http://www.mtexpress.com/index2.php?ID=2005115805Crash report was off mark
Within hours of our hearing of (our son) Quin's helicopter crash, we got the first warning that it would be most convenient for the National Transportation Safety Board if they could find evidence to blame the dead pilot. It could save millions for the government or one of the big corporations involved. They did not in fact find any such evidence so they just blamed him anyway.
There were three NTSB reports. The first, about 10 days after the crash, noted that the lidless external cargo baskets had spilled baggage all the way down the mountain. There may or may not have been human error involved in securing the cargo with bungies. The cargo had been slashed by the tail rotors and the tail cone came off. The aviation company that owned and maintained the helicopter swiftly (about a month) refitted all their helicopters with lidded baskets. The problem had been corrected.
But the second and the last NTSB reports painted this picture: The pilot, coming down from the lookout, turned to the crew chief safety officer and the firefighter who had just survived a car crash and a burnover and the Forest Service lookout who loved her job but hated flying and said, "OK if I fly directly into the late afternoon sun and buzz this ridge and perform a zero gravity maneuver?'' And they all agreed, and that's when they hit the snag that wasn't noticed for the first report and the contents of the basket that were previously thought to have been spilling all the way down the mountain were gathered closely downhill from that snag.
I want justice.
Ann Stone
Emmett
____________________________________________________
Editor's note: The Express called the helicopter company, Evergreen Helicopter Inc., to inquire whether it had indeed retrofitted its aircraft after the incident. Company representatives said they did not want to comment on the matter, at least as long as the case is still being investigated.
In its last report, the NTSB listed the cause of the crash as "intentional low-altitude flight."
Crash report was off mark
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister
Crash report was off mark
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
Widow,
I understand that you feel the investigation into the accident that killed your husband and several others was not adequate. I would even go so far as to say, based on what you've posted and what I have read, the accident was probably a case of poor maintenance and pilot error.
I read your comment at the bottom of the article, and it may be true that blaming the pilot is the easiest solution but some times it is the right conlcusion.
If you read the information from the NTSB website I don't think it is a stretch to pin this one on the pilot. He was flying into the sun which could have easily caused poor vis making it difficult to see the tree at the top of the ridge. Also, even if cargo did come out of the container and hit the tail rotor it seems that it likley could have been caused by the "sleigh ride" manouver described in the reports. They have witnesses that say this pilot had a history of "showy" flying. It may have bit him in the ass this time.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 1237&key=1
I understand that you feel the investigation into the accident that killed your husband and several others was not adequate. I would even go so far as to say, based on what you've posted and what I have read, the accident was probably a case of poor maintenance and pilot error.
I read your comment at the bottom of the article, and it may be true that blaming the pilot is the easiest solution but some times it is the right conlcusion.
If you read the information from the NTSB website I don't think it is a stretch to pin this one on the pilot. He was flying into the sun which could have easily caused poor vis making it difficult to see the tree at the top of the ridge. Also, even if cargo did come out of the container and hit the tail rotor it seems that it likley could have been caused by the "sleigh ride" manouver described in the reports. They have witnesses that say this pilot had a history of "showy" flying. It may have bit him in the ass this time.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_i ... 1237&key=1
If the initial reports were "adjusted" because a "stakeholder" did not want the information made "public", then the NTSB has failed in it's accurate reporting of the incident.
As for the "showy" pilot stuff, trust me that the NTSB/TSB will use negative references to support their conclusions, even if they fly in the face of positive references.
As for the "showy" pilot stuff, trust me that the NTSB/TSB will use negative references to support their conclusions, even if they fly in the face of positive references.
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
Widow,
I went through the process of a seeing TSB investigation when an instructor at the flight school where I worked was killed in a training accident. The initial reports are just that....initial. Once more information is obtained the view of the accident can chage dramatically. Changes in subsequent reports are not always because of a cover-up or a cop out on the part of the investigators.
I went through the process of a seeing TSB investigation when an instructor at the flight school where I worked was killed in a training accident. The initial reports are just that....initial. Once more information is obtained the view of the accident can chage dramatically. Changes in subsequent reports are not always because of a cover-up or a cop out on the part of the investigators.
If they initially thought the lidless cargo may have had a detrimental effect in the outcome of the incident/accident, and the company was concerned enough to go out and change their system immediately, that reeks of collusion.
I see this as a possible mirror of what happened with the flight following in our case. It is obvious that had their been effective flight following my husbands life (at least) would have been saved. But the problem was corrected by the company within weeks of the accident and then ignored in the "letter to the coroner".
The TSB/NTSB have an obligation to include all relevent information in their reports.
I see this as a possible mirror of what happened with the flight following in our case. It is obvious that had their been effective flight following my husbands life (at least) would have been saved. But the problem was corrected by the company within weeks of the accident and then ignored in the "letter to the coroner".
The TSB/NTSB have an obligation to include all relevent information in their reports.
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
That's quite a bit "if".If the initial reports were "adjusted" because a "stakeholder" did not want the information made "public", then the NTSB has failed in it's accurate reporting of the incident.
The word "showy" wasn't invented by the NTSB. According to the report, his work associates coined that word. The NTSB just wrote it down and reported it.As for the "showy" pilot stuff, trust me that the NTSB/TSB will use negative references to support their conclusions, even if they fly in the face of positive references.
I hate to say this but your statement reeks of paranoia.If they initially thought the lidless cargo may have had a detrimental effect in the outcome of the incident/accident, and the company was concerned enough to go out and change their system immediately, that reeks of collusion.
I read all the reports and feel that without having had the opportunity to look over their shoulder during the investigation the NTSB has done quite a good job.
ANY commercial pilot that takes his passengers on "sleigh rides" is wreckless and irresponsible. It is ultimately the pilot's responsibility to ensure the load is secured properly and to keep the airplane and passengers safe.
Some of the pilot's workmates state that he always asked his passengers if it was OK before he performed his "showy" manoevers. I wonder how many passengers felt aprehensive but went along as to not appear afraid?
Sorry widow, but regardless of the accolades and concerns of family and friends, this "bold" pilot wasn't going to grow "old" and it appears his skill just postponed the inevitable.
It's quite sad that his cowboy ended the lives of 3 others on his last sleigh ride.
