Originally Posted by
BFSGrad
I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn’t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident.
Reviewing the 5342 CVR, runway 33 was not included in the CA/PF’s approach briefing about 35 minutes prior to the expected landing time. The CA/PF did do an abbreviated briefing for 33 after the circle 33 option was accepted.
Thais reminds me of the trail of the "Herald of Free Enterprise" ferry back in 80s. The Company procedure was clear : it was prohibited to start moving the RORO ferry if the front door was still open . But it had become common practice to gain time ,to leave harbor while the doors were closing When the guy in charge of the door overslept during his break the door remained fully open while the ship was leaving port , and when accelerating water came in and the boat capsized .killing 200 people . During the trail the company executives showed the SOP, and got away with blame , The Guy that overslept and the captain took all the blame . (All this from memory , check Internet for the full report if you want more info)
We could maybe potentially see something similar here , blaming the PSA captain for accepting without prior briefing a visual Circle 33 to gain time , things he probably had done many times before to the satisfaction of his employer .
@ WillowRun 6-3 : Is normalization of deviance a mitigating circumstances in the US legal system ?