In March, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released a brief statement stating the results of a study it conducted into the relative safety of general aviation airplanes equipped with glass-panel technologies. As we reported in our April issue, the NTSB concluded the last decades glass-cockpit revolution has not resulted in enhanced safety for the period and aircraft it studied. It came to such a conclusion, in part, because it found single-engine airplanes manufactured 288
Dissecting The NTSBs Glass-Panel Study
In March, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released a brief statement stating the results of a study it conducted into the relative safety of general aviation airplanes equipped with glass-panel technologies. As we reported in our April issue, the NTSB concluded the last decades glass-cockpit revolution has not resulted in enhanced safety for the period and aircraft it studied. It came to such a conclusion, in part, because it found single-engine airplanes manufactured between 2002 and 2006 and equipped with glass cockpits had a higher fatal accident rate than similar aircraft with conventional instruments. At that time, very little else was known about the study, including the specific aircraft models involved, its methodology and other metrics, raising many questions. Since our April issue was finalized, the NTSB has released the full 91-page study results, including a separate seven-page letter detailing a series of recommendations to the FAA. These documents may be retrieved from the NTSB Web site using links published in the box in the upper right corner of the opposite page.
Key Takeaways:
- The NTSB study concluded that glass-cockpit equipped general aviation aircraft (2002-2008) had a higher fatal accident rate than similar conventional aircraft, suggesting the technology has not enhanced safety for the period and aircraft studied.
- Surprisingly, pilots involved in glass-cockpit accidents were found to have higher levels of certification and more total flight experience, while the NTSB also identified a lack of specific FAA training requirements and assessment for glass-cockpit functionality.
- Aviation industry groups criticized the NTSB's study methodology, arguing it did not account for different operational uses of glass-cockpit aircraft (e.g., longer, more challenging flights) and that many of its recommendations were already being addressed by the industry.
Key takeaways sponsored by Aviator Pro | Start Your Training ->
See a mistake? Contact us.
