The Buffalo Feb, 2009, Colgan Air mishap killing more than 50 people occurred nearly 3 years ago. In the past few days the FAA has come out with a proposed document that will address commercial pilots, flying and stall prevention. Hmmmmmmmm...
I seem to recall that stall recovery training occurred during my first few flights in a C-150 as a student to get my private pilot license, "a way back when."
What is the news? Why have almost three years gone by before this recommendation is being proposed? How long will the "comment period" be on this proposed recommendation? Did the mishap investigation somehow reveal something that we didn't already know? When did the FAA find out that Colgan may have been operating revenue passenger flights with flight crew members not sufficently trained in stall prevention, recognition and recovery procedures?
In the nearly three years since the mishap and in the next few years as the FAA goes through this excruciatingly slow legal, lawyer-based process to address what is in fact a SAFETY OF FLIGHT issue and not a legal issue, how many more revenue paying passengers will be subject to airlines operating with flight crew members not sufficiently trained in stall prevention, recognition and recovery procedures?
Is this senseless "lawyer-led" FAA process really just SAFETY DENIED? So, I ask the question on behalf of the traveling public, "Is not safety delayed really safety denied?" As readers of this blog, what do you think?
In my humble opinion and curiosity, I ask, "Should not the agency that leads, governs and regulates commercial aviation be led by someone trained and experienced in commercial aviation?"
It is wonderful that the agency has so many lawyers who went to law school and can handle all sorts of legal issues for this federal agency. I applaud their hard work and expertise in their field.
But, having acknowledged that, any commercial pilot knows that stall prevention, recognition and recovery procedures are part of the very basics of private pilot training, qualification and licensing leading to FAA CERTIFICATION. So now three years hence this senseless fatal commercial scheduled passenger US aviation disaster, why is the Federal Aviation Admin going in this direction? Did not Colgan have an FAA Principle Operations Inspector (POI) whose sole job was to ensure this?
So, I would ask who ever is leading the FAA at this time, do you think that the FAA should need a fatal commercial aviation mishap disaster of the first order in order to make a proposed recommendation that all commercial pilots be trained, qualified, licensed and certified in stall prevention, recognition and recovery procedures?
In my opinion, this aerodynamics lesson is something learned in the first few days of flight school and my guess is that it is not even in the syllabus of of any law school. (I haven't really checked and done the syllabus research on this claim, so please forgive this error if it is not true and in fact stall training is covered in law school.)
Again, just my humble opinion.
But again I would offer that perhaps with an experienced trained, qualified, licensed and certificated commercial line pilot in the leadership role of the FAA, this process would move along a little faster.
See reference of WSJ article by ANDY PASZTOR, from U.S. NEWS
DECEMBER 14, 2011, 4:35 P.M. ET
"The Wall Street Journal
FAA Proposal Targets Stall Recovery After Deadly Crash
Federal aviation regulators released draft recommendations detailing measures to prevent airline pilots from flying aircraft too slowly and risking the onset of dangerous aerodynamic stalls, such as the one that caused a much-publicized 2009 crash near Buffalo, N.Y., that claimed 50 lives."
No comments:
Post a Comment