Conair loses fireboss pilot ok

[digits_]

To drive the point home, the TSB did NOT make the recommendation of using multi-engine aircraft in this report. Even the TSB deemed it an acceptable level of risk.

Have they ever made that recommendation in a report on a single engine crash?

[goingnowherefast]

No, because it's silly. Single engine aircraft are a known calculated level of safety. The risk is accepted by the regulator and society.

This report proves how safe the Fireboss actually is despite its single engine. The airframe got destroyed, but it protected the pilot. A very crashworthy design. Sure there was some procedural/training things to be cleaned up, but none of the TSB's recommendations were likely to have prevented this crash.

[cncpc]

At the end of the day it all comes down to acceptable levels of risk. Each of us has our perception of risk but most of us don't sit around the table and actually look at the risk from a statistical perspective. A key component to the equation is survivability - a fact which the TSB mentions in this report as contributing to the safe outcome for the pilot. I've never flown an Air Tractor but I am very familiar with how they are built - especially in the cockpit. Think NASCAR roll cages for airplanes. Most firefighting accidents have nothing to do with engine failures - they're usually related to some type of CFIT event. When it comes to surviving a CFIT crash, the Air Tractor / FireBoss offers way better protection to the crew than a 215, but most of those CFIT's wouldn't be survivable in a Sherman tank, never mind an airplane.

Fair, but largely irrelevant. This crash *was* caused by an engine failure, which would have been preventable in a twin. And having a single engine does *not* offer any additional protection against CFIT.

An engine failure is not preventable in a twin. It is twice as likely.

[cncpc]

To drive the point home, the TSB did NOT make the recommendation of using multi-engine aircraft in this report. Even the TSB deemed it an acceptable level of risk.

Have they ever made that recommendation in a report on a single engine crash?

Lad? Do you beat a lot of dead horses?

[cncpc]

The old guard with adding machine tape still onboard I guess. One of which I remember actively tried to push ridge crossings as low as possible and trained observers to critique new pilots who didn’t fly low enough. He added himself to the BC fire detection multi engine casualty list about a decade ago on one ridge he didn’t make it over.

I take it you mean the one at the top of St. Mary's?