?thank you 60 minutes. do we agree with this?

[jhurditch]

Doomed on MSN Video (http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/doomed/x2mwzbc)

[Faire d'income]

That is a truly shocking piece of journalism.

There are questions to be answered alright but that idiot reporter is not the man for the job.

He seems to have decided that this is a heroes versus villains story (with him getting to decide which are which) and doesn't allow any latitude for any other possibility.

Certainly flying without fuel for an alternate is very odd. It being legal is even odder. That IMHO is what 15 of the 16 minutes should have been about.

Nonsense such as 'would you take off without a full tank of fuel?' and 'no one knew where to look because the pilot didn't issue a mayday' demonstrate the agenda clearly.

In addition he never examines the weather the Captain relied upon. He never examines how much fuel was taken versus the flight time. We are left to rely on an Air Traffic Controller's view of fuel load which is poor at best and the word of some retired guy who said he would never take off without a full tank of fuel. Is he really a pilot?

This is why most pilots never trust journalists.

[169west]

2009 Pel-Air Westwind crash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Pel-Air_Westwind_crash)

not an happy career for that pilot!

[bfisk]

Quite interesting piece, this one. Glad I did see it.

On one hand, I find this to be highly biased and conclusive despite there being an ongoing investigation.

On the other hand it does pose some valid questions, such as why they chose depart without fuelling to capacity, and how that could be legal.

Could anyone share some light to weather information and briefing in this part of the world? And does anyone know if this can be a case of the Isolated Aerodrome fuel policy (what is it, 2 hours final reserve and certain wx conditions?)

One way or the other, credits to the crew for ditching successfully, when ditching was the only remaining option. Now it will be interesting to see how they got to that situation in the first place, hopefully we can all learn something.


Edit: it according to wikipedia, the crew flew ILSs, however according to the AIP there are only nonprecision approaches avaliable.

[stepwilk]

Seems to be a rather meaningless video 97 percent concerned with the innate drama of the situation--screaming passengers, black-of-night ditching, miraculous rescue, lots of emotional shots of people saying, "It was horrible..."

The other three percent mentions some dispensation--never further explained--whereby Australian air-ambulance flights can apparently file VFR with only VFR fuel. And the chief pilot of Pel-Air (or whatever his position is) calmly explains to the "reporter," "I've already explained to you on the telephone all our reasons and explanations for this..." None of which are provided to the audience. Baffling.

[3REDS]

Supprised nobody has commented on the fact that the aircraft is on the bottom of the ocean standing on its main gear.

Gear down ditching.... this guy has a lot of questions to answer.

[AerocatS2A]

Nonsense such as 'would you take off without a full tank of fuel?' and 'no one knew where to look because the pilot didn't issue a mayday' demonstrate the agenda clearly.
Why do you think that stuff is nonsense?

If you are flying to a remote aerodrome known for having unpredictable weather, why would you only load the legal minimum fuel? Why not fill to your MAUW?

If you're going to do a controlled ditching with power and some time to prepare, why wouldn't you put out a mayday including your actual position? Why wouldn't you give the passengers enough time to get life jackets on?

Why was the Captain out before the passengers?

I think these are valid questions for this type of show to be asking and I'll be interested to read the ATSB report when it comes out.

[RatherBeFlying]

http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-aviation-questions/396269-merged-pel-air-westwind-ditching-off-nlk.html

[Northbeach]

I watched the MSN video link and read through some of the posts and the related discussion that ran at the time of this event. Here are a few ancillary things to point out to the “spotter’s balcony”.

Thousands of aviation regulations are in place. However, an operator/airline can apply for an “exemptions” a license not to comply with the regulation. If an operator can justify not complying with a rule they can petition to be exempted from that rule, if the reasons are good enough the petition is granted. Sruprised?

Virtually everything this crew and company did in relation to this flight will be brought out in the open and analyzed in detail; just as it should be.

As pilots, and a condition to continued employment, we have to certify medically every six months (Captains). If we do not pass the medical examination we are finished flying. Our backgrounds are reviewed by the medical and civil/federal authorities and any hint of substance abuse/addiction or trouble with the law (driving while intoxicated or other anti-social behavior) will result in the removal of authority to fly. Our blood and urine is analyzed, and breathalyzer exams administered-often randomly while at work.

On the job every word uttered is recorded as is every radio transmission, once by the jet and then again by the controlling air traffic facility. My phone conversations with the company flight operations center are all recorded. On the aircraft itself Flight Data Recorders (FDR) document sometimes hundreds of parameters simultaneously; virtually every switch, lever or pedal I move is digitally inscribed in memory with exhaustive detail.

As pilots we will be randomly inspected and our work directly observed, sometimes several times a year by, by government aviation inspectors and company designated examiners (Ramp & Line Checks). Each year, during annual recurrent training (for me this is 5 days), we are expected to demonstrate our flying ability under normal, abnormal and emergency conditions. We must be familiar with changing policies & regulations and possess a thorough mechanical knowledge of the airplanes we fly, the regulations we operate under and the policies commanded by the company along with all the changes therein. You could think of this in terms of sitting for (defending) your PHD, MD, Certified Public Accountant or other professional license exams each year, every year, throughout your working professional life.

I don’t complain one iota regarding the exhaustive oversight I work under. Other than astronauts and a few specialized instances in the military, your commercial airline pilots are likely the most scrutinized, observed and regulated working population on the planet; exactly as it should be.

When this accident investigation is complete the facts will be laid bare; the good, bad and ugly in a way that is unique to aviation. The passengers involved, the public and media will have access to virtually all the unadulterated evidence.

How I wish I could unleash the same level of transparency, accountability and public scrutiny along with the identical threat of jeopardy (we pilots face) on every elected members of my government, the Judiciary, the Law Profession and every Federal/Civil/State/County/Municipality/Public Works or City employee I am required to work with. What a different world this would be.

[AerocatS2A]

I agree Northbeach.

A small nitpick, a Class 1 medical in Australia is only done once a year unless you are over a certain age. Your country must either have more strict requirements or perhaps you are over a certain age? ;)

[stepwilk]

Class I USA every six months No matter how old or young you are.

[AerocatS2A]

More strict requirements then :ok:.