NTSB TO OFFER TRAINING ON EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS INVOLVED IN MAJOR AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS AND INCIDENTS

Similar Posts

  • | | | |

    NTSB to Hold Investigative Hearing Into August 2013 UPS A300 crash in Birmingham, Ala.


    NTSB to Hold Investigative Hearing Into August 2013 UPS A300 crash in Birmingham, Ala.

    Jan. 30, 2014
    WASHINGTON – The National Transportation Safety Board has scheduled an investigative hearing on February 20 into the crash of a UPS Airbus A300-600 on approach to Birmingham-Shuttlesworth International Airport in Birmingham, Ala., on Aug. 14, 2013.
    The two flight crew members were killed and the airplane was destroyed when it impacted the ground less than a mile short of Runway 18. The cargo flight had originated from Louisville, Ky. Runway 18 was being used because the main runway at the airport was closed for repairs at the time of the airplane’s arrival.
    The one-day hearing will examine:
    • Execution of non-precision approaches, including initial and recurrent training, adherence to standard operating procedures, and proficiency
    • Human factors issues associated with effective crew coordination and resource management applicable to this accident, including decision-making, communication, fatigue and fitness for duty, as well as monitoring and cross-checking, policies, standard operating procedures, guidance, and training provided to UPS crewmembers.
    • Dispatch procedures, including the training, evaluation, roles and responsibilities of UPS dispatchers and the limitations of dispatch-related software.
    The investigation is ongoing and this hearing will develop additional facts to support the investigation. The hearing will be held in the NTSB Board Room and Conference Center in Washington, D.C. A detailed agenda and a list of attendees will be forthcoming.
    Parties to the hearing will include the Federal Aviation Administration, UPS, Airbus, the Independent Pilots Association and the Transport Workers Union. The accredited representative from the French Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses pour la sécurité de l’aviation civile (BEA) will participate on the technical panels.
    The determination of the probable cause of the crash will be released when the investigation is complete. Just prior to the start of the hearing, the public docket will be opened. Included in the docket are photographs, interview transcripts and other documents.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | | | | | |

    Automated Cockpit Props up Undertrained Pilots

    The Asiana investigation continues.

    Back in July, the pilot who was insecure about making a visual approach in a 777 crashed at San Francisco International Airport on a visual approach in Asiana Flight 214’s Boeing 777. Specifically, he told NTSB investigators “it was very difficult to perform a visual approach with a heavy airplane.” The glideslope was not working at the San Francisco airport, and that was an instrument the (*undertrained) pilot was relying on. The plane came in so low the tail struck the seawall and broke off. The video below shows the plane rotate 360 degrees and catch fire by the runway.

    New Asiana Crash Video

    Video with news commentary

    Before impact, the relief pilot in the jump seat repeated several times “sink rate” trying to warn the pilots at the controls that the jet was too quickly losing altitude. One of the pilots said “It’s low.” Then there was a stick shaker alert (which occurs when the plane is about to stall from flying too slowly. I once had a pilot do a presentation that included the disturbing grinding of the stick shaker alarm as it violently vibrated the control yoke. It’s an alarming direction to the pilots to increase thrust.)

    When the stick shaker went off, the instructor called for a go around. It went off four seconds before impact. It was too late.

    Both the instructor and the captain were relying on the auto throttle, and both were unaware it was off.

    In George’s Point of View

    I do not know how anyone can watch the surveillance video of the Asiana crash and not marvel that of the three hundred and seven people aboard the plane, there were only three deaths.

    I’m not discounting the wounds of the injured, nor those three deaths, nor the tragedy of one of the teen victims being run over by an airport crash tender. (That’s a whole tragedy by itself—who knows if she might have survived but for being so obscured by foam that she was not visible to crash responders—through the firemen who carried her out surely must have known she was there.)

    A dozen critically injured, a hundred-sixty-nine injured, but only three deaths.

    It’s nothing short of a miracle. Especially on inspecting the condition of the burned out shell of the hull. Especially on reviewing the just-released surveillance video that shows the plane splintering after impacting the firewall, cartwheeling like a crippled gymnast down the runway and dissolving into a cloud of dust and flame. No jet fuel fire here——leaking oil ignited as it poured on to a hot engine.

    The Kazan crash (Tatarstan Airlines Flight 363) from November 17th is fresh in my mind. Everyone aboard–fifty people (forty-four passengers and six crew) all died. The plane just fell from the sky while landing at an impossible 75-degree-nose-down attitude, piloted by a pilot whose license is apparently fake. Everyone in that crash died. (Tatarstan surveillance below.)

    Of course one can see the physics—that everyone on the Tatarstan flight received the full direct impact, versus how the rolling of the Asiana plane dispersed some of the impact energy. Still, there is tremendous force in a crash.

    I know I should be talking about pilot training, because this is yet another crash that appears to be due to pilots becoming too dependent on technology. But I will focus on that another day. Right now, I am overwhelmed after looking at the crash tape.

    Asiana—Cartwheeling Catastrophe
    I am surprised that I have neither heard or seen choruses of amazement that all but three people survived the rolling catastrophe in San Francisco. Some credit should perhaps go to the rescue crew, quick actions of the cabin crew, performance of the emergency slides, and maybe even the aerodynamics of the 777 whose seats are required to withstand 16g of dynamic force.

    Sure, there was error involved in this crash, but when you look at the survival rate, some credit is due to the 5.5 billion Boeing put into research, development and safety of the 777.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | |

    NTSB Sends Assistance

    On Jan 16, 2013, an ANA All Nippon Airways Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner was en route from Yamaguchi-Ube Airport to Tokyo-Haneda Airport when smoke in the forward electrical compartment developed. Also, an unusual smell was detected.

    The flight made an emergency landing.

    There were 137 passengers aboard.One passenger was injured in the evacuation. The firefighters did not find any fire.

    The NTSB sent out a release that said “The National Transportation Safety Board is sending an investigator to Japan to assist in the investigation of an emergency landing of an ANA Boeing 787 that occurred yesterday. Initial reports indicate that the crew received multiple messages in the cockpit concerning the battery and other systems that were affected, and also reported smoke in the cockpit and an odor in the cabin. The airplane subsequently landed, and passengers and crew evacuated via emergency slides.”

    Investigator Lorenda Ward is the U. S. accredited representative to the JTSB’s investigation and will work alongside reps from the FAA and Boeing.

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | |

    NTSB Denies Petition on 1996 Crash of TWA Flight 800


    The National Transportation Safety Board today denied a petition for reconsideration of its findings in the investigation of the 1996 crash of TWA flight 800.

    The petition was filed in June 2013 by a group called The TWA 800 Project. Petitioners claimed a “detonation or high-velocity explosion” caused the crash.

    “Our investigations are never ‘closed’,” said Acting Chairman Christopher A. Hart. “We always remain open to the presentation of new evidence.”

    Before responding to the petition, NTSB staff met with the petitioners’ representatives and listened to an eyewitness who described what he saw on the night of the accident. After a thorough review of all the information provided by the petitioners, the NTSB denied the petition in its entirety because the evidence and analysis presented did not show the original findings were incorrect.

    Black Box

    Part 1

    Black Box

    Part 2

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • | | |

    NTSB Reports Uncertified Pilot in December Crash

    According to the NtSB Preliminary report of the Beech crash on December 18, 2012, about 0002 mountain standard time (MST), a Beech B100, N499SW, collided with trees at Libby, Montana. Stinger Welding was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The noncertificated pilot and one passenger sustained fatal injuries; the airplane sustained substantial damage from impact forces. The cross-country personal flight departed Coolidge, Arizona, about 2025 MST on December 17th, with Libby as the planned destination. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the nearest official reporting station of Sandpoint, Idaho, 264 degrees at 46 miles, and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan had been filed.

    Read the preliminary report

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.
  • |

    NTSB Safety Recommendations

    National Transportation Safety Board
    Washington, DC 20594

    April 10, 2012

    The National Transportation Safety Board makes the following
    recommendations to the Reno Air Racing Association:

    Require aircraft owners, as a condition of eligibility to
    participate in the Reno National Championship Air Races, to
    provide an engineering evaluation that includes flight
    demonstrations and analysis within the anticipated flight
    envelope for aircraft with any major modification, such as
    to the structure or flight controls. (A-12-13)

    Evaluate the design of the unlimited class course and safety
    areas to minimize maneuvering near and potential conflicts
    with spectators; if warranted by the results of the
    evaluation, implement changes to the race course. (A-12-14)

    Take the following actions to raise the level of safety for
    spectators and personnel near the race course: (1) relocate
    the fuel truck away from the ramp area and (2) in front of
    any area where spectators are present, install barriers more
    substantial than those currently in place. (A-12-15)

    Provide high g training to pilots, including techniques to
    mitigate the potential effects of high g exposure, as part
    of preparations before the Reno National Championship Air
    Races (NCAR) and during daily briefs at the NCAR. (A-12-16)

    Evaluate the feasibility of requiring pilots to wear g suits
    when racing at the Reno National Championship Air Races; if
    the evaluation determines it is feasible, implement a
    requirement. (A-12-17)

    To include the featured image in your Twitter Card, please tap or click their icon a second time.