Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Private Jets Have More Fatal Accidents Than Commercial Planes

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Traderd

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
2,073
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ing-commercial

Great headline, huh? Check out the lead sentence;

"In fatal crashes involving private or charter flights, investigators usually blame careless pilots."

A sample;

"Airline crashes have become rare because carriers take steps to protect against pilot mistakes. The Federal Aviation Administration doesn't regularly inspect many corporate aircraft operators, and pilots are often left to decide when it's safe to land or how many hours they work. "If they don't say yes to every flight, they worry about the owners looking for another flight department," says Melissa Washburn, a pilot who flies business planes."

"Commercial aviation is regulated by multiple tiers of U.S. law, but privately owned aircraft have almost no oversight. "Nobody's paying attention," says Kitty Higgins, who served as an NTSB member from 2006 to 2009. The FAA has begun introducing safety data monitoring for private operations like that used by airlines, but NTSB Chairman Christopher Hart says adding new rules won?t make a difference. "A lot of times we're talking about people who aren't following the regulations anyway, so I'm not sure that more regulation is the answer," he says."

I stuck this in Fractionals because I thought the NetJet guys would appreciate this piece;

"For operators whose flight crews routinely adhere to industry best practices, the likelihood of a fatal accident is greatly diminished," says Peter Ingleton, a director at the Montreal-based aviation council. Berkshire Hathaway's NetJets, which operates with airline-like safety standards, hasn't had a fatal accident since 2000."

That's a selling point right there....
 
The reference of no "fatal" accidents is way faster and needs correction. I believe there was one fatal accident involving a Lear, if that tells you how long ago. Only one, and it was way before 2000.
 
The reason that private jets have a worse accident record is clearly because the pilot pay is less.

Pay private pilots more and they'll have more to live for!

(Puleeeeze.....this is tongue in check. Don't get your boxers in a wad.)
 
Saw these on the NJ wiki. Actually, very few incidents/accidents considering the amount of airplanes and flights.

On May 2, 2002, NetJets Flight 397, a Citation 560 landed more than halfway down the runway in Leakey, TX. The aircraft overran the departure end of the runway and collided with trees. a post impact fire consumed the aircraft after the crew and four passengers were able to evacuate. [16]
On November 25, 2003, NetJets Flight 632 landed with the nose gear retracted for undetermined reasons. [17]
On August 18, 2004, Netjets Flight 961 experienced a landing gear failure in landing at Jackson, WY. The two passengers and two crew members were not injured. [18]
On September 26, 2005, Netjets Flight 669 experienced a landing gear failure while taxiing for departure in Columbus, OH. The two crew members were not injured. [19]
On January 5, 2006, the crew of Netjets Flight 391 failed to maintain adequate airspeed during landing at the Woodruff, Wi airport. The right wing contacted the runway, the aircraft departed the runway and impacted a snow bank. The two crew members and five passengers were uninjured. [20]
On August 28, 2006, Netjets Flight 879, a Hawker 800XP, collided mid air with a glider over Smith, NV while on approach to Reno, NV. Flight 879 landed safely with only minor injuries on board, the pilot of the glider parachuted to safety. [21]
On May 27, 2011, NetJets Flight 749, a Gulfstream G-200, landed with the landing gear retracted in Newburgh, NY. [22]
On July 23, 2014, NetJets Flight 731, a Gulfstream G-200, experienced a tire failure upon landing in Aspen, Colorado. [23]
On September 19, 2014, NetJets Flight 322,[24] an Embraer Phenom 300 arriving from Nashville International Airport, slid off the runway at Lone Star Executive Airport (IATA: CXO) in Conroe, Texas.[25] The area had recently been inundated by the remains of Hurricane Odile. Neither the pilot nor co-pilot were hurt.
 
The reference of no "fatal" accidents is way faster and needs correction. I believe there was one fatal accident involving a Lear, if that tells you how long ago. Only one, and it was way before 2000.

Early 70's I believe. There have been 5 hull losses since 2001. Leakey TX, 2 in SFO, the mid air in NV, CXO. Still stunned at how awesomely the crew handled the mid air. And if "awesomely" wasn't a word, it is now.

SG
 
Last edited:
Early 70's I believe. There have been 5 hull losses since 2001. Leakey TX, 2 in SFO, the mid air in NV, CXO. Still stunned at how awesomely the crew handled the mid air. And if "awesomely" wasn't a word, it is now.

SG

One of the "hull losses" in SFO was an airplane that was parked, locked up and un-crewed, at 5 in the morning. A service vehicle ran into the wing at high speed causing extensive damage. The driver was killed and the airframe written off.

Some Guy is correct about the mid-air near Reno. Truly an amazing feat of airmanship (and a tiny bit of good luck) that prevented a major tragedy.
 
One of the "hull losses" in SFO was an airplane that was parked, locked up and un-crewed, at 5 in the morning. A service vehicle ran into the wing at high speed causing extensive damage. The driver was killed and the airframe written off.

Some Guy is correct about the mid-air near Reno. Truly an amazing feat of airmanship (and a tiny bit of good luck) that prevented a major tragedy.

The other in SFO was an old 1000 waiting in line for takeoff. Had been held for about 20 minutes (thankfully) due to traffic. Tower told the crew they were smoking in the back. The hell hole caught fire. Investigation couldn't determine what started it, but a hydraulic leak (likely mist at 3000 psi) fueled it. Damaged the rear pressure bulkhead and once that is gone, the aircraft is done.

Word has it the service truck driver was dead before he hit the airplane. Cardiac arrest or something. Damaged the left wing spar.

As for Reno, she earned a bunch of awards. I saw the pictures and read the final report. without the skill of both crew members, they would have never made it back.

SG
 
Last edited:
I think there was a Falcon 20 many years ago that hit birds leaving BKL and lost both engines. Crew landed in the water and was picked up by a boat. As the story goes, they never even got their feet wet. The aircraft was pulled from the water, fixed, and continued to fly although they probably never got the Lake Erie funk fully cleaned off the paint.

Sg
 
So how many operations did Netjets do, and how many "avoidable" accidents were there?

Seems like a pretty good record by any standard.
 
One of the "hull losses" in SFO was an airplane that was parked, locked up and un-crewed, at 5 in the morning. A service vehicle ran into the wing at high speed causing extensive damage. The driver was killed and the airframe written off.

Some Guy is correct about the mid-air near Reno. Truly an amazing feat of airmanship (and a tiny bit of good luck) that prevented a major tragedy.

I've flown with and talked to MM....there was a LOT of luck involved. Not to diminish the great flying....he was just being honest. In any case, whatever the amount of luck, they did a great job with everything against them.
 
I've flown with and talked to MM....there was a LOT of luck involved. Not to diminish the great flying....he was just being honest. In any case, whatever the amount of luck, they did a great job with everything against them.

Absolutely. Call it what you want. They made it back safe and in the end, that's all that matters.

SG
 
NetJets pilots have created the safest flying operation I have ever been with. You get a few that don't follow the procedures and mistakes are made, but largely this is a safe working environment. Happy to be a part of this pilot group.

Now if we can just improve the contract . . .
 
Anybody else see this:

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...pilot-versus-two-pilot-there-safety-advantage

Seemed like using raw number of accidents rather than percentage of hours flown skews the picture to make single pilot ops just about as safe as two pilot ops.

Or am I missing something?

I was right there with you thinking the article was a total hatched job because the vast number of private jet operations are multi crew. However, looking at the type of aircraft considered, all are single pilot certified. It's at least possible there are more single pilot operations among that group than multi crew operations. I'd really like to see the actual numbers, but sadly I doubt they exist.

I used to fly a King Air 350 almost exclusively single pilot. I freely admit, on the rare occasion two single pilot captains flew together just trying to help the other guy out, invariably something got missed despite a type rated captain running the checklist from the right seat. We had no sop's for division of tasks and whether it was because each pilot thought the other guy would do something, or neither of us was operating within our normal flow, things got missed. Many times single pilot airplane captains train by themselves so they can fly by themselves when necessary even if they are normally part of a two pilot crew. I know I always trained single pilot. That can't be a good thing for a duel pilot crew. Considering pilots who fly this select group of airplanes often don't train together, follow multi crew SOPs, or regularly even fly as multi crew, I can see this article's conclusions being completely plausible. Also, considering a second pilot in a single pilot airplane is not required, some may not even be trained in type. Hey Mr. Flight Instructor, I need a copilot...
 
Makes me wonder if the propaganda machine for single pilot airliners is getting cranked up.

When I started in aviation, the huge debate was whether a turbo jet could be safely flown by 'just" two pilots.

With UAV technology maturing, it is conceivable that the airliner of the future flies itself from push-back to block in with one pilot "just in case".

Perhaps this is the warning shot over the bow that the days of the two pilot cockpit are numbered?
 
The telling statistic would be comparing the single pilot certified Jets to two pilot certified jets. I'm guessing there would be at least an order of magnitude between the two.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom