According to the news, the pilot "pilot accidentally knocked the propeller"!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wherever the work is!
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not saying this actually happened but thought i would throw it out there. Another plausible explanation could be that he/she had the a/c running, noticed the tie downs still tied down and rather than shutdown and have to restart, pulled the handbrake on thinking it would stop the a/c going anywhere while he/she undid the tiedowns... EPIC FAIL 
Turbz
Turbz
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horatio - Yes, I've made mistakes - but I'm unforgiving when a person who is supposed to be a thoroughly trained professional, does something, that to my line of thought - not only involves all three of the unprofessional failings of Capt A.G. Lamplughs quote - but which story of the event, also smacks of lying as well.
Despite the media misdescriptions and errors in reporting, I suspect he isn't telling the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I am being hard on him/her for basic unprofessional failings, and possibly basic honesty and integrity failings.
Except for the greatest stroke of luck, we are looking today at a physically destructive event, that is only a whisker away from reporting another aviation serious injury/fatality. One is reminded of the Yak-52 incident at Albury?
Aviation Quotes
http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/18-19.pdf
Despite the media misdescriptions and errors in reporting, I suspect he isn't telling the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I am being hard on him/her for basic unprofessional failings, and possibly basic honesty and integrity failings.
Except for the greatest stroke of luck, we are looking today at a physically destructive event, that is only a whisker away from reporting another aviation serious injury/fatality. One is reminded of the Yak-52 incident at Albury?
Aviation Quotes
http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/18-19.pdf
Bottums Up
Thread Starter
There's no indication thus far, if what's reported as fact, is fact. We've all read journalistic bloopers on these fora, so it's entirely possible that the pilot didn't say that they knocked the prop but a journo has tried to translate a technical explanation in to layperson's terms.
For this reason alone, the poor pilot should be given the natural justice position of innocent until proven guilty.
When I started the thread, my mindset was the the news article title was incorrectly stated. Perhaps I'm wrong?
For this reason alone, the poor pilot should be given the natural justice position of innocent until proven guilty.
When I started the thread, my mindset was the the news article title was incorrectly stated. Perhaps I'm wrong?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wherever the work is!
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so it's entirely possible that the pilot didn't say that they knocked the prop but a journo has tried to translate a technical explanation in to layperson's terms.
Pilot - Innocent until provent guilty.
Journos - Ignorant until proven slightly less ignorant.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: perth
Age: 42
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that the media, has indicated exactly how the pilot in question told the story, unbelievable and unprofessional as it may be. 
I also got told on the grape vine, as a previous post stated the mixture and throttle were pushed in with the mag's left on, not sure if its true or not, seems rather hard to believe that kind of complacency, but the general story doesn't add up which ever way you look at it. I recall a few years back watching someone try and hand start a 206 and it took a long time with a huge amount of effort, not brushing/knocking the prop!
I feel sorry for the pilot, this could be a career ender, but for their sake I hope not.
I also got told on the grape vine, as a previous post stated the mixture and throttle were pushed in with the mag's left on, not sure if its true or not, seems rather hard to believe that kind of complacency, but the general story doesn't add up which ever way you look at it. I recall a few years back watching someone try and hand start a 206 and it took a long time with a huge amount of effort, not brushing/knocking the prop!
I feel sorry for the pilot, this could be a career ender, but for their sake I hope not.
Claret, I hope you are right.
To the person who picked holes in my "plausible" explanation, fair points.
I wonder how many people there are between the media and the pilot? If he talked directly to the media, that's bad form and unlikely. So how many times has the story been told before it got to the media and how much did it change due to the Chinese whispers effect?
To the person who picked holes in my "plausible" explanation, fair points.
I wonder how many people there are between the media and the pilot? If he talked directly to the media, that's bad form and unlikely. So how many times has the story been told before it got to the media and how much did it change due to the Chinese whispers effect?
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Darwin
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I want to know is, why did the ASIC card not stop this?
The ASIC scheme aims to reduce the risk of unlawful interference with aviation, not just terrorism. So why was this horrific accident not prevented by the little red card?
The ASIC scheme aims to reduce the risk of unlawful interference with aviation, not just terrorism. So why was this horrific accident not prevented by the little red card?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People who live in glass houses..........
Did he F
up? Yes
Is he the 1st person to ever screw up? No
Will he be the last one? Sure as hell no
People do gear up landings, have prop strikes, leave nose or wing lockers open, leave fuel caps off etc. (even the ones who say "id never do anything that stupid") despite the thousands of times we have been told since day one "check this, always do that, these checks, those checks." It only takes you to miss something one time and the other holes in the cheese to line up and something like this can happen, no matter how thorough and professional you are.
He was doing the right thing by his company by being there at 1:30 am (dark - no apron lights) in the pissing down rain moving the aircraft becuase some of the "locals" were causing trouble at the airport.
If you can honestly say that you have NEVER, once in you flying career done something stupid not realising, then thought afterwards "oops that could have ended badly" then you are either lying or too stupid to realise. It just so happens that this one did end badly. Aircraft are insured and no one was hurt. Cut the guy some slack.
Im sure he feels bad enough and is having a hard enough time dealing with it as it is. Surely he doesn't need to be slandered and second guessed in an annoymous forum by people who don't know the circumstances and should be able to if at least not understand then sympathise rather than bag the sh%t out of him. Its easy to bag somone from the saftey of anonimity but be careful, it could be you next.
Did he F
up? YesIs he the 1st person to ever screw up? No
Will he be the last one? Sure as hell no
People do gear up landings, have prop strikes, leave nose or wing lockers open, leave fuel caps off etc. (even the ones who say "id never do anything that stupid") despite the thousands of times we have been told since day one "check this, always do that, these checks, those checks." It only takes you to miss something one time and the other holes in the cheese to line up and something like this can happen, no matter how thorough and professional you are.
He was doing the right thing by his company by being there at 1:30 am (dark - no apron lights) in the pissing down rain moving the aircraft becuase some of the "locals" were causing trouble at the airport.
If you can honestly say that you have NEVER, once in you flying career done something stupid not realising, then thought afterwards "oops that could have ended badly" then you are either lying or too stupid to realise. It just so happens that this one did end badly. Aircraft are insured and no one was hurt. Cut the guy some slack.
Im sure he feels bad enough and is having a hard enough time dealing with it as it is. Surely he doesn't need to be slandered and second guessed in an annoymous forum by people who don't know the circumstances and should be able to if at least not understand then sympathise rather than bag the sh%t out of him. Its easy to bag somone from the saftey of anonimity but be careful, it could be you next.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: in the heat
Age: 52
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well said
What a bugger, what a ferk up, but **** does happen and at that hour of the night!
Certainly would not be the first time the locals damaged some aircraft if it was not moved. Hang on someone mentioned the ASIC thats right they could not possibly damage aircraft now as they could not get airside without the red card!
That is quiet a few pilotless aircraft seeking freedom over the years.
Finding 2 replacement aircraft in a hurry sheesh
Certainly would not be the first time the locals damaged some aircraft if it was not moved. Hang on someone mentioned the ASIC thats right they could not possibly damage aircraft now as they could not get airside without the red card!
That is quiet a few pilotless aircraft seeking freedom over the years.
Finding 2 replacement aircraft in a hurry sheesh
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,969
Received 96 Likes
on
55 Posts
gettin' there,JMEN; Well said!
The most intelligent posts I've read on this (and other) threads where the subject has been along the lines of
There but for the grace of God go I.
All prospective stone throwers and 'I'd never be so silly as to do that' types please take a deep breath and think for a moment.
From someone for whom the holes in the cheese a long time ago once lined up.
The most intelligent posts I've read on this (and other) threads where the subject has been along the lines ofThere but for the grace of God go I.
All prospective stone throwers and 'I'd never be so silly as to do that' types please take a deep breath and think for a moment.
From someone for whom the holes in the cheese a long time ago once lined up.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is, now - for the owner, he's going to be looking at a massive increase in insurance premiums, when he's up for insurance renewal - because the insurance company will be closely scrutinising whether the owner has a less-than-satisfactory level of attention to safety procedures. Insurance companies are proper b*&%$#ds, they make bank look generous. My broker assured me after a major claim, caused by a careless employee, that the starting point for renewal of premiums, by insurance companies - after a major event - is the cost of the last event, added to your current premium. Brokers work hard to negotiate premiums down from that start point.
For a bloke running a business on high turnover and slim margins - a major increase in insurance premiums, is the last thing he'd want. An employee who does that level of damage, due to what even a generous soul would describe as a "moment of carelessness", would more than likely be on the road, looking for a new position, under most circumstances - after the employer has decided he's too expensive to keep on the payroll.
After all, there are plenty of others likely to be eager to take his position, and to be more caring of the boss's high-value equipment. The second headache for the employer is the cost of rounding up replacement planes, and the lost income while the replacements are being sourced, organised, and set up to earn money for him/her again. Just as taxi-owners get furious at their taxis being pranged - it's not the actual cost of the accident, it's lost time and income, while the replacement is being sorted. Yes, they're only machines - and yes, no-one got hurt, fortunately - but the owner is going to suffer a major financial penalty due to the actions of one careless employee.
For a bloke running a business on high turnover and slim margins - a major increase in insurance premiums, is the last thing he'd want. An employee who does that level of damage, due to what even a generous soul would describe as a "moment of carelessness", would more than likely be on the road, looking for a new position, under most circumstances - after the employer has decided he's too expensive to keep on the payroll.
After all, there are plenty of others likely to be eager to take his position, and to be more caring of the boss's high-value equipment. The second headache for the employer is the cost of rounding up replacement planes, and the lost income while the replacements are being sourced, organised, and set up to earn money for him/her again. Just as taxi-owners get furious at their taxis being pranged - it's not the actual cost of the accident, it's lost time and income, while the replacement is being sorted. Yes, they're only machines - and yes, no-one got hurt, fortunately - but the owner is going to suffer a major financial penalty due to the actions of one careless employee.
On The Other Hand.............
From an old source -
A 'KODAK' employee once cost the company over $2M for a 'stuff-up' which could and should have been avoided by him.
The employee was acutely aware of this.
He was otherwise a 'good employee' and an asset to the company.
The Managing Director of KODAK, when faced with the dilemma, chose to make his decision thus,
"Why fire the bastard when we have just spent over $2M educating him"....
and so the man kept his job, lesson learned, and NEVER to be repeated....
(And they all lived happily everafter....)
A 'Win - Win' situation , I would think......
From an old source -
A 'KODAK' employee once cost the company over $2M for a 'stuff-up' which could and should have been avoided by him.
The employee was acutely aware of this.
He was otherwise a 'good employee' and an asset to the company.
The Managing Director of KODAK, when faced with the dilemma, chose to make his decision thus,
"Why fire the bastard when we have just spent over $2M educating him"....
and so the man kept his job, lesson learned, and NEVER to be repeated....
(And they all lived happily everafter....)
A 'Win - Win' situation , I would think......
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Over the Rainbow
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Career ending - should hope not.
Job ending - i hope so.
Accident - no.
Totally avoidable unprofessional conduct - yes.
Is "knocked the prop" an unlikely cause - yes.
Aircraft will NOT taxi by themselves unless, no chocks and brakes are off (or not working), mixture open, throttle open. Mags can be live but in combination with the other three the chances are quite slim . Logical conclusion, dopey tried to either move the aircraft by pulling on the prop or swing start it with throttle and mixture open probably with mags left on and stuffed it up.
Very easy for an engineer to confirm live mags so pilot better hope he isn't trying to pass on blame
Job ending - i hope so.
Accident - no.
Totally avoidable unprofessional conduct - yes.
Is "knocked the prop" an unlikely cause - yes.
Aircraft will NOT taxi by themselves unless, no chocks and brakes are off (or not working), mixture open, throttle open. Mags can be live but in combination with the other three the chances are quite slim . Logical conclusion, dopey tried to either move the aircraft by pulling on the prop or swing start it with throttle and mixture open probably with mags left on and stuffed it up.
Very easy for an engineer to confirm live mags so pilot better hope he isn't trying to pass on blame
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ozzzzzzz
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As they always say, you've got to do a wheel's up landing to get into Qantas... This incident is just as good a story as any.
Maybe it's a sign QF is about to start recruiting again
Maybe it's a sign QF is about to start recruiting again
Moderator
I suspect he isn't telling the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Career ending - should hope not.
Job ending - i hope so.
Accident - no.
Totally avoidable unprofessional conduct - yes.
Is "knocked the prop" an unlikely cause - yes.
Job ending - i hope so.
Accident - no.
Totally avoidable unprofessional conduct - yes.
Is "knocked the prop" an unlikely cause - yes.
I believe the pilot has provided an accurate report to the authorities which is substantially different to the conjecture in the media and in this thread.
Talk about a hanging jury! Give the guy a break, eh?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Over the Rainbow
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that judgement based upon full, accurate knowledge of the incident or the inaccurate media report and incorrect assumptions posted in this thread??
I believe the pilot has provided an accurate report to the authorities which is substantially different to the conjecture in the media and in this thread.
I have been an engineer for over 30 years so I reckon I know a bit about what will and will not cause an aircraft to taxi by itself. In every case you will find a two legged idiot involved.
Talk about a hanging jury! Give the guy a break, eh?
Career ending - should hope not.
Job ending - i hope so.
Accident - no.
Totally avoidable unprofessional conduct - yes.
Is "knocked the prop" an unlikely cause - yes.
Bottums Up
Thread Starter
Maybe some nefarious sod, slipped out of the bush when they saw the pilot exit the aeroplane and hit the starter before buggering off back to the bush.
Unlikely - yes
Impossible - no
Hang the pilot before determining result - it would appear so.
Unlikely - yes
Impossible - no
Hang the pilot before determining result - it would appear so.
