Jeezalou, awful lot of FAA oversight for a basic ground loop.
Given that loss of control on landing is the #1 cause of aircraft damage, the FAA feels pretty strongly that should be a high priority. Included in that is the feeling that any pilot who busts an airplane should be checked to see if they're really up to standards in that task, i.e., to see if this was one of those one-time "it just got away too fast" situations or a case of a pilot who needs to improve his/her skills lest it happen again, and that later time result in someone getting hurt or someone else's plane getting hit.Jeezalou, awful lot of FAA oversight for a basic ground loop.
Given that loss of control on landing is the #1 cause of aircraft damage, the FAA feels pretty strongly that should be a high priority. Included in that is the feeling that any pilot who busts an airplane should be checked to see if they're really up to standards in that task, i.e., to see if this was one of those one-time "it just got away too fast" situations or a case of a pilot who needs to improve his/her skills lest it happen again, and that later time result in someone getting hurt or someone else's plane getting hit.
That's quite something.Talking to the ops guy from FSDO today, he indicated he thought I did every thing that any pilot could do. and said he saw no sense in advising to have me checked for proficiency.
The NTSB isn't involved in the process of deciding what to do with the pilot in such a case.now we will see what happens when they get back to FSDO and file the report with NTSB.
What they do as designated accident investigators for the NTSB has nothing to do with what they do as Inspectors for the FAA regarding pilot certification issues. However, they do have considerable leeway in what they do as Inspectors, and if they are satisfied that there is no issue of pilot competence, they can certainly close the FAA book on the matter. It just doesn't happen often with taildragger landing accidents.Making blanket statements as to what the FAA will do does not carry over to all FSDOs.
They have a lot of leeway in what they can do as accident investigators.
At the SEA FSDO they work hand in hand with NTSB, and what they tell the NTSB carries a lot of weight, But don't get me wrong, I don't know if I will get to re-test or not yet, I simply don't trust the FEDs when they put their heads together.What they do as designated accident investigators for the NTSB has nothing to do with what they do as Inspectors for the FAA regarding pilot certification issues. However, they do have considerable leeway in what they do as Inspectors, and if they are satisfied that there is no issue of pilot competence, they can certainly close the FAA book on the matter. It just doesn't happen often with taildragger landing accidents.
The NTSB is simply not involved in the FAA's decision whether or not to order a reexamination. No input, no authority, no nothing. They are just not in the loop on that. It is entirely a matter for the FAA, which gathers the pertinent data and makes all the decisions on that issue without either informing or obtaining input from the NTSB. Where FAA input to the NTSB is important is in the NTSB's determination of the probable cause of an accident investigated by the FAA for the NTSB, but that's a totally separate matter.At the SEA FSDO they work hand in hand with NTSB, and what they tell the NTSB carries a lot of weight,
The NTSB is simply not involved in the FAA's decision whether or not to order a reexamination. No input, no authority, no nothing. They are just not in the loop on that. It is entirely a matter for the FAA, which gathers the pertinent data and makes all the decisions on that issue without either informing or obtaining input from the NTSB. Where FAA input to the NTSB is important is in the NTSB's determination of the probable cause of an accident investigated by the FAA for the NTSB, but that's a totally separate matter.
Given that loss of control on landing is the #1 cause of aircraft damage, the FAA feels pretty strongly that should be a high priority. Included in that is the feeling that any pilot who busts an airplane should be checked to see if they're really up to standards in that task, i.e., to see if this was one of those one-time "it just got away too fast" situations or a case of a pilot who needs to improve his/her skills lest it happen again, and that later time result in someone getting hurt or someone else's plane getting hit.
Here, in reality they all talk to one an other, it really doesn't matter who is responsible to make the decision it's made with every ones input.
but once again you have taken the thread on a tangent to the subject, to prove what?
Here, in reality they all talk to one an other, it really doesn't matter who is responsible to make the decision it's made with every ones input.
but once again you have taken the thread on a tangent to the subject, to prove what?
First things first, I'm sorry to see your plane like that. It was a true testament to your craftsmanship skills.
...
Tom's is a non event in the big picture really. If a 44709 comes out of it, don't sweat it.
Obviously Ron speaks for the entire FAA...how dare you ask!
Have you ever, from that front-row seat, seen anyone from the NTSB make an input to a FSDO on a pilot certification action or otherwise become involved in that area?I don't know why things don't always go like the books says, only that it happens frequently in situations where I'm on the inside with a front-row seat.
Yes. And I didn't need a front-row seat, either. Plenty of cases in the papers and NTSB Opinions & Orders action files.Better question, has anyone with a front row seat ever seen an Inspector held to accountability for the "book".
Problem is that the FAA is just like so many other bureaucracies. As the organization spreads out, the personalities within the individual entities color how policy is implemented.I think Ron has a pretty good handle on what the guys in DC have written about the way things are to be done. And even has some case law to support his position and prediction of how it will play in Peoria. His grasp of the way they are actually done by people outside of DC (at least those in the middle of the country) isn't nearly as profound.
I don't know why things don't always go like the books says, only that it happens frequently in situations where I'm on the inside with a front-row seat.
As Hertz likes to say with respect to the outcomes that Ron predicts, the answer is "not exactly."
Yes. And I didn't need a front-row seat, either. Plenty of cases in the papers and NTSB Opinions & Orders action files.
Losing your tickets, getting fired, going to jail -- stuff like that.Being written up in a paper like that leads to what? I don't see that as accountability. What are the repercussions?
Losing your tickets, getting fired, going to jail -- stuff like that.
Losing your tickets, getting fired, going to jail -- stuff like that.
Not that I agree with the handling of the whole affair, and it gave the FAA a black eye. The actions of the Agency were upheld by the US District Court of Appeals. This took 5 seconds to find.
http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avia...gnee_types/ame/fasmb/editorials_jj/bobhoover/
Whether it is a rogue Inspector or incompetent DPE or just wanting to shout to the wind for having a hard on for "the system", there is always more to the story.
Yes. And I didn't need a front-row seat, either. Plenty of cases in the papers and NTSB Opinions & Orders action files.
Very true...hope it works out for Tom.Right now I have a bigger problem than the Federal government.
It's a crappy feeling when, all of sudden the rudder reaches the stop, the brake is applied but the landscape continues to rotate. Helpless.
Thing is, I have learned that if the rudder is to the stop, the ONLY thing that has a chance of saving it from a ground loop is power. The center of gravity is already outside the main gear and applying brake will only exacerbate the situation.
YMMV. I'm no expert on TW landings, having got my ASEL in a Citabria, and quite a few hours in a S2A, but there is just no way I'm stabbing the throttle in a ground loop. If you do get it to straighten out from over-center, I can't imagine what comes next....
YMMV. I'm no expert on TW landings, having got my ASEL in a Citabria, and quite a few hours in a S2A, but there is just no way I'm stabbing the throttle in a ground loop. If you do get it to straighten out from over-center, I can't imagine what comes next....
... and that's when it truly becomes a ground loop, and not just a mere swerve. You're basically along for the ride when it goes that far. All you can do is hang on and pay attention, because it is time to learn a lesson.Well, as I said, "chance". If you are out of rudder, and all you have left is brake, chances are real good that you are already past the point of no return. If you are out of rudder, chances are that the CG is already outside of the gear track and adding brake is just going to accelerate the groundloop.