[quote author=Rookie Pilot link=topic=9098.msg24954#msg24954 date=1538166349]
[quote author=digits link=topic=9098.msg24948#msg24948 date=1538153012]
[quote author=Nark link=topic=9098.msg24946#msg24946 date=1538152151]
I’m captain of the exact same aircraft for a different company.
13 feet is absolutely unacceptable.
[/quote]
Okay, that means you should be able to explain to me why.
Why is it that 15ft clearance for an airplane with one engine out on a wet runway and reduced manoeuvrability is deemed acceptable and certified, but 13ft in a perfectly functioning airplane is not?
[/quote]
If this was a normal event; why did the crew willingly allowed the tapes to be overwritten?
Don't even think of calling that an oversight.
The company should be charged with destroying evidence to impede an investigation.
[/quote]
Woud you really pull a circuit breaker (or whatever it is you need to do to preserve the CVR etc) after a go-around?
They called ATC and their company, and nobody seemed to care. Why would you preserve the tapes, and thus effectively be flying around without datarecord for the next few flights untill someone felt like copying them?
If the controller or the company told them "holy crap, you screwed up. you're grounded", the tapes would have been preserved. That didn't happen.
AC Near crash SFO - NOTAMS are a bunch of Garbage and pilot fatigue
-
digits
[quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=9098.msg24953#msg24953 date=1538161163]
[font=verdana]
If the system was working properly these two pilots would have been fired and charged with gross negligence.
[/font]
[/quote]
[quote]
[font=verdana][i]Gross negligence[/i] is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both.[/font][/quote]
[font=verdana]Please explain how the actions of the crew can be described as gross negligence? Do you think they intentionally lined up with the taxiway?[/font]
[font=verdana]
If the system was working properly these two pilots would have been fired and charged with gross negligence.
[/font]
[/quote]
[quote]
[font=verdana][i]Gross negligence[/i] is a conscious and voluntary disregard of the need to use reasonable care, which is likely to cause foreseeable grave injury or harm to persons, property, or both.[/font][/quote]
[font=verdana]Please explain how the actions of the crew can be described as gross negligence? Do you think they intentionally lined up with the taxiway?[/font]
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
They were lazy and did not bother to dial in the localizer.
If they were a [i]half a second[/i] slower on the go-around there
would have been a terrible mess.
I think a one year suspension for both pilots would give them
time to think about it, but the rules are different for different
people.
If they were a [i]half a second[/i] slower on the go-around there
would have been a terrible mess.
I think a one year suspension for both pilots would give them
time to think about it, but the rules are different for different
people.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
[quote]Do you think they intentionally lined up with the taxiway?[/quote]
No I don't.
They were flying a night visual approach.
There were two pilots flying that airplane they did not have proper situational awareness at any time during the approach until they almost hit a line of three big airline airplanes facing them parked on the taxiway with all their lights on Red, Green and white lights.
Air Canada can save more money by just flying their airplanes single pilot because having two does not seem to make it much safer.
It was a " Visual " approach.
They were not aware of where they were landing until they almost landed on those well lit up airplanes.
That in my opinion is negligence or incompetence or both on the part of the crew.
If they had been my employees I would have fired them.
No I don't.
They were flying a night visual approach.
There were two pilots flying that airplane they did not have proper situational awareness at any time during the approach until they almost hit a line of three big airline airplanes facing them parked on the taxiway with all their lights on Red, Green and white lights.
Air Canada can save more money by just flying their airplanes single pilot because having two does not seem to make it much safer.
It was a " Visual " approach.
They were not aware of where they were landing until they almost landed on those well lit up airplanes.
That in my opinion is negligence or incompetence or both on the part of the crew.
If they had been my employees I would have fired them.
-
Eric Janson
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:31 am
[quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=9098.msg24953#msg24953 date=1538161163]
[quote][font=verdana]People are using this as an example of how the system failed. I consider this an example of the system working: they noticed something was wrong, and they went around. Ideally they should have noticed it sooner, or not have made the mistake earlier. Absolutely. But you can't blame them for "the worst accident in aviation history" because there happened to be a bunch of airliners on the taxiway.[/font][/quote][font=verdana]If the system was working properly these two pilots would have been fired and charged with gross negligence.[/font][/quote]
If I had done this at my present company - I'm 100% certain it would cost me my job.
Same if I had been flying in the Montego Bay incident or the St. Maarten incident.
[quote][font=verdana]People are using this as an example of how the system failed. I consider this an example of the system working: they noticed something was wrong, and they went around. Ideally they should have noticed it sooner, or not have made the mistake earlier. Absolutely. But you can't blame them for "the worst accident in aviation history" because there happened to be a bunch of airliners on the taxiway.[/font][/quote][font=verdana]If the system was working properly these two pilots would have been fired and charged with gross negligence.[/font][/quote]
If I had done this at my present company - I'm 100% certain it would cost me my job.
Same if I had been flying in the Montego Bay incident or the St. Maarten incident.
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
[quote]If I had done this - I'm 100% certain it would cost me my job[/quote]
Different rules for different people. The Kennedys and the Clintons can rape
and kill women, because they are the elite.
Similarly, AC are the elite. If anything bad happens, it can't [i]possibly[/i] be their
fault.
Just a "hard landing", folks. Nothing to see here.
[img width=500 height=281]https://i.cbc.ca/1.3014702.1495118278!/ ... ngines.jpg[/img]
Meanwhile, Westjet denied this happened:
[img width=500 height=275]http://christinenegroni.com/wp-content/ ... 24x565.jpg[/img]
It's funny how people furiously try to obscure the incontrovertible
lesson of history, is that [u]four bars should not be allowed to fly an
approach without [b]BOTH[/b] horizontal and vertical guidance[/u].
[size=18pt][b]NO ILS -> NO APPROACH[/b][/size]
All the four bars can flap their lips all they want to, but they cannot
alter the fact that if the AC crew hadn't been so fucking lazy and
dialed in the LOC freq, they could have easily lined up on the runway
at SFO.
No one gives a fuck about the facts. It's all about fake news, and
pushing their narratives. People aren't stupid - they know about all
the carnage resulting from non-precision approaches over the decades
and [u]they don't care[/u].
Some day, people may learn that [u]you can synthesize an ILS from GPS[/u].
Won't that be a wonderful world? Four bars can stop scaring the shit
out of the rest of us.
Different rules for different people. The Kennedys and the Clintons can rape
and kill women, because they are the elite.
Similarly, AC are the elite. If anything bad happens, it can't [i]possibly[/i] be their
fault.
Just a "hard landing", folks. Nothing to see here.
[img width=500 height=281]https://i.cbc.ca/1.3014702.1495118278!/ ... ngines.jpg[/img]
Meanwhile, Westjet denied this happened:
[img width=500 height=275]http://christinenegroni.com/wp-content/ ... 24x565.jpg[/img]
It's funny how people furiously try to obscure the incontrovertible
lesson of history, is that [u]four bars should not be allowed to fly an
approach without [b]BOTH[/b] horizontal and vertical guidance[/u].
[size=18pt][b]NO ILS -> NO APPROACH[/b][/size]
All the four bars can flap their lips all they want to, but they cannot
alter the fact that if the AC crew hadn't been so fucking lazy and
dialed in the LOC freq, they could have easily lined up on the runway
at SFO.
No one gives a fuck about the facts. It's all about fake news, and
pushing their narratives. People aren't stupid - they know about all
the carnage resulting from non-precision approaches over the decades
and [u]they don't care[/u].
Some day, people may learn that [u]you can synthesize an ILS from GPS[/u].
Won't that be a wonderful world? Four bars can stop scaring the shit
out of the rest of us.
-
Nark1
Andy: fun fact:
Using 1980’s technology you can synthesize a GPS line off a point.... like a runway threshold.
You can be a pilot, and synthesize a 3:1 glidepath: 3 miles=1500’ 2 miles=1000’ 1mile =500’
No need to come within 13’ of another plane.
I have flown fatigued many times. Too many times really. I use all the tools I can to make sure I don’t end up on the news or message boards. Like backing up my approach. Many many many approach controllers will clear you for a visual way ahead of you lining up with the runway. It allows reduced separation and they can squeeze more planes in.
Digits:
I’m wondering if you have changed your thought process on why 13’ from another airplane on a taxiway is no big deal.
Using 1980’s technology you can synthesize a GPS line off a point.... like a runway threshold.
You can be a pilot, and synthesize a 3:1 glidepath: 3 miles=1500’ 2 miles=1000’ 1mile =500’
No need to come within 13’ of another plane.
I have flown fatigued many times. Too many times really. I use all the tools I can to make sure I don’t end up on the news or message boards. Like backing up my approach. Many many many approach controllers will clear you for a visual way ahead of you lining up with the runway. It allows reduced separation and they can squeeze more planes in.
Digits:
I’m wondering if you have changed your thought process on why 13’ from another airplane on a taxiway is no big deal.
-
Tailwind W10
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 5:39 pm
I'm going to risk having an opinion here...
First of all I'll stipulate that this particular aircrew screwed the pooch on this occasion. I may even allow that no Air Canada pilot currently or ever employed by them is capable of flying any airplane ever manufactured in the history of time.
My opinion goes back to the title of this thread: The NOTAMs are a complete pile of steaming compost!!!! I find it incredulous that we are still saddled with a cryptic system designed for transmission by telex in minimal characters, when is the last time anyone saw a telex? The devices EVERYONE uses to make and access NOTAMs now is quite capable of transmitting and receiving plane words in English or any other language.
Secondly it seems absurd to have the quantity of permanent NOTAMs that for the most part have nothing to do with safety of flight. Like the gent in the video says, the NOTAM for the closed runway was deep in 27 pages of useless bullshit, is there no way with modern computing power to take something like that to the top of the pile?
When I plan a flight from Wetaskiwin to Drayton Valley for example, I have to sift through many pages of inoperative lights on towers ranging from Swan Hills to Medicine Hat, most of which are hundreds of miles out of my flight path. Could we not simply have one NOTAM that says no tower in Alberta has an operational light on it. Or better yet, have the fucking lights fixed. Then well down the list is a NOTAM that the runway is closed for drag races on a particular weekend. Again, shouldn't this one be top of the pile?
Gerry
First of all I'll stipulate that this particular aircrew screwed the pooch on this occasion. I may even allow that no Air Canada pilot currently or ever employed by them is capable of flying any airplane ever manufactured in the history of time.
My opinion goes back to the title of this thread: The NOTAMs are a complete pile of steaming compost!!!! I find it incredulous that we are still saddled with a cryptic system designed for transmission by telex in minimal characters, when is the last time anyone saw a telex? The devices EVERYONE uses to make and access NOTAMs now is quite capable of transmitting and receiving plane words in English or any other language.
Secondly it seems absurd to have the quantity of permanent NOTAMs that for the most part have nothing to do with safety of flight. Like the gent in the video says, the NOTAM for the closed runway was deep in 27 pages of useless bullshit, is there no way with modern computing power to take something like that to the top of the pile?
When I plan a flight from Wetaskiwin to Drayton Valley for example, I have to sift through many pages of inoperative lights on towers ranging from Swan Hills to Medicine Hat, most of which are hundreds of miles out of my flight path. Could we not simply have one NOTAM that says no tower in Alberta has an operational light on it. Or better yet, have the fucking lights fixed. Then well down the list is a NOTAM that the runway is closed for drag races on a particular weekend. Again, shouldn't this one be top of the pile?
Gerry
-
Rookie Pilot
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:44 am
When this first came out I asked Rockie on the other blog on simple question.
Did the crew brief from the Notams during the long cruise portion? Very simple.
He refused to answer and told to stay in my lane. Ok then. So yes I am not a commercial pilot but I do know how to read a Notam. Just like I can read a metar.
Maybe if pilots didn't waste time in cruise bitching about their seniority or pay scales they would have time to conduct a proper briefing.
I have Zero sympathy for the excuses.
No other crew that night tried to land on the taxiway.
Did the crew brief from the Notams during the long cruise portion? Very simple.
He refused to answer and told to stay in my lane. Ok then. So yes I am not a commercial pilot but I do know how to read a Notam. Just like I can read a metar.
Maybe if pilots didn't waste time in cruise bitching about their seniority or pay scales they would have time to conduct a proper briefing.
I have Zero sympathy for the excuses.
No other crew that night tried to land on the taxiway.
-
Nark1
Point of contention regarding notams: as a helicopter pilot (as well) I fly low level at night wearing night vision goggles. Unlit towers are an extreme hazard.
I will agree, for fixed wing flying at altitudes they don’t apply. As PIC it’s my job to determine what applies and what does not.
I often have 27 pages of notams for my airline flights. I skim them, if they say obstruction/obstacle/ etc. I generally don’t bother reading past it. I look for runway notams, Taxiway notams and lastly SID/STARs for both departure and arrival and alternate if applicable. It doesn’t take but 3 minutes of the 45 I have prior to departure.
Rookie: those are very valid questions to ask. I count on my FO for saving my ass, because I make mistakes. He/she should be reading the notams (often don’t because they see I have).
I don’t visit avcanada because of some users, like you mentioned.
My favorite: “nark just because you have 1000+ posts doesn’t make you an expert†(talking about an Air Canada E170/190 incident in LGA)
A friend, and another user piped up and stated:†I think since nark is type rated in the same plane he might have some credibility.â€
I will agree, for fixed wing flying at altitudes they don’t apply. As PIC it’s my job to determine what applies and what does not.
I often have 27 pages of notams for my airline flights. I skim them, if they say obstruction/obstacle/ etc. I generally don’t bother reading past it. I look for runway notams, Taxiway notams and lastly SID/STARs for both departure and arrival and alternate if applicable. It doesn’t take but 3 minutes of the 45 I have prior to departure.
Rookie: those are very valid questions to ask. I count on my FO for saving my ass, because I make mistakes. He/she should be reading the notams (often don’t because they see I have).
I don’t visit avcanada because of some users, like you mentioned.
My favorite: “nark just because you have 1000+ posts doesn’t make you an expert†(talking about an Air Canada E170/190 incident in LGA)
A friend, and another user piped up and stated:†I think since nark is type rated in the same plane he might have some credibility.â€
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 0 Replies
- 806 Views
-
Last post by Colonel
-
- 4 Replies
- 1680 Views
-
Last post by Colonel
-
- 11 Replies
- 3580 Views
-
Last post by David MacRay