fry Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Pilot Tamara Williams and Justine Wyatt Duncan died in crash on March 27, 2007. New safety reports reveal poor maintenance work by an overworked mechanical staff was a factor in the accident. The aircraft was owned by Silver State Helicopters. http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/n...?storyid=101085 comment by a poster at JH: Based on SSH's behavior in other areas of its company it is not at all a stretch to extrapolate that behavior to the maintenance operations. As a routine element of its operations the company opened new locations with too many students for the training resources available. It's been doing this since its inception...it is a systemic part of its business plan. So why wouldn't it do the same thing with its maintenance functions? The company had too few resources and too little management oversight for the tempo of operations that were being driven by its marketing machine. And what's more, that situation was only going to get worse and it was not going to change until someone died. There was no incentive to change...especially from the top where all the real decision making resided. Those deaths were inevitable, forseeable and avoidable. Where was the FAA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmsemel Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 The Decision to fly or not to fly lies with the Pilot in Command or in this case the Flight Instructor so named. This is basic stuff, the FAR's are written in a manner that the Pilot will have the last say and guess what will shoulder most if not all the blame when things go wrong. Now its a pilots right to say no, this aircraft is not safe to fly and not fly it. I am not going to jump on the A+P's or the company in question since this something written in a newspaper and has since posted on the net. I don't know to what extent this has been cherry picked by the person who wrote it for the paper. The FAA will come up with a final report, and I can wait for that one. And it will be my guess at what I know at this point the blame will be laid on the PIC, there maybe some laid on the A+P's and DOM. But if you are looking for some kind of out come like SSH being shut down or the principals going to jail etc, you will have a very long wait. The best thing that could happen is for student pilots not go there for flight training, Flight Instructors look else were for work, same for A+P's. Other than that, the rest of it is just typing to be heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotorWeed Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=DEN07FA079&rpt=fa Here is the report, it speaks for it's self. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teflon Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 RotorWeed thanks for the link. I read the whole Report. It speaks for its self. Rushed and pressured mechanics, poor logging and an ambitious mechanic without the oversight and policies resulted in the accident, in my opinion. I hope SSH has fully implemented the safety policies that they submitted to the NTSB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IFLY Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 They did at my school the day after it happened and it's still that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunHelo Mark Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 They did at my school the day after it happened and it's still that way.Thank god!.. good to hear! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldy Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 (edited) Thank god!.. good to hear! Reminds me of the old story. Pilot screws up, pilot dies.ATC screws up, pilot dies.Mechanic screws up, pilot dies.Manufacturer screws up, pilot dies. Edited January 31, 2008 by Goldy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lwalling Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 One of the things I like about the older ships (Astros) is that its easier, in my opinion, to put your fingers on important items that actuate those swashplates. What should we, as pilots, be trying to look for and do around the hydraulic mechanism to insure we aren't flying something that is going to kill us. I dig up in there as good as possible to check the link points from the hydraulic servos to the push pull tubes but feel sure I am not seeing/feeling everything. Obviously after any work is performed by a mechanic, everything worked on (and everything else) needs to be thoroughly inspected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500E Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Not good however you read it, poor QA, A&P pulled of job more times than you can count, + over stretched to cover for lack of staff, people making bad decisions, QA paperwork not being checked for compliance with SOP.The people I feel sorry for are the family's of the bereaved, what a sad report for them to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyMountainPilot Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 The Decision to fly or not to fly lies with the Pilot in Command or in this case the Flight Instructor so named. This is basic stuff, the FAR's are written in a manner that the Pilot will have the last say and guess what will shoulder most if not all the blame when things go wrong. Now its a pilots right to say no, this aircraft is not safe to fly and not fly it. I am not going to jump on the A+P's or the company in question since this something written in a newspaper and has since posted on the net. I don't know to what extent this has been cherry picked by the person who wrote it for the paper. The FAA will come up with a final report, and I can wait for that one. And it will be my guess at what I know at this point the blame will be laid on the PIC, there maybe some laid on the A+P's and DOM. But if you are looking for some kind of out come like SSH being shut down or the principals going to jail etc, you will have a very long wait. The best thing that could happen is for student pilots not go there for flight training, Flight Instructors look else were for work, same for A+P's. Other than that, the rest of it is just typing to be heard. So, you open all the inspection panels every time you fly? Torque all the nuts do you? Check vital clearances? Although the pilot is the final say as to the airworthiness of the aircraft and the safety of a flight, this authority allows one to trust certain qualified personnel to provide them with the information to make such a conclusion. A certificated A&P mechanic is one such person. So is a flight briefer. If you call and get a briefing and they fail to tell you about a TFR and you bust it, you are off the hook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotorWeed Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 So, you open all the inspection panels every time you fly? Torque all the nuts do you? Check vital clearances? Although the pilot is the final say as to the airworthiness of the aircraft and the safety of a flight, this authority allows one to trust certain qualified personnel to provide them with the information to make such a conclusion. A certificated A&P mechanic is one such person. So is a flight briefer. If you call and get a briefing and they fail to tell you about a TFR and you bust it, you are off the hook. NO, if you are the pilot of an aircraft coming out of the shop for what ever; it is your duty as PIC to go find the mechanic, and ask him or her a few simple questions. For instance “Did you disconnect a primary flight control? And if the answer is YES, ask the mechanic to personally SHOW you which ones were disconnected. I believe this point is driven home at every Robinson Factory safety course during the maintenance session. I trust no one; it’s my neck on the line when I hit the starter. RW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyMountainPilot Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 NO, if you are the pilot of an aircraft coming out of the shop for what ever; it is your duty as PIC to go find the mechanic, and ask him or her a few simple questions. For instance “Did you disconnect a primary flight control? And if the answer is YES, ask the mechanic to personally SHOW you which ones were disconnected. I believe this point is driven home at every Robinson Factory safety course during the maintenance session. I trust no one; it’s my neck on the line when I hit the starter. RW So, a mechanic is going to open up all the inspection panels for every pilot who wants to see all the flight controls?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHelicopterPilot Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 They damn well better. If I ask MX what they did and ask to see the end result of the work, then either he or I will open it up for inspection. If they refuse then I would simply tell them I will not sign off on the aircraft and that's that. I never had any problem though. I did a lot of MX flights as an instructor and it's not just hop in and go. A big part of it is the preflight inspection. I always asked what they did and inspected it. As for the flight portion of a MX check, that needs to be taken just as seriously as the pre flight portion. It's been a while now, but if I recall there was a check list in the RHC maintenance manual for the pilot to use after Routine MX such as a 100hr. I think this was just related to checks that needed to be done as part of said inspection. I am not blaming anyone, rather we need to learn from the chain of events that led to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyMountainPilot Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 They damn well better. If I ask MX what they did and ask to see the end result of the work, then either he or I will open it up for inspection. If they refuse then I would simply tell them I will not sign off on the aircraft and that's that. I never had any problem though. I did a lot of MX flights as an instructor and it's not just hop in and go. A big part of it is the preflight inspection. I always asked what they did and inspected it. As for the flight portion of a MX check, that needs to be taken just as seriously as the pre flight portion. It's been a while now, but if I recall there was a check list in the RHC maintenance manual for the pilot to use after Routine MX such as a 100hr. I think this was just related to checks that needed to be done as part of said inspection. I am not blaming anyone, rather we need to learn from the chain of events that led to this. I think you need to go back and read the report. The accident did not occur on a maintenance flight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruise475 Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 I think you need to go back and read the report. The accident did not occur on a maintenance flight. I don't think he was saying that it occured on a maintenance flight. I think he was just saying that the pilot who flys the maintenance flight is also required to do a inspection of the aircraft to make sure it is airworthy. It is a very good to check over the mechanics work, you may not always know what your looking at, but im sure you can see if something is not attached right, or a screw is missing where it really should be. That also gives the mechanic another turn to look over his work to make sure it is right again. This incident was the first flight after the maintenance flight if I remember correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE_COYOTE Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 (edited) In this case a proper preflight would not have saved anyone. If you have flown an R-44 you would know that the control link that lost the bolt is not visible by any means other than having the mast cowling off. I would love to blame SSH for this one but having been an aircraft mechanic I must say that it was the mechanics fault. This area in particular is emphasized by robinson as needing a "second set of eyes" before covering it up. Sad but true. RIP Edited February 2, 2008 by THE_COYOTE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fry Posted February 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 In this case a proper preflight would not have saved anyone. If you have flown an R-44 you would know that the control link that lost the bolt is not visible by any means other than having the mast cowling off. I would love to blame SSH for this one but having been an aircraft mechanic I must say that it was the mechanics fault. This area in particular is emphasized by robinson as needing a "second set of eyes" before covering it up. Sad but true. RIP If RHC emphasizes a QC check of maintenance in this area and SSH did not have the personnel or the policies in-place to do this then how is it not SSH's fault? Certainly the mechanic was at fault (maybe even the pilot to some small degree if only because she had reservations about SSH's practices but did not act on her beliefs) but equally to blame were the company's policies, procedures, management practices and culture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyNHighNFast Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 I wonder why there isn't a maintenance/inspection panel? For such a critical connection, preflight access would be good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE_COYOTE Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Every aircraft I have flown and worked in have parts that can not be inspected on a preflight. I agree that a proper preflight should always be done, however at some point you have to trust your mechanics. The smaller the aircraft the easier to inspect, how many 747 pilots have you seen opening engine cowling and shaking control linkages? Would it be his fault if the 747 had some sort of mechanical failure in the non inspected areas? Yes SSH seemed to have some bad practices as far as staffing and maintenance time, but have you EVER worked at a helicopter operator that didn't want their aircraft flying yesterday? The mechanic is the FAA representative to make sure that the maintenance is performed properly, just like the pilot is responsible for the rules of operation of the aircraft they are flying. One thing I do agree with, if a pilot feels that he/she is flying an aircraft that is not airworthy or is in question of their companies policies then they are somewhat at fault. This in its self is another problem. As a SSH graduate this person has few options, many companies especially other schools will not hire SSH grads. So either you quit your job or you try to do your best to make the situation better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.