|
DNova posted:Well, they also actively fought against the plane's best efforts to keep them out of a stall, stalled, and nosedived into a house. How is requiring more experience going to help that? Stall prevention and recovery is already something that every pilot has practiced prior to their first solo, and then been tested on (presumably) at every level thereafter. We're not talking about situations that require vast amounts of experience, judgement and airmanship, but things that any pilot should know regardless of hours. Assuming that lack of experience is the problem, which I don't believe it is (it's probably more related to the horrendous working conditions a lot of junior pilots face more than anything else), wouldn't it make more sense to increase the hours required to become a captain, and decrease the number of hours required to be a first officer? That way, it's easier for newer pilots to get experience, and there's always someone with quite a lot of experience on board.
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
PT6A posted:How is requiring more experience going to help that? Stall prevention and recovery is already something that every pilot has practiced prior to their first solo, and then been tested on (presumably) at every level thereafter. We're not talking about situations that require vast amounts of experience, judgement and airmanship, but things that any pilot should know regardless of hours. I was only saying that those two were a particular kind of special. I don't agree with the new regulations either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
DNova posted:I was only saying that those two were a particular kind of special. I don't agree with the new regulations either. Yeah, I wasn't really responding to you specifically when I wrote my post (although I agree that's what it looks like). Still, some (non-industry) people might say, "well, a more experienced pilot would've known to avoid a stall!" when it's basically the first emergency pilots are taught how to handle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Stall prevention and recovery is already something that every pilot has practiced prior to their first solo, and then been tested on (presumably) at every level thereafter. Yeahh, not really. Maybe recovering from getting slow and hearing the stall horn yeah, but actual stall recovery not so much. When the wing is actually stalled and the nose drops on its own terms, that presents a completely different scenario (physically and mentally) to the pilot. But you're right that the amount of experience doesn't really help the issue.... type of experience does. I'd trust my fiance's life to a 200 hour pilot who learned in a glider and converted to airplanes under an old salt who does stalls to a full break (where the nose drops on its own terms and not yours) as well as spins over a 2000 or even a 20,000 hour pilot with nothing but the puppy mill checkride-script passing type of so-called stall experience. On top of all that, some operators still haven't reprioritized unstalling the goddamn wing over minimizing altitude loss, after many started to see the light after Colgan 3407. In a recent checkride event, on a power-on stall I dropped the nose only a tiny bit (after being briefed on how little drop they want to see) but it turned out to be too little as the stall horn beeped again. I dropped it a tiny bit more, and the check pilot reflexively barked at me to minimize altitude loss. Yessir! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:We started using iPads for approach plates a couple of months ago, and they're so much easier than paper charts. We had been using them to replace paper manuals for about a year prior (which cut probably 15 lbs of paper out of my flight case), and we're still required to carry updated paper charts on trips during the validation period, but we should be able to ditch the paper Jepps in the next month or two. We will be required to carry a spare battery of our choosing. I already have a 13,000mah one made by Anker so I am ready to go. Can't wait.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The 1500hr rule is crony politics of the worst kind. Chuck Schumer's (phone posting and first accidentally typed "Scumer", which would seem fitting if it were a word) ambulance-chasing and fervent fighting to get the Law done was pretty obvious and disgusting. "This happened in MY state? Hot drat, I'll look like a hero and get another term in spite of having no idea what I'm talking about and being unwilling to compromise at all!". Then, bring a heroic pitchman like Sully (who was pissed off about pay, and rightfully so) into the fold to talk about what a flawless solution to the problem it is, and nobody who doesn't know any better, people such as the person described here: PT6A posted:Still, some (non-industry) people might say, "well, a more experienced pilot would've known to avoid a stall!" when it's basically the first emergency pilots are taught how to handle. ...is going to question it. e- If you want an interesting social experiment, check out Captain Sully's Facebook page any time he posts something about the ATP Law. You're going to have three groups of responses: 1) People who are clueless as to what's going on: "BAH GAWD THANK YOU SULLY I DON'T KNOW NOTHIN' 'BOUT AEROPLANES BUT THANK YOU FOR PROTECTIN' ARE (sic) KIDS!" 2) People who make assumptions and are apt to say things like "The gas pedal makes the plane go faster" and "Stalls involve the engines, right?" 3) People who know what they're talking about and post responses ranging from civil counterargument to passive-aggressively calling he and Schumer frauds. You can't assume everyone's an aviation expert because there's a crapton to learn, but it's amazing the number of people who are simply willing to say "I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and I'm not willing to take 3 minutes to get a basic explanation of a stall on Google so I think this is a good thing." CBJSprague24 fucked around with this message at 15:24 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, I wasn't really responding to you specifically when I wrote my post (although I agree that's what it looks like). Still, some (non-industry) people might say, "well, a more experienced pilot would've known to avoid a stall!" when it's basically the first emergency pilots are taught how to handle. Interestingly, the pilots of Colgan 3407 had actually never been taught actual stall recoveries in the Q400. At the time of the accident, Colgan's training program only took stalls to the stick shaker, and not the stick pusher. Because the Colgan crew had turned on the "increase ref speeds" switch (used in icing conditions to modify when the stick shaker triggers), the captain actually had about a 25-30kt margin from the stick shaker until the stick pusher went off and actual stall occurred, so had he not hauled back on the yoke in response to the stick shaker, the airplane would have easily flown out of the situation without losing any altitude or actually stalling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
God I love watching Fox News reporters tell me about airplane pressurization systems.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
vessbot posted:old salt who does stalls to a full break (where the nose drops on its own terms and not yours) Wait, there are instructors who have students recover prior to the nose dropping? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
There was a remarkable amount of stupid going on in the cockpit of 3407, but some of the blame definitely goes to Colgan for cutting corners. There's so much wrong with the ATP Law that it's not even funny. I was in Atlanta waiting for a flight last week and talked to a pilot who's MD-80/DC-9/737-typed who thinks it's pants-on-head stupid, which surprised me. You start out mandating 1,500 hours. Why? "I don't know...some legislative aide I told to do research on this who's clueless said it's because it's how many you need for the ATP.". Various companies are consulted and some suggest 750-1000 as being the experience floor. Schumer goes to Congress and says (this isn't hyperbole) "I said FIFTEEN-HUNDRED!". So the Law goes through, but the big schools complain and get a "here, take this and shut up" concession, which reduces experience requirements in exchange for an aviation degree AND...wait for it...the completion of Instrument AND Commercial at their FAA-approved school from which you earned the degree. But there's no grandfathering, no help for those who had already taken the time, effort, and money to get those ratings at other places. Also, even if you HAVE the required degree, it all comes down to where you flew. I have a Bachelor's from Riddle which doesn't mean jack because I did Instrument Part 61 (with the world's most miserable examiner) at a local FBO on the recommendation of the local flight school's director in spite of 141 being in place. It feels like a law which uses safety as smoke and mirrors to get pay increased. That's something which needs to happen, but...it hasn't worked. CBJSprague24 fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Mar 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
German a320 down in the alps, no survivors. CNN is already blaming the crash on weather because a mountain guide saw a cloud around the time the airplane crashed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
8 minute 3400 fpm descent with no radio contact before the crash.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Agh, I've been so busy that I forgot to post this earlier. There is a Kickstarter out there, from a company with a history of actually delivering documentaries, about Burt Rutan and his new Amphibian LSA Motorglider. They are about $2300 and 3 days away from making their stretch goals to help upgrade the quality of the equipment to mount to mount on the SkiGull. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/antennafilms/looking-up-way-up-the-burt-rutan-story Entone fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Mar 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
KodiakRS posted:German a320 down in the alps, no survivors. Had to turn the TV off when Don Lemon turned to the camera and said "When we return: Just how unsafe are budget carriers? Sure they save you a few bucks, but is it worth your life? We'll look into what kind of training etc do they receive?" 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
Logged my first actual today, a whopping 0.2  Then had to descend because of light rime  
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:Had to turn the TV off when Don Lemon turned to the camera and said "When we return: Just how unsafe are budget carriers? Sure they save you a few bucks, but is it worth your life? We'll look into what kind of training etc do they receive?" If it is Ryanair... but that is mainly down to fuel pressure put on from on high, and in older times fuel league tables. got home last night and Dad was in a flat panic as we were 40 minutes late back from TFS (5 hr block home, thanks jet). First thing was, didn't you know? Have to say ops did sound a little stressed when we were talking to them via Stockholm mid Atlantic when the FDR failed. There but for the grace of God go I. hjp766 fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Mar 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 08:23
|
|
|
Rickety Cricket posted:Had to turn the TV off when Don Lemon turned to the camera and said "When we return: Just how unsafe are budget carriers? Sure they save you a few bucks, but is it worth your life? We'll look into what kind of training etc do they receive?" I wonder if they ran the same segment about airlines with "Asia" in the name... Speaking of which, this could have been a larger disaster. (Ok, China Airlines doesn't have Asia in its name...)
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
Well this is going to make for an interesting episode of Air Disasters in a couple years.quote:A senior military official involved in the investigation described “very smooth, very cool” conversation between the pilots during the early part of the flight from Barcelona to Düsseldorf. Then the audio indicated that one of the pilots left the cockpit and could not re-enter. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/world/europe/germanwings-airbus-crash.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=1
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Maybe having locking, reinforced cockpit doors that can only be opened from the inside with no emergency backup in case no one on the flight deck can open the door is not the wonderful idea it seemed in the wake of 9/11.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
We are required to have two crewmembers in the cockpit at all times. So if one of the pilots goes to the lav, either a flight attendant or a jumpseater has to accompany the remaining pilot. Either they dont share the same rule or these guys disregarded it
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Maybe having locking, reinforced cockpit doors that can only be opened from the inside with no emergency backup in case no one on the flight deck can open the door is not the wonderful idea it seemed in the wake of 9/11. Egypt air 990 - wouldn't have helped
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Animal posted:We are required to have two crewmembers in the cockpit at all times. So if one of the pilots goes to the lav, either a flight attendant or a jumpseater has to accompany the remaining pilot. The fact is we just don't know. Maybe something incapacitated both people on the flight deck, either by accident or on purpose -- not outside the realm of possibility. There are risks to not allowing the flight deck to be secured from the inside, clearly, but if there was a pilot outside the flight deck with no way back in, it might also be that there are risks to allowing the flight deck to be completed isolated from the inside out, regardless of other regulations or practices.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The fact is we just don't know. Maybe something incapacitated both people on the flight deck, either by accident or on purpose -- not outside the realm of possibility. Don't you think that a 2nd crewmember to enter the cockpit would say hello or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
DNova posted:Don't you think that a 2nd crewmember to enter the cockpit would say hello or something? I assume so. I don't think even the door-banging has been officially confirmed at this point, so we really don't have even half of the story at this point. Still, even if there were a second crew member present in the cockpit, this still would not fix the situation of an actively suicidal pilot who overpowers the second crew member, or an incident in which both people on the flight deck are incapacitated by accident. I don't have any evidence to suggest that either of these things happened on this flight, nor do I suspect they happened on this flight. I'm only pointing out that there are situations where it would be a good idea to allow some way of accessing the flight deck from outside. Whether these outweigh the risks posed by allowing outside access is hard to say. EDIT: Further, the possibility of someone ignoring regulations or simply making a mistake should be taken into account when designing these systems in general. Forgetting or "forgetting" to bring a second crew-member onto the flight deck probably shouldn't have the possibility to lead to an absolutely unrecoverable situation if something happens to the single person left on the flight deck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Does anyone have enough familiarity with the A320 cockpit to say whether a passed out person in the right seat could physically slump onto the stick or other controls in such a way to initiate a very stable 3,400 foot per minute descent? edit: I think the odds are slightly in favor of this being intentional, given what we know at the moment. That the co-pilot was suicidal/homicidal and waited for an opportunity which happened to present itself on this flight is a simple explanation. That the co-pilot passed out during the brief time the captain was out of the cockpit, and then somehow his body initiated a stable 8-minute descent into terrain seems more complicated and less likely. I wish I could work on investigations like these. sleepy gary fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Mar 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
DNova posted:Does anyone have enough familiarity with the A320 cockpit to say whether a passed out person in the right seat could physically slump onto the stick or other controls in such a way to initiate a very stable 3,400 foot per minute descent? If you are hell bent on suicide, why not just nose dive straight into the ground? Granted, its an airbus so HAL is flying but it seems like there should be a faster way to kill yourself, especially with someone beating on the door.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
Lockmart Lawndart posted:If you are hell bent on suicide, why not just nose dive straight into the ground? Granted, its an airbus so HAL is flying but it seems like there should be a faster way to kill yourself, especially with someone beating on the door. Germans even commit suicide precisely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
Lockmart Lawndart posted:If you are hell bent on suicide, why not just nose dive straight into the ground? Granted, its an airbus so HAL is flying but it seems like there should be a faster way to kill yourself, especially with someone beating on the door. Of course a Mr. Lawndart would advocate this method.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
If you're hell bent on suicide, why take 149 innocent people with you, more like? Off yourself if you really feel that's the thing to do, but gently caress you if you harm anyone else in the process.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
PT6A posted:If you're hell bent on suicide, why take 149 innocent people with you, more like? It's like the person is mentally unstable or something... If suicide is the case, god knows the pilot would of never seen a doctor about it when it was preventable due to the medical licensing system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
That's a huge conclusion to jump to, though. I don't think we know that at all based on what's known so far.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
The Slaughter posted:That's a huge conclusion to jump to, though. I don't think we know that at all based on what's known so far. This is mostly speculation; nobody is making statements of facts pertaining to the recent crash. Everyone understands we don't have much information yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
Entone posted:If suicide is the case, god knows the pilot would of never seen a doctor about it when it was preventable due to the medical licensing system. This is another major, major problem: the current system actively discourages people from seeking help for any kind of mental conditions (or physical conditions, to some degree, but those are harder to lie about). And every time the regulations are made more stringent, the problem only becomes worse. The Slaughter posted:That's a huge conclusion to jump to, though. I don't think we know that at all based on what's known so far. Yeah, I don't think we can say it's even likely at this point, although it's certainly a possibility (as are many other things).
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
PT6A posted:This is another major, major problem: the current system actively discourages people from seeking help for any kind of mental conditions (or physical conditions, to some degree, but those are harder to lie about). And every time the regulations are made more stringent, the problem only becomes worse. I don't go to the doctor for normal poo poo, for fear of losing my medical, even temporarily. I see the flight surgeon once a year for my physical, and that's it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 11:37
|
|
|
Germanwings Co-Pilot Deliberately Crashed Airbus Jet, French Prosecutor Says Who could have seen that coming!?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 13:18
|
|
|
For anyone following crash info there is a life stream from the Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/mar/26/germanwings-plane-crash-investigation-press-conference-live-updates-4u9525
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
DNova posted:Germanwings Co-Pilot Deliberately Crashed Airbus Jet, French Prosecutor Says http://news.yahoo.com/official-1-pilot-locked-crash-plane-cockpit-072049706.html?clear-cache Who's ready for Congress to start the outrage train again? Also, 630 TT under his belt, too. Something, something "inexperienced", something "making hasty assumptions", something something "sweeping changes in spite of everything pointing to everyone knowing him being stunned he'd do this and which will inevitably miss the point completely"... Apparently one of the news networks last night said the forward lav wall can be kicked in as a last-ditch measure to get into the cockpit. Not sure how that works (and granted it's a news network), but I fear somebody's going to try it now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Also of note is that an official with Lufthansa said there was no requirement to have a second crew member on the flight deck, nor is it company policy to do so. I foresee that changing with blinding loving speed (as well it probably should).
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 18:04
|
|
|
Wouldn't have happened if they hadn't gotten rid of flight engineers!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
The Slaughter posted:Wouldn't have happened if they hadn't gotten rid of flight engineers! Uh, about that... Eh its a short article: quote:Japan Airlines Flight 350 was a McDonnell Douglas DC-8-61, registered JA8061, on a domestic scheduled passenger flight from Fukuoka, Japan, to Tokyo. The airplane crashed 9 February 1982 on approach to Haneda Airport in Tokyo Bay. Flight 350 was Japan Airlines' first crash of the 1980s.[2]
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 19:43
|
|