Joe sent me this story (thanks buddy) and although it dates back from last year I somehow missed it. Its written by David Axe for Wired and its compelling. READ it!
Quite honestly I despise the spokesman's account of the incident as not being a "serious flying accident."
They're playing word games.
Its cute if you're a guy and girl playing a dating game.
Its acceptable if you're a low life lawyer or Congressman (well not really but lets say expected).
Its totally unacceptable if you're a US Marine. Higher standards and all that other jazz.
We (the USMC) need to get our house in order. This is sad. Pathetic. Unacceptable. And how this didn't get bigger air time is beyond me.
On March 27, 2006, at a Marine Corps air base in New River, North Carolina, an MV-22 assigned to Medium Tiltrotor Training Squadron 204 experienced an unplanned surge in engine power as the three-man crew was preparing for a flight. “That caused the aircraft to inadvertently lift off the deck approximately 30 feet,” Marine spokesman Maj. Shawn Haney explained. “It came back down … there was major damage sustained to the right wing and the right engine.”Quite honestly I didn't like the way David characterized a potentially life threatening situation as a joy ride...but I get it. He was probably frustrated at the insanity of it all.
Luckily, the three crewmembers were unhurt. The cost to repair the self-flying Osprey totaled $7,068,028, according to the Naval Safety Center, which tracks all Navy and Marine aircraft mishaps. An investigation by the Navy and manufacturers Bell and Boeing resulted in tweaks to the V-22′s engine controls.
Yet the Marines and the Naval Safety Center ultimately decided that the Osprey’s dangerous joyride didn’t count as a serious flying accident, known in Pentagon parlance as a “Class A flight mishap.” The reason, said Capt. Brian Block, a Marine spokesman: The aircraft wasn’t supposed to take off just then; therefore, it’s not a flight problem. If a V-22 suffers damage while preparing to launch or after landing, or if the crew does not explicitly command the aircraft to take off but it does anyways, then the accident doesn’t count as a flight accident.
Quite honestly I despise the spokesman's account of the incident as not being a "serious flying accident."
They're playing word games.
Its cute if you're a guy and girl playing a dating game.
Its acceptable if you're a low life lawyer or Congressman (well not really but lets say expected).
Its totally unacceptable if you're a US Marine. Higher standards and all that other jazz.
We (the USMC) need to get our house in order. This is sad. Pathetic. Unacceptable. And how this didn't get bigger air time is beyond me.
I think they classified it properly as a ground mishap, since that was where it occured. What made it a mishap is that it LEFT the ground when it wasn't supposed to and not while part of an attempted takeoff. If you want to see a really curious case, try to get some dope on the crash of the Pave Low "Moccasin 2" in Saudi Arabia right after Desert Storm. It was initially classified as a Class A mishap, was downgraded to a Class B rather quickly, and much later somehow magically became a Class C. I was told last week by a friend that the AF Safety Center couldn't even find a record of the mishap when he asked for some info. 'Pilot Protection System' anyone?
ReplyDeleteuh...that's the exact words that the spokesman used. the guy was prepping for take off and the bird leaps into the air? but maybe you're right...seems like the pilot protection system works only for certain aircraft...if you fly the F-22 or B-2 you're automatically screwed no PPS for you. anything else and its the planes fault???? doesn't seem right. heck they found the F-22 was broke and still didn't clear the guys name.
ReplyDeletebut back to this. say that shit out loud. really? seriously? you don't think politics has something to do with this????
i could care less about the classification but what does it do for our understanding of the V22, its a great aircraft but we MUST learn from our mistakes or people die. If this is somehow being pushed aside as a non-issue, then they should be fired immediately, we have a great military because of our ability to learn from our mistakes, we will lose that greatness once we lose the ability to learn.
ReplyDeleteMy point was that the incident not only didn't fit the definition of a flight mishap as the spokeman noted, but also that would fit the definition of a ground mishap (vs some ambiguous state). I suspect from the write-up that the incident revealed a previously unseen problem with (using system safety 'SHEL' language) 'Liveware-Software' (Man-Tech data) and/or 'Liveware-Hardware' (Man-Machine) interfaces. It also could have been simply an aircrew doing something they shouldn't have done. If it was the latter, the 'glossing over' is a product of the zero-tolerance 'official' mindset that tries to ignore the reality that people DO make mistakes, and the conflict of that mindset with the personal obligations and bonds among the aircrews.
ReplyDeleteI not-infrequently relive one mission these past 25+ years where I conciously (but with an adrenaline boost) chose to listen to another crewdog and deviate from the checkist and mission brief. As it happens, it 'saved' the mission, but if I had been 'wrong' about the problem, I wouldn't be here typing, and 8-9 other guys wouldn't have come home either -- and it would have been no one's fault but mine. If I had followed the checklist and the brief, there would have been no official recriminations over the loss of a many-million dollar test article, but I'm pretty sure it would have been my last flight test mission.
In any case, it appears the V-22 problem was quickly remedied (if there was one) without a lot of hoopla, and I can't get too excited when an outsider (a journalist no less) finds out about the incident post facto and perhaps decides to make a mountain out of a molehill.