Where Does Responsibility Lie?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ....
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where Does Responsibility Lie?
OK - picture this HYPOTHETICAL scenario and then decide where you think the responsibility for the resulting accident lies....
A Seneca with two students and a senior instructor on board is carrying out practice IR circuits at a foreign airfield. During the asymmetric circuits the instructor becomes annoyed with the constant bleating of the configuration horn and so pulls the circuit breaker on it. (For those not familiar with the Seneca, the same horn serves as the Gear Warning horn - I think you have guessed what happened next). On the following circuit the student makes an unusually rough landing (even for a student) as the gear is still retracted, causing heavy damage to the aircraft belly and props.Luckily no-one is hurt and the bean counters still have an aircraft.
So - whose 'fault' is it? I know that instructors are likely to say that it is the students fault for not checking 'three greens' - which would be a fair comment. However, the instructor is there to do precisely that - instruct. Surely a double check of what the student says/does on finals is prudent - how many times have we heard about environment capture catching students out? Also, how important a factor was the pulling of the circuit breaker? Would it have helped if the configuration horn was still active?
I am interested to hear what you guys have got to say about this. I'll keep my own opinions to myself! Oh, and by the way, this MAY HAVE actually happened to a major training establishment in the UK during the last 2 weeks.....
A Seneca with two students and a senior instructor on board is carrying out practice IR circuits at a foreign airfield. During the asymmetric circuits the instructor becomes annoyed with the constant bleating of the configuration horn and so pulls the circuit breaker on it. (For those not familiar with the Seneca, the same horn serves as the Gear Warning horn - I think you have guessed what happened next). On the following circuit the student makes an unusually rough landing (even for a student) as the gear is still retracted, causing heavy damage to the aircraft belly and props.Luckily no-one is hurt and the bean counters still have an aircraft.
So - whose 'fault' is it? I know that instructors are likely to say that it is the students fault for not checking 'three greens' - which would be a fair comment. However, the instructor is there to do precisely that - instruct. Surely a double check of what the student says/does on finals is prudent - how many times have we heard about environment capture catching students out? Also, how important a factor was the pulling of the circuit breaker? Would it have helped if the configuration horn was still active?
I am interested to hear what you guys have got to say about this. I'll keep my own opinions to myself! Oh, and by the way, this MAY HAVE actually happened to a major training establishment in the UK during the last 2 weeks.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ultimately, its down to whoever is the Pilot in Command, who in this case is the instructor. A student is there to learn and is expected to make mistakes. The Instructor is there toteach, demonstrate and supervise the student whlie he practices, and ensure that such things as gear selection is not overlooked. I'm sure every instructor has missed something potentially dangerous at some stage, but most of us get away with it. In this case its hard to escape the consequences.
Mature Wannabe
Instructor for my sins
Mature Wannabe
Instructor for my sins
It is definitly the instructors fault. The instructor pulled the breakers. The instructor was PIC. The student would expect the instructor to fix any mistakes.
The instructors (chief?) instructor should kick themselves for not instructing the instructor to instruct in such a way that this sort of thing becomes a problem.
The instructors (chief?) instructor should kick themselves for not instructing the instructor to instruct in such a way that this sort of thing becomes a problem.
Guest
Posts: n/a
There are a couple of issues that come from this situation which go beyond just blaming the people in the cockpit at the time.
1) In the field of education, there seems to be consensus that learning new tasks required a certain amount of concentration by the student. An instructor needs to concentrate on the students activities to provide feeback etc. for the student. Quiet classrooms have been put to this purpose for hundreds of years.
2) An aircraft is a noisy workplace, particularly light twin aircraft. Designed into these workplaces are various aural warnings which must be loud enough to override the ambient noise and are purpose built to be a distraction (ie a warning).
Combining these statements it would appear that instuction in a light twin is at best difficult for all concerned.
I know of a similar situation involving a routine company instructor check where a 'wheels up' occured involving the Chief Instuctor, a senior instructor and a junior instructor. Finding fault doesn't necessarily help to prevent the situation from reoccuring. As unfortunate as the incident was it is to be hoped that the focus of investigation will be on how can the orgainisation can prevent further incidents through training of staff, SOPs, etc.
Maybe suggestions on how to prevent/avoid such incidents would be more useful to readers of this thread than pointing the finger of blame.
1) In the field of education, there seems to be consensus that learning new tasks required a certain amount of concentration by the student. An instructor needs to concentrate on the students activities to provide feeback etc. for the student. Quiet classrooms have been put to this purpose for hundreds of years.
2) An aircraft is a noisy workplace, particularly light twin aircraft. Designed into these workplaces are various aural warnings which must be loud enough to override the ambient noise and are purpose built to be a distraction (ie a warning).
Combining these statements it would appear that instuction in a light twin is at best difficult for all concerned.
I know of a similar situation involving a routine company instructor check where a 'wheels up' occured involving the Chief Instuctor, a senior instructor and a junior instructor. Finding fault doesn't necessarily help to prevent the situation from reoccuring. As unfortunate as the incident was it is to be hoped that the focus of investigation will be on how can the orgainisation can prevent further incidents through training of staff, SOPs, etc.
Maybe suggestions on how to prevent/avoid such incidents would be more useful to readers of this thread than pointing the finger of blame.
Moderator
Perhaps the word "fault" would be better said as "responsibility". It is the responsibility of the Pilot in Command etc etc.
It was very irresposible of the Instructor to pull the circuit breaker. If the instructor was getting annoyed by the bleating horn , then perhaps this instructor is in the wrong job.
It was very irresposible of the Instructor to pull the circuit breaker. If the instructor was getting annoyed by the bleating horn , then perhaps this instructor is in the wrong job.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just as an aside, the aircraft I trained in had two small convex mirrors on the engine cowlings so that a visual nosewheel check could be made by student & instructor, if he didn't want to keep his head inside. Good idea I thought.
o8
PS Why didn't the student call "3 greens" on short final?
o8
PS Why didn't the student call "3 greens" on short final?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not good for the instructor as he is the P in C. I would be embarrised if it were me. You have to be fully alert in the Seneca, especially when your instructing in a complex aircraft. Having the warning going off in your ear while practicing Engine Failures is annoying but put up with it.!!!
Otherwise its something else that can go wrong.
How many instructors KNOW the Seneca that well?
Why are the two lift detectors?
How many Fuel tanks does the Seneca have and what type are they?
Simple questions but I do believe there are instructors that don't know. They are out there just wanting to get the Twin Hours too quick and don't really know ALL about the different areas of the aircraft. Constant reading of the flight manual is important to keep up to play with that type of aircraft.
And one last comment to think about.
EVERY STUDENT IS DIFFERENT AND THEY DO THE MOST UNOBVIOUS THINGS......
Otherwise its something else that can go wrong.
How many instructors KNOW the Seneca that well?
Why are the two lift detectors?
How many Fuel tanks does the Seneca have and what type are they?
Simple questions but I do believe there are instructors that don't know. They are out there just wanting to get the Twin Hours too quick and don't really know ALL about the different areas of the aircraft. Constant reading of the flight manual is important to keep up to play with that type of aircraft.
And one last comment to think about.
EVERY STUDENT IS DIFFERENT AND THEY DO THE MOST UNOBVIOUS THINGS......
