Richard Champion de Crespigny - QF32 book

[dreamer84]

Your own thoughts on his book aside, there's a burning question I have that at first intrigued me and now annoys me. :confused:

On QF32 he was getting a route check, and said "either Dave or Harry (Check captain's) could end my career that day with a fail on the route check."

Then at the very end of the book, he states that he didn't pass.

Would he have failed the route check because of his actions on the flight, emergency procedures included? Or would a route check on a flight that experiences an emergency and diversion/and or return to land constitute an incomplete check or something similar, with a requirement for an additional check?

Are there items on a route check that can be revisited if not to a satisfactory standard, or is it one in all in - 'end my career' type stuff.

Thanks - Once resolved I can move onto the next trivial, inconsequential matter.

[Feather #3]

This is one item which needs correcting.

It is the difference between "not passing" the Route Check and "not completing" the Route Check.

In this case, it's the latter. The Route Check has to be completed by the line crew alone, without Check pilot input. They worked as a very successful team of 5 to get the aircraft back on the ground safely, but this is outside the licence requirement. Therefore, the check was incomplete; nobody "didn't pass" or "failed"!!

Hope that helps.

G'day ;)

[engine out]

On this occasion it was not complete but failing a route check is not a career ending scenario. Most people I know have failed a route check or sim check at some stage. Usually it is a case of some training to get back to standard and then a new check. If you made a habit of failing them then it could be career ending. Never let facts get in the way of a story.

[dreamer84]

Thanks! Nothing like a little dramatisation.

[das Uber Soldat]

nobody didn't pass or failed!!
Oh someone failed alright. :}

[Capt Fathom]

Most people I know have failed a route check or sim check at some stage
Let's hope we never meet!

[Lookleft]

One thing that intrigued me about what was in the book (actually a lot intrigued me including RDC intention to do an Armstrong spiral if all the engines failed!) but Harry was also under check to become an A380 checkie, so I assume he did not complete his check either?

[Freewheel]

Was one of the crew named Tom? That would satisfactorily complete the meaningless giggle session.....

[Feather #3]

Lookleft, correct.

G'day ;)

[Lookleft]

Thanks Feather. Now if you could explain the whole Armstrong spiral thing and why that was even a consideration....:ok:

[Capt Fathom]

Now if you could explain the whole Armstrong spiral thing
Only Richard knows the answer to that. Neil couldn't comment! :sad:

[Feather #3]

Have a look at:

Flight 51: To the edge of space and to the edge of Los Angeles (http://www.sierrafoot.org/x-15/adventures/flight_051/flight_51.html)

G'day ;)

[Mish A]

Just finished reading QF32 and I really appreciate the honesty by the author and suspect that it's not an easy task to relate personal thoughts to the general public.

Further, the roles that Captains De Crespigny and Sullenberger took on after their respective incidents is difficult to comprehend. To have incidents such as these is big enough for the average Pilot to cope with. To then become open and approachable by the public afterwards is a role that most pilots would be very reluctant to take on.

These two gentlemen have accepted these important post incident roles and as a result we are all better off for the information shared.

Thankyou.

P.S. Our old 1960's farm bike from my teenage years had a kill switch on it. Any chance that the A380 as complex as it is could have external kill switches installed on the engines that are safely accessible to fire crews?

[Sunamer]

...as it is could have external kill switches installed on the engines that are safely accessible to fire crews?

what if that "switch" starts glitching and shuts down the healthy engine in-flight/on TO/landing?

it is one more point of failure (at least) and it is unclear whether it increases the safety and not decreases it, because each point has its own chance > 0 of failing.

[Keg]

Never let facts get in the way of a story.


Kinda sums up the whole book doesn't it? :E :ok:

[Bonniciwah]

These two gentlemen have accepted these important post incident roles and as a result we are all better off for the information shared.

Good point. It's easy to argue that they were just doing what they were trained to do, and were in the right place at the wrong time. But in an age where the general public is pretty blasé about aviation and think computers fly airliners, these guys have helped bring some glory back to the airline industry and aviation as a whole.

[Keg]

One of them aimed to promote the industry. The other chose to promote himself. You can probably work out which is which.

[LeadSled]

Keg,
I'm with you on this one.
Tootle pip!!

[john_tullamarine]

Nothing like a little dramatisation

Having a read of the book and it's not a bad sort of yarn, I guess .. a long way in before one finds any meat to do with the mishap, though.

RDC was a guest speaker at an engineering symposium I attended a year or so ago .. his tale was delivered with a tad more drama than necessary for the group concerned but, nonetheless, entertaining ..

As to whether I might find his manner desirable on a flight is another matter.

[Double Asymmetric]

A shame he ruined what could have been a remarkable yarn in it's own right by his relentless overdramatisation. I was greatly looking forward to his story coming out, however after hearing a couple of his interviews on the radio/net and the over-egging of various puddings (spin training in the Winjeel comes to mind) I took a pass. I eventually borrowed the book to read, made a genuine start and handed it back unfinished. Ruined.

[Wally Mk2]

Sully & D'Crep, two entirely diff people.........one a genuine hero who had but a couple of minutes to make a life & death decision, the other as 'Keg' said.


Wmk2

[5th officer]

I know I am getting off the track a bit but as Sully has been bought into the equation, has anyone ever observed an interim ATSB report on the Hudson River Ditching?
I too, believe that once the decision to turn a land plane into a sea plane the crew, and especially Sully pulled off a brilliant landing and fully deserve the title of hero.
But I have always had a nagging feeling about all of the proceedings that took place prior to finding themselves 500 ft above the Hudson and not many options left?
It is the time from when engines choked up with a large amount birdlife and what took place in the following minutes that has me perplexed.
I maybe totally wrong but if a decision to do a 180 or fly straight ahead to another airfield instead of flying away from both and spend valuable minutes trying a restart engines that was never going to restart.
The crew was well aware they had ingested birds and from my training, if the birds stopped the turbines they were never going to restart.
I am sure I will castigated for casting doubts about a hero, but?:bored:

[TWT]

NTSB report.Fill yer boots :

http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/AAR1003.pdf

[Wally Mk2]

I can't for one minute imagine what it would have been like in that cockpit with Sully & his Coey dealing with an extreme very short term difficult situation & I fly the bus! They had what 2-3 mins at best b4 impact somewhere whether it be on land or water. They where damned lucky they had an open area in which to put the machine down & lucky again that it was winter with little river traffic about.
Dealing with a dieing plane under his ass, ATC whom obviously are trying to help but wanna know what he's gunna do, trying to keep the crew/pax in the loop as well as assist the F/O whom I might add had very few hrs on type but still kept his cool & all the time thinking about his family, ANY normal human would bring them into the mix here (as this could be the end) as he is a human not a machine.
Going thru the QRH in a thorough manor & getting the best result from same wasn't gunna happen due the short time farme avail b4 impact so I'd say Sully did a damned good job & used his many years of raw experience to handle the situation the best he could. We practice these sought of failures often in the comfort of a nice (stoppable at any time & survive) Sim full knowing that we had just briefed what we where gunna do b4hand & then handle the failure as per the book. No 'ad-lib' or interpretation of the rules in the Sim or yr chastised by the checky so it's all nice & cruzy...........stuff the rules in this case I say that's why the Capt is a Capt he makes decisions based on what he has at the time, the latter very little of!

As for the other Capt of the other event here........well no comparison but an interesting read with lots of 'Hollywood' content.



Wmk2

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Well before Sully and just as heroic was this event- TACA 110. Well worth looking at the National Geographic Air Crash investigation episode on it. Here is a snippet from the news coverage at the time of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPn8G7enbF4

[TWT]

TACA 110 'Mayday'

jnX1u5vp1J4

[sprocket check]

Are you gents talking about the same Richard De Crespigny that purportedly lives somewhere around Kiribili and was one of the lead complainants against the heliport for Sydney Harbour?

Just wanting to connect some dots...

sc

[training wheels]

There was also another case (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garuda_Indonesia_Flight_421) of a double engine flameout involving a Garuda 737-300 flying in thunderstorm conditions. After the flameout and breaking through the cloud base at 8000, the crew spotted the Solo river and ditched the aircraft there. Everyone survived except one flight attendant who died during the evacuation (some say she slipped, feel and drowned in the river). Another case of a successful ditching but not as highly publicized as Sully's.

[Fantome]

A propos flying 'Hero Class', on one of the air crash docos series on TV not long ago there featured a Canadian A330 en route Toronto - Lisbon. Due to fuel loss caused by chaffing and then fracture of lines they first lost one and then the other.
Prior to this, the captain spent a long time in disbelief before the reality was brought home to him.

He put the big glider down on a military field in the Azores after a well judged approach. Nobody got a scratch. One passenger, speaking for the doco, said words to this effect -

"Do I think Pierre Lamont is a brilliant pilot? . . . YES!"

"Do I think he is a hero? . . .. . NO!"

[framer]

She probably thought that because they transferred all the fuel out into the air from the leaking engine.

[Jack Ranga]

Sully & D'Crep, two entirely diff people

Wal, are you saying Sully is an a-hole?

[TWT]

The 'Gimli Glider' was a similar tale.

[International Trader]

Never met the 'local hero' but, he lost me when his wife got on the media and said something like " nobody knows more about that aeroplane than him".
When ever a pilots wife becomes an instant industry expert on the basis of being married to a pilot , you know that the BS has been flying long and hard back at the ranch.
The old boy probably has epaulettes sewn on to his pyjamas and wears his cap to bed so that they know who the captain is.

However, a wife should know if he is an a-hole or not.
Over to the aviation expert for comment

[Mish A]

IT, it's just my opinion but I don't think there is anything wrong with a wife (or vice versa) being supportive of her husband. In modern times good, solid, lifelong better halves are few and far between in the aviation industry. There should be more of them. If they're being harassed by the media and along with everything else just happen to say something nice about the Capt in the spotlight, so be it.

What the media needs to do after the next incident is to grab some quotes from a few ex wives. Now that maybe entertaining :p