S
server
Guest
message unavailable
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
FAA rejects airlineâÂDÂs request to hire less-exp erienced pilots...
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes..
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes..
A
a a
Guest
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted the accident investigation and published a final report on Tuesday, February 2, 2010, which found the probable cause to be the pilots\' inappropriate response to the stall warnings.[3] Flight 3407 is the most recent aviation incident involving a U.S.-based airline that resulted in multiple casualties.[4][5]
Families of the accident victims lobbied the U.S. Congress to enact more stringent regulations for regional carriers, and to improve the scrutiny of safe operating procedures and the working conditions of pilots. The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administrative Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111â216) required some of these regulation changes.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407
NTSB Colgan Air Crash Animation Flight 3407
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33NUAy3eomg
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted the accident investigation and published a final report on Tuesday, February 2, 2010, which found the probable cause to be the pilots\' inappropriate response to the stall warnings.[3] Flight 3407 is the most recent aviation incident involving a U.S.-based airline that resulted in multiple casualties.[4][5]
Families of the accident victims lobbied the U.S. Congress to enact more stringent regulations for regional carriers, and to improve the scrutiny of safe operating procedures and the working conditions of pilots. The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administrative Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111â216) required some of these regulation changes.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407
NTSB Colgan Air Crash Animation Flight 3407
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33NUAy3eomg
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 10:32:44 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
There\'s nothing ironic about the FAA flight hours rules putting an incompetent pilot where he could crash the plane.
The FAA clearly failed to assess the pilot correctly and failed to predict that he was going to crash a plane.
Their arse is grass. If Gnatguy once worked for them you see how they might concentrate on what a pilot used to be able to do while neglecting to pay any attention to whether they could still do it now. Gnatguy does seem to think that he still has a working brain and rejects any suggestion that the last working bits dribbled out of his ears years ago.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
There\'s nothing ironic about the FAA flight hours rules putting an incompetent pilot where he could crash the plane.
The FAA clearly failed to assess the pilot correctly and failed to predict that he was going to crash a plane.
Their arse is grass. If Gnatguy once worked for them you see how they might concentrate on what a pilot used to be able to do while neglecting to pay any attention to whether they could still do it now. Gnatguy does seem to think that he still has a working brain and rejects any suggestion that the last working bits dribbled out of his ears years ago.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
a a
Guest
Stall warning is provided by an electronic or mechanical device that sounds an audible warning as the stall speed is approached. The simplest such device is an airframe mounted stall warning horn which sounds when the airflow through it occurs at a specific angle.
Stall Warning Systems | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
Stall Warning Systems | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
https://skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
As per the regulations, the stall warning system requirements can be satisfied by the inherent stall characteristics of the aircraft itself or by other appropriate means. Some of the most common stall warning systems are as follows: 1. Pre-Stall Buffet. In this case, the warning of the impending stall is provided soâ¦
Definition
An aircraft Stall Warning System is that system which provides the pilot with advance warning of an impending stall.
Stall warning systems are designed to activate based on the stall characteristics of clean, contamination free surfaces. Airframe contaminatioâ¦
Pilot Actions
Pilot response to any stall warning including: 1. Buffeting or the activation of a stall warning system 2. Uncommanded roll or the inability to contrâ¦
Further Reading
NTSB Safety Alertson General Aviation risks 1. Safety Alert 19 - Prevent Aerodynamic Stalls at â¦
Regulatory Requirement
As is the case with most safety related equipment, the requirement for a Stall Warning System will be found within the aviation regulations for the State of Manufacture and the Sâ¦
Mach Number Effect
As altitude increases and air density decreases, the gap between IAS and TAS increases, until the TAâ¦
Related Articles
1. Loss of Control
2. Stick Pusher
3. Stall
The Stall Warning System - Plane & Pilot Magazine planeandpilotmag.com
How It Works: Stall horn - AOPA aopa.org
737 Stall Warning System - The Boeing 737 Technical Site b737.org.uk
Tech Talk: Stall-Warning Systems - IFR Magazine ifr-magazine.com
Stall Warning Systems - AVweb avweb.com
Stall Warning Systems - Aviation Safety
https://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/aircraft/...
20.04.2021 · A stall warning system is something of a last resort: By the time it activates inadvertently, youâve already ignored several other indications that the airplane is approaching a stall. Youâve allowed the airplane to get too slow, â¦
A Look at Stall Warning Devices - Experimental Aircraft Association
https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-building/builder...
01.04.1995 · Stall Strips Vs. Stall Warning Horns A stall warning horn, correctly installed and adjusted, will start its unearthly raucous blare anytime the aircraft wing approaches within 5 to 10 mph of a stalled condition. This â¦
How fast does a stall warning horn go?
Stall Warning | Aviation System Wikia | Fandom
https://aviation-system.fandom.com/wiki/Stall_Warning
DefinitionRegulatory RequirementWarning SystemsIcingMach Number EffectPilot Actions
As per the regulations, the stall warning system requirements can be satisfied by the inherent stall characteristics of the aircraft itself or by other appropriate means. Some of the most common stall warning systems are as follows: 1. Pre-Stall Buffet. In this case, the warning of the impending stall is provided solely by aerodynamic buffet. As th...
aviation-system.fandom.com
Stall Warning Systems | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
Stall Warning Systems | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
https://skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
As per the regulations, the stall warning system requirements can be satisfied by the inherent stall characteristics of the aircraft itself or by other appropriate means. Some of the most common stall warning systems are as follows: 1. Pre-Stall Buffet. In this case, the warning of the impending stall is provided soâ¦
Definition
An aircraft Stall Warning System is that system which provides the pilot with advance warning of an impending stall.
Stall warning systems are designed to activate based on the stall characteristics of clean, contamination free surfaces. Airframe contaminatioâ¦
Pilot Actions
Pilot response to any stall warning including: 1. Buffeting or the activation of a stall warning system 2. Uncommanded roll or the inability to contrâ¦
Further Reading
NTSB Safety Alertson General Aviation risks 1. Safety Alert 19 - Prevent Aerodynamic Stalls at â¦
Regulatory Requirement
As is the case with most safety related equipment, the requirement for a Stall Warning System will be found within the aviation regulations for the State of Manufacture and the Sâ¦
Mach Number Effect
As altitude increases and air density decreases, the gap between IAS and TAS increases, until the TAâ¦
Related Articles
1. Loss of Control
2. Stick Pusher
3. Stall
The Stall Warning System - Plane & Pilot Magazine planeandpilotmag.com
How It Works: Stall horn - AOPA aopa.org
737 Stall Warning System - The Boeing 737 Technical Site b737.org.uk
Tech Talk: Stall-Warning Systems - IFR Magazine ifr-magazine.com
Stall Warning Systems - AVweb avweb.com
Stall Warning Systems - Aviation Safety
https://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/aircraft/...
20.04.2021 · A stall warning system is something of a last resort: By the time it activates inadvertently, youâve already ignored several other indications that the airplane is approaching a stall. Youâve allowed the airplane to get too slow, â¦
A Look at Stall Warning Devices - Experimental Aircraft Association
https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-building/builder...
01.04.1995 · Stall Strips Vs. Stall Warning Horns A stall warning horn, correctly installed and adjusted, will start its unearthly raucous blare anytime the aircraft wing approaches within 5 to 10 mph of a stalled condition. This â¦
How fast does a stall warning horn go?
Stall Warning | Aviation System Wikia | Fandom
https://aviation-system.fandom.com/wiki/Stall_Warning
DefinitionRegulatory RequirementWarning SystemsIcingMach Number EffectPilot Actions
As per the regulations, the stall warning system requirements can be satisfied by the inherent stall characteristics of the aircraft itself or by other appropriate means. Some of the most common stall warning systems are as follows: 1. Pre-Stall Buffet. In this case, the warning of the impending stall is provided solely by aerodynamic buffet. As th...
aviation-system.fandom.com
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 10:43:43 AM UTC-4, a a wrote:
Most of the time they don\'t hear the alarm until they\'re in a stall. And the slower airspeeds and requirements to maneuver/bank the aircraft almost always occur at minimal ground clearance as in coming in for a landing. There\'s not much they can do about stalls when the ground is just a few seconds free fall away. The best defense against stalls is a pilot who knows what he\'s doing, anticipates problems well before they arise, and avoids them.
Stall warning is provided by an electronic or mechanical device that sounds an audible warning as the stall speed is approached. The simplest such device is an airframe mounted stall warning horn which sounds when the airflow through it occurs at a specific angle.
Stall Warning Systems | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
Stall Warning Systems | SKYbrary Aviation Safety
https://skybrary.aero/articles/stall-warning-systems
As per the regulations, the stall warning system requirements can be satisfied by the inherent stall characteristics of the aircraft itself or by other appropriate means. Some of the most common stall warning systems are as follows: 1. Pre-Stall Buffet. In this case, the warning of the impending stall is provided soâ¦
Definition
An aircraft Stall Warning System is that system which provides the pilot with advance warning of an impending stall.
Stall warning systems are designed to activate based on the stall characteristics of clean, contamination free surfaces. Airframe contaminatioâ¦
Pilot Actions
Pilot response to any stall warning including: 1. Buffeting or the activation of a stall warning system 2. Uncommanded roll or the inability to contrâ¦
Further Reading
NTSB Safety Alertson General Aviation risks 1. Safety Alert 19 - Prevent Aerodynamic Stalls at â¦
Regulatory Requirement
As is the case with most safety related equipment, the requirement for a Stall Warning System will be found within the aviation regulations for the State of Manufacture and the Sâ¦
Mach Number Effect
As altitude increases and air density decreases, the gap between IAS and TAS increases, until the TAâ¦
Related Articles
1. Loss of Control
2. Stick Pusher
3. Stall
The Stall Warning System - Plane & Pilot Magazine planeandpilotmag.com
How It Works: Stall horn - AOPA aopa.org
737 Stall Warning System - The Boeing 737 Technical Site b737.org.uk
Tech Talk: Stall-Warning Systems - IFR Magazine ifr-magazine.com
Stall Warning Systems - AVweb avweb.com
Stall Warning Systems - Aviation Safety
https://www.aviationsafetymagazine.com/aircraft/...
20.04.2021 · A stall warning system is something of a last resort: By the time it activates inadvertently, youâve already ignored several other indications that the airplane is approaching a stall. Youâve allowed the airplane to get too slow, â¦
A Look at Stall Warning Devices - Experimental Aircraft Association
https://www.eaa.org/eaa/aircraft-building/builder...
01.04.1995 · Stall Strips Vs. Stall Warning Horns A stall warning horn, correctly installed and adjusted, will start its unearthly raucous blare anytime the aircraft wing approaches within 5 to 10 mph of a stalled condition. This â¦
How fast does a stall warning horn go?
Stall Warning | Aviation System Wikia | Fandom
https://aviation-system.fandom.com/wiki/Stall_Warning
DefinitionRegulatory RequirementWarning SystemsIcingMach Number EffectPilot Actions
As per the regulations, the stall warning system requirements can be satisfied by the inherent stall characteristics of the aircraft itself or by other appropriate means. Some of the most common stall warning systems are as follows: 1. Pre-Stall Buffet. In this case, the warning of the impending stall is provided solely by aerodynamic buffet. As th...
aviation-system.fandom.com
Most of the time they don\'t hear the alarm until they\'re in a stall. And the slower airspeeds and requirements to maneuver/bank the aircraft almost always occur at minimal ground clearance as in coming in for a landing. There\'s not much they can do about stalls when the ground is just a few seconds free fall away. The best defense against stalls is a pilot who knows what he\'s doing, anticipates problems well before they arise, and avoids them.
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 8:32:44 PM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
It was a Bombardier- that\'s a major disadvantage right there. And I don\'t call not knowing his ass from a hole in the ground a \"mistake.\" That individual shouldn\'t have been in a cockpit in any capacity.
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
It was a Bombardier- that\'s a major disadvantage right there. And I don\'t call not knowing his ass from a hole in the ground a \"mistake.\" That individual shouldn\'t have been in a cockpit in any capacity.
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 10:08:52 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
The FAA doesn\'t assess the pilot, the airline does. The FAA has observers at training sites but they\'re not exactly on top of things in any detail. And when a pilot fails a checkout or some other test, the airlines just put them in some kind administrative probation that appears to mean they have to make another attempt at it (at some later date), but all the while the failed pilot keeps flying.
On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 10:32:44 AM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
There\'s nothing ironic about the FAA flight hours rules putting an incompetent pilot where he could crash the plane.
The FAA clearly failed to assess the pilot correctly and failed to predict that he was going to crash a plane.
The FAA doesn\'t assess the pilot, the airline does. The FAA has observers at training sites but they\'re not exactly on top of things in any detail. And when a pilot fails a checkout or some other test, the airlines just put them in some kind administrative probation that appears to mean they have to make another attempt at it (at some later date), but all the while the failed pilot keeps flying.
Their arse is grass. If Gnatguy once worked for them you see how they might concentrate on what a pilot used to be able to do while neglecting to pay any attention to whether they could still do it now. Gnatguy does seem to think that he still has a working brain and rejects any suggestion that the last working bits dribbled out of his ears years ago.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
The pilot flying (PF) in this tragic accident was the CAPTAIN, NOT the copilot. Yet the FAA dropped a load of bricks on copilots, upping the minimum hours from 250 to 1,500, a SIX FOLD increase. There was NO justification for doing this from the FAA. Note: the captain had problematic check rides in the past and should have had his license revoked.
Here are excerpts from the NTSB final accident report (NOT fucking Wikipedia!):
9. The reason the captain did not recognize the impending onset of the stick shaker could not be
determined from the available evidence, but the first officerâs tasks at the time the low-speed
cue was visible would have likely reduced opportunities for her timely recognition of the
impending event; the failure of both pilots to detect this situation was the result of a
significant breakdown in their monitoring responsibilities and workload management.
10. The flight crew did not consider the position of the reference speeds switch when the stick
shaker activated.
11. The captainâs response to stick shaker activation should have been automatic, but his
improper flight control inputs were inconsistent with his training and were instead consistent
with startle and confusion.
12. The captain did not recognize the stick pusherâs action to decrease angle-of-attack as a
proper step in a stall recovery, and his improper flight control inputs to override the stick
pusher exacerbated the situation.
13. It is unlikely that the captain was deliberately attempting to perform a tailplane stall
recovery.
18. The captainâs failure to effectively manage the flight
(1) enabled conversation that delayed
checklist completion and conflicted with sterile cockpit procedures and
(2) created an environment that impeded timely error detection.
3.2 Probable Cause
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this
accident was the captainâs inappropriate response to the activation of the stick shaker, which led
to an aerodynamic stall from which the airplane did not recover. Contributing to the accident
were
(1) the flight crewâs failure to monitor airspeed in relation to the rising position of the low speed cue, (2) the flight crewâs failure to adhere to sterile cockpit procedures,
(3) the captainâs
failure to effectively manage the flight, and
(4) Colgan Airâs inadequate procedures for airspeed
selection and management during approaches in icing conditions.
======================================================Note that ALL of the accident conclusions point to actions by the CAPTAIN, not the copilot!
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted the accident investigation and published a final report on Tuesday, February 2, 2010, which found the probable cause to be the pilots\' inappropriate response to the stall warnings.[3] Flight 3407 is the most recent aviation incident involving a U.S.-based airline that resulted in multiple casualties.[4][5]
Families of the accident victims lobbied the U.S. Congress to enact more stringent regulations for regional carriers, and to improve the scrutiny of safe operating procedures and the working conditions of pilots. The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administrative Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111â216) required some of these regulation changes.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407
NTSB Colgan Air Crash Animation Flight 3407
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33NUAy3eomg
The pilot flying (PF) in this tragic accident was the CAPTAIN, NOT the copilot. Yet the FAA dropped a load of bricks on copilots, upping the minimum hours from 250 to 1,500, a SIX FOLD increase. There was NO justification for doing this from the FAA. Note: the captain had problematic check rides in the past and should have had his license revoked.
Here are excerpts from the NTSB final accident report (NOT fucking Wikipedia!):
9. The reason the captain did not recognize the impending onset of the stick shaker could not be
determined from the available evidence, but the first officerâs tasks at the time the low-speed
cue was visible would have likely reduced opportunities for her timely recognition of the
impending event; the failure of both pilots to detect this situation was the result of a
significant breakdown in their monitoring responsibilities and workload management.
10. The flight crew did not consider the position of the reference speeds switch when the stick
shaker activated.
11. The captainâs response to stick shaker activation should have been automatic, but his
improper flight control inputs were inconsistent with his training and were instead consistent
with startle and confusion.
12. The captain did not recognize the stick pusherâs action to decrease angle-of-attack as a
proper step in a stall recovery, and his improper flight control inputs to override the stick
pusher exacerbated the situation.
13. It is unlikely that the captain was deliberately attempting to perform a tailplane stall
recovery.
18. The captainâs failure to effectively manage the flight
(1) enabled conversation that delayed
checklist completion and conflicted with sterile cockpit procedures and
(2) created an environment that impeded timely error detection.
3.2 Probable Cause
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this
accident was the captainâs inappropriate response to the activation of the stick shaker, which led
to an aerodynamic stall from which the airplane did not recover. Contributing to the accident
were
(1) the flight crewâs failure to monitor airspeed in relation to the rising position of the low speed cue, (2) the flight crewâs failure to adhere to sterile cockpit procedures,
(3) the captainâs
failure to effectively manage the flight, and
(4) Colgan Airâs inadequate procedures for airspeed
selection and management during approaches in icing conditions.
======================================================Note that ALL of the accident conclusions point to actions by the CAPTAIN, not the copilot!
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:58:00 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted the accident investigation and published a final report on Tuesday, February 2, 2010, which found the probable cause to be the pilots\' inappropriate response to the stall warnings.[3] Flight 3407 is the most recent aviation incident involving a U.S.-based airline that resulted in multiple casualties.[4][5]
Families of the accident victims lobbied the U.S. Congress to enact more stringent regulations for regional carriers, and to improve the scrutiny of safe operating procedures and the working conditions of pilots. The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administrative Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111â216) required some of these regulation changes.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407
NTSB Colgan Air Crash Animation Flight 3407
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33NUAy3eomg
The pilot flying (PF) in this tragic accident was the CAPTAIN, NOT the copilot. Yet the FAA dropped a load of bricks on copilots, upping the minimum hours from 250 to 1,500, a SIX FOLD increase. There was NO justification for doing this from the FAA. Note: the captain had problematic check rides in the past and should have had his license revoked.
Here are excerpts from the NTSB final accident report (NOT fucking Wikipedia!):
9. The reason the captain did not recognize the impending onset of the stick shaker could not be
determined from the available evidence, but the first officerâs tasks at the time the low-speed
cue was visible would have likely reduced opportunities for her timely recognition of the
impending event; the failure of both pilots to detect this situation was the result of a
significant breakdown in their monitoring responsibilities and workload management.
10. The flight crew did not consider the position of the reference speeds switch when the stick
shaker activated.
11. The captainâs response to stick shaker activation should have been automatic, but his
improper flight control inputs were inconsistent with his training and were instead consistent
with startle and confusion.
12. The captain did not recognize the stick pusherâs action to decrease angle-of-attack as a
proper step in a stall recovery, and his improper flight control inputs to override the stick
pusher exacerbated the situation.
13. It is unlikely that the captain was deliberately attempting to perform a tailplane stall
recovery.
18. The captainâs failure to effectively manage the flight
(1) enabled conversation that delayed
checklist completion and conflicted with sterile cockpit procedures and
(2) created an environment that impeded timely error detection.
3.2 Probable Cause
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this
accident was the captainâs inappropriate response to the activation of the stick shaker, which led
to an aerodynamic stall from which the airplane did not recover. Contributing to the accident
were
(1) the flight crewâs failure to monitor airspeed in relation to the rising position of the low speed cue, (2) the flight crewâs failure to adhere to sterile cockpit procedures,
(3) the captainâs
failure to effectively manage the flight, and
(4) Colgan Airâs inadequate procedures for airspeed
selection and management during approaches in icing conditions.
=======================================================
Note that ALL of the accident conclusions point to actions by the CAPTAIN, not the copilot!
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
P
Phil Allison
Guest
Flyswatter wrote:
==================
** But both are equally to blame for the fatal crash.
> Yet the FAA dropped a load of bricks on copilots,
** Drivel.
The increase in hours had long been needed, so all co-pilots were experienced.
A competent co-pilot would have *prevented* the crash, instead of aiding it as this *incompetent* one did.
This vid shows the cockpit of a Q400, during a take off etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHAdgAmXLc0
The pair up front work as a team, not student and teacher.
........ Phil
==================
The pilot flying (PF) in this tragic accident was the CAPTAIN, NOT the copilot.
** But both are equally to blame for the fatal crash.
> Yet the FAA dropped a load of bricks on copilots,
** Drivel.
The increase in hours had long been needed, so all co-pilots were experienced.
A competent co-pilot would have *prevented* the crash, instead of aiding it as this *incompetent* one did.
This vid shows the cockpit of a Q400, during a take off etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHAdgAmXLc0
The pair up front work as a team, not student and teacher.
........ Phil
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 5:36:29 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
There is a MAJOR difference between a pilot who commits mass suicide and an INCOMPETENT pilot.
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:58:00 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
This is a CYA response by the FAA. If your flight is canceled because a crew wasn\'t available to fly the plane you don\'t blame the FAA. But, if the flight crashes and one of the crew had a lower standard of flight hours then the FAA is on the hot seat. What is ironic is the Colgan Air crash wasn\'t because of the copilot\'s ineptness, it was because of the CAPTAIN\'s mistakes.
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted the accident investigation and published a final report on Tuesday, February 2, 2010, which found the probable cause to be the pilots\' inappropriate response to the stall warnings.[3] Flight 3407 is the most recent aviation incident involving a U.S.-based airline that resulted in multiple casualties.[4][5]
Families of the accident victims lobbied the U.S. Congress to enact more stringent regulations for regional carriers, and to improve the scrutiny of safe operating procedures and the working conditions of pilots. The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administrative Extension Act of 2010 (Public Law 111â216) required some of these regulation changes.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407
NTSB Colgan Air Crash Animation Flight 3407
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33NUAy3eomg
The pilot flying (PF) in this tragic accident was the CAPTAIN, NOT the copilot. Yet the FAA dropped a load of bricks on copilots, upping the minimum hours from 250 to 1,500, a SIX FOLD increase. There was NO justification for doing this from the FAA. Note: the captain had problematic check rides in the past and should have had his license revoked.
Here are excerpts from the NTSB final accident report (NOT fucking Wikipedia!):
9. The reason the captain did not recognize the impending onset of the stick shaker could not be
determined from the available evidence, but the first officerâs tasks at the time the low-speed
cue was visible would have likely reduced opportunities for her timely recognition of the
impending event; the failure of both pilots to detect this situation was the result of a
significant breakdown in their monitoring responsibilities and workload management.
10. The flight crew did not consider the position of the reference speeds switch when the stick
shaker activated.
11. The captainâs response to stick shaker activation should have been automatic, but his
improper flight control inputs were inconsistent with his training and were instead consistent
with startle and confusion.
12. The captain did not recognize the stick pusherâs action to decrease angle-of-attack as a
proper step in a stall recovery, and his improper flight control inputs to override the stick
pusher exacerbated the situation.
13. It is unlikely that the captain was deliberately attempting to perform a tailplane stall
recovery.
18. The captainâs failure to effectively manage the flight
(1) enabled conversation that delayed
checklist completion and conflicted with sterile cockpit procedures and
(2) created an environment that impeded timely error detection.
3.2 Probable Cause
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this
accident was the captainâs inappropriate response to the activation of the stick shaker, which led
to an aerodynamic stall from which the airplane did not recover. Contributing to the accident
were
(1) the flight crewâs failure to monitor airspeed in relation to the rising position of the low speed cue, (2) the flight crewâs failure to adhere to sterile cockpit procedures,
(3) the captainâs
failure to effectively manage the flight, and
(4) Colgan Airâs inadequate procedures for airspeed
selection and management during approaches in icing conditions.
=======================================================
Note that ALL of the accident conclusions point to actions by the CAPTAIN, not the copilot!
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
There is a MAJOR difference between a pilot who commits mass suicide and an INCOMPETENT pilot.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 2:48:58 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
<snip>
You can\'t \"commit mass suicide\" - at least not when killing a lot people in the process of killing yourself. That\'s murder-suicide.
The people killed aren\'t going to see a lot of difference. From the public safety point of view, a pilot who is depressed enough to kill themselves and their passengers shouldn\'t have been put in control of an aircraft. Competence goes rather further than avoiding unintentional mistakes.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 5:36:29 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:58:00 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
<snip>
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
There is a MAJOR difference between a pilot who commits mass suicide and an INCOMPETENT pilot.
You can\'t \"commit mass suicide\" - at least not when killing a lot people in the process of killing yourself. That\'s murder-suicide.
The people killed aren\'t going to see a lot of difference. From the public safety point of view, a pilot who is depressed enough to kill themselves and their passengers shouldn\'t have been put in control of an aircraft. Competence goes rather further than avoiding unintentional mistakes.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 4:02:00 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
Hey Bozo, exactly HOW are they going to do this? You NEGLECTED to include that minor detail. Give SPECIFIC examples.
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 2:48:58 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 5:36:29 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:58:00 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
snip
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
There is a MAJOR difference between a pilot who commits mass suicide and an INCOMPETENT pilot.
You can\'t \"commit mass suicide\" - at least not when killing a lot people in the process of killing yourself. That\'s murder-suicide.
The people killed aren\'t going to see a lot of difference. From the public safety point of view, a pilot who is depressed enough to kill themselves and their passengers shouldn\'t have been put in control of an aircraft. Competence goes rather further than avoiding unintentional mistakes.
--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney
Hey Bozo, exactly HOW are they going to do this? You NEGLECTED to include that minor detail. Give SPECIFIC examples.
S
Sylvia Else
Guest
On 20/09/2022 9:06 am, a a wrote:
It was the captain who crashed Colgan Air, not the copilot. There was
some question about whether either of them belonged at the controls of
an passenger airliner at all.
The system as it stands puts a substantial barrier to entry for pilots.
There\'s a clear danger that what\'s being achieved by that is that we get
the people most strongly motivated to become airline pilots, and they
are not necessarily the people most able to be competent and safe pilots.
In accident reports, we sometimes discover that even experienced
captains were really quite marginal as pilots. We could probably do
better if we focused more on aptitude, and less on hours of experience.
Sylvia.
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
It was the captain who crashed Colgan Air, not the copilot. There was
some question about whether either of them belonged at the controls of
an passenger airliner at all.
The system as it stands puts a substantial barrier to entry for pilots.
There\'s a clear danger that what\'s being achieved by that is that we get
the people most strongly motivated to become airline pilots, and they
are not necessarily the people most able to be competent and safe pilots.
In accident reports, we sometimes discover that even experienced
captains were really quite marginal as pilots. We could probably do
better if we focused more on aptitude, and less on hours of experience.
Sylvia.
A
Anthony William Sloman
Guest
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:31:07 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
Why on earth should I? I\'ve set out the problem that needs to be solved. It\'s clear that the current arrangements are inadequate, and that the people who were paid to set them up and run them have a duty to improve them. If they haven\'t got the expertise to do that they do need to be fired and replaced by people who look as though they might. That wouldn\'t include me - I may have the systems engineer\'s knack of seeing what the problem is, but personnel selection is a different skill, and calls for people with different experience.
Only a clown like you would ask for detailed advice from a random stranger.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 4:02:00 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 2:48:58 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 5:36:29 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:58:00 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
snip
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
There is a MAJOR difference between a pilot who commits mass suicide and an INCOMPETENT pilot.
You can\'t \"commit mass suicide\" - at least not when killing a lot people in the process of killing yourself. That\'s murder-suicide.
The people killed aren\'t going to see a lot of difference. From the public safety point of view, a pilot who is depressed enough to kill themselves and their passengers shouldn\'t have been put in control of an aircraft. Competence goes rather further than avoiding unintentional mistakes.
Hey, exactly HOW are they going to do this? You NEGLECTED to include that minor detail. Give SPECIFIC examples.
Why on earth should I? I\'ve set out the problem that needs to be solved. It\'s clear that the current arrangements are inadequate, and that the people who were paid to set them up and run them have a duty to improve them. If they haven\'t got the expertise to do that they do need to be fired and replaced by people who look as though they might. That wouldn\'t include me - I may have the systems engineer\'s knack of seeing what the problem is, but personnel selection is a different skill, and calls for people with different experience.
Only a clown like you would ask for detailed advice from a random stranger.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
A
a a
Guest
fake
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 18:23:04 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:
Eventually computers will probably do the actual flying. The captain
will just be the exec in charge of the plane, like the captain of a
ship.
Some planes now have an emergency \"find a field and land me\" button.
wrote:
On 20/09/2022 9:06 am, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlines request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
It was the captain who crashed Colgan Air, not the copilot. There was
some question about whether either of them belonged at the controls of
an passenger airliner at all.
The system as it stands puts a substantial barrier to entry for pilots.
There\'s a clear danger that what\'s being achieved by that is that we get
the people most strongly motivated to become airline pilots, and they
are not necessarily the people most able to be competent and safe pilots.
In accident reports, we sometimes discover that even experienced
captains were really quite marginal as pilots. We could probably do
better if we focused more on aptitude, and less on hours of experience.
Sylvia.
Eventually computers will probably do the actual flying. The captain
will just be the exec in charge of the plane, like the captain of a
ship.
Some planes now have an emergency \"find a field and land me\" button.
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 11:43:15 PM UTC-8, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
Simple: if you don\'t, and that\'s what you\'re saying, you are just BLOWING SMOKE with absolutely NO ANSWERS. I expect NOTHING MORE from you.
No, you ARE NOT a \"random stranger\" - you put yourself out there as an expert of EVERYTHING!
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 3:31:07 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 4:02:00 AM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, September 23, 2022 at 2:48:58 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 5:36:29 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:58:00 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 5:42:36 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 September 2022 at 02:32:44 UTC+2, Flyguy wrote:
On Monday, September 19, 2022 at 4:06:28 PM UTC-7, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
snip
He wasn\'t going to prevent a crash no matter what he did, especially if icing was causing his loss of airspeed. The reality is that quite a few commercial airline pilots cannot fly the aircraft manually, they are entirely dependent on automated flight control, and don\'t really understand that all too well either.
This Chinese pilot didn\'t even wait for a stall to happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/17/china-air-crash-that-killed-132-may-have-been-deliberate-says-us-report
There is a MAJOR difference between a pilot who commits mass suicide and an INCOMPETENT pilot.
You can\'t \"commit mass suicide\" - at least not when killing a lot people in the process of killing yourself. That\'s murder-suicide.
The people killed aren\'t going to see a lot of difference. From the public safety point of view, a pilot who is depressed enough to kill themselves and their passengers shouldn\'t have been put in control of an aircraft. Competence goes rather further than avoiding unintentional mistakes.
Hey, exactly HOW are they going to do this? You NEGLECTED to include that minor detail. Give SPECIFIC examples.
Why on earth should I?
Simple: if you don\'t, and that\'s what you\'re saying, you are just BLOWING SMOKE with absolutely NO ANSWERS. I expect NOTHING MORE from you.
Only a clown like you would ask for detailed advice from a random stranger.
No, you ARE NOT a \"random stranger\" - you put yourself out there as an expert of EVERYTHING!
--
Bozo Bill Sloman, Sydney
F
Flyguy
Guest
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 4:07:13 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:
Actually, the computers are doing most of the flying now - only a few minutes of the flight are under the actual control of a pilot, the rest of the flight is on autopilot. Sometimes, however, the computers give up and hand back control to the pilot, competent or not. This is EXACTLY what happened on the Colgan Air accident. The FAA changed the recurrent training of airline pilots as a result of the investigation into this accident. This is a good review of the entire event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6c3ENr_CRM
On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 18:23:04 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 20/09/2022 9:06 am, a a wrote:
FAA rejects airlineâs request to hire less-experienced pilots
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/faa-rejects-airlines-request-to-hire-less-experienced-pilots-01663626813?mod=mw_latestnews
It was the captain who crashed Colgan Air, not the copilot. There was
some question about whether either of them belonged at the controls of
an passenger airliner at all.
The system as it stands puts a substantial barrier to entry for pilots.
There\'s a clear danger that what\'s being achieved by that is that we get
the people most strongly motivated to become airline pilots, and they
are not necessarily the people most able to be competent and safe pilots..
In accident reports, we sometimes discover that even experienced
captains were really quite marginal as pilots. We could probably do
better if we focused more on aptitude, and less on hours of experience.
Sylvia.
Eventually computers will probably do the actual flying. The captain
will just be the exec in charge of the plane, like the captain of a
ship.
Some planes now have an emergency \"find a field and land me\" button.
Actually, the computers are doing most of the flying now - only a few minutes of the flight are under the actual control of a pilot, the rest of the flight is on autopilot. Sometimes, however, the computers give up and hand back control to the pilot, competent or not. This is EXACTLY what happened on the Colgan Air accident. The FAA changed the recurrent training of airline pilots as a result of the investigation into this accident. This is a good review of the entire event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6c3ENr_CRM