NTSB Safety Alerts: General aviation is on the radar and not in a good way!

iflyblog.com

iflyblog.com

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
151
Location
Central Ohio
Display Name
Display name:
Brent
No owner maintenance on experiments (listen up guys – 30,000 airplanes in the system are experimental)......Copied from article.....


No one but me is working on my airplane. A&P's know very little about HB. I have had to deal with this on every condition inspection. I am not only telling these people what needs to be done but I have to show them the REGs.

You are all wet on this one. HB and a GA A&P do not work good together. Now if you have a HB A&P that is trained in nothing but HB then let that person have at it, but a GA A&P is not qualified to work on these HB IMHO. I have had to show these GA A&P's to much.

They even believe you need an IA to do a Condition inspection. Ask any of them, they will tell you you do. Now I am sure a few know better, but they are few and far between.
 
Great example I am going through this right now. I just removed my prop and was reinstalling it. The A&P walked by and asked me what I was doing and how I was doing it.

I said I am reinstalling my prop. He said what are you torqueing those bolts too. I said 200 Inch pounds. He said, he will not sign it off for its not correct. I again had to show him on the Props website what it said about torque on this bolts. He again said..its not right.

I let him rage, and went about doing what I was doing. I WILL NOT BE DOING IT ANY OTHER WAY. I care less if he signs anything or not.

No one but me touches my airplane..I do want to live.....
 
You do know mechanic induced failures are one of the biggest reasons for accidents in the GA community?
 
1600vw said:
You do know mechanic induced failures are one of the biggest reasons for accidents in the GA community?
Click to expand...
The number of mechanic-induced accidents is more than an order of magnitude less than the most-common cause: Pilot Error.

I looked at Cessa 172/210 non-training accidents over a ten-year period; there were an average of 5.6 accidents per year due to mechanic error (vs. 71.4 due to pilot miscontrol). That was about half the number due to fuel exhaustion, a bit less than VFR to IFR cases. Mechanic error occurred about twice as often as mid-airs. With my accounting system, mechanic error was #7 on a 20-cause list.

I looked at homebuilt accidents over the same period. The average annual number of maintainer errors was 9.0, significantly higher than the 172/210 fleet for roughly the same number of aircraft.

Sorry to hear about your problems with A&Ps and your experimental. I've had three A&Ps doing Condition Inspections over the years, and they've all been reasonable.

Ron Wanttaja
 
The cost to implement NTSB recommendations is never borne by the NTSB. My understanding is that it rarely (never?) attempts to compute the costs to implement its recommendations, nor attempts to compute the benefits so as to get a benefit to cost ratio. That may be why many of its recommendations are not acted on by the FAA.
 
GA has to go, simply because society has decided personal risk is against the law. No large sodas in nyc, no base jumping in the park, all the same stuff. There will never be an acceptable accident rate, if you accept their frame of reducing to X accidents you will lose. Calling them willing participants and acceptable losses is the only way to stay free.
 
GA is in the government kill zone, because they need to clear the sky to make it "free" for all the next generation drones they'll fly to make sure you're "safe."
Sick, but likely.
 
I tend to think Cracker has a point, that is certainly the reason for ADS-B becoming mandatory
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top