Comair CRJ crash in Kentucky
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
of course ATC responsibility is the seperation of IFR aircraft...that was done.
BUT
there are secondary safety responsibilities...sadly the allocation of resources by the FAA for the last 25 years has been a little short of ideal in my mind.
no, we won't place blame on the controller, but wouldn't he be a hero now if he had saved the plane?
yes the PILOT in command is responsible. that's the regs, but certainly there will be some additional factors to consider and they will come out...wondering which pilot noticed the runway lights were not lit?
and THE LAWYERS ARE CHAMPING AT THE BITS. And I can see how comair will have to pay quite a bit, the FAA a little bit, the airport a little bit.
BUT
there are secondary safety responsibilities...sadly the allocation of resources by the FAA for the last 25 years has been a little short of ideal in my mind.
no, we won't place blame on the controller, but wouldn't he be a hero now if he had saved the plane?
yes the PILOT in command is responsible. that's the regs, but certainly there will be some additional factors to consider and they will come out...wondering which pilot noticed the runway lights were not lit?
and THE LAWYERS ARE CHAMPING AT THE BITS. And I can see how comair will have to pay quite a bit, the FAA a little bit, the airport a little bit.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Virginia, USA
Age: 74
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a 747-400 capt, I think there are way too many administrative requirements that can sometimes distract the operating crew from paying attention to what's going on outside the cockpit. While training new FOs during line ops, I've had to take all paperwork and the flight plan out of the hands of the FO during taxi-out sometimes and stored it on my own side compartment so the FO will focus on what's going on outside the cockpit. From writing down deadheading crewmember names, amendments to the release, block out fuel, etc.. and getting the "Off" message ready to send, the FOs are sometimes totally engrossed in the paperwork and not the operation. Time to put down the clipboard and pen, and look out the window and pay attention to what's going on. Let's get back to the fundamentals. The "Off" message can wait, so can writing down everything else, except perhaps the ATC clearance. And those places like Prestwick and Delhi, where we get the clearance while taxiing out for takeoff - I suggest those airports change the procedures and give us the clearance in the blocks prior to push.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with globally.
May I further suggest that the FAA allows controllers past mandatory retirement age to do paperwork while allowing the other controllers to look out the window.
perhaps one gets too old to be sharp at looking out the window, but paperwork is paperwork ande can be done over.
May I further suggest that the FAA allows controllers past mandatory retirement age to do paperwork while allowing the other controllers to look out the window.
perhaps one gets too old to be sharp at looking out the window, but paperwork is paperwork ande can be done over.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: 39N 77W
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find that the tower staffing level is one more example of the pressure to save money. Federal expenditures for Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc), Military spending and interest on the debt comprise most of the Budget. The modest fraction which is left gets squeezed. It pays for the FAA, NTSB, NOAA (Weather Service and aero charts), National Parks and the myriad other Federal activities. Yes, we pay fees for some of these activities, but the squeeze would be even tighter without them - and some fees aren't spent in order to make the budget look nearer balanced or just go into the General Fund.
So I expect reduced tower staffing is another example of saving money - as is the elimination of weather observers in some places.
So I expect reduced tower staffing is another example of saving money - as is the elimination of weather observers in some places.
Originally posted by jondc9
Probably not, as the event would never have made the media. Controller "saves" occur reasonably often and tend to remain low key. Eg spotting in time someone with the gear up; a hatch open, unusual vapour/smoke, taxiing the wrong way etc.
I try to learn from these horrible events to sharpen my game up. Others I know do, too.
The best incident is the one you can do something to prevent happening, if you perceive its' imminence.
no, we won't place blame on the controller, but wouldn't he be a hero now if he had saved the plane?
I try to learn from these horrible events to sharpen my game up. Others I know do, too.
The best incident is the one you can do something to prevent happening, if you perceive its' imminence.
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jon … you are not being fair to the ATC!
.
… think about what we know from the NTSB so far
.
- dark/early light
- Taxiways and Runway 22 lit
- Crossing runway not lit
- Controller and pilots referred to runway 22 in transmissions
- Controller observed aircraft taxiing towards the departure runway (22)
- Two crew commercial jet
- No other applicable traffic
.
.. are you saying the ATC should have considered it even remotely possible that this aircraft might use an un-notified, unlit and unsuitable crossing runway in the dark ….. .
.
I for one could quite easily have made the same deductions as the duty ATC and assumed (in any logical sense of the word) I could attend to other duties as there was nothing ‘sensibly’ to go wrong …. I dare say many others would have too!!
.
… prioritising tasks is what we do … do we stop doing everything else just in case?? . .. how many aircraft do you think the system would move then??? … would you be up in arms about delays
.
…. how many eyes is enough? … would it have made any difference in this case .. we will never know!!
.
.. you cannot have it both ways!!!
.
… please stop attempting to apportion veiled blame towards the unfortunate ATC!
… there is much riding on this for the individual concerned ……… IMHO it was not their fault! 
.
… think about what we know from the NTSB so far
.
- dark/early light
- Taxiways and Runway 22 lit
- Crossing runway not lit
- Controller and pilots referred to runway 22 in transmissions
- Controller observed aircraft taxiing towards the departure runway (22)
- Two crew commercial jet
- No other applicable traffic
.
.. are you saying the ATC should have considered it even remotely possible that this aircraft might use an un-notified, unlit and unsuitable crossing runway in the dark ….. .
.
I for one could quite easily have made the same deductions as the duty ATC and assumed (in any logical sense of the word) I could attend to other duties as there was nothing ‘sensibly’ to go wrong …. I dare say many others would have too!!
.
… prioritising tasks is what we do … do we stop doing everything else just in case?? . .. how many aircraft do you think the system would move then??? … would you be up in arms about delays
.
…. how many eyes is enough? … would it have made any difference in this case .. we will never know!!
.
.. you cannot have it both ways!!!
.
… please stop attempting to apportion veiled blame towards the unfortunate ATC!
… there is much riding on this for the individual concerned ……… IMHO it was not their fault!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: US
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Amidst the dust and the flies, somewhere in Western Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am an old man, 2 years out of the seat, but still flying for fun quite happily and safely, and still sharp and fresh as I was 20 years ago. Age wearies not the mind!!
Regards
DA1-11
Check 6
A chapter/page reference would be useful, please.
Quite a meaty doc. to read through, and appears no more intuitively organised than the manual I have to use.
A chapter/page reference would be useful, please.
Quite a meaty doc. to read through, and appears no more intuitively organised than the manual I have to use.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Totally agree with Globally... administrative duties while taxying out should be kept to a minimum.
But I also blame airports such as KORD (Chicago O'Hare) for contributing to an unnecessarily high workload because they don't issue your departure runway until you are with "metering" control, engines running and ready to taxi. The ATIS offers numerous departure runways, and if you guess wrong, now take-off data has all got to be re-calculated. If you don't start taxying immediately, expect to get flack from ATC.
Frequently during the 737 Classic days, I've seen the FO heads down with runway analysis manuals out while I've been steering the old beast around a taxi route I wasn't expecting. Sometimes I wouldn't start taxying until we got things somewhat organized. It's no better with the Airbus technology ... departure runway to change, new performance data required, briefings to give, etc.
ATC must have an idea what runway we are to expect well before we start to taxi ... why not let us in on the secret?
But I also blame airports such as KORD (Chicago O'Hare) for contributing to an unnecessarily high workload because they don't issue your departure runway until you are with "metering" control, engines running and ready to taxi. The ATIS offers numerous departure runways, and if you guess wrong, now take-off data has all got to be re-calculated. If you don't start taxying immediately, expect to get flack from ATC.
Frequently during the 737 Classic days, I've seen the FO heads down with runway analysis manuals out while I've been steering the old beast around a taxi route I wasn't expecting. Sometimes I wouldn't start taxying until we got things somewhat organized. It's no better with the Airbus technology ... departure runway to change, new performance data required, briefings to give, etc.
ATC must have an idea what runway we are to expect well before we start to taxi ... why not let us in on the secret?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Timbukthree
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deductive reasoning works to a point. Lets try reductive reasoning. If the
airport was unattended, would the crash still occur?
If there were two controllers on duty, and one controller was on a break at the time, would the crash still have occurred?
If all the runway lights on all runways were illuminated at the time, (as in ARCAL) would the same runway have been used for take-off?
The controller's inaction may be a contributory cause, but imagine a traffic cop directing cars through an intersection during a low traffic period. He/She waves a car through the intersection, turns to look at the other on-coming lanes, not seeing the car previously directed take a turn down the wrong way on a one-way street.
If the aircraft had been an old 727 with a third set of eyes in the cockpit AKA The Flight Engineer, would they have departed on the same runway?
Years ago at Tenerife, the CVR recorded the voice of an FE saying that
he thought another 747 was still on the runway as his aircraft rolled for take-off..
Still pondering? So am I..
airport was unattended, would the crash still occur?
If there were two controllers on duty, and one controller was on a break at the time, would the crash still have occurred?
If all the runway lights on all runways were illuminated at the time, (as in ARCAL) would the same runway have been used for take-off?
The controller's inaction may be a contributory cause, but imagine a traffic cop directing cars through an intersection during a low traffic period. He/She waves a car through the intersection, turns to look at the other on-coming lanes, not seeing the car previously directed take a turn down the wrong way on a one-way street.
If the aircraft had been an old 727 with a third set of eyes in the cockpit AKA The Flight Engineer, would they have departed on the same runway?
Years ago at Tenerife, the CVR recorded the voice of an FE saying that
he thought another 747 was still on the runway as his aircraft rolled for take-off..
Still pondering? So am I..
Comair Controller Slept Only 2 Hours
From LA Times
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5232856.story
If that's how ATCOs are scheduled, it's totally up to the pilots to look out for themselves -- to say nothing of the danger the ATCO will pose to himself and the public when driving home
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,5232856.story
By JEFFREY McMURRAY, Associated Press Writer
7:30 PM PDT, August 30, 2006
LEXINGTON, Ky. -- The lone air traffic controller on duty the morning Comair Flight 5191 crashed had only two hours of sleep before starting work on the overnight shift, a federal investigator said Wednesday.
National Transportation Safety Board member Debbie Hersman said the controller had only nine hours off between work shifts Saturday. That was just enough to meet federal rules, which require a minimum of eight hours off between shifts, Hersman said.
The controller, whose name has not been released publicly, worked from 6:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on Saturday. He came back to work at 11:30 p.m. on the same day to begin an eight-hour overnight shift.
7:30 PM PDT, August 30, 2006
LEXINGTON, Ky. -- The lone air traffic controller on duty the morning Comair Flight 5191 crashed had only two hours of sleep before starting work on the overnight shift, a federal investigator said Wednesday.
National Transportation Safety Board member Debbie Hersman said the controller had only nine hours off between work shifts Saturday. That was just enough to meet federal rules, which require a minimum of eight hours off between shifts, Hersman said.
The controller, whose name has not been released publicly, worked from 6:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. on Saturday. He came back to work at 11:30 p.m. on the same day to begin an eight-hour overnight shift.
Last edited by RatherBeFlying; 31st Aug 2006 at 03:02. Reason: spelling
Join Date: May 2000
Location: US
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, I should have mentioned that I could not find any such requirement. You can use the adobe pdb search function using "takeoff clearance."
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
From this evening's NTSB briefing, revised numbers for the takeoff data:
Vr - 138 knots
Distance to begin nosewheel rotation - 3744 feet
Ms. Hersman said the earlier numbers were for a more powerful engine version. Is the aircraft indeed a CRJ-100, not a CRJ-200? I've seen references to both in the media coverage.
Vr - 138 knots
Distance to begin nosewheel rotation - 3744 feet
Ms. Hersman said the earlier numbers were for a more powerful engine version. Is the aircraft indeed a CRJ-100, not a CRJ-200? I've seen references to both in the media coverage.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North of the border
Age: 61
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks,
The distraction here is that there was an ATC presence. Had this been an uncontrolled airport, the Pilot would announce on Unicom his intentions, then presumably takeoff on the runway that he stated.
6 O'Clock in the morning, zero traffic, this place appears to be one step above an uncontrolled airport as there was the presence of ATC.
In any event, all concerned apparently believed that the runway that was going to be used was 22.
That 26 was used instead is not the fault of the controller, perhaps it's the fault of the "system". If one "knows" one is departing an uncontrolled airport, one acts as his own ATC. Perhaps, when ATC is present, one may let their guard down expecting any errors to be pointed out.
It is MY totally unqualified opinion that the only person responsible for your safety is yourself. If you believe that the guy in the tower is going to see any error you may make and correct you (thus saving your life), you are in for a big surprise at a probably unfortunate time.
A billion years ago, right seat in a 727 on a maintenance run in MIA, we were cleared to cross the runway to the military area. Kid in the left seat throttles up to go when I look out the right side and see a really BIG DC-8 landing.
I pull the throttles back and hit the brakes. Kid on the left starts to complain as we see the Diesel 8 land in front of us.
Maybe ATC figured we would look first and wait. Maybe not, never know. I don't know what I'm saying except that it appears to me that these guys just took the worst kind of wrong turn.
PB
The distraction here is that there was an ATC presence. Had this been an uncontrolled airport, the Pilot would announce on Unicom his intentions, then presumably takeoff on the runway that he stated.
6 O'Clock in the morning, zero traffic, this place appears to be one step above an uncontrolled airport as there was the presence of ATC.
In any event, all concerned apparently believed that the runway that was going to be used was 22.
That 26 was used instead is not the fault of the controller, perhaps it's the fault of the "system". If one "knows" one is departing an uncontrolled airport, one acts as his own ATC. Perhaps, when ATC is present, one may let their guard down expecting any errors to be pointed out.
It is MY totally unqualified opinion that the only person responsible for your safety is yourself. If you believe that the guy in the tower is going to see any error you may make and correct you (thus saving your life), you are in for a big surprise at a probably unfortunate time.
A billion years ago, right seat in a 727 on a maintenance run in MIA, we were cleared to cross the runway to the military area. Kid in the left seat throttles up to go when I look out the right side and see a really BIG DC-8 landing.
I pull the throttles back and hit the brakes. Kid on the left starts to complain as we see the Diesel 8 land in front of us.
Maybe ATC figured we would look first and wait. Maybe not, never know. I don't know what I'm saying except that it appears to me that these guys just took the worst kind of wrong turn.
PB
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The Heart of Darkness
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never in the Field of Aviation Has So Much Been Written By So Many About So Few.
The A/c was in no great pressure to line up and take off... something I've noticed many a time in the States is a tendancy for atc to be fast and slick pressruizing crews to get on to the runway and go go go... This was not the case here. Whatever the distractions in the cockpit the crew had the luxuary to do things in their own time... A simple check on the DI beforen applying power...something taught from day 1 in flight training should have caught the attention of the crew.
I've noticed that some pretty basic items like this are now left out of modern check-lists in the dubious drive to use 'flow' checks and keep the list short... I'm awaiting the first check-list to dispense with 'Gear-Down and Locked'...after all... it's such an obvious item... isn't it ?
The A/c was in no great pressure to line up and take off... something I've noticed many a time in the States is a tendancy for atc to be fast and slick pressruizing crews to get on to the runway and go go go... This was not the case here. Whatever the distractions in the cockpit the crew had the luxuary to do things in their own time... A simple check on the DI beforen applying power...something taught from day 1 in flight training should have caught the attention of the crew.
I've noticed that some pretty basic items like this are now left out of modern check-lists in the dubious drive to use 'flow' checks and keep the list short... I'm awaiting the first check-list to dispense with 'Gear-Down and Locked'...after all... it's such an obvious item... isn't it ?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Amidst the dust and the flies, somewhere in Western Australia
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plastic Bug. . . . . nail on the head sir. It is indeed ultimately one's own responsibility when it comes to matters such, the prospect of external assistance, as welcome as it undoubtedly would be, should NEVER dimininsh one's own responibility to self.
Regards
DA1-11
Regards
DA1-11