SpringLanding

You have to take in to account the fact that airplanes are designed differently for different priorities and this leads to less options when things go wrong. Also, flight regimes in military training may present different risks than civilian flying- such as flying on military training routes (500 kts at 500” AGL) or aircraft carrier landings.

I’m not sure anyone who is professionally trained in safety would seriously compare the two, but I could be wrong.

aeroengineer

Yep, root cause was corrosion missed during depot inspection at Warner Robbins AFB. Most likely by a Air Force civilian inspector(s) who may or may not have had a lot of experience and or training when the blades came through in 2011. I can assure you non-destructive testing(admittedly a dark art in some ways) for flaws on any rotating fracture critical parts keeps everyone up nights for this very reason. On that particular mishap I was referring to how human error is so often somewhere in the failure chain not necessarily aircrew. I know Air Force has a publicly releasable report put out by Accident Investigation Board (AIB) after the Safety Investigation Board (SIB) but I don't know what the Navy equivalents are. SIB deals in safety privileged information and is not supposed (though sometimes it is in spite of the rules) to be able to be used in any adverse action in order to encourage candor. You are correct that economics always factors in as putting on brand new hardware during each overhaul would be ideal but not necessarily feasible. A lot of military specific hardware may be a year lead time away from production and the military very often buys low volume at very irregular intervals so manufacturers often stop making the parts. This is one reason military hardware can be so expensive to procure.

at6d

Roselawn wasn’t a tailplane stall.

The Colgan crash was 90% poor airmanship and the rest was fatigue and more poor airmanship. The captain should have been in another line of work.

The last time I was in a full rudder deflection while cross controlled near a stall I was doing aerobatics.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=33NUAy3eomg

Flyboy68

This exactly.

You young, low time guys might think think you're God's gift to aviation at 1000 hours, but trust me, you're not. I would use the analogy of a rookie NFL QB versus a veteran QB. You were the sh*t hot QB/CFI in college, but when you step up to the big leagues/aircraft, you quickly see how much you don't know and get your a** handed to you quickly.

SoFloFlyer

Love this
Filler

Flyboy68

Exactly.

Shut up and get your time to get hired and be damn happy you have the opportunity. When I graduated from college, the regionals required 2500 TT and 500 multi to get an interview to fly a Saab turboprop, and paid about $22,000 a year. They had FO's that qualified for food stamps.

I had to flight instruct for 2 years making nothing and then to Alaska to risk my life as a bush pilot for 15 months, then go back to instructing and flying charters and corporate before finally getting 2500 hours to get an FE job with a low rate cargo airline. Trust me, no older guys want to hear your sob stories.

This is like a millennial complaining to someone who grew up in the Depression about how hard they have it.

Fixnem2Flyinem

I’ll start this off by saying I am a fan of the 1500 hour rule. It wasn’t that hard to build 1300 hours after getting the ratings, a few years is all. However, if there wasn’t a glut of guys such as you willing to climb up the ladder while being pee’d on the whole time, then maybe the airlines wouldn’t have been such a race to the bottom for so long. The truth is people got smarter over the years, they didn’t want to put themselves in the financial gutter to fly a plane, and that is the reason pay is going back up. So point fingers at the new guys all you want but starting a career by bending over and saying “thank you, may I have another” isn’t necessarily a good thing either. It made you part of the problem, a problem that lasted way too long.

If the 1500 hour rule goes away, it will crush any of the momentum we have to keep pay rising at the appropriate levels.

BrownDoubles

Absolutely 100% incorrect assessment; human factors were completely discounted. You may want to do some research on the investigation findings. Yanky 72 was an absolute mechanical failure and nothing, not a thing could have been done by that crew to save that aircraft, crew, or the combat warrior passengers on board.

Flyboy68

All this.

End thread.

Flyboy68

Dude, we were all chasing the dream of flying for a major, same as it is today. So what was I supposed to do? Tell all the guys I graduated with to quit flying so a select few of us could get good jobs? We didn't make the rules, we were just playing by them. It's just how it was. You graduated, you flight instructed, flew sightseeing, charters, skydivers, bush pilot, whatever you had to do to get at least 2500 hours to be considered for a shi**y regional job, make CA after several years and hopefully get hired by a major a couple years later. We all knew it was a long, hard road to the majors, but worth it in the end.

The only thing that's changed now is, it's not "a long, hard road". It's a couple of years of instructing.