AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013
and fuss and oooooh!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
TC I know the Commander of this flight very well. He is capable, competent and extremely diligent. He is well liked and respected by all his colleagues including me. I know his heart is broken by what happened. I know you are a heartless prick but it still grates when I read your unsympathetic drivel.
It is very difficult, knowing the man, to understand why this happened. A large part of the community is hoping the he suffered an incapacitation.
TC, I know it is easy when detached from the situation, which you clearly are, to be openly critical and I recognise that you also have your place in the grand scheme of things. So do I. On this occasion my place is to tell you what a tw*t you are.
DB
It is very difficult, knowing the man, to understand why this happened. A large part of the community is hoping the he suffered an incapacitation.
TC, I know it is easy when detached from the situation, which you clearly are, to be openly critical and I recognise that you also have your place in the grand scheme of things. So do I. On this occasion my place is to tell you what a tw*t you are.
DB
DB
Just because he is a nice guy, liked by is colleagues, respected even, someone you know well and who is heartbroken does not mean that he was not part of a serious crew error which led to the loss of a serviceable helicopter and the death of 4 passengers who had put themselves under his expert charge.
There were 2 crew so both are part of the same error but P1 is the Commander of the aircraft and in the absence of extenuating circumstances has no option but to take the blame. Hard but true, true for all of us when we sign for an aircraft.
Just because he is a nice guy, liked by is colleagues, respected even, someone you know well and who is heartbroken does not mean that he was not part of a serious crew error which led to the loss of a serviceable helicopter and the death of 4 passengers who had put themselves under his expert charge.
There were 2 crew so both are part of the same error but P1 is the Commander of the aircraft and in the absence of extenuating circumstances has no option but to take the blame. Hard but true, true for all of us when we sign for an aircraft.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
II I hear you and you are of course right. However this kind of accident is not unusual and happens a lot more than we think around the world.
My last count I have 27 serviceable helicopters impacting the sea!!
Why does this happen and how can it be prevented?
Modern machines like the EC225 and EC175 have Flight Envelope Protections built into the DAFCS. Even this did not stop one hitting the sea when the crew decided ( because they are allowed to) fly manually in the dark.
It's a very poor response to try and blame these accidents on the individuals alone. They are, for the most part, simply guilty of poor airmanship that leads to the accident. It is much more relevant and progressive to try to understand what processes, procedures and equipment could be deployed to prevent these accidents.
DB
My last count I have 27 serviceable helicopters impacting the sea!!
Why does this happen and how can it be prevented?
Modern machines like the EC225 and EC175 have Flight Envelope Protections built into the DAFCS. Even this did not stop one hitting the sea when the crew decided ( because they are allowed to) fly manually in the dark.
It's a very poor response to try and blame these accidents on the individuals alone. They are, for the most part, simply guilty of poor airmanship that leads to the accident. It is much more relevant and progressive to try to understand what processes, procedures and equipment could be deployed to prevent these accidents.
DB
DB, you are very right but sometimes it seems it is a lost battle. We are our worst enemy... 
I.i. & t.c. yes. You are also right, but don't say ther is nothing to be done...
Regards
I.i. & t.c. yes. You are also right, but don't say ther is nothing to be done...
Regards
DB: Thank you for your kind words.
I am trying very hard NOT to put emotion into this subject matter. My intention was to sort the wheat from the chaff. 111 pages of "just another accident" (which is what it is) seems an awful lot of froth to me. My emphasis is pointed at those who wish to wrap this in something it is not, that is all.
I most certainly have not, nor wish not to offend the crew that night, for we are all human and we all make mistakes. Like many before them - what they did was NOT intentional - sh*t happens. QED.
If my message is "off key" then I apologise, I will endeavour to be more humane in my delivery but the content of what I am stating - I stand by, wholeheartedly.
P3 - your sneyd PM was not welcome, keep your vitriol to yourself in future.
Let's please try and keep emotion out of this, can we?
ASER: What to do? Goodness, where does one start. Possibly one place might be to review SOP's, training and CRM? Human beings won't change over night, thus "human factors" will pretty much remain the same for centuries to come I suspect. We are definitely the "single point of failure" when it comes to aviation.
I am trying very hard NOT to put emotion into this subject matter. My intention was to sort the wheat from the chaff. 111 pages of "just another accident" (which is what it is) seems an awful lot of froth to me. My emphasis is pointed at those who wish to wrap this in something it is not, that is all.
I most certainly have not, nor wish not to offend the crew that night, for we are all human and we all make mistakes. Like many before them - what they did was NOT intentional - sh*t happens. QED.
If my message is "off key" then I apologise, I will endeavour to be more humane in my delivery but the content of what I am stating - I stand by, wholeheartedly.
P3 - your sneyd PM was not welcome, keep your vitriol to yourself in future.
Let's please try and keep emotion out of this, can we?
ASER: What to do? Goodness, where does one start. Possibly one place might be to review SOP's, training and CRM? Human beings won't change over night, thus "human factors" will pretty much remain the same for centuries to come I suspect. We are definitely the "single point of failure" when it comes to aviation.
TC,
Read back over your past dozen posts or so and you will see evidence that you have devoted scant effort in using a professional, polite, and appropriate tone in your posts.
Perhaps you might be able to do so in the future......as it is the right thing to do for any number of reasons.
Most important is your credibility which at this point suffers greatly due to the manner in which you have conducted yourself here.
Additionally, I would like to know just what your Bona Fides are that put you into the position to be the Judge of what others post...and decide for the rest of us what is Fluff, Froth, and other terms you use to describe others.
I thought about sending you a PM suggesting you mend your ways but decided against it as I felt it would probably do no good.
You understand perfectly well that any discussion of Private Messages is a Mortal Sin....and I would not be surprised to see Senior Pilot address that with you.....I certainly hope he does as it is warranted.
Simply put TC.....you come across as an officious, arrogant, obnoxious Prick and add less to the discussion they you detract with your repulsive manner.
In Jet Blast I use a technique I call "The Peanut Gallery" that allows me not to have to even see a post made by those who I promote to that not so illustrious group.
I have used that exactly once here at Rotorheads....but have decided it is appropriate in your case.
Congratulations.....you are now rear row, end seat in the Peanut Gallery.
Read back over your past dozen posts or so and you will see evidence that you have devoted scant effort in using a professional, polite, and appropriate tone in your posts.
Perhaps you might be able to do so in the future......as it is the right thing to do for any number of reasons.
Most important is your credibility which at this point suffers greatly due to the manner in which you have conducted yourself here.
Additionally, I would like to know just what your Bona Fides are that put you into the position to be the Judge of what others post...and decide for the rest of us what is Fluff, Froth, and other terms you use to describe others.
I thought about sending you a PM suggesting you mend your ways but decided against it as I felt it would probably do no good.
You understand perfectly well that any discussion of Private Messages is a Mortal Sin....and I would not be surprised to see Senior Pilot address that with you.....I certainly hope he does as it is warranted.
Simply put TC.....you come across as an officious, arrogant, obnoxious Prick and add less to the discussion they you detract with your repulsive manner.
In Jet Blast I use a technique I call "The Peanut Gallery" that allows me not to have to even see a post made by those who I promote to that not so illustrious group.
I have used that exactly once here at Rotorheads....but have decided it is appropriate in your case.
Congratulations.....you are now rear row, end seat in the Peanut Gallery.
So what became of the 'shields down' approach, SAS? Is the opinion - based, one would imagine on some experience - of TC worth less than that of someone who once operated in the North Sea but no longer?
Dig,
"Shields Down" does not connote unprofessional insulting posts will be accepted , tolerated or appreciated.
TC has crossed the line and got called out by many of us.....for the Tone and Spirit of his posts. No one has questioned his Professional background and experience, just his attitude and demeanor.
I did ask him just what authority he has to pass judgement on other's background, experience, training, and education that would allow him to call their posts "Fluff", "Froth" and similar names.
That is not questioning his background, etc. But it certainly challenges him to explain why he thought it proper to make the posts he has that are so objectionable.
Remember it was not me who called him a Tw@t!
If I decide his Tone destroys his credibility in my eyes...that is my business.
I made that decision and took my own private action to relieve me of seeing his posts.
"Shields Down" does not connote unprofessional insulting posts will be accepted , tolerated or appreciated.
TC has crossed the line and got called out by many of us.....for the Tone and Spirit of his posts. No one has questioned his Professional background and experience, just his attitude and demeanor.
I did ask him just what authority he has to pass judgement on other's background, experience, training, and education that would allow him to call their posts "Fluff", "Froth" and similar names.
That is not questioning his background, etc. But it certainly challenges him to explain why he thought it proper to make the posts he has that are so objectionable.
Remember it was not me who called him a Tw@t!
If I decide his Tone destroys his credibility in my eyes...that is my business.
I made that decision and took my own private action to relieve me of seeing his posts.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot Error = the end...
...I don't think so. At least I hope not, I hope that's not the end of our interest in this puzzling event. Whatever we think of TC's assertions it may in the end turn out to be - Pilot Error = the end of the story, which would make him right and he can wear any smugness he feels appropriate when and if that time comes. But I personally hope that we dig and dig, look and analyse until we have chewed over the accident in painful detail.
It has been pointed out by me and others that we do not operate in a vacuum. The processes we used are not made up on the hoof so we need to understand where what happened fits into those processes and if they were found to have contributed to the accident then we must block that hole in the Swiss cheese.
While we are at it we can look at the subject of automation in general and see if we have the design, use and training for automation 'right'.
I hope that will be one positive outcome from a tragic event.
G.
It has been pointed out by me and others that we do not operate in a vacuum. The processes we used are not made up on the hoof so we need to understand where what happened fits into those processes and if they were found to have contributed to the accident then we must block that hole in the Swiss cheese.
While we are at it we can look at the subject of automation in general and see if we have the design, use and training for automation 'right'.
I hope that will be one positive outcome from a tragic event.
G.
SASless, I respect that you have your opinion, and have exercised it accordingly. I will always remember the first time I turned and met the expectant gaze of those I had responsibility-for, and the enormous burden and expectation they placed upon my shoulders.
Dig,
It is a very long walk from the Ramp of a Chinook to the front seats....when it is filled with folks.....I know what you are talking about. I will have to admit I never really gave that much thought really....as I always felt if I got back to the Bar in the Evening.....they would as well.....which very much was my express goal and intent.....getting everyone home safe.
That thought in mind.....that is what is so confusing about this latest crash.
I am quite sure the Crew had that very mindset....as it follows they would just from the fact that is the way we all think or we would not get into the cockpit. At least my experience with Non-Muslims confirms that. We place our immediate faith in ourselves and our partner in the cockpit and not in the Almighty.
Until the AAIB issues that final report....having exhausted every line of inquiry....we have to be a bit careful about deciding what caused this tragedy.
We all have our opinions....but without being aware of all the facts, evidence, inspection results, interviews of the crew....we are just guessing.
It is a very long walk from the Ramp of a Chinook to the front seats....when it is filled with folks.....I know what you are talking about. I will have to admit I never really gave that much thought really....as I always felt if I got back to the Bar in the Evening.....they would as well.....which very much was my express goal and intent.....getting everyone home safe.
That thought in mind.....that is what is so confusing about this latest crash.
I am quite sure the Crew had that very mindset....as it follows they would just from the fact that is the way we all think or we would not get into the cockpit. At least my experience with Non-Muslims confirms that. We place our immediate faith in ourselves and our partner in the cockpit and not in the Almighty.
Until the AAIB issues that final report....having exhausted every line of inquiry....we have to be a bit careful about deciding what caused this tragedy.
We all have our opinions....but without being aware of all the facts, evidence, inspection results, interviews of the crew....we are just guessing.
Originally Posted by SASless
We all have our opinions....
If a pilot uses an inappropriate technique (not using IAS for example) for the situation, he has made an error of judgement or possibly a cognitive error - that appears to be what happened at the beginning of the approach and should not result in a fatal accident.
But, when the ramifications of that judgemental or cognitive error become apparent (aircraft deviating from flightpath), the real pilot error is not flying the aircraft first and foremost.
Failing to take the required corrective action in a worsening situation until it is far too late isn't a procedural, legislative or technical failure - it is pilot error, no matter how much of a nice chap he might be.
Sorry, but despite TCs failings as a 'pink and fluffy, keep everyone happy bunny'
I think he has called it correctly.
But, when the ramifications of that judgemental or cognitive error become apparent (aircraft deviating from flightpath), the real pilot error is not flying the aircraft first and foremost.
Failing to take the required corrective action in a worsening situation until it is far too late isn't a procedural, legislative or technical failure - it is pilot error, no matter how much of a nice chap he might be.
Sorry, but despite TCs failings as a 'pink and fluffy, keep everyone happy bunny'
I think he has called it correctly.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have mentioned previously my concern at the apparent lack of procedure in the effective monitoring (and inter-crew communication) of primary flight information and which, on the surface, seems incongruous with the duty of professional piloting.
We should remind ourselves however that this tragedy possesses one feature which most others do not - a living crew.
If this crew now wish to serve the wider aviation community then their honest testimony about the events which transpired that evening should go a long way in dismissing much of the speculation and which testimony will hopefully result in the illumination of some specific failure in their cockpit procedure from which everyone may learn.
Rational thought assumes that some distraction must have occupied both pilots for sufficient time to accommodate the attrition of airspeed to the point where it became critical but, until the crew's testimony is made public, we are left guessing - and which absence of information is naturally frustrating.
We should remind ourselves however that this tragedy possesses one feature which most others do not - a living crew.
If this crew now wish to serve the wider aviation community then their honest testimony about the events which transpired that evening should go a long way in dismissing much of the speculation and which testimony will hopefully result in the illumination of some specific failure in their cockpit procedure from which everyone may learn.
Rational thought assumes that some distraction must have occupied both pilots for sufficient time to accommodate the attrition of airspeed to the point where it became critical but, until the crew's testimony is made public, we are left guessing - and which absence of information is naturally frustrating.
Clearly the pilot(s) made a mistake. Big time. But the question is, why did they do that? In the bad old days it would have been "sack the pilots -we're OK now, the problem has gone away".
In these slightly more enlightened times, the reasons behind the error are looked at in the hope of finding out something that might help to prevent a recurrence - after all, it seems unlikely that the pilots did it deliberately or were in general incompetent.
Those who say "pilot error. End of." are incompetent to hold any role in flight safety, even if they may hold some (self) important elevated position in the military. Let's hope that when they join the civilian world, it is in their deserved position as a junior copilot, since a lot of attitude adjustment will be required.
In these slightly more enlightened times, the reasons behind the error are looked at in the hope of finding out something that might help to prevent a recurrence - after all, it seems unlikely that the pilots did it deliberately or were in general incompetent.
Those who say "pilot error. End of." are incompetent to hold any role in flight safety, even if they may hold some (self) important elevated position in the military. Let's hope that when they join the civilian world, it is in their deserved position as a junior copilot, since a lot of attitude adjustment will be required.
