Netjets 680 down on Highway in Laredo

[KE5BM]

ValuJet 592 - Congress pushed the FAA to ground the airline - and did - before the investigation was complete. In the end, the airline itself was safe and didn't do anything wrong.
ComAir 5191 - Congress quickly pushed runway incursion laws that had almost nothing to do with the actual cause. They had to walk back a bunch of their demands after the investigation was complete.

Just the first two that come to mind in aviation only.

 

[Larry in TN]

ValuJet 592 - Congress pushed the FAA to ground the airline - and did - before the investigation was complete. In the end, the airline itself was safe and didn't do anything wrong

That's not what the NTSB said.

“The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the failure of SabreTech to properly prepare, package, and identify the chemical oxygen generators before presenting them to ValuJet for carriage in the cargo compartment, and the failure of ValuJet to properly oversee its maintenance program and to ensure that its contract maintenance facility followed procedures, which resulted in the loading of the oxygen generators as cargo; the failure of the Federal Aviation Administration to require smoke detectors and fire-suppression systems in Class D cargo compartments; and ValuJet’s failure to properly train its personnel regarding the carriage of hazardous materials.”

 

[bonefishpete]

Well Dan just implied the pilots ran out of fuel. We shall see.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

That's not what the NTSB said.

“The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the failure of SabreTech to properly prepare, package, and identify the chemical oxygen generators before presenting them to ValuJet for carriage in the cargo compartment, and the failure of ValuJet to properly oversee its maintenance program and to ensure that its contract maintenance facility followed procedures, which resulted in the loading of the oxygen generators as cargo; the failure of the Federal Aviation Administration to require smoke detectors and fire-suppression systems in Class D cargo compartments; and ValuJet’s failure to properly train its personnel regarding the carriage of hazardous materials.”

Yeah. You beat me to it. Value jet did a lot wrong.

I do miss them. Always laughed a little when I heard them in the radio. Awesome callsign.

 

[Larry in TN]

Yeah. You beat me to it. Value jet did a lot wrong.

Also, often overlooked, was that the expired oxygen generators belonged to ValuJet. They had been removed from ValuJet airplanes. They were being shipped to Atlanta, under ValuJet's direction, because the HAZMAT laws in Georgia allowed for less expensive methods of disposal than did the laws in Florida.

For those who don't know, the oxygen generators where canisters that operate similar to a hand grenade but that burn, instead of exploding. The generator is fired when a pin is pulled when the passenger "pulls the mask towards them to start the flow of oxygen". That starts a chemical reaction that produces both heat and oxygen and lasts for about 15 minutes. Each half-row has one canister and pulling any one of the masks triggers the generator. Such canisters are how most current airliners provide oxygen for passengers in the event of a depressurization. They eliminate the need for large oxygen tank with plumbing to each seat.

 

[Bacho]

In a former life we would set them off outside as we had no way to transport the timed out ones. Even then they were treated as hazmat IIRC.

 

[Jim_R]

ValuJet 592 - Congress pushed the FAA to ground the airline - and did - before the investigation was complete. In the end, the airline itself was safe and didn't do anything wrong.
ComAir 5191 - Congress quickly pushed runway incursion laws that had almost nothing to do with the actual cause. They had to walk back a bunch of their demands after the investigation was complete.

Just the first two that come to mind in aviation only.

Both of those were scheduled service airline flights that killed multiple paying passengers. Those crashes are rare, and they always get a lot of attention.

This conversation is about a bizjet crash that killed one (very rich) guy. It's not going to get the same attention from Congress (or anyone else). About the only place people are talking about this is right here in this thread. Go type "netjets 680" into Google, click the "news" tab, and just look at all the stories from two weeks ago when the crash happened, and pretty much nothing else since then except a local Laredo news story that's behind a paywall.

 

[Cesarmx]

Colgan 3407- Congress also pushed for the 1500 hr requirement plus ATP cert for 121 ops (which most 135 ops have adopted it as well). Has this mandate really increased Aviation safety?

 

[MauleSkinner]

Colgan 3407- Congress also pushed for the 1500 hr requirement plus ATP cert for 121 ops (which most 135 ops have adopted it as well).

While I don’t see “most” 135 ops, none of the ones I see require an ATP for the jet SIC.

 

[Cesarmx]

While I don’t see “most” 135 ops, none of the ones I see require an ATP for the jet SIC.

Ok, fair enough; some years back I applied For a 135 SIC and was asked to have an ATP written passed with a first class medical on hand as pre employment requirement, and expected to earn an ATP cert within a year while employed.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Ok, fair enough; some years back I applied For a 135 SIC and was asked to have an ATP written passed with a first class medical on hand as pre employment requirement, and expected to earn an ATP cert within a year while employed.

What was the upgrade time frame?

 

[midwestpa24]

Colgan 3407- Congress also pushed for the 1500 hr requirement plus ATP cert for 121 ops (which most 135 ops have adopted it as well). Has this mandate really increased Aviation safety?

Even though both pilots of Colgan 3407 had well over 1,500 hours (3,000 and 2,500 respectively if I recall correctly). ALPA seized on a note in the NTSB report about lack of training and experience, and marched the families of the victims in front of Congress.

 

[KSCessnaDriver]

My experience with those clowns at CBP is they treat you differently when you have an airline (large 91k included) name behind your tail number. The saber-rattling about 5k fines and eAPIS notifications/ADIZ crossings is meant only for us peasants who naively think we have a right to re-enter our Country without penalty, by constitutional decree.

As to taking off short on FOB because "mexican fueling takes too long"? Oof. I guess I'll stipulate; def not cut out for corporate aviation if that's the case. It's the problem with having a pension, you get too comfortable saying NO in this life.

Jest aside, I'm willing to give a 91k crew with a job high paying enough to be considered "career money" as opposed to "time builder money", to be more guarded about it and not succumb to dumb rich people pressure. Furthermore, an outfit that dislocates its own shoulder patting itself in the back about running things like 121, would be about as immune as the latter about taking off without sufficient fuel. I'm no Captain Steve of course (/s), I can't stake my entire parasocial reputation making the claim they didn't bone up the fuel.. but I don't think they did. yes, I'm incurring a halo bias just because they have "netjets" jobs. That said, I'm 100% open to stand corrected on that matter if the evidence shows they in fact rushed over concern for CBP clowns, and launched with insufficient gas. Maybe the NTSB will get this one published before GTA 6....

I wouldn't jump to conclusions there about an airline and customs. I've never been treated worse than Laredo customs, flying in a DC9 freighter. They saw us all the time, yet they constantly thought we were criminals.

 

[flyingron]

A lot of the "captains" produce a lot of drivel. I gave up on 74 Gear because his stuff is terribly repetitive (as bad as some Cable chow) and simplified to the point of frequently being completely inaccurate. What bothers me with people like this is that if they wanted to spend 15 minutes prior to recording their content to actually look up the things that they admit they aren't sure of, the material would be a lot better.

Even some of the better guys like MentourPilot get some serious things wrong. His analysis recently of the ancient TWA 514 which has aleady been studied to death, while entertaining to non-pilots I suspect, has some very serious errors. In fact, his comments made the same incorrect assumptions that got that flight into trouble to begin with. I wrote him about that, hopefully that he could fix them, but he's never EVER responded to any questions (even non-critical ones) I've sent his way.

 

[rwellner98]

I wouldn't jump to conclusions there about an airline and customs. I've never been treated worse than Laredo customs, flying in a DC9 freighter. They saw us all the time, yet they constantly thought we were criminals.

Tell me about it. I lived in Mexico for a while and people would regularly ask me about flying there and ask if I had problems with security or paying bribes. In 14 years of flying in Mexico I never once had a bad experience with customs and immigration. There was that normal Mexican issue that there wasn't much consistency airport to airport, but everyone was respectful and polite in their requests. Even the two or three times that I was asked to unload the plane and bring it inside for customs inspection wasn't a huge deal because they were so decent about it.

OTOH, US CBP at Laredo were just *******s. Once I arrived to have them threatening me with jail time and fines for not filing the proper paperwork. They harassed and questioned me for 30 minutes, behaving like a stereotypical bully straight out of central casting. It took me 30 minutes to convince them to finally let me go back to the plane, fetch my laptop and show them the receipt I had from the system that accepted my paperwork. With that in hand, they were able to find my record and process me into the country. Worst part, instead of an apology, dude seemed ****ed off that I had made him look bad.

That was the last time I ever cleared through Laredo. McAllen was my favorite. Dozens of times passing through there and they were always easy peasy. Going the other direction, Tampico was one of my favorites clearing into Mexico. The people there were always awesome and all the offices were in one hallway just doors away from one another. Very efficient compared to some airports (cough, Querétaro, cough).

 

[Cesarmx]

Well Dan just implied the pilots ran out of fuel. We shall see.

Only about 3 people have implied or stated or are leaning on this probable cause ( only personal opinions, comments , speculations etc) . We shall see the initial report from NTSB …….once all the parties involved send their reports to NTSB including US and Mexican customs, Mexican FBO etc.

 

[Larry in TN]

Congress also pushed for the 1500 hr requirement plus ATP cert for 121 ops

It's an ATP requirement, not a 1,500 hour requirement. There are paths to rATP that require only 750, 1,000, or 1,250 total hours. It also requires additional training that wasn't required before.

That accident also changes how airline pilots train for stall recovery. We no long train to power-out with a minimal loss of altitude.

Even though both pilots of Colgan 3407 had well over 1,500 hours

They did, at the time of the accident. They did not when they first started flying scheduled airline flights.

 

[Zeldman]

I've never been treated worse than Laredo customs, flying in a DC9 freighter. They saw us all the time, yet they constantly thought we were criminals.

Kept ya honest, didn't they.??

 

[midwestpa24]

They did, at the time of the accident. They did not when they first started flying scheduled airline flights.

And they didn't crash when they first started flying scheduled flights either. But I'm sure another few hundred hours riding right seat in a 172 at a puppy mill flight school would have changed the outcome.

 

[Larry in TN]

And they didn't crash when they first started flying scheduled flights either. But I'm sure another few hundred hours riding right seat in a 172 at a puppy mill flight school would have changed the outcome.

It may have. Doing a bunch more stalls with students couldn't have hurt.

 

[midwestpa24]

It may have. Doing a bunch more stalls with students couldn't have hurt.

I always thought the NTSB report gave the captain more credit that it was worth. There was an attempt to say he just botched the stall recovery, or was reacting to a perceived tailplane stall, and that was why he held the yoke back. Personally I think he panicked when the nose dropped and held that yoke for dear life, much like AF447.

The real failure was well before the stall, removing power to slow the airplane during the descent and completely forgetting about it until the stall warning started. Basic airmanship, neither pilot was remotely monitoring their airspeed.

And I will stand by my argument, more ink in their logbook wouldn't have made a difference.

 

[AV8R_87]

or was reacting to a perceived tailplane stall

So, not long after it happened, I was chatting with a friend of a friend who used to fly with the mishap pilots at that airline. He was adamant that the aircraft was known for tailplane stalls and that they did the right thing.

held that yoke for dear life, much like AF447

AF447 co-pilot vapor locked when presented with simultaneous stall and overspeed warnings.

 

[MauleSkinner]

So, not long after it happened, I was chatting with a friend of a friend who used to fly with the mishap pilots at that airline. He was adamant that the aircraft was known for tailplane stalls and that they did the right thing.

Tail plane stalls don’t result in a shaker or pusher.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Colgan 3407- Congress also pushed for the 1500 hr requirement plus ATP cert for 121 ops (which most 135 ops have adopted it as well). Has this mandate really increased Aviation safety?

Yes - But not because someone has more time when they start at the airlines. Even before the ATP rule, most pilots had 1500 hours by the time they started flying passengers under part 121.

But, by requiring it of everyone, they did raise the price of entry in both dollars and time, which in turn forced the airlines to start paying better, which in turn opened up aviation as a viable career to many more people, which resulted in lots of great pilots choosing aviation as a career.

Tail plane stalls don’t result in a shaker or pusher.

I've never experienced a tailplane stall, but I could see how on some models of airplanes, maybe there's a buffet that happens when the tailplane is about to stall that could be mistaken for a shaker. I don't think it's super likely but I wouldn't bet my life against it either.

 

[dmspilot]

It's an ATP requirement, not a 1,500 hour requirement. There are paths to rATP that require only 750, 1,000, or 1,250 total hours.

It is a 1,500 hour requirement, with exceptions under certain circumstances. That's how the house bill was written. Everyone calls it the 1500 hour rule. Everyone knows there are exceptions. The distinction is needlessly pedantic.

 

[bonefishpete]

“No emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD) related to the cause of the NetJets crash has been issued.”

Nothing obvious seen yet?
Or something obvious seen but not related to airframe?

 

[MauleSkinner]

I've never experienced a tailplane stall, but I could see how on some models of airplanes, maybe there's a buffet that happens when the tailplane is about to stall that could be mistaken for a shaker. I don't think it's super likely but I wouldn't bet my life against it either.

The elevator and yoke can start to oscillate a bit with a tail plane stall, but it’s nowhere near the frequency (or sound) of a shaker.

 

[Larry in TN]

Everyone knows there are exceptions.

When someone's argument is that 1,500 hours isn't needed, then I'm not so sure that they do.

 

[Larry in TN]

I've never experienced a tailplane stall, but I could see how on some models of airplanes, maybe there's a buffet that happens when the tailplane is about to stall that could be mistaken for a shaker.

I doubt that there was much thought devoted to what was causing the problem. They were reacting and fighting to maintain control of the airplane. There wasn't time to think about it and weigh options. This wasn't a wind-your-watch situation.

 

[Doc Holliday]

To understand part of the problem with the Colgan crash was the stall recovery.

For years it was taught in 121 that stall recovery was a precision maneuver, the airplane would hold an altitude while decelerating and at the onset of a stall the recovery was to hold altitude and power out of the stall. Loss of altitude or a secondary stall resulted in an unsat.

When the stall occurred at Colgan the pilot attempted to hold altitude, just as he trained and checked.

Fortunately after that the stall series was revised to an actual stall recovery (lower pitch, add power and recover)

 

[Kenny Phillips]

When someone's argument is that 1,500 hours isn't needed, then I'm not so sure that they do.

It ain't the hours, it's the particular experience. Droning about in a Skyhawk adds not-so-valuable hours (I didn't even log many of mine). But a concentrated training regime can get you flying jets in a few hundred. Competently.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Fortunately after that the stall series was revised to an actual stall recovery (lower pitch, add power and recover)

I also appreciated the change to doing stalls in the “operational environment”. I had quite a few at first that struggled to transition from a landing stall to a missed approach.

 

[MauleSkinner]

It ain't the hours, it's the particular experience. Droning about in a Skyhawk adds not-so-valuable hours (I didn't even log many of mine).

Those hours can be valuable if they’re built on a solid training foundation, but given the number of pilots I see who can’t figure out how (or why) to fly LNAV minimums on an approach, for example, that foundation isn’t common.

But a concentrated training regime can get you flying jets in a few hundred. Competently.

Obviously that’s where the 750-hour requirement comes in.

 

[Tools]

EVERYTHING is a wind your watch situation. If you aren’t trained to the point you can avoid startle response, you aren’t trained as well as you can be.

Where we are now is a point where we have mitigated startle response to an acceptable level. Which is a few startle response crashes a year and subsequently people dying that didn’t need to, but not significant enough to warrant the increase in ticket prices that would occur if we trained to that point. Is what it is, but THAT IS the case.

Let’s consider these two stall recovery methods…. NEITHER flys the plane, just executes procedures. Flying the plane would be once you stall, max power, pitch to l/d max and wait for it to recover, you have done ALL you can. Depending on the situation, it may power out and lose no altitude, it may lose a thousand feet… but you have flown the plane to its max performance and you aren’t using procedures that are simply a compromise.

This would take a LOT more training and the addition of GOOD AOA indication. We aren’t willing to fund that apparently, so we are getting what we asked for.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Flying the plane would be once you stall, max power, pitch to l/d max and wait for it to recover, you have done ALL you can.

As one of the untrained, I assume this statement means pitch down until AOA shows L/D Max, and continue to pitch to maintain that AOA until airspeed builds to match (a 1g condition)?

 

[Tools]

Exactly (except you really don’t give a fig about this airspeed thing you mention). It works in all sorts of situations… as simple as it gets, a needle that simply says flying, or not flying, in real time.

Note, you actually might need to pitch UP to get there, who knows? Simply move the thing in front of you forwards or backwards until the gage points at the green mark, and KEEP IT THERE.

Kinda cool we fund the ntsb to be able to see our aoa from the data recorder AFTER the crash, but us simpleton pilots don’t get access to that. Unreal, but exactly what we put up with.

Added bonus, when you start flying this way, you really start to understand your machine much better. It has cascading benefits.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Exactly (except you really don’t give a fig about this airspeed thing you mention). It works in all sorts of situations… as simple as it gets, a needle that simply says flying, or not flying, in real time.

Note, you actually might need to pitch UP to get there, who knows? Simply move the thing in front of you forwards or backwards until the gage points at the green mark, and KEEP IT THERE.

I guess the follow up is, at what point do you do consider yourself recovered from the stall and maybe fly something other than best L/D?

 

[Tools]

Climbing, and generally back to entry altitude.

But if someone is chasing you, l/d max is a good turning aoa. If you have far to go, l/d is good. May never wanna do other than l/d max!

 

[MauleSkinner]

Climbing, and generally back to entry altitude.

That’s where I occasionally see huge misapplication of the “no minimum altitude loss” in the ACS…lower the nose, add thrust, and gaining almost 100 knots before even thinking about pitching up. All the while not noticing the buildings and trees going by the window.

And, granted, you need to recover from the stall before you can follow a ground prox warning, but it sure seems awfully noisy in the cockpit for an awfully long time.

 

[Tools]

That’s the beauty of using AOA… can’t under pitch, or over pitch. It’s ALWAYS correct pitch. If anything, you’ll stay there (at a good usable pitch) longer than you need, and will just be higher.

Started doing high altitude stalls in 121 training (eet). You might need a hunnert more knots at 30,000 feet. If using aoa, it would be moot, it’ll only happen if needed.