Originally posted by SYDCBRWOD
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Embraer 145 questions
Collapse
X
-
What's the relevance of that observation. You didn't even wait to learn what the question was about.
I'm just saying that atmospheric conditions vary as you climb to different altitudes. That Colgan flight probably wasn't flying in the same conditions as AF447. Which probably explains the "unprofessional behavior". They obviously didn't perceive that they were doing a job full of the same hazard as an international flight.
As for danger at altitude, how about the crash in the Canary Islands. One plane sitting on the runway, the other one laboring to achieve enough height not to ram it. But, then, that was another human error, wasn't it? A guy who wasn't cleared who decided to do it anyway. I mean, if that's going to happen, the passengers are screwed. No amount of safety engineering is of any use when universally-known procedures are simply bypassed. I don't know what the total errors made in that crash were, but I'd call them "unforced" in the sense they use in tennnis.
Amazing how few crashes occur considering the same human brain capacity and training is involved. Hell, who knows, maybe most of those pilots aren't ready to die. That could induce some care and patience.
Hmm. Occurs to me we're all lucky that its not so easy to launch an ICBM attack as it is to launch an aircraft.
Comment
-
Originally posted by EconomyClass View PostWhat's the relevance of that observation. You didn't even wait to learn what the question was about.
Originally posted by EconomyClass View PostI'm just saying that atmospheric conditions vary as you climb to different altitudes. That Colgan flight probably wasn't flying in the same conditions as AF447. Which probably explains the "unprofessional behavior". They obviously didn't perceive that they were doing a job full of the same hazard as an international flight.
Ask a few basic questions and you would have had the answers to your questions.
Originally posted by EconomyClass View PostAs for danger at altitude, how about the crash in the Canary Islands. One plane sitting on the runway, the other one laboring to achieve enough height not to ram it. But, then, that was another human error, wasn't it? A guy who wasn't cleared who decided to do it anyway. I mean, if that's going to happen, the passengers are screwed. No amount of safety engineering is of any use when universally-known procedures are simply bypassed. I don't know what the total errors made in that crash were, but I'd call them "unforced" in the sense they use in tennnis.
Originally posted by EconomyClass View PostAmazing how few crashes occur considering the same human brain capacity and training is involved. Hell, who knows, maybe most of those pilots aren't ready to die. That could induce some care and patience.
Considering the figures, 4.874 Billion passengers moved in 2008, compared with 577 deaths in 32 crashes - the odds are miniscule of losing your life.
http://www.aci.aero/cda/aci_common/d...p=1-5-54_666_2__
Aviation Safety Network: Airliner accident statistics; 100 worst accident, fatalities and number of accidents per month, year etc.
But you go ahead and keep pointing out how obviously stupid you consider pilots to be "that could induce some care and patience". Incidentally if you were again alluding to the Canary Islands incident, the 'impatience' wasn't due to the KLM pilot wanting to get on the turps early - it was because he was restricted in the flight hours he could do in any one period - you know, one of those pesky safety rules.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SYDCBRWOD View Post...almost as much stuff as Gabriel posts...
(Make no mistake- a good effort to explain things, and excellent explanations too.)
While you are at it- I've always worried about DC-9/MD-80 and ERJ aircraft- that uneven, left-to-right seating arrangement must put a lot of extra strain on the right wing- I'm always scared that it will fail if we were to encouter turbulence at a middle altitude.Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Getting back to the Embraer, it is constantly ranked higher in comfort ratings than the CRJ. It has bigger windows and has a 2-1 configuration, where CRJ's have a 2-2 Configuration.
In general, turbulence will be felt more on a smaller airplane than a large one, but it's not a big deal. They won't fly you through anything too crazy.
They may be young pilots, but that doesn't mean their less professional. Most graduates of my school end up at ExpressJet flying the ERJ-145 and I can tell you not only do we have top notch flight training with the degree and college courses to back it up, ExpressJet has one of the best training regiments for their new hires.
If you want to know anything specific about the 145 PM me, I am currently in a college course specifically tailored to the systems on the ERJ-145 so I have a ton of information and the flight manuals on my desk.Tanner Johnson - Owner
twenty53 Photography
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tanner_J View PostThey may be young pilots, but that doesn't mean their less professional. Most graduates of my school end up at ExpressJet flying the ERJ-145 and I can tell you not only do we have top notch flight training with the degree and college courses to back it up, ExpressJet has one of the best training regiments for their new hires.
However, I need to understand how young pilots can sit at FL410 with a 20 degree nose up angle, watching their airpseed decay over a period of a minute or two until the stick shaker starts going off, but then LET the plane stall itself.
I also need to understand how a different young, less experienced dude's response to a stick shaker is to pull up "as hard as you can" to a 30 degree nose up attitude.
What is the screening procedure that separates your pilots from these others, and how, as a passenger, do I know that I will get one of your pilots?Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostI also need to understand how a different young, less experienced dude's response to a stick shaker is to pull up "as hard as you can" to a 30 degree nose up attitude.
Kind of like when a car starts to hydroplane during rain and people hit the brakes as hard as they can.
But he should have relied on his co-pilot for guidance. Wait, er, no, the copilot was scared because she had never seen icing like that.
HOWEVER, I am hoping that American Eagle pilots (the airline I am flying) are better than that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostHaving fun yet?
(Make no mistake- a good effort to explain things, and excellent explanations too.)
While you are at it- I've always worried about DC-9/MD-80 and ERJ aircraft- that uneven, left-to-right seating arrangement must put a lot of extra strain on the right wing- I'm always scared that it will fail if we were to encouter turbulence at a middle altitude.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tanner_J View PostThey may be young pilots, but that doesn't mean their less professional. Most graduates of my school end up at ExpressJet flying the ERJ-145 and I can tell you not only do we have top notch flight training with the degree and college courses to back it up, ExpressJet has one of the best training regiments for their new hires.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apooh View PostThat Colgan Air? Easy...the dude got scared when the plane stalled and he pulled up.
Kind of like when a car starts to hydroplane during rain and people hit the brakes as hard as they can.
As to your other smart-assed comment about the FO (I'm being complimentary), I would ask: Are you Putt-4-Par?Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View Post
I also need to understand how a different young, less experienced dude's response to a stick shaker is to pull up "as hard as you can" to a 30 degree nose up attitude.
Comment
-
When an aircraft is stalling...why in the world would you yank back, no matter the aircraft. Maybe I'm wrong (I only have 230 hours) but it just doesn't make sense.
In the days leading up to the crash (no joke) I heard from a captain at another airline who flew on Colgan as a non-rev and said he would never put his family on them because their training is shady and it was an overall bad experience. This was literally a day before the flight went down in Buffalo.
If you let an airplane stall at 41,000 feet, you retarded to begin with. Is this referring to the CRJ that went down in Missouri? If so, that was pushing the envelope of the airplane with no one on board. I don't think you need to worry.
I feel professionalism and experience will depend on the training. Did they come from Part 61 or Part 141. Did they go through a College Part 61 program or the one at the grass strip in the hills of Kentucky? Did they go through a College Part 141 program or the Part 141 program at your typical GA airport? It depends on the person and the training they received.
Sure, at my school (Part 141 university) we have some pilots who I would consider not professional, and they are quickly weeded out. To make it through our program at the university you need to be dedicated to making it through the academics as well as the flying. If the grades don't meet a standard, you can't fly. I'm at the airport 5 days a week for 3 hours, either flying or in ground school. The rest of my classes are all aviation related dealing with aerodynamics, systems, air traffic control, human factors, or theories based on the course we're in.Tanner Johnson - Owner
twenty53 Photography
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostAs to your other smart-assed comment about the FO (I'm being complimentary), I would ask: Are you Putt-4-Par?
If I was a refuge from the other forum I would have probably used the same name. So no, it is not me.
Comment
-
But you go ahead and keep pointing out how obviously stupid you consider pilots to be "that could induce some care and patience". Incidentally if you were again alluding to the Canary Islands incident, the 'impatience' wasn't due to the KLM pilot wanting to get on the turps early - it was because he was restricted in the flight hours he could do in any one period - you know, one of those pesky safety rules.
If I'm the KLM pilot, by that time I'd have called the corporate office and told them "I'm too close to my limit on flying hours. This plane is going nowhere till you put a rested pilot down here." I read that airline managements "intimidate" pilots into breaking rules. But I ask myself how can they intimidate a guy at his age? Does he have 3 kids in college or something? In any case, I don't care what their threats may be, my life is more important than anything they can take away, so I lay it on the line and then go curl up with whatever there is to read, knowing my passengers are going to get a fresh pilot.
Complaining passengers? Ha! Better for them to be irritated than dead.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TeeVee View Postwasn't he fresh out of flying a saab or some of a/c where the correct procedure for a tail stall WAS yanking back on the stick? not positive but i think i read that somewhere...
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
Comment