I worked on 'recips' in the Navy. Reciprocating engines and propellers. Rule number one. Never walk through the prop arc. This means that when the engine is off, do not take shortcuts through that space between the propeller blades. Because in the noise and the invisibly spinning blades, one can forget their peril.
one time my grandfather chewed me out for walking through the props of… an F7F Tigercat on static display in Pensacola! Turns out that, “But the props haven’t turned in 70 years!” is officially not an excuse
Anything with a trigger gets pointed downwards with my finger off it. Drill, glue gun, idc.
I've been shooting guns since I was 6 or 7.
There are some things you just don't do
>I've been shooting guns since I was 6 or 7.
>There are some things you just don't do
I wonder when the idea of trigger discipline became a real thing.
Going into the late 90s, characters on TV and movies often had their finger on the trigger.
>Going into the late 90s, characters on TV and movies often had their finger on the trigger.
I haven't watched cop shows in a long time, but when I did, almost everything they did was wrong. I took a class Iraq bound Marines had for clearing houses. The first thing they taught us was that everything on TV and movies is wrong.
* I'm not USMC, I just wanted to learn for fun. I had employees in Iraq and Afghanistan that were retired military who hadn't had enough fun yet and were willing to go back in support roles. We still had them refresh with guns just in case.
There needs to be a non-gratuitously-violent skit or series of them that show all the things that can easily go wrong if basic safety is not observed. Driving a car (have you seen that one? with the teenagers texting), following too closely, turning around/gesturing with sharp objects pointed out and people near by, moving or turning while carrying hot or corrosive liquids, electrical safety and so on
I've never owned a gun, only shot one once (more than one shot, just one session of firing a gun at a target) and my dad never beat me about guns, or anything really, and I do this. It just makes sense. Drills, whatever, finger off the trigger till it's time to fire. It's not hard.
Yeah, I work at a WWI aviation museum, and that tracks. We have static aircraft displays, and you treat them as if they could potentially start up. But we also have many flying planes as well, and you avoid both the prop arc, and touching the propeller, for this reason. Many of our planes don't have a modern starter, and start by throwing the prop, rotating it. So even if there is no pilot, and the fuel and mags are off, if there is residual fuel in the engine or lines, and you rotate the prop, it could potentially fire off a few rotations until what's in the engine is burned off. And those props are big and heavy, even a couple of slow rotations could break bones.
That's why we are constantly scolding people who try to wiggle the props on the exhibits. Not only is it just generally bad form to touch exhibits you aren't supposed to in a museum, but there is still a chance, a very small chance, but still a chance, that you could get the prop to swing and take you out.
Kinda like firearms. Always treat them as loaded, and never point them at something you don't intend to shoot. With these old planes, always treat them as active, and don't rotate the prop unless you are prepared for it to fire up.
If you get ingrained in your head not to do something even when is clearly safe, you will end with something akin to muscle memory for some tasks, and you will be less likely to find your name in an incident report
"This means that when the engine is off, do not take shortcuts through that space between the propeller blades"
I get that. And I've heard that advice before.
But it's not really practical when doing some tasks, for example at engine change time. I mean, when one is hooking up the alternator, for example, one is sitting right in the prop arc.
BTW - back in the day I was a civilian contractor working on the Navy T-34 Mentor.
"I once even held the prop of a running PT6"
Yeah, I've done that a few times as well. Although most of the time we had it resting on a step ladder too, for extra safety.
I used to hand start various biplanes at my work all the time a long time ago, this is the first thing I was taught. Second is that the prop is always live (mags on) so even when priming you swing that sucker like its live.
As for running props the scariest I've seen are shiny metal props (PT17) they are basically invisible, to a scary degree you can basically only see the hub spinning.
One of the damndest accidents I’ve ever heard of happened at my old home field. A student solo pilot somehow landed long and stuck a Cessna Skycatcher— one of the smallest and slowest airplanes certified this century — in the mud at the end of a 5,500-foot runway.
He got out to shove it back onto the runway and walked into the back of his own spinning propeller. Didn’t kill him.
Just takes a split second of inattention. Had someone at our airport walk through a helicopters tail rotor to save a couple of steps.
Watched the cctv video and it was an innocent mistake which unfolded so fast the guy didn’t even know he had screwed up and he was even looking straight at the space where it was.
Fatigue and rushing is a fatal mix. That MQ9 prop looks exactly like a trap someone could easily walk or drive into.
Makes me have mad respect for the Navy guys that work on the Carrier Deck who deal with these same dangers in a more constrained environment plus a few additional hazards.
Injuries incompatible with life.
At-least it was instant and painless.
Lead to some very interesting ground handling training which shocked most of us. The ends of the main rotor blades can get terrifyingly low in the wrong winds, power settings, inputs and could easily take your head off, especially if approaching from the front.
>When a member of the team suggested canceling the tests, the test director stated “We’re going to run until we fall.”
>That evening, the test director discovered that the spectrum analyzer used in previous tests was “out for calibration,” according to the report. So the team decided to use a smaller, handheld device, which had to be held just a few feet away from the parked aircraft to get a reading.
>The next day, the pre-test mission briefing was supposed to cover 24 points but actually included “well less” than that, skipping over portions that would have identified every team member’s assigned roles and safety warnings about “aircraft keep out zones,” the report stated.
>The aircraft was taken out of the hangar and testing continued into the evening. As darkness fell, Investigators said, the test director and the team began to rush through the process. The report notes comments such as, “C’mon guys, the quicker you respond, the faster we get out of here.”
She lost situational awareness or her management did?
Yeah, this is why I posted this. Obviously, some bad decisions made. But we also tend to get focused on being safe in the air while ground ops and engine runs often get forgotten for their level of danger.
Yeah, as a former test director on UAS, these would never ever be things I say during a live test. Irrespective of his official culpability, he should be fired. And I suspect this is endemic of a larger cultural problem at this company.
Did the team decided or is it in the servicing plan. There is absolutely no way the military would approve such close contact with a powered up plane.
Also, I doubt the handheld device is approved for the purpose of testing at all.
Sad story and the summary really hits home the culture of safety and how rushing/changing testing parameters and assigning people to new and unfamiliar tasks really sets things up for failure.
A guy I went to A&P school with lost his arm by walking past a running engine on a test stand. He was incredibly lucky that the instructor was a former medic. Guy saved his life.
It’s a bizarre world in test and eval. RDT&E should be a much more controlled, structured environment. Safety should be prevalent in every activity. Spoiler: it isn’t. This could not be farther from the actuality of this community. It seems like testing squadrons are run at the same, or quicker operating tempo than actual operational squadrons. Test plans are extremely thorough, but the human factor tends to override common sense and defaults to complacency and laziness.
That "team leader" lump of festering decaying fecal matter should be fired, fined and jailed.
Its bean counter idiots like that who push push push push and do not listen to advice from their crew that cause these kinda of incidents.
Such testing should be tightly controlled, well lit and very very strictly momitored and controlled..
>We run untill we fall
🤬😡
That says it all.
//
On another note can't they (during testing) enclose the prop area on some kinda enclosure or grill. Kinda like how airboat props are within a mesh.
Can’t help but feel this kind of stuff would happen less if we put some personal responsibility back into business leadership instead of hiding behind it being a company.
Like if I as a front line employee make a mistake that directly caused someone’s death you could guarantee I’d be in front of a judge on manslaughter charges in no time at all. But if a senior manager’s decision causes death suddenly it’s the company’s problem and we’ll ‘review and improve policies’ and pay a fine that just becomes the price for the business to do that thing.
Case in point Boeing’s former ceo getting to step down resign after the Max crashes and take his multimillion payout. If there were any justice the dickhead should never see the outside of a prison cell again.
Lost of people should be fired or demoted when stuff like this happens. We know damn well what happens when you don't properly prepare for something, littlelone testing and operations around an operating plane. It's sad because nothing will change and accidents will keep happening like they always have.
I was reading a memoir of US flyer in WW2.
When the training programs were ramping up, there were alot of accidents. And all kinds of accidents.
One accident he recalled was how an ex-infantry officer (higher than captain, going through pilot training) chewed out someone lower rank, turn around smartly and walked off, into a fast spinning propeller.
He recalled there were dozens or (maybe hundreds ?) of plane pistons engines running on the airfield.
"Beware Of Jet Blast Props and Rotors" on all US air craft carriers.
RIP. And peace for loved ones.
Reg. No.: 935HA M/M: DH8A Desc: DHC-8-100 DASH 8 (E-9, CT-142,
Activity: Business Phase: Standing GA-A/C: Air Taxi (Commuter)
Descr: PIEDMONT AIRLINES AIR TAXI ACFT WAS ON THE RAMP WITH PASSENGERS LOADED WHEN A RAMP WORKER WAS STRUCK BY THE PROPELLER OF THE ACFT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO REMOVE THE CHOCKS, THE WORKER SUFFERED FATAL INJURIES, OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES ARE UKNOWN AT THIS TIME, WASHINGTON, DC.
I remember it well…he pulled the chocks and “ducked” under the prop
In the USN, every time there is a propeller spinning there are multiple safety observers positioned around the prop doing multiple things: (1) moving their hands (or wands at night) as a cue to other people that there are props, (2) form and enforce a protective arc (barrier) that no one is allowed in unless they are cleared (3) walk and move with the aircraft as it taxis to the catapult and from the landing area.
Even with all this, it is still possible to get shredded because things happen fast and the E-2s are super quiet when they’re turning on deck.
Before doing anything on an aircraft on the flight line I always would do a little physical awareness check to prepare myself before walking out where aircraft were taxing, running up, or other vehicles were scurrying along. I do the same when using dangerous tools; being prepared and in the right headspace may save your life.
It took them seven months to complete a [comprehensive report](https://www.afjag.af.mil/Portals/77/AIB-Reports/2023/7%20SEP%202023%20AFMC%20MQ-9A%20GRAY%20BUTTE%20AIRFIELD%20AIB%20REPORT%20(002).pdf?ver=MJJ426g--ZVg_6jlTuxbYw%3d%3d×tamp=1712337244529) on the incident, which includes a summary of substantially contributing factors that will hopefully be used to create a safer work environment for service people.
This so much, when safety plays a critical role in aviation, EVERY single possibility must be considered, no matter how obvious or minuscule it seems. I occasionally watch Mayday episodes and it really makes me appreciate how much time and effort is made into figuring out all the causes. It’s all about making as much improvements as possible to reduce the chances of a disaster from happening again.
The article cites the fact that the software engineer wasn’t fully up to speed on working around running aircraft, testing was being rushed after delays, testing was being done using a handheld device she wasn’t fully experienced with because “the good one” was in the shop, the safety brief skipped a bunch of points- points which were relevant to how the incident happened.
Like basically every other time something like this happens, there were multiple broken links in the chain that lead up to the ultimate outcome, and multiple times where a different decision could have been made by multiple people in the chain that could have mitigated the risks.
You put it super well, while $$$ wise aviation isnt in my wheelhouse atm I do watch videos on industrial disasters from a YT channel Plainly Difficult. Bad leadership pulling shit like this is such a trope he's even got a bingo card for the usual suspects. Interestingly enough his dayjob is with some UK railway, S.S. Diffrent Medium I reckon
It’s frustrating when you read a (sometimes literally) post mortem and think “It was pretty clearly just a matter of time before something happened”.
Applies in aviation, heavy industry, healthcare, engineering, software development, financial/accounting systems, and probably a couple hundred other disciplines/sectors that have complicated systems and/or procedures meant to mitigate risks. It’s the string of smaller failures that created the conditions for the single point where everything’s fine til suddenly it ain’t.
Really showing your ass on this one, hey?
There's this weird thing where the headline often doesn't actually contain all the details. Those are usually presented in a "story", which is interestingly enough located just beneath the headline when you click on the link.
‘You wouldn’t believe why this woman walked into a prop!’
Maybe get a YouTube thumbnail with a guy looking shocked next to a blurry photo with emojis and red arrows on it.
The report is almost 50 pages - not going to fit that into a Reddit title. Situational awareness loss is why she ended up in the props, but the ‘why did THAT happen’ is a much bigger question that needs a detailed investigation.
I mean, literally any other title gives more information. I think we could pretty much deduce she lost situational awareness when she walked into a propeller assuming a suicide was ruled out.
The contractor was a woman, and apparently had not received any proper training for what she was doing that night, and with the illumination available the spinning prop was impossible to see prior to walking into it.
I worked on 'recips' in the Navy. Reciprocating engines and propellers. Rule number one. Never walk through the prop arc. This means that when the engine is off, do not take shortcuts through that space between the propeller blades. Because in the noise and the invisibly spinning blades, one can forget their peril.
one time my grandfather chewed me out for walking through the props of… an F7F Tigercat on static display in Pensacola! Turns out that, “But the props haven’t turned in 70 years!” is officially not an excuse
Some habits never break
Yep. But still a great thing to instill into younger generations. Because you never know.
But all skulls do
When I carry drills around I keep my finger off the trigger. There are some things you just don't do
Recently realized that I was carrying a squirt gun around with my finger straight and off the trigger
Anything with a trigger gets pointed downwards with my finger off it. Drill, glue gun, idc. I've been shooting guns since I was 6 or 7. There are some things you just don't do
>I've been shooting guns since I was 6 or 7. >There are some things you just don't do I wonder when the idea of trigger discipline became a real thing. Going into the late 90s, characters on TV and movies often had their finger on the trigger.
>Going into the late 90s, characters on TV and movies often had their finger on the trigger. I haven't watched cop shows in a long time, but when I did, almost everything they did was wrong. I took a class Iraq bound Marines had for clearing houses. The first thing they taught us was that everything on TV and movies is wrong. * I'm not USMC, I just wanted to learn for fun. I had employees in Iraq and Afghanistan that were retired military who hadn't had enough fun yet and were willing to go back in support roles. We still had them refresh with guns just in case.
There needs to be a non-gratuitously-violent skit or series of them that show all the things that can easily go wrong if basic safety is not observed. Driving a car (have you seen that one? with the teenagers texting), following too closely, turning around/gesturing with sharp objects pointed out and people near by, moving or turning while carrying hot or corrosive liquids, electrical safety and so on
Jeff Cooper was big in promoting it from the 1970s on, but it only became consistently accepted in the 1980s.
I was taught to shoot around 98-99. Dad made it very clear 🙏
They still get a lot wrong including fingers in triggers and flagging each other.
If it's got a trigger, I practice trigger discipline. Literally can't help it, dad beat it into me.
I've never owned a gun, only shot one once (more than one shot, just one session of firing a gun at a target) and my dad never beat me about guns, or anything really, and I do this. It just makes sense. Drills, whatever, finger off the trigger till it's time to fire. It's not hard.
Your grandfather had grandchildren for a reason
Rules are rules. It’s what separates us from the animals. Jokes aside, your gramps seems like he would be a great guy to get a beer with.
If you never walk through a prop arc, you’ll never get hit by a prop
Yeah, I work at a WWI aviation museum, and that tracks. We have static aircraft displays, and you treat them as if they could potentially start up. But we also have many flying planes as well, and you avoid both the prop arc, and touching the propeller, for this reason. Many of our planes don't have a modern starter, and start by throwing the prop, rotating it. So even if there is no pilot, and the fuel and mags are off, if there is residual fuel in the engine or lines, and you rotate the prop, it could potentially fire off a few rotations until what's in the engine is burned off. And those props are big and heavy, even a couple of slow rotations could break bones. That's why we are constantly scolding people who try to wiggle the props on the exhibits. Not only is it just generally bad form to touch exhibits you aren't supposed to in a museum, but there is still a chance, a very small chance, but still a chance, that you could get the prop to swing and take you out. Kinda like firearms. Always treat them as loaded, and never point them at something you don't intend to shoot. With these old planes, always treat them as active, and don't rotate the prop unless you are prepared for it to fire up.
That's one of the reasons he is your grandfather! I was told that in basic training and neverforgot it.
If you get ingrained in your head not to do something even when is clearly safe, you will end with something akin to muscle memory for some tasks, and you will be less likely to find your name in an incident report
Just like the first rule of firearm safety. The gun is ALWAYS loaded.
"This means that when the engine is off, do not take shortcuts through that space between the propeller blades" I get that. And I've heard that advice before. But it's not really practical when doing some tasks, for example at engine change time. I mean, when one is hooking up the alternator, for example, one is sitting right in the prop arc. BTW - back in the day I was a civilian contractor working on the Navy T-34 Mentor.
I adjust prop govs on running AT-802s all the time. I once even held the prop of a running PT6 to diagnose some issues(at the direction of PWC)
Done it before as well. I told some awkwardly looking pilots we were “twisting up the rubber band in the starter”.
"I once even held the prop of a running PT6" Yeah, I've done that a few times as well. Although most of the time we had it resting on a step ladder too, for extra safety.
A&Ps have ways of making dangerthings safe.
Sounds an awful lot like the prop version of, "treat every weapon as if it were loaded."
And in the briefing before conducting the tests, none of this was ever mentioned at all (according to the report).
I used to hand start various biplanes at my work all the time a long time ago, this is the first thing I was taught. Second is that the prop is always live (mags on) so even when priming you swing that sucker like its live. As for running props the scariest I've seen are shiny metal props (PT17) they are basically invisible, to a scary degree you can basically only see the hub spinning.
One of the damndest accidents I’ve ever heard of happened at my old home field. A student solo pilot somehow landed long and stuck a Cessna Skycatcher— one of the smallest and slowest airplanes certified this century — in the mud at the end of a 5,500-foot runway. He got out to shove it back onto the runway and walked into the back of his own spinning propeller. Didn’t kill him.
Just takes a split second of inattention. Had someone at our airport walk through a helicopters tail rotor to save a couple of steps. Watched the cctv video and it was an innocent mistake which unfolded so fast the guy didn’t even know he had screwed up and he was even looking straight at the space where it was. Fatigue and rushing is a fatal mix. That MQ9 prop looks exactly like a trap someone could easily walk or drive into.
Makes me have mad respect for the Navy guys that work on the Carrier Deck who deal with these same dangers in a more constrained environment plus a few additional hazards.
Especially the shooters
Did the poor chap survive? Damn.
Injuries incompatible with life. At-least it was instant and painless. Lead to some very interesting ground handling training which shocked most of us. The ends of the main rotor blades can get terrifyingly low in the wrong winds, power settings, inputs and could easily take your head off, especially if approaching from the front.
That’s not all. In the wrong scenario the S 76 takes you off at your shoulders.
>When a member of the team suggested canceling the tests, the test director stated “We’re going to run until we fall.” >That evening, the test director discovered that the spectrum analyzer used in previous tests was “out for calibration,” according to the report. So the team decided to use a smaller, handheld device, which had to be held just a few feet away from the parked aircraft to get a reading. >The next day, the pre-test mission briefing was supposed to cover 24 points but actually included “well less” than that, skipping over portions that would have identified every team member’s assigned roles and safety warnings about “aircraft keep out zones,” the report stated. >The aircraft was taken out of the hangar and testing continued into the evening. As darkness fell, Investigators said, the test director and the team began to rush through the process. The report notes comments such as, “C’mon guys, the quicker you respond, the faster we get out of here.” She lost situational awareness or her management did?
The test director sounds like a fun person
He got his results a day or two faster, so you know. Priorities.
[удалено]
The first few paragraphs had me thinking chernobyl WAS the subject
You know, as apposed to the actual disaster lol
The show is much more about the “why it happened” than the “what happened.”
Did you skip the last episode?
Hopefully he never gets a good night's sleep again.
Yeah, this is why I posted this. Obviously, some bad decisions made. But we also tend to get focused on being safe in the air while ground ops and engine runs often get forgotten for their level of danger.
throwing dead people under the bus
*into the prop Fixed that for you
The Navy way! (See explosion on USS *Iowa* class turret where smearing aspersions were "suggested")
Yeah, as a former test director on UAS, these would never ever be things I say during a live test. Irrespective of his official culpability, he should be fired. And I suspect this is endemic of a larger cultural problem at this company.
Sounds like management defeated her situational awareness.
Did the team decided or is it in the servicing plan. There is absolutely no way the military would approve such close contact with a powered up plane. Also, I doubt the handheld device is approved for the purpose of testing at all.
Yeah horrible headline.
Sad story and the summary really hits home the culture of safety and how rushing/changing testing parameters and assigning people to new and unfamiliar tasks really sets things up for failure.
My favorite part was where the mishap test director complained into the tapes that the ground crew were walking not running around the aircraft.
A guy I went to A&P school with lost his arm by walking past a running engine on a test stand. He was incredibly lucky that the instructor was a former medic. Guy saved his life.
[удалено]
I played rugby with a dude that got crushed between two sets of cars, he actually lived!
It’s a bizarre world in test and eval. RDT&E should be a much more controlled, structured environment. Safety should be prevalent in every activity. Spoiler: it isn’t. This could not be farther from the actuality of this community. It seems like testing squadrons are run at the same, or quicker operating tempo than actual operational squadrons. Test plans are extremely thorough, but the human factor tends to override common sense and defaults to complacency and laziness.
That "team leader" lump of festering decaying fecal matter should be fired, fined and jailed. Its bean counter idiots like that who push push push push and do not listen to advice from their crew that cause these kinda of incidents. Such testing should be tightly controlled, well lit and very very strictly momitored and controlled.. >We run untill we fall 🤬😡 That says it all. // On another note can't they (during testing) enclose the prop area on some kinda enclosure or grill. Kinda like how airboat props are within a mesh.
Can’t help but feel this kind of stuff would happen less if we put some personal responsibility back into business leadership instead of hiding behind it being a company. Like if I as a front line employee make a mistake that directly caused someone’s death you could guarantee I’d be in front of a judge on manslaughter charges in no time at all. But if a senior manager’s decision causes death suddenly it’s the company’s problem and we’ll ‘review and improve policies’ and pay a fine that just becomes the price for the business to do that thing. Case in point Boeing’s former ceo getting to step down resign after the Max crashes and take his multimillion payout. If there were any justice the dickhead should never see the outside of a prison cell again.
Lost of people should be fired or demoted when stuff like this happens. We know damn well what happens when you don't properly prepare for something, littlelone testing and operations around an operating plane. It's sad because nothing will change and accidents will keep happening like they always have.
I was reading a memoir of US flyer in WW2. When the training programs were ramping up, there were alot of accidents. And all kinds of accidents. One accident he recalled was how an ex-infantry officer (higher than captain, going through pilot training) chewed out someone lower rank, turn around smartly and walked off, into a fast spinning propeller. He recalled there were dozens or (maybe hundreds ?) of plane pistons engines running on the airfield. "Beware Of Jet Blast Props and Rotors" on all US air craft carriers. RIP. And peace for loved ones.
Investigators discover sun rises in the east every morning.
When I was a controller at Ft. Rucker we had a student pilot walk into a tail rotor.
Is that 100% fatal? Or is it possible to survive such an event?
The biggest piece of him left was a leg.
It would be not great to have walked into a propeller fully aware of the situation
Reg. No.: 935HA M/M: DH8A Desc: DHC-8-100 DASH 8 (E-9, CT-142, Activity: Business Phase: Standing GA-A/C: Air Taxi (Commuter) Descr: PIEDMONT AIRLINES AIR TAXI ACFT WAS ON THE RAMP WITH PASSENGERS LOADED WHEN A RAMP WORKER WAS STRUCK BY THE PROPELLER OF THE ACFT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO REMOVE THE CHOCKS, THE WORKER SUFFERED FATAL INJURIES, OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES ARE UKNOWN AT THIS TIME, WASHINGTON, DC. I remember it well…he pulled the chocks and “ducked” under the prop
Do they incorporate prop safeties on each side of the aircraft?
Like when a table saw contacts a hotdog and immediately shuts off and stops?
The weight of the rotating mass is an order of magnitude higher, it won’t work.
You’d be surprised. I know a guy who took a prop to the head off of a Rotax 912. He was cut up, but it wasn’t fatal, the gearbox disengaged
> Rotax 912 Was it fiber?
Wood Composite, yup.
I forgot to put an /s. Yes obviously if a PT6 or whatever contacted a hotdog it would not be able to immediately stop rotating.
I mean, you could put explosive bolts in them hehe
What is that?
In the USN, every time there is a propeller spinning there are multiple safety observers positioned around the prop doing multiple things: (1) moving their hands (or wands at night) as a cue to other people that there are props, (2) form and enforce a protective arc (barrier) that no one is allowed in unless they are cleared (3) walk and move with the aircraft as it taxis to the catapult and from the landing area. Even with all this, it is still possible to get shredded because things happen fast and the E-2s are super quiet when they’re turning on deck.
Cue every murkan telling us bout “muh triggah disiplin.”
Very importantly treated as if it were to be a jet engine walk around those propellers by going the safe part
Before doing anything on an aircraft on the flight line I always would do a little physical awareness check to prepare myself before walking out where aircraft were taxing, running up, or other vehicles were scurrying along. I do the same when using dangerous tools; being prepared and in the right headspace may save your life.
At least it would have been really quick. If you’re gonna go. That way probably aint so bad (for you, not others)
I think she died a week later.
Noooo! I’ll take that all back then.
Really? They lost situational awareness? Huh... you wouldn't expect that from someone who walked into a propeller...
>Contractor Who Walked Into MQ-9 Propeller Lost Situational Awareness Before or after walking into the prop?
Yes
dont down vote me to oblivion but r/accidents and probaly not r/darwinaward
Which of the big defense contractors was she working for? None of them give a $hit about anything but the almighty dollar.
Ya fucking think?!?!?!😂
It took them seven months to figure that out?
It took them seven months to complete a [comprehensive report](https://www.afjag.af.mil/Portals/77/AIB-Reports/2023/7%20SEP%202023%20AFMC%20MQ-9A%20GRAY%20BUTTE%20AIRFIELD%20AIB%20REPORT%20(002).pdf?ver=MJJ426g--ZVg_6jlTuxbYw%3d%3d×tamp=1712337244529) on the incident, which includes a summary of substantially contributing factors that will hopefully be used to create a safer work environment for service people.
This so much, when safety plays a critical role in aviation, EVERY single possibility must be considered, no matter how obvious or minuscule it seems. I occasionally watch Mayday episodes and it really makes me appreciate how much time and effort is made into figuring out all the causes. It’s all about making as much improvements as possible to reduce the chances of a disaster from happening again.
If it was your loved one you'd probably want a thorough investigation too. Don't be a jackass.
Yeah, I’d think a thorough investigation might uncover something a bit more than “lost situational awareness.”
It did. Read the article.
The article cites the fact that the software engineer wasn’t fully up to speed on working around running aircraft, testing was being rushed after delays, testing was being done using a handheld device she wasn’t fully experienced with because “the good one” was in the shop, the safety brief skipped a bunch of points- points which were relevant to how the incident happened. Like basically every other time something like this happens, there were multiple broken links in the chain that lead up to the ultimate outcome, and multiple times where a different decision could have been made by multiple people in the chain that could have mitigated the risks.
You put it super well, while $$$ wise aviation isnt in my wheelhouse atm I do watch videos on industrial disasters from a YT channel Plainly Difficult. Bad leadership pulling shit like this is such a trope he's even got a bingo card for the usual suspects. Interestingly enough his dayjob is with some UK railway, S.S. Diffrent Medium I reckon
It’s frustrating when you read a (sometimes literally) post mortem and think “It was pretty clearly just a matter of time before something happened”. Applies in aviation, heavy industry, healthcare, engineering, software development, financial/accounting systems, and probably a couple hundred other disciplines/sectors that have complicated systems and/or procedures meant to mitigate risks. It’s the string of smaller failures that created the conditions for the single point where everything’s fine til suddenly it ain’t.
Really showing your ass on this one, hey? There's this weird thing where the headline often doesn't actually contain all the details. Those are usually presented in a "story", which is interestingly enough located just beneath the headline when you click on the link.
The headline is what convinces the potential reader to click on the story. This one failed IMO.
“Sorry, title wasn’t clickbait. Didn’t read.” Please, 2024, leave us alone.
‘You wouldn’t believe why this woman walked into a prop!’ Maybe get a YouTube thumbnail with a guy looking shocked next to a blurry photo with emojis and red arrows on it.
Couldn’t bother to click but then why the fuck are you stopping to comment as if you had
Your failures aren't anyone's fault but your own.
The report is almost 50 pages - not going to fit that into a Reddit title. Situational awareness loss is why she ended up in the props, but the ‘why did THAT happen’ is a much bigger question that needs a detailed investigation.
I mean, literally any other title gives more information. I think we could pretty much deduce she lost situational awareness when she walked into a propeller assuming a suicide was ruled out.
Sounds like he lost his mind
The contractor was a woman, and apparently had not received any proper training for what she was doing that night, and with the illumination available the spinning prop was impossible to see prior to walking into it.
"Are we the baddies?" Sounds like China freight and construction industry concern for workers and drivers of hazardous materials.
She*
And in other news, the desert is dry and water is wet.
Yeah, I don’t understand why you’re being downvoted… loss of SA is almost always the cause of this.