Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Safety Recommendation Details

Safety Recommendation A-88-102
Details
Synopsis: ON MARCH 4, 1987, FISCHER BROS. AVIATION, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS NORTHWEST AIRLINK, FLIGHT 2268, A CONSTRUCCIONES AERONAUTICAS, S.A. (CASA) C-212-CC, N160FB, CRASHED JUST INSIDE THE THRESHOLD OF RUNWAY 21R AT THE DETROIT METROPOLITAN WAYNE COUNTY AIRPORT IN ROMULUS, MICHIGAN. NINE OF THE 19 PERSONS ON BOARD WERE KILLED. THE AIRPLANE WAS DESTROYED BY IMPACT FORCES AND POSTCRASH FIRE. ON MAY 8, 1987, EXECUTIVE AIR CHARTER, INC., DOING BUSINESS AS AMERICAN EAGLE, FLIGHT 5452, A CASA C-212-CC, CRASHED SHORT OF RUNWAY 9 WHILE ON A VISUAL APPROACH TO THE AIRPORT AT MAYAGUEZ, PUERTO RICO, IN VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS. BOTH CREWMEMBERS WERE KILLED AND THE FOUR PASSENGERS SUSTAINED MINOR INJURIES. THE AIRPLANE WAS DESTROYED BY IMPACT FORCES AND POSTCRASH FIRE.
Recommendation: THE NTSB RECOMMENDS THAT THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION: AMEND TITLE 14 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PARTS 121 AND 135 TO REQUIRE A STALL WARNING DEVICE ON THOSE AIRPLANES THAT CURRENTLY USE "INHERENT AERODYNAMIC QUALITIES" (AERODYNAMIC BUFFETING) AS A STALL WARNING.
Original recommendation transmittal letter: PDF
Overall Status: Closed - Unacceptable Action
Mode: Aviation
Location: ROMULUS, MI, United States
Is Reiterated: No
Is Hazmat: No
Is NPRM: No
Accident #: DCA87MA022
Accident Reports: Fischer Bros. Aviation, Inc. dba NW Airlink, Flight 2268 Construcciones Aeronautics, S.A. (CASA) C-212-CC, N160FB
Report #: AAR-88-08
Accident Date: 3/4/1987
Issue Date: 10/17/1988
Date Closed: 10/27/1995
Addressee(s) and Addressee Status: FAA (Closed - Unacceptable Action)
Keyword(s):

Safety Recommendation History
From: NTSB
To: FAA
Date: 10/27/1995
Response: THE BOARD NOTES THAT THE FAA BELIEVES THAT AMENDMENTS 10 14 CFR PARTS 121 & 135 AS PROPOSED BY THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD HAVE NO MEANINGFUL EFFECT BECAUSE ALL POST-1980 TRANSPORT-CATEGORY ARIPLANES ALREADY INCORPORATE ARTIFICIAL STALL WARNING SYSTEMS. IN ADDITION, THE FAA BELIEVES THAT THE NUMBER OF AIRPLANES THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE REQUIREMENT TO INSALL STALL WARNING DEVICES IS VERY SMALL, & INCLUDES AIRPLANES OF PROVEN DESIGN WITH GOOD SAFETY RECORDS. THE BOARD CONTINUES TO BELIEVE THAT THE INSTALLATION OF SUCH DEVICES WOULD ENHANCE THE SAFETY OF THE SUBJECT AIRPLANES. BEAUSE THE FAA PLANS NO FUTHER ACTION ON THIS ISSUE, THE BOARD CLASSIFIES A-88-102 "CLOSED--UNACCEPTABLE ACTION."

From: FAA
To: NTSB
Date: 6/29/1995
Response: THE FAA HAD PREVIOUSLY INFORMED THE BOARD THAT IT WAS CONSIDERING THE ISSUANCE OF A NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING TO AMEND 14 CFR PARTS 121 & 135 TO REQUIRE STALL WARNING DEVICES ON THOSE AIRPLANES CURRENTLY USING INHERENT AERODYNAMIC QUALITIES AS A STALL WARNING.

From: NTSB
To: FAA
Date: 8/2/1990
Response: In Safety Recommendation A-88-102, we asked the FAA to amend Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 121 and 135 to require a stall warning device on airplanes that currently use "inherent aerodynamic qualities" (aerodynamic buffeting) as a stall warning. We note that the FAA is considering issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend 14 CFR Parts 121 and 135 to require stall warning devices on airplanes currently using inherent aerodynamic qualities as a stall warning. Pending your further response, this safety recommendation is classified as "Open-- Acceptable Response."

From: FAA
To: NTSB
Date: 5/1/1990
Response: "THE FAA COMPLETED ITS SURVEY OF THE AIRPLANE STALL WARNING SYSTEM DESIGNS OF AIRPLANES OPERATING UNDER 14 CFR PARTS 121 AND 135. THE FAA HAS CONCLUDED THAT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A FEW OF THE SMALLER "BUSINESS" TYPE AIRPLANES, ALL OF THE CANDIDATE AIRPLANE TYPES INCORPORATE SOME FORM OF STALL WARNING DEVICE RATHER THAN RELYING ON INHERENT AERODYNAMIC QUALITIES FOR STALL WARNING. BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY, THE FAA IS CONSIDERING THE ISSUANCE OF A NOTICE OF A PROPOSED RULEMAKING PROPOSING TO AMEND 14 CFR PARTS 121 AND 135 TO REQUIRE STALL WARNING DEVICES ON THOSE AIRPLANES CURRENTLY USING INHERENT AERODYNAMIC QUALITIES AS A STALL WARNING.--"

From: NTSB
To: FAA
Date: 12/8/1989
Response: In Safety Recommendation A-88-102 we asked the FAA to amend Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 121 and 135 to require a stall warning device on those airplanes that currently use "inherent aerodynamic qualities" (aerodynamic buffeting) as a stall warning. We note that the FAA is continuing to examine this issue to determine whether rulemaking action is required. Pending your further response, this safety recommendation is classified as "Open--Acceptable Action."

From: FAA
To: NTSB
Date: 11/9/1989
Response: THE FAA COMPLETED ITS SURVEY OF THE AIRPLANE STALL WARNING SYSTEM DESIGNS TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM. THE FAA HAS CONCLUDED THAT AIRPLANES THAT MAY TYPICALLY BE USED IN 14 CFR PARTS 121 AND 135 OPERATIONS HAVE SOME FORM OF STALL WARNING OTHER THAN THE USE OF "INHERENT AERODYNAMIC QUALITIES." THE FAA IS CONTINUING TO EXAMINE THIS ISSUE TO DETERMINE WHETHER RULEMAKING ACTION TO REQUIRE ARTIFICIAL STALL WARNING IN TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRPLANES IS JUSTIFIED IN VIEW OF THE SERVICE HISTORY ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXISTING REGULATIONS AND THE GUIDANCE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN ADVISORY CIRCULAR 25-7.

From: NTSB
To: FAA
Date: 5/19/1989
Response: Safety Recommendations A-88-101, -102, and -105 concern recommended regulatory changes addressing stall warnings and improper propeller use. Each of these safety recommendations is classified as "Open--Acceptable Action" pending completion of the evaluations and reviews discussed in the FAA response.

From: FAA
To: NTSB
Date: 1/12/1989
Response: THE FAA IS SURVEYING THE AIRPLANE STALL WARNING SYSTEM DESIGNS TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM. AS SOON AS THE SURVEY IS COMPLETED, I WILL APPRISE THE BOARD OF THE FAA'S PLANNED ACTIONS TO ADDRESS THIS RECOMMENDATION.