NTSB Report on Bill Phillips' Accident

Peter Dohm wrote:
....
1) Was the canopy open/unlatched?
(It very probably was)
2) Could this happen to an unimpaired pilot?
(Obviously yes, since it has happened several times)
3) Could an open/unlatched canopy be prevented, or
could the results be mitigated in a cost effective way?
(I think so, and think it needs further discussion)

As Stealth has pointed out, those canopies appear not to be a fail safe
design. One would initially presume that they would only open slightly and
maintain a slightly open position in trail, which was true in at lease one
instance and might presumably have been true of the test aircraft. However,
at least one other example appears to have behaved quite differently and I
personally doubt that the difference in shape would need to be much greater
than the thickness of a coat of paint to cause a dramatic difference in
behavior.

I suspect that a safety catch of a type common on the engine hoods of
automobiles and placed close enough to the latched position to preclude
oscillation, accompanied by the installation of a warning lamp when the
canopy is not in its fully latched position, would both mitigate the result
of an unlatched canopy and make the occurence less likely.

I still would not personally choose a hinged canopy; but those improvements
should be sufficient to render my other criticisms nearly moot.

Peter




Side and forward hinged canopies can lift in the airstream. This
would not be a "gee-whiz how could that happen" type of problem.
I have reported my own stone-cold sober experience with a side hinge top
canopy unlatching at takeoff and I would be surprised to hear of side
and front hinged canopies that DON'T lift in the air stream.
Accordingly, I think a secondary catch sounds like a very, very sensible
idea. You can't imagine how distracting it is 'til you experience it.
an inch or two of bobble would be a whole lot less threatening,
in my view.

Brian W

tom c wrote:

Acute in a clinicians realm is either a new sudden onset such as AMI (Acute
Myocardial Infarction) or a sudden flare up of an old condition such as
Acute Exacerbation of COPD.

Chronic is an ongoing but currently stable problem. Chronic Obstructive
Pulmonary Disease. Chronic conditions over the course of time cause
deterioration and for many mortality. Example would be Pulmonary Fibrosis.

In another post a "doctor" from POA said Bill's "Vicodin Level" was near
lethal. There is no such thing as a Vicodin Level. Vicodin (Lortab, Norco
etc) is a combination of acetaminophen (Tylenol) and hydrocodone. In the
report Bill's acetaminophen level was barely at the low end of therapeutic
and the hydrocodone and metabolites were sub therapeutic.

Thanks, Tommy. I'm yust an engineer; I don't have any medical
background, and the wide variety of opinion on this is making my head
spin. Some people say he would have been unaffected by the levels found
in the autopsy; others claim they are near-fatal doses.

BTW, in the interest of clarity, here's the link to the post from the
doctor on POA:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum...6&postcount=16

I figured his reference to "Vicodin level" was an attempt to simplify
things for the layman. When I first read the NTSB report, I had to Wiki
the drug terms to find out what that stuff is.

I guess I still step back to the "acute drug intoxication" comment on
the NTSB factual. Stealth and you have explained the medical meaning.
But when I do a Google search on the term, the hits seem to imply that
this is a fairly dire condition.

Let me try to put it simpler. If I get pulled over by the cops and my
blood test shows "... 0.055 (ug/ml, ug/g) diazepam, 0.031 (ug/mL, ug/g)
dihydrocodeine, doxazosin, 0.152 (ug/ml, ug/g) hydrocodone, and 0.094
(ug/ml, ug/g) nordiazepam," is this a level at which the courts would
consider me impaired?

Ron Wanttaja

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
...


Let me try to put it simpler. If I get pulled over by the cops and my
blood test shows "... 0.055 (ug/ml, ug/g) diazepam, 0.031 (ug/mL, ug/g)
dihydrocodeine, doxazosin, 0.152 (ug/ml, ug/g) hydrocodone, and 0.094
(ug/ml, ug/g) nordiazepam," is this a level at which the courts would
consider me impaired?

Ron Wanttaja


It would vary by state but the sub therapeutic levels would weigh at trial.
Utah has a statute - driving while impaired - meaning that a hard limit
isn't necessary for conviction. There is a second statute for driving over
the limit RE alcohol. Most state don't enumerate a fixed limit on drugs.
Mere presence with evidence of impairment is significant for arrest. In
Utah's case being under the 0.08% isn't a guarantee of acquittal in a DWI
case. If the prosecutor can show evidence that the driver was impaired they
can still obtain a conviction. Likewise with drugs. The key is often the
dash camera.

The flip side of the coin is how long drugs remain in the system even after
the effects may no longer be present. THC remains detectable for a very long
period of time. Its presence can be found in hair for weeks. Certain drugs
can give false positives for others in quantity. I had a 78 year old lady as
a patient a few years ago. She essentially overdosed herself on
dextromethphorothan. Her Urine tox came back positive for PCP! We sent a
second specimen to verify and it was positive again. Called poison control
and they verified that the cough syrup gives a false positive for PCP. This
raises question regarding when the meds were taken.

Guess in the long run we'll need to wait for the NTSB final. The dissection
of the chain of events will be a lesson.

tom c

Clark wrote:
Here's a listing of various drug levels. I believe it indicates that the
hydrocondone level was in the therapeutic range.

http://fscimage.fishersci.com/webima...oads/winek.pdf

Outstanding. Here's a comparison of the NTSB Factual Report level vs.
the table.

Acetaminophen (Tylenol): 10.01 (ug/ml, ug/g)
Table: 10-20 ug/ml is therapeutic.
Conclusion: Low therapeutic range

Diazepam (Valium): 0.055 (ug/ml, ug/g)
Table: 0.02-4.00 is therapeutic
Conclusion: Low therapeutic range

Dihydrocodeine (Codine derivative): 0.031 (ug/mL, ug/g)
Table: 0.03-0.25 is therapeutic
Conclusion: Low therapeutic range

Hydrocodone (Vicodin): 0.152 (ug/ml, ug/g)
Table: 0.03-0.25 is therapeutic
Conclusion: Mid therapeutic range

Nordiazepam: 0.094 (ug/ml, ug/g)
Table: 0.1-2.6 is therapeutic
Conclusion: Low therapeutic range (Wikipedia says that this is
a metabolite of Valim)

Everything looks in the therapeutic range, to this layman. I looked for
a list online of which are banned by the FAA, but didn't find one that
addressed anything other than general classes (AOPA has one, but I'm not
a member).

Ron Wanttaja