NTSB

NTSB reports, where the FAA were the investigators, are notorious for
their inaccuracies. The NTSB change the original facts quite often. The
FAA inspectors are just as frustrated as you are when they point out
the incorrect facts and the NTSB refuses to correct them.
This is probably why NTSB reports cannot be used in trials.

"Colin Taylor" wrote in message
...
[...]
I am a few hours away from my commercial checkride, and then I want to
do the instructor rating... Has this wrecked my career before I finished
my training?

Seems to me that the FAA enforcement action(s), if any, is what would affect
your career. Even if you did cause the accident, I doubt that would have
wrecked your career, and since the FAA held your instructor to blame, I
don't see why it'd have any significant effect at all.

Is it likely to affect my career at all?

Nope....I have an accident on my record..two actually. One was my fault and one
was NOT my fault. I'm flying for a living.
As for the NTSB, they could care less about the facts.
On my 2nd accident (the one that was my fault), they decided not to use pretty
much anything that was in my report to them and the FAA's report...hell, there
was even video and they still got it wrong. Oh well.

But, when you interview for a job in flying, just be honest about it and things
fall into place.


-John
*You are nothing until you have flown a Douglas, Lockheed, Grumman or North
American*

"Colin Taylor" wrote in message
...
EDR wrote:
NTSB reports, where the FAA were the investigators, are notorious for
their inaccuracies. The NTSB change the original facts quite often. The
FAA inspectors are just as frustrated as you are when they point out
the incorrect facts and the NTSB refuses to correct them.
This is probably why NTSB reports cannot be used in trials.

Is it likely to affect my career at all?

No and when you are asked if you ever had an accident the answer is no. The
FAA considered the instructor to be PIC, that's why he had to have another
checkride.

"EDR" wrote in message
...

NTSB reports, where the FAA were the investigators, are notorious for
their inaccuracies. The NTSB change the original facts quite often. The
FAA inspectors are just as frustrated as you are when they point out
the incorrect facts and the NTSB refuses to correct them.
This is probably why NTSB reports cannot be used in trials.

I'd assume NTSB reports would be inadmissible regardless of their
reliability, because they're hearsay, not evidence.

--Gary

EDR wrote
NTSB reports, where the FAA were the investigators, are notorious for
their inaccuracies. The NTSB change the original facts quite often. The
FAA inspectors are just as frustrated as you are when they point out
the incorrect facts and the NTSB refuses to correct them.

Over the years I've been involved in general aviation, I've had
first-hand knowledge of quite a few accidents and incidents that
eventually wound up in the NTSB database (and some that should have
but did not). Reading the report after the fact, I find that
inaccuracies are the norm. In fact, some of them read like a work of
fiction.

This is probably why NTSB reports cannot be used in trials.

No, there are other reasons. Nonetheless, based on my experience I
consider NTSB reports to be just slightly more accurate than news
reports.

Michael

Colin Taylor wrote:

If I was asked this question, I would say I was *in* an accident, but
not the primary input at the controls at the time.
Technically, I was PIC (for the logbook) cos I held a PPL at the time,
although I was undergoing further instruction in that flight.


If you held a PPL at the time I believe you and the instructor can
both log PIC time during instruction, unless you are receiving instruction
for an aircraft category/class/type that you have not yet been signed
off for, then only the instructor is the PIC and can log it.

As far as who is the REAL PIC in the event of an accident, I believe
the FAA places a greater burden on the instructor since HE has been
trained and licensed to insure the training is safe and risks are minimized.

Michael wrote:
Over the years I've been involved in general aviation, I've had
first-hand knowledge of quite a few accidents and incidents that
eventually wound up in the NTSB database (and some that should have
but did not). Reading the report after the fact, I find that
inaccuracies are the norm. In fact, some of them read like a work of
fiction.

Like the JFK report, for instance?

its not the NTSB reports that count.. it's what is in your pilot folder at
FAA OKC that matters.. if they did not require you to retake a ride with the
FAA and sent you no letters to that effect.. or findings.. then it is a moot
point.. keep a copy of all FAA correspondence

press on.. fly safe.. and learn from it

BT

"Colin Taylor" wrote in message
...
EDR wrote:
NTSB reports, where the FAA were the investigators, are notorious for
their inaccuracies. The NTSB change the original facts quite often. The
FAA inspectors are just as frustrated as you are when they point out
the incorrect facts and the NTSB refuses to correct them.
This is probably why NTSB reports cannot be used in trials.

Is it likely to affect my career at all?

I am a few hours away from my commercial checkride, and then I want to
do the instructor rating... Has this wrecked my career before I finished
my training?

Colin

"EDR" wrote in message
...

This is probably why NTSB reports cannot be used in trials.

NTSB reports are inadmissible in trials by statute. Otherwise lawyers would
continually interfere with the investigation.