Jet Airways check pilot pulls CB on finals
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pulling a CB in flight is a classic example of a PINC event (procedural intentional non-compliance) PINCs seem to be occurring more often these days and they are a cause of a number of incidents/accidents. It is lack of descipline and rensponsibility. I do hope that jet airways will take the necessary steps to ensure that no stupid pilot trick will be perfomed by their flight crews.
Last edited by aileron buzz; 9th Dec 2009 at 12:53.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interfering with the aircraft systems is clearly beyond the competence of a checker on a passenger flight and shouldn't be without consequence.
being unable to fly raw data approaches in limits in any kind of weather MUST not be without consequence ,is a more and more common and alarming phenomenon.
solely blaming the check airmen for this incident would be disguising the lack of handling skills ( provided the press tells the truth).
SOPs encouraging the use of automation may be well intentioned tools to reduce workload in busy situations, but they must not result in decreasing proficiency.
what's your excuse when the autopilot kicks out on a gusty and demanding approach?
remember the air france accident at toronto?
"After the autopilot had been disengaged, the pilot flying increased engine thrust in reaction to a decrease in airspeed and a perception that the aircraft was sinking. The power increase contributed to an increase in aircraft energy and the aircraft deviated above the flight path."
being unable to fly raw data approaches in limits in any kind of weather MUST not be without consequence ,is a more and more common and alarming phenomenon.
solely blaming the check airmen for this incident would be disguising the lack of handling skills ( provided the press tells the truth).
SOPs encouraging the use of automation may be well intentioned tools to reduce workload in busy situations, but they must not result in decreasing proficiency.
what's your excuse when the autopilot kicks out on a gusty and demanding approach?
remember the air france accident at toronto?
"After the autopilot had been disengaged, the pilot flying increased engine thrust in reaction to a decrease in airspeed and a perception that the aircraft was sinking. The power increase contributed to an increase in aircraft energy and the aircraft deviated above the flight path."
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been on a few coupled approaches when the autopilot disconnected or it was a bad glide slope signal because of unprotected ILS in DFW. Crosschecking DME and glide slope saying we were high and the autopilot trying to descend rapidly I told the FO to level out because something was wrong with the glide slope read out. Another time in ATL also on an MD80 at 500 ft in the clouds with a cross wind and turbulence both times , the autopilot disengages with the plane in a bank and throttles were wherever the last setting was. It wasn't a big deal but now I guess we are getting pilots that can't hand fly. How could this happen? Sully is right. When we all got hired by an airline we had to hand fly on one engine to a minimums landing or we were'nt hired. Now, with some airlines, it isn't so.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sim check was in an Electra and did a one engine approach into SNA to get my job. I have never flown an Electra. It worked out fine but you had to know how to fly in the 80's. A bored check airman pulled the only engine running fire handle at 200 ft to make it more fun. No visual display in that era, just instrument guidance. Everybody was qualified back then. If you needed the computer to get on the ground you couldn't get a job.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Christchurch
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Find it utterly amusing that there're actually views that support revelation of sub-standard raw data flying as a consequence of this check airman behaviour.
My views:
You retain, every single redundancy you could possibly find, to ensure a safe and sound revenue flight; let alone the fact that you're gambling with lives of so many pax onboard. The check airman should be sacked. Period. If my family member is onboard that flight, I'll sue the check airman.
If you wanna check for raw data flying competency, introduce more surprise elements on your SIM refresher/check session.
May the rest of check airmen not behave in this childish and irresponsible behaviour.
My views:
You retain, every single redundancy you could possibly find, to ensure a safe and sound revenue flight; let alone the fact that you're gambling with lives of so many pax onboard. The check airman should be sacked. Period. If my family member is onboard that flight, I'll sue the check airman.
If you wanna check for raw data flying competency, introduce more surprise elements on your SIM refresher/check session.
May the rest of check airmen not behave in this childish and irresponsible behaviour.
