Unanswered questions from plane crash probe: Cessna 172N Skyhawk II, C-GBLG, Accident occurred October 25, 2012, near Puslinch Lake in Cambridge, Ontario, Canada

Additional work by federal investigators into a plane crash that killed a Guelph entrepreneur last fall shows the limited nature and value of the first probe into the incident.

Were it not for pressure brought by the family of Russ Hawkins and media scrutiny into the crash and the Transportation Safety Board's first review of it, all that might have emerged from the incident from the federal agency was an 87-word report that left behind many unanswered questions. In that way, it was like the Oct. 25, 2012 crash itself.

Hawkins, 47, was killed when his Cessna 172 crashed into the shoreline of Puslinch Lake. He was practising landing and taking off from water. A second man on board survived.

In its brief report, the federal Transportation Safety Board, which investigates crashes, ruled Hawkins misjudged his takeoff and might have been saved if he had elected to wear his shoulder harness.

But that investigation never addressed mechanical concerns about the plane that were raised by Hawkins before the crash. Nor did it reveal that the crash survivor was a flight instructor. It also neglected to mention that the flight may have violated aviation regulations. Further, it included no reference to a cockpit struggle alleged to have occurred in the final seconds in a failed bid to abort the takeoff.

Following a Metroland Media report about these issues, Transport Canada — the agency that regulates pilots and instructors — initiated a new review to determine if there were any violations of Canadian aviation regulations that govern flight training, flight instructors and flight rules.

The results of that probe, at least the portions accessible through an access-to-information request, make it clear there were aspects of the crash that seem not to have been covered in the Transportation Safety Board investigation.

For example, the subsequent review suggests "it seemed that the aircraft was not performing to 100 (per cent)." Based on a new interview with the flight instructor-passenger, the Transport Canada report also cites the possibility of "reduced power?" and notes "a number of issues with the plane" related to malfunctioning electronics.

However, the Transportation Safety Board continues to point to pilot error, ruling out mechanical causes.

Hawkins had been a licensed pilot for just four months and was training to earn seaplane credentials at the time of the crash.

Transport Canada reports the failed takeoff saw the qualified pilot-passenger tell Hawkins to "reject" the takeoff but was overruled.

In the wake of the latest crash report emerging, Hawkins' widow has expressed doubt about some of its findings.

The mandate of the Transportation Safety Board is no longer to conduct full probes of each crash report it receives. But its efforts on this case show how that budget-motivated change of policy sometimes results in limited reviews that have many interested stakeholders questioning their value. 

Source:   http://www.guelphmercury.com/opinion-story

Related: 
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2013/06/opinion-plane-crash-merits-further.html