Sheepskin seat covers save life.

[Answering two posting in one]

On 28 Nov 2003 14:08:35 GMT, Mike Spera wrote:

]"the main fault
]being assigned to the pilot when the accident was precipitated by a
]mechanical fault". Guess why? Because if it is not the pilot's fault,
]then it must be the FAA's fault. They set up the processes and
]procedures by which airplanes and their components are tested, approved,
]distributed, tracked, and reinspected. If something goes wrong, either
]this system is not perfect, or it is someone else's fault. Guess which
]option the FAA chooses...?

Well...keep in mind that the FAA does not perform the formal accident
investigation. They do the initial fact-finding, and all the analysis and
determination is performed by the NTSB. While they are both government
agencies, they are quite separate. You'll often find the NTSB reports at
odds with current FAA regulations/policy (almost always towards trying to
make them MORE restrictive, but, hey....)

Oddly enough, the NTSB does have *some* regulatory basis for ruling that
pilot error was the primary cause in some engine-failure accidents. 14 CFR
91.119, "Minimum Altitudes," says that "...no person may operate below...an
altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, a emergency landing without undue
hazard to persons or property on the surface."

If the field you pick has a fence in it and you end up crashing through it,
then you obviously weren't flying at a high enough altitude to select a
field where you could land without causing property damage... 1/2 :-)

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:37:37 -0000, Dylan Smith
wrote:

In article , Ron Wanttaja wrote:
There was no water separation in the fuel when I checked the sumps. There
were tiny bubbles in the sample, but they looked like air. They did not

I remember readin this in the book, "I Learned about Flying From That".
The great phrase was, "Looks like champagne", to which the answer was
"It costs like champagne" :-)

Yup...it was published in the third edition of ILAFFT articles.

I really *don't* kick about that engine failure. That FLYING article that
resulted was the very first writing I got paid for. And the FBO gave me a
free fill-up on my next visit. :-)

Ron "Brought a microscope that time" Wanttaja

Well...keep in mind that the FAA does not perform the formal accident
investigation. They do the initial fact-finding, and all the analysis and
determination is performed by the NTSB. While they are both government
agencies, they are quite separate. You'll often find the NTSB reports at
odds with current FAA regulations/policy (almost always towards trying to
make them MORE restrictive, but, hey....)

I know of one case where the FSDO investigated, turned the facts over
to the NTSB, and the NTSB conclusion changed the facts to support their
conclusion.