PDA

View Full Version : Pathetic


RodH
28th Dec 2018, 01:18
Have a look at today’s ABC news story of QF’s greatest hero pilot who seemingly and according to the sickening story saved the A380 single handedly after the engine explosion.
Such a modest pilot——— not.
Made my skin crawl..
Pathetic!!!!
:yuk::yuk:
PS. It’s in the ABC news online a fair way down the page in the “ Good news section “

NewZealand2
28th Dec 2018, 01:50
Try flying with the guy :rolleyes:

blow.n.gasket
28th Dec 2018, 02:09
Would there be a ď wretched discrepancy ď between myth and reality NZ2 ? :E

Icarus2001
28th Dec 2018, 02:25
I heard this in an extract of his "book" on radio ".... Landing an A380 is a precision exercise."

Unlike landing any other modern jet transport.

I turned the radio off.

Capt Fathom
28th Dec 2018, 02:26
Well he does have a new 'novel' to flog!

Transition Layer
28th Dec 2018, 02:52
Is it true that his new book can be found in the fiction section?

Is it also true that the unsigned copies are worth more than the signed ones? ;)

Petropavlovsk
28th Dec 2018, 04:37
It's an insult to the those in QF that really did make a difference
The ground and flight staff whom made up the crew for the Catalina aircraft that flew the "Double Sunrise". It takes more than a pilot to make a flight successful!

maggot
28th Dec 2018, 04:49
I heard this in an extract of his "book" on radio ".... Landing an A380 is a precision exercise."

Unlike landing any other modern jet transport.



its the easiest by a significant margin that I've come across

Beautiful even

Buster Hyman
28th Dec 2018, 12:46
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/400x161/r5p9g94_e9f9221e086a75362273d0f9359c06d9d3542033.gif

R.Cruizo
28th Dec 2018, 12:47
And here I was thinking I’d get a balanced facts only story from the ABC

Flyboy1987
28th Dec 2018, 23:01
I somehow made it the whole way through QF32 a few years ago. I believe the F stood for figjam.

V-Jet
28th Dec 2018, 23:08
One of the best, and most honest, unintentional yet clever put-downs I have ever seen was in a crew bar with a couple of crews when Discrepancy wandered in. One Capt at the table immediately piped up with the greeting 'G'day Mate! we saw your crew heading off to xxxx up the road - they'll still be there!'. Stifled laughter from around the table as the subtlety of the comment sunk in. The Capt involved genuinely hadn't meant to be 'rude' but did admit that it just 'popped out'. It was a beautiful thing to witness:)

RU/16
28th Dec 2018, 23:39
Ansett had a Bae 146 have all four engines roll back I remember in the 90s. No QRH procedure captain got 3 going and landed safely in Meekatharra. No book no TV show just doing his job.....but then I guess it wasnít Qantas!

megan
29th Dec 2018, 01:08
I don't think you can equate the 146 incident with the 380. Saw from the tower a Lear recover single engine via a GCA in absolutely atrocious weather after a double engine failure due ice ingestion, managed to relight one, even though compressor damage was extensive. Just doing their job i guess, self preservation and all. You may rail about the afterwards/circus of the 380 event, but it certainly was a major, major event in terms of an airborne emergency. I've always wondered what the outcome may have been had there been only two occupants on the flight deck to handle the work load.

Chocks Away
29th Dec 2018, 03:23
Yes Megan, good point though both were effective use of all the crew at hand (senior fleet A380) and tools available, to end with the same number of landings to takeoffs.:ok: Both Widebody heavies :p
The Ansett BAE146 "rollback" incident was shown afterwards by a good, though cheesey CRM Video, while Ansett's CRM video of their Sydney B747 incident won awards.
Somehow I doubt QF capable of doing likewise with this.
Here's a good place to confirm / dispel events that may have occurred afterwards. I have no "horse in the race" so don't shoot the messenger:
* He wasn't "Cleared to Line" until close to a year later, given it was his last sector of a final check, requiring 4 sectors?
* The same scenario was replicated in the sim, to which everyone failed, even after all the criticism of him?

How this bloke is now, long after the fact, I don't care too much for as it's the flights safe result and CRM points that we can learn from it, that are important.
We already know the catalyst - an incorrectly bored alloy tube that split under pressure & leaked etc etc but what about an objective look into the human factors side?
Happy Landings:ok:

dr dre
29th Dec 2018, 07:15
* He wasn't "Cleared to Line" until close to a year later, given it was his last sector of a final check, requiring 4 sectors?

It was a route check, not a final check. The three active crew were all checked to line. One training Captain was training another training captain in that role on that flight.

* The same scenario was replicated in the sim, to which everyone failed, even after all the criticism of him?


No I donít believe thatís true. You may be confusing it with the Hudson River incident were investigators believed there was a chance the A320 could have glided to land at La Guardia airport but failed to achieve this in the simulator.

A320ECAM
29th Dec 2018, 07:32
* The same scenario was replicated in the sim, to which everyone failed, even after all the criticism of him?

Fake news.
The A380 suffered a single engine failure albeit uncontained. There were four highly trained and experienced pilots onboard at the time (none on crew rest). This is a breeze compared to the A380 losing all four or even three engines!

itsnotthatbloodyhard
29th Dec 2018, 07:45
There were four highly trained and experienced pilots onboard at the time (none on crew rest).

Five, actually.

busdriver007
29th Dec 2018, 07:52
Bloodyhard,
The reference to 4 highly trained pilots was deliberate I would suggest. :D

Chocks Away
29th Dec 2018, 13:41
Thanks for the replies as this is good, everyone is learning something.
No sorry I'm not confusing it with the Hudson River event, as it was talk in Singapore when I was there at the time it occurred.

"The A380 suffered a single engine failure albeit uncontained." ... is quite a rubbish simplification of the whole event seriously.

The disintegration of "the single engine failure" Intermediate turbine, caused multiple failures of many systems and flight controls. Fragments of the failed engine flung out, resulting in structural and systems damage. It also severed critical wiring routes, which rendered signals erroneous or devoid. "Uncontained"? I suggest you reword that.

That is where the CRM story begins, after such unexpected multiple failures.
Handing over...

73qanda
29th Dec 2018, 22:16
I don’t know the person, but at the end of the day the result was great.
If we can learn something that’s great but I think it is a foolish pilot who lays scorn on a fellow pilot who got the end result we see here. I wouldn’t dare lest I be tested next week.

RodH
29th Dec 2018, 22:27
I don’t know the person, but at the end of the day the result was great.
If we can learn something that’s great but I think it is a foolish pilot who lays scorn on a fellow pilot who got the end result we see here. I wouldn’t dare lest I be tested next week.



It's not the end result we are discussing. The good outcome is unquestionable.
If you read the ABC news story book and other interviews you might understand a bit better. It's the vanity , self praise and impression that " I did it all by myself " that irks fellow pilots.

Fantome
29th Dec 2018, 22:54
It's the vanity , self praise and impression that " I did it all by myself " that irks fellow pilots.
.... ain't that the guts of it . . .. and anyone who says it matters nil about who or what is the person behind the mask, as opposed to his performance, is naive. (and probably can't get his hand off it as well.)

Go to the accident reports that reveal that tension and animosity on the flight deck led to incidents or worse. In my own experience, a month with a narcissistic, arrogant, superior person was enough to make one want to run away.... run away. . . at least for a few days at the end of that month.

601
30th Dec 2018, 02:10
And here I was thinking I’d get a balanced facts only story from the ABC

I should not read PPrune while I am eating my Wheaties.

Chocks Away
30th Dec 2018, 02:45
Ok, fair call fellas, all of the aboves.
That's where I get off this train then, as I don't watch or listen to any ABC "editorial" networks' diatribe.
Happy landings:ok:

dr dre
30th Dec 2018, 03:10
No sorry I'm not confusing it with the Hudson River event, as it was talk in Singapore when I was there at the time it occurred.

How could you have been in Singapore when the A380 incident occurred, but hear a rumour that they had tried to replicate the exact scenario in the sim but failed? It wouldíve taken weeks to learn what exactly had happened and programmed it into a simulator session so I donít see how itís possible.

It was a remarkable feat of airmanship achieved by all crew on the flight deck that day, more demanding than a simple engine failure but by no means was it a miraculous outcome that any other crew placed in the same situation would have failed in.

Control the aircraft after the failure, prioritise the important ECAM actions to set the aircraft up for landing, land and control the situation on the ground. It wasnít something that has baffled investigators and mystified pilots, those pilots onboard that day simply used their professionalism, experience and knowledge to achieve a safe result. Iíve no doubt every well trained crew wouldíve achieved a similar result in the same situation.

Ollie Onion
30th Dec 2018, 03:24
I was chatting to an Airbus Safety investigator about this incident a few months after and he said that Airbus were a bit dismayed as to why it took so long to get the aircraft back on the ground as there were no longer runways available for them to return to but a lot of time was wasted trying to find the perfect mix of entries to the performance software to generate a result that showed they could land when in reality the fiddling with the numbers didn’t change the reality of the situation just meant lots more time spent in the air with a LAND ASAP. He also said that the crew hadn’t done anything extra special and that any average A380 crew could have recovered the aircraft safely, I got the feeling this was a bit of a dig at the QF32 Captain who was on a bit of a book tour at the time spreading the story that he pretty much single handily recovered the crippled aircraft against all odds.

Chocks Away
30th Dec 2018, 03:56
dr dre - It's quite obvious the sim rumour came later and that's where I heard it.
It was hangered in Singapore for a long time awaiting repairs; findings and payouts "at the time"...

RodH
30th Dec 2018, 04:53
Ok, fair call fellas, all of the aboves.
That's where I get off this train then, as I don't watch or listen to any ABC "editorial" networks' diatribe.
Happy landings:ok:
It has nothing to do with the ABCís reporting of which I do concur has a lot of diatribe at times.
It was all to do with what ďHEĒ said about the incident, his words not the reporters.
if you read the story on the ABCís web site you will understand.

A320ECAM
30th Dec 2018, 05:25
Five, actually.


/facepalm

and whoever tried going at me about downplaying the Qantas emergency, it wasn't exactly a combination of excellent CRM, all round teamwork and flying skills like the Hudson flight! There simply is no comparison.

The biggest challenge for the Qantas crew was working out if the beast was going to land and stop on the runway... and have you seen the runway length? The biggest challenge for the Hudson crew was where to put it down and keeping it in one piece!

umop apisdn
30th Dec 2018, 05:50
Do they have EMAS in Singapore? The same stuff that stopped Southwest in Burbank the other week?

Capt Fathom
30th Dec 2018, 06:07
A320ECAM. Good to see you're still backing your local team, but it's not a competition.

Two aircraft bought skillfully back to earth with no fatalities. Good result all round.

DirectAnywhere
30th Dec 2018, 20:27
Some of the opprobrium directed towards RDC comes from https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/468768-hero-pilot-richard-de-crespigny-takes-sides-qantas-ir-war.html

He went on to the front page of the Australian, shortly after the airline was shutdown during an IR dispute, and used his notoriety to throw his colleagues under a bus. This was perhaps to advance his own prospects at a management job as all pilots know the consequences of speaking to the media Ďout of schoolí. It was a betrayal.

Interestingly, seven years later, RDC continues to enjoy those legacy conditions he railed against.

Beer Baron
30th Dec 2018, 22:37
DirectAnywhere has hit the nail on the head.

When Sully landed on the Hudson and found himself an instant celebrity he used his celebrity to advance the cause of all pilots in th US by pushing for more rigorous safety standards.

When RDC found himself an instant celebrity he used it to line his own pockets and threw his colleagues under a bus industrially.

ramble on
31st Dec 2018, 02:07
I listened to an ABC radio interview with the guy back in October perhaps. To me it was disjointed and repetitive and not good radiio. When listening I had the thought that if this was a relative of mine the way they spoke would cause me to keep a close eye on them for mental health issues.

machtuk
31st Dec 2018, 02:20
DirectAnywhere has hit the nail on the head.

When Sully landed on the Hudson and found himself an instant celebrity he used his celebrity to advance the cause of all pilots in th US by pushing for more rigorous safety standards.

When RDC found himself an instant celebrity he used it to line his own pockets and threw his colleagues under a bus industrially.

BB & DA spoken with the real truth, not the Hollywood version the gullible pubic get! This guy is cringeworthy no matter what comes out of his mouth, some pilots are like that, God like status is there for the taking under these circumstances, fortunately most of us aren't like that attention seeking xxxxx!!!!

Jeps
31st Dec 2018, 03:17
To those that had encountered him before the incident was he always like this? And did the incident simply exaggerate his...erm personality?

Fantome
31st Dec 2018, 04:37
If it is true that your man displays characteristics pointing to an excess of narcissism, an indifference to the opinions of his fellow man that are not in accord with his , a very low reading on the empathetic scale and an unshakeable self-righteousness, then how come the rigorous QF psych tests did not show "TILT"? (Or did he know someone who gave him the nod and an exemption?)

Ascend Charlie
31st Dec 2018, 05:22
Famous/rich family might help...

airdualbleedfault
31st Dec 2018, 07:47
Ru16, I think you'll find that the 146 captain in question was a total flog also

Fantome
31st Dec 2018, 09:58
Just in case you were wondering, as I was -
What did the spectators mean, booing Adam Goodes ,when they said he's a 'flog' ... Flog is a slang term for WAN***, itself meaning someone who's up himself, getting ideas above his station.

777Nine
31st Dec 2018, 11:01
Read the book. Most of it was about his childhood, growing up, becoming a pilot etc. I only remember towards the middle/end of the book being about the QF32 incident. Don't know the guy nor am I a pilot, but didn't read too much into it. I'm guessing it was aimed more at the genrgen public that doesn't know about aviation other than what they read in the media..

john_tullamarine
31st Dec 2018, 23:30
Ru16, I think you'll find that the 146 captain in question was a total flog also

I think that comment is a little unfair, perhaps ? The chap in question (PS) and I were on the same intake and I knew him reasonably well. Generally a quiet and considered personality. I never had an opportunity to observe his flying but I suspect he would have been more than generally competent and a reasonable manager in the cockpit ?

From my limited knowledge of the incident it appears that his management of the situation warranted a "good show" call rather than your opprobrium
.
Might be worth a read of the ATSB report https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1992/AAIR/pdf/aair199200286_001.pdf .. especially the bit about night, thunderstorms, handflying and limited panel. For sure, I would not have desired to swap shoes with the left seater on that occasion ...

Hamley
3rd Jan 2019, 14:04
Made my skin crawl..
Pathetic!!!!

You know what makes my skin crawl? Taking the time to bag a person in the same profession as you.

Everyone always laments the decline of aviation culture in Australia. This kind of sad drivel contributes directly to this decline. We should all support each other.

You should be ashamed of yourselves. This thread shows you are all pathetic.

SeenItAll
3rd Jan 2019, 15:55
I was chatting to an Airbus Safety investigator about this incident a few months after and he said that Airbus were a bit dismayed as to why it took so long to get the aircraft back on the ground as there were no longer runways available for them to return to but a lot of time was wasted trying to find the perfect mix of entries to the performance software to generate a result that showed they could land when in reality the fiddling with the numbers didnít change the reality of the situation just meant lots more time spent in the air with a LAND ASAP. He also said that the crew hadnít done anything extra special and that any average A380 crew could have recovered the aircraft safely, I got the feeling this was a bit of a dig at the QF32 Captain who was on a bit of a book tour at the time spreading the story that he pretty much single handily recovered the crippled aircraft against all odds.

To pick up on this, it is my understanding that the key problem they were exacerbating as they kept the plane in the air was that the lateral weight discrepancy (due to fuel not being consumed evenly on each side and crossfeed impossible) was increasing. I would be interested to know what the crew considered as their "Plan B" if they couldn't make the computer find a performance setting that they could stop within the longest runway's available distance. Were they just going to fly the plane until it rolled over? This seems ridiculous relative to a low-energy overrun.

RodH
3rd Jan 2019, 20:01
You know what makes my skin crawl? Taking the time to bag a person in the same profession as you.

Everyone always laments the decline of aviation culture in Australia. This kind of sad drivel contributes directly to this decline. We should all support each other.

You should be ashamed of yourselves. This thread shows you are all pathetic.

Hamley.
Your either a friend of his or you simply have failed to comprehend what virtually everyone replying to the thread has said about this fellow and his apparent lack of vanity or professionalism.
The pilots who have actually flown with him can't all be wrong in their criticism and the rest of us except yourself just have to listen or read what he says to be justifiably critical.
Not really hard to comprehend if you open your eyes and mind.

Fantome
3rd Jan 2019, 22:16
You should be ashamed of yourself. This thread shows you are pathetic. - (slight edit)

Now stand out in the corridor till this period is over. And if I ever hear you again saying anything bad about a person, such as calling him a FIGJAM . . .. it will be six of the best for you my boy.

Bull at a Gate
3rd Jan 2019, 22:16
Wow! Tough crowd here. Do you all really think it’s so important to publicly ridicule someone who may, or may not, have a high opinion of himself? If that is your criterion for criticising someone you are going to be very busy.

I don’t know him at all, but I have read his book. As I read it he shared the credit for the successful outcome amongst all 5 on the flight deck. There is even a bit of self deprecating humour at the end too.

There are many people in the world who try to rise above the rest by pulling them all down. Lots of people posting in this thread suffer from that personality defect in my opinion.

mrdeux
3rd Jan 2019, 22:54
I've always wondered what the outcome may have been had there been only two occupants on the flight deck to handle the work load.

I'd expect it would have been exactly the same. Depending up which two, possibly with a lot less fuss.

mrdeux
3rd Jan 2019, 22:57
* The same scenario was replicated in the sim, to which everyone failed, even after all the criticism of him?

It was never replicated as a sim exercise. So, nobody failed it.

I flew it about two days after the event, once we'd heard the list of failures. It was interesting, but not outlandish.

tail wheel
4th Jan 2019, 03:33
A fair debate indeed! :ok:

All views were presented. Thanks.