Today's Province Newspaper and Transport Canada

[safetywatch]

Call for zero-tolerance flight safety

Father of killed pilot says 'red flags' raised over airline were ignored

By Susan Lazaruk, The Province; with files from Canwest News ServiceFebruary 22, 2009



A father whose pilot son died three years ago after his small plane crashed on Vancouver Island said he fears a similar accident could happen again -- now that he's discovered an inspector's safety concerns about the airline were ignored by superiors.

Jonathan Huggett of Surrey is calling for zero tolerance of safety infractions by airlines, for disclosure of other inspectors' concerns and for a revamping of the industry's regulation.

His son, pilot Edward Huggett, 25, died with two passengers, including a three-year-old boy, when the Sonicblue Airways Cessna crashed on Jan. 21, 2006, shortly after taking off from Tofino for Vancouver. Five others, including a 17-month-old girl, survived.

A turbine-blade fault that originated in the manufacture of the part caused the motor to seize and couldn't have been detected by inspection, the Transportation Safety Board found. It determined neither the pilot nor the airline, owned by International Express Aircharter, were to blame.

But internal documents obtained by Jonathan Huggett through a Freedom of Information request showed a Transport Canada inspector was worried enough about safety infractions to fear flying on Sonicblue planes five years before the crash.

The inspector threw up "red flags" in an e-mail to his regional supervisor and wrote, "I do find it [words blacked out] doing check-rides in poorly maintained aircraft and [words blacked out] if there is a mechanical problem."

He called the airline's aircraft maintenance organization "badly run, enough to cause Transport Canada great concern," and said if it couldn't meet standards, it should lose its licence.

After that and before the crash, the company was fined $100,000 for improper record-keeping and maintenance irregularities, but never lost its licence. Less than two weeks before the crash, Transport Canada found six planes -- including Edward Huggett's -- had missed mandatory inspections.

Sonicblue's licence was pulled two days after the crash.

"Transport Canada clearly sees there were problems with this airline and clearly does nothing to fix them," said Huggett. "There should be zero tolerance for infractions of safety regulations."

He said the public should have access to concerns by inspectors to help them make an informed decision about whether to fly.

"Most people I talk to have no idea" what the situation is, he said.

He added that Transport Canada's dual mandate of promoting and regulating airlines creates a conflict between economic and safety interests, and that regulators should report to Parliament, as the auditor-general does, not a ministry.

Huggett said three years after the crash, Transport Canada is still consulting with industry about implementing a terrain awareness and warning system the Transportation Safety Board said would have saved his son time in locating a place to land.

Spokeswoman Sara Hof said she couldn't comment on the inspector's e-mails because the courts sealed the documents after a lawsuit settlement with Huggett -- despite the public release of those documents through FOI.

"The regulatory inspection regime is aimed at prevention [of accidents] and Transport Canada does not hesitate to protect the travelling public," she said.

slazaruk@theprovince.com
© Copyright (c) The Province

[2R]

This is news now ?
Is it a slow news day ?
Ten years ago Regency had a reputation for dangerous maintenance .Do not take my word for it talk to any former regency pilot .They all had tales of horror about the planes and working conditions .It took how many FATAL crashes before they got shut down ?
When most pilots are starting out most are trusting little lambs who could easily be sent to their deaths by unscrupulious or stupid employers.
The hardest part of managing a newbie is holding them back from proving themselves to be the best pilot ever and doing things that may get them hurt.Keeping a newhire on a shortleash is tough as most pilots will brave just about anything if you let them.
The aggresive use of Lawyers to run some business's has made transport gun-shy and the new guys now do not have the protection they used to have.The lack of regulation enforcement has made everyones insurance costs go through the roof as we all pay for the crashes that bad operators insist on having.When one company has two caravans with nine millions dollars liabilty on each go down .Guess who pays for that ? YOU DO,comes right out of your companies operating expenses and if they are not makin money neither are you.

Perhaps in future it wil be impossible to get insurance with a breach of warranty clause .Now that small change would make the accountable executive pay attention to how his ships are being operated.The lawyers will have fun fighting that one out in courts .
You might read about that in ten years at this rate

[foxmoth]

"Transport Canada does not hesitate to protect the travelling public."
quote by
Patrick Charette
Sara Hof

Transport Canada employees spokes'people'

same quote, same lies.
I want these people fired. maybe then we can find out who told them to lie.
how many innocent people have to die while we pay taxes fo this dishonesty?

[Cat Driver]

same quote, same lies.
I want these people fired. maybe then we can find out who told them to lie.
how many innocent people have to die while we pay taxes fo this dishonesty?

Dishonesty is a prerequisite to advancement in TCCA.

When Dave Nowzek was found to have been deliberately dishonest in his handling of my case and I appealed to the Director General Civil Aviation that disgrace to the office he holds had the audacity and arrogance to write a personal letter to me stating that he found Nowzek's handling of my issues to be quite satisfactory and has his full backing.

The really troubling part of my case was even after the findings that my allegations were all proven to be true and both Nowzek and Preuss were found guilty of denying me due process they still continue to defend their actions...fucking unbelievable.

The arrogant prick even signed the letter and it has become one of my most treasured pieces of evidence as to how they really operate.

Tower C is the manhole cover for the sewer that is TCCA.

Ya all gotta be proud of your government.....and vacation in Zimbabwe where you will feel right at home.

[HORUNNER]

I'm very sorry for what happened to "Ed" for a period of time he was the last pic entry in my logbook after I did some training there for a job I held elsewhere, he was the second person I knew in aviation that died doing what they loved. I also watched a Firefighting Trainer go into a MT very close to Cranbrook while flying directly over head all of these had big impacts on me.
What we all need to know is we work in a field that has risks, guys we are working thousands of feet in the air and we can fall to the ground at anytime at any rate. . .

No matter how far along you are remembering this is key

Now Sonic,Regency or whatever they wish to be called was a crapy place to work (pay/mait./mngmnt) we all have to see that. But what happened to Ed was only the fault of manufacture, I am glad they got shut down that was needed. I just dont like how alot of people on this site lump his accident in with the rest of the companies performance.
Doing so only implies things could have been different and yes if they were shut down it might not have been Ed but the engine would still have been out there and it could have been YOU.

"By Susan Lazaruk, The Province; with files from Canwest News ServiceFebruary 22, 2009"

"A turbine-blade fault that originated in the manufacture of the part caused the motor to seize and couldn't have been detected by inspection, the Transportation Safety Board found. It determined neither the pilot nor the airline, owned by International Express Aircharter, were to blame."

This is a dangerous job we do and every time we go out we accept the aircraft in front of us from that point on safety is our responsibility, if you dont like something speak up for yourself your pax, fellow employees aswell as that guy sitting on his couch in the living room of the house you may land on. It up to all of us to keep safe we have the final say of every flight.

[Widow]

he was the second person I knew in aviation that died doing what they loved. .

I just HATE this phrase. How many other professions would you say this about???

They loved to fly. They did NOT love to crash.

They did NOT die doing what they loved.


Didn't these emails garnered through ATIP show that there was KNOWN substandard maintenance on the aircraft? Is it possible, do you think, that the failed blade was manufactured by a substandard company? And purchased because it was cheap?

The company shouldn't have been operating, period. If it had not been operating, this accident would not have occurred.

[Anonymous1]

The engine temp limits had been exceeded prior to the accident but after the overhaul (due to a hot start). The automatic trend monitoring recorded the overtemp but the engine was not removed for inspection because the DOM was not downloading the information. Even if he had recorded the info, the engine would not have been sent for repair because there was insufficent money for such an expense.

The blade failed as a result of an overtemp that was not acted upon.

Source for this info was last week from Cessna themself.

The interesting thing is that the DOM is still working in the industry but has kept all this quiet. He knows who he is but is more concerned about protecting his income then resigning out of disgrace and going into another line of work.

[Widow]

Interesting. So by not assigning any blame, the TSB also did not identify the root cause of the accident?

[MUSKEG]

Widow. Although I agree with you in principle, neither the company nor the pilot knew the condition of that compressor blade. If said company would have been shutdown prior to the accident, the accident would only have happened somewhere else, granted the outcome might be better or the same, we will never know. If the blade was overtemped then some pilot somewhere is walking around with a guitly concience if infact he had enough experience and training to understand what just happened. If maintanance knew about it and didn't act on it that would be the saddest of all. Sometimes machines just break and we are left to deal with the situation as best we can. Life can be so unfair.

[HORUNNER]

he was the second person I knew in aviation that died doing what they loved. .

I just HATE this phrase. How many other professions would you say this about???

They loved to fly. They did NOT love to crash.

They did NOT die doing what they loved.


Didn't these emails garnered through ATIP show that there was KNOWN substandard maintenance on the aircraft? Is it possible, do you think, that the failed blade was manufactured by a substandard company? And purchased because it was cheap?

The company shouldn't have been operating, period. If it had not been operating, this accident would not have occurred.

But "Widow" it would have happened, just to someone else, . . .

I never said they didnt have substandard mait. infact I said they did need to get shut down but what I stand by is as tragic as it was this time it had nothing to do with their mait. but another facilities and that is fact.

As well you need to admit this job envolves risk if you dont . . .

by the way there are a lot of other professions out there that one could phrase "died doing what they loved"

Race car driver
NASA
King crab fishing
Extream Ski/Snowboard
Loggers
Iron workers
ECT . . .

I dont want to argue with you Widow, I am reminded every time I read a post from you that you have lost aswell

I do wish to make it clear those of us that are pilots have to remember that it is not a safe job and it is up to us to make it better when and where we can

[Anonymous1]

So if a part fails due to the absence of following correct produres (as mandated by TC), the company is not liable because they were not aware of the pending failure? Following this logic, one could not be responsible for hitting a mountain if they never read a map that said the mountain was there?

I'm not saying the pilot overtemped the engine knowingly...it could have been maintenance or anyone else. All I know is the recording data found an earlier hotstart that stressed the blade enough to cause a failure at a later date. Why didn't the TSB include this detail in their data?

[foxmoth]

lets get this strait.
"hesitate" as in "Transport Canada does not hesitate" according to Webster says

"to pause irresolutely, to be in doubt, to be reluctant"

are they not supposed to be pros, are they not tasked with taking action "to protect the public" ?

people have died while they "does not hesitate". People have died AFTER the INDUSTRY and MANY inspectors KNEW they were risky operations. i know one ex inspector who has had a consience ever since the Wapiti crash. Same shit!

and no, I agree the broken part may have caused deaths elsewhere, but thers two issues here. Broken part may, maybe, chance. Bad operation means dead people sooner or later.
If you do not act, you are criminal neglgent.

[Widow]

by the way there are a lot of other professions out there that one could phrase "died doing what they loved"

They don't often take uninformed members of the public with them though, do they?

['79K20driver]

"died doing what they loved" is a stupid statement. Not to be overly graphic, but I'm sure in the final moments the last thing they would be feeling is any sort of love for the job whether it's flying or driving race cars. It is happens to me, that's the last thing I would want anyone to think.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I do wish to make it clear those of us that are pilots have to remember that it is not a safe job and it is up to us to make it better when and where we can

It is not a safe job compared to what other job?

But "Widow" it would have happened, just to someone else, . . .

How do you come to that conclusion?

Had TC shut down Sonic Blue years before this crash the engine probably would not have been over temped, and even if it had the airplane could have had the failure on a warm sunny day over Sask. instead of in the mountains on a real crappy weather day.

[mag check]

It is not a safe job compared to what other job?

Well ., flying is listed as the 3rd most dangerous job in the US, behind fishing, and logging. The death rate is 67 pilots for every 100,000.

So I guess you could say that just about every job is safer.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

So I guess you could say that just about every job is safer.

We could go deeper into the why of this issue.

Is there any difference between the safety stats between the small airplane sector of aviation and the large airline segment of the industry in the USA?

[mag check]

I personally don't have the numbers to compare, however I would give an educated guess that the "small" aviation industry in Canada would be worse, simply because usually a smaller sampling of stats results in larger swings in the final tally.
While the numbers might eventually even out with the "larger" US, I suspect we are worse now.

[safetywatch]

I have heard the rumours before about overtemping. I want to assure everyone that it is not true. I am an engineer. The blade was taken to Ottawa and was subjected to microscopic examination by the Engineering Branch Laboratory of the TSB and I have examined the photographs. The blade failed because a fatigue crack propogated from an anomoly in the parent metal that had gone undetected since manufacture. Basically it was a time bomb waiting to happen. The data from the Trend recorder also did not show any overtemping and there was all the data stored when TSB downloaded it even though it had not been sent to P&W.

The issue in the story really relates to the basic conflict that TC senior management will not support their own inspectors and are allowing the economic interests of the airline industry to override public safety and it must stop. This is not the end of the story even after 3 years. We will get every single recommendation from a TC inspector that has not been acted on by senior management and we will publish the list with all the names. We do have inside sources in TC who will leak all the data to us. We will also use Access to Information legislation. This is likely 3 months off. Also hopefully Widow will raise this issue in Ottawa during her visit. Stay tuned - it is not over by a long way and we will have the truth regardless of the cost.

[Cat Driver]

This is not the end of the story even after 3 years. We will get every single recommendation from a TC inspector that has not been acted on by senior management and we will publish the list with all the names.

That is step one in bringing about changes in the way TCCA is managed.

The inspectors who want to do their jobs deserve to be recognized.

Conversely those who for whatever reason pervert the intent and importance of the job deserve to have their names printed so the industry can demand their removal from our employment rolls.

We do have inside sources in TC who will leak all the data to us.

That is the only way you will get to the truth.

[foxmoth]

safetywatch

thanks for your post. it is great.
I hope you can bring this to everyone attention.
I am waiting to see it done.
justice may still be an option.

[marktheone]

So if a part fails due to the absence of following correct produres (as mandated by TC), the company is not liable because they were not aware of the pending failure? Following this logic, one could not be responsible for hitting a mountain if they never read a map that said the mountain was there?

I'm not saying the pilot overtemped the engine knowingly...it could have been maintenance or anyone else. All I know is the recording data found an earlier hotstart that stressed the blade enough to cause a failure at a later date. Why didn't the TSB include this detail in their data?

They probably didn't include that because it not's true. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and bet the farm that never happened. I know the old DOM and not a chance he woulda let that go out the door. I suppose it is possible that he wasn't dowloading the data but the gents who flew that plane would've owned up to a hot start, if it happened. And it is pretty f_ckin hard to hot start a PT6. You gotta work at it.

Where do your facts come from?

[MUSKEG]

Marktheone. That is exactly the kind of attitude that we tried to snuff out in groundschool. Yes a PT6 is not prone to a H/S but it can and did happen. I guarantee that with your attitude if and when it ever happens to you your reaction will be , naw can't be, and in that moment of hesitation you will spew 100 grand out the pipes.

Sounds like someone started a rumour regarding a H/S on sonicblue.

Widow- I agree with you completely. When impact is imminent that last thing you are thinking is man I love my job. Many jobs have a degree of difficulty to them but few are in the public eye like aviation.

[marktheone]

Muskeg,
if you are paying any attention at all to the start and it starts to get warm it is easy to prevent. I don't know if you are knowledgable with pratts or not but I would suspect not. There are certain things that can occur that make it more likely to have a hot start but again if the pilot is paying any attention at all it is easily preventable.

I will vouch for all the pilots that flew that aircraft and say that a hot start is EXTREMELY unlikely.And Safetywatch did say above that it had not happened.

The only variable in the mix is that the old chief pilot did fly it occasionally. I would not vouch him nor his integrity.

I have no idea how many times I've lit one but it's more than a few. I have seen them get warm (more common on larger PT6's) and been almost to the point of yanking it off but have yet to have to. Trust me I wouldn't sit there and let the thing burn, anyone that knows me would back that up. That is a bit of an offside thing to say.

[Cat Driver]

For some reason I must have been a misfit in aviation because I still do not believe that flying is all that dangerous.

I wonder why I did not find it to be all that dangerous, was it because I tried not to expose myself to situations I could not control and would not fly airplanes that were not maintained to a safe standard or was I just super lucky and dodged the bullet?