Chinook - Still Hitting Back 3 (Merged)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caz,
It would appear I have rather confused you in a previous post with my reference to tea making hence your supposition that I am a Cpl Air Steward............ whilst on 32 Sqn it may well be that stewards make the tea but on the rest of the AT fleet tea making is often carried out by a different crewmember..............the ALM
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=323817
A look at post #9 on the above link should clear up any more confusion............... and maybe if you get a moment you could point out your error to the quick fire posting civilian as he seems to have taken what you said to heart
As for "YOU have taken exception to the decisions that he has stated that he made and berated his Airmanship although you have NO experience of Piloting or Captaincy yourself."............now I am really confused as I thought I was simply being polite in the extreme as I ask my questions and those that know me would certainly tell you that I would never have the temerity to question any pilot on his piloting skills
I sincerely thank you for giving us an insight to JP's credentials and I will refrain from any cheesy statements to save on embarrassment all round but will continue to question politely in the manner I have done thus far
JP,
I am not suggesting the Chinook crew did anything as the only thing I know is that they hit the Mull and all sadly perished. I am of the opinion that IMC must have figured in the accident as the notion that the crew were VMC and simply flew straight into the rock is just ludicrous. And it's because of my opinion that IMC featured I asked you for your thoughts.
As I said I have been on crews, both rotary and C130 where INADVERTENT entry into IMC has occurred and on not one of those occasions did WE as a CREW consider ourselves grossly negligent, and as the weather so obviously played a major part of this incident I was simply trying to understand your certainty that the verdict in this case was right and proper.
Regards
SFFP
It would appear I have rather confused you in a previous post with my reference to tea making hence your supposition that I am a Cpl Air Steward............ whilst on 32 Sqn it may well be that stewards make the tea but on the rest of the AT fleet tea making is often carried out by a different crewmember..............the ALM
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=323817
A look at post #9 on the above link should clear up any more confusion............... and maybe if you get a moment you could point out your error to the quick fire posting civilian as he seems to have taken what you said to heart
As for "YOU have taken exception to the decisions that he has stated that he made and berated his Airmanship although you have NO experience of Piloting or Captaincy yourself."............now I am really confused as I thought I was simply being polite in the extreme as I ask my questions and those that know me would certainly tell you that I would never have the temerity to question any pilot on his piloting skills
I sincerely thank you for giving us an insight to JP's credentials and I will refrain from any cheesy statements to save on embarrassment all round but will continue to question politely in the manner I have done thus far
JP,
I am not suggesting the Chinook crew did anything as the only thing I know is that they hit the Mull and all sadly perished. I am of the opinion that IMC must have figured in the accident as the notion that the crew were VMC and simply flew straight into the rock is just ludicrous. And it's because of my opinion that IMC featured I asked you for your thoughts.
As I said I have been on crews, both rotary and C130 where INADVERTENT entry into IMC has occurred and on not one of those occasions did WE as a CREW consider ourselves grossly negligent, and as the weather so obviously played a major part of this incident I was simply trying to understand your certainty that the verdict in this case was right and proper.
Regards
SFFP
Last edited by Seldomfitforpurpose; 24th Apr 2008 at 23:28.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 419 Likes
on
221 Posts
SFFP
As an Aircraft Captain on 32 Sqn for approx 14 years I flew with many Cpl Stewards (Male & Female) who were essential members of the Crew but had no input unless requested (except in emergency) into the decision making process on the Flight Deck.
As an Aircraft Captain on 32 Sqn for approx 14 years I flew with many Cpl Stewards (Male & Female) who were essential members of the Crew but had no input unless requested (except in emergency) into the decision making process on the Flight Deck.
BTW, How does fixed wing time on 32 Sqn, which is essentially a VIP squadron operating from airport to airport, qualify you to be an expert on support helicopter operations?
How much time do you actually have flying in support helicopters?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: BATH
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chinook
Seldom. You say above "yes I have been involved in inadvertent entry into IMC and yes I know exactly how and why it happened and happily for me I am still here to talk about". Just like me! Not therefore clear why you are quibbling about my experience?
Cazatou. Many thanks. JP
Cazatou. Many thanks. JP
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JP,
I am rather bemused at your reluctance to satisfy my curiosity here when the questions I pose are rather straight forward and quite simple to answer.
All I am asking you to consider is that based on your experiences with entry in to IMC and the supposition that the weather was a major factor in the Chinook crash is the verdict reached in this case correct ?
I cannot answer for you but, as I previously stated, on the occasions that unplanned entry into IMC has happened with me on board we never once considered ourselves grossly negligent. We did however think we had f@cked up by pushing on too far but invariably task needs dictated that we try our utmost to get the job done.
When you operate in the SH world using weather limits of 100' cloud base and 1k's vis it comes as no big surprise that when rattling along at 140 kts things can change pretty damn quick and I would be very surprised if you could find an SH or TAC AT or fast jet pilot past or present who has not found themselves in an unplanned IMC scenario at sometime in their flying career.
That is why I am asking you to consider, based on your experiences with IMC if you still think this verdict is correct.
Cheers
SFFP
I am rather bemused at your reluctance to satisfy my curiosity here when the questions I pose are rather straight forward and quite simple to answer.
All I am asking you to consider is that based on your experiences with entry in to IMC and the supposition that the weather was a major factor in the Chinook crash is the verdict reached in this case correct ?
I cannot answer for you but, as I previously stated, on the occasions that unplanned entry into IMC has happened with me on board we never once considered ourselves grossly negligent. We did however think we had f@cked up by pushing on too far but invariably task needs dictated that we try our utmost to get the job done.
When you operate in the SH world using weather limits of 100' cloud base and 1k's vis it comes as no big surprise that when rattling along at 140 kts things can change pretty damn quick and I would be very surprised if you could find an SH or TAC AT or fast jet pilot past or present who has not found themselves in an unplanned IMC scenario at sometime in their flying career.
That is why I am asking you to consider, based on your experiences with IMC if you still think this verdict is correct.
Cheers
SFFP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFFP,
You seem to accept that the Chinook was flying under control in IMC at high speed directly towards high ground immediately prior to the crash - is that correct?
You seem to accept that the Chinook was flying under control in IMC at high speed directly towards high ground immediately prior to the crash - is that correct?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That may be his opinion. It may not be mine.
The Air Marshalls didn't have the luxury of dealing with matters of opinion. Their duty was to deal in matters of fact!
Where is the absolute proof of their speed as they approached the Mull?
It simply does not exist. Therefor it is a matter of opinion.
The Air Marshalls didn't have the luxury of dealing with matters of opinion. Their duty was to deal in matters of fact!
Where is the absolute proof of their speed as they approached the Mull?
It simply does not exist. Therefor it is a matter of opinion.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caz,
Steady chap, anyone would think you were trying to put words into my mouth
I have stated from the outset that I, like everyone else have absolutely no idea what actually happened that day. I have absolutely no knowledge of what the weather conditions were as seen from the flight deck windows and I have absolutely no knowledge of whether the aircraft was in controlled flight, as does NOBODY else.
It's my opinion that the weather was a major contributory factor and it's my opinion that entry into IMC is probably what caused them to not see the Mull as the notion that they were VMC and 2 experienced pilots and an ALM did not see the obstacle ahead is too ludicrous to even contemplate.
My question to JP and I guess to yourself as well is simply that based on your wealth of flying experience and as previously stated experiences with unplanned entry into IMC do you think that the verdict in this case is correct?
I have further stated that having encoutered this before on both rotary and fixed wing I, and the rest of the crew never once felt we were grossly negligent but had simply fu@ked up by pressing on to hard which I suspect, and I stress I SUSPECT is what was the root cause of JP's experiences.
Cheers
SFFP
Edited to state this post was being typed as Tandemrotor was posting.
Steady chap, anyone would think you were trying to put words into my mouth
I have stated from the outset that I, like everyone else have absolutely no idea what actually happened that day. I have absolutely no knowledge of what the weather conditions were as seen from the flight deck windows and I have absolutely no knowledge of whether the aircraft was in controlled flight, as does NOBODY else.
It's my opinion that the weather was a major contributory factor and it's my opinion that entry into IMC is probably what caused them to not see the Mull as the notion that they were VMC and 2 experienced pilots and an ALM did not see the obstacle ahead is too ludicrous to even contemplate.
My question to JP and I guess to yourself as well is simply that based on your wealth of flying experience and as previously stated experiences with unplanned entry into IMC do you think that the verdict in this case is correct?
I have further stated that having encoutered this before on both rotary and fixed wing I, and the rest of the crew never once felt we were grossly negligent but had simply fu@ked up by pressing on to hard which I suspect, and I stress I SUSPECT is what was the root cause of JP's experiences.
Cheers
SFFP
Edited to state this post was being typed as Tandemrotor was posting.
Just a numbered other
Excuse me butting in, but my answers, JP would be:
1 The icing clearance of the aircraft precluded planned flight in IMC
2 The plan was always to complete a VFR transit, and it has been agreed by all that the weather was suitable for this.
3 I am confident that this was not a case of suicide and mass murder.
Soo no-one knows beyond all doubt why the aircraft ended up crashing in cloud.
No-one.
1 The icing clearance of the aircraft precluded planned flight in IMC
2 The plan was always to complete a VFR transit, and it has been agreed by all that the weather was suitable for this.
3 I am confident that this was not a case of suicide and mass murder.
Soo no-one knows beyond all doubt why the aircraft ended up crashing in cloud.
No-one.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JP,
You still seem to want to avoid the question. Where did I say in my last couple of posts "involuntary" ?
I am presuming that an entry into IMC contributed to the incident for the reason I have already given, but like you I don't know that for fact. It's because of that assumption that I am asking you for your opinion, based on your previous experiences with IMC incursions if you think that a verdict of gross negligence is warranted ?
Cheers
SFFP
You still seem to want to avoid the question. Where did I say in my last couple of posts "involuntary" ?
I am presuming that an entry into IMC contributed to the incident for the reason I have already given, but like you I don't know that for fact. It's because of that assumption that I am asking you for your opinion, based on your previous experiences with IMC incursions if you think that a verdict of gross negligence is warranted ?
Cheers
SFFP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFFP
Have I got this correct?
You are "presuming" that flight in IMC conditions MAY have contributed to the Accident.
So if you fly directly towards high ground in IMC and hit said high ground at approx 160 kts then that is not a direct cause of the accident -merely a contributary cause?
Have I got this correct?
You are "presuming" that flight in IMC conditions MAY have contributed to the Accident.
So if you fly directly towards high ground in IMC and hit said high ground at approx 160 kts then that is not a direct cause of the accident -merely a contributary cause?
cazatou,
I'm sorry, but that has got to be one of the most insulting and pointless posts on a forum with a long record of pointless and insulting posts.
The BoI, who presumably had far more data available than the crew at the time, raised no question as to the suitability of the weather for the planned flight.
I'm sorry, but that has got to be one of the most insulting and pointless posts on a forum with a long record of pointless and insulting posts.
The BoI, who presumably had far more data available than the crew at the time, raised no question as to the suitability of the weather for the planned flight.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caz,
There you go again putting words into my mouth, have you ever considered a career in politics as your ability to spin is something every politician would dream of
"So if you fly directly to wards high ground in IMC and hit said high ground at approx 160 kts then that is not a direct cause of the accident -merely a contributory cause?"
Why not consider the following, which bearing in mind his stance all the way through this thread is a question that JP is oh so reluctant to answer.
"So if you fly directly towards high ground in VMC and subsequently for what ever reason enter IMC and sadly hit said high ground at approx 160 kts should you be judged as grossly negligent?
Apart from the hitting the ground bit JP has done it and as I suggest most low level folk have probably done it as well at some stage and as none of them, JP included ever considered them selves grossly negligent why is this crew being judged in this manner ?
There you go again putting words into my mouth, have you ever considered a career in politics as your ability to spin is something every politician would dream of
"So if you fly directly to wards high ground in IMC and hit said high ground at approx 160 kts then that is not a direct cause of the accident -merely a contributory cause?"
Why not consider the following, which bearing in mind his stance all the way through this thread is a question that JP is oh so reluctant to answer.
"So if you fly directly towards high ground in VMC and subsequently for what ever reason enter IMC and sadly hit said high ground at approx 160 kts should you be judged as grossly negligent?
Apart from the hitting the ground bit JP has done it and as I suggest most low level folk have probably done it as well at some stage and as none of them, JP included ever considered them selves grossly negligent why is this crew being judged in this manner ?
Last edited by Seldomfitforpurpose; 26th Apr 2008 at 00:47.
If this tiresome exchange is the best that you guys can do, would it perhaps be more worthy to do nothing? This thread is in effective limbo while the Secretary of State ponders on the pros and cons of this case and pronounces his verdict. Well that's the fiction that is playing out now and it is hardly enhanced by this little spat of "Did", Didn't", "Did Too". My 4 and 3/4 (that last bit is all important!) year old grandson could do better. Until Mr Browne is ex SoS we all need to sit on our hands, see I'm doing that right now...
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: cornwall UK
Age: 80
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFFP
I usually follow your logic even if I don't agree.
Leaving aside what the crew in question may or may not have done, "if you fly directly towards high ground in VMC and subsequently for what ever reason enter IMC and sadly hit said high ground at approx 160 kts", how can you not be negligent? There can't be many acts of airmanship worse than flying into a hill?
Further, its a breathtaking statement to claim that no low-level pilot who has done all that except hit the ground would claim to be grossly negligent. Anyone who has done that and hasn't admitted to himself that he's been a BF/ negligent/call it what you will, simply is not open to learning from experience and shouldn't be flying.
I usually follow your logic even if I don't agree.
Leaving aside what the crew in question may or may not have done, "if you fly directly towards high ground in VMC and subsequently for what ever reason enter IMC and sadly hit said high ground at approx 160 kts", how can you not be negligent? There can't be many acts of airmanship worse than flying into a hill?
Further, its a breathtaking statement to claim that no low-level pilot who has done all that except hit the ground would claim to be grossly negligent. Anyone who has done that and hasn't admitted to himself that he's been a BF/ negligent/call it what you will, simply is not open to learning from experience and shouldn't be flying.