It even happens in piloted aircraft...

[reedchristiansen]

The NTSB just released their preliminary report on the crash of a new twin engine jet in the process of certification.

Here is the report:
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=a03a3c8c-9ba1-413f-9a0f-5a4ed2e5730e

Both pilots were killed when the jet rolled hard right just after take off.

The report states the cause of the crash were that the ailerons were "missrigged" meaning left aileron input created a right roll, right aileron produced a left roll. Simply amazing - I feel really bad for the engineers involved in the project and the A&P who signed it off. I am curious how it made it past the test pilots during their pre-flight. I thought it was fairly standard practice to check control directions during pre-flight on full scale aircraft.

I am glad I am an engineer in the unmanned industry rather then manned - I guess a mistake in the UAV industry could also potential lead to the loss of life, but it seems much less likely.

Reed

[Tom Harper]

Obviously a bad pre-flight!

[Unterhausen]

hard to believe that you can do that, but it's been done way too many times.

[Hovertime]

Poor guys.... :(

[ElectroLawndart]

Deleted.

[peter_jensen]

(quotes are snips, though in context)


I thought it was fairly standard practice to check control directions during pre-flight on full scale aircraft.

Of course it is. Even more so for models, as it's a lot easier to have the wrong model program loaded than it is to rig the ailerons on a full scale plane backwards. Having only looked out the windows while manipulating the controls and saying "free and correct" fewer than 100 times I can still say that it is easy to imagine someone going through the motions and saying that even in the presence of obvious visual evidence to the contrary. That's a bad pre-flight, but unfortunately it can happen.

Even the little things count -- I've been in a light plane with the trim tab reverse-rigged after maintenance. It was hardly a problem, but it took some head-scratching in the air and a precautionary landing.

I can't find the quote, but there is a well-said way to say that it's difficult to kill yourself in a novel or new way in an airplane. This is as close as I can come:


From: http://www.skygod.com/quotes/safety.html
There are no new types of aircrashes — only people with short memories. Every accident has its own forerunners, and every one happens either because somebody did not know where to draw the vital dividing line between the unforeseen and the unforeseeable or because well-meaning people deemed the risk acceptable.

If politics is the art of the possible, and flying is the art of the seemingly impossible, then air safety must be the art of the economically viable. At a time of crowded skies and sharpening competition, it is a daunting task not to let the art of the acceptable deteriorate into the dodgers' art of what you can get away with.

— Stephen Barlay, 'The Final Call: Why Airline Disasters Continue to Happen,' March 1990.




I am glad I am an engineer in the unmanned industry rather then manned - I guess a mistake in the UAV industry could also potential lead to the loss of life, but it seems much less likely.
Reed

Agreed, though remember that the public's tolerance of loss of life caused by manned aviation operations is well-established. We have yet to see how the situation will evolve with UAVs, but I'm not as optimistic as I once was. The difference between knowing participants and "innocent bystander" is significant, and it's not the people doing it right who are going to be the majority of the problem.


Regardless, the original accident mentioned is tragic. I too am curious as to whether the pre-flight was omitted or if they just performed the pre-flight on autopilot.

-Peter