Egyptair 990
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could the pilot have been hypnotised? I always thought that you couldn't be hypnotised into doing something that would really harm yourself then I found this on the web...
Quote:
A classic study which illustrated how far individuals would go in hypnotic responses to contrived hypnotic situations was Lloyd W. Rowland, "Will Hypnotized Persons Try To Harm Themselves or Others?", Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 34(1939):114-117. This study is described in William Corliss' The Unfathomed Mind: A Handbook of Unusual Mental Phenomena, pp. 120-123. This study showed subjects sticking their hands into boxes with what they presumably believed were live rattlesnakes, and throwing concentrated acid into what they presumably believed was the unprotected face of another person.
End Quote:
Would hypnosis explain why he shut off the engines? What I mean is... most non-pilots (eg the Hypnotist) believe that to crash the plane you shut off the engines, where as increasing power is probably more effective.
That research article is dated 1939. It would be interesting to know if it's has been repeated more recently.
Quote:
A classic study which illustrated how far individuals would go in hypnotic responses to contrived hypnotic situations was Lloyd W. Rowland, "Will Hypnotized Persons Try To Harm Themselves or Others?", Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 34(1939):114-117. This study is described in William Corliss' The Unfathomed Mind: A Handbook of Unusual Mental Phenomena, pp. 120-123. This study showed subjects sticking their hands into boxes with what they presumably believed were live rattlesnakes, and throwing concentrated acid into what they presumably believed was the unprotected face of another person.
End Quote:
Would hypnosis explain why he shut off the engines? What I mean is... most non-pilots (eg the Hypnotist) believe that to crash the plane you shut off the engines, where as increasing power is probably more effective.
That research article is dated 1939. It would be interesting to know if it's has been repeated more recently.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Perth, W.A.
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Casper got it in one. This is really nothing to do with Egypt Air or Egyptians, but it is certainly all to do with Arabic culture. It is insulting for an arab to lose "face". Had the same problem last year in Saudi F&*k%$G Arabia. We had an absolutely miserable time working with people who were totally and completely ignorant of what were were actually doing their, but we had to play the game to stop these ignorant fools losing face.
Same culture in Asian countries. Look at some of the accidents that China Air and Korean Air have had and the causes behind them, it is often that junior pilots simply will not draw attention to the Captains error or a problem that the Captain didn't notice because to do so would cause the captain to lose face.
Basically I do my best to avoid airlines which have pilots from countries with these cultures. As for Emirates, I think that you may have a different outcome as most of the pilots are westerners as are a lot of the management. I think that they would take the Singapore Airlines example after the SQ005 accident in Taipei. Basically they admitted the error, settled and got on with making money. For something a lot more interesting, lets see what happens with Qatar Airways when the inevitable happens, it will be the biggest coverup of all time.
In short, would you seriously consider flying with Egypt Air?
RMA
Same culture in Asian countries. Look at some of the accidents that China Air and Korean Air have had and the causes behind them, it is often that junior pilots simply will not draw attention to the Captains error or a problem that the Captain didn't notice because to do so would cause the captain to lose face.
Basically I do my best to avoid airlines which have pilots from countries with these cultures. As for Emirates, I think that you may have a different outcome as most of the pilots are westerners as are a lot of the management. I think that they would take the Singapore Airlines example after the SQ005 accident in Taipei. Basically they admitted the error, settled and got on with making money. For something a lot more interesting, lets see what happens with Qatar Airways when the inevitable happens, it will be the biggest coverup of all time.
In short, would you seriously consider flying with Egypt Air?
RMA
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dumbledore, I see your point. However do you choose a carrier by who is more likely to "cause" an investigation, or who is likely to have a "more open" investigation?
You are correct, as is the post after your last one, that any Arab carrier will sit on the truth. As they say...... "Denial" is not just a big river in Egypt!!! It's a way of life in the ME.
Would EK be open about an accident? Only as much as they were forced to be, and yes, they would be looking at getting back into profit mode asap. Damage control, and returning to profit as quickly as possible, are perfectly sound business practices: any airline would try to do that. The difference is the level of cooperation with the authorities. If EK had an accident within the UAE you would see the biggest cover up of all time; the aviation authority here would do anything up to bulldozing sand over the crash site and saying "what accident?" if it helped EK. (exagerating to make the point) If it happened on western turf you would see a whole different response. I just hope we don't get to find out! EK is not perfect, but it does try pretty hard (from within) to keep the operation safe and efficient. But when you own the bat, the ball, the umpire and the ball park, it must be tempting to play with the rules a little?!
Happy flying
You are correct, as is the post after your last one, that any Arab carrier will sit on the truth. As they say...... "Denial" is not just a big river in Egypt!!! It's a way of life in the ME.
Would EK be open about an accident? Only as much as they were forced to be, and yes, they would be looking at getting back into profit mode asap. Damage control, and returning to profit as quickly as possible, are perfectly sound business practices: any airline would try to do that. The difference is the level of cooperation with the authorities. If EK had an accident within the UAE you would see the biggest cover up of all time; the aviation authority here would do anything up to bulldozing sand over the crash site and saying "what accident?" if it helped EK. (exagerating to make the point) If it happened on western turf you would see a whole different response. I just hope we don't get to find out! EK is not perfect, but it does try pretty hard (from within) to keep the operation safe and efficient. But when you own the bat, the ball, the umpire and the ball park, it must be tempting to play with the rules a little?!
Happy flying
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember that GA Airbus flight that went off the end of the runway in Abu Dhabi in 1996 (or 1997). The local newspaper had it on the front page with the GA logo airbrushed out.
I never saw the reason. I suspect it was an ATC fault as Airbus didn't ground anything and the pilot (who was kept under armed guard in hospital in case he tried to 'escape') wasn't charged with anything.
I never saw the reason. I suspect it was an ATC fault as Airbus didn't ground anything and the pilot (who was kept under armed guard in hospital in case he tried to 'escape') wasn't charged with anything.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 3rd World
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, as Dumbledore and Casper have noted, it is all a matter of face, and by no means limited to the Arab culture.
Other posters have mentioned Silk Air 185, and remember how SQ immediately and instinctively tried to dodge blame for the SQ006 crash at Taipei.
Also, anyone who has read the efforts of investigators trying to get to the bottom of the Vietnam Airlines crash in Nha Trang in the 1990s will know to what lengths these people will go to save face.
Then consider: just how many governments in the world would you trust to put the truth, no matter how much it hurts, ahead of prestige and, particularly, face?
Not many, I think, and those of you who happen to live in one of them are privileged indeed.
Other posters have mentioned Silk Air 185, and remember how SQ immediately and instinctively tried to dodge blame for the SQ006 crash at Taipei.
Also, anyone who has read the efforts of investigators trying to get to the bottom of the Vietnam Airlines crash in Nha Trang in the 1990s will know to what lengths these people will go to save face.
Then consider: just how many governments in the world would you trust to put the truth, no matter how much it hurts, ahead of prestige and, particularly, face?
Not many, I think, and those of you who happen to live in one of them are privileged indeed.
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about airlines refusing insurance write offs to avoid having a hull loss on their record. I could name two airlines right now that shelled out mega bucks to do just that. One was a L1011 and the other, more recent was a B744. Neither airline is Arabic.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Truthfulness in Western Airlines after an incident
Just seen this thread..
and this post:
"I never said that the airplanes that went into the WTC were Arab owned. The issue is what happens when you fly on an Arab carrier and something goes wrong.......do you get the truth? no!
The point in my posting was that, if given the choice, passengers flying to Arab or third world countries should chose for western carriers. At least, if something goes wrong, they can rely on truthful investigation".
er..in my own very small experience I remember the Airtours 767 departing from the Canaries which (after a Monarch mechanic had left a very large torch in a wing inspection compartment) found itself unable to turn left. After a wings vertical moment or two when both pilots tried the breakout procedure (didn't work. no-one explained why), they continued back to Manchester (no left turns on the way).
Airtours sat heavily on the incident, which they (after the press got wind of it) decribed as a minor malfunction ably handled by the crew. I could never find any signs of an investigation, or an incident report, or any attempts by a seemingly inert CAA to pass on useful information to other users.
In the end the captain (Ray Cockerton) went to a national broadsheet and it waas given half a page of shock/horror..and then....nothing happened as far as I know.
In a responsible airline everyone would have learned a lot from the whole thing. In the air force, the incident report would have been an inch thick and still be being read in crewrooms.
are there any , um, middle-eastern aspects to any of this ?
and this post:
"I never said that the airplanes that went into the WTC were Arab owned. The issue is what happens when you fly on an Arab carrier and something goes wrong.......do you get the truth? no!
The point in my posting was that, if given the choice, passengers flying to Arab or third world countries should chose for western carriers. At least, if something goes wrong, they can rely on truthful investigation".
er..in my own very small experience I remember the Airtours 767 departing from the Canaries which (after a Monarch mechanic had left a very large torch in a wing inspection compartment) found itself unable to turn left. After a wings vertical moment or two when both pilots tried the breakout procedure (didn't work. no-one explained why), they continued back to Manchester (no left turns on the way).
Airtours sat heavily on the incident, which they (after the press got wind of it) decribed as a minor malfunction ably handled by the crew. I could never find any signs of an investigation, or an incident report, or any attempts by a seemingly inert CAA to pass on useful information to other users.
In the end the captain (Ray Cockerton) went to a national broadsheet and it waas given half a page of shock/horror..and then....nothing happened as far as I know.
In a responsible airline everyone would have learned a lot from the whole thing. In the air force, the incident report would have been an inch thick and still be being read in crewrooms.
are there any , um, middle-eastern aspects to any of this ?
Last edited by waketurb; 10th Jan 2004 at 21:04.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Feltham, UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone is suggesting that yukky stuff doesn't ever happen on western airlines. I have personal knowlege of far more incidents and cover-ups on a UK carrier than any ME one, yet I can fully understand the difference between a cultural tendancy and oportunistic endeavers of some western individuals and organisations.
Nobody should be talking in absolutes, just as isolated examples are not going to prove a general case. Cultural tendancies will tend to influence, they will not make every incident predictable. I am worried that so many people have already decided that they will never hear the truth about the Flash 737. I certainly agree that we are less likely to either hear the truth or have some people accept it, but I wouldn't rule either out so conclusively.
Nobody should be talking in absolutes, just as isolated examples are not going to prove a general case. Cultural tendancies will tend to influence, they will not make every incident predictable. I am worried that so many people have already decided that they will never hear the truth about the Flash 737. I certainly agree that we are less likely to either hear the truth or have some people accept it, but I wouldn't rule either out so conclusively.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cover ups
Tony_EM
thanks for that. could you or someone start a great cover-ups thread ? amazing what does get covered up.
For exactly the opposite approach, I occasionally used to get to see the Cathay flight safety publication. They publish in great detail every incident..and accept any bad publicity as the cost of truly promoting flight safety in their airline. Best I´ve ever seen.
thanks for that. could you or someone start a great cover-ups thread ? amazing what does get covered up.
For exactly the opposite approach, I occasionally used to get to see the Cathay flight safety publication. They publish in great detail every incident..and accept any bad publicity as the cost of truly promoting flight safety in their airline. Best I´ve ever seen.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Feltham, UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Waketurb, as tantalising as that prospect sounds, I doubt the mods here would relish the prospect of more libel than you could shake a stick at.
Having said that, a quick search of my posts should reveal all that I am prepared to say about BD and Aviance in public, which constitutes everything I have proof of, but certainly not everything I suspect or know yet do not have proof of. Since I do not use an alias or conceal my identity from those I accuse/criticise, I feel obliged to follow the rules of this site and law in general. I'm sure there are others that won't, so be careful what you wish for.
There is of course a subtle difference in actually 'covering up' and putting a good 'spin' on things. Anyone who works in this industry knows that any management claim of "Safety is No 1" is basically missing the out the qualifying part; "...as long as it is cost effective in the long run". Does that mean that they are covering up the fact that safety is not as good as it could be in every respect?
The generalisation that we won't ever hear the truth from the ME/E cultures is as misleading as the assumption that we will always hear the truth from our erstewhile management/government in the west. The subtleties lie in how good the respective cultures are at convincing their own people. We may not believe what they claim, and they probably trust our claims to the same extent. It gets interesting when you solicit comment from each culture about their own respective management/government claims.
Since the M/E airline market is mostly from the M/E, they only have to fool some of the people all of the time. I doubt they give a toss what we think about the truth or their version of it.
As you point out, the exceptions are to be applauded and encouraged. I have to say that BA's QAR system is above and beyond the call of duty, regarding costs as well as personal sacrifice (in terms of privacy) from the pilots. Then again, they aren't making the information it gathers public. So is that a cover-up?
Having said that, a quick search of my posts should reveal all that I am prepared to say about BD and Aviance in public, which constitutes everything I have proof of, but certainly not everything I suspect or know yet do not have proof of. Since I do not use an alias or conceal my identity from those I accuse/criticise, I feel obliged to follow the rules of this site and law in general. I'm sure there are others that won't, so be careful what you wish for.
There is of course a subtle difference in actually 'covering up' and putting a good 'spin' on things. Anyone who works in this industry knows that any management claim of "Safety is No 1" is basically missing the out the qualifying part; "...as long as it is cost effective in the long run". Does that mean that they are covering up the fact that safety is not as good as it could be in every respect?
The generalisation that we won't ever hear the truth from the ME/E cultures is as misleading as the assumption that we will always hear the truth from our erstewhile management/government in the west. The subtleties lie in how good the respective cultures are at convincing their own people. We may not believe what they claim, and they probably trust our claims to the same extent. It gets interesting when you solicit comment from each culture about their own respective management/government claims.
Since the M/E airline market is mostly from the M/E, they only have to fool some of the people all of the time. I doubt they give a toss what we think about the truth or their version of it.
As you point out, the exceptions are to be applauded and encouraged. I have to say that BA's QAR system is above and beyond the call of duty, regarding costs as well as personal sacrifice (in terms of privacy) from the pilots. Then again, they aren't making the information it gathers public. So is that a cover-up?
