A story of how a crew of three very senior captains -- possibly the three most-senior in the system -- and two very senior flight engineers came as close as one would wish landing a 747 gear up.
The distraction itself is not the problem, but the way he mishandled it. He should have said his "Aw $#1+!" or whatever, and gotten back to flying the airplane.
I disagree. He didn't fail at trying; he just didn't succeed before the GPWS did.
Whether or not he should have initiated a go-around is subject to debate. It is a serious step to take when the Captain was allegedly the handling pilot, and was probably warranted in this case. However, I can't blame him for being reticent, at least to the point of the GPWS alarm or missed approach altitude, as long as the airplane was otherwise stable.
I disagree. He didn't fail at trying; he just didn't succeed before the GPWS did.
Whether or not he should have initiated a go-around is subject to debate. It is a serious step to take when the Captain was allegedly the handling pilot, and was probably warranted in this case. However, I can't blame him for being reticent, at least to the point of the GPWS alarm or missed approach altitude, as long as the airplane was otherwise stable.
Wow, if it had been a co-pilot from the third world, there would have been deafening condemnation. Hypocrites you guys, aren't you? There would have been clarion calls for both pilots to be summarily sacked. Sheesh, what double standards!
Location: 5° above the Equator, 75° left of Greenwich
Posts: 171
Quote:
I disagree. He didn't fail at trying; he just didn't succeed before the GPWS did.
Whether or not he should have initiated a go-around is subject to debate. It is a serious step to take when the Captain was allegedly the handling pilot, and was probably warranted in this case.
He didn't get the captain's attention back into the situation, he didn't do anything actually, regarding that matter. He also didn't successfully regain control of the airplane timely: Given the case he had tried to take control, he failed to have to airplane properly configured to land, not just the gear, but the whole lot: flaps, autobrakes, spoilers (as per the report) and both also failed to fly the go-around in a proper way; there was nothing but chaos from the point they discovered the gear wasn't down all the way up to almost the missed approach altitude.
FO was PF by the way. He didn't fail at trying, he and the captain failed altogether at conducting proper CRM
Location: 5° above the Equator, 75° left of Greenwich
Posts: 171
Quote:
Where/when did the info come out that the FO was PF? I hadn't noticed that in here.
Post #4 has a link to the report:
Quote:
The ATSB report can be found by following this link.
...adding to the fact that the thread talks about the FO asking the captain to set the missed approach altitude as a sort of a "trigger event", meaning he was PF and captain PM
There,s a lot of reference to the F/O being PF but you have to read the report and not rely on PPRuNe to tell you. The F/O was PF not PIC. This whole Incident would not have happened if the Captain had been doing his job and monitoring the progress of the flight.
