ATR-72 crash at PKR, Nepal. Many fatalities feared.

[3WE]

The pilot monitoring was consumed with navigating a challenging, maneuvering exercise, with his eyes focused outside the cockpit.

Consumed?

…I’ll give you that maybe he was consumed with the joy of a totally routine visual landing with beautiful scenery and weather.

Gabe?

[Gabriel]

There were a couple other things shown in that video, but I guess you didn’t notice.

Well, not sure what are you at, but here are a few things I did note:

• ILS in IMC being flown manually (no AP, no AT) with more than a handful of engine levers (more levers than fingers, granted, not all of them throttles)., followed by a vidual circle-to-land.
• Steam gauge cockpit (the HSI is nice though).
• The guy in the right seat is a passenger, not a pilot (not at least one on duty, no uniform).
• The low level final turn is obvious, so you are not referring to that.
• Oh yes, the landing checklist done "for procedural compliance" (to check the box), meaning it was just read, not actually executed (challenge, watch, touch, reply).

[Gabriel]

While the decision to fly this approach is definitely a lack of safe discipline, I don't think this is necessarily revealing a lack of piloting discipline, but rather a breakdown of piloting discipline.

Sure. What about the previous approaches that also didn't meet the stabilized approach criteria but were not abandoned, and apparently not reported to the airline either? (not to mention the previous accidents). The lack of COMPANY safety culture is evident to me. The pilots are just part of that.

[Evan]

Sure. What about the previous approaches that also didn't meet the stabilized approach criteria but were not abandoned, and apparently not reported to the airline either? (not to mention the previous accidents). The lack of COMPANY safety culture is evident to me. The pilots are just part of that.

Yes, piloting discipline and safety culture are not synonymous.

[Gabriel]

Yes, piloting discipline and safety culture are not synonymous.

Maybe not. But they are very highly correlated.

In an airline with a strong safety culture, undisciplined pilots don't survive. They either become disciplined, or they resign not bearing the environment, or they are kicked out.
In an airline with a poor safety culture, disciplined pilots don't survive. They either adapt to the culture, or they resign, or they are kicked out because they are an obstacle for the airline.

Safety culture is more important that pilot discipline. It drives pilot's discipline. When there is an accident in an airline due to lack of pilot in which lack of pilot discipline was a factor, I blame more the airline than the pilot. And airline with a poor safety culture will always find undisciplined pilots (or pilots consciously or unconsciously willing to become undisciplined).

[3WE]

[*]The low level final turn is obvious, so you are not referring to that.

Well, yes, actually.

1. That he is making TURNS AT ALL to land the plane (vs straight in).

A pilot in a complex twin with props and mixture and cowl flaps, operating the flaps, on combo ILS visual hand flown no ILS in mild IMC doing the radios, tuning the navaids, dropping the gear, using visual check points, and NOT ALIGNED with the runway at the 500 stabilized approach gate.

ALL BY HIMSELF…apparently not_consumed, and maybe even imperfect sterility to the PASSENGERNF.

And not making sudden commanded steep left banks to cause accelerated stalls.

Or course, none of this is TYPE SPECIFIC, so, it’s totally irrelevant.