Another Norseman...gone

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Rooster69
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2018 9:06 am

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by Rooster69 » Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:09 pm

PilotDar’s third paragraph says it all.
---------- ADS -----------
  

corethatthermal
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by corethatthermal » Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:01 pm

CBC was reporting Air Schefferville had 3 crashes in the last 8 yrs 2 were fatal. With the other aircraft crashes, one has to wonder how many standards and procedures were being eroded or "modified" Perhaps crashes can be divided into pilot error or maintenance error with a small percentage being no error on the part of the companies involved ( like hitting a submerged log or a manufacturing defect. )
Busting weather minimums or company minimums ( like wind speeds for certain lakes etc) or poor or incomplete maintenance all fall within the company standards and procedures. The rash of accidents are often a result of long term failures in the organizations involved and so we can preach on our pedestal all day long and nothing will change UNLESS, we get to the heart of the problem.
---------- ADS -----------
  

C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by C.W.E. » Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:15 pm

The rash of accidents are often a result of long term failures in the organizations involved and so we can preach on our pedestal all day long and nothing will change UNLESS, we get to the heart of the problem.

Unless we get to the heart of the problem???

I have been flying seaplanes since 1954 and the same accidents have been happening ever since I can remember.

So how would you change this problem?
---------- ADS -----------
  

corethatthermal
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by corethatthermal » Tue Jul 23, 2019 6:29 pm

2 definitions of accident:

An accident, also known as an unintentional act, is an undesirable, incidental, and an unplanned event that could have been prevented had circumstances leading up to the accident been recognized, and acted upon, prior to its occurrence. Most scientists who study unintentional injury avoid using the term "accident" and focus on factors that increase risk of severe injury and that reduce injury incidence and severity.

an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

An article quotes these #s Causes of accidents 50% pilot error 20% mechanical failure 10% weather and 10% sabotage ?

For small 703 and 704 ops, enforcement must be effective and firm for companies that repeatedly break the rules. They are getting away with murder now. For the smaller companies, bush ops and mom and pop operators, SMS is a joke! Audits and firm, swift action are the only things that will work with these companies. Enforcement against pilots needs to be much stronger with larger penalties. A slap on the hand is what repeat offenders are getting now.
We need to boot idiots like Trudeau out on the street so the government can invest in CANADA and provide more resources to those enforcing the laws, incentives for companies to build and repair aircraft in Canada. ( Where is the Canadian replacement for the beaver? ) Where are the Canadian engines and props?
The margins are too tight in the aviation industry, causing operators to cheap out on maintenance, living and working conditions, crazy pilot work shifts, poor mentoring and poor oversight of pilots and AME s Do we need further deregulation when all it is doing is creating lower margins?

Employees who are "forced" or through company culture bend the rules or lower the standard should be allowed to report to TC AND not only be protected but the company must pay the employee wages, plus a large bonus regardless as to whether he/she continues to work for the company until employee finds another job. The fines and penalties for violating employee rights should be very high and quickly enforced !!!

In Canada, we need better equipment, better margins, better enforcement, better employee protection and better working conditions and pay!

We cannot have 0 accidents in aviation in Canada but we can reduce the number greatly.

Can you add to these CWE ?
---------- ADS -----------
  

C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by C.W.E. » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:00 pm

Can you add to these CWE ?
You have done a very credible job of pointing out the short comings in lack of enforcement by T.C. in aviation law breaking.

However it has always been like this and most likely always will be.

T.C. is managed by many corrupt officials who are a disgrace to the position they hold, but no one ever cleans that cess pool out.

Why don't you contact the DGCA and ask him to read what I just posted and ask him what he thinks about my opinion?

Oh, maybe you can suggest he have a real close look at my background and the actions I took against their top management a few years ago.

I clearly described the DGCA at that time as a moral degenerate in my legal fight against their unlawful actions against me and my company.

By the way I won my case.

Ask him if the new top management are any different.

Get back to me and let me know how it turns out.

C.W.E.

Charles W. Ellsworth.
---------- ADS -----------
  

valleyboy
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 4:05 am

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by valleyboy » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:27 pm

Regardless of anything accidents will continue. There is nothing wrong with the equipement except for the way its maintained in some cases Pilots operating in remote areas, hundreds of miles from base need to be able to make decisions. They are on their own with no support, not like a wheel operation from airport to airport. The off strip work in the high arctic is also like this. It's all about risk assessment and using your head. No amount of regulation or policing will fix this.

What I will say is that loading 6 pax and a pilot into a beaver is wrong on this length of trip. Either you are very overloaded if you take survival gear and provisions or they only had the clothes on their back. It should have been either 2 beavers or one otter. I can't imagine taking a group out unless you can spend a night or two on the land if needed.

Part of the problem is that the movement to take the "bush" out of float and ski flying might be causing more issues than it cures.

The one thing I will agree with is the shocking lack of mentoring. Young and new pilots need to have someone kicking their assess when bone head decisions are made. With no correction bad habits never get fixed.
---------- ADS -----------
  

C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by C.W.E. » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:44 pm

T.C. enforcement should start at the company management level.

When I had my flying business I had my employees sign an agreement that if I found them intentionally flying my airplanes in contravention of the law they would be immediately terminated.

That solved the overloading, flying with known mechanical defects and pushing weather problem in my company.
---------- ADS -----------
  

corethatthermal
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by corethatthermal » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:17 pm

There is nothing wrong with the equipment except for the way its maintained
On another post, a poster was trying to find ways to go "on-condition" after the fact ( save $$$ ) for a commercial operation. When margins are that low, safety is undercut. Running commercial engines to 2500-3000 hrs along with a window dressing SMS , in my opinion is going in the wrong direction.

If all beavers and otters were pt-6 equipped I would imagine maintenance time would be reduced, reliability and safety would go up and accidents related to maintenance/ mechanical failure would go down. When a shop is dealing with a 70 yr old engine problem(s) less time, energy and $$ is available for the rest of the plane, other issues and personnel issues etc. Its a ballooning effect.

The last 2 posters are right on the money, TOP management ( TC ) and top management ( company owners and DOM/ chief pilots ) establish standards and minimums regardless of the bottom line and they must be enforced by the owners and TC.

When charter or package prices go up considerable , so be it! BUY your own plane and become a pilot if you want to go to Labrador to fish and hunt cheaply !
---------- ADS -----------
  

cncpc
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1343
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:17 am

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by cncpc » Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:47 pm

corethatthermal wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 6:29 pm
2 definitions of accident:

An accident, also known as an unintentional act, is an undesirable, incidental, and an unplanned event that could have been prevented had circumstances leading up to the accident been recognized, and acted upon, prior to its occurrence. Most scientists who study unintentional injury avoid using the term "accident" and focus on factors that increase risk of severe injury and that reduce injury incidence and severity.

an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.

An article quotes these #s Causes of accidents 50% pilot error 20% mechanical failure 10% weather and 10% sabotage ?

For small 703 and 704 ops, enforcement must be effective and firm for companies that repeatedly break the rules. They are getting away with murder now. For the smaller companies, bush ops and mom and pop operators, SMS is a joke! Audits and firm, swift action are the only things that will work with these companies. Enforcement against pilots needs to be much stronger with larger penalties. A slap on the hand is what repeat offenders are getting now.
We need to boot idiots like Trudeau out on the street so the government can invest in CANADA and provide more resources to those enforcing the laws, incentives for companies to build and repair aircraft in Canada. ( Where is the Canadian replacement for the beaver? ) Where are the Canadian engines and props?
The margins are too tight in the aviation industry, causing operators to cheap out on maintenance, living and working conditions, crazy pilot work shifts, poor mentoring and poor oversight of pilots and AME s Do we need further deregulation when all it is doing is creating lower margins?

Employees who are "forced" or through company culture bend the rules or lower the standard should be allowed to report to TC AND not only be protected but the company must pay the employee wages, plus a large bonus regardless as to whether he/she continues to work for the company until employee finds another job. The fines and penalties for violating employee rights should be very high and quickly enforced !!!

In Canada, we need better equipment, better margins, better enforcement, better employee protection and better working conditions and pay!

We cannot have 0 accidents in aviation in Canada but we can reduce the number greatly.

Can you add to these CWE ?
Learn first, then know everything. You've it the wrong ways round.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Good judgment comes from experience. Experience often comes from bad judgment.

jakeandelwood
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 11:45 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by jakeandelwood » Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:15 am

C.W.E. wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:44 pm
T.C. enforcement should start at the company management level.

When I had my flying business I had my employees sign an agreement that if I found them intentionally flying my airplanes in contravention of the law they would be immediately terminated.

That solved the overloading, flying with known mechanical defects and pushing weather problem in my company.
More companies need to do something like that, a company I used to work for seemed to promote the opposite, I'm sure there is more. I was flying with the Chief pilot and I was flying and he said "you can easily go 100 or 200 low (can't remember what exactly he said)on this ifr approach, I didn't know really if he was testing me on what I'd say or what, he was the kind of pilot that would do whatever it takes to get the job done, legal or not
---------- ADS -----------
  

valleyboy
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 4:05 am

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by valleyboy » Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:21 pm

window dressing SMS
SMS - is not required by 703/704 operations and most choose not to implement, companies use the acronym but are not certified or have an approved system in place.
---------- ADS -----------
  

corethatthermal
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by corethatthermal » Wed Jul 24, 2019 5:30 pm

I have worked for a small and also an intermediate company and both had SMS in the maint dept due to customers requirements not TC requirements, at that time One was a mom and pop operation and one was in the oilfield.
---------- ADS -----------
  

valleyboy
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 361
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 4:05 am

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by valleyboy » Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:00 pm

A small company doing that work would likely be a good operation anyway, usually the companies that require the SMS. program audit as well. SMS with a company that embraces the concept can actually work very well. The problem is still the bandits who use smoke and mirrors to satisfy TC.
---------- ADS -----------
  

goldeneagle
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by goldeneagle » Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:28 am

valleyboy wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:27 pm
What I will say is that loading 6 pax and a pilot into a beaver is wrong on this length of trip.
Umm, if you look back a bit, this discussion was about a norseman with only a pilot on board....
---------- ADS -----------
  

beaverbob
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:34 pm
Location: BC

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by beaverbob » Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:39 pm

corethatthermal wrote:
Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:00 pm
dh2 EATER, A Glassy water approach to a smaller landing body CANNOT be a stabilized approach Because the initial approach may be stabilized BUT the transition is unstabilizing, THEN the final approach MUST be ( more or less lol ) perfectly stabilized to accomplish the procedure. You must unstabilize the initial approach in order to enter into the new approach for glassy water DUH !!! BOY some folks are still in school even when they are on the job !!!
Are you serious? How many tens of thousands of hours do you have on floats?
Bob
---------- ADS -----------
  

corethatthermal
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: Another Norseman...gone

Post by corethatthermal » Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:15 am

Are you serious?
Yes, Care to explain what your beef is?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”