NTSB Press Release
 

This just in, old news for some of us, maybe new news for others, FYI. Glenn

************************************************** ********** NTSB PRESS RELEASE******************************************* ***************** National Transportation Safety BoardWashington, DC 20594 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 14, 2011 ************************************************** ********** NTSB UNDERTAKES COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF EXPERIMENTAL AMATEUR-BUILT (E-AB) AIRCRAFT SAFETYSeeks input from E-AB pilots and builders ************************************************** ********** WASHINGTON - The National Transportation Safety Board has launched a study of accidents involving E-AB (sometimes called homebuilt) aircraft in order to evaluate the safety of this growing and innovative segment of general aviation. The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) will support the project by hosting a web-based survey for E-AB owners of the aircraft; their survey findings will be shared with the NTSB. ?Going all the way back to the Wright brothers, amateur aircraft builders have played a crucial and inspirational role in leading the way towards greater achievements in manned flight,? said NTSB Chairman Deborah A.P. Hersman. ?We are pleased to be working with EAA towards the shared goal of improving safety in this particularly innovative sector of general aviation.? Of the approximately 224,000 general aviation (GA) aircraft in the U.S., about 33,000 of them are classified as E-AB. This includes a wide variety of aircraft, which can be built from a prefabricated kit, existing plans, or a builder?s unique design. Unfortunately, this group of aircraft has, for several years, experienced accident rates greater than those of other comparable segments of GA. The NTSB and EAA are collaborating to identify how to improve that record. The study will look at a range of issue areas, including builder assistance programs; transition training for pilot-builders of E-ABs; flight test and certification requirements; maintenance of E-AB aircraft; and the performance and failures of systems, structures, and power plants. ?Earlier studies have looked at isolated E-AB safety issues, but this is the first study to comprehensively examine both the building and piloting of these unique aircraft,? said Joseph M. Kolly, Director of the NTSB Office of Research and Engineering. ?And the direct input from E-AB owners and others involved in the design and day-to-day operations of these aircraft will be of enormous value in understanding all of the aspects that play a role in the safety of experimental flight operations.? The EAA will be collecting survey data this summer. Operators, builders, and owners of E-AB aircraft who are interested in participating in the survey should go to www.EAA.org/AB-Survey. The completed safety study is expected to be published by the fall of 2012. ### NTSB Media Contact: Peter Knudson(202) 314-6100peter.knudson@ntsb.gov ************************************************** ********** This message is delivered to you as a free service from the National Transportation Safety Board.

Get on board folks
 

while everyone is still in a lovey dovey mode

http://www.rvflightsafety.org/

We can do better!!

To that end, might I ask a question from an engineering standpoint? Are there any specific things that the members of this forum see as needing improvement in the design of the RV series. Not as in "Are there some defects with the design?" but rather where is there room for a better aircraft. Be it from a structural, human factors or mechanical operations standpoint, it might be interesting to share ideas about how these aircraft can be made even better. One of my most deeply held believes is that the experimental community has both the leeway in terms of the FARs and the moral duty to be the birthplace of the advancements that will make all of aviation safer through better engineering. I believe it so deeply that I am going back to school to make a career of it as a point of fact.

Supposedly around 24% of the RV fatalities involve a stall/spin (maybe just a stall) scenario.

How do you fix that? You can inform pilots and let them know what they already know about getting out of a deteriorating situation.

Yet 24% suggests something that may need training of a nature that RV pilots in general will not do...or equipment addition to alert the pilot. An angle of attack or stall warning system that provides an audible alert may drive down that fatality factor if all aircraft are retrofitted.

That is unlikely to happen especially when the FAA wants to mandate ADS-B Out equipment that provides little or no safety benefit to the pilot.

What about allowing instruction in a new RV after perhaps five hours of flight time to verify that the aircraft is airworthy? That should be done in months...not years.

If the LODA process is cumbersome and time-consuming, fix it now....not in 2012.

But the real key is probably to improve our safety culture and professionalism internally. You have read about it from Van. The RV Flight Safety program is an element but perhaps not the end solution.

They have been doing that for years and it has a minimal and often temporary effect on crash rates. I often wonder if the same self-confidence that leads folks like us to want to build our own airplane in the first place also lays a trap (so to speak) when it comes to missing things that would be a precursor to a stall. Much like the oft mentioned tendency of doctors, lawyers and engineers to have higher rates of fatal crashes than lesser educated persons, perhaps the very nature of the beast that is a homebuilder is part of the puzzle that is the undoing of so many in our ranks.

Perhaps the development of a lightweight and inexpensive stick shaker (or better yet, stick pusher) should be considered? Or the development of an improved ballistic recovery system that is functional quick enough to be useful even from pattern altitude? Both of these are things I am considering working on as subsystems for the design I am putting together.

The FAA wants the EAB community to improve markedly. Yet they impose serious obstacles to giving flight instruction and transition training in EX-AB aircraft.

Does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?

Then why doesn't someone just build a full motion RV simulator using X-Plane and get it certified by the FAA as a "type rating" program of sorts? You eliminate the issue of obstacles to training and flight instruction but also allow folks to familiarize themselves with the handling characteristics of the aircraft. BTW, if anyone actually does it, I want free time in the thing in exchange for the use of my idea. LOL

There's a breakdown between the regulatory and the safety side of the agency. Also the fact that the FAA doesn't pay much attention to the NTSB tends to pose a huge problem as well.

I think the process to apply for, and get, a LODA has become pretty straight forward, since the first of the year. Of course, as we all know, individual FSDO's and individual inspectors can be a wild card in the process. But, I don't think the obstacles are very serious at this time.

Pay Attention
 

It is astounding that stall/ spin accidents are killing that many people. It's just so simple, keep it above 65 knots at all times, limit bank angles to less than 30 degrees below 500 feet. If you have trouble remembering these two rules, should you really be flying? Simply no excuse in my book.

When I looked back through a bunch of RV stall accidents they seemed to fit onto 3 main categories (no particular order):

1. Departure stalls- usually by someone showing off with a super steep climb after takeoff, usually during some sort of fly in- nice big audience to stoke the ego. No excuse.

2. Stretching the glide after power loss- The laws of physics and stall speed don't change much just because the engine stopped. Cross check the ASI every 3 seconds when the engine goes quiet and maintain best glide speed right to the flare.

3. Tightening up the base to final turn with more bank angle and higher G loading. Look at rule 2 in the first paragraph for the solution. Swallow your pride and go around if you are going to overshoot the lineup for final by that much. Better late than dead.

People are looking for a magic bullet here: AOA warning, stick shakers, stick pushers. Look at some recent airline and military accidents which involved stalls- stall warning horns blaring, shakers shaking and pushers pushing and they still hit the ground in a full stall. Stall recovery training might save a few but why stall in the first place? It is a simple area of the envelope to avoid.

The ASI has worked fine for me for the last 33 years, never came close in all that time to an inadvertent stall. Speed is life- drummed into me by a very good instructor a long time ago.

...and if you have fields under you, put it down there. A runway is nice, but not necessary.

Point well taken and I couldn't agree more, but then again you were dealing with pilots who were in a freaked out state (to use the technical term) and didn't let the system do its job. The partial solution of "avoid the coffin corner" should be used in concert with engineering solutions because using it alone sure as heck hasn't worked yet despite people having it drilled into their heads for years.