Not sure if this link will work?

http://dms.ntsb.gov/public%2F55000-5...7%2F549636.pdf

If not, go to www.ntsb.gov, and in the center Investigations box, select the drop down Accident Dockets link. Hit the search link and enter the NTSB Accident ID for this accident: DCA13MA133

Now hit FIND at the bottom right (don't hit SEARCH again) and a hyperlink of DCA13MA133 will come up in the results box. Click on that hyperlink and select page 5, and what you're looking for will be document 68.

Thanks, Raptor, for the link. It worked perfectly. I'm trying to assemble a complete package of all the reports for this accident.

This whole sad affair can be a learning opportunity. If lives are saved by understanding exactly what happened and thereby avoiding the same mistakes, then their tragic loss will not have been in vain. Like someone else said, "There, but for the Grace of God, go I." I always try to do my very best and bring my A-game, but I have no illusions of being bullet-proof. Anyone who thinks they can operate heavy transport aircraft in the middle of the night in all kinds of weather for years without ever making an error is a fool.

If you look at the docket, UPS 1354 Accident Docket , you can get all of the Factual Reports from each group. The factual reports are the first document for each group number. Operations is group 2, ATC is 3, Meterology is 5 and so on. Click on the desired document and then click on the download link which is a small button in the middle of the frame.

Agree, and the cargo cutout is completely asinine. I was simply countering Shy's weak point with and equal one to point point out how invalid his stance is.

And since 117 is based on "scientific data", repeated/consecutive back side of the clock FDP's should be more restrictive than current 117. Jmho.......

In many ways, mature CBA's such as the agreement between the IPA and UPS are more restrictive than 117, and its overall affect on our operation will not be as large as the true non-skeds. On a macro level the more important point is to not allow the industry (read company) to exclude one particular piece of a class and craft. If we let this precedent to set what will be next?

The list goes on and on.

I hope this accident shines the light down the darkest of alleyways to find the lurking industry lobbyists and that my friends and coworkers did not die in vain.

TB

A quick question for the A306 drivers who use P.DES for approach. Looking at the guide in the docket regarding types of approach(item14) , guidance to use and position of the VNI switch the guide has the VNI switch in I for ILS for a LOC approach. If you do this in my A306 it removes the VDEV scale from the map display. I imagine that the logic is not wanting to display deviation on the map and glide slope information on the PFD. In the event of a non available GS it still shows the GS scales on the PFD but not the deviation diamond and nothing on the map. Does the VDEV football still display on your aircraft on the map display when you are flying a LOC approach? There was quite a bit of talk about the football at the hearing last week and I just wanted to clear this up.

Hey 306...in the performance descent mode the vert dev scale disappears when you place the VNI to ILS. In the aporoach mode, after activating the approach on TO/APP page, the vert dev scale remains with the VNI in ILS. If the approach isn't cleaned up, the vertical deviation on the PROG and App pages will indicate -9990 and caret on the ND will be pegged. Hope this helps.

That clears it up for me, thank you.

Reading the factuals on this mishap....I'm reminded of other words to live by

If I'm on final saying what's going on, I'm going around.

tough thing is that sometimes it's incredibly difficult to just stop, wind the watch, and start over.

So true. It is difficult to practice.