please help this writer
 

---I had a wonderful technical advisor for my writing project, but he disappeared suddenly. Last I heard he was very ill so I wonder if he's even alive, or if I'd know it if he's not.
---My work is fiction, but I'm obsessive about every detail being technically correct. I need technical advice from any of the following: a pilot who has survived a crash, a crash investigator, an aviation attorney, and/or anyone who knows the ins and outs of g.a. crash investigation. I've exhausted the internet looking for sources of information, but everything so far has come up empty.
---What I need to know is probably quite simple. The pilot in question has 30 years experience and was flying a business-class turboprop over the Appalachian Mountains when he lost fuel pressure and ultimately crashed. He remembers little about what happened. He owned the airplane. There were no fatalities or private property damages, save for 4 trees he took out in a national forest. His injuries will prevent him from ever flying again so FAA will be revoking his medical certificate. In ICU he was off-limits, but now he's in a regular hospital room and fair game to anyone who wants answers. He retained an aviation attorney first thing. On Monday, NTSB and FAA are going to want to talk to him, and herein lies the problem. I haven't the faintest idea where to go from here. Will the investigators show up together? Have they made an appointment, seeing as how there is now an attorney involved, or do they just drop in? After their initial introductions, what kinds of questions do they ask? Will it take all day or just a few hours, keeping in mind that no forms of any kind have been submitted yet? Do they aggressively demand answers or are they mostly decent people? As for the medical certificate, is that something they'd revoke on the spot or is it a process? After they leave, are they likely to come back?
---I'd so appreciate any insight someone who has "been there, done that" can offer. Thanks!!

So, he's not an employee of a company (subject to getting fired).... so why an attorney?

Was he running drugs? Is he an illegal immigrant? Tax evader? Why would there be people who "want answers"? Yes, the FAA. That's pretty straight forward. And the insurance company. And maybe the Forest Service, if he landed in a wilderness.

Assuming the airplane was legal (proper maintenance and records) and he was legal (medical, certificate, currency), the FAA might be looking at fuel suppliers, or maintenance folks (not the pilot).

Obviously, this is in the US, where everything is an "attorney first thing". And the NTSB does not investigate every single crash. I doubt a guy running out of gas would qualify. It just happens too much.

So this scenario is "fiction". Well the Medical is pretty much done. The FAA does what they want when they want in what ever manner is most convient for them. Nothing wrong with it, they are protecting a Billion dollar industry and human lives. So yes they will want to talk to him and it all depends on there mood and what he has to say as to how it goes. A person is going to get an attorney if they are GUILTY typically or FEAR legal ramifications for there actions. So what has you character done???

---First of all, thank you so much for your help ... I haven't been able to catch a break in figuring out this one little tiny segment.

---There were no laws broken here, no drug running or criminal activity with this 30-year pilot with a spotless record. It was just a faulty fuel pump and nowhere to put the airplane down. I wrote in the attorney after studying an aviation attorney's website. He made it sound like it was absolutely essential to retain an atty first thing, even if the pilot has done nothing wrong, just to make sure his rights are protected and no one twists anything he says to make him look guilty. I can very easily write out the lawyer if he isn't necessary; in fact, it might make things a lot less complicated.
---So it is conceivable, then, that an FAA investigator would just show up unannounced on Monday morning with no appointment?
---The atty website said the FAA and NTSB investigators might make their appearance together ... is that right?
---If they're decent guys, would he help him with the 6120? Any other forms or paperwork he'd need to submit?
---How long would it take to mop this whole mess up with the FAA, NTSB, and insurance co, i.e., one morning vs several days?
---As for the medical certificate, is that something they'd revoke on the spot or is it a process? My pilot doesn't even know where all that stuff is at the moment.

Thanks so much for your help; I appreciate it more than you know. One tiny half-page segment has been a real bear to get through!

FAA Accident Database
 

FAA aviation accidents take months to years to get to the end. There's the preliminary report, the factual report and finally the probable cause report - I may have missed a step or two along the way. You can see about 50 years worth of stuff at
N T S B - Aviation Accidents - Index of Months

I'm guessing the FAA and NTSB could show up together depending on how close their respective offices are to the pilot and how "high profile" the accident may have been. Somewhat educated conjecture on my part, but I would not think federal agencies would do a good job of coordinating.

If it happened on the Appalachian trail, the state of South Carolina may be interested to know if our Governor is ok. :)

Good Luck
73M - Private Pilot, not an Airline guy.

A business class turboprop? If a twin, a dual simultaneous failure is a stretch, in fact many aircraft (single or twin) can operate with gravity fuel pressure alone. If you're going to go into technically correct detail about the aftermath, why not be realistic about the point of failure?

I got most of the technical stuff from the pilot of the single-engine airplane I used as a model (won't mention it by name in the book so I can't get sued) so I got all the mechanics figured out. I derived everything from his own experience ... he was the surviving pilot in a crash of that particular airplane, then adjusted it to fit what I needed to accomplish. He sent pictures and everything. I even tracked one of these planes down locally and was invited out to see it firsthand; that was especially helpful. Unfortunately, the only thing my advisor didn't cover was the one thing I'm working on now, and I don't have a clue.
Basically, this airplane became a glider, which should have been no problem had there been anyplace to put it down. In all the insanity of the first week, no forms or reports were filled out. The family didn't know they had to. Might investigators have talked to the family during that week? Never thought of that.
I don't want to drag it on and on; there are too many other things to work into that short time span. And since it's fiction, I can alter this and adjust that and make just about anything work. I just need to get that Monday morning taken care of in a way that any pilot could read it and not roll his eyes because it's unrealistic and stupid.
This pilot remembers very little about the actual crash and is bound to frustrate anyone who wants answers of any kind. With no witnesses and no one else to interview, details are few.
If you all have any kind of imagination, I'd very very much appreciate any input or suggestions about this aftermath. And I should scrap the attorney, right?
(Not quite sure I know what you mean about the governor of SC??)
Thanks ...
W

He claimed to be hiking the App trail while he was really in Brazil with his mistress.

Any final thoughts on this before I close the subject? Questions remaining unanswered:
--Scrap the attorney?
--After their initial introductions, what kinds of questions do the investigators ask?
--Will it take all day or just a few hours, keeping in mind that no forms of any kind have been submitted yet?
--Do they aggressively demand answers or are they mostly decent people?
--As for the medical certificate, is that something they'd revoke on the spot or is it a process? After they leave, are they likely to come back?

Thank you all for your help. This one little segment has been a bear to get through! After this, the rest is easy.
w

An attorney is always a good idea when dealing with the feds. You don't have the same rights or presumption of innocence like when dealing with a crime.
Ntsb people I have talked seem like decent people, there mission is safety more than anything, FAA inspectors on the otherhand are like the kids that got beat up in school and are now looking to bust everyone for everything. (Not all of them)

I have been questioned by the FAA (never NTSB) on two occasions. One was impromtu, the other was by appointment. No attorney was present, nor even thought of, but I never have been knocked out in a plane crash and didn't know what happened.

The first time was flying my Cessna 177 from Hayward, California to Orange County, California, when the alternator went out. First, the transponder stopped, then the radios (I had a back up battery powered radio). So, ATC had a heads up of a problem before I landed. I was met on the ramp at my plane by FSDO dudes (the FAA guys that handle this, Flight Standards District Office). EDIT: They may have been GADO in those days, General Aviation District Office.

One side note. I was an FAA employee at the time, in ATC. Anyhoo, these guys were all business, which gave me the initial impression that they were jerks. But, they asked for my pilot certificate, and medical. Asked a few questions. Never heard from them again. No problems.

On the second instance, I had some problems with control of my Beech Baron, after a new paint job. I declared an emergency, and landed. The FSDO was notified by me, and they came out and took a look. Very pleasant dude.

Virtually all the FSDO guys/girls are pilots also.

For you book, any reader would not be surprised that in the USA, you don't fart without calling a lawyer. But, it could just as easily not be a factor.

But, if I thought I had done something wrong, you bet I'd get a lawyer who specialized in this type of investigation. But without a lawyer, just like with a police man stopping you for a road side chat, you hand him your license, don't admit to jack squat, and don't volunteer information that can be used against you. If it progresses beyond questions and a traffic ticket, sure, get a lawyer. The same would go for a car crash.

As to the NTSB, they do not investigate ever plane crash. Plane running out of gas and crashing.... yawn. They've heard that story a few times. I doubt they'd make more than a phone call. NTSB for aviation is a really tiny office in Washington DC. FSDO's are everywhere.

I, too, wouldn't buy that a single fuel pump caused any plane to crash.

Okay, my fault. I forgot to mention windshear. What I was originally looking for was a manageable situation, turning unmanageable ... i.e., loss of fuel pressure along with ...... At first I tried to write in a bird strike but that got too messy and I hated the way it was going, so I scrapped it. My previous tech advisor suggested windshear and, once I figured out the ins and outs of that, that's what I kept in the picture. So taking all that into consideration, hopefully that should be a little more realistic??

Thanks ...
w

So, a single fuel pump failed, which probably wouldn't stop any plane, and then a windshear event? I don't get it.

There are a zillion ways to crash a plane. The two most common are flying a perfectly good airplane into terrain (CFIT... controlled flight into terrain); usually getting in clouds and losing visibility... and continuing on until crunch time. The recent Senator Ted Stevens crash in Alaska was probably this.

The JFK, Jr. crash was a loss of control when the horizon disappeared over the ocean at night in marginal visibility. The plane banks one way or the other, and is not corrected by the pilot because he can't see a horizon (and doesn't know how to follow the instruments available to him). Then, when the airplane starts descending, the pilot pulls the controls back, which at this point, does not stop a descent. Instead, it tightens the descending spiral... until crunch time.

The other popular way to smash up a plane is running out of gas. Instead of a fuel pump failing, perhaps a misfueling / fuel leak would be more believable. Leaving a fuel cap off on some airplanes can siphon the fuel out. The pilot might not notice right away, but then there's almost always two tanks. A fuel line breaking will pump out plenty of gas.

This actually happened to me in my trusty Cessna Cardinal, IFR over the mountains of western Montana at 13,000 feet. The engine quit. I switched tanks, engine restarted, and I landed at nearest suitable airport.

For a windshear event, sure, you can smash up a plane just fine. Maybe some fuel issue caused this pilot to go to an airport that he hadn't planned, which had bad weather, and a combination of worrying about the fuel issue, stress from whatever, getting the crap pounded out of him in the weather, and not recognizing the shifting of wind with enough warning to power out of it. Bang.

Ya, I'd buy that.

Something that is supposed to take about half a chapter is getting more and more complicated. I'd probably scrap it if I wouldn't have to rewrite the rest of the whole book. My pilot is an IFR 30-yr veteran flyer, used to be a professional. I just can't see him leaving a fuel cap off or running out of gas. It's not easy thinking of something he can't control that would take him down. My former tech advisor suggested windshear. To put him over rough terrain was easy ... just reroute him because of weather. It should've been no big deal to him. But couple that gusting winds and therein lies a problem. So that's a bad idea?

Unfortunately, it happens. How about this aviator gets into a monster thunderstorm? That can happen easy enough (recent Air France crash in the Atlantic). Radar setting not proper, no radar installed, radar failed, etc.

The pilot didn't think there would be serious weather, and since he's a pro pilot, he checked with flight service, and they didn't see embedded TS's along the route, but they were forecast for later.

So Ace Durden launched (get there-itis), even though the radar was broken, and then starting having doubts... considered turning back, but... boom! In a level 5 cell. All heck breaks loose, like it no doubt did with Air France.

Losing control in a TS / CB is easy enough... living through it, well... if the plane stays together, I guess there's a chance. There would be plenty of wind shear in the microburst !

Rough terrain, sure. Ace, fighting for control, and feeling stupid after 30 years of flying without an incident, is in shear terror as he pops out of the bottom of the storm clouds only to see trees. CRASH !!!

When Delta crashed in DFW due to windshear / microburst, they had at least 30 years of experience in that flight deck, and radar. Yes, it can happen to any of us.

Fuel cap is but isn't always the pilots fault. Some caps look secure although a linemen might've put it on improperly, and the pilot simply trusted they knew what they were doing. My experience is though it only vented about 10gal maybe, and the worst part was trying to get the cap back off because they forced it on out of alignment, but who's to say something couldn't break/fall off and cause a problem.

When the NTSB arrives, it's usually with the FAA in trail. The FAA is a party to NTSB Investigations.

Perhaps the pilot (or employer) decided a lawyer was a good idea due to the cargo being carried? Or the location of the crash into the ever-present schoolyard full of children.

You can make the investigators as mean or as gentle as you like. The nicest investigators can turn into the most forward and in-your-face interrogators if need be. Is your pilot fearful of what happened? Does the pilot have something to hide that the investigators might have seen in the wreckage? Or did the post-impact fire destroy the evidence?

As far as the medical goes, that's probably a distraction not needed in the book. Sometimes the FAA will want a re-exam ride and that requires a medical, thus the pilot will be grounded. Or, the pilot realizes he won't be qualifying for his commercial medical again and allows his to expire, to take up sport flying after his injuries heal. Everything is a process and even if the FAA wanted to do an emergency revocation of certificates, the paperwork takes a few weeks to months.

The investigators could ask questions whenever they want. They'd direct the questions to the attorney, if there is one. The attorney would make it a more adverse process, but, no matter, the investigators will ask their questions. The pilot could get a call with questions months after the initial investigation.

What are your characters telling you?

The chapter name is Under Glass and it needs to be as high-tension as I can write it. My pilot needs to come out of the safety of intensive care right into the line of fire. As of the moment, I haven't scrapped the attorney; he's just visiting in an initial consultation mode. Because no laws were broken, the pilot owned the plane, there was no other property damage, and neither drugs nor alcohol were involved, the only purpose for retaining him would be to make the interrogations easier to get through and make sure nothing he says will be twisted or incriminating. As for the medical certificate, it's just a matter of how to word the sentence, i.e., is revoked vs. will be revoked. His injuries will prevent him from ever flying again; no way could be reinstated.
What is my character is telling me? That he wishes he hadn't survived.

I'm getting awesome feedback here ... thank you all so much for your help. I appreciate it more than you can know.