Transport Canada Shares Blame For Accident
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Transport Canada Shares Blame For Accident
Transport Canada was monitoring the VFR regulations, not enforcing them.
Pilot was a known risk-taker who had been challenged by management for pushing the limits.
Pilot was a known risk-taker who had been challenged by management for pushing the limits.
Pilot in deadly 2008 B.C. plane crash took risks, flew in bad weather: report
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
History will repeat it's self and there will be a very short period of denial on the part of T.C. with the added drama of some drone from government hand wringing on TV and vowing to make sure T.C. will now seriously enforce the law and all float plane operators will fly within the regulations or be shut down.
Then Brittany Spears will get out of another car with no panties on again and public attention will shift to more interesting subects.
Meanwhile back at T.C. it will be business as usual, they will make an appearance at their offices as needed, push some more useless paper work around and collect their performance bonuses until they can collect their pension plans for a job well done.
Disgusting situation for any so called first world country.
Then Brittany Spears will get out of another car with no panties on again and public attention will shift to more interesting subects.
Meanwhile back at T.C. it will be business as usual, they will make an appearance at their offices as needed, push some more useless paper work around and collect their performance bonuses until they can collect their pension plans for a job well done.
Disgusting situation for any so called first world country.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
News Flash! The TSB have finaly worked it out that TC is made up mostly of the failures of aviation! {With a few notable exceptions} When will we have a Minister of Transport who will clean house in TC? I was recentley in conversation with one of the few good ones left, his take on TC? "TC is in itself the bigest threat to aviation safety in Canada", end quote. And we were the nation who taught the world to fly, makes me want to weep.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Vancouver Island
Age: 57
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smells like Davis Inlet but with a much bigger death toll. Hugh Danford must be seething, like I am.
I hope someone sues the hell of Transport - publically, none of this settlement crap - or they will never change, just keep offloading responisiblity through their darling Safety Partnership Program and sweet old SMS.
The "Floatplane Safety Workshop" next month should be tons of fun ...
Much love from your friendly homemaker turned troublemaker.
I hope someone sues the hell of Transport - publically, none of this settlement crap - or they will never change, just keep offloading responisiblity through their darling Safety Partnership Program and sweet old SMS.
The "Floatplane Safety Workshop" next month should be tons of fun ...
Much love from your friendly homemaker turned troublemaker.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wherever I go, there I am
Age: 43
Posts: 808
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
News Flash! The TSB have finaly worked it out that TC is made up mostly of the failures of aviation! {With a few notable exceptions}
Most of my encounters with Transport have been with the classic "Those who can, do; those who cant go to Transport" types. You know the sort: fired or laid off because after 200 hours of Line Indoc they still could not line fly a Dash 8/Metro/ATR, etc or because their attitude was just plain awful (PC TPOP anyone?
)I actually look forward to the battles with Transport (sick in the head I know - maybe it'll be picked up on my next Medical). The idea that one person could think they know every reg in the book, throwing around their weight, only to be reminded of that one, small one sentance reg, standard, advisory circular, etc that pops that little bubble of theirs. Ahh, its like the feeling of being on a nice sandy beach in the tropics .
As for:
TC is in itself the bigest threat to aviation safety in Canada
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What other work place in Canada will protect their top management, even after said individuals were found guilty of breaking the very rules and policies they were sworn to uphold, not to mention ignoring the part of the law that guarantees every Canadian due process under law?
To rub salt in the wounds of the taxpayer these people are still given their " performance bonuses "
Makes me feel nauseous just thinking about them.
By the way what exactly does the Minister of Transport do to justify the position they hold?
To rub salt in the wounds of the taxpayer these people are still given their " performance bonuses "
Makes me feel nauseous just thinking about them.
By the way what exactly does the Minister of Transport do to justify the position they hold?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the actual TSB report, upon which the Vancouver Sun article was based:
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-re...3/a08p0353.pdf
http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-re...3/a08p0353.pdf
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way what exactly does the Minister of Transport do to justify the position they hold?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That depends entirely on how many people know about it Chuck. Nothing substantive happens unless the minister wants it, or is embarrassed into it if he doesn't want it.
I'm not telling you anything you don't already know in spades.
I'm not telling you anything you don't already know in spades.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California
Age: 64
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft in question was chartered by Peter Kiewit and Sons. (US company building a power plant up the coast) Their aviation department, Midwest Aviation, had to review the operation and approve it. Evidently they did not do a good job and a bunch of company employees died because of their and the pilots mistakes.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is the TSB Report:
Transportation Safety Board of Canada | | A08P0353 | Controlled Flight into Terrain
I find this portion especially disconcerting (Page 5):
Pacific Coastal management had met with the pilot three times to discuss concerns they had with his decision making. The last meeting, about three months before the accident, was held because management was concerned that he was completing trips in what other pilots deemed to be adverse wind and sea conditions. The company believed that this behaviour was causing other pilots to feel pressured to fly in those conditions and was also influencing customer expectations.
Not to mention this (Page 15):
Some pilots and operators challenge the interpretation of the minimum weather regulation. For example, the regulation refers to a minimum height “above ground level.” Some operators assert that this does not apply in the case of floatplane flights because they operate above water.
Additionally, because the regulation states that clearance must be maintained from obstacles “or” ground, it is argued that one clearance is sufficient rather than both. Finally, when flying over water, some operators contend that they are above an aerodrome and, as such, may fly for extended periods at low altitude as long as they are configured for landing. This is referred to as the infinite runway concept and, although not a factor in this accident, is often used to skirt the intent of the regulations and continue flight in conditions below legal weather minima.
Transportation Safety Board of Canada | | A08P0353 | Controlled Flight into Terrain
I find this portion especially disconcerting (Page 5):
Pacific Coastal management had met with the pilot three times to discuss concerns they had with his decision making. The last meeting, about three months before the accident, was held because management was concerned that he was completing trips in what other pilots deemed to be adverse wind and sea conditions. The company believed that this behaviour was causing other pilots to feel pressured to fly in those conditions and was also influencing customer expectations.
Not to mention this (Page 15):
Some pilots and operators challenge the interpretation of the minimum weather regulation. For example, the regulation refers to a minimum height “above ground level.” Some operators assert that this does not apply in the case of floatplane flights because they operate above water.
Additionally, because the regulation states that clearance must be maintained from obstacles “or” ground, it is argued that one clearance is sufficient rather than both. Finally, when flying over water, some operators contend that they are above an aerodrome and, as such, may fly for extended periods at low altitude as long as they are configured for landing. This is referred to as the infinite runway concept and, although not a factor in this accident, is often used to skirt the intent of the regulations and continue flight in conditions below legal weather minima.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: FL 410
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all, the title of this thread is a little misleading in my opinion. Section 3, CONCLUSIONS, in the report might be a reasonable place to find where the TSB determined blame to lie. (As opposed to supplying your own conclusions.) TC seems conspicuously absent in this section as far as culpability lies.
Second, DHC2 Widow, what would the exact nature of the statement of claim be against TC if someone did as you suggested:
Negligence? A stretch, even for OJ's lawyers I suggest.
Second, DHC2 Widow, what would the exact nature of the statement of claim be against TC if someone did as you suggested:
I hope someone sues the hell of Transport
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: FL 410
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the report:
Between November 1999 and January 2009, TC’s Aviation Enforcement Section initiated 20 actions in the Pacific Region pertaining to contraventions of regulations concerning VFR Minimum Visual Meteorological Conditions. 15 Of these, no punitive actions resulted.
...
Identifying pilots and operators that fly below VFR minima is difficult unless a customer reports an issue or a TC inspector is present when the violation occurs.
...
Identifying pilots and operators that fly below VFR minima is difficult unless a customer reports an issue or a TC inspector is present when the violation occurs.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon gang, most of this is just hostility toward TC. That aside, to quote Forest Gump (yet again) "stupid is as stupid does". This pilot sounded not only stupid but dangerous (with apology to his loved ones).
I personally don't want more government, more government intervention, regulation, regulatory oversight, prosecutions and court time, followed by remedial training and their associated costs, simply because some "nimrod" decides he's going flying when he should have known better. Let's not advocate a TC Inspector show up for each departure in Canada to review the Wx package and crew qualifications before deciding whether or not to let them go flying.
Frankly, you can't hang this stupid act on TC, or Pacific Coastal. The pilot of this Goose got what he deserved and it should require no gigantic production to remediate.
What angers me in all this is the fact that the innocent people who climbed onto that Goose weren't forewarned or knowledgeable about his reputation like so many others seemed to have been. But then again, I also feel sorry for the 50 passengers who needlessly lost their lives at Clarence Center, N.Y. in 2008. Look at the sh*tstorm that accident has caused.
No thanks.
Willie
I personally don't want more government, more government intervention, regulation, regulatory oversight, prosecutions and court time, followed by remedial training and their associated costs, simply because some "nimrod" decides he's going flying when he should have known better. Let's not advocate a TC Inspector show up for each departure in Canada to review the Wx package and crew qualifications before deciding whether or not to let them go flying.
Frankly, you can't hang this stupid act on TC, or Pacific Coastal. The pilot of this Goose got what he deserved and it should require no gigantic production to remediate.
What angers me in all this is the fact that the innocent people who climbed onto that Goose weren't forewarned or knowledgeable about his reputation like so many others seemed to have been. But then again, I also feel sorry for the 50 passengers who needlessly lost their lives at Clarence Center, N.Y. in 2008. Look at the sh*tstorm that accident has caused.
No thanks.
Willie
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regard to this accident Willie is correct, you can't hang a culture of excessive risk taking that is common to far to many west coast float plane pilots on T.C.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jonny dangerous
And to keep the record straight, the original poster of this thread, Underated, has posted exactly twice on PPRuNe, both in this thread, having registered Sep 2010.
What's your point? My first post was a reference to the Vancouver Sun article discussing the accident. My second post was a reference to the TSB Report that evaluated the accident.
Delete the thread?