NTSB Docket for G650 Flight Test Accident

[Zeffy]

Accident ID DCA11MA076 Mode Aviation occurred on April 02, 2011 in Roswell, NM United States Last Modified on March 05, 2012 17:03 Public Released on March 05, 2012 17:03 Total 30 document items (http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/hitlist.cfm?docketID=50904)

[John Farley]

On many accident threads where it is clear the facts are not known or in dispute there are those who argue for better cockpit recording of everything the crew did before the accident.

Then there are others (usually aircrew) who raise all sorts of reasons why that would be a bad thing.

I spent years having my actions recorded (on a transport aircraft as well as fast jets) so I have in the past tried to explain why I liked that since if I pranged it could show it was not my fault. In true PPRuNe style I got burned for such comments.

Now with this accident we have every possible recording of what happened not just on the accident TO but many others before during that sortie. What a privilege it was to read how well the crew conducted themselves at all times. They were so good one could only feel that given their background and behaviour the problem would have got any crew.

JF

[BizJetJock]

As you say, the crew appear to have done their jobs as well as can be expected of anyone. The primary issue appears to be the ige stall being at a significantly lower AoA than predicted.

The thing that puzzles me is that, if I am reading it correctly, they appear to have been conducting performance testing using the limit control force to rotate. This resulting in a pitch rate approximately double the normal.

Surely both from the point of view of minimising hazard and meeting the requirement to use normal techniques they should have been using normal rotation rates and ensuring the forces were below the certification limit. The maximum force test would come under testing the abuse case.

Sadly, doing it that way probably would just have resulted in the accident happening on a later flight when testing the abuse case, so not been of any benefit to the crew.

[212man]

Sorry...An error has occurred while processing your request!

Sadly I can't access the docket

[Zeffy]

The NTSB dms web site appears to have been down over the weekend.

Should work for you now.

[IGh]

Comment from JF: "... many accident ... the facts are not known or in dispute... years ... my actions recorded ... tried to explain why I liked that ... burned for such comments.... a privilege ... to read how well the crew conducted themselves ..."
During testing, the cockpit-video sometimes offered the ONLY explanation for a mysterious response, even with a fully instrumented test aircraft (instrumentation or FDR always seemed to omit that one parameter needed to explain the mishap).

To support your argument for Cockpit Image Recorder (CIR) is this old case, an investigator-err still never corrected:
http://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-emergency-response-planning/372186-your-opinion-old-controversial-accident.html

Just as our Respected Pilot Gossips spread the "Boeing Scenario" then, since then misguided pilots have persuaded unions to oppose the proposed CIRs.

[The USA's NTSB enjoys a "good" reputation -- mostly undeserved: The NTSB has no effective oversight, no independent "Court of Inquiry" to acknowledge staff mistakes (erroneous assumptions). The NTSB is currently tasked to consider "Petition for Reconsideration" -- their system doesn't do that "reconsideration", once anchored to their erroneous "conclusions". Soon the French BEA will release their report on the high-altitude CRZ upset of AF447 an A330: Some organization should carefully contrast this current French investigation (of AF447), against the NTSB's biased investigation of that B727 (TWA841/4Apr79) CRZ upset-RECOVERY.]