Originally Posted by
blind pew
Uplinker.
I can think of several occurances where in 45 mins all would have gone down the pan including the afore mentioned BOAC 707.
And equally with flight 712 you could argue that if they had flown the SID & concentrated on following the briefing, with better CRM they'd have extinguished the engine fire & returned for a more controlled landing, saving 5 lives & the aircraft.
Or you could say that if there'd been a similar engine fire on the Oslo flight, the loss of the cowls would have left the crew with no way of extinguishing it & this incident would have ended in disaster.
In any particular incident, we can speculate retrospectively from the comfort of an armchair that disaster could have been averted if only procedures had/had not been followed (delete as appropriate for your chosen incident), but, statistically speaking, there's more likely to be a successful outcome if the PIC follows the briefing and stays in the loop than if they throw away the book.
That said, there will always be situations where acting instinctively and in contradiction with the briefing is the only way to save the day (Cpt Sully being one obvious example).
Recognising the difference & making the correct decision, in seconds whilst under extreme pressure, is perhaps the real test of an aircraft commander. In following procedure in this incident and not following it in the Hudsdon river ditching, the respective commanders made the right judgment call in each case.
In my book, they are both heroes.