Atlas NTSB 3/12 investigative update

Nick

Well-Known Member
There was a period of time where our FSDO had a policy of all CFI initials done in house, during that time we had one inspector basically tell us quietly that if students were assigned to a certain other inspector they should just cancel and reschedule because his philosophy was "everyone fails the first try."
Yep, before I scheduled my checkride, I already knew the name of the one inspector who, if I was assigned, I was recommended by everyone to have sinus congestion that day etc.

Ended up getting the easiest one in the building. I'll never forget the feeling of hearing him say "Well, let's take an hour for lunch and we'll head outside" after 1 hour and 15 minutes of oral exam discussion.
 

Richman

Well-Known Member
Better investigate it with an independent review board outside the NTSB though, otherwise they’d find pilot error to be the probable cause
There’s precedent for bringing in an outside entity when a conflict of interest exists. When there was a midair in Virginia with two GA aircraft, one owned by an FAA guy and another by an NTSB guy (what are the chances, right?), the NTSB handed it off to the Canadian TSB.

You wouldn’t like that though. The Canadian TSB is rabid about protecting the data surrounding any accident & investigation, and the CVR data is considered highly privileged, to the point that not even a transcript is released.

That would leave all the armchair quarterbacks and morbid rubber-neckers adrift until the final report comes out.
 

trafficinsight

Well-Known Member
There’s precedent for bringing in an outside entity when a conflict of interest exists. When there was a midair in Virginia with two GA aircraft, one owned by an FAA guy and another by an NTSB guy (what are the chances, right?), the NTSB handed it off to the Canadian TSB.

You wouldn’t like that though. The Canadian TSB is rabid about protecting the data surrounding any accident & investigation, and the CVR data is considered highly privileged, to the point that not even a transcript is released.

That would leave all the armchair quarterbacks and morbid rubber-neckers adrift until the final report comes out.
Since the universe tends toward maximum irony I'd say the chances were pretty good!

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
There’s precedent for bringing in an outside entity when a conflict of interest exists. When there was a midair in Virginia with two GA aircraft, one owned by an FAA guy and another by an NTSB guy (what are the chances, right?), the NTSB handed it off to the Canadian TSB.

You wouldn’t like that though. The Canadian TSB is rabid about protecting the data surrounding any accident & investigation, and the CVR data is considered highly privileged, to the point that not even a transcript is released.

That would leave all the armchair quarterbacks and morbid rubber-neckers adrift until the final report comes out.
The Canadian investigation model cleaned up their act with creation of the TSB, and has really made positive strides as an organization after their predecessor, CASB, was dissolved following the Arrow Air DC-8 crash in Gander investigation, and CASBs handling of it.
 

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
What did they do wrong with the DC8 Gsnder accident? I think they mentioned the possibility of s bomb but I highly doubt that’s what happened.
There was diagreement among the board on the cause, with one member saying how a small amount of ice could not bring down an airliner.....which is what happened a few years later in an Air Ontario crash. Deicing procedures were not changed/updated due to the dissenting opinion, and had they been, Air Ontario might not have happened. Government of Canada lost confidence in CASB, and dissolved the board.
 

MikeD

Administrator
Staff member
@MikeD , still miles behind the NTSB in larger factors. I don't understand how landing short of the runway, ripping off engines and landing gear, writing off the aircraft etc... can be considered a "hard landing."
TSB still has some miles to go before reaching NTSB or Britain AAIB level, but they're miles ahead of where they were back in the 80s.
 

ppragman

Direct Yeska
There was a period of time where our FSDO had a policy of all CFI initials done in house, during that time we had one inspector basically tell us quietly that if students were assigned to a certain other inspector they should just cancel and reschedule because his philosophy was "everyone fails the first try."



Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
That's remarkably •ed up.
 

Adler

Low-Level Individual
Yep, before I scheduled my checkride, I already knew the name of the one inspector who, if I was assigned, I was recommended by everyone to have sinus congestion that day etc.

Ended up getting the easiest one in the building. I'll never forget the feeling of hearing him say "Well, let's take an hour for lunch and we'll head outside" after 1 hour and 15 minutes of oral exam discussion.

They assigned me mine, Leon Pinkston, email was pinksplippinkston@whatever.com.
 

A80TRACON

Well-Known Member
The UPS at BHM had a CA that basically was gonna fail upgrade twice, pulled himself out back to line FO. Failed ground school / recurrent too. Colgan CA has multiple failures at literally every step of his aviation career.

The political correctness and HR lovey dovey has taken over hiring. No, I don’t care how many kittens you saved or which minority/sexual group you belong to. I do, however, care if you can fly a plane and have an excellent training background. I had a recruiter at a job fair tell me straight up that they know I can fly a plane, it’s the other stuff they want to see. Really? You can just assume I know how to fly based on the sole fact I’m employed as a pilot? No asking about failed training? Failed checkrides? 121 training history? This is what happens when HR takes over hiring. Hell, I say bring back DC10 and 707 sim evals. I wonder how many of the glass crowd today couldn’t 6-pack track a VOR needle, or shoot an NDB approach. “The computer FMS does that for me....” It’s even worse for kids coming out today in their primary training which is now all G1000 glass types.

I don’t care if you were a union guy, pro stans, hiring committee, saved a kittten, built a house, joined OBAP, etc. I would care about how many checkrides you failed? How many 121 training events you failed? How many upgrade attempts you failed? If you failed 3-4+ checkrides, airlines shouldn’t hire you. How’s it gonna look if you crash a plane and the media runs with that headline? They did for the Colgan CA. If you fail upgrade twice, you should be fired. Period. Sorry, you couldn’t be a CA. So it’s okay, go be a FO again? In what world do we live in? FOs are CAs in training. You fail upgrade twice, goodbye Felicia.


I get that customer service aspect and getting along with people, being friendly, being easy to fly with, not a dbag, etc, are nice traits and should be considered. But actual flying competency matters too. This is a serious business. One-of day and failure here or there is fine. Numerous repeat offenses should not be tolerated. Look at the crash reports of recent that were pilot errors as primary cause. In nearly every case, the guy had a questionable/ checkered history.


Now full disclaimer that I do not know about this Atlas FO’s actual history or failures. I don’t know if he was PF or PM, and what role he did or didn’t play in the accident. I’ll wait for the report to come out on that. But based on commments that are already coming out about him online, it’s not a good look.
What's with all the hating on kittens?
 
Top