Transmission to counter pilot decision
 

The scenario could quite conceivably been that the delay and confusion caused by the "hold off" transmission could have cost lives.

A serious investigation of that transmission must surely be taking place.

As for the sacking I cannot think of a more damaging way to attack safety culture

As far as I am aware, the Commander is ultimately responsible for the aircraft and its inhabitants safety. To achieve this, he is allowed to make decisions and orders as he sees fit, in case of an emergency even above and beyond the scope of the books and the law. In emergency, he is only measured by the result: did everybody make it out alive or not? If the company entrusts a Commander with an aircraft, it at the same time entrusts him with this power.

There is no instance above the commander on the aircraft. Should there be any doubt, a look at the Polish Airforce Tu-154 accident in Smolensk might be enlightening.

I would be highly surprised if this termination was to be held up in court and not kicked out unceremoniously. All the best to the Captain.

I hope he gets a massive settlement because I'm sure he doesn't want to return to work for a management team like that.

The Fire Now is not the Fire 90 Seconds from Now
 

90 seconds is the standard evacuation time. That's a long time for a fire.

Dry Scotch Pine Tree...

Bl00dy hell! Was the Pine Tree full of Scotch then????? :eek:

Sounds pretty outrageous; if that decision isn't within the Captain's authority, what is?

Secondly, I hope there has been an investigation into the unidentified voice telling to hold off. In that situation, information from outside could be crucial -but having some unknown person trying to run the decision-making while giving no info at all may have been disastrous!

er340790 no, just volatile oils and resin. Crowning out occurs in Australia during some bush fires when the eucalyptus oils ignite. :(
As a Radio Amateur I am well aware that some unscrupulous, unlicensed persons have been known to make illegal broadcasts which have caused confusion and mayhem. The perpetrators rarely, if ever, identify themselves.

If I were Capt Kinzer's lawyer, I'd be inclined to cite Saudi Flight 163 as a reason why evacuation in case of a suspected fire should not be delayed. The whole actions of Allegiant are disgraceful and their culture of safety warrants a closer inspection......

Tu.114 wrote:
Isn't there a follow-up question - "Did everyone make it out uninjured?"? Emergency evacuations cause injuries.

As soon as the word "emergency" is uttered, the captain is in charge, end of story. I'll help him/her anyway I can, but they're the boss.

He ordered the evac despite someone messing around on the frequency and potentially risking the lives of everyone on that plane. Good man.

If this situation is as it appears appears to us here, he deserves 6 figures, at least.

The freq is recorded in the tower. I sincerely hope they gave the recordings to the cops or his lawyers so they can interview suspects and try find out who endangered those lives. It's an ICAO mandate for all ATC tapes to be stored for a minimum of 30 days (remember that if you're ever in a sticky situation and you think they'll help you). Most places keep them far longer because there's so much memory available to do so on the digital recorders.

Thanks for the additional info...
I think we shouldn't focus too much on the "voice" but more on the questioning of PIC authority in a situation like this.

Well, there certainly is some common ancestry:

As Allegiant Air wavers, Pinellas airport and tourism industry cross fingers | Tampa Bay Times

Some earlier discussion of recent Allegiant incidents on this PPRuNe thread:

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...incidents.html

This is unclear from the transcripts, which seem to indicate that the request not to evacuate came from "Airport Command RF 2", i.e., one of the rescue fire fighters on the ground.

A Captain as PIC is in charge. But that does not mean that on Monday morning his decisions cannot subsequently be evaluated by anyone (management, FAA, etc.) if those decisions may have needlessly endangered passengers and crew.

Personally I think the FAA will not get involved here.

From a strictly legal perspective, IMHO the Captain has a very tough case since Nevada is an "at will" employment state. But Allegiant made enough procedural mistakes in firing him that I think both parties will play for a settlement.

Btw the Captain's attorney was FAA's chief trial attorney in previous life.

Ahh if the other voice on the radio was a fire truck attending then that is a completely different matter, does not remove responsibility from captain but if captain were to make a judgement that fire truck has better info ie can see what they cant. Might be worth considering advice and certainly reasonable to give it.

If it were a truck outside, it should have mentioned that it was observing no fire threat or that it was under control.
There was really any clear identification of who it was or what they were seeing.

The other question to ask is, what if the captain had listened and fire consequently ended up getting in the cabin and pax getting burnt or killed?

It really does matter who made the call claiming eventually to be RF2. If it was genuinely a fire response vehicle, they only have visual externally, with no real knowledge of fumes within the aircraft. Therefore not qualified to venture an opinion.
If the calls came from the company, same situation, but probably increased liability in court as a result.
There are ways to positively determine the exact origin of the calls and the identity of the caller, so someone should be quite concerned with their own skin. Knowledgeable readers should not discuss the means of doing this for obvious reasons.

So why did RF2 not come back and explain why it was necessary to hold the evac? surely someone knows who was manning the RF2 transmitter during the incident and they could confirm what was said and why.

The Captain is in charge of the aircraft, period. He signed for it and it is his till he signs it back in. It's very important who said what to him, why they said it, and more importantly should they have said it. The Captain remained in command though and decided the situation demanded an evacuation which is exactly what he ordered.

Remember if he had taken the advice not to evacuate and the unthinkable had then occurred he would have been the one held ultimately responsible and you can bet your bottom dollar his employers would have held him responsible to.

Unless their are reasons we are not being told, which I highly doubt, sacking a man for carrying out his role as Captain is ridiculous. If there should not have been an evacuation that's for the FAA to investigate, advise on and apportion blame.

The whole thing smacks of double standards by the Airline.

My .00002
 

IF RF2 had said ' fire on port side- do not evacuate on port side ' or the equivalent- it might have been appropriate. But he/she didn't- and it wasn't

One can only assume RF2 will sooner or later have to stand up.

Thus the lawsuit !! :ok:

Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether he was "right" or "wrong" (insofar as those are even meaningful adjectives when your plane might be on fire.) What matters is that he was the PIC, and determined that it was time to evacuate. End of meaningful discussion. If we let this sort of second-guessing go on, it's not just bad for "us", it's bad for our passengers. The Feds famously have a "dual-mandate", in the US. That leaves the Pilots to be the ultimate advocates for Safety. We let this guy get cashiered for making a command decision, we've basically given up any meaningful authority on our own aircraft, forever. And they won't be giving it back out of the goodness of their hearts.