Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Comair CRJ crash in Kentucky

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Comair CRJ crash in Kentucky

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 31st Aug 2006, 16:36
  #281 (permalink)  
PPRuNe supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All the tools and visual clues were present (or absent) to have avoided this terrible occurrence
Dave, try flying 100 hours a month, a gross error check for what, in your perfect world, maybe just prior to each departure maybe I should check with the tower to make sure I am on the proper runway, just to be sure. Pilots don't generally end up on the wrong runway because they are confused, they are usually sure of where they are- except for whatever reason they have made an error, we must try to understand why they made these errors and try to correct them.

D.L.
Dream Land is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 18:11
  #282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RevMan2
The runway width should have been a heads-up for the crew - at 75ft (compared with 150ft for 22), it was only barely wider than the wingspan of the aircraft.
If you check the airport via google earth, you will see both runways are actually 150ft wide. The charts depict 26 at 75 ft wide since that is what is considered usable. This pepiction is yet another minor factor in the lethal equation.

But anyone who has flown the line for a while has begun a preflight on the wrong airplane. Maintenance moves airplane, ground crews move airplanes due to gate needs, aiport info is incorrect, etc. The point is not that they began preflighting the wrong airplane but more important with the emphasis on on-time departures, possibly :10 was lost and this created additional time pressures.

Of note is the fact that this was, to the crew, just another day at the office. The F/O was flying indicating to me a normal leg-swap was in place. Had there been any red-flags, the Capt would have probably taken the leg.

Reliability is a two edge sword. After you have done task A 10,000 times, it is hard to keep the 'wow' factor and the edge sharp for the 10,001th time. Not the way it is supposed to be, I know, but reality is... how many guys with glass have their paper charts out per SOPs?

Also, does anyone know.. isn't 22 a crowned runway sort of like ROA where you can't see the end of the runway due to the hump? Another possible factor..
wileydog3 is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 18:55
  #283 (permalink)  
Final 3 Greens
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wileydog3

Reliability is a two edge sword. After you have done task A 10,000 times, it is hard to keep the 'wow' factor and the edge sharp for the 10,001th time.

This is a profound insight, in any profession.
 
Old 31st Aug 2006, 19:14
  #284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: below the sky
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Runway lighting?

One of the things that doesn’t add up to me about this accident is the repeated statements that runway 26 lighting was inoperative.

Would any professional pilot line up and roll on an unlit runway before dawn without any question to the tower like “where are the runway lights?”

Can anybody say it’s a fact that the runway edge lights were not switched on?

It’s rumoured that a comment was made during the take off run, by one of the pilots
That “the runway lights were out”!
Was this made when the aircraft ran out of runway? So there could be no more lights!
I wonder………
nooluv is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 19:38
  #285 (permalink)  

Not available in stores.
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Eye of the Storm
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can anybody say it’s a fact that the runway edge lights were not switched on?
nooluv, if you go back to post #140 and peruse a dozen or so following posts (notably #152), you'll see this was confirmed by the NTSB in a briefing a couple of days ago. Lights on 26 had been inop for a few years.
HowlingWind is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 19:54
  #286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Durban
Age: 44
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sobelena
Whilst not detracting from the sentiments you express SpringbokCaptain, for those not in the know, I would venture to suppose that you work for Comair, South Africa, an entirely different airline to the U.S. Comair.
No actually, while i call South Africa my home, i am still a Captain for Comair the Delta Connection. Entirely the only airline relevant to my quote. That is besides the point anyway.
SpringbokCapt is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 20:02
  #287 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1) Weren't the runway lights on 22 off (failed) when the pilots arrived at LEX? I thought I saw an earlier post/news item saying exactly that.
Reflex... "oh, they still haven't fixed the lights"....
2) Looking at the airport diagrams and photos from the air, I had the impression that when taxying and lining up for take-off on either 22 or 26, the actual runway numbers (those painted on the runway, not the ICAO markers) would have been BEHIND them, so they would never have seen the actual runway numbers.
Please shoot me down if I'm wrong... it looked obvious to me, but nobody seems to have picked up on it.
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 20:03
  #288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: below the sky
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So Howling Wind back to my question?

Would any professional pilot line up and roll on an unlit runway before dawn without any question to the tower like “where are the runway lights?”
nooluv is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 20:16
  #289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Final 3 Greens
Wileydog3
Reliability is a two edge sword. After you have done task A 10,000 times, it is hard to keep the 'wow' factor and the edge sharp for the 10,001th time.
This is a profound insight, in any profession.
In a way, it's a corollary to "Flying is 99% boredom and 1% terror".... (Ernest Gann? No I think it's older than that.)
THIS time may be the occasion that your number is up and all your skills will be called upon.
Staying aware that THIS time may be ANY time, is what I call true professionalism.
ChristiaanJ is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 20:45
  #290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1) Weren't the runway lights on 22 off (failed) when the pilots arrived at LEX? I thought I saw an earlier post/news item saying exactly that.
Reflex... "oh, they still haven't fixed the lights"....
I also recall reading that and thinking something similar ..... I suspect the CVR will have a major input into the investigation
hobie is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 21:23
  #291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Canada
Age: 82
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Regarding runway lights, in Canada takeoff is prohibited at night if runway is not lit. I believe "day" begins at morning civil twilight (sunrise - 30 mins??). This may be dated info, been retired for 5 years but T/O in the dark with no lights was always a no-no. Have endured numerous delays for U/S runway lights on early morning departures in the winter.

Should this not have alerted the crew?
Idle Thrust is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 21:23
  #292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ChristiaanJ
In a way, it's a corollary to "Flying is 99% boredom and 1% terror".... (Ernest Gann? No I think it's older than that.)
THIS time may be the occasion that your number is up and all your skills will be called upon.
Staying aware that THIS time may be ANY time, is what I call true professionalism.
A borg may be aware any time but humans are not... a fallacy in the basic design of the Mk1 Human which is flexible but prone to error.

The truth is, IMHO, this is just another aircrew.. nothing deficient, nothing extraordinary. This is not to demean the crew by any measure. But with a photoshop, we could probably put our faces on these guys.. they are US.

And for the next x weeks, the savvy aviators will have a heightened awareness. It is not too different from the gazelles on the savannah. After the 'lion' takes one, everyone is acutely aware but after a period of time, the edge wears off and things settle down.. until the next gazelle falls prey to the hunter. (a paraphrase to Gann again)
wileydog3 is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2006, 22:42
  #293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lights were inoperative on RW26

Hard to understand or explain why that would'nt have made the hair on their necks stand up but ATIS stated RW22 centerline lights inoperative. When 5191 lined up on RW26, it's possible they confused the NOTAM to be RW22 lights inop.
Cross-eyed is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 01:46
  #294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: LA
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2 hours sleep

Just reported that the controller worked the night shift then came back to work the overnight with 2 hours sleep. Not blaming the controller at all-Pic has final authority. I wonder how much sleep the crew had. When people are fatigued they don't realize it and how much your affected. Like what was stated before accidents are always a chain of events. so you've got the factor of changed taxiway signage not mentioned in notams-understaffed tower-I've lost a good friend flying a double shift (weather also a factor). It's just sad to see. When the final report comes out the only positive thing is that others can learn from the mistakes and stay safe.
emailme is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 03:00
  #295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: long island
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question for the pros. Would the fact that the crew had begun to preflight the wrong aircraft until corrected by ramp persnnel, in and of itself, if nothing more had transpired, have been enough to subject them to any kind of action by the airline?

It occurred to me that IF they were concerned about the possible repurcussions from the initial mistake, their concentration and judgement could have been affected by this worry.

Last edited by finfly1; 1st Sep 2006 at 04:36.
finfly1 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 03:10
  #296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: US
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by finfly1
Question for the pros. Would the fact that the crew had begun to preflight the wrong aircraft until corrected by ramp persnnel, in and of itself, if nothing more had transpired, have been enough to subject them to any kind of action by the airline?
It occurred to me that IF they were concerned about the possible repurcussions from the initial mistake, their concentration and judgement could have been affected by this worry.
Finfly, this is a NON-ISSUE. This is a somewhat common event, in that a crew is told by dispatch that their assigned aircraft is at "Gate X." They go to "Gate X" and enter that aircraft and learn soon enough that their gate assignment has changed to "Gate Y."
Have you never approached the wrong car in a parking lot (car park)?

Let the professionals figure this out, i.e. NTSB.

Last edited by Check 6; 1st Sep 2006 at 04:14.
Check 6 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 08:15
  #297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: York
Age: 41
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dream Land
Dave, try flying 100 hours a month, a gross error check for what, in your perfect world, maybe just prior to each departure maybe I should check with the tower to make sure I am on the proper runway, just to be sure. Pilots don't generally end up on the wrong runway because they are confused, they are usually sure of where they are- except for whatever reason they have made an error, we must try to understand why they made these errors and try to correct them.

D.L.
I agree, but i think the point that dave is trying to get across is that surely it doesn't take too long just to glance at your compass to ensure you are indeed on the right runway.

I do it when ever i fly, granted its not an airliner etc, but the fundamental principles are the same... just take a 2 second glance.
ZH-127 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 08:22
  #298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: York
Age: 41
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Final 3 Greens
Wileydog3

Reliability is a two edge sword. After you have done task A 10,000 times, it is hard to keep the 'wow' factor and the edge sharp for the 10,001th time.

This is a profound insight, in any profession.
Is indeed a profound insight, however it just doesnt bear true.

In my job, i've performed the same tasks thousands of thousands of times, each time just as proper as the first time. And each time i do it, i check and check again. I ensure my figures are correct, that what i'm saying is true. Because if i get into the mindset of the above, i can potentially break this company over night.

I need to keep task 'A' just as sharp for the 10,001 time as it was for the 10,000 time, 1001 time, 101 time etc.

If i have to adhere to those extreme levels of professionalism and accuracy in my job, in which the only real potential loss is millions of pounds, SURELY a captain of an airliner with hundreds of lives in their hands must adhere to even higher levels of accuracy each time.

Oh, and as for working hours, its 65 hours a week (260 a month)

No?
ZH-127 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 08:31
  #299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: An Island Province
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Check 6
... preflight the wrong aircraft until corrected by ramp persnnel, ... this is a NON-ISSUE.
All issues are worthy of investigation. The human factors investigation should consider if there was any ‘embarrassment’ aspect to this error, which could have affected subsequent personal attitude or judgement for some time after – the hidden aspects of behaviour. If further speculation is required consider what fixes would provide a safety defence against the choice of the wrong aircraft.

It is more likely that the error could have cause a delay, or the perception of a delay, which could contribute to a need to rush or hurry. This could be a powerful behaviour driver particularly in an arrival slot controlled environment – if the first sector of the day is late, then everyone is late thereafter.

We know that we should not be affected by these sorts of pressures, but the facts show that we are. The industry might have to re-examine those organisational aspects which can add time pressure, or at least provide some outlet or recovery action. Note that the low level fix for the wrong aircraft and the potentially more powerful fix for time pressure, address the sources of error deep within the organisation/system – Prof James Reason provides the theory.
alf5071h is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2006, 08:35
  #300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ZH-127
Is indeed a profound insight, however it just doesnt bear true.

In my job, i've performed the same tasks thousands of thousands of times, each time just as proper as the first time. And each time i do it, i check and check again. I ensure my figures are correct, that what i'm saying is true. Because if i get into the mindset of the above, i can potentially break this company over night.

I need to keep task 'A' just as sharp for the 10,001 time as it was for the 10,000 time, 1001 time, 101 time etc.

If i have to adhere to those extreme levels of professionalism and accuracy in my job, in which the only real potential loss is millions of pounds, SURELY a captain of an airliner with hundreds of lives in their hands must adhere to even higher levels of accuracy each time.

Oh, and as for working hours, its 65 hours a week (260 a month)

No?
It is not a matter of need, mindset or trying to be sharp. Humans.. even highly proficient, skilled, experienced, motivated professionals miss cues and make mistakes. It is also not a matter of aspiring to higher standards. My personal standards exceed company and regulatory standards but that doesn't make me error proof. I have made plenty of mistakes in my almost 40 years of flying (military, businessjets, airlines) and none of them were intentional.

Finally, IF I may.. your age is posted as 23. Is that correct? I only ask because I sincerely appreciate and admire your zeal. But I would be interested to see if you think the same way when you are 43 or 53.
wileydog3 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.