In response, find two peer discussions and post a 100+ word response each to two different discussions. (just reply your thought after you read it doesn't need reference and scholarly sources) 1. Disc

In response, find two peer discussions and post a 100+ word response each to two different discussions. (just reply your thought after you read it doesn't need reference and scholarly sources)

1. Discussions

Included with the conclusions of the NTSB report it states that the aircraft was “not permissible to fly… under Federal regulation.” However this should not be a legal question but a question of the organization because there were several latent errors that occurred that if caught could have stopped this accident from happening. First and foremost if they were set on continuing to use this aircraft the radar circuit board should have been removed, and deactivated. When asked to produce maintenance documents on the aircraft they could  not give the yellow copy of the form needed.  While it was undetermined what exactly started the fire, it is reasonable to assume the radar circuit board was the cause. It is likely that the pilot reset the radar circuit breaker when doing his preflight check. The main consideration in if this was legal or not is if the pilot knew the radar chip was a hazard when activated. Although the maintenance binder was placed on the throttle of the aircraft, the pilot could have neglected to look or skimmed, missing important information needed during his flight. This could have led to him resetting the radar circuit breaker. After reviewing the case I personally believe that is was not legal for this plane to fly because the paperwork was filled out but not processed properly. 

2. Discussions

I agree with NASCAR’s statement that the airplane was airworthy. The NASCSAR pilot followed all correct procedure according to 14 CFR 91.213 (d). The PIC deliberately disabled the radar, and even wrote a note labeling his actions and the status of the aircraft. However, the description states that the note was placed near the throttle and not labeled near the radar. The pilot still accomplished the same end result by doing this that a placard would have accomplished even though it was not exactly what the regulation state. Furthermore, the NTSB reports that the fire in the was likely caused by the fact that the weather radar was turned off because there was a discrepancy. However, they contradict themselves in a different sentence which states “There is insufficient evidence to conclusively determine the origin of the fire.” However, they still conclude that the actions of the pilots and company are what causes the plane to catch fire and ultimately crash.  Although there was an issue with the radar system the pilot labeled the problem and complied with the airworthiness directives in 14 CFR 91.213(d). While I may have not decided to fly with this issue, they are within the parameters.