EK407 Tailstrike @ ML
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boring Point
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I gotta tell ya, Trimotor and Groper...
you're both a couple of amateurs compared to White Knight...
who's obvious experience makes you both look like a couple of cowboys!
Get real!...get some experience!
And then come back and talk to the Pro's!!
Oh! and by the way "iceman"...
...'bout time you started to run the show yourself, don't you think?
And not rely on others to do what you're paid to do?
you're both a couple of amateurs compared to White Knight...
who's obvious experience makes you both look like a couple of cowboys!
Get real!...get some experience!
And then come back and talk to the Pro's!!
Oh! and by the way "iceman"...
...'bout time you started to run the show yourself, don't you think?
And not rely on others to do what you're paid to do?
Last edited by Obie; 26th Mar 2009 at 08:45.
Why so tough on White Knight?
What he's saying actually makes sense. If it takes two crew to run the aircraft, any more is just a pain in the @rse.
If two crew can't do things in time, then operations need to change.
Granted the delivery could have been better, and I have to say White Knight - you came across as a pit of a w@nker with your last comment...
What he's saying actually makes sense. If it takes two crew to run the aircraft, any more is just a pain in the @rse.
If two crew can't do things in time, then operations need to change.
Granted the delivery could have been better, and I have to say White Knight - you came across as a pit of a w@nker with your last comment...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: France
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the current airfield technology available, why can't they design weighing pads at the parking stands that will give an aircraft's weight dynamically to within a given acceptable tolerance e.g (+/- 1000kgs) and displayed on a board somewhere that all can see.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Back home
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
White Knight....WOW, just about sums up your rant really.
We went to very different schools on common decency and respect towards others I think. If a fellow pilot who is a necessary part of the crew wants to look at 'the numbers' before you go or has some input on what's about to take place, then what's wrong with that, as long as it's at an appropriate time. "Can't we all just get along?"
We went to very different schools on common decency and respect towards others I think. If a fellow pilot who is a necessary part of the crew wants to look at 'the numbers' before you go or has some input on what's about to take place, then what's wrong with that, as long as it's at an appropriate time. "Can't we all just get along?"
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Boring Point
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...err!... I think you might actually be "The W@nker", Squiffy...
...when one considers your profile!!
And for you Props...you wanna start showing some some "command potential"?
...when one considers your profile!!
And for you Props...you wanna start showing some some "command potential"?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting opinion of your augmented crew you have, White Knight.
If you got the aug. pilots in the flightdeck does it really hurt (apart from your ego) to have them check the figures?
Earlier on this thread somebody owed up to inserting the wrong figures into the box, This got picked up by the AUG. F/O!!! Who in that case might have saved an embarrasing incident or dare I say an accident with or without loss of life.
Manage your resources carefully, one day they might save your arse.
If you got the aug. pilots in the flightdeck does it really hurt (apart from your ego) to have them check the figures?
Earlier on this thread somebody owed up to inserting the wrong figures into the box, This got picked up by the AUG. F/O!!! Who in that case might have saved an embarrasing incident or dare I say an accident with or without loss of life.
Manage your resources carefully, one day they might save your arse.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 34S
Age: 59
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SO...... now that the "boys" are hopefully done with their immature little scrap...
what nos & figures did the EK407crew, unfortunately, punch into the MCDU for TOW & flex T.O. values???
what nos & figures did the EK407crew, unfortunately, punch into the MCDU for TOW & flex T.O. values???
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: AUSTRALIA - CHINA STHN
Age: 59
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
poor white night!!
I like flying with the extra crew personally but ( and apart from his tone level and style which was c@#p) White Knight has a small point.
I am of the (personal) opinion that having extra crew on the flight deck is a double edged sword.
yeah - great to help do a bit of the work etc. but I anecdotally believe that sometimes it may not add to safety.
I like the idea of the three pilot crew ( 1 skipper /2 f/o's) as the delineation of command is clear. Sometimes too many cooks etc etc.
This is a little like having two QFI's in the one aircraft - there used to be silly incidents as command was a little blurred sometimes.
Personally , when I am augmenting I offer to do what ever the other captain wants but don't volunteer for anything specifically.
I certainly don't wear a head set normally on take off or interfere on arrival.
Reason - they are good enough to operate by themselves ( of course I will ask if they want help and keep my head out just in case there is something really obvious) but if you are not on the head set etc you cant interfere, they don't assume you will help and when /if it goes south you cannot be held to blame ( assuming it is not fatal of course).
Might be seen as a cop out but I give the two guys in the operating seat the benefit of the doubt that they can do the job they are trained for. Well .... most of the time but EKs recruitment and training lately seems to have missed something but we are all human!!
tail wheel - hmmm like that idea...
So ... back to the thread... what were the numbers in the box... and how small was the yellow trend arrow on take off... just my 2 cents. And the guys were not new to the jet so must be more to it..perhaps busy getting wound up about the change in Ops policy or discussing the FG1 with the big ta ta'S... at least that would be a reason!!!
dont mean to get anyone off side - all is tongue in cheek and meant in a nice tone and style as if we were at a bar chatting over a pint...you know ... civil!!!
I am of the (personal) opinion that having extra crew on the flight deck is a double edged sword.
yeah - great to help do a bit of the work etc. but I anecdotally believe that sometimes it may not add to safety.
I like the idea of the three pilot crew ( 1 skipper /2 f/o's) as the delineation of command is clear. Sometimes too many cooks etc etc.
This is a little like having two QFI's in the one aircraft - there used to be silly incidents as command was a little blurred sometimes.
Personally , when I am augmenting I offer to do what ever the other captain wants but don't volunteer for anything specifically.
I certainly don't wear a head set normally on take off or interfere on arrival.
Reason - they are good enough to operate by themselves ( of course I will ask if they want help and keep my head out just in case there is something really obvious) but if you are not on the head set etc you cant interfere, they don't assume you will help and when /if it goes south you cannot be held to blame ( assuming it is not fatal of course).
Might be seen as a cop out but I give the two guys in the operating seat the benefit of the doubt that they can do the job they are trained for. Well .... most of the time but EKs recruitment and training lately seems to have missed something but we are all human!!
tail wheel - hmmm like that idea...
So ... back to the thread... what were the numbers in the box... and how small was the yellow trend arrow on take off... just my 2 cents. And the guys were not new to the jet so must be more to it..perhaps busy getting wound up about the change in Ops policy or discussing the FG1 with the big ta ta'S... at least that would be a reason!!!
dont mean to get anyone off side - all is tongue in cheek and meant in a nice tone and style as if we were at a bar chatting over a pint...you know ... civil!!!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: down south east
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft weighing pads !!!!
It seems to me that this has similarities with the MK Halifax disaster. Let me be clear and explain.
As stated and , as I understand it the rotation was late and climb out speed "slow".
This is not exactly what happened in Halifax , but there are lessons to be learnt and similarities between the facts of MKJ and what appears to be a thread here.
The Halifax incident sighted in the report as wrong take of power set and (it was the same take off power as the previous , almost empty ferry sector from North of New York , Bradley I think from memory).
So if the wrong take off figures were calculated, based on unreliable, unrealistic weights, then it would seem that the end of the run way arrived sooner than expected, causing the over rotation and a tail strike.
MK's senior mangement and again from memeory the flight safety officer and ops Director were approached by Cranfeild to try and design / understand a method of speed calculation verses runway length etc to prevent this from happeneing again. Whether or not this is ongoing i dont know, but there was an effort to improve and reduce this from happening again.
Not the same as weighing the aircraft on stand but with the same end result in mind.
MK Halifax was caused as we who were involved know by the fatigue and lack of knowledge on the BLT and the latent faults that laid within it. Not wishing to bang on the same drum that was beat for so long , post Halifax but many of the PPruner's balmmed the MK culture for dangerous practice and all the rest of the rubbish that was going around at the time and many blamed Mike Kruger for all sorts of things, many he could be held accountable for, along with 70 % of every other airline owner COO /CEO. But who now will critisise the safety and procedures of EK, not many I would imagine. But you see , and I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, Mike Thorneycroft and his crew were in exactly the same position as the EK crew, only there was an obsticle at the end of the runway (a 10 foot high burm), otherwise they would be here today.
Lessons to be learnt, yes i think so. Dont critisise untill the final incident reports are out.
Goes with out saying that the EK crew did well and got the aircraft on the ground safely, that has to be the message we all focus on not looking for argument fuel, not withstanding this is a rumour forum.
Nuf said
As stated and , as I understand it the rotation was late and climb out speed "slow".
This is not exactly what happened in Halifax , but there are lessons to be learnt and similarities between the facts of MKJ and what appears to be a thread here.
The Halifax incident sighted in the report as wrong take of power set and (it was the same take off power as the previous , almost empty ferry sector from North of New York , Bradley I think from memory).
So if the wrong take off figures were calculated, based on unreliable, unrealistic weights, then it would seem that the end of the run way arrived sooner than expected, causing the over rotation and a tail strike.
MK's senior mangement and again from memeory the flight safety officer and ops Director were approached by Cranfeild to try and design / understand a method of speed calculation verses runway length etc to prevent this from happeneing again. Whether or not this is ongoing i dont know, but there was an effort to improve and reduce this from happening again.
Not the same as weighing the aircraft on stand but with the same end result in mind.
MK Halifax was caused as we who were involved know by the fatigue and lack of knowledge on the BLT and the latent faults that laid within it. Not wishing to bang on the same drum that was beat for so long , post Halifax but many of the PPruner's balmmed the MK culture for dangerous practice and all the rest of the rubbish that was going around at the time and many blamed Mike Kruger for all sorts of things, many he could be held accountable for, along with 70 % of every other airline owner COO /CEO. But who now will critisise the safety and procedures of EK, not many I would imagine. But you see , and I know hindsight is a wonderful thing, Mike Thorneycroft and his crew were in exactly the same position as the EK crew, only there was an obsticle at the end of the runway (a 10 foot high burm), otherwise they would be here today.
Lessons to be learnt, yes i think so. Dont critisise untill the final incident reports are out.
Goes with out saying that the EK crew did well and got the aircraft on the ground safely, that has to be the message we all focus on not looking for argument fuel, not withstanding this is a rumour forum.
Nuf said
Guest
Posts: n/a
I want to be alone!
There's enough material here for a Phd in aviation psychology and not all of it "normal". Some of the commentators here truly look for the "loneliness of command". When it all goes tits up for them then they surely will be alone, very much so. I can't see any reason why a commander wouldn't use the brain power of everyone at his/her disposal to "work a problem". The buck stops at the commander's side of the aircraft of course.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reason we don't routinely have more than 2 sets of eyes and ears on the flight deck in normal ops is cost, so certain technologies were developed and employed to wind the min crew down to 2.
Granted, the aug crew needs to know what's appropriate and not, though where there is discussion about procedures, performance, other life-threateneing stuff, I'm in the loop - it's my bum too, and just because I'm not the operating captan, dare I say it at this juncture, won't obsolve me from the responsibility of taking any reasonable opportunity to prevent a problem (at best) or having to answer difficult questions as to why I took no notice.
Ask yourself, how would the ensuing investigation view an aug crew's lack of 'oversight' that resulted in a problem? Perhaps we are about to have a definitive answer on that one. Realise one thing though: as the aug crew you are sufficiently disconnected from the operation to have the spare capacity to recognise when things are not right. Seize the opportunity. How you then approach the question of intervention is up to your CRM skills.
I AM on headset for arrival and departure, and have been pleased to be so several times, with incorrectly understood clearances, and other little career-affecting gems cropping up a the end of a long day..
Perhaps some of us here are frightened of being monitored, fearing scrutiny. If so, it's time to question your own operation: if it goes wrong, your life will be nothing but scrutiny. Ask the poor sods imn MEL: at least we can.
Now, back to what happened in MEL...
Granted, the aug crew needs to know what's appropriate and not, though where there is discussion about procedures, performance, other life-threateneing stuff, I'm in the loop - it's my bum too, and just because I'm not the operating captan, dare I say it at this juncture, won't obsolve me from the responsibility of taking any reasonable opportunity to prevent a problem (at best) or having to answer difficult questions as to why I took no notice.
Ask yourself, how would the ensuing investigation view an aug crew's lack of 'oversight' that resulted in a problem? Perhaps we are about to have a definitive answer on that one. Realise one thing though: as the aug crew you are sufficiently disconnected from the operation to have the spare capacity to recognise when things are not right. Seize the opportunity. How you then approach the question of intervention is up to your CRM skills.
I AM on headset for arrival and departure, and have been pleased to be so several times, with incorrectly understood clearances, and other little career-affecting gems cropping up a the end of a long day..
Perhaps some of us here are frightened of being monitored, fearing scrutiny. If so, it's time to question your own operation: if it goes wrong, your life will be nothing but scrutiny. Ask the poor sods imn MEL: at least we can.
Now, back to what happened in MEL...
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gulf playing Golf
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aug crew has no duties in the flight deck during ground stop. They dont even need to be present. Its actually nicer when they are not. Less people. Less interference. Hence they carry no responsibility. If EK chooses to change that, then print out yet another FCI...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Middle East
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with you. Aug crew are all too often a distraction - even with the best of intentions. Would be different if the operation was designed for four people but its not. Disruption of normal habit patterns is a hazard.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: not in Dubai anymore
Age: 94
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when I am the augmenting crew I always stay out of the flight deck till the doors are closed, there is no space in the cockpit, its full of ground staff all the time.
but if I am the operating crew I would never throw out the augmenting crew I think whitey is still traumatized from the boarding school experience.
but if I am the operating crew I would never throw out the augmenting crew I think whitey is still traumatized from the boarding school experience.