VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #21  
Old 09-02-2017, 07:50 PM
catmandu's Avatar
catmandu catmandu is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 709
Default

Very astute observation, Dave. Thanks.
__________________
Mike C.
Maryland's Eastern Shore
RV-6A bought flying
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-03-2017, 08:09 AM
Mr Grinch Mr Grinch is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Land of the Free (Texas)
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV8JD View Post
The NTSB does a better job of investigating GA accidents now than they did in previous decades, but not nearly as well as commercial airliner accidents, train accidents, or bus accidents. They just don't commit (or have) the money and resources necessary for an in-depth investigation of GA accidents. Some other country's accident investigation organizations often do a good job on GA accidents (Canada and Australia come to mind).

But it's to Mr. Nixon's credit (and the NTSB) that corrections will be made. My wife and I were in a partnership with a friend (Dave) and his wife in a Rolladen-Schneider LS1-f sailplane. In October 1978, my partner was flying the sailplane and was involved in a midair collision with a Piper Saratoga on a CAVU day. Dave and 4 people in the Saratoga perished in the accident. The NTSB did a quick investigation, and there were several factual errors in the final report. As co-owner of the sailplane, I pointed these out to the single investigator assigned to the accident. He was adamant that there were no errors and would not change a thing. One that sticks in my mind: The investigator misidentified the Variometer, which is a sensitive rate-of-climb indicator, with a "g"-meter. I explained what a Variometer was, and told him the there was no "g"-meter installed in the sailplane. He was adamant that he knew what a "g'-meter looked like and that (Variometer) was a "g"-meter! I should note that in this case the factual errors did not affect the Probable Cause finding (i.e., The pilots of both aircraft failed to see and avoid each other.)

So I'm always a little bit skeptical of NTSB GA accident reports, but not so much of commercial airline accident reports, which are usually well investigated.
They make mistakes and grand leaps in airline accidents as well. Politics, bias, lack of experience in operations, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-03-2017, 01:50 PM
Thermos's Avatar
Thermos Thermos is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: KASH
Posts: 405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV8JD View Post
Many of the differences in the rudders are covered in this thread:

http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...d.php?t=146673
I completely missed this thread, Carl - thanks for pointing it out and thanks for sharing your flutter/aeroelasticity knowledge!

Dave
__________________
Dave Setser
RV-7 skin, bones, muscle and heart complete, nervous system in progress
Nashua, NH (KASH)
Putting the "slow" in slow-build since 2004!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-03-2017, 06:26 PM
sblack sblack is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,313
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OkieDave View Post
This. Also, if there's ever a lawsuit, the discrepancy is going to be highly relevant. That's the sort of thing defense attorneys dream of.
I recall reading, though I don't recall why, that NTSB reports are not admissible in a lawsuit. Is it because they are considered heresay? You have to bring in an expert witness to testify directly to the available evidence.
__________________
Scott Black
RV 4, with an engine...and other stuff
VAF dues 2018
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-13-2018, 08:26 PM
gmcjetpilot's Avatar
gmcjetpilot gmcjetpilot is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,730
Default

Not sure if you all know you can look up the backing data.

The "structures groups chrirman's reports" go into 4 pages of details. One item popped up

"All the fractures examined had a dull, grainy appearance consistent with overstress separation. There was no evidence of progressive or pre-exiting fracture on any of the parts examined. Many of the rivets examined appeared to be not sufficiently driven"

There were many comments about how H stab skins had peeled open. If this was inflight or impact don't know.

The figure of debris field is telling... H Stab south end of debris field, left wing tip and out board wing with canopy middle, north end the main wreckage... All of this from south to north is over a fairly large area. No doubt the H stab came apart first.

The report was corrected (removed control cable splayed) with errata amendment that reads:

"Control continuity was established from the control stick in the cockpit to both elevators and
the right aileron. The left aileron control rod aft rod end was fractured from the control
rod. The rod end remained attached to the aileron control horn at the inboard aileron hinge.
Control continuity was established from the control stick in the cockpit to the left aileron
bell crank and aft to the fracture point on the left aileron control rod. The rudder cables
were jammed somewhere in the fuselage so continuity could not be established but the
cables remained attached at the rudder and the pedals. "
__________________
George
Raleigh, NC Area
RV-4, RV-7, ATP, CFII, MEI, 737/757/767

Last edited by gmcjetpilot : 11-13-2018 at 08:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:10 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.