Quote:
Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile
Actually the NTSB does a pretty damn good job. The last thing anyone wants is the FAA having accident investigative responsibility. The FAA is a regulatory enforcement agency. If we gave them investigative responsibility all it would do is open the door for them to go on witch hunts / fishing expeditions to nail people for all manner of stupid violations and encourage pilots, controllers, etc. to spend more time covering their respective asses than cooperating with investigations. It'd be an utterly stupid idea.
One of the best programs in the aviation world is the ASRS (Aviation Safety Reporting System) program - it collects lots of good data directly from pilots, controllers, crew members, etc. about things they experience in the real world whether or not they result in accidents or incidents. This is done in exchange for giving the reporter a "get out of jail free" card that indemnifies them from any violation / certificate action for that incident that happens to get pursued by the FAA. The whole reason the program succeeds is that it's administered by NASA and specifically NOT the FAA. There is no way any pilot would ever admit "hey we were distracted by such-and-such which caused us to bust our altitude by 200'" or whatever to the FAA because the FAA would immediately go after the pilot's license as an enforcement responsibility. NASA however can collect that information, de-identify it and pass on the aggregate recommendations to the FAA for regulatory changes that will make the system safer (e.g. "lots of pilots are being distracted by such-and-such so perhaps a change in procedure is warranted to help prevent it".
As with all federal government programs there's a certain amount of bloat / excess / fat but all in all I have no issue whatsoever with the NTSB being in charge of investigations. Back in my flying days I was always happy to talk to an NTSB investigator, never to an FAA inspector - the former people are there to collect information to make a system better. The latter are just looking for ways to screw you or your company, issue violations and justify their own existences.
|
I edited this sentence for you: "As with all federal government programs there's a certain amount of bloat / excess / fat / corruption of power / arrogance and general stupidity..."
Otherwise very well said. As a professional pilot I deal with FAA folks often and most just want a ride--a
free ride somewhere. They do this under the guise of "line checks" and sit in the cockpit jumpseat and watch the show. Some are really good people and know the airplane and in rare cases are former airline pilots. Many are ex-military flyers who could not get hired or didn't want the airline career. That type can go either way on the good guy / bad guy scale. Again, 99% of them are just trying to get somewhere for free--a daughter's wedding, Hawaii, fishing trip with the guys, etc. and will quietly sit there and watch. Rarely do we get a type-qualified guy who really knows the jet. They all know 250 KIAS max below 10,000 feet so don't go 251 or he'll note that. Best Fed I ever had in the jump was a former United 767 captain and it was my ETOPS checkout flight from Hawaii to the west coast. Great guy and showed me (us--captain was new to ETOPS too) some tips for over-water flying. He had been a Navy F-8 Crusader guy in Vietnam so when he said that I knew he was good people. Anyway, FAA usually means not helpful.