Pilots Palermo ATR Crash received 10-year sentences
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are pilots above the law then?
I think that 10 years jail is harsh. I believe that alot of what has been reported in the press e.g. praying etc. is baloney, but that doesn't take away from the fact that innocent people were killed.
If a civilian can be convicted of vehicle manslaughter for incompetent driving, why not a pilot for a similar offence?
If a civilian can be convicted of vehicle manslaughter for incompetent driving, why not a pilot for a similar offence?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why? Because almost any fool can drive a car and easily judge what is and is not incompetent driving.
Very few people can fly aircraft, let alone airliners, yet they deem themselves capable of judging "competence". Farcical.
So the salaries for professional aircrew are plummeting, the T&C falling and very few people are choosing to pursue aviation as a career.
Add to this the potential for professional crews to be judged by clueless laymen as incompetent and you have the makings of the whole industry grinding to a halt for lack of anybody willing to subject themselves to such stupidity. Lets just add some money-grubbing lawyers into the equation to really accelerate this stupidity eh!
Very few people can fly aircraft, let alone airliners, yet they deem themselves capable of judging "competence". Farcical.
So the salaries for professional aircrew are plummeting, the T&C falling and very few people are choosing to pursue aviation as a career.
Add to this the potential for professional crews to be judged by clueless laymen as incompetent and you have the makings of the whole industry grinding to a halt for lack of anybody willing to subject themselves to such stupidity. Lets just add some money-grubbing lawyers into the equation to really accelerate this stupidity eh!
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 61
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why? Because almost any fool can drive a car and easily judge what is and is not incompetent driving. Very few people can fly aircraft, let alone airliners, yet they deem themselves capable of judging "competence". Farcical.
So the salaries for professional aircrew are plummeting, the T&C falling and very few people are choosing to pursue aviation as a career.
Add to this the potential for professional crews to be judged by clueless laymen as incompetent and you have the makings of the whole industry grinding to a halt for lack of anybody willing to subject themselves to such stupidity. Lets just add some money-grubbing lawyers into the equation to really accelerate this stupidity eh!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
7 Posts
I just finished reading the report. I thought that it was quite well done. Wish the ANSV would put out more english reports. Near the very end, however, is one of the most bizarre things I have ever seen in the many accident reports I have read over the years.
It is not unusual fpr comments to be made at the end of a report such as this by representatives from another country. In this case, the Tunisian DGCA claims that the accident did not happen in Italian waters(denied by the Italians) and therefore the Tunisians should have been the lead investigators. They say that the Italians were claiming that the "Tunisian authority was shackling the investigation process and Italian authority have banned Tuninter further to first ANSV findings and recommendations."
At the end the Tunisians say "ANSV is not competent to conduct this investigation" and "Above mentioned report is null and void".
While there have not been many crashes in Tunisia, the was an Egyptair 737 a few years back. No report has ever been seen by me. I wonder if they wanted this one to disappear as well. Just like so many other accident investigations in Africa.
It is not unusual fpr comments to be made at the end of a report such as this by representatives from another country. In this case, the Tunisian DGCA claims that the accident did not happen in Italian waters(denied by the Italians) and therefore the Tunisians should have been the lead investigators. They say that the Italians were claiming that the "Tunisian authority was shackling the investigation process and Italian authority have banned Tuninter further to first ANSV findings and recommendations."
At the end the Tunisians say "ANSV is not competent to conduct this investigation" and "Above mentioned report is null and void".
While there have not been many crashes in Tunisia, the was an Egyptair 737 a few years back. No report has ever been seen by me. I wonder if they wanted this one to disappear as well. Just like so many other accident investigations in Africa.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Norden
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing about Italy and justice from my side.Only some words about ATR ,maintenance and the crew.
There was no reason to replace the indicator asap.The report is showing there are only 4 digits u/s-this means it was an ongoing problem because digits are failing one after the other over a long period.The calculation of the amount of fuel is not affected and a second indication (repeater) is available as well.
So a MEL release for at least 3 days is no problem.(may be it is a 10 days
item)
Sufficient time to order a correct part number.
Now we have the engineer with the wrong part ordered by another engineer.Bad situation-no doubt.
First thing at my type course regarding chapter 28 was:be carefull,there are indicators showing/calculating with LBS or KG and 42 or 72 options as well.All engineers i know are aware of this problem.
At each replacement of this indicator you have to compare the old and the new amount of fuel.Due to a lot problems with fuel indication on older ATR (the crashed one had more than 30.000 cycles) fuel indicator replacement is very often a part of t/s to eliminate the origin of the problem.I'm sure the guy did not changed this part for the first time,
but he learned nothing...
And the crew:i never met a crew accepting an aircraft with a split more than 100 kg during refueling !this crew received the aircraft with nearly to
tons more indicated than reported in the log.And they refueled it twice with a split of nearly 50%.Unbelievable !
It is a 10 minuit job to confirm the correct aount of fuel with the sticks !
So for me a combination of very very poor maintenance and a crew who had the wrong job.
There was no reason to replace the indicator asap.The report is showing there are only 4 digits u/s-this means it was an ongoing problem because digits are failing one after the other over a long period.The calculation of the amount of fuel is not affected and a second indication (repeater) is available as well.
So a MEL release for at least 3 days is no problem.(may be it is a 10 days
item)
Sufficient time to order a correct part number.
Now we have the engineer with the wrong part ordered by another engineer.Bad situation-no doubt.
First thing at my type course regarding chapter 28 was:be carefull,there are indicators showing/calculating with LBS or KG and 42 or 72 options as well.All engineers i know are aware of this problem.
At each replacement of this indicator you have to compare the old and the new amount of fuel.Due to a lot problems with fuel indication on older ATR (the crashed one had more than 30.000 cycles) fuel indicator replacement is very often a part of t/s to eliminate the origin of the problem.I'm sure the guy did not changed this part for the first time,
but he learned nothing...
And the crew:i never met a crew accepting an aircraft with a split more than 100 kg during refueling !this crew received the aircraft with nearly to
tons more indicated than reported in the log.And they refueled it twice with a split of nearly 50%.Unbelievable !
It is a 10 minuit job to confirm the correct aount of fuel with the sticks !
So for me a combination of very very poor maintenance and a crew who had the wrong job.
Person Of Interest
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nohopper is correct...however...this crew (as he says) screwed up, and I agree, however, a loss of license should be enough in this case..actually probably too much, but JAIL???? NO WAY...
When is the last time your accountant (CPA) went to jail for messing up your taxes???
Or your Crew Bus Driver for having an accident on the way to the hotel???
Get my point???
When is the last time your accountant (CPA) went to jail for messing up your taxes???
Or your Crew Bus Driver for having an accident on the way to the hotel???
Get my point???
