2014 Gulfstream crash uncovers scary trend

In May of 2014, a Gulfstream IV crashed on takeoff near Boston, killing Lewis Katz, and four others on board. The investigation discovered that the gust lock was left engaged, and the crew didn't perform a simple control check, or try to abort the takeoff until they were past 160 knots. After examining other flights preformed by the crew, who both were highly experienced, found that in 98% of the previous 175 flights they performed, they failed to perform a flight control check prior to takeoff.

As a result the National Business Aviation Association analyzed over 143,000 flights, performed by 379 aircraft, and found that in over 2900 flights no flight control checks were performed. In over 15% of flights partial flight control checks were performed.

m.aviationweek.com...

Considering the age of this technology and the many aviators who pride themselves in their skills as a pilot, I look towards "complacency". Many of these people treat this like their own cars, I mean once you're good at what you do after so long, "meh, I'll skip a flight check or two..."

In regards to the article, I'm guessing I need to register to finish it? Ugh its the morning, I got my smoke and hot cup of joe, too tired...

a reply to: Zaphod58

That is outrageous!

Look, I am learning to drive a car at the moment. When I get into the car, there are several things I check before we even think about moving. Mirror angles, seat angle, height, distance from wheel and pedals, weather conditions, seat belt, and so on and so forth.

After the engine is activated, another series of checks need to be completed and others repeated, before actually moving the vehicle. Road ahead, both side and rear view mirrors, blindspot. Indicator goes on, handbrake released, check the mirrors, road ahead and blindspot again, then back to the road ahead, all while measuring my exit from the parking space to ensure there is no risk of scraping the car parked ahead with the front bumper (or "fender"). You get the picture. And every time I perform any kind of manoeuvre whilst in motion, I must perform yet more checks, to ensure that my situational awareness, spatial awareness and other observational elements are all accounted for, so that I pose as small a risk as possible to the car itself, but more importantly to other road users, pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.

These checks are constant, throughout the drive. This is only a small car, with a maximum passenger capacity of four, plus the driver. If it crashes, it could be potentially deadly, but on a relatively small scale. But a plane? The fuel on board an aircraft alone, its volatility, makes them INCREDIBLY dangerous things by comparison. Then you have the speed at which aircraft generally move, which adds a whole other level to the potential danger they pose, not just to the occupants, but to everything under the flight path of the aircraft.

Not performing the pre-flight check to ensure that critical systems are reading as operable and in the correct configuration for take off, seems therefore to be a singularly foolish thing to allow to happen. Given the potential threat posed by a driver just pulling out, having given no thought to the possibility that a cyclist or a pedestrian might be in their blindspot, it makes absolutely no sense to play fast and loose with the safety of an aircraft. I am appalled, stunned... shocked to be honest.

a reply to: TrueBrit

You'll get over all that preparation to drive a car eventually.
But then again, your car doesn't fall out of the sky because you didn't check the turn signals.

a reply to: Arnie123

It's a free registry. I'm logged in so didn't even notice you had to be logged in.

a reply to: Bluntone22

And isn't traveling at 162 knots when you get stupid and try to stop.

"uncovers scary trend"

That would seem to be a major understatement.

a reply to: TrueBrit

In all reality, in a little while you will forget about most of those car "checks".

What makes this worse is that the control check consists of moving the control column around to make sure there are no obstructions.

With a military aircraft you have a guy on the intercom to tell you they're moving, but with a business jet it's just a matter of moving the controls and feeling for something blocking them.

a reply to: Bluntone22

No, that is true.

But a couple of years back, a woman who had forgotten to perform her checks, and was wearing flip flops for driving, managed to begin reversing out of a space, without checking behind to see where she was going at all, and got her flip flop caught in the clutch in such a way, that she could not depress the clutch. This had the result of the car throwing itself backward rather too much, and her crushing the leg of a toddler who was stood on the pavement on the opposite side of the street.

I saw the whole thing go down. Its not the first time I have witnessed driver stupidity with serious consequences either, and I would like to think that I will keep those checks going for as long as is humanly possible, having seen what failure to apply those checks can cause.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Are there FAA regs that requires a preflight check of control surfaces or is it just a common sense and survival procedure.

a reply to: Zaphod58

If you want true terror, head down to a small scale skydiving operation. I was an avid skydiver for years, and saw the absolute worst aircraft with little to no maintenance. Pilots were half-assed at best. I've seen Cessna 182's that were being prop started for weeks at a time, multiple instrument fails, and saw flaps fail once. I quit jumping years ago due to what I saw at many of the drop zones.

a reply to: roadgravel

It's supposed to be part of the preflight checklist. In the instance where they crashed they half assed that too.

a reply to: Zaphod58

deffo not confined to aviation - if theres a check list thats " supoosed " to be followed pre-ops - then people all over the world are ignoring it

Given the cost of aircraft, I would think owners would not continue to employ pilots who ignore these important checks.

a reply to: TrueBrit
Most strange .. you live round the corner from me and I'm also currently learning to drive, passed my theory test Wednesday. Let go cruising down the sea front in the summer! Join all the youths revving the crap out their engines lol

Sorry Zaph for the completely unrelated reply.

Wait no I'll finish with being on topic ... Do checks, checks are needed or you crash

I think I saw a report (don't remember the complete details) where a study revealed that in a large percentage of Part 91 flights studied employed "non standard procedures" when operating. Not sure if it's related to the study or not but it was very alarming.

a reply to: Arnie123

Complacency and "get-there-itis"/go-factors.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: Zaphod58

Are there FAA regs that requires a preflight check of control surfaces or is it just a common sense and survival procedure.

There is no FAA regulation that talks about a preflight check of control surfaces, but FAR 91.13 prohibiting careless and reckless operation would probably cover it. On everyaircraft I have ever flown, the Before Takeoff Checklist has included a "controls-free and clear" item.

a reply to: F4guy

Of course, you have to actually DO the checklist to get to that step.