Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 19, 2014, 03:53:43 PM
Home Help Login Register      
News: NEW Follow LiveATC updates on Twitter and Facebook


+  LiveATC Discussion Forums
|-+  Air Traffic Monitoring
| |-+  Aviation Audio Clips (Moderators: dave, RonR)
| | |-+  Bonanza crash at KBNA Nashville
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Bonanza crash at KBNA Nashville  (Read 12188 times)
flygirltammy
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2009, 02:29:11 PM »

So. so sad. i have read the reports but I cannot bring myself to listen to the audio yet.
Logged

KJET100
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


kdev.us


WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2009, 09:14:56 PM »

I'd like to remind you that just because something is released and/or stated by the NTSB / Government, does not necessarily make it FACT. People ARE allowed to draw their own informed, researched opinions. This is not "speculating" or doing the perished a disservice (as the media pushes), it is making educated guesses. We are learning. That is WE. Meaning everyone. Not just the NTSB/FAA/GOV. I know enough about aircraft icing to understand it in a limited sense. I know enough about aircraft behavior and some failures to simulate in my own mind probability. You can go through the list and probably narrow it down to something common ie; failure, icing, etc. I don't believe so many accidents should be chalked-up to "spatial disorientation." I think that's an easy way to say "general problem with the piloting." And write it off.

If you are naive enough to actually believe that NTSB/FAA gospel is 100% rightful, truthful, fact, then this does not pertain to you. Nevermind. But if you have an independant and research based method of dealing with things (especially pertaining to complex situations) such as air disasters, then you'll get what I'm saying and not be offended. It's not my intention to offend. But rather open up more discussion.

I understand what you are saying my friend. But I just wanted to say that we should at least be able to discuss freely (as in American as Apple pie Freedom-of-speech) possibilities. You are right, if you know nothing, dont speculate. But that affirmation of the NTSB's investigative qualities just kills me. I've seen them over the last 20 years time and time again, screw things up. Sometimes they generalize due to the fact they cannot pinpoint specific problems and failures. We cant read dead minds. We can barely even reconstruct flight data of major airliners. With redundant data systems.
Logged
KSYR-pjr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1722



« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2009, 09:30:05 PM »

I'd like to remind you that just because something is released and/or stated by the NTSB / Government, does not necessarily make it FACT. People ARE allowed to draw their own informed, researched opinions. This is not "speculating" or doing the perished a disservice (as the media pushes), it is making educated guesses. We are learning. That is WE. Meaning everyone. Not just the NTSB/FAA/GOV. I know enough about aircraft icing to understand it in a limited sense. I know enough about aircraft behavior and some failures to simulate in my own mind probability. You can go through the list and probably narrow it down to something common ie; failure, icing, etc. I don't believe so many accidents should be chalked-up to "spatial disorientation." I think that's an easy way to say "general problem with the piloting." And write it off.

To whom are your replying?  It seems to me that you are taking issue with Jason's and my response to the newbie about what he believes is fact in this crash.   

For the record I have absolutely no disagreement with anything you have raised in your quote above.   The only disagreement I have is with the newbie and his abrupt, "this is what happened and it is fact. END of story."  That is not speculation, that is not opinion, and that is not an educated guess.  The only people at this point of the investigation who know what the facts were that caused this accident are the pilot and perhaps his passengers, but sadly they are all deceased.  Everyone else, including the controller who handled this accident and the NTSB, doesn't have all the facts and probably never will.
Logged

Regards, Peter
ATC Feed:  Syracuse (KSYR), NY
Jason
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1260


CFI/CFII


« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2009, 10:54:22 PM »

I'd like to remind you that just because something is released and/or stated by the NTSB / Government, does not necessarily make it FACT. People ARE allowed to draw their own informed, researched opinions. This is not "speculating" or doing the perished a disservice (as the media pushes), it is making educated guesses. We are learning. That is WE. Meaning everyone. Not just the NTSB/FAA/GOV. I know enough about aircraft icing to understand it in a limited sense. I know enough about aircraft behavior and some failures to simulate in my own mind probability. You can go through the list and probably narrow it down to something common ie; failure, icing, etc. I don't believe so many accidents should be chalked-up to "spatial disorientation." I think that's an easy way to say "general problem with the piloting." And write it off.

Absolutely, but what I responded to was not an informed, researched opinion, there was no support given to substantiate an educated guess of any kind.  As Peter pointed out, those that have the real facts are unfortunately deceased in this particular tragedy.  Pilots learn from others' mistakes.  Reading and learning from crucial errors in NTSB reports, both preliminary and factual, aids in promoting flight safety and preventing accidents.  That is how "WE" learn and continue to fly safely, not by ignoring the NTSB or FAA, and is why many professional training corporations (airlines included) use accidents and associated NTSB reports in initial, recurrent, and IOE training.

If you are naive enough to actually believe that NTSB/FAA gospel is 100% rightful, truthful, fact, then this does not pertain to you. Nevermind. But if you have an independant and research based method of dealing with things (especially pertaining to complex situations) such as air disasters, then you'll get what I'm saying and not be offended. It's not my intention to offend. But rather open up more discussion.

Aviation accidents are increasingly complex and difficult to conclude definitively.  No where did I point out that everything the NTSB or FAA concludes is 100% accurate.  Often, the only facts left from an accident are recorded and published by the NTSB rather than the speculative public.

I understand what you are saying my friend. But I just wanted to say that we should at least be able to discuss freely (as in American as Apple pie Freedom-of-speech) possibilities. You are right, if you know nothing, dont speculate. But that affirmation of the NTSB's investigative qualities just kills me. I've seen them over the last 20 years time and time again, screw things up. Sometimes they generalize due to the fact they cannot pinpoint specific problems and failures. We cant read dead minds. We can barely even reconstruct flight data of major airliners. With redundant data systems.

Perhaps my professional relationship with a number of NTSB accident investigators has given me a greater, more optimistic perspective on the agency.  Nothing found in aviation accidents is taken for it's whole value, there are always questionable facts and other fragments of evidence that leave the most complex tragedies a mystery.  However, it's important that we learn to avoid the mistakes identified in accidents investigated by the NTSB, whether they exist in the body of a report or require inference or extrapolation to recognize and educate.

I don't think your post was meant to undermine or discredit the agencies mentioned, but I find it extremely important to use them in a collaborative manner to enhance our safety in the skies.

Safe flying...

Best,
Jason
« Last Edit: March 01, 2009, 10:56:23 PM by Jason » Logged
KJET100
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


kdev.us


WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 03, 2009, 06:40:13 AM »

Very well put. So much for opening up for more discussion though. Because I concur with everything you say. You are kind as well as intelligent. Have a safe day!
« Last Edit: March 03, 2009, 06:43:13 AM by KJET100 » Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!