Why should it not have one? Is there a single valid reason why not? It's a high performance business jet. An FDR can help investigators identify the cause of tragedies such as this crash. That knowledge can be used to benefit others operators of this equipment and, if applicable, the larger aviation community. I really shake my head at such questions.
Lear down in PHL
- Thread starter Inverted
- Start date
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
Cost.
Where do you draw the line? Should a 172 have an FDR? What about a Cub on floats?
Baronman
Well-Known Member
We’re talking about a multi million dollar jet , not some 172. Things are gonna get pricy, that’s the cost of going 600mph at 40,000’.
And when things go wrong , a lot of people can get hurt…
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
I agree. If you’re a jet carrying hospital patients, yeah I think it ought to have operable FDR and CVR.
Baronman
Well-Known Member
I don't know if it's necessarily hospital patients that warrant a FDR/CVR. I don't see them any differently vs a paying customer.
But something that's turbine...requiring type ratings...multiple pilots.....that presumably will be used in business or as a business....over 12,500lbs...Costing millions of dollars. All these little things summed in my mind say it should have the same level of equipment as we'd expect from say an airliner. I'm sure the paying customer expects it, and the public at large should expect it.
CFI A&P
Exploring the world one toilet at a time.
I agree that it would be beneficial, but in this case - the hull value of a clapped out Learjet is probably lower than the avionics installation.
Just a couple years ago ADS-B installs were very expensive for some operators with vintage equipment. The lists of STCs for a FDR/CVR that would be compatible with whatever legacy avionics are installed in that make/model is going to be quite short.
Yeah, requiring new tech on new aircraft going forward is a different ball game than requiring retrofits.
ETA: post edited, see post #110 below…
Last edited:
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
They can comply with regulations or not fly the things — just like everyone else.
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
Note I’m referring specifically to the CVR here, which I *think* is a regulatory requirement on that airplane.
A quick search for FDR requirements yielded this (there’s probably better info out there…):
Example (more in the link):
Example (more in the link):
CFI A&P
Exploring the world one toilet at a time.
No argument here, just pointing out to the Monday morning quarterbacks that some things are easier said than done.
It’ll take me a minute to research it, maybe someone else has it readily available, was this required to have these items based on nation of registration, operational requirements, ICAO, applicable MEL, etc.
BlueMoon
Well-Known Member
The CVR not working for "years" is kind of telling me where this investigation is heading...
The regs can require all the equipment they want, but it still has actually be maintained in working order. I doubt they can do anything to the folks that pencil whipped the inspection of th CVR, since it's a foreign registered aircraft and the mechanics most likely doesn't work in the US.
The regs can require all the equipment they want, but it still has actually be maintained in working order. I doubt they can do anything to the folks that pencil whipped the inspection of th CVR, since it's a foreign registered aircraft and the mechanics most likely doesn't work in the US.
moxiepilot
Well-Known Member
From what I understood the company didn't pencil whip the CVR inspection, it just wasn't required to be operational.
tcco94
Future GTA VI Pilot
How does that work with a foreign operator are they subject to the same requirement the FAA states since they’re operating our airspace or international ICAO regulations, not aware of Mexican authority so I just assume it’s under ICAO
Ideally, it should be installed during manufacture.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
I don’t know about ICAO but under US 135 rules there are a variety of rules that would require the CVR to eventually be repaired or removed.
knot4u
Repeat Offender
All of the jets (US registered) that were equipped with a CVR that I've worked on required a fairly extensive functional check. I can't recall if it's an annual or semi-annual requirement, but you have to test all of the audio sources (the microphones mounted in the cockpit, any headsets, and anything the audio panel might provide including HF) and you have to do it with the airplane with no engines running, with the APU running, with each engine running by itself with no APU, with each engine running by itself with the APU and both engines running with and without the APU. I've seen airplanes come into a hangar for big inspections and somehow halfway through the inspection when the airplane is still on jacks that workcard is somehow miraculously signed off as completed. I'm quite certain the portion that didn't require running the engines was completed, but I'm also quite certain they never actually finished the scope of the functional test. I get why it's done but it's one of the reasons why I walked away from the whole shebang.
averettpilot
Well-Known Member
This absolutely doesn’t surprise me considering the type of operation. My experience in 91/135 (which is most of it so far, just started 121) is one of habitual noncompliance with various regulations and industry best practices across the board. I realize this is a foreign tail, but there is a reason why these types of operations have incidents/accidents at far greater rates than 121.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
You seem to have an idealistic view of what aviation should be. Most airplanes flying out there are designed on 1970s technology and are patchworked together to still fly in 2025.