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

Continental TurboProp crash inbound for Buffalo

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

Continental TurboProp crash inbound for Buffalo

Old 8th May 2009, 10:51
  #1021 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When they pay $24 an hour for a coey and $60 for a skipper what do you expect!

If you pay peanuts you get monkeys
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 12:58
  #1022 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bit harsh Goblin,

Just because they weren't on the best pay doesn't make them bad pilots!!!!!

P
Pizzaro is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 14:11
  #1023 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
no, poor pay doesn't make you a bad pilot

I kept my standards high when paid badly...you do that if you want to develop good habit patterns.

But if you are talking significant ice thoughout the flight, you have to be on your toes during the letdown.

sometimes, pilots try to appear too cool...when you need to be a bit on the edge of your seat...just a bit.
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 14:35
  #1024 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Middle East
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The NTSB has already ruled out ice as a significant factor in this particular crash.
metro301 is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 15:10
  #1025 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,511
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
I dont think there is a real correlation between bad pilots and bad pay, however there might be a correlation between bad pay and poor training (and probably thrown in poor rostering). I don't say that was the case here as i have absolutely no idea how the training and safety culture is with Colgan.
Denti is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 15:57
  #1026 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,486
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Pizzaro;
Your response to The Green Goblin's remarks about, "paying pilots peanuts gets you monkeys" was:
Just because they weren't on the best pay doesn't make them bad pilots!!!!!
I think almost everyone would agree with you. That's because the statement is reversed and has been, I think, misunderstood as causal within an airline - that is not where to look for the accuracy of Goblin's statment - there is no causal relationship because 99% of pilots, to the best of their ability and within an established training regime, (please bear this in mind for a moment), keep their standards high regardless of pay.

That has always been a key factor in the lack of integrity of employers when dealing with pilots - though highly-skilled and not easily replaced, employers will nickel-and-dime their pilots because they know that a pilot will not do shoddy work because the pay is low.

This discussion has been had numerous times on PPRuNe before - pay low and otherwise treat the profession as airlines have over the past decade or so and those with the intelligence, talent, discipline, motivation and ability will seek their fortunes elsewhere and will not come to aviation.

That is where Goblin's statment makes sense, and indeed the pipeline has been drying up for some time. One of the reasons, (but not the only reason), the MPL has emerged is to shorten the time from when somebody off the street decides they "want to be a pilot", and getting to be one, perhaps, (after 40 sectors, I see in the ad here), an A320 First Officer.

One might offer the comment, "gee, if that doesn't work out, maybe I'll be a trial lawyer next or perhaps a surgeon...".

The conditions offered professional airline pilots today are a desecrated shambles of a career compared to what it was twenty or thirty years ago and the smart ones are turning to other careers and professions. The comment I asked to be borne in mind above, and this is a difficult point to make because it sounds unkind but is most certainly not intended as such, means that those who may best be suited to other careers may "choose" flying, for various reasons.

I put the word "choose" in quotes because aviation is a bit unusual: Usually, "flying chooses you". In other words, one doesn't suddenly decide to be a pilot one afternoon. Like Sully himself said, he knew he was going to be a pilot by age five. It is that kind of fundamental passion which comes with high motivation that makes a good, and safe pilot. It also makes an excellent target for lousy pay - because the employer can, and get away with it - temporarily.

Today, people don't make career choices about professions - they make "lifestyle choices". To the naive looking around for a career, flying has an allure that masks the tough bits and doesn't make clear the kind of dedication it takes to do well in aviation.

Perhaps others can add to this perspective, but as a retired guy who flew for fourty years, thirty-five professionally, I see quite a different profession than I joined but of course I see quite a different economic, political and philosophical world than 'way back then', too. I would prefer to hear a younger person's perspective on all this.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 16:15
  #1027 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by metro301
The board will look at the effectiveness of pilot training on the use of emergency features on the plane, a Bombardier Q400 turboprop. According to a source familiar with the direction of the NTSB's investigation, neither pilot was fully trained to use the aircraft's stall warning and protection system, which includes a feature called the "stick pusher" that automatically presses the nose of the plane down to keep it from stalling.

washingtonpost.com
I think people may be mis-reading the intent of the NTSB's comments about "training". I suspect that what they are going to bring up is not any specific deficiency in Colgan's training programme (but likely there isn't one) but rather the more general issue of stall training requirements.

Transport Canada have relatively recently issued an Advisory Circular on "Training and Checking Practices for Stall Recovery" and to quote some relevant points from that document:

Training for Fully Developed Stalls

Many current training practices do not demonstrate a full stall and associated handling characteristics. This may leave flight crews insufficently prepared to recognize and recover from of an aerodynamic stall, should the recovery actions from the approach to a stall, not be successful.
and
Recommended Simulator Training for recovery from full stall

Many flight training devices (simulators) have a limited ability to model high angle of attack flight conditions, associated with the stall angles of attack. However where a simulator is capable, a full stall should be entered to demonstrate the function of stall protection systems on aeroplanes, (such as stick pushers), the appropriate recovery actions to be applied, and the altitude loss associated with entry into a full stall.
(my emphasis)
In other words, Transport Canada wants pilots to experience the full stall during sim training, rather than the older practice - still I believe the norm for FAA for example - of simply training to recover from the initial warning (shaker etc) and thus never see the actual stall itself.

The problem they are reacting to in promoting this (new) training approach is that crews either don't recognize the stall itself (because they've never had a chance to experience it) OR are so fixated on minimizing altitude loss in the recovery - which is a reasonable goal for a recovery from "close to" the stall but a recipe for disaster if the full stall has been encountered - they they neglect the "reduce alpha/increase airspeed" part of the recovery.

Given that there is precedent in another jurisdiction, as above, and given that the dash8 has a pusher type system, and given that (from all the released info) it seems the crew either failed to identify the stall OR failed to take the appropriate action, I would not be at all surprised if the NTSB is considering a Safety Recommendation very much aligned with the TC Advisory Circular contents.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 18:40
  #1028 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 59
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
P2J

It also makes an excellent target for lousy pay - because the employer can, and get away with it - temporarily.
It is common on many professions. The employer will always try to get the best people for a lousy pay. We (I say we because although I am not a pilot I consider myself a good professional on my field) will always perform at our best performing our duties. That because we are trained professional and proud of our jobs. The difference is that a pilot has the responsability to carry on the back a few hundreds SLFs, good for me that I do not have such pressure. Nevertheless some jobs carry a lot of responsability however I cannot think of anyone that involves to be responsible for the life of so many people (a bus driver comparison is a joke IMHO).
Having said that I am confident that nobody will lower his/her standards because of a lower pay.
The safety rests (still IMHO) on the shoulders of the highly qualified professionals who are in front of the plane, they are the ones that make the difference.
Becoming a member of PPRUNE and be able to read all the posts here made me understood how "lucky" I am when flying and enjoying my champagne.
Rest assured that such though always flashes on my mind!
Thanks!
FrequentSLF is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 19:05
  #1029 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agenda for next week's hearing.
Zeffy is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 21:15
  #1030 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Focus

Zeffy, thanks,

Where in this agenda will Mad (Flt) Scientist's analysis or equivalents be taken into account? What if he is right?
daikilo is offline  
Old 8th May 2009, 22:01
  #1031 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In other words, Transport Canada wants pilots to experience the full stall during sim training, rather than the older practice - still I believe the norm for FAA for example - of simply training to recover from the initial warning (shaker etc) and thus never see the actual stall itself.

The problem they are reacting to in promoting this (new) training approach is that crews either don't recognize the stall itself (because they've never had a chance to experience it) OR are so fixated on minimizing altitude loss in the recovery - which is a reasonable goal for a recovery from "close to" the stall but a recipe for disaster if the full stall has been encountered - they they neglect the "reduce alpha/increase airspeed" part of the recovery.
Totally gobsmacked that if true this is where commerical aviation has descended to (sic)...

Speechless...
HarryMann is offline  
Old 9th May 2009, 00:21
  #1032 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
some smart guy said: hey, we can save money by making incipent stall recovery and wind shear recovery the same and train for both at the same time.

if you are STALLED, see Wolfgang Langweische's Book and push the stick forward a bit.

if you are near a stall, go ahead and power out of it and hold altitude

if you are in windshear, firewall power, pitch to 15 and bounce off the shaker

BUT THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT!
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 05:47
  #1033 (permalink)  
Person Of Interest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Protect....couldn't agree more...in your 3 examples the pilot is FLYING THE A/C...not the A/P!!!!
DownIn3Green is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 13:18
  #1034 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
down 3 green

pal...I honestly think if I were a designated examiner or FAA examiner in a simulator, I wouldn't fail the engine... I WOULD FAIL THE DAMN AUTOPILOT

30 seconds after takeoff...autopilot/autothrottles/auto everything would fail.

I would then proceed with ILS, VOR holding, approaches, missed approaches

and I'll bet that most pilots couldn't hand fly for two solid hours...and I wouldn't let the copilot fly for more than 1 minute (I'll give the captain that to pull out a chart, yes a CHART!!!)
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 15:50
  #1035 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gone Flying...
Age: 63
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree with you. That's why (in my airline) we hand-fly more than half of our Sim sessions. That's why we have a third Sim session every year, dedicated to training!
Fly Safe.

Last edited by aguadalte; 10th May 2009 at 15:54. Reason: to be more especific
aguadalte is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 18:08
  #1036 (permalink)  
Person Of Interest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Protect...That's exactly what I'm agreeing with you about...I come from 1st generation jets..727, 737....I can't count the # of times the A/P wouldn't couple and we hand flew to mins...

Some of these guys today, god forbid they have to go missed w/ no autopilot...Especially in Africa or some other 3rd world place where you don't get "vectors" from ATC...
DownIn3Green is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 20:35
  #1037 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
down3green

hey man, I agree with you. I flew the DC9 and 737...they had autopilots, but useful really only in cruise, though we did monitored cat 2 apchs...I'm sure you know.

I looked forward to hand flying to legal minimums any time I could...either you are good at something or you aren't...and you aren't good unless you practice.

I flew with guys who wouldn't set the missed approach holding fix (LOM) because they counted on ''vectors''.

I would hand fly and trim up at max alt. I know people who were afraid of the plane and wouldn't even try to hand fly at max auth. alt. (us old guys called it service ceiling).

BUT, the 727 and 737 were not first generation jets...second gen.

707/DC8/Comet/Caravelle are /were first... and even pre 1st gen like the Avro Airliner (canada)

you and I are on the same page.

Did you ever fly with guys who wouldn't touch the throttles all the way down? Great if you can do it...but when you get slow a bit scary.

wondering if the captain was a little too cool for school in this case??????? maybe you know what I mean.
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 22:45
  #1038 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: edge of reality
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A month or so ago during a sim recurrent session I failed the Flt Director on the crew... they both acted stunned...
With a bucket full of irony I asked if they wanted to declare an emergency and the NFP clicked the Tx and told ATC that they'd lost their Flt Director...
In total disbelief and playing the part of ATC I asked how many souls on board and fuel endurance...

I get the impression from some of the younger guys that they spent their adolesence alone with their acne and playing with their flight sim 2000 or whatever.
MungoP is offline  
Old 10th May 2009, 22:57
  #1039 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
mungo

thank you for telling us about the flight director adventure.

In everything I've ever done...its all about the basics. And we are not demanding the basics are sound with modern pilots.
protectthehornet is offline  
Old 11th May 2009, 03:37
  #1040 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Captain's Training Faulted In Air Crash That Killed 50 - WSJ.com
PlatinumFlyer 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.