GT says fatal 737 MAX crashes caused by 'incompetent crew.'
I think this is the best article I have read about this whole 737 max mess. (I am an A380 skipper (never flown Boeing) - so it was a well written and informative read.)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/m...x-crashes.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/m...x-crashes.html
I think this is the best article I have read about this whole 737 max mess. (I am an A380 skipper (never flown Boeing) - so it was a well written and informative read.)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/m...x-crashes.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/m...x-crashes.html
‘’From the NYT:
when he was hired by Lion Air. Like thousands of new pilots now meeting the demands for crews — especially those in developing countries with rapid airline growth — his experience with flying was scripted, bounded by checklists and cockpit mandates and dependent on autopilots. He had some rote knowledge of cockpit procedures as handed down from the big manufacturers, but he was weak in an essential quality known as airmanship. Sadly, his captain turned out to be weak in it, too.
“Airmanship” is an anachronistic word, but it is applied without prejudice to women as well as men. Its full meaning is difficult to convey. It includes a visceral sense of navigation, an operational understanding of weather and weather information, the ability to form mental maps of traffic flows, fluency in the nuance of radio communications and, especially, a deep appreciation for the interplay between energy, inertia and wings. Airplanes are living things. The best pilots do not sit in cockpits so much as strap them on. The United States Navy manages to instill a sense of this in its fledgling fighter pilots by ramming them through rigorous classroom instruction and then requiring them to fly at bank angles without limits, including upside down. The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their careers. The worst of them are intimidated by their airplanes and remain so until they retire or die. It is unfortunate that those who die in cockpits tend to take their passengers with them.
“Airmanship” is an anachronistic word, but it is applied without prejudice to women as well as men. Its full meaning is difficult to convey. It includes a visceral sense of navigation, an operational understanding of weather and weather information, the ability to form mental maps of traffic flows, fluency in the nuance of radio communications and, especially, a deep appreciation for the interplay between energy, inertia and wings. Airplanes are living things. The best pilots do not sit in cockpits so much as strap them on. The United States Navy manages to instill a sense of this in its fledgling fighter pilots by ramming them through rigorous classroom instruction and then requiring them to fly at bank angles without limits, including upside down. The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their careers. The worst of them are intimidated by their airplanes and remain so until they retire or die. It is unfortunate that those who die in cockpits tend to take their passengers with them.
Oh I see...... ...The cause is using crews of ignorant cheap locals who aren’t real pilots. Obviously hadn’t read Dads book/; stick and rudder.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody is saying that. They are saying that standards are standards and that those should be the same whether you are flying in Indonesia, Ethiopia or anywhere else. Nobody said the poor pilots were ignorant. They may or may not have been well trained which is different matter.
There is an argument being put forward here that to criticise the standards in some countries is to demonise the whole population and is racist. In this context this is pure bunkum.
Consider that until 2016 Lionair for example, was on the EU banned list. Lionair rose from those ashes. So they don't have a long history of excellence in aviation as do some other airlines. This all counts.
So let's drop the racist card and just stick with the hard facts when discussing the competence of airlines or their pilots to operate safely.
When I fly as a passenger I look for the competence of the airline/crew combination and am not at all concerned about their ethnicity. In one airline I worked for recently there were over 30 nationalities flying as pilots. But they all flew to the same standard.
Bye for now.
R Guy
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is the best article I have read about this whole 737 max mess. (I am an A380 skipper (never flown Boeing) - so it was a well written and informative read.)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/m...x-crashes.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/m...x-crashes.html
R Guy
Airplanes are living things. The best pilots do not sit in cockpits so much as strap them on. The United States Navy manages to instill a sense of this in its fledgling fighter pilots by ramming them through rigorous classroom instruction and then requiring them to fly at bank angles without limits, including upside down.
The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their careers.
The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their careers.
AA 1420 and AA 965 pilots were in the former group.
BA 38 and U6 178 pilots were in the latter group.
The second two showed airmanship, the first two did not.
I know that some cannot comprehend this fact (like the author of the article) but it’s the truth.
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Derry
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airplanes are living things. The best pilots do not sit in cockpits so much as strap them on. The United States Navy manages to instill a sense of this in its fledgling fighter pilots by ramming them through rigorous classroom instruction and then requiring them to fly at bank angles without limits, including upside down.
The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their career
DRE
Add in this one for pure airmanship. Not many people know about this one which is in my view on of the most significant recoveries I have seen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...ys_Flight_2069
Summary
One dark night over Africa en route CPT, a guy broke into the cockpit. The copilot was being strangled by the intruder, the 747 fell 18,000 ft (2 miles) in a minute or so with bank angle in excess of 90 degrees in the dark. Airspeed around 100 its - same as AF 447.
Co pilot eventually struggled free (Captain attacked the attacker) but by now they were falling so fast that impact was less than a minute away.
But, once he broke free from the attacker, he recovered the plane wings level and pulled out of the dive without over stressing the wings.
Landed Nairobi and plane found perfectly airworthy after a day or so.
He never flew for the US Navy. Nor did Eric Moody. This nonsense that we hear occasionally that airline pilots are not the 'real thing' is a nonsense. Airline pilots are trained to do a very different job which military pilots are often unsuited to perform. Many of them fail conversion course on to civil airlines.
R Guy
The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their career
Nonsense and lazy stereotyping to the max.
AA 1420 and AA 965 pilots were in the former group.
BA 38 and U6 178 pilots were in the latter group.
The second two showed airmanship, the first two did not.
I know that some cannot comprehend this fact (like the author of the article) but it’s the truth.
AA 1420 and AA 965 pilots were in the former group.
BA 38 and U6 178 pilots were in the latter group.
The second two showed airmanship, the first two did not.
I know that some cannot comprehend this fact (like the author of the article) but it’s the truth.
DRE
Add in this one for pure airmanship. Not many people know about this one which is in my view on of the most significant recoveries I have seen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britis...ys_Flight_2069
Summary
One dark night over Africa en route CPT, a guy broke into the cockpit. The copilot was being strangled by the intruder, the 747 fell 18,000 ft (2 miles) in a minute or so with bank angle in excess of 90 degrees in the dark. Airspeed around 100 its - same as AF 447.
Co pilot eventually struggled free (Captain attacked the attacker) but by now they were falling so fast that impact was less than a minute away.
But, once he broke free from the attacker, he recovered the plane wings level and pulled out of the dive without over stressing the wings.
Landed Nairobi and plane found perfectly airworthy after a day or so.
He never flew for the US Navy. Nor did Eric Moody. This nonsense that we hear occasionally that airline pilots are not the 'real thing' is a nonsense. Airline pilots are trained to do a very different job which military pilots are often unsuited to perform. Many of them fail conversion course on to civil airlines.
R Guy
At this point, buying the theory GT is peddling means that you buy this: Boeing has lost $18bn, its customers are losing Gawd-knows-how much, and the industry is being disrupted, all because the leaders involved, including worldwide regulators, are too PC, or too scared of being insulted on Twitter, to tell the truth and insist that a perfectly safe airplane was brought down by inept, badly trained crews. Moreover, this error of judgment is protected by ironclad secrecy so that not a word of dissent has leaked out of FAA, EASA, Boeing, SWAL &c.
Any less credible theory would have to involve recovered alien spacecraft.
Any less credible theory would have to involve recovered alien spacecraft.
One dark night over Africa en route CPT, a guy broke into the cockpit. The copilot was being strangled by the intruder, the 747 fell 18,000 ft (2 miles) in a minute or so with bank angle in excess of 90 degrees in the dark. Airspeed around 100 its - same as AF 447.
Co pilot eventually struggled free (Captain attacked the attacker) but by now they were falling so fast that impact was less than a minute away.
But, once he broke free from the attacker, he recovered the plane wings level and pulled out of the dive without over stressing the wings.
Landed Nairobi and plane found perfectly airworthy after a day or so.
He never flew for the US Navy. Nor did Eric Moody. This nonsense that we hear occasionally that airline pilots are not the 'real thing' is a nonsense. Airline pilots are trained to do a very different job which military pilots are often unsuited to perform. Many of them fail conversion course on to civil airlines.
Co pilot eventually struggled free (Captain attacked the attacker) but by now they were falling so fast that impact was less than a minute away.
But, once he broke free from the attacker, he recovered the plane wings level and pulled out of the dive without over stressing the wings.
Landed Nairobi and plane found perfectly airworthy after a day or so.
He never flew for the US Navy. Nor did Eric Moody. This nonsense that we hear occasionally that airline pilots are not the 'real thing' is a nonsense. Airline pilots are trained to do a very different job which military pilots are often unsuited to perform. Many of them fail conversion course on to civil airlines.
"Best to remain silent and risk being thought a fool than to open one's mouth and put the question beyond doubt".
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 67
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Langewiesche’s article is spot on.
Pity so many posters who obviously have no Boeing , no RPT experience , no ATPL but perhaps a single engine VFR PPL masquerade as knowledgeable commentators. Why do you do it ?
Pity so many posters who obviously have no Boeing , no RPT experience , no ATPL but perhaps a single engine VFR PPL masquerade as knowledgeable commentators. Why do you do it ?
Thanks AP that’s the one. GG if the article was correct then the Max would have been back in the air months ago. BTW I meet all the criteria you think is necessary to have an informed opinion on the subject.
Most I would say (all with ATPLs and Boeing RPT jet time).
It doesn’t matter if you’re not an ex-Navy ace.
It does matter if executive management know so little about what skills are required to safely fly an Airliner that they cut the amount and quality of training given to a point where pilots don’t feel comfortable flying aircraft.
The accountants run the industry and they have cocked it up.
It does matter if executive management know so little about what skills are required to safely fly an Airliner that they cut the amount and quality of training given to a point where pilots don’t feel comfortable flying aircraft.
The accountants run the industry and they have cocked it up.
[QUOTE=retired guy;10678360]Airplanes are living things. The best pilots do not sit in cockpits so much as strap them on. The United States Navy manages to instill a sense of this in its fledgling fighter pilots by ramming them through rigorous classroom instruction and then requiring them to fly at bank angles without limits, including upside down.
The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their career
DRE
Many of them fail conversion course on to civil airlines.
R Guy[/QUOTE
Really. As an ex military trainer myself, I have encountered a few who had trouble adapting to two crew operation, but many failing, I doubt it.
The same cannot be expected of airline pilots who never fly solo and whose entire experience consists of catering to passengers who flinch in mild turbulence, refer to “air pockets” in cocktail conversation and think they are near death if bank angles exceed 30 degrees. The problem exists for many American and European pilots, too. Unless they make extraordinary efforts — for instance, going out to fly aerobatics, fly sailplanes or wander among the airstrips of backcountry Idaho — they may never develop true airmanship no matter the length of their career
DRE
Many of them fail conversion course on to civil airlines.
R Guy[/QUOTE
Really. As an ex military trainer myself, I have encountered a few who had trouble adapting to two crew operation, but many failing, I doubt it.
My comment was based on logic (for A to be true, B and C must be true). Don't need flight time for that.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 67
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dr dre , if you really believe that you’re delusional. “Most” ? Rubbish. Most of the pilots I have had the privilege of flying with over the last 30 years were exactly that sort of “real Pilot”.
