-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Hornet crash near Miramar:
- Thread starter BarrettRC8
- Start date
I agree 100% that this forum should not be used or viewed as an official or even semi-official source of military information. But that policy is different from wondering if someone (without names) did an approach turn stall. After all, Approach Magazine is online and available publicly.
But, its your home and I will play by your rules.
Jim
Thanks for that. Wish more new members felt the same way.
As for the Approach angle, that is an official publication so, someone from big Navy makes the call to publish about specific mishaps to highlight safety issues the Navy thinks is important. And those types of stories come out after all the facts are known and generally even the final investigation.
Welcome aboard
The policy has been in place here for quite awhile. Who knows who is reading this site. It doesn't matter if the speculation is 100% right or 100% wrong - since this site has a lot of active military, all of a sudden the speculation gains creditability. Next thing we know there is a blurb in the papers saying "current Navy pilots on Airwarriors.com are discussing this accident and have said..." Then the webmaster (who is an active duty Navy pilot) ends up in front of some Admiral watching his career go down the drain.
So no speculation.
So no speculation.
I understand and appreciate your position on this. I guess my immediate concern was that the young and future aviators on this board realize that the policy is due to the nature of the internet and not some sort of pilot taboo. Hanger flying is in general a good thing, but as always good headwork takes precedence.
No worries here.
Although lets face it, some times the accident report is nothing more than an "official" speculation. But the key word is "official."
And roger that for the first 2 lines...
Brett,
Could you explain the definitions of the classes of accidents, i.e. "Class A" etc.?
Thanks
There are 3 classes (A/B/C) with A being the most severe. There are specific dollar and other criteria used to define the classes, but Class A means damage >$ 1 million, or complete loss of aircraft, or fatality. There are a bunch of other details, but that's the jist of it.
@IRFly: No.
Brett
BACK-IN-THE-DAY .... (who cares, right?? You boys today are ALL smarter, prettier, got better edumacations, have better equipment and came from better families ....... right???) ....
If it was "possible" or "readily apparent" that the crew was a big-time contributing factor to any aircraft accident/incident ... based on the circumstances, conditions, early post-mortems of the accident/incident, and the crew's HISTORY in the squadron .... they were "beached" until the board cleared them.
Otherwise ............ mount up ... back-in-the-saddle was what the doctor (or flight surgeon, in this case) ordered ...
You boys today are ALL smarter, prettier, got better edumacations, have better equipment and came from better families ....... right???) ....If it was "possible" or "readily apparent" that the crew was a big-time contributing factor to any aircraft accident/incident ... based on the circumstances, conditions, early post-mortems of the accident/incident, and the crew's HISTORY in the squadron .... they were "beached" until the board cleared them.
Otherwise ............ mount up ... back-in-the-saddle was what the doctor (or flight surgeon, in this case) ordered ...
Although lets face it, some times the accident report is nothing more than an "official" speculation. But the key word is "official."
My Funk and Wagnal defines speculate as "to review something idly or casually and often inconclusively." A mishap report determines probable cause based on facts known to the board,. While sometimes not all facts are known to the board, it is patently not an idle or casual review based on anything other then the facts they do know. Might a board incorrectly assign probable cause due to unknown facts or even the technical deficiencies of the board, yes. That is not speculation however. If you have knowledge of a final report based on speculation a true miscarriage was done. Since mishap reports are chopped by the entire chain of command up to flag level, one can hope that any case of "official speculation" would be caught and duely corrected.
The smiley was noted!
Got that right. It took me 7 months.....someone sat on the paperwork for 4 months, otherwise, I would have been flying again in 3 months. One thing I certainly wish for is my fellow aviators to never have to experience is a Class A mishap. That's other than being killed of course. Doesn't matter the reason, it's just not a fun process to go through, at all. I was 99% sure of what the outcome of my board and ADM decision would be but it's still a crappy situation to be in and go through. Like said above, not all Class A's are mandatory FNAEB's. Even when known bad decisions are made, the CO can now waive it. I'm not going to give an example but I know of one in my old community.
The unfortunate by-product of the times in which we live makes the leadership element of Naval Aviation ultra-sensitive to things like that. Most of the time, they're concerned in examining every angle of a mishap before drawing any conclusions WRT aircrew error. Even in such "no brainer" circumstances like a bird strike, I can see certain kinds of people asking questions like "Did the MP check the BASH report? Was it up to date? Does the command/community have a robust BASH program in place," etc. In the end, it's probably not going to place the MP at fault for a bird strike, but people would rather go through the motions for CYA purposes.
Brett