Harrison Ford Probable Cause(s)

[danielfindling]

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...15FA121&akey=1

"The NTSB determined the probable cause(s) of this accident to be a total loss of engine power during initial climb when the carburetor main metering jet became unseated, which led to an extremely rich fuel-to-air ratio. Contributing to the accident was the lack of adequate carburetor maintenance instructions. Contributing to the severity of the pilot's injuries was the improperly installed shoulder harness."

Interesting that the typical: "The pilots failure to . . . ." is missing as a probable cause.

Finally a NTSB report that supports the notion that sometimes S%&t happens and there is nothing you can do about it.

[Marc Zeitlin]

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...15FA121&akey=1

Interesting that the typical: "The pilots failure to . . . ." is missing as a probable cause.

Finally a NTSB report that supports the notion that sometimes S%&t happens and there is nothing you can do about it.

While I agree with you that "SSHATINYCDAI", I would also claim that (saying NOTHING about anyone's actual ability as a pilot - mine or anyone else's), if the title of your message was "Marc Zeitlin Probable Cause(s)", it would be far more likely that somewhere in the report would be the words "The pilot's failure to <xyz>...".

Just sayin'...

[rwanttaja]

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.av...15FA121&akey=1

"The NTSB determined the probable cause(s) of this accident to be a total loss of engine power during initial climb when the carburetor main metering jet became unseated, which led to an extremely rich fuel-to-air ratio. Contributing to the accident was the lack of adequate carburetor maintenance instructions. Contributing to the severity of the pilot's injuries was the improperly installed shoulder harness."

Interesting that the typical: "The pilots failure to . . . ." is missing as a probable cause.

Finally a NTSB report that supports the notion that sometimes S%&t happens and there is nothing you can do about it.

I've seen plenty of cases of "mechanical-but-failure-pilot's-failure-to" but I've also seen a good number of cases where the pilot is not blamed. It's not that rare.

My guess is that the NTSB investigator (minimum qualification for the job is commercial ticket) assesses as to whether a successful forced landing could have been made. Waffle while choosing a field and end up smacking the trees: Your fault. Nowhere reasonable to set down: mechanical failure's fault.

I've read and assessed something like 5,000 accident reports for my own databases. On my records, I record what the "initiator" of the accident was...the first major thing that happened that resulted in the accident. So I do have lower "Pilot Error" numbers than the NTSB has.

Ron Wanttaja