Massive hailstorm in Istanbul 27.07.2017

[atakacs]

Multiple aircrafts damaged

Turkish airline A-321 (ECN-IST), diverted to CKZ.

https://i.imgur.com/UleHFKD.jpg

Pegasus Airlines flight PC909

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFwaYabWsAEKTXC.jpg

and the the "pièce de resistance" Atlas Global flight KK1010

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFwYh-9WsAAeQBD.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFzX7J3XcAAE46y.jpg

whoops

A video of the landing

KxlA0nKFciQ

Another video in the cabin

nSiu0Ncnzug

[Capn Bloggs]

Why did they fly into it?

[atakacs]

That is obviously a very relevant question. Given the downpour affecting the area the weather radar muss have been lit like a Christmas tree...

[typhoonpilot]

Actually dry hail doesn't show up that well on airborne weather radar.

[RAT 5]

That is obviously a very relevant question. Given the downpour affecting the area the weather radar must have been lit like a Christmas tree...
Why did they fly into it?

Also relevant is where was this encounter during arrival? What could ATC radar see, or was weather suppressed? If it was, and the a/c is at low altitude, the onboard Wx radar can become cluttered with ground returns. On various occasions, in Europe, I asked ATC for weather avoidance assistance and they told me they couldn't see much, but my scope was showing unfriendly returns. Problem was I wasn't so confident what was ground return and what was lumpy bumpy sky. Under vectors I sometimes refused them and requested places that I could see were clear. An ATC controller can tells us what they can see for real.
However, descending into Orlando, the choice was taken from me. The weather was so bad that ATC had to re-route all arrivals & departures round some severe stuff, and they could see it all.
ATC are responsible for terrain avoidance and concrete clouds. What responsibility do they have for CB avoidance?

[Skyjob]

An ATC controller can tells us what they can see for real.

Not all ATC controllers have access to a window in the direction of their controlling area, thus may not be able to see.
Some ATC units are better then others in having weather on their screens, some do not even have this capability. It would not be good to assume they have access to information they are unable to provide.

Of course those controllers that do and make use this technology are a great help to aviators and should be consulted as they can sometimes provide vital clues required to make a different decision.

[FBW390]

Typhoon:

Yes, but there was a huge quantity! Plus water probably! And windshear ahead ? And turbulences on the wx radar too!

Would be intersting to see the wx radar picture and trajectory.

[pilotguy1222]

And at least 3 different aircraft?

[DIBO]

Apparently also blew a 747 on to a loader parked next to it airporthaber.com/ahl-haberleri/firtina-nedeniyle-ahlde-b747-loader-aracina-carpti.html (http://www.airporthaber.com/ahl-haberleri/firtina-nedeniyle-ahlde-b747-loader-aracina-carpti.html)

[RAT 5]

Not all ATC controllers have access to a window in the direction of their controlling area, thus may not be able to see.

And that is what can be very disturbing. ATC give vectors towards finals, you have a lot of ground clutter, and trust ATC have your best interests at heart. They do not tell you, and thus you can not know, what they can see, or not. Going into GRO I tried to build a good picture of the weather when at high FL and ask for re-routing accordingly. When <FL200 the Pyrenees masked the true weather.
In todays world of low experienced captains they have been brought up to 'do as you are told' and thus do what ATC tell you without question. I've certainly seen it from F/O's: a nice sunny day, only one large Cu in the sky, a/c skin temp -20c, ATC give vectors directly towards the Cu. No thought as PF selected the HDG. I questioned it, blank expression from PF, and suggested to ATC that either another 20 degrees in the turn or a turn the opposite direction due Wx. No problem, they had a choice and made it. PF still looked blank as if it was a huge surprise we could question ATC.

I'm still curious at what FL and how far from the runway this damage happened. The windscreen of Global looks very challenging. Well done, in the end, guys.

[DeRodeKat]

The most damaged one, Atlasglobal A-320, got it while climbing through 4000 feet. The pilots claim they saw nothing on the weather radar
Incident: Atlasglobal A320 near Istanbul on Jul 27th 2017, hail strike (http://avherald.com/h?article=4ac397e5&opt=0)

[Sailvi767]

Was the radar turned on? Hail this time of year in IST is going to wet at the altitudes discussed and paint like crazy.

[DeRodeKat]

Good question

[Chronus]

Has anyone got any TAF and METAR`s.

[pilotguy1222]

Here is a video from the ground in Turkey. Looks like some serious precip with the hail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDSf9-13lH0

[lomapaseo]

Was the radar turned on? Hail this time of year in IST is going to wet at the altitudes discussed and paint like crazy.


If you're in climb or descent and under ATC what are you supposed to do with your own weather radar? Do you cancel your ATC instruction?

[PAXfips]

Has anyone got any TAF and METAR`s.
Incident: Atlasglobal A320 near Istanbul on Jul 27th 2017, hail strike (http://avherald.com/h?article=4ac397e5&opt=0)
also includes inside "view" of cracked windshield:eek:

[atakacs]

As mentioned by some avherald commenter I'm surprised they did not use autoland.

[darkbarly]

Maybe the autoland antennae were as useful as the radome:ooh:

[Vessbot]

If you're in climb or descent and under ATC what are you supposed to do with your own weather radar? Do you cancel your ATC instruction?

Yes.

"Unable due to ________"

[oliver2002]

The Atlas PIC for sure appreciated having a magenta line.. .. ;)

[Sailvi767]

If you're in climb or descent and under ATC what are you supposed to do with your own weather radar? Do you cancel your ATC instruction?

Absolutely! You simply say unable. If they insist you exercise your emergency authority.

[lomapaseo]

OK, sounds about right

now for anybody, how often is that done for weather you have been vectored into?

Obviously we know where it wasn't done.

I'm not trying to find fault but just to get a feel for what actually is being done both on the ground and in the air.

[JammedStab]

Reminds me of my only time in Istanbul. Multiple crew, taking off northbound. Thunderstorm about 6 or 7 miles north of the runway at touching the edge of the first waypoint where we will make a 90 degree turn. Some flights are asking tower for an early turn with approval but that suggestion by me is ignored by the PIC. After all...we will just ask departure for an early turn.

It is so busy on departure frequency that we can't get a word in for an early turn. Only light rain encountered fortunately. Get the weather deviation clearance early.

[His dudeness]

It is so busy on departure frequency that we can't get a word in for an early turn.

Same happened to me going into a northern Italian airfield, a small CB that seemed to be on its deathbed (decaying) and did not paint more than just green was in our way, thus I thought I could enter that cloud on it edge. I judged wrong.
I judged wrong. Tock tock tock and the radome was due for repair. The TCAS was full in that terminal area.

[RAT 5]

If you're in climb or descent and under ATC what are you supposed to do with your own weather radar? Do you cancel your ATC instruction?

Agreed. Safety of the flight is captain's responsibility.

Thunderstorm about 6 or 7 miles north of the runway at touching the edge of the first waypoint where we will make a 90 degree turn. Some flights are asking tower for an early turn with approval but that suggestion by me is ignored by the PIC. After all...we will just ask departure for an early turn.

Was at a reasonable quiet airfield, but No.2 for departure, and luckily the taxiway approaching the Hold was pointing in take off direction. The sky ahead looked grey & unfriendly. We lit up the radar to scan the SID. Not nice. We called tower to ask Departure ATC for either; an opposite early left turn, or an extended climb out (across a national border) by 10nm and then the 270 right turn in the normal direction. All coordinated before we launched and stressless. Tower did not have radar and Departure was a remote location. ATC are a member of the team, but you are the captain/manager & coach, ultimately. Use all resources.

[Vessbot]

now for anybody, how often is that done for weather you have been vectored into?


Did it about 2 days ago.

[ironbutt57]

most often hail reflects radar poorly, it may not even display at all

[jugofpropwash]

The first pic of the Turkish Airline - any idea why only one half of the windscreen appears damaged? Pure luck, or a replacement part of a different material?

[FIRESYSOK]

Transparent aluminum.

[VinRouge]

Be interested to see intakes/blades from the A320.

[Bergerie1]

It has happened before and will happen again. As others have said on this thread, aircraft weather radar is not very good at identifying hail. See this:-
Incidents and Accidents (http://vc10.net/History/incidents_and_accidents.html#G-ARVB_ice_encounter)

[lomapaseo]

To me, this is the essence of the minimization of the risk encounters.

I tend to think along the lines that there is a lot more knowledge available from ground based radar, covering approaches and departures from an airport, than expecting airborne radar to key the crew actions.

For enroutes the expectations may be different.

[PENKO]

I have seen many crews willingly fly into an obvious massive thunderstorm on approach, relying on previous pilot/ATC reports of 'it's just rain', or 'three aircraft in front of you landed successfully'. I am not talking monsoon conditions but obvious cells above the runway. Why risk it?

It might be 'just rain'. Then again, it might not. Or you might be the unlucky one to catch the first line of hail and lightning. Why risk it? The storm will move away in minutes.. And remember, the first one in the hold is the first one out. It takes just one 'negative request to hold at the IAF for the rest to follow'.

I have no idea what was painting on the wx radar in front of these Turkish crews, this is just my 2p worth.

[PENKO]

It has happened before and will happen again. As others have said on this thread, aircraft weather radar is not very good at identifying hail. See this:-
Incidents and Accidents (http://vc10.net/History/incidents_and_accidents.html#G-ARVB_ice_encounter)

I, like many others have a hard time believing that there was nothing painting on the radar. For this kind of hail you need a CB. A massive CB. CB's paint on most wx-radars I have seen.

But hey, I'm willing to learn.

[Sailvi767]

It has happened before and will happen again. As others have said on this thread, aircraft weather radar is not very good at identifying hail. See this:-
Incidents and Accidents (http://vc10.net/History/incidents_and_accidents.html#G-ARVB_ice_encounter)
WX radar is not good at painting dry hail which is normally at high altitude. It paints wet hail extremely well which would certainly have been the case in IST this time of year. In addition the radar will paint the cells that create the hail and in this case I understand the cell could be seen visually as well as being reported by ATC.
The dry hail issue being reported here is normally hail being spit out the top of a cell above 30,000 feet. Again the cell itself will paint however the hail can be tossed as much as 20 miles downwind of the cell and won't show up on radar until it gets below the freezing level and a film of moisture builds. This is the reason for the common advice to avoid enroute thunderstorms by 20 miles.

[Bergerie1]

Sailvi767,
You are correct

[piesupper]

Seems there are few depths the Ukrainians will not sink to.....

Ukrainian pilot cyber-bullied for landing hail-damaged passenger aircraft - PravdaReport (http://www.pravdareport.com/news/society/stories/31-07-2017/138296-ukrainian_pilot-0/)

[Herod]

Errr. What was the option? Not land?

[atakacs]

He isn't bullied for landing the jet or more generally for his skills but for being from the "wrong" part of Ukraine, thus not deserving of the praise handed over by the government.

Not that it excuses anything.

[neila83]

I have seen many crews willingly fly into an obvious massive thunderstorm on approach, relying on previous pilot/ATC reports of 'it's just rain', or 'three aircraft in front of you landed successfully'. I am not talking monsoon conditions but obvious cells above the runway. Why risk it?

It might be 'just rain'. Then again, it might not. Or you might be the unlucky one to catch the first line of hail and lightning. Why risk it? The storm will move away in minutes.. And remember, the first one in the hold is the first one out. It takes just one 'negative request to hold at the IAF for the rest to follow'.

I have no idea what was painting on the wx radar in front of these Turkish crews, this is just my 2p worth.

Indeed, I do appreciate that weather avoidance is harder in the climb and approach phases due to the regular and often large heading changes, along with altitude, and needing to see a much closer picture of what is ahead that at cruise. Where ground radar is available I would hope ATC are proactive and assertive in steering pilots away form the bad stuff. Are they though, or do they assume pilots are responsible for avoidance? I wouldn't blame ATC if they shied away, given some of the aggressive responses seen here in other discussions to any suggestion ATC should tell a pilot what to do...

It is hard to believe that there was a storm of this size near the airport and no-one knew about it. I would imagine the old Mark I eyeball would have been enough. And as others have said, it would most certainly have painted on radar. I’ve been on flights when we’ve entered something on approach that I’m quite sure ‘by the books’ we shouldn’t have done. I remember taking off in a storm from Kigali once when as we were boarding lightning struck just off the runway. And this continued until we departed. What we were doing boarding using external stairs in those conditions god only knows, let alone taking off. I was pretty nervous till we cleared the cloud that day.

What it seems to reflect is the common observed behaviour of pilots to very regularly penetrate radar returns at low altitude that they would never go near at high altitude. There is a study on this that I read, I don’t have time to try and find it now, but it matched ground radar with flight paths at a US airport over a period of time, and showed while pilots nearly always avoided storms at altitude, they rather regularly penetrated at low altitude. The normalisation of deviancy I believe is the apt phrase. And rather dangerous if pilots begin to believe it’ll always be OK. Until it isn’t of course.

The industry really needs to get to grips with this, is enough emphasis being placed on how dangerous this can be in training? Is it a few days of meteorology theory and then it’s never discussed again? Is it drilled into pilots that they must never knowingly enter a thunderstorm whatever the circumstances? Or it is left ambiguous because actually airlines quite like pilots taking shortcuts every now and again? I really don’t appreciate pilots taking us on a test flight. Would you expect a train driver to see a tree on the line ahead and just plough on, because he doesn’t want to be late? It seems like the ‘don’t enter thunderstorms’ rule is often treated more as guidance than a strict rule.

I’d also add my observations having lived in Bogotá and now Mexico City, two cities regularly affected by very large thunderstorms, and I’m quite astonished sometimes to note the weather I am experiencing, and seeing on the departure route, and then to look at FR24 and see flights taking the SID straight into it. Of course, as someone notes above, as soon as one goes around and holds, everyone else behind them holds. What kind of nonsense is that?

[FlightDetent]

IST is a major aviation hub with quite busy SAW in close proximity. If the cell was fierce enough to create hail capable of damaging the aircraft as seen (on ground videos too!), it raises a question:

Why were only 3 (4-10) aircraft damaged, and not all of the 30-80 that were around?

neila83: Thunderstorms are not like monasteries that you either enter or not, with walls around.

[neila83]

Ok, perhaps you could enlighten us? Because that's contrary to everything I've ever read or heard said on the matter of entering CBs.

What's the old saying I remember someone quoting once, something like 'there's no peacetime reason to enter a thunderstorm'.

[Herod]

This one?

There is no reason to fly through a thunderstorm in peacetime.
(Sign over squadron ops desk at Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ, 1970) (allegedly)

[RAT 5]

The industry really needs to get to grips with this, is enough emphasis being placed on how dangerous this can be in training?

During initial line training on various types there was very little 'use of Wx radar' instruction. I didn't get too many answers to my questions. There was naff all in FCOM. Manipulation of tilt is an easy one, but the use of gain + tilt & at what heights was missing. It was from various old farts that I learnt most.
Regarding ATC <5000' and on vectors. I was into a major UK airfield coming downwind, IMC. Lots of Wx had been visible higher up. I asked ATC about CB's in the vicinity and they said they has suppression on so couldn't see. They then gave me wide base leg vectors straight at a tomato. I refused. They switched their primary back on and said they could see nothing. I accepted the vector and they were correct. All those damned little villages around airports do cause havoc at low level. You tilt up, into the weather and are confused: you reduce the gain until the tomato disappears and have false sense of security, perhaps. It does seem, at times, a low tech and unreliable process for such a dangerous critical phase of flight.

[neila83]

This one?

There is no reason to fly through a thunderstorm in peacetime.
(Sign over squadron ops desk at Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ, 1970) (allegedly)

Thank you!

[FlightDetent]

There's a difference between CB and a TS, to begin with. No worries though, I do share most of your sentiment displayed in the post above, and especially this:
"Is it drilled into pilots that they must never knowingly enter a thunderstorm whatever the circumstances?" gets an enthusiastic YES from me.

There needs to be a judgement about what constitutes a hazardeous CB or not, the danger becomes unacceptable of course much sooner before a TS develops from one. Your post evolves around a clear cut distinction which airmass is TS and which not, and it is never as perfectly discrete as that. Question remains why the few aircraft were not able to steer far enough in IST.

[Murexway]

OK, sounds about right

now for anybody, how often is that done for weather you have been vectored into?

Obviously we know where it wasn't done.

I'm not trying to find fault but just to get a feel for what actually is being done both on the ground and in the air.This is supposed to be a forum for professional pilots.... not an question and answer forum for the education of the general public. If you'll simply read the posts of the pilots here you'll learn a lot.

[Avenger]

FWIW we were making an approach to IST at the very time the activity occurred. Aircraft were initially asked to hold at various points on the star, in our case they asked Corlu and then advised holding would be 10/15 minutes and expect ILS for 35R. We could not hold in exactly the right location but did our best at FL180. There were maybe 5 aircraft below us. The activity quickly moved towards us and we took a non-standard hold at BA690 for another 10 minutes before being advised the runway was changing to 05 ILS. The problem with this hold was that approach could not see us on their system as a "waypoint" as it was off the STAR. It was impossible to make the approach to 05 from our position without going directly through the cells. Although we were holding in " clear air" we got a good old bashing from smaller hail, but the game changed after Atlas declared an emergency and several others declared "minimum fuel". Quite frankly ATC did a good job considering there was a great deal of blocking of transmissions and Sabiha was closed at the time. Eventually we did a drive and dive to the fix and landed on 35R , but others were still expecting 05 or even 23. On the fleet we are equipped with both Collins and Honeywell with threat detectors ( stripes and symbols) the area of "hail" was showing as projected turbulence in clear air, the edges of the clouds could be clearly seen. Aircraft on departure may have seen the " clear spots" on the WX radar and without threat detection been unaware of the extreme hail which we observed from FL170 downwards. The general thoughts seemed to be that IST has no doppler radar and thus it is left up to pilots to arrange their avoiding. The phrase "all deviations approved" which we have heard several times in Istanbul FIR was not apparent and it was obvious ATC had their hands full. Listing to the 17 traffic that were advising " minimum fuel" it was also obvious that little "inflight planning" on where to go next was going on. SAW was not an option, Corlu was definitely out and Ankara was stretched, we heard several divert to Izmir. This was a "freak" storm and vertical lighting could be seen at times travelling 25 miles or more, I doubt Atlas jet even saw the threat.

[Lat3ralus]

?Blind? hero pilot lands plane with 127 passengers on board (http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/08/01/08/27/blind-hero-pilot-lands-plane-with-127-passengers-on-board)

[Alber Ratman]

Yes, the VOR/LOC antenna were likely to be toast, so any CAT3 , perhaps any ILS approach on the AP would likely have been rejected by the AP system due to the conflicts arising. They did a fine job of getting her on the ground.

[Trim Stab]

Ok, perhaps you could enlighten us? Because that's contrary to everything I've ever read or heard said on the matter of entering CBs.



I once got hammered by hail in a Citation flying in bright sunshine in VMC. I thought we were well clear of the obvious CuNim. The hail presumably got sucked out of the top of the CuNim and then got dumped onto us. Both leading edges of the wings had to be replaced. So yes, Cunims can still be dangerous even if you are not flying in them.

[PENKO]

FWIW we were making an approach to IST at the very time the activity occurred. Aircraft were initially asked to hold at various points on the star, in our case they asked Corlu and then advised holding would be 10/15 minutes and expect ILS for 35R. We could not hold in exactly the right location but did our best at FL180. There were maybe 5 aircraft below us. The activity quickly moved towards us and we took a non-standard hold at BA690 for another 10 minutes before being advised the runway was changing to 05 ILS. The problem with this hold was that approach could not see us on their system as a "waypoint" as it was off the STAR. It was impossible to make the approach to 05 from our position without going directly through the cells. Although we were holding in " clear air" we got a good old bashing from smaller hail, but the game changed after Atlas declared an emergency and several others declared "minimum fuel". Quite frankly ATC did a good job considering there was a great deal of blocking of transmissions and Sabiha was closed at the time. Eventually we did a drive and dive to the fix and landed on 35R , but others were still expecting 05 or even 23. On the fleet we are equipped with both Collins and Honeywell with threat detectors ( stripes and symbols) the area of "hail" was showing as projected turbulence in clear air, the edges of the clouds could be clearly seen. Aircraft on departure may have seen the " clear spots" on the WX radar and without threat detection been unaware of the extreme hail which we observed from FL170 downwards. The general thoughts seemed to be that IST has no doppler radar and thus it is left up to pilots to arrange their avoiding. The phrase "all deviations approved" which we have heard several times in Istanbul FIR was not apparent and it was obvious ATC had their hands full. Listing to the 17 traffic that were advising " minimum fuel" it was also obvious that little "inflight planning" on where to go next was going on. SAW was not an option, Corlu was definitely out and Ankara was stretched, we heard several divert to Izmir. This was a "freak" storm and vertical lighting could be seen at times travelling 25 miles or more, I doubt Atlas jet even saw the threat.

Just to be clear for my understanding, did you experience/observe hail in the clear (i.e. out of cloud) or do you mean clear as in nothing being painted by standard radar?

I still have a hard time believing that at lower levels noting was painting on the radar. At FL180 yes, but in summer on the ground? If true that's a very scary thought.

Anyway, if ATC tells all aircraft to avoid at own convenience then it is way past time to go elsewhere :)

[Fursty Ferret]

Was the radar turned on?

Doubt it. Half the pilots at my company (not Turkish...) turn the weather radar off at every opportunity based on some urban legend that they're continually irradiating themselves. One despairs. :ugh:

[BluSdUp]

Can any of You ATC fellas enlighten us on what ATC has for primary radar and WX detection?
It seems non for most places I go , as some are miffed as we ask for left or right to avoid. Some times big cells sitting on waypionts and getting clearances direct to. I am talking Europe, US and Canada is different I think. Not my current playground.

In the early 1990s I was FO on Beech 200 in Norway and we had no AP or radar.
ATC gave us vector around the big stuff, the small stuff, well: Rock and Roll.

Now I bring plenty of fuel and chicken out as per SOP.
Getting older and less bold.

Hail is indeed predictable in a CB, but as pointed out it is when it starts spitting it outside the cell its time to pay attention.

Had some light hail a few times and always wondered how bad it was going to get.

And the lightning strike that eventually follow is at least 2 hrs plus delay .
Done a few of those, so with plenty of fuel I tend to let someone low on fuel do the first few.
Both for arrival AND departure.
I think my record is 55 minutes idle on ground at LondonCity, due to a cell that covered Greater London area.

Anyway, all well that ends well. I think this one , if well documented is a nice case study. After all at least 3 aircraft got grounded for no good reason whatsoever.

[rak64]

Many sources available for present weather and for local forecasts. See following links.

https://mgm.gov.tr/sondurum/radar.aspx?rG=anm&rR=00&rU=ppi#sfB

https://mgm.gov.tr/sondurum/radar.aspx?rG=anm&rR=34X&rU=max#sfB

Lightning & Thunderstorms - Greece, Turkey (http://en.blitzortung.org/live_lightning_maps.php?map=14)

HNMS (http://hnms.gr/hnms/english/index_html?)

Regional Forecast Animation (http://forecast.uoa.gr/LINKS/SKIRON/skiron.php?field=zoomrain&lan=en)

Interestingly mgm.gov.tr showed clearly 2 massive thundrstorm systems aproaching from south-west but TAF forcast was only RESHA. In addition the forecast was addapted for the actual weather.

[Avenger]

PENKO, our Honeywell 3D radar shows areas of predictive turbulence and signal attenuation. At the time our system was showing the cells as normally displayed and the areas of overflight turbulence in the " unpainted "areas between the cells , approx 30/50 miles apart. When we entered was was apparently "safe" areas, i.e no painting other than the odd magenta stripes, we still experienced hail falling from the clouds although we were actually clear of cloud, maybe 20 miles away at times. If we had manually selected a down tilt probably the cells below the flight path would have been painted. From the ground they may well have chosen a path between cells not realising that the apparently best option route was hailing from above. IST departures are stepped climb and thus the level flight segments would again only show the threats in the flight path.

[underfire]

Video showing the quite a bit of the ac. Does not look like any damage to leading edge or cowl.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCqYBOgfFSE

[FlightDetent]

Avenger: that is excellent insight, much appreciated!

[lomapaseo]

Video showing the quite a bit of the ac. Does not look like any damage to leading edge or cowl.


Damage goes with hail size, aircraft speed and structure impacted.

Radoms show it first, followed by wind screens, then LE devices, then inlet cowls and lastly engine fan blades.

Damage to engine fan blades is extremely rare in a hail encounter compared to all other surfaces.

The hail concern with the engines is internal cycle effects of processing ice instead of air.

[Icelanta]

RNav approach to touchdown.

[cappt]

A Lot of armchair quarterbacks around here, some who have not one hour of PIC or SIC even.
That's all, it's just an observation ;)