If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
to a traveling fool like me, this is deathly terrifying. 12,000 combined hours on type and these two idiots flew a perfectly functioning aircraft into the water...
Well, that's not something new. Since you have your avatar in American Airlines colors, let me tell you that this airline has crashed two perfectly functioning airplanes:
The B-757 in Cali that they've flown into a mountain.
The A300 that they boke up the fin in flight due to overcontrol out of New York.
--- 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 ---
Well, that's not something new. Since you have your avatar in American Airlines colors, let me tell you that this airline has crashed two perfectly functioning airplanes:
The B-757 in Cali that they've flown into a mountain.
The A300 that they boke up the fin in flight due to overcontrol out of New York.
those did not escape me. and i take no solace from the fact that it's been quite some time since those two incidents.
however, i have to say that the results of the investigation in the Cali accident were ridiculous. no approach radar and no fault was placed on the colombians? horseshit!
also, honeywell and jeppesen were found to be 40% at fault.
yeah ultimately the pilots screwed the pooch, but let's be serious, there is NO excuse for not rebuilding approach radar for three years. there's also no excuse for coding two different waypoints with the same code. how friggin stupid is that????????
those did not escape me. and i take no solace from the fact that it's been quite some time since those two incidents.
however, i have to say that the results of the investigation in the Cali accident were ridiculous. no approach radar and no fault was placed on the colombians? horseshit!
also, honeywell and jeppesen were found to be 40% at fault.
yeah ultimately the pilots screwed the pooch, but let's be serious, there is NO excuse for not rebuilding approach radar for three years. there's also no excuse for coding two different waypoints with the same code. how friggin stupid is that????????
Well, there are hundreds of airports that serve commercial flights that lack approach radar. Ok, leave the approach part. They lack any radar.
Regarding the two navaids named "R", well, that was a dirty trick.
But the most important thing in the hindsight is that today this accident would not have happened because of two things:
- The EGPWS would have warned about the danger several seconds in advance of what the GPWS did (the E is for "Enhanced" and it uses nav data and a terrain database to warns about terrain ahead, while the older not-E type only uses radar altitude and vertical speed data, but cannot see a wall ahead).
- The requirement (not in effect then) that the spoilers self-retract when thrust is added.
This accident was a strong factor in the developement of these two systems and to make them required equipment. So it's sort of comfortable to know that at least so much death was not in vain.
--- 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 ---
- Lack of training or briefing of the crew...
- The crew did not properly apply procedures...
Cockpit hours mean nothing here. Just bad culture, more well practiced.
Airbus designed their FCU knobs to feel distinctly different in the dark. But that can't overcome this kind of thing.
Yet another case of improvisational airmanship...
I am sure this kind of mistakes is done from time to time in any type.
Just that pilots normally FLY the plane (even if in AP) and they find the mistake before it's too late by doing "crazy" things like looking at the Primary Flight Display.
--- 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 ---
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment