FAA vs NTSB for investigations

A

Airfrm

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jun 10, 2019
Messages
8
Display Name
Display name:
Airfrm
Hello all, I am working toward my CFI, and am currently in a human factors class. One discussion point we are talking about is the NTSB and the FAA and was hoping someone here might be able to explain something for me. I read where the FAA can perform investigations for non fatal and MGTW of 12,000 or less and it says the FAA will send all findings to the NTSB. Is this a requirement or is the FAA able to make their own findings without sending to the NTSB? If I'm not mistaken, all findings from the NTSB are recommendations and it is the FAA who imposes or changes policy.
 
Airfrm said:
s this a requirement or is the FAA able to make their own findings without sending to the NTSB?
Click to expand...
The NTSB oversees all US aircraft incidents and accidents and are required to be notified per 49 CFR Part 830. Who performs the actual investigation is determined by a number of variables. But any accident were there is substantial damage to the aircraft, or serious injury or death to crew/pax/ground then the NTSB is usually is the primary investigator.
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49cfr830_main_02.tpl
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/process/Pages/default.aspx
 
Airfrm said:
Hello all, I am working toward my CFI, and am currently in a human factors class. One discussion point we are talking about is the NTSB and the FAA and was hoping someone here might be able to explain something for me. I read where the FAA can perform investigations for non fatal and MGTW of 12,000 or less and it says the FAA will send all findings to the NTSB. Is this a requirement or is the FAA able to make their own findings without sending to the NTSB? If I'm not mistaken, all findings from the NTSB are recommendations and it is the FAA who imposes or changes policy.
Click to expand...

Bell206 said:
The NTSB oversees all US aircraft incidents and accidents and are required to be notified per 49 CFR Part 830. Who performs the actual investigation is determined by a number of variables. But any accident were there is substantial damage to the aircraft, or serious injury or death to crew/pax/ground then the NTSB is usually is the primary investigator.
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49cfr830_main_02.tpl
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/process/Pages/default.aspx
Click to expand...

Bell206 is correct. The FAA conducts investigations on behalf of the NTSB. The FAA will get non-fatals and fatals, as well as substantial damage accidents. The NTSB has criteria on assigning the investigation. The NTSB will investigate Air Carrier (Airline) and high profile accidents (JFK,JR for example).

The NTSB is a small agency, so they are limited on resources. Another interesting fact on the NTSB is they are not a part of any cabinet position in the Executive Branch, and they report directly to the President.
 
Doc Holliday said:
This has nothing to do with what the OP requested.

Why are you so intent on trying to derail threads?
Click to expand...

How the NTSB/FAA mis handles human factors and the rules who said a VERY regarded pilot (that’s the HUMAN in human factors) wasn’t safe to fly.....you don’t see how that is on the same lines as a human factors class that’s trying to teach people about FAA and NTSB and human factors??
 
James331 said:
How the NTSB/FAA mis handles a non fatal accident and the rules who said a VERY regarded pilot (that’s the HUMAN in human factors) wasn’t safe to fly.....you don’t see how that is on the same lines as a human factors clas that’s trying to teach people about FAA and NTSB and what happens during a accident??
Click to expand...

This is a subject you know zilch about. Go back to playing with your Xbox.
 
Doc Holliday said:
This is a subject you know zilch about. Go back to playing with your Xbox.
Click to expand...

^speaking of acting childish.

When someone resorts to calling names it’s never a good sign.


So doc, I’ll let that slide, please tell us how the human factors of Hoover’s T28 crash gave valid cause to find him medically unfit, and educate us who know “zilch” on how the FAA and NTSB did a service to the flying public by their actions there as well as things like mandatory retirement age?

I’ll put my Xbox controller down and wait for your brilliant response.
 
Doc Holliday said:
The FAA conducts investigations on behalf of the NTSB. The FAA will get non-fatals and fatals, as well as substantial damage accidents. The NTSB has criteria on assigning the investigation. The NTSB will investigate Air Carrier (Airline) and high profile accidents (JFK,JR for example).

The NTSB is a small agency, so they are limited on resources.
Click to expand...
This is a clear and concise answer to the OP's question about the FAA's role in NTSB accident investigations to determine their causes for the purpose of making recommendations to enhance safety.

The side discussion on how nasty and off-base the FAA and NTSB can be in their very different accusatory, enforcement, and adjudicatory roles has at least the relevance of pointing out that these agencies do have two separate and distinct functions. An FAA investigator may be investigating an accident for root cause on behalf of the NTSB. Or she may be investigating for potential enforcement action against a pilot, mechanic, or operator.

Whether that's important or not to @Airfrm's question depends, I guess, on whether the human factors being discussed are those which contribute to accidents or those which involve the potential conflict between the two different roles of those assigned to the investigation.
 
midlifeflyer said:
This is a clear and concise answer to the OP's question about the FAA's role in NTSB accident investigations to determine their causes for the purpose of making recommendations to enhance safety.

The side discussion on how nasty and off-base the FAA and NTSB can be in their very different accusatory, enforcement, and adjudicatory roles has at least the relevance of pointing out that these agencies do have two separate and distinct functions. An FAA investigator may be investigating an accident for root cause on behalf of the NTSB. Or she may be investigating for potential enforcement action against a pilot, mechanic, or operator.

Whether that's important or not to @Airfrm's question depends, I guess, on whether the human factors being discussed are those which contribute to accidents or those which involve the potential conflict between the two different roles of those assigned to the investigation.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I seriously doubt the OP is here looking at the latter.

Here's an excellent book on the subject "A Human Error Approach to Aviation Accident Analysis" by Douglas A. Wiegmann and Scott A. Shappell. I attended a seminar on Human Factors in Accident Investigation and Dr. Shappell was the guest lecturer.
 
Airfrm said:
human factors class
Click to expand...
Ain't never worked on no FAA or NTSB investigation. But, based on automobile accidents investigated by "experts" I can say that the humans doing accident investigation / analysis are able to come up with pretty much whatever conclusion they wanted to come up with at the start of the investigation.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Ain't never worked on no FAA or NTSB investigation. But, based on automobile accidents investigated by "experts" I can say that the humans doing accident investigation / analysis are able to come up with pretty much whatever conclusion they wanted to come up with at the start of the investigation.
Click to expand...

Not so in aviation accident investigations.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Ain't never worked on no FAA or NTSB investigation. But, based on automobile accidents investigated by "experts" I can say that the humans doing accident investigation / analysis are able to come up with pretty much whatever conclusion they wanted to come up with at the start of the investigation.
Click to expand...
Those experts tend to be hired for litigation by someone with a point of view they want to support. And often, if the expert doesn't agree with the desired conclusion, the other side doesn't hear about them.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Ain't never worked on no FAA or NTSB investigation. But, based on automobile accidents investigated by "experts" I can say that the humans doing accident investigation / analysis are able to come up with pretty much whatever conclusion they wanted to come up with at the start of the investigation.
Click to expand...

Very few automobile crashes are investigated by experts.
 
James331 said:
Minus the ones where they do, like Hoover’s t28. You defend the FAA/NTSB as if it were a religion to you.
Click to expand...

You obviously are in a subject you know nothing about. Now you resort to slinging insults in an inane attempt to argue.

Please go back to playing your Xbox and let the adults have a conversation.
 
Doc Holliday said:
You obviously are in a subject you know nothing about. Now you resort to slinging insults in an inane attempt to argue.

Please go back to playing your Xbox and let the adults have a conversation.
Click to expand...

I have made no insults and you haven’t answer my question, all you have done is basically say the FAA/NTSB can do no wrong and insult anyone who points out the flaw in that thinking.
 
James331 said:
I have made no insults and you haven’t answer my question, all you have done is basically say the FAA/NTSB can do no wrong and insult anyone who points out the flaw in that thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't have to answer your question since it has nothing to do with the thread or conversation.

You obviously know nothing on what's being discussed here, yet you persist in wanting to derail this thread. And that's your MO for the majority of your postings.

I won't waste anymore of my time entertaining a petulant child.
 
both the NTSB and the FAA investigate with separate purposes and focus.....In most cases , when dealing with accidents or incidents, they perform interviews together. Since the FAA is a regulatory agency....they are "mostly" concerned with rule compliance and enforcement....and somewhat safety. NTSB is focused more so on safety and makes safety recommendations to the FAA....which chooses to ignore or implement the recommendations.

The FAA also performs investigations "outside" of accidents and incidents independent from the NTSB.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
But, based on automobile accidents investigated by "experts" I can say
Click to expand...
Aircraft and vehicle accidents are handled completely different in that the former is handled by an independent federal agency(s) with its own federal laws/regulations and the latter by local or state LEO only. So there's no comparison. Once you get beyond the investigative portion of an accident to the civil/tort side of things then these accidents (aircraft/vehicle) fall under similar rules/laws and follow a more common path depending if filed at the state or federal level. In my limited experience, investigators do the accident investigation and experts assist in the civil litigation of the accident.
 
Doc Holliday said:
I don't have to answer your question since it has nothing to do with the thread or conversation.

You obviously know nothing on what's being discussed here, yet you persist in wanting to derail this thread. And that's your MO for the majority of your postings.

I won't waste anymore of my time entertaining a petulant child.
Click to expand...

Why do you resort to calling me a child, when I asked you about the FAA/NTSBs mis handling of accident/human factor events like the Hoover case, you straight refuse to openly discuss it, the only position you have taken has been to argue from a point of authority.



See+No+Evil,+Hear+No+Evil,+Speak+No+Evil2.jpg
 
Last edited:
A good accident to research in regards to how the NTSB and FAA are complicit to ignore human factors is the comair crash in Lexington. At the end of it all they publicly stated the primary cause was pilot error. There was no effort at all to address the system failures that contributed to the pilot error.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
A good accident to research in regards to how the NTSB and FAA are complicit to ignore human factors is the comair crash in Lexington. At the end of it all they publicly stated the primary cause was pilot error. There was no effort at all to address the system failures that contributed to the pilot error.
Click to expand...

Which system failures are you referring too?
 
What is the reference to Doc Holiday? It also says Tombstone, which he visited ie with the Earps, but in fact he is buried near here. He was a dentist about whom one writer said " He made a lot more cavities than he filled." I sometimes go to dental specialist in Glenwood Springs, just down the highway and he office is a a low area and 1/4 mile to the east on a hill is the cemetery with Doc's grave, or at least that is the story and you can easily hike up to the grave.
 
Bill Greenwood said:
What is the reference to Doc Holiday? It also says Tombstone, which he visited ie with the Earps, but in fact he is buried near here. He was a dentist about whom one writer said " He made a lot more cavities than he filled." I sometimes go to dental specialist in Glenwood Springs, just down the highway and he office is a a low area and 1/4 mile to the east on a hill is the cemetery with Doc's grave, or at least that is the story and you can easily hike up to the grave.
Click to expand...

And this has what to do with the topic being discussed?
 
Doc Holliday said:
Which system failures are you referring too?
Click to expand...

Understaffing ATC facilities, standards for airport design that allowed that runway configuration to exist in the first place, etc...

After Comair 5191, the FAA stopped (for a while at least?) putting single controllers on duty in a facility by themselves, and Lexington's runway 26 was torn out. So, it seems that the FAA knew that they contributed to the accident, even if it can be primarily blamed on the pilots for not checking heading on line-up and taking off from an unlit runway.
 
Airfrm said:
Hello all, I am working toward my CFI, and am currently in a human factors class. One discussion point we are talking about is the NTSB and the FAA and was hoping someone here might be able to explain something for me. I read where the FAA can perform investigations for non fatal and MGTW of 12,000 or less and it says the FAA will send all findings to the NTSB. Is this a requirement or is the FAA able to make their own findings without sending to the NTSB? If I'm not mistaken, all findings from the NTSB are recommendations and it is the FAA who imposes or changes policy.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that an accident investigation by the FAA is conducted by people well below the level of changing policy, and if a policy change recommendation is going to come from an accident report, the accident will most likely be a one for which the investigation must be conducted by the NTSB.
 
One way you can judge which side was valid in the case of two low level FAA non entities vs Bob Hoover was that the FAA could not find a single airshow professional out of hundreds to testify in any way against Bob. I don't even recall any or many pilots, military or civilian who expressed doubts about Bob's flying ability.
I never understood it, Bob thought it was about the retirement at 60 rule. Hard to belive they would try to ruin his life and reputation for that.
 
Doc Holliday said:
You obviously are in a subject you know nothing about. Now you resort to slinging insults in an inane attempt to argue.

Please go back to playing your Xbox and let the adults have a conversation.
Click to expand...

Doc, the FAA and the NTSB may not be as qualified as you'd like to think in accident investigation, although I do put more weight behind the NTSB.

Throughout the 80s and 90s, being in law enforcement, and specifically trained in accident investigation, and a team leader on mountain rescue teams as well as being a pilot, I have amassed 100s of photos of accident investigations to which I was the first person on the scene. Some times, even in fatals, because of the location, the FAA or NTSB wouldn't even come on site to investigate.

There have been several times I was surprised at the report released 2 years later that took no account of the physical evidence and supporting photos.

I would attribute this to either pure ineptness or sheer laziness. From my personal experience, I always read accident reports with a jaundiced eye.
 
SToL said:
I was surprised at the report released 2 years later that took no account of the physical evidence and supporting photos.
Click to expand...
FWIW: the difference is you were trained in criminal investigations which is not the purpose of NTSB investigations.
 
Bell206 said:
FWIW: the difference is you were trained in criminal investigations which is not the purpose of NTSB investigations.
Click to expand...

I said, "accident investigation". Nothing to do with criminal investigation.

Regardless, when you see 100 feet of skid marks across the ground and then a mangled mess, and the FAA reports the pilot caught a skid while hovering, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that just doesn't add up.

My point was, it many cases, it's obvious that the report did not substantiate the physical or photographical evidence.
 
Bell206 said:
FWIW: the difference is you were trained in criminal investigations which is not the purpose of NTSB investigations.
Click to expand...
I would think that the purpose of both criminal investigations and NTSB investigations ought to include finding out the truth of what happened.
 
SToL said:
Doc, the FAA and the NTSB may not be as qualified as you'd like to think in accident investigation, although I do put more weight behind the NTSB.

Throughout the 80s and 90s, being in law enforcement, and specifically trained in accident investigation, and a team leader on mountain rescue teams as well as being a pilot, I have amassed 100s of photos of accident investigations to which I was the first person on the scene. Some times, even in fatals, because of the location, the FAA or NTSB wouldn't even come on site to investigate.

There have been several times I was surprised at the report released 2 years later that took no account of the physical evidence and supporting photos.

I would attribute this to either pure ineptness or sheer laziness. From my personal experience, I always read accident reports with a jaundiced eye.
Click to expand...

Curious, where did you receive your training in aircraft accident investigation?
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
I would think that the purpose of both criminal investigations and NTSB investigations ought to include finding out the truth of what happened.
Click to expand...
It is. But the difference between the two is that criminal and civil investigations look for who caused the accident vs NTSB investigations look for what caused caused the accident. So how the "truth" is reported depends on the method. It makes a difference in my experience. Plus NTSB aviation investigations are an anomaly within investigations in general. Just ask any attorney. Have sat in a few lectures at USC's AAI classes and they explained some of these differences which I thought was interesting.
 
SToL said:
Regardless, when you see 100 feet of skid marks across the ground and then a mangled mess, and the FAA reports the pilot caught a skid while hovering, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that just doesn't add up.

My point was, it many cases, it's obvious that the report did not substantiate the physical or photographical evidence.
Click to expand...
While I don't agree on the "many cases" comment, you're right it is not a perfect system. But neither is any human based system. But in my experience the NTSB gets it right a lot more than wrong. Curious, do you recall any of the details of the accident you mentioned? I'd be interested in ready any reports on it.
 
Bell206 said:
While I don't agree on the "many cases" comment, you're right it is not a perfect system. But neither is any human based system. But in my experience the NTSB gets it right a lot more than wrong. Curious, do you recall any of the details of the accident you mentioned? I'd be interested in ready any reports on it.
Click to expand...

I agree as well, per my previous statement, that the NTSB is far superior to the FAA and generally do a much more thorough investigation.

I recall many of the details of what I saw, as well as having photographs, but it has been 25-30 years ago. I don't recall dates or months.
 
SToL said:
I agree as well, per my previous statement, that the NTSB is far superior to the FAA and generally do a much more thorough investigation.

.
Click to expand...

I take it you’re aware the FAA and the NTSB attend the same courses and receive the same certifications.

Also, the NTSB is involved with accident investigation full time, while it’s an additional duty of the FAA ASI. But the techniques and procedures are the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top