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

Pilots blamed INITIALLY in 2006 British Airways crunching of lights at MIA

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

Pilots blamed INITIALLY in 2006 British Airways crunching of lights at MIA

Old 7th Oct 2008, 13:28
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
411A, at times, you could be amusing with your over inflated ego. But I can't remember when the amusement stopped.

After a normal landing the flight crew took the precaution of requesting assistance because the lights guiding aircraft from the runway to the taxiway were unclear.
These people were operating an aeroplane (a really big one remember) with real passengers on aboard. The statement above shows that they were well up to the job. Their company had paid navigation and landing fees in the expectation that the airport would be equipped/configured in a first world fashion. Bad mistake on their part.
forget is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 14:09
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After a normal landing the flight crew took the precaution of requesting assistance because the lights guiding aircraft from the runway to the taxiway were unclear.
You missed the part about having taxied over lights prior.
IF the crew had doubts, seems to me they should have held position prior to making contact with frangible lights, and then asked for assistance.
That they did not, brought problems.
Perhaps a little retraining is in order.
411A is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 15:52
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,868
Received 13 Likes on 9 Posts
You missed the part about having taxied over lights prior.
IF the crew had doubts, seems to me they should have held position prior to making contact with frangible lights, and then asked for assistance.
You missed the part about them not being able to see the lights because they weren't the right type or in the right position... It was dark, you know? Please tell us how you would have avoided an invisible obstruction on the runway so we can all learn from it.
FullWings is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 16:19
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please tell us how you would have avoided an invisible obstruction on the runway so we can all learn from it.
Step 1 - Remove head from backside
Simeng is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 17:37
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re 411a:
Step 1 - Remove head from backside
The problem is that he is so far up his own backside, it is so large and he has been there so long that he has come to think of it as the real world
TopBunk is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 18:31
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,487
Likes: 0
Received 24 Likes on 12 Posts
Why initially, did a reputable investigation (NTSB) came to such a poor conclusion. Taken at first sight, the focus on the crew was little more than blame culture.
This could of course be due to a ‘rushed job’, or ‘an incident of little consequence’, these are too reflect human weakness, which probably have latent deficiencies at their root.
The first report was not the standard normally expected, but in conjunction with some of the contributions to this thread, it could be an indication of national culture, although hopefully not a professional one.
safetypee is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 21:12
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Am I going to bite.....maybe a little then.
411A you are a tw*t. If you had bothered to read the frangible lights weren't visible from the flight deck. But you wouldn't know because you've never taxied a 747.
And about your FO taxiing remark, yes sky god....live in your own little world but stop commenting of stuff that you know nothing about. Your training is from the dinosaur age and it must be hard to change and go with the times.
Shaka Zulu is offline  
Old 7th Oct 2008, 21:50
  #68 (permalink)  

the lunatic fringe
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Odds are, it was a First Officer who was taxiing the airplane...always a large mistake.
Honestly 411A, comments like that only serve to demonstrate just how dated and out of touch you are.

Trust me the world has moved on. First Officers, are not only human, but they are responsible adults as well.

In my experience Captains who refuse to trust the First Officer, irrespective of demonstrated ability, are always without exception poor under confident Captains themselves. Captains with ability have the capacity and the skills to let the FO be P1. Note I said P1 not the Captain.

I can only conclude that your determination to control every aspect of the operation is because you did not have those skills or the capacity required.
L337 is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2008, 11:37
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'll step in and help old 411a save the burned ego a little...

Odds are, it was a First Officer who was taxiing the airplane...always a large mistake.
...if the plane doesn't have a tiller on his side of the deck


which is not the case I'm led to believe

GD&L
GearDown&Locked is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2008, 23:06
  #70 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Person
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My interest in this is that I also operate into MIA for the company concerned.

Some of the markings/lights in the USA are very poor at night, I'm thinking of JFK in the dark and rain. I have actually shut down and been towed onto stand in those conditions.

BTW, I have 411a on ignore (I recommend it!), but am curious as to how he is permitted to continue spouting drivel on these forums? One can be wound up by him simply by observing the reactions of those who have chosen to not use the ignore function!
overstress is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 02:09
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,789
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
The updated report, now published on the NTSB website, makes it clear the incident was caused primarily by inadequate and non-standard lighting on the runway

And lighting is inadequate and non standard at many other US airports. I mentioned this and the 411a response was that as the US 'invented aviation' they could do what they liked. That unprofessional attitude seems to prevail in the US. They don't follow ICAO standards and don't seem interested. They still get incidents and the attitude seems to be like 411a's - "Can't stand the heat, then stay out of the kitchen".
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 03:00
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Can't stand the heat, then stay out of the kitchen".
Yup, about sums it up, quite nicely.

Now then, here is a a reasonable alternative...

I'm thinking of JFK in the dark and rain. I have actually shut down and been towed onto stand in those conditions.
If careless folks go taxying over frangible lights, when a reasonable alternative is a tow, expect to find yourself mentioned in the eventual NTSB report.

Simple as that.
411A is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 05:56
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If careless folks go taxying over frangible lights, when a reasonable alternative is a tow, expect to find yourself mentioned in the eventual NTSB report.
My reading of the situation is that had they stopped to wait for a tow before hitting the lights, they'd have sat on the end of the runway and annoyed a lot of other people who then couldn't land or take off. I bet that would have had an overall cost far higher than replacing a couple of lights.
llondel is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 07:04
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My reading of the situation is that had they stopped to wait for a tow before hitting the lights, they'd have sat on the end of the runway and annoyed a lot of other people who then couldn't land or take off
Who is taxying the airplane?
The concerned pilot, or 'a lot of other people'?

I presently operate to some rather poorly lighted airfields in Africa with a large wide-body airplane, often times with congested apron areas, and to go blindly pressing ahead while taxying the airplane, when either a follow-me vehicle or a tow would be the better alternative, is foolhardy in the extreme.

Apparently, BA feel differently, so they ended up with damage to ground lighting equipment.

The concerned pilot was, in three words...not especially bright.
411A is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 10:59
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
411A,

I guess you must have missed post #52 by pedropedro, or perhaps you chose to ignore the facts as subsequently stated by the NTSB, and their admissions that the airport lighting was not correctly configured, and that it was not possible for the crew to have actually seen the lights they overan. The lights were not only incorrectly placed, but were also of the wrong directional type, and as a result of this they have since been changed and brought up to ICAO standard. Furthermore, and perhaps much to your annoyance, the crew of a respected airline have been relieved of any blame.

The NTSB in this instance have admitted "rushing" out a flawed report, but unlike them you prefer to stick to your first take - even if subsequent evidence or facts fail to support it.

Any reading of your past postings leads me to form the opinion that your particular personality trait is not of the type best suited to the role of being an aircraft commander in this current day and age. You appear to be balanced in only one respect - that you have a chip on both shoulders. My guess is that you were abused as a co-pilot - and I'll guess further that it was because you were an over confident under achiever in the right hand seat - and deserved what you got!




.
fullyspooled is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 11:29
  #76 (permalink)  

the lunatic fringe
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
411A, you are a broken old record.

If it's British, and or BA you just cannot help yourself. Your prejudice renders any opinions about either worthless.
L337 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 12:06
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A very interesting observation fullyspooled!

The old adage 'empty vessels make the most noise' seems to be more than appropriate when describing 411... Vacuous as a Captain relegated to the minor leagues of African aviation in an antique machine, reliant on bluster and pomposity. Where else and for which modern day forward thinking operators could so empty a noise maker ply his now almost extinct form of our (to most) open and constructively self critical trade!

I'm sure such a challenging Captain could have only been the product of an extremely challenged FO, the sediment always finds it's way to the bottom...maybe it's time to drain the sump!

Happy landings

Jazzy
JazzyKex is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 13:14
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My guess is that you were abused as a co-pilot - and I'll guess further that it was because you were an over confident under achiever in the right hand seat - and deserved what you got!
You perhaps might like to guess again, fullyspooled, as I have never been a co-pilot in a jet airplane...and have been flying heavy jet transport types as a Commander since 1974.
Nice try, wrong conclusion, on your part.
To be expected.

You perhaps might not like my style, but on the other hand, I haven't taxied over frangible light bits, either.

Pilots who simply do not watch what they are doing, while on the ground, especially when they are unsure of ground lighting or other issues with regard to unfamiliar taxiway/apron layouts, and further do not ask for assistance, will find grief, sooner or later.
Clearly, some of the pilots at BA have their beaks well above ground effect, and go into unfamiliar areas unaided, regardless.
Also, to be expected.
411A is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 13:20
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 411A
... as I have never been a co-pilot in a jet airplane...
Aaahh ... that would explain the level achieved in the practical part of the Inter-Personal Skills Course, then ...


JD
Jumbo Driver is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2008, 13:52
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...practical part of the Inter-Personal Skills Course...
Just another name for the psycho-babble nonsense practised today, by many airlines.
BA included, no doubt.
Clearly, it doesn't prevent taxi incidents.
Perhaps actually looking out the window might work slightly better.
411A is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.