Rght out of the gate? Seriously???

[Jackk]

7 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

I did almost 25 years as a GS employee and now I am a lawyer in the private sector.  The public/private sector talent discrepancy that we have heard so much about recently is absolutely ridiculous and is just a way for some people to feel better about themselves and better than others.  

 For me it’s just what I see with my with my two lying eyes.

 

 Obviously there are outliers, but the “I work to live don’t live to work” and “keep your head down till pension” type attitude is WAY more prevalent in the GS world, also the pay scales and job requirements are public knowledge 

 

Add to that how hard it is to get a bad apple in GS fired vs private sector.

Edited November 10 by Jackk

[Hank]

14 minutes ago, DCarlton said:

I was further disturbed that this organization named themselves DTSB; a play on NTSB that could be very confusing for the public; it confused me for a moment; "who the heck are these people".   

'THESE PEOPLE" are One Person = Dan Gryder. The confusion with the NTSB is deliberate on his part, to sound more official, a simple act of hubris.

He calls them "Final Reports" ala NTSB for the same reason, because after pondering what he has seen and read the day after an accident, he posts his 'final report" and moves on to make another video for the all-importanr money-creating clicks and views.

[Jackk]

14 hours ago, Hank said:

Yep! The "D" in "DTSB" is "Dangryder" Transportation Safety Bureau, a self-righteous, self-appointed one man "bureau" who reviews initial video, does Google views of the accident scene and has his "final cause verdict" out before the National Transportation Safety Bureau has even completed their initial report of the accident circumstances. No need for actual data or investigation, just quickly assign blame amd move on to the next video because he needs clicks and views.

Oh, if he can wangle a free airline ride near the accident, he will visit the scene, going around barriers and looking for "evidence." But his own accidents, which he also reports on, are never pilot error . . . . 

 Just curious, I don’t recall ever voting in new investigators into the NTSB, they are, just as Dan, unelected 

[DCarlton]

20 minutes ago, Jackk said:

also the pay scales and job requirements are public knowledge 

Add to that how hard it is to get a bad apple in GS fired vs private sector.

The pay scales don't adequately consider the benefits of government employment; matching contributions to your retirement account, health insurance, locality pay, stability, pensions, the possibility of earlier retirement and the less tangible; providing a service to your country.  I saw several of my peers leave government for private industry chasing bigger paychecks and they regret it today.  One layoff can erase years of gains.  

Yes it is hard to remove a bad apple, and it can take many months but it can be done.  That's why the government has long probationary periods for new hires.  Most people don't turn "bad" later in their career.  

[Hank]

5 minutes ago, Jackk said:

 Just curious, I don’t recall ever voting in new investigators into the NTSB, they are, just as Dan, unelected 

We also don't vote in FAA Administrators, or any Cabinet members--they are all appointed. 

[Jackk]

48 minutes ago, Hank said:

We also don't vote in FAA Administrators, or any Cabinet members--they are all appointed. 

Sadly that is true 

[Andy95W]

4 hours ago, Jackk said:

  Obviously there are outliers, but the “I work to live don’t live to work” and “keep your head down till pension” type attitude is WAY more prevalent in the GS world, also the pay scales and job requirements are public knowledge 

It seems pretty obvious by your comments that you have never worked for the government. All you’ve said is that you work in the industry.

So basically, all of your “facts” are simply your opinions because you have no first hand knowledge. Why should we listen to your opinions about government workers but you don’t need to listen to mine about Nickleback?

[N201MKTurbo]

Like all places there are good people and bad people.

I only worked for the government for a year back in the 70s. I worked on radios for the Maricopa County sheriff’s office. 
 

After I left I was talking to one of my ex-coworkers. He told me one of the guys at the radio shop forgot to set the brake on his truck and it rolled down the side of the mountain. He got promoted. He said there was another county employee who drove his work truck to Mexico and sold it. They told him if he did that again they would have to let him go. They didn’t even ask for the proceeds of the sale.

[dkkim73]

5 hours ago, DCarlton said:

The pay scales don't adequately consider the benefits of government employment; matching contributions to your retirement account, health insurance, locality pay, stability, pensions, the possibility of earlier retirement and the less tangible; providing a service to your country.  I saw several of my peers leave government for private industry chasing bigger paychecks and they regret it today.  One layoff can erase years of gains.  

Very true. People (esp. those outside it) tend to moralize about government service, either bad or good, esp. recently when it can be used as a political point. But it isn't a bad economic deal in many ways and during many eras. 

The pension and security are a big deal to many people. Our friend who is a senior (career, not appointed) regional EPA guy would occasionally wax worried about "the big cuts" (lack of growth in budget about 8 yrs ago) but would also admit his excellent time flexibility, pension, healthcare and retirement options. And many of those folks were sitting pretty during the lockdowns when an enormous number of small businesses were effectively destroyed. And many of us who could and would otherwise work lost a year of income. 

I will disagree slightly in saying that, while one might be able to remove a bad apple if it's agreed what a bad apple is, it's hard to fire people due to marginal hypocompetence or hard-to-characterize poor personal attitudes. There's still a lot of security once you're "in".  Though I'm not sure that's different in a union job, or state govt job. It's been mostly different in the private sector though I think people don't admit that some of the same bureaucratic forces apply. 

But back to the initial point, it can be a good gig, esp. if you find something you like. 

 

[LANCECASPER]

Anyway . . . this was a post about a person who was having problems with his airplane that turned into a tragedy for him and his family. Within a week, during a shutdown, we have an initial report with an eye-witness account. 

If you feel the need to debate over private sector vs. government employees open up another thread somewhere. Perhaps Pilots of America . . . lol.

[Echo]

Big Government is a failure. 37 trillion shows this to be true. Defenders derive benefit or they would be detractors. 

[dkkim73]

9 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

Perhaps Pilots of America . . . lol.

Ouch. Yes, perhaps a different thread. 

[PT20J]

On 11/9/2025 at 1:58 PM, Jackk said:

“Here are documented cases where NTSB findings on aircraft accidents were later contradicted by court rulings, juries, or subsequent studies:

•  2002 Piper Saratoga crash (Mark Williams): NTSB blamed pilot for fuel exhaustion; later federal investigator found failed engine component. [21]

•  1999 Piper Cherokee crash: NTSB found no malfunction, blamed pilot loss of control; jury ruled defective carburetor caused engine failure, killing four. [21]

•  2006 deHavilland crash: NTSB couldn’t determine blade failure cause, blamed pilot airspeed loss; jury found defective turbine blades, killing six.

•  1989 Cessna crash: NTSB blamed pilot stall; jury found defective pilot seat caused control loss, injuring three.

•  2008 Textron Lycoming crash: NTSB blamed pilot’s weather decision; judge ruled defective carburetor caused engine failure, killing three.

•  2003 Midair helicopter collision: NTSB blamed pilot non-compliance with ATC; federal judge ruled FAA negligence in separation, killing three.

•  1998 Cessna Skyhawk crash: NTSB blamed pilot; later evidence showed illegal runway mound violation caused impact.

•  Home-built aircraft crashes (1982–2013): NTSB blamed pilots in 72%; 2012 study revealed engine failures, design flaws, and inadequate manuals.

•  Islander airplane crash: NTSB blamed pilot error; analysis argued engine failure led to roll below minimum control airspeed.”

I only looked at one of these (the 2006 twin otter crash) and find your conclusion grossly misleading. The NTSB final report fully describes the right engine failure due to compressor blade fractures. It states that the fractured blade tips were never recovered and so it did not determine what caused them to fracture. But the investigators did find ample evidence that the pilot did not follow prescribed engine-out procedures and stalled and crashed impacting the ground in a near vertical attitude which led to the probable cause of the accident being attributed to pilot error. During a subsequent lawsuit, it was determined that a company that manufactured the failed components had used an alloy not meeting P&W specifications allowing it to sell the parts for reduced cost and had apparently somehow misled the FAA in order to get the parts approved. I would hardly have expected the NTSB to uncover that. 

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR0803.pdf

https://www.robbrobb.com/48-million-jury-verdict-for-wrongful-death-from-crash-of-dehavilland-plane

 

 

 

[Jackk]

3 hours ago, Andy95W said:

It seems pretty obvious by your comments that you have never worked for the government. All you’ve said is that you work in the industry.

So basically, all of your “facts” are simply your opinions because you have no first hand knowledge. Why should we listen to your opinions about government workers but you don’t need to listen to mine about Nickleback?

 I also don’t eat raw chicken, but I can tell when the thing is raw lol

[DCarlton]

3 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Anyway . . . this was a post about a person who was having problems with his airplane that turned into a tragedy for him and his family. Within a week, during a shutdown, we have an initial report with an eye-witness account. 

If you feel the need to debate over private sector vs. government employees open up another thread somewhere. Perhaps Pilots of America . . . lol.

Perhaps this is a good time/place to support the FAA/NTSB (government employees).  I expect several will read this thread.  To those that do, thank you for your service.  It wasn't a debate until they were trashed.  But yes, what an unfortunate tangent.  

[Shadrach]

This thread has degraded quickly.  I don't know Dan Gryder personally but I know two people that do.  Those folks would likely admit that he can be a blowhard, a provocateur, a troll, and any number of other pejoratives one can imagine.  However, in discussions with folks who know Dan, I have never inferred that he is an idiot. To the contrary, he’s been described as a pretty talented aviator that is often his own worst enemy.

I personally find his style off-putting. I also find some of his public statements needlessly antagonistic. Some of those statements have resulted in litigation, and likely deservedly so.

What is also off-putting is all the name calling and piling on by people who've likely never met the man. Anyone here who knows Dan personally, feel free to correct me with a personal anecdote. Those of you who want to continue beating this horse every time Dan posts something you hate should consider starting a new thread where you can have a Gryder hatefest, circle jerk.

@Freddb34 did not post a lot on this forum, I am saddened that his final thread is tied to all of this Gryder bickering.

[Yetti]

17 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Anyway . . . this was a post about a person who was having problems with his airplane that turned into a tragedy for him and his family. Within a week, during a shutdown, we have an initial report with an eye-witness account. 

If you feel the need to debate over private sector vs. government employees open up another thread somewhere. Perhaps Pilots of America . . . lol.

hear hear

[EricJ]

Something to keep in mind about juries is that they aren't charged with finding fact, rather in finding fault, and often that boils down to whichever lawyer makes a more convincing argument.    There is not much, if any, deliberative input about finding fact, just two sets of one-sided arguments that are built to persuade, not determine facts.   The stories told to the jurors are deliberately skewed on behalf of those paying the lawyers in order to persuade the jury.

Investigative and governing bodies, however, are generally more interested in factual determinations.   

Citing jury verdicts is usually not a good way to build a convincing factual case about anything.

[MikeOH]

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

Something to keep in mind about juries is that they aren't charged with finding fact, rather in finding fault

Well, LEGALLY, I believe juries are tasked with finding fact!  Pragmatically, I tend to agree the reality is otherwise

1 hour ago, EricJ said:

Investigative and governing bodies, however, are generally more interested in factual determinations. 

Again, in theory, that should be the case.  Pragmatically, I don't think the NTSB spends squat on looking for facts to support a scientific determination of cause.  I've looked at enough small GA NTSB accident reports to know that many, if not most, don't even get a visit to the scene of the accident or wreckage examination.  Just don't have the budget, I suspect.

However, if it's a celebrity, most egregious example would be the JFK, Jr. crash, they will send out the Navy!  Obviously, an airliner crash will also roll a real investigation.

I think the point of the poster's thread that spawned this whole 'debate' was that jury trials often reveal information/facts that the NTSB did NOT bother to find.  IOW, when there's money at stake (a lawsuit) capital is expended to find things out, even if it's a small GA crash.  But with the NTSB, without a bunch of POLITICAL capital at stake, they don't leave their offices!

[Shadrach]

11 hours ago, EricJ said:

Something to keep in mind about juries is that they aren't charged with finding fact, rather in finding fault, and often that boils down to whichever lawyer makes a more convincing argument.    There is not much, if any, deliberative input about finding fact, just two sets of one-sided arguments that are built to persuade, not determine facts.   The stories told to the jurors are deliberately skewed on behalf of those paying the lawyers in order to persuade the jury.

Investigative and governing bodies, however, are generally more interested in factual determinations.   

Citing jury verdicts is usually not a good way to build a convincing factual case about anything.

Yea, no need to cite verdicts when you can just read through several reports.  
 

I recently read an NTSB report that stated that the boost pump was found in the on position in a C172P that landed off airport. Have you ever seen a boost pump on a gravity fed, carbureted, high wing, Cessna?

Like all organizations the FAA/NTSB has good eggs and bad eggs. I don’t think either organization is at their peak when compared to past performance, but I remain hopeful.  No organization is above reproach. 

[Igor_U]

11 hours ago, Shadrach said:

Yea, no need to cite verdicts when you can just read through several reports.  
 

I recently read an NTSB report that stated that the boost pump was found in the on position in a C172P that landed off airport. Have you ever seen a boost pump on a gravity fed, carbureted, high wing, Cessna?

Like all organizations the FAA/NTSB has good eggs and bad eggs. I don’t think either organization is at their peak when compared to past performance, but I remain hopeful.  No organization is above reproach. 

It's been a while but i believe C172SP is fuel injected (IO360) and has eclectic boost pump.... 

[hazek]

6 minutes ago, Igor_U said:

It's been a while but i believe C172SP is fuel injected (IO360) and has eclectic boost pump.... 

It has not been a while for me, it is, it does.

[Shadrach]

9 hours ago, Igor_U said:

It's been a while but i believe C172SP is fuel injected (IO360) and has eclectic boost pump.... 

Yes, I am familiar with the 172SP, as I am with the 172P. As I stated my post, this was a172P, which doesn’t even have a mechanical fuel pump, let alone a boost pump.

I mean an RV6A has a nose wheel, but that’s not really relevant to a discussion about an accident involving an RV6 that had a ground loop on landing.

You can be forgiven in an online forum for not knowing the difference between a 172P and a 172SP. However, the FSDO and NTSB personnel writing preliminary reports should be held to a higher standard than someone casually posting on an Internet forum. Preliminary reports should go out for peer review before being published. 
 

So you have an “expert“ on the ground that incorrectly suggested that a boost pump was left on in an aircraft that did not have one… And then you have an “expert” that peer reviewed the report before it was published and didn’t catch it. 
 

I understand how this can happen and it’s not that big of a deal in the whole scheme of things. I only pointed it out to make it clear that the FAA/NTSB make mistakes just like everyone else and that questioning, scrutinizing, or disagreeing with their “probable cause” is entirely reasonable, and at times warranted.

 

[Conrad]

Oh wow, oh no. Oh my. :' (

I'm sorry Fred. I'm so sorry.

Edited 19 hours ago by Conrad

[Bolter]

1 hour ago, Conrad said:

Oh wow, oh no. Oh my. :' ( https://presencenews.org/fredrick-marshall-baber-tribute

I'm sorry Fred. I'm so sorry.

I think this is a scam site.  They collected public info and put it into a page full of dangerous links and phishing pop ups.  I do not recommend clicking on it.