Originally Posted by
alf5071h
The NYT article, and the accident report, should reinforce the wake up call emerging from the Max saga. Not specifically directed Boeing, FAA, NTSB, but for world manufacturing, regulation, investigation and operations.
Alternatively as a bold safety statement, publishing the report anonymously with the objective of learning and changing even at this late stage.
Uh-huh. It was the world's company that designed and built 737-800. It was the world's certifying authority that rubber-stamped it. It was the world's investigation organization that put the pressure on the
Onderzoeksraad to play down the technical aspects of the disaster so it seems that the world was quite responsible. I wish there were some way we could narrow down the responsibility, at least to the country level or so.
Originally Posted by
Brian Pern
Today's sky gods are so full of themselves with all the latest shimmy kit, they don't have an inkling of airmanship.
Safety statistics do not corroborate your claim.
Originally Posted by
Old Carthusian
There will always be pilots who are unable to respond effectively in an emergency or anomalous situation just as there are pilots who can do so successfully.
So, in which group falls the captain of FlyDubai 981? Could he fly the missed approach or not?
Originally Posted by
wonkazoo
What the heck is "airmanship" and why is it so great at saving airplanes that have been poorly designed??
The greatness of airmainship lays in the fact it is cheaper than properly designing the aeroplanes plus you can always count on the (volunteer) army of fans to berate the pilots killed in the poorly designed aeroplanes for the lack thereof, thereby moving the focus from design to pilot.
Originally Posted by
maxxer
As slf that article gives me shivers and i think this thread should be deleted asap.
You might be able to stop the PPRuNE, but in the grand scheme of the things, PPRuNe is insignificant compared to the New York Times and it's the one you can't stop. Reporters have smelled the blood.
Originally Posted by
fox niner
The only up-side of flying a 737, is that it makes you a better-than-average pilot. If you can fly a 737, than you can fly ANY Boeing airplane.
I am glad to read that, as I have found 738 to be far easier to fly than Q400 and maybe I'll be searching for another type rating pretty soon.
Originally Posted by
alf5071h
wonkazoo, Ascend Charlie, et al,
“Airmanship is a personal attitude to flying, why we do it, how we do it. Airmanship must grow with training, experience, and personal exposure. It is not just about staying alive or not bending the airplane or yourself, it is about walking off the airfield knowing that you have both performed and crafted an activity. You have been totally aware of what you have done and why you enjoyed it, and a that point you owe nothing to anyone.”
If we go by this definition, that leans heavily on the pilot's self-appraisal instead of the consequences of his or her actions, well then late Arthur "Bud" Holland would be one of the airmanshipest pilots that have ever walked the Earth. If we conveniently edit
Czar 52 flight out of his biography, that is.
Originally Posted by
Captain Biggles 101
Put simply, there are far too many pilots that cannot perform and fly aircraft properly within its normal flight envelope well in all normal conditions, let alone with complex demanding technical issues when least expected and possibly fatigued.
Safety statistics do not corroborate your claim.
Originally Posted by
Captain Biggles 101
Talk to most long term sim TREs and they will tell you they have witnessed terrible things.
Pilots who perform terrible things are retrained until they do their flying in non-terrible way or are washed out.
Originally Posted by
Captain Biggles 101
The real question is how did we get to this?
We got to what? To humongous discrepancy between real world's flying safety and PPRuNeload of claims we are doomed because pilots today can't fly? I would guess that huge holes in understanding how the modern aviation works and unwillingness to face the fact that air travel has never been safer were filled and compensated by industrial quantities of imagination and self-righteousness. Whether psychotropic substances played part, I can't speculate at the moment.
Originally Posted by
Captain Biggles 101
Are we heading in the wrong direction with children of the magenta just obsessed with the OFDM improved event safety stats, whilst we now witness terrible crashes where crews handle some serious events badly creating crashes?
If there is really a plot to improve safety stats by killing less passengers and crew, I will gladly join it.
Originally Posted by
Captain Biggles 101
We cannot just blame solely aircraft design.
You as "we" don't matter at all. FAA is blaming design enough that it grounded it and keeps it grounded.
Originally Posted by
Captain Biggles 101
Right now there is a constant race to the bottom, whereby financial incentives push airlines to constantly favour inexperience pulling in at the bottom end, to the detriment of experience and safety.
There are no statistics or studies to corroborate your claim that safety is somehow diminished through the lack of experience. Personally, as someone who has flown with quite a few MPLs, ex-fast jet jocks and wobble to planks, I find the claims that the training standards are getting lower or that MPL is the doom of us all fairly ridiculous. Actually, those who tried hardest to kill me, themselves, our cabin crew and our passengers were the graybeards in the LHS who picked up all the wrong habits through experience.