Merged: Senate Inquiry
The other question is. If two people have similar training are they better with 200 or 1500hrs? We all know the answer. Quality of training is very important no doubt. But if training is all that is required, why not have DE captains with 200hrs. Perhaps because all organisations realise that experience does count. I can only believe that no airforce pilot flying multi crew goes straight from training into the LHS. If they are going to fly single seaters they spend a lot of time in the dual seat training versions under very very strict supervision.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South of the Equator
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a matter of interest for those that didn't know, the Inquiry was televised on (FOXTEL - APAC Channel) for the full day of hearings.
I recorded it all on DVD and am in the process of converting it to .avi format. However, as it goes for about 4 hours, I suspect it will be a large file (several hundred MB, if not a GB or more?)
However, I'm willing to share it with Pprune members who didn't see it.
The question is can a large file be uploaded on Pprune? If, yes, then how do you do it?
I recorded it all on DVD and am in the process of converting it to .avi format. However, as it goes for about 4 hours, I suspect it will be a large file (several hundred MB, if not a GB or more?)
However, I'm willing to share it with Pprune members who didn't see it.
The question is can a large file be uploaded on Pprune? If, yes, then how do you do it?
Sunfish you are clearly very astute ... the cost-reduction battleplan will have a few more strategies to play out yet. However the senators have exposed raw nerves and the fatigue issue amongst other things has also been dumped into casa's lap. Fatigue limits=duty times= pushing range of operations and number of sectors alowed=overnighting costs=staff numbers needed. There are big dollars is this equation.
The question now is, how long will the current labour government allow it to continue to remain in the spotlight, including FWA impending decision on jetconnect, all the while gathering more momentum before it reaches critical mass and becomes a workchoices type of issue in the media, and threatens public trust? And how long can the CEOs keep their heads down hoping it will blow over?
The question now is, how long will the current labour government allow it to continue to remain in the spotlight, including FWA impending decision on jetconnect, all the while gathering more momentum before it reaches critical mass and becomes a workchoices type of issue in the media, and threatens public trust? And how long can the CEOs keep their heads down hoping it will blow over?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Questions raised over aviation regulation - The Irish Times - Thu, Mar 17, 2011
Says it all. You can't buy experience!
Says it all. You can't buy experience!
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't have the snippets of the audit but here goes
And another. Great reporting ben
Senate gets scathing Jetstar audit CASA didn’t see fit to send to airline
March 18, 2011 – 6:35 pm, by Ben Sandilands
Senator Nick Xenophon today tabled an internal and damning CASA human factors audit of Jetstar that the CEO of the aviation regulator, John McCormick,* said wasn’t in a suitable format to send to the airline.
The document produced at the public hearings today of the Senate Inquiry into pilot training and airline safety contradicts Jetstar claims to put safety above all else and points to a culture of intimidation and rule bending in the Qantas low cost subsidiary.
The Special Fatigue Audit: Jetstar dated 10 May 2010 was prepared by CASA’s manager human factors and found, among other things that:
The present system has been managed with a strong emphasis on achieving operational outcomes with insufficient consideration given to potential fatigue risk. This was evident in a number of loose interpretations and applications of* rostering practices … and further supported by the feedback obtained from operational personnel.
The human factors audit was discussed with the AIPA delegation, Captain Richard Woodward and its safety and technical consultant Captain Dick Mackerras before the public part of today’s testimony by CASA and the ATSB continued in camera.
Woodward said the audit found Jetstar was legally flying under its current staffing dispensations tougher back-of-clock consecutive rosters than would be lawful for train drivers. He drew attention to a finding that* in January 12 out of 21 of the flights between Darwin-Singapore-Darwin exceeded Jetstar’s own limits, primarily because the roster was based on a 40 minute turnaround at Changi airport which was very hard to achieve in reality when it took up to 12-15 minutes to taxi to the terminal before disembarkation, cleaning and the embarkation of the next passengers could even begin.
“There is a culture of fear and intimidation at Jetstar” he said. “I would like to have a Jetstar pilot sitting beside me this afternoon…We get many, many complaints about what is happening at Jetstar….but the damage to career and income from speaking out publicly prevents that.”
Woodward said the pilots association wanted to see Australian regulations dealing with cabin crew fatigue as well because of the safety function they perform, which was their primary role, rather than serving or selling refreshments. (In later testimony CASA outlined a provisional timetable for this to happen starting later in the year after ICAO produces* a framework and set of definitions of fatigue to be applied world wide.)
Dick Mackerras described part of the problem as out of date regulations which had been written on the basis of reasonable people doing reasonable things and not the intense commercial realities of modern long haul and low cost flying.
“This document (the human factors audit) goes to the heart of having the appearance of good safety management systems but if you don’t really have a good system where the rubber hits the road, then you get lots of complaints coming through from the pilots.
“This is happening in Jetstar.”
Senator Bill Heffernan asked the AIPA representatives if there were airlines around the world that through risk analysis and the availability of good insurance were taking the view that an ‘occasional hole in the ground’ is acceptable.
Woodward said the reality was that there would be some carriers prepared to ‘wear a hull loss’ as affordable in terms of complying with legal minimum standards rather than investing in higher standards.
Senator Heffernan: It has been put to us that it is better to have a Senate inquiry than sit around and watch a Royal Commission.
In his public testimony the CEO of CASA, John McCormick, explained that the human resources audit was but one third of an audit conducted by a jet airliner pilot, and a safety systems expert as well as the human resources manager (who has since been recruited to another senior position outside CASA).
McCormick said not all of the findings in the human resources audit were suitable for inclusion in the resulting document which was sent to Jetstar* because some sections were not verified or supported.
He also said that as a result of the combined audit and its recommendations being sent to Jetstar all of the those findings had been satisfactorily addressed by Jetstar.* Pressed by Xenophon and Heffernan for more details of as to how CASA was satisfied, and what exactly it was satisfied with, McCormick said he would provide the inquiry members with a copy of the document sent to Jetstar.
McCormick also said there was a new audit of Jetstar schduled for May this year, which wasn’t quite the answers that the senators appeared determined to establish, as observed on the small screen of the Senate inquiry webcast.* Greg Hood, CASA’s executive manager, operations division, said “We will go back and review the Jetstar responses.”
In a lengthy exchange about fatigue issues, McCormick said “There is only one cure for fatigue issues and that is money.”
During this afternoon’s public sessions the chariman Senator Heffernan said “We haven’t finished….with Jetstar and Qantas, and we are assembling evidence to call them back.”
March 18, 2011 – 6:35 pm, by Ben Sandilands
Senator Nick Xenophon today tabled an internal and damning CASA human factors audit of Jetstar that the CEO of the aviation regulator, John McCormick,* said wasn’t in a suitable format to send to the airline.
The document produced at the public hearings today of the Senate Inquiry into pilot training and airline safety contradicts Jetstar claims to put safety above all else and points to a culture of intimidation and rule bending in the Qantas low cost subsidiary.
The Special Fatigue Audit: Jetstar dated 10 May 2010 was prepared by CASA’s manager human factors and found, among other things that:
The present system has been managed with a strong emphasis on achieving operational outcomes with insufficient consideration given to potential fatigue risk. This was evident in a number of loose interpretations and applications of* rostering practices … and further supported by the feedback obtained from operational personnel.
The human factors audit was discussed with the AIPA delegation, Captain Richard Woodward and its safety and technical consultant Captain Dick Mackerras before the public part of today’s testimony by CASA and the ATSB continued in camera.
Woodward said the audit found Jetstar was legally flying under its current staffing dispensations tougher back-of-clock consecutive rosters than would be lawful for train drivers. He drew attention to a finding that* in January 12 out of 21 of the flights between Darwin-Singapore-Darwin exceeded Jetstar’s own limits, primarily because the roster was based on a 40 minute turnaround at Changi airport which was very hard to achieve in reality when it took up to 12-15 minutes to taxi to the terminal before disembarkation, cleaning and the embarkation of the next passengers could even begin.
“There is a culture of fear and intimidation at Jetstar” he said. “I would like to have a Jetstar pilot sitting beside me this afternoon…We get many, many complaints about what is happening at Jetstar….but the damage to career and income from speaking out publicly prevents that.”
Woodward said the pilots association wanted to see Australian regulations dealing with cabin crew fatigue as well because of the safety function they perform, which was their primary role, rather than serving or selling refreshments. (In later testimony CASA outlined a provisional timetable for this to happen starting later in the year after ICAO produces* a framework and set of definitions of fatigue to be applied world wide.)
Dick Mackerras described part of the problem as out of date regulations which had been written on the basis of reasonable people doing reasonable things and not the intense commercial realities of modern long haul and low cost flying.
“This document (the human factors audit) goes to the heart of having the appearance of good safety management systems but if you don’t really have a good system where the rubber hits the road, then you get lots of complaints coming through from the pilots.
“This is happening in Jetstar.”
Senator Bill Heffernan asked the AIPA representatives if there were airlines around the world that through risk analysis and the availability of good insurance were taking the view that an ‘occasional hole in the ground’ is acceptable.
Woodward said the reality was that there would be some carriers prepared to ‘wear a hull loss’ as affordable in terms of complying with legal minimum standards rather than investing in higher standards.
Senator Heffernan: It has been put to us that it is better to have a Senate inquiry than sit around and watch a Royal Commission.
In his public testimony the CEO of CASA, John McCormick, explained that the human resources audit was but one third of an audit conducted by a jet airliner pilot, and a safety systems expert as well as the human resources manager (who has since been recruited to another senior position outside CASA).
McCormick said not all of the findings in the human resources audit were suitable for inclusion in the resulting document which was sent to Jetstar* because some sections were not verified or supported.
He also said that as a result of the combined audit and its recommendations being sent to Jetstar all of the those findings had been satisfactorily addressed by Jetstar.* Pressed by Xenophon and Heffernan for more details of as to how CASA was satisfied, and what exactly it was satisfied with, McCormick said he would provide the inquiry members with a copy of the document sent to Jetstar.
McCormick also said there was a new audit of Jetstar schduled for May this year, which wasn’t quite the answers that the senators appeared determined to establish, as observed on the small screen of the Senate inquiry webcast.* Greg Hood, CASA’s executive manager, operations division, said “We will go back and review the Jetstar responses.”
In a lengthy exchange about fatigue issues, McCormick said “There is only one cure for fatigue issues and that is money.”
During this afternoon’s public sessions the chariman Senator Heffernan said “We haven’t finished….with Jetstar and Qantas, and we are assembling evidence to call them back.”
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but if they can make the training of a high enough standard in these cadetships then there is no issue
No issue, BS! How many 200 hour guys have you sat next to in a Boeing or Airbus to be qualified to make that statement.
I have, and they are fine to a point. If the proverbial hits the fan then there is a high probability that you will be on your own. Yes, it can also happen with higher time people too, but the chances are smaller. Have seen it in the sim and on line.
Yes, they pass the same checks for their licence in the sim, but to a certain extent most sims are a standard format exercise that we have seen (similar) before. In the real thing, with a mortal threat to your own life and an unexpected, complex scenario to deal with it can be totally different. It is dificult to find any form of training that will be of a high enough standard for a 200 hour cadet to cope with a situation like this. The only form of training I know of that could is called experience.
The only reason that companies are putting these cadet "schemes" in place is that it is cheaper (sometimes even makes money for them) and they have a compliant work force that will do as they are told. Financial pressure can have a great affect on what you will and won't do and most of these cadets are under financial pressure from day 1 as they have a huge level of debt and a subsistance wage to live on. (As alluded to by the CASA chap (says a lot about his personal motivation and character) when he said that the only cure for fatigue was more money or words to that effect. Funny, I always thought it was rest). Their contracts are also used to undermine the contracts of existing employees both in their own company and others. Don't believe me, go and ask someone what they were earning 15 years ago in the RHS of the same aircraft.
In the end of the day you have to sit your checkride and tests the same as everyone else. If you pass it, you pass.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Aust
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a little off subject.
But the question needs asking
What will happen to Australia's GA industry and what effects will this have on the regionals if these cadet schemes continue to grow within the majors?
But the question needs asking
What will happen to Australia's GA industry and what effects will this have on the regionals if these cadet schemes continue to grow within the majors?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DominicYPGV,
Lets face it, most of what we learn comes from trial and error.
The thing is you have to baby-sit the buggers! Watch them like a hawk.
Maybe it's just me, but when I had 1000hrs I was freaking dangerous.
- Weather radar interpretation takes a long time to learn in my opinion.
- Local knowledge is not taught in a course.
- Big picture situational awareness takes years to develop.
- Real situations are nealry always very different than the sim.
- If I am faced with a potentially dangerous development, it is more often experience that will get me out of it and experience that helps me avoid it in the first place. Training is great for CRM, systems knowledge and emergency management, I don't disagree with that.
Lets face it, most of what we learn comes from trial and error.
The thing is you have to baby-sit the buggers! Watch them like a hawk.
Maybe it's just me, but when I had 1000hrs I was freaking dangerous.
Last edited by WynSock; 18th Mar 2011 at 10:40.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Exiled in the Ukraine
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here are a few questions I would love the Senators to ask Dumb and Dumber if they ever get the spine to appear again.
1. If the A380 incident happened with a Captain and a 200+ hour Cadet from the Jetstar cadet program, would you be confident the result would have been the same?
2. Why do you need a Jetstar cadet program? Was the Qantas program not sufficient? Or is this driven purely by profiting from this scheme?
3. AJ, with the amount of distrust and distain that is evident towards you and your management, how can it be possible to maintain safety to the highest standards, taking into consideration the continual threat to your employees livelihoods?
4. Do you believe executive and management bonuses are at the detriment of a safety orientated business like an Airline?
5. Should KPI's and bonuses be driving decisions in a business like an airline?
6. Do you believe flying Australian registered jets with 200 hour pilot, based overseas, working under the overseas states regulations, being paid local wages with no benefits (e.g housing allowances, accommodation, transport and superannuation/provident fund etc), is in the best interest of the Australian traveling public?
7. How do you believe that this benefits Australia in any way? Considering tax would obviously be avoided in Australia and our industrial laws would be circumvented. Wouldn't this set a precedent for other organisations?
For example, we could have Rio Tinto fly in Indonesian miners for a dollar a day and fly them out after two weeks, undercutting current Australian condition, would this not be the same thing and be detrimental to working Australians?
8. Are your mothers proud of you both?
Just for starters.
1. If the A380 incident happened with a Captain and a 200+ hour Cadet from the Jetstar cadet program, would you be confident the result would have been the same?
2. Why do you need a Jetstar cadet program? Was the Qantas program not sufficient? Or is this driven purely by profiting from this scheme?
3. AJ, with the amount of distrust and distain that is evident towards you and your management, how can it be possible to maintain safety to the highest standards, taking into consideration the continual threat to your employees livelihoods?
4. Do you believe executive and management bonuses are at the detriment of a safety orientated business like an Airline?
5. Should KPI's and bonuses be driving decisions in a business like an airline?
6. Do you believe flying Australian registered jets with 200 hour pilot, based overseas, working under the overseas states regulations, being paid local wages with no benefits (e.g housing allowances, accommodation, transport and superannuation/provident fund etc), is in the best interest of the Australian traveling public?
7. How do you believe that this benefits Australia in any way? Considering tax would obviously be avoided in Australia and our industrial laws would be circumvented. Wouldn't this set a precedent for other organisations?
For example, we could have Rio Tinto fly in Indonesian miners for a dollar a day and fly them out after two weeks, undercutting current Australian condition, would this not be the same thing and be detrimental to working Australians?
8. Are your mothers proud of you both?
Just for starters.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I may be hijacking the thread to an extent, but I am severely underwhelmed with the organization tasked with the responsibility of overseeing aviation safety in Australia.
QUOTE]Did I hear CASA correctly, did he just say "The only way to fix fatigue is to pay them more money" ? [/QUOTE]
I have concerns about the Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) in Airservices Australia and ASAs application of InterDynes' FAID system. I have repeatedly spoken to InterDyne and they agree that ASA are misusing the application. I have an internal email trail going back years for ASA to address the issue and talk to InterDyne. ASA will not refer the concerns to InterDyne. ASA seem to begrudgingly recognize that they have a requirement/responsibility from the Senate Transport Inquiry ( beyond the Midnight Oil)of the early 2000s to address fatigue. Since that time ASA (and others?) has treated these statuatory obligations like tax laws, as something to be subverted or minimized.
We had CASA in to do an unassociated audit. I was told that one of the auditors was very interested in FRMSs’, when I outlined my concerns and gave him examples of the abuse and blatant disregard of FAID he asked about the new FRMS that ASA were supposed to be introducing. I told him that this was supposed to be introduced last year but wasn't. His attitude was that ASA were now working to address the issue. I asked him that if someone was flying people around in a non-compliant manner/aircraft but said that they would fix this up in the future would CASA consider this acceptable. He would not answer.
I offered to CASA person that I would send him the email trail I had and he could refer to above or investigate, if he would give me his email address. He said he would not even give me his CASA email address. He asked what Civilair ( the ATC Association were doing about it), I said that you are supposed to be the regulator and I am making you aware of ASAs conduct and what will CASA do about it. He said that he would not ask these questions.
I am still attempting to follow these questions up internally in ASA, and through CASA. I spoke to one of the canteen workers yesterday, in conversation she told me that if they worked 6 days it was a compulsory 2 day break. In ATC after 10 days or 80 hours it triggers a 1 day break and you can then do 10 days or 80 hours again. That sandwich toaster/chip fryer must be a dangerous place.
Why is it now so damned hard and so personally fraught with penalties to do the right thing in Australia????
QUOTE]Did I hear CASA correctly, did he just say "The only way to fix fatigue is to pay them more money" ? [/QUOTE]
I have concerns about the Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) in Airservices Australia and ASAs application of InterDynes' FAID system. I have repeatedly spoken to InterDyne and they agree that ASA are misusing the application. I have an internal email trail going back years for ASA to address the issue and talk to InterDyne. ASA will not refer the concerns to InterDyne. ASA seem to begrudgingly recognize that they have a requirement/responsibility from the Senate Transport Inquiry ( beyond the Midnight Oil)of the early 2000s to address fatigue. Since that time ASA (and others?) has treated these statuatory obligations like tax laws, as something to be subverted or minimized.
We had CASA in to do an unassociated audit. I was told that one of the auditors was very interested in FRMSs’, when I outlined my concerns and gave him examples of the abuse and blatant disregard of FAID he asked about the new FRMS that ASA were supposed to be introducing. I told him that this was supposed to be introduced last year but wasn't. His attitude was that ASA were now working to address the issue. I asked him that if someone was flying people around in a non-compliant manner/aircraft but said that they would fix this up in the future would CASA consider this acceptable. He would not answer.
I offered to CASA person that I would send him the email trail I had and he could refer to above or investigate, if he would give me his email address. He said he would not even give me his CASA email address. He asked what Civilair ( the ATC Association were doing about it), I said that you are supposed to be the regulator and I am making you aware of ASAs conduct and what will CASA do about it. He said that he would not ask these questions.
I am still attempting to follow these questions up internally in ASA, and through CASA. I spoke to one of the canteen workers yesterday, in conversation she told me that if they worked 6 days it was a compulsory 2 day break. In ATC after 10 days or 80 hours it triggers a 1 day break and you can then do 10 days or 80 hours again. That sandwich toaster/chip fryer must be a dangerous place.
Why is it now so damned hard and so personally fraught with penalties to do the right thing in Australia????
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was on jq62 a few months back and the level of English on the cabin crew was abysmal. The guy doing the announcements read it parrot fashion so much so I swear he did not understand what he was saying. I was fortunate that I had the A321 exit seat with lots of leg room. I was not only asked to open the exit in the event of an emergency but rather assist the cabin crew and provide assistance for them to get out of the aircraft I'd necessary. Bugger that, any problem requiring an evacuation and I'm gone!!!
Anyway:
Anyway:
I wouldn't be surprised if Immigration Officials (given that they have offices at international ports of entry) will be standing at the JQ62 and return leg domestic gates in Melbourne and Darwin over the next few days to check crew immigation status. For Aus citizens or PR it will not be a problem!!
Fines, jail terms and exclusion periods are significant for breach of Visa conditions.
I took advantage of the 'dob-in' line!!!! I would encourage others to do the same as it is the duty of every citizen to protect our country and our jobs!!
Immigration didn't seem too chuft that it was alledged to be happenning right under their noses, or so to speak!
Fines, jail terms and exclusion periods are significant for breach of Visa conditions.
I took advantage of the 'dob-in' line!!!! I would encourage others to do the same as it is the duty of every citizen to protect our country and our jobs!!
Immigration didn't seem too chuft that it was alledged to be happenning right under their noses, or so to speak!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Immigration Dob-in Line
Telephone: 1800 009 623
Use this number to advise the department about a person working or living illegally in Australia
Hours of operation
8.30 am to 4.30 pm Monday to Friday (voicemail facility available out of these hours)
Fax Number
1800 009 849
Alternatively, you can fax information to the department.
See: Immigration Dob-In Line
Telephone: 1800 009 623
Use this number to advise the department about a person working or living illegally in Australia
Hours of operation
8.30 am to 4.30 pm Monday to Friday (voicemail facility available out of these hours)
Fax Number
1800 009 849
Alternatively, you can fax information to the department.
See: Immigration Dob-In Line
Did I hear CASA correctly, did he just say "The only way to fix fatigue is to pay them more money" ?
In a lengthy exchange about fatigue issues, McCormick said “There is only one cure for fatigue issues and that is money.”
Read it carefully!
Meaning pilots flying less hours etc leading to more crew required or more rest leading to less fatigue. Which COSTS MONEY.
40 minute turn around at Changi? What do they do leave them running?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems the mainstream press are aware although the author should check his facts I think:
Jetstar flight crew feared death
Geoff Easdown From: Herald Sun March 19, 2011 12:00AM
A JETSTAR flight crew feared for their lives late last year after their plane came close to crashing during a tropical storm over Darwin, a Senate inquiry has heard.
The hearing was told that the A320 passenger jet would not climb and stalled for several minutes.
A Qantas A380 captain, who gave evidence on behalf of the pilot of the Jetstar plane, told the inquiry that a report given to him of the incident told how the pilot and first officer were convinced they would crash.
Richard Woodward, the A380 captain representing the Australian International Airline Pilots' Association, said it was strange the Australian Transport Safety Bureau had closed an inquiry given that the incident was so serious.
"He (the pilot) was quite concerned and thought that they were going to die because of the severe weather event. It (the plane) actually stopped climbing for quite some period of time," Captain Woodward
"The storm was directly overhead and they (the pilots) couldn't have seen it," he said.
Geoff Easdown From: Herald Sun March 19, 2011 12:00AM
A JETSTAR flight crew feared for their lives late last year after their plane came close to crashing during a tropical storm over Darwin, a Senate inquiry has heard.
The hearing was told that the A320 passenger jet would not climb and stalled for several minutes.
A Qantas A380 captain, who gave evidence on behalf of the pilot of the Jetstar plane, told the inquiry that a report given to him of the incident told how the pilot and first officer were convinced they would crash.
Richard Woodward, the A380 captain representing the Australian International Airline Pilots' Association, said it was strange the Australian Transport Safety Bureau had closed an inquiry given that the incident was so serious.
"He (the pilot) was quite concerned and thought that they were going to die because of the severe weather event. It (the plane) actually stopped climbing for quite some period of time," Captain Woodward
"The storm was directly overhead and they (the pilots) couldn't have seen it," he said.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The storm was directly overhead and they (the pilots) couldn't have seen it," he said.
The hearing was told that the A320 passenger jet would not climb and stalled for several minutes.