pilot will suffer more "legal consequences" then the
pilot in case one, which is mucho backwards.

In my analysis, I would list both Case 1 and Case 2 above as a "Loss of
Power (Engine Internal).

Well, the "loss of power" was what caused the pilot to prematurely come
down and land, The engine failure was not the direct the cause of the
crash in either situation. Your case #2 substantiates this. Go back to
my take off example, and yes, I would agree with you that the crash
cause would be engine failure. At that phase of flight, the pilot has
no alternatives.

The reportability criteria for aircraft accidents and incidents is
contained in NTSB Part 830. I didn't report my engine failure; no damage,
no injuries. I did have a thing or two to say to the FBO who sold me
contaminated fuel. :-)

And this did not show up on your preflight??? I don't know about
others, but I sump everytime I get topped off. Even on layover flights.

Sorry, I believe that's oversimplified. All forced landings take some
element of luck. Two pilots pick different pastures that look the same
from 5,000 feet. Both have 8" tall grass, but one field is studded with old
railroad ties that you can't see until you get on short final. Time is
only one factor. Add a howling crosswind, wires you can't see until you
descend, a panicking passenger, and unanticipated better glide ratio
because of a stopped prop, and/or a tractor that pulls onto the field as
you're on short final. As Ernie Gann said, "Fate is the Hunter". There
are a lot of good pilots in graveyards.

I simplify it, but I doubt the NTSB would say pilot error for landing in
a field in your example. If you have come across a report that
"exaggerated", I would love to see it. I think there is some
reasonability in their determinations.

Allen