Posted on 02/27/2020 4:27:06 PM PST by L.A.Justice
(Joke to follow:) I don't know what it is with the Marine's, they always seem to be walking home, after they take care of business.
It must be they have alligator arms, with very deep pockets, when it comes time to put gas / fuel in a vehicle or aircraft.
Until the NTSB completes its crash investigation, any liability litigation is nothing but a search for deep pockets.
I thought it was descending at 4000 feet/min. Only if they were falling up could it break through the clouds.
That’s plagued me all my life. Back in “1988” I bought a blockhead (H-D) for my one and only electric start motorcycle. That piece of crap invariably put me too walking (pushing) in all the wrong places. Three yrs later I swapped it title for title for a “1979” 80” shovelhead and it was the best trade ever.
If I was in Vanessa’s shoes and was set for life, I would not sue the pilot’s estate, probably ruining his family financially. They are grieving and lost their bread winner too, unfortunately, and probably aren’t financially secure like the Bryant family is.
This will be interesting. The pilot is described as “Bryant’s long time pilot”. Assuming Bryant would routinely request this guy Zobayan it’ll probably boil down to percentage of liability. Since the NTSB is saying no engine or mechanical issues, it’s purely pilot error.
“ Yeah their done. Wonder if they are even getting any business since the crash.”
Not sure how many Island Express operations there are in LA. But the one I know of is flying constantly.
In that case he would have known that the pilot wasn't qualified and could potentially be held liable by the others.
Correct.
Apology and bluntly stated, I simply don’t care about who he was. There are many men and women in this great country that lost their life serving the nation, but no wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Passing’s are not to be celebrated, but must be reasonable and a guy that bounced a ball just doesn’t get to me.
News reports when it comes to mishaps are remarkable inaccurate. “Reporters” are not professional pilots or trained and experienced mishap investigators. Not to argue with you, but not being licensed to fly in “that weather” is profoundly inaccurate. No official reports issued, no technical details shared, and what sort of license did the pilot have? Commercial, commercial instrument airplane, commercial-instrument helicopter, ATP, currency?. . .ATC transcripts etc. . .
(Recall Whitney Houston. . .the Flag was lowered because this drug addict passed, but no flag lowering for a hero like Col Phil “Hands” Handley. . .https://theaviationgeekclub.com/how-a-usaf-f-4e-flying-at-mach-1-2-gun-killed-a-north-vietnamese-mig-19-scoring-the-worlds-only-supersonic-gun-kill/)
So, bottom line, right now we really don’t know anything factual related to the mishap. Many times what appears obvious to the average non-rated person, is not so obvious to professional aviators, especially to certified mishap investigators.
(By the way, historically, pilot error accounts for roughly 80% of mishaps)
Nice to know someone like you is a vastly experienced aviator that has an unbiased mind when it comes to mishap investigation. Fog, we are all gonna die? Please see post 70, a comment therein includes many factors we must consider but don’t know about.
Would be posted on the FAA website.
“He was negligent.”
How do we know that is a fact? We don’t know until the NTSB report is issued.
Sad to see, not you, on this website too much emotion over an incident that remains under investigation, an investigation to determine what exactly happened and why.
and
“is company was not licensed to fly in those conditions using visual site”
Flying under VFR conditions requires no special clearances, unless it is something like VFR on top.
I will wait for the report and look forward to reviewing his tickets and currency.
How many people here would know that? I was just trying to be informative. Thanks for sharing.
Your comment about not shaming is a good thing. Along those lines, I suggest we refrain from shaming the pilot before facts are available. Until then, we really don’t know what happened.
All true but I wouldn’t bankrupt the pilots family
I doubt that will stand anyhow since he wasn’t a principal in the helicopter company
Sir, then the pilot was wrong. The pilot is the ultimate authority on the operation of his platform. Sadly, many times a pilot is pressured to fly when it goes against his judgment. Pilots must be strong enough to detach from that sort of pressure.
True.
Interesting data, but that is not the only data-points, like perhaps electrical issues.
And it is way too early to issue a statement that says no mechanical issues, though the preliminary statement says something like that, they did not actually say that, and the report states one engine indicated power upon impact, and the other engine, “visually examined” indicates nothing. This is information without a conclusion.
We don’t really know until a thorough forensic analysis of all the pieces/parts of the platform, and that includes engine issues as well are examined in minute detail.
Walking a mishap scene, I’ve observed engines after a mishap, looking all spiffy and undamaged, however, internal examinations revealed much more than the eye could see, so perhaps there WAS an engine problem but thus far they say “initial” indications see no engine issues. The NTSB does not assign cause (backed by facts) until they have a complete picture. Later they will.
“As such, no conclusions about how the incident happened should be drawn from the information contained within the investigative update.
“According to FAA records, the pilot held an FAA commercial certificate with ratings for helicopter and instrument helicopter, as well as an FAA instructor certificate for flight, instrument, and ground instruction.” https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/DCA20MA059-Investigative-Update.pdf
Highly experienced pilot, for sure.
As a closing comment, while preliminary reports can be interesting, holding judgment until the final report is good practice. Hard to do, for sure, but necessary until all aspects of the flight, pilot and platform are examined in detail.
And yes, we can’t ignore the historical average of pilot error accounts for 80% of mishaps. . .pilot are human.
As usual, you are on top of things. Seriously, not poking at you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.