Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Check out the Aviation Safety Network report on this accident and investigation, it has a minute by minute narrative of events, control inputs, and communications. They augered in from less than 3000 feet after a bucking bronco ride that sounds like a combination of pilot induced oscillations and a confused FBW system trying to counter the pilot's control inputs with stabilizer trim. It didn't help that there were large changes in thrust settings and configuration throughout the episode. The final stall occurred too low for recovery. At impact the aircraft was nose down, accelerating, and no longer stalled. Another 2-3000 feet would probably have saved the day.They did a deliberate stall at high altitude to check out the flight control system. And the flight control system that was designed to prevent stalling the airplane - the very system that enabled Capt Scully to land on the Hudson River without fear of stall - prevented stall recovery (computer: You don't need to put the nose down! You are not stalling!). The airplane did not recover from the stall and went into the ocean nose first, straight down.
Still, I think commercial Airlines are the safest mode of travel considering passenger miles covered.
Of course! Aren't all airline pilots Supermen and super heroes?? They damn well better be, for what we pay them!
If they can get hired at all. There's a huge yawning gap between graduation from an academy with 350 hours and all the tickets in hand, and the 1500 hours, ATP, and jet type rating required to climb into the right seat of today's commuter planes and start earning that princely sum. You wonder the biggies are experiencing a pilot shortage? And flight instructors are paid less than sales clerks at Home Depot. And the large reservoir of small scale corporate flight departments with Navajos, 421s, and King Airs, where newbies could grab some right seat multi time, has dwindled and tightened up due to insurance, tax, and regulatory requirements. And some of the commuters, walking a financial tightrope, are still paying new hire first officers less than new hire flight attendants. Oh, and BTW, applying for food stamps is a termination offense.Average starting salary for a fresh commercial pilot is $16 an hour...
Well, we don't pay them like that any more. A number of US airlines declared bankruptcy specifically to abrogate labor contracts and cut pilots' salaries.
If they can get hired at all. There's a huge yawning gap between graduation from an academy with 350 hours and all the tickets in hand, and the 1500 hours, ATP, and jet type rating required to climb into the right seat of today's commuter planes and start earning that princely sum. You wonder the biggies are experiencing a pilot shortage? And flight instructors are paid less than sales clerks at Home Depot. And the large reservoir of small scale corporate flight departments with Navajos, 421s, and King Airs, where newbies could grab some right seat multi time, has dwindled and tightened up due to insurance, tax, and regulatory requirements. And some of the commuters, walking a financial tightrope, are still paying new hire first officers less than new hire flight attendants. Oh, and BTW, applying for food stamps is a termination offense.
Cheers,
Wes
The pilots were... everybody else would have basically died had this been for real.TRAINING??? DRILL?? STAN/EVAL? Is anybody on the ball here?
Out of curiosity, why are they so anal?USAF is supposed to be the most organized, procedural, and anal of the services
Sure, put it upOkay, I just posed a G-Suit piece for anyone interested.
1. What do you mean "for real"?? They were REALLY in flight in a REAL aircraft and REALLY passed out and in danger of REALLY dying through the REAL stupidity of all those involved who should have stuck to the REAL procedures in place to prevent this kind of REAL negligence. The Aircraft Commander and all surviving aircrew would have been "burned" if somebody had actually died.The pilots1. were... everybody else would have basically died had this been for real.
Out of curiosity, why are they so anal?
The leadership of NTSB and many other investigative bodies around the world are political appointees with usually no hands-on experience with aviation, railroads, shipping, or trucking. They depend on their highly experienced technical staff to dig out the data, but draw the final conclusions themselves. It sometimes happens that they override the recommendations of staff when they are idealogically unpalatable. Notably they have been sometimes reluctant in the past to acknowledge management actions or human physiology or psychology as contributing factors in accident scenarios, preferring to hold operating crew members to superhuman levels of perfection, regardless of circumstances. It's easier and less professionally risky to blame the individual rather than the system. The company, the unions, the various government agencies, the equipment manufacturers, and in many cases the victims, all have their representitives on hand to "aid" in the investigation and "provide expertise", but really to defend their organization's interests and shift the blame on someone else.Annoys me them programme where some expert says the pilot did this wrong. Excuse me but the pilot had a few seconds to live so give him some credit. Easy to say what you would have done drinking coffee behind your desk.
Wes.......I don't buy that for a minute. The NTSB has has worked hard to determine the cause if accidents for many years. Some times it is nearly impossible to make that decision but they make the effort. I think they deserve more credit than you give.The leadership of NTSB and many other investigative bodies around the world are political appointees with usually no hands-on experience with aviation, railroads, shipping, or trucking. They depend on their highly experienced technical staff to dig out the data, but draw the final conclusions themselves. It sometimes happens that they override the recommendations of staff when they are idealogically unpalatable. Notably they have been sometimes reluctant in the past to acknowledge management actions or human physiology or psychology as contributing factors in accident scenarios, preferring to hold operating crew members to superhuman levels of perfection, regardless of circumstances. It's easier and less professionally risky to blame the individual rather than the system. The company, the unions, the government
Bill, I apreciate your opininion and I share your appreciation of the technical staff. They're heroes in my book. I'm less enthralled with the political leadership. There've been some really good dedicated impartial ones over the years, but I think there've been some clueless political hacks as well. One of those is one too many in my book.Wes.......I don't buy that for a minute. The NTSB has has worked hard to determine the cause if accidents for many years. Some times it is nearly impossible to make that decision but they make the effort. I think they deserve more credit than you give.
The aircrew usually have the least powerful advocates in the postcrash pissing contest, plus in most countries outside the US and EU, being involved in any way in a public conveyance accident is in itself a crime. So there's that stigma to deal with as well.I have followed aircraft investigation for many years and there does seem a blame game and usually the pilot is at fault even if he isn't.
Pilots all know, in their hearts of hearts, that some very hard-nosed professionals are going to go through the last few few hours of their lives before a crash with a very fine toothed comb.People pay for cheapest ticket and expect to be treated like cattle.
Annoys me them programme where some expert says the pilot did this wrong. Excuse me but the pilot had a few seconds to live so give him some credit. Easy to say what you would have done drinking coffee behind your desk.