Can outdated paper charts really cause an aircraft accident?
The latest from Comair regarding the crash of flight 5191 is that the crew had outdated charts for the airport, and that due to construction at the Blue Grass airport they may have been confused. Newspapers talk about the missing air traffic controller, and everyone is looking for someone or something to blame. Human nature, I guess.
However, let's examine this a bit closer. Who has the most interest in assigning blame ? The airline? The insurance company. The flight crew? The air traffic controllers? The Blue Grass airport? Could a piece of paper really cause an aircraft to crash on takeoff?
Well, let's take a look. The insurance company will typically provide a limit of liability on an aircraft like this somewhere between $ 100,000,000 and $ 500,000,000 - a lot of money, right? Well, most insurance carriers split up or share the risk with other insurance companies. For example, let's say the primary insurance company takes the first $ 10,000,000 of liability, and then purchases excess liability coverage from another carrier, or reinsurer. So, their liability is limited to just $ 10,000,000 - certainly an acceptable level of risk/reward to stay in business.
Then, the first reinsurer may take the limit from $ 10,000,000 to $ 50,000,000. Not too tough because they can provide that limit across many air carriers, so their maximum exposure is $ 40,000,000. From $ 50,000,000 to $ 100,000,000 another reinsurer takes that risk, and so on.
So, none of the insurance carriers are going out of business because of this loss, and they WILL pay! No reason to worry about blame here.
The flight crew? Well, Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR's) Section 91.3 - Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command states "(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft." Not much wiggle room here, is there? And, I guarantee you that the pilot(s) are extremely distressed and would not dodge responsibility even if they could. Nothing here to gain from blaming someone/something else.
The air traffic controllers? Again, looking at FAR 91.3 (a) it simply is not their responsibility. One, two or three controllers might not have made a difference, but in any case it is still the flight crews responsiblity.
The Blue Grass airport? Well, under the FAR's they are required to issue NOTAMS when there are activities on the airport which affect airport operations. NOTAMS are Notices to Airmen which the pilot in command is required to read and understand before undertaking operations at the airport. These are usually provided in the briefing packet the pilot gets prior to takeoff, and in many cases are broadcast over the ATIS (Air Traffic Information System) frequency at the airport, and which flight crews should always listen to.
So, where does that leave us? The airline. Yes, they have a vested interest in assigning blame anywhere but on the airline and the flight crew. After all, they are in the business of providing safe transportation to the public. If the public believes the airline and/or its employees are unsafe, it will affect the bottom line. Therefore, the out of date chart is to blame. But, who provides those charts to the crew? Ah ha, the airline.
Back to square one.
I am not judging, nor opining as to the actual cause of the accident, but in the end we are left with FAR 91.3 (a). What do you think?
FLy safe - Crusty Captain
However, let's examine this a bit closer. Who has the most interest in assigning blame ? The airline? The insurance company. The flight crew? The air traffic controllers? The Blue Grass airport? Could a piece of paper really cause an aircraft to crash on takeoff?
Well, let's take a look. The insurance company will typically provide a limit of liability on an aircraft like this somewhere between $ 100,000,000 and $ 500,000,000 - a lot of money, right? Well, most insurance carriers split up or share the risk with other insurance companies. For example, let's say the primary insurance company takes the first $ 10,000,000 of liability, and then purchases excess liability coverage from another carrier, or reinsurer. So, their liability is limited to just $ 10,000,000 - certainly an acceptable level of risk/reward to stay in business.
Then, the first reinsurer may take the limit from $ 10,000,000 to $ 50,000,000. Not too tough because they can provide that limit across many air carriers, so their maximum exposure is $ 40,000,000. From $ 50,000,000 to $ 100,000,000 another reinsurer takes that risk, and so on.
So, none of the insurance carriers are going out of business because of this loss, and they WILL pay! No reason to worry about blame here.
The flight crew? Well, Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR's) Section 91.3 - Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command states "(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft." Not much wiggle room here, is there? And, I guarantee you that the pilot(s) are extremely distressed and would not dodge responsibility even if they could. Nothing here to gain from blaming someone/something else.
The air traffic controllers? Again, looking at FAR 91.3 (a) it simply is not their responsibility. One, two or three controllers might not have made a difference, but in any case it is still the flight crews responsiblity.
The Blue Grass airport? Well, under the FAR's they are required to issue NOTAMS when there are activities on the airport which affect airport operations. NOTAMS are Notices to Airmen which the pilot in command is required to read and understand before undertaking operations at the airport. These are usually provided in the briefing packet the pilot gets prior to takeoff, and in many cases are broadcast over the ATIS (Air Traffic Information System) frequency at the airport, and which flight crews should always listen to.
So, where does that leave us? The airline. Yes, they have a vested interest in assigning blame anywhere but on the airline and the flight crew. After all, they are in the business of providing safe transportation to the public. If the public believes the airline and/or its employees are unsafe, it will affect the bottom line. Therefore, the out of date chart is to blame. But, who provides those charts to the crew? Ah ha, the airline.
Back to square one.
I am not judging, nor opining as to the actual cause of the accident, but in the end we are left with FAR 91.3 (a). What do you think?
FLy safe - Crusty Captain
posted by Crusty Captain at 5:13 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home