Safety Guy
You make a couple of very good points with which I wholeheartedly agree.
How do you know this crew was in violation of the CARs??? Have you already conducted your investigation? I don't for a minute suggest "they got away with it this time" and neither should you. However, it does appear as though they flew off from A to B safely, unless I got it wrong. I'm not suggesting they got away with anything. I'm confident but accept the fact I wouldn't know, they did a walkaround and decided they had a clean wing based on what they saw. Or, should I assume otherwise? I don't think so.
I credit a professional crew with believing what was seen on a walkaround, that they had a clean wing and made the right decision to depart without deicing and no CAR was violated.
A simple PA to inform the passengers that a thorough inspection of the aircraft exterior and wings was conducted removing the necessity for deicing. It's recorded for the investigators in case they made a boo boo.
I am also crediting a professional pilot who was a passenger on that flight with the ability to observe, identify and claim that there was ice adhering to the wing. This person says he had no opportunity to bring it to the crews attention. I am accepting that as well and applaud him for doing the right thing.
So, now what? Who's right and who's wrong and why not bring it to someones attention? Who better than officials at West Jet? After all, the PAX has a customer complaint. Doesn't he?
The sarcastic part of my comment was, "Why wasn't the aircraft sprayed/deiced? Captain's responsibility. Captain's call."
It's never that simple, is it?
Perhaps it would have stirred more emotion to say this. "Captain screwed up. Off with his head!"
I don't think so.
As previously stated (by someone closer to the action than me) there are two sides to the story here and until a 'judge' hears both sides, we have only the innocent to listen to.
A310GUY
Excellent posts. Well said.