Some might say that the NTSB only apportions blame, but let’s be honest. Their mandate is to decide what happened. That means pointing the finger.

The problem – at least to me – always seemed to focus on the simplicity of the answers … “Pilot failed to maintain control,” … “Pilot flew into IFR weather … ” etc.

The questions they never answer is why the pilot or the controller did what they did. Why did the controller at LEX show up for work with only two hours of sleep that day?

We never hear any more about it.

I’ll keep the Excel-Jet story brief here.
In 2006 the Sport-Jet (a VLJ entry by Excel-Jet) crashed/cartwheeled at the Colo. Springs airport. The company sued the gov. related to a controller error. And yes, the gov. claims pilot error. The pilot on board was a very experienced, ex-military, test pilot.
The “PilotMag.com” (july/aug 09) issue has a short piece on this “The Sport-Jet Story.” Seems this is just the beginning of the story. Rumor has it the premier wake vortex research institute in Europe will support/testify on behalf of Excel-Jet.

The best news…the two people in the plane walked away from the crash. The plane has a carbon fiber roll cage (like race cars) to protect occupants. Now that’s the real story!

Some very interesting info is starting to come out of this one. If you’d like a little more detail, I’ll e-mail it to you at jetwhine. Let me know.

Barry

As you point out though, there are ALWAYS extenuating circumstances.

Was the controller being on the phone the cause here though. Probably not. Sure doesn’t look like he was ready to be much help though.

It is interesting how organizations hide behind the “rules say” when it is convenient. We’ve watched FAA do that for years.

In this case, “the rules” said NATCA is out. Anyone who is a party to an accident needs to add their two cents.

I’m not familiar with the Excel-Jet story you mentioned. What’s that about?

Rob

This history of blaming the pilot (usually dead) has been a successful strategy for these organizations. They’ve been able to deflect any scrutiny of their own errors and incompetencies. Again, this stems from the current culture of government agencies. This history has been seen in Dallas, New York, and the DOT indicates the problem is system-wide.

In the final report, on this case, I certainly expect to see the standard “pilot error” shown as the cause. Due to the history of the agencies, it’ll be difficult to determine if this is the true cause or just another cover-up.

Some upcoming court cases are attempting to take on this “culture of cover-up” at the FAA. Looks like one has a good shot at exposing the ruse of “it’s always pilot error” (the pilot is alive). Multiple issues exist in the Excel-Jet case: controller error, cover-up, gov. attorneys directing their witnesses to disregard critical pieces of physical evidence (thereby leading to false opinions), etc. Unfortunately, in this case the gov. has to smear and try to destroy the career of a very distinguished (military) black pilot in order to make their case. Totally unfair. I think this case will generate media attention and shine some light on the SOP at the FAA.

These issues are critical to GA. The only way to advance safety in aviation is to admit mistakes and learn from them. When this isn’t done lives continue to be lost. I hope Babbitt can change the culture at the FAA/NATCA.

It would be interesting to find out if the new head of NTSB is close with Marion. You have to wonder if there are other personal, behind the scenes things going on.

Frank, really! The NTSB didn’t behave badly. They released incorrect information. Not just insignificant BS, but non-facts that had a direct bearing on the investigation and the controllers reputation. Is it to much to ask of the NTSB to get their facts straight before crucifying the controller via news released?
What happened to the good old days where the NTSB didn’t give out info until they knew (or thought they knew) what actually happened?

Didn’t NTSB going public with a statement of fact they could not support violate the agreement as well?

How would the union having pulled out of the investigation prior to going public have changed anything?

That being said, how the heck do they release a statement indicting the TEB controller, when their own timeline of events does not support the statement? They just don’t make irresponsible public announcements such as this. Not even when that hack Marion Blakey was running the NTSB.

The correction statement was less than genuine. Buried under a huge headline that NATCA was kicked off the investigation, and 7 paragraphs attempting to justify this action, came the admission of error. To their credit, most news sources saw through the smoke screen and reported the NTSB admission and the correction as the newsworthy item. The exception was the WSJ which took the predictable ant-union slant and led off with NATCA getting publicly spanked.

I agree with you that both parties need to work through this and NATCA inclusion is vital to the integrity of the investigation.