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

American Airlines jet goes off runway in Jackson Hole, Wyoming

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

American Airlines jet goes off runway in Jackson Hole, Wyoming

Old 1st Jan 2011, 17:42
  #81 (permalink)  
VFD
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: us
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The airline is instructed to
transport the recorders without delay and without accessing
the information contained within them by any means. This
practice has worked efficiently and without complication for
more than 40 years.
Pretty cut and dried. Not like protocall changed last week.

So one would wonder what AA's motive really was.
Previous Mx issues?, after a flight crew?, blowing off the NTSB?
Why risk all this bad publicity over an incident?
Somehow this is not passing the smell test.
VFD is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 18:09
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 411
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I wouldn't be too quick to label AAL as arrogant or criminal.

They are a very large entity and have checks and balances against procedures, one of which is comply with the norms (as stated above) of NTSB procedures.

CVRs and DFDRs are downloaded by airlines quite often after an incident. It's what's known as being proactive in an investigation of a low level incident before repeating it enough times to result in an accident.
lomapaseo,

Read the NTSB statement again. They didn't just throw in the "40 years" statement for decoration, they are pi##ed. The AA Pilots union (APA) is also pi##ed. Their contract specifically says that any data will not be download without notification and an opportunity to be present.

The NTSB specifically addresses handling of the data:
http://www.ntsb.gov/Aviation/Manuals/FDR_Handbook.pdf

"3.7. The FDR shall not be read out or downloaded on scene. The IIC shall caution the parties
to the investigation that unauthorized readout or download of an FDR, following a
reportable NTSB accident or incident, may result in loss of party status (refer to section
4 FDR Data: Non-Safety Board FDR Download).:"


This wasn't some "we forgot to water the office plants over the holidays" mistake.
WhatsaLizad? is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 18:45
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This wasn't some "we forgot to water the office plants over the holidays" mistake.
Indeed it was not...for once WhatsaLizad? and I are in total agreement.
AA management...arrogance personified.

Is the rate higher, lower, or the expected rate due to the amount of exposure? You said you had the facts, how about producing them? Who's better? Who's worse?
The data I provided is all-telling.
AA, amongst US trunk air carriers, has had more incidents/accidents with regard to runway overruns than any other US truck airline.
The facts speak for themselves.
Hull loses?
American leads there, too.
Make all the excuses you like, misd-agin, AA management is rotten to the core.
The latest 'episode' demonstrates this conclusively.
IF I were the FAA administrator, I would suspend the AA air carrier certificate for at least thirty days.
This would get their attention, big time.
The EU might also like to have a close look at AA ops, as some of AA's actions border on deliberate malfeasance.
411A is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 20:29
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wonder at what management level the decison was made to deviate from the norm in this incident. The higher up, the more egregious this conduct is.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 21:19
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
Is the rate higher, lower, or the expected rate due to the amount of exposure? You said you had the facts, how about producing them? Who's better? Who's worse?

The data I provided is all-telling.

What data? That's the point, you provide NO data but BELIEVE something without providing facts to support your allegation.

AA, amongst US trunk air carriers, has had more incidents/accidents with regard to runway overruns than any other US truck airline.

How about the link to the source?

The facts speak for themselves.

Exactly. If you'd provide some facts we'd be getting somewhere.

Hull loses?
American leads there, too.

Source? www.airdisaster.com doesn't have AA in first place. If you add in the total number of flights AA falls even farther.

Make all the excuses you like, misd-agin, AA management is rotten to the core.

I havn't been making excuses for AA management. I've been asking you to provide facts as opposed to garbage.

The latest 'episode' demonstrates this conclusively.



IF I were the FAA administrator, I would suspend the AA air carrier certificate for at least thirty days.
This would get their attention, big time.

You'll never be FAA administrator. That's a given.

The EU might also like to have a close look at AA ops, as some of AA's actions border on deliberate malfeasance.

Reread this thread. First post by you - maybe a low drag/idle power screwup...uh, no.

Next - dumb airline company, and pilots ferrying gas. Uh, no. No ferry gas.

Next - worst for runway overruns. Facts/links provided to show data? Uh, no.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 21:34
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: usa
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
411A: As an AA pilot, I am no fan of AA management, not by a long shot. They must be held accountable for their screwup in releasing the CVR/DFDR.

That said - your track record of bashing AA *PILOTS* and safety record is extremely biased and based on opinion only - not fact. While AA has had its share of hull losses/overruns/incidents, they are IN NO WAY leading the industry. In fact, a check of the NTSB files over the past two decades shows AA right in the middle of the statistics along with other US airline mishaps.

If you'd care to check the history of runway overruns at JAC, for example, you'll see that UAL and Skywest are the leading carriers of overruns there.

Again - I'm not saying AA's record is perfect, far from it. However, for you to sit here and claim that our record is the worst in the industry is not only misleading, it denotes a certain level of arrogance on your part and an unwillingness to back up your opinion with facts. Go back to the beginning of NTSB records and prove that AA has the highest level of overruns/incidents/accidents for all of us, please.

The fact that we have had a string of incidents is nothing more than the inevitable odds catching up with us. ALL major airlines except SWA have had a string of them - and even SWA is not immune.

Our training is top notch and comparable to all US airline training programs. Our pilots are amongst the most experienced in the industry. I am prout to share the cockpit with them. That said - our management needs to go, on that I agree with you 100%, and this latest screwup proves it. But please place blame where blame is due, without reverting to your opinion and presenting it as a "fact." The truth is, AA's accident record is quite comparable with all major US airlines its size, if you go back to the beginning of NTSB records.

73
aa73 is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 22:27
  #87 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
The overrun? ess happens... The download of the DFDR?? Appalling, and for the very first time, I tend to agree with 411A re: certificate suspension. Unbelievable.
 
Old 1st Jan 2011, 22:56
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Somewhere Over America
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
USA aviation system load factor running in the high 80% and a "certificate suspension" of AA. Way to funny. You guys are like a bunch of little old ladies at a quilting bee.

What you should be focusing on is jet operations into a snow country airport that is 6,451' MSL with a 6,300' runway. Over twenty excursions into the weeds and no one seems concerned that there is no margin for error when operating swept wings jets on a snowy runway. It should be nothing but turboprop aircraft going in there with the capability of stopping well short of the end of the runway vs. the current SOP of an idling bulldozer with a long chain parked in the firehouse.
Halfnut is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2011, 23:12
  #89 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Look, FAA has the ultimate Hammer, and the starting point is the DFDR. There is no doubt that palms have been crossed at the agency relative to ops at this airfield. 757 duty into this place is absurd, as you point out.

One thing at a time, Eh?
 
Old 1st Jan 2011, 23:32
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Would downloading the QAR (under normal FOQA rules) been OK??
zalt is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 00:00
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Our training is top notch and comparable to all US airline training programs.
Top notch, you say?
A First Officer bike-pedaling the rudder on an A300-600R, directly causing the vertical fin to depart the airframe...top notch?

AA management is not only negligent, it is grossly so.
Some of their pilots included.
Just look at the Kingston accident I provided a reference to...to actually view the results.
The photos speak for themselves.
Only the blind refuse to see.
411A is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 00:09
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: usa
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So a tail gets ripped off due to substandard composite construction in one of the most massive aircraft manufacturer cover-ups ever and you're dumb enough to blame the pilot that was reacting to a wake turbulence encounter by putting in NORMAL rudder inputs without realizing the TRAP that Airbus had set up... OK, you've just proven that either you're the biggest moron in the aviation industry or you're really that naive. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're just inexperienced in this industry and like to shoot your mouth off.

Regarding Kingston, wow, great example. Would you like me to provide a list of airlines that have run off the end of runways from 1982 through today? Because I'll be glad to. AA was not the first, nor will it be the last.

In fact, the ONLY accurate part of your post is labeling AA management "negligent." You're giving me just a little ray of hope there, 411. But as for your comments regarding our experienced pilots and instructors here, you are way off base.

I guess Continental pilots are also terribly negligent with their Denver runway excursion.... and USAir pilots as well, after their LGA incidents... and Delta pilots, after their DFW deals... and Northwest pilots, after their landing at how many wrong airports...

In fact, 411, the only one who is apparently perfect is you... You must be a real joy to fly with, Chuck Yeager.
aa73 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 00:09
  #93 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 41
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Be thankful that you don't have to share a cockpit with some (make that one) of the people who bloviate here.
W9SQD is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 00:51
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Regarding Kingston, wow, great example.
It certainly is....of how not to perform a reasonable landing.
Photo of Boeing 737-823 (WL) N977AN - Aviation Safety Network

...blame the pilot that was reacting to a wake turbulence encounter by putting in NORMAL rudder inputs
Normal, you say?
Somehow 'normal' for AA, entirely not normal considering past history and experience with swept-wing jet transport airplanes.

aa73 must be a new guy to airline flying...either that or he is totally off the clock.
Wait...he is an AA guy...that explains all.

Last edited by 411A; 2nd Jan 2011 at 01:07.
411A is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 02:07
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect that 411A was turned down during the AA hiring period of the sixties and has has had a hard on for AA ever since.
Spooky 2 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 02:17
  #96 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,484
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Zalt;
Would downloading the QAR (under normal FOQA rules) been OK??
No, not in my view and not at my former airline, but that is a matter that would (or should) be foreseen and agreed upon in any Airline-Association FOQA Agreement.

The reason is simple: - once a reportable incident occurs, any and all data belongs (in this case) to the NTSB, not the airline or the pilots and must be made available to the IIC and investigating board.

If we think about it, this protection is necessary. Otherwise an airline might be tempted to use the QAR data for their (as in "Flight Operations', not Flight Safety's) own investigation instead of permitting the in-house safety invesigation process to do it's job.

Good question...

PJ2
PJ2 is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 02:22
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
aa73's one of the most inexperienced pilots at AA. Over 10,000 hrs as a pilot, years to go before reaching age 40 and experienced in at least 5 airline jets. Why doesn't he have experience in 6? Too junior.

Yup, that's the standard to be called 'inexperienced' at AA.

It's a treat to fly with guys that, relatively speaking , are 'inexperienced'.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 02:39
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yup, that's the standard to be called 'inexperienced' at AA.
Goes nicely with this little problem...Photo of McDonnell Douglas MD-82 N215AA - Aviation Safety Network
411A is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 02:42
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Queensland, Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you'll tolerate a question from a non-pilot:

Would there be any way AA could have changed or deleted parts of the DFDR data while downloading it?

If so, then their actions are very suspicious. If not, then it should likely be filed under "stupid but pointless".

Bob
Bobbsy is offline  
Old 2nd Jan 2011, 02:55
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MNL ex CCR ex CLE
Age: 65
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
" Would there be any way AA could have changed or deleted parts of the DFDR data while downloading it? "

Actually....more than 'stupid'. They broke protocol AND 'chain of custody', with even the HINT of contaminating the data......NOT good! I believe there was a big fur ball about an Air France crash and tampering with the flight recorders....?
PA-28-180 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.