Crash-Cork Airport
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No offence, but so what ? Personally l believe "a lack of fear" wasn`t a factor.
Probably the opposite. l can`t defend what they did, why they did it is the cruncher. Two young guys sh*t scared of losing their jobs to others who could do it is my best guess.
Just a guess.
Captplaystation, l respect your opinion but could it be a little out dated in this current climate of no-bleeding-jobs and waiting rooms full ?
Standards are standards are standards.
Has anyone told the profit takers ?
An afterthought, no reflection on anything other than a first class management system. Not penis sizeing in any form.
As a lad myself - comparatively - l took a winter contract in the north of Scandinavia. During the several days in ground school concerned with iceing a local asked the cost of a type 11 cover.
The chief of training refused to say. On the grounds that if we knew how much it cost we could be tempted to forego it.
This is the type of proper management l`m talking about.
Did they have that support ? l don`t honestly know.
Probably the opposite. l can`t defend what they did, why they did it is the cruncher. Two young guys sh*t scared of losing their jobs to others who could do it is my best guess.
Just a guess.
Captplaystation, l respect your opinion but could it be a little out dated in this current climate of no-bleeding-jobs and waiting rooms full ?
Standards are standards are standards.
Has anyone told the profit takers ?
An afterthought, no reflection on anything other than a first class management system. Not penis sizeing in any form.
As a lad myself - comparatively - l took a winter contract in the north of Scandinavia. During the several days in ground school concerned with iceing a local asked the cost of a type 11 cover.
The chief of training refused to say. On the grounds that if we knew how much it cost we could be tempted to forego it.
This is the type of proper management l`m talking about.
Did they have that support ? l don`t honestly know.
Last edited by overun; 27th Mar 2011 at 13:12.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think, in all probability , they were attempting to do just what the grubby little directors probably expected of them, the directors knowledge/ interest level ? probably something along the lines of "just trouser the money".
I said it way way back on this thread, and it still holds true.
Look after, in order of priority
1 - your life
2- your licence
3 - your job
These guys paid too much attention to #3 and completely ignored 1 & 2. End of
I said it way way back on this thread, and it still holds true.
Look after, in order of priority
1 - your life
2- your licence
3 - your job
These guys paid too much attention to #3 and completely ignored 1 & 2. End of
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Spain
Age: 73
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dead Sunderland pilot’s girlfriend slams airline
Andrew Cantle, from Moorside, in Sunderland, was making a third attempt to land the turboprop aircraft in thick fog when it hit the runway and burst into flames.
The 27-year-old co-pilot, Spanish pilot Jordi Lopez, 31, and four passengers were killed in the tragedy.
Today, his partner Beth Webster, who is taking legal action against airline Manx2.com over alleged operational and staffing mistakes, said his employers should “hang their heads in shame.”
Mr Lopez did not take over from Mr Cantle, who had only 17 hours’ experience flying that type of plane, even after two failed landing attempts.
Dead Sunderland pilot
The 27-year-old co-pilot, Spanish pilot Jordi Lopez, 31, and four passengers were killed in the tragedy.
Today, his partner Beth Webster, who is taking legal action against airline Manx2.com over alleged operational and staffing mistakes, said his employers should “hang their heads in shame.”
“I feel that Manx 2’s conduct in all of this has been unacceptable,” said the airstewardess. “Andy’s parents and myself have yet to hear a word of condolence from any of the senior executives of the company, and they should hang their heads in shame.”
A preliminary report by the Republic of Ireland’s Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) confirmed that Mr Cantle was at the controls of the 19-year-old Fairchild Metroliner, which was travelling from Belfast to Cork, when it crashed on February 10.Mr Lopez did not take over from Mr Cantle, who had only 17 hours’ experience flying that type of plane, even after two failed landing attempts.
Dead Sunderland pilot
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1984, you sound as if you're trying to shift the blame from the pilots to the training you received.
I had under 200 hours when I started flying commercially and in the subsequent 15 years or so I have never, ever, ever "busted" any minima.
Can I ask you if, during your training, you had ever practiced a diversion?
You say you never practiced the Cork scenario in training. Really!? You never practiced 3 approaches below minima, illegaly and dangerously?
I take particular exception to this. Good CRM and adherence to SOPs will override lack of experience and nerves, that's called being professional.
Do you think that a simple diversion would have been so nerve wracking?
I had under 200 hours when I started flying commercially and in the subsequent 15 years or so I have never, ever, ever "busted" any minima.
Can I ask you if, during your training, you had ever practiced a diversion?
You say you never practiced the Cork scenario in training. Really!? You never practiced 3 approaches below minima, illegaly and dangerously?
He would have known right from wrong, but lack of experience and sheer nerves/adrenaline will override good CRM and adherence to SOP's.
Do you think that a simple diversion would have been so nerve wracking?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: U K
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fg1984 To compare this organisation with the likes of FR and easy is chalk and chese. Yes, they are all flying low houred F/O's but that's where the similarity ends. At FR a cadet will do something like 80 hours line training before being released to the line. They will be flying with a captain that is more than capable of managing the flight and any weather conditions they may be faced with. if and when they may be faqced with making approaches to minima, they would be flown on automatics in highly sophisticated, modern equipment. And finaly, if any cowboy atitudes got through the net onto the line, all operations of flights are monitored by onboard equipment, the aircraft even automaticaly report back to company of any limit busting imediately upon landing. They would probably be telephoned and grounded before they had the time to turn the aircraft round for the next flight.
Having said all of this, their training is excelent and there is no presure to get in so your pals coment is utter bol**x
Having said all of this, their training is excelent and there is no presure to get in so your pals coment is utter bol**x
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to get into one of these typical pprune slanging matches. Lord Spandex - despite him being a friend - I am not shifting the blame. I have read the report and yes it was pilot error, but so are many accidents, yet what caused the pilot error is what we have to deal with. During training we practiced missed approaches, but we always did one, then a "diversion" which was always back to our base. No planning or consideration to do as such, it was the routine. We didn't consider alternate planning properly until MCC. The problem with the training is that they are training you to get through it, had a real life problem occurred we wouldn't have known what to do. All of the emergency scenarios are practiced but we know exactly what they are going to be and when, such is the nature of current IFR training. E.g. Route - approach - missed approach - diversion - hold - approach - G/A - land. Same every time. I am not saying that everyone who has done 200 hour training will bust minima - but in this case a lack of experience and training is the issue. As for being professional, do you think soldiers in the army who train constantly never go against what they have been taught and just panic in certain situations? We are human at the end of the day. To BALLSOUT, I wasn't comparing the two. You're right though, totally different outfits and I didn't mean to cause offence. However accidents and incidents have occurred when there has been vast difference of experience in the cockpit. If Airlines want to keep their costs down, there will ultimately be a price to pay if they take people with less experience.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: South of the Watford Gap, East of Portland
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear fg1984
I fear that your post is going to attract a lot of flak. Furthermore, it does reflect your own inexpereince and, perhaps, naivity surrounding this industry.
SOPs are designed and implemented to prevent this kind of crash (and I use the term crash quite deliberately - it was not an accident) from happening.
Many of us have benefitted from learning our trade with operators that provided thorough training and experienced captains who had all the Tshirts. Others, of course, don't, and I'm sure that they are equally good aviators.
However, in my expereince, what goes on on the flightdeck is a reflection of what goes on elswhere in the airline. Your friend, the FO, was 'green' and really knew no better (apart from the fact minimas are not to be broken) as, I fear, this was the SOP. The captain, I would venture to suggest, having been 'brought up' in this third level airline culture, also knew no better. Yes he knew the rules as well as anyone but breaking the minima was just the SOP.
The cause of this crash runs much deeper than just what happened during those 45 mins at Cork.
I fear that your post is going to attract a lot of flak. Furthermore, it does reflect your own inexpereince and, perhaps, naivity surrounding this industry.
SOPs are designed and implemented to prevent this kind of crash (and I use the term crash quite deliberately - it was not an accident) from happening.
Many of us have benefitted from learning our trade with operators that provided thorough training and experienced captains who had all the Tshirts. Others, of course, don't, and I'm sure that they are equally good aviators.
However, in my expereince, what goes on on the flightdeck is a reflection of what goes on elswhere in the airline. Your friend, the FO, was 'green' and really knew no better (apart from the fact minimas are not to be broken) as, I fear, this was the SOP. The captain, I would venture to suggest, having been 'brought up' in this third level airline culture, also knew no better. Yes he knew the rules as well as anyone but breaking the minima was just the SOP.
The cause of this crash runs much deeper than just what happened during those 45 mins at Cork.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
judge11 you are absolutely right - I am inexperienced in this industry and I was giving my opinion on the matter. I didn't intend to offend anyone. Also I should have used the words crash and not accident. I suppose it's just difficult to process in my mind how this happened.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
such is the nature of current IFR training. E.g. Route - approach - missed approach - diversion - hold - approach - G/A - land
Diversion - It would have avoided all the "panic" and "nerves".
Your comparison with a soldier isn't a fair one. Soldiers are expected to put themselves in harms way and risk their lives. We are expected to avoid it.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct. I do still stand by my viewpoint which is that we are trained to pass the IRT and it is very possible to wing your way through a course without being a good aviator. The stories of some students performance during training is shocking and worrying. In fact someone at the same FTO failed a 170a twice and was declared dangerous by the examiner - managed to get through another one with a different examiner - failed his IRT and then partialled the second attempt and scraped through his MCC. He now flys for FR. It also took him twice as long to get released by the safety pilot as he was moaning about not being paid for nearly two months of flying.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots who struggle through their training are not neccessarily bad pilots. Indeed they may be safer than some of the 'aces' who find it all too easy. Being aware of your limitations is a good thing when it comes to being a pilot, particularly in the civil field. If he got through FR training then he met the standard required. FR are ruthless enough to eliminate anyone not up to spec.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well.
Absolute and total bolleaux.
Lost for words.
The chance of having two homicidal maniacs together in one flightdeck is beyond computation.
Personally l grieve for them.
ln those famous words....... end of.
Absolute and total bolleaux.
Lost for words.
The chance of having two homicidal maniacs together in one flightdeck is beyond computation.
Personally l grieve for them.
ln those famous words....... end of.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Spain
Age: 73
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still totally fail to understand the 2nd approach (reported by Ireland's AAIU as established on the ILS at 09.10:56) to RWY 35 after the initial missed approach on RWY 17 at 09:03 hrs. Surely if Cork ATC had refused permission for a change in runway (as no emergency had been declared) we would probably not be talking about this now?
Why was this request for a 2nd approach on a runway not in use at the time, not refused out of hand by Cork ATC in the absence of any declared emergency or other problem? The fact that RWY 35 is only ever Cat 1 with a minimum RVR of 750 metres makes it even more confusing.
I do not recall anyone seriously questioning this bizarre decision for the Captain to immediately request a 2nd approach on RWY 35 which Cork ATC immediately agreed to. It seems incredibly unprofessional in the absence of any emergency being declared. Was the Captain that desperate to get in on time that he made such a request? I feel certain he would have known that he had a VIP on board, a relative of the Irish President.
Is it the human behavioural key to the subsequent and fateful decision to attempt yet another 3rd approach on RWY 17 after a 20 minute hold? God alone must know what it must have been like for those passengers. Was their possible terrified behaviour by this time also a factor? What was actually said during that 20 minute hold?
Why was this request for a 2nd approach on a runway not in use at the time, not refused out of hand by Cork ATC in the absence of any declared emergency or other problem? The fact that RWY 35 is only ever Cat 1 with a minimum RVR of 750 metres makes it even more confusing.
I do not recall anyone seriously questioning this bizarre decision for the Captain to immediately request a 2nd approach on RWY 35 which Cork ATC immediately agreed to. It seems incredibly unprofessional in the absence of any emergency being declared. Was the Captain that desperate to get in on time that he made such a request? I feel certain he would have known that he had a VIP on board, a relative of the Irish President.
Is it the human behavioural key to the subsequent and fateful decision to attempt yet another 3rd approach on RWY 17 after a 20 minute hold? God alone must know what it must have been like for those passengers. Was their possible terrified behaviour by this time also a factor? What was actually said during that 20 minute hold?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's human nature - no one wants to admit defeat - I remember a longgg day at Balikpapan when it had no aids with Merpati & Bouraq planes trying every 10 minutes to land in smog without success - they just kept on trying
the Tower can't see the what the pilot can see (especially in misty conditions) and so they leave it up to him
HE is the one with the rules about not busting altitude
the Tower can't see the what the pilot can see (especially in misty conditions) and so they leave it up to him
HE is the one with the rules about not busting altitude
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because runway 35 has way better approach lights than 17.
Been there myself and missed on 17 then got the lights at 250ft on 35 with a 5knt tail.
I would imagine its not an uncommon request.
Been there myself and missed on 17 then got the lights at 250ft on 35 with a 5knt tail.
I would imagine its not an uncommon request.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not recall anyone seriously questioning this bizarre decision for the Captain to immediately request a 2nd approach on RWY 35 which Cork ATC immediately agreed to. It seems incredibly unprofessional in the absence of any emergency being declared
Do not try to shift the blame. It is clearly the crews fault. Why they felt they can´t go to Kerry instead we possibly will never know. They screwed up. End of.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not recall anyone seriously questioning this bizarre decision for the Captain to immediately request a 2nd approach on RWY 35 which Cork ATC immediately agreed to. It seems incredibly unprofessional in the absence of any emergency being declared.
The RVRs on RWY 17 were passed by Cork Approach to EC-ITP as 300 m (touchdown), 350 m (midpoint) and 550 m (stop-end) (300/350/550).
Now, given the exact minima for Cork, and the limitations for this specific aircraft, it does appear wholly "inappropriate" for the crew to continue the approach... but such "flexibility" of the crew (did not get in RW17, try 35?) is in fact expected of a commercial operation. Had he flown the approach to ~1000', and continued to minima/gone around if required based on the last RVR, a good decision.
So I disagree with your comments above. The error was the disregard for the rules.
NoD
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys/girls - let's leave this '35' approach out of it? As NoD says, both he and I may well have considered that option given those RVRrs, except that he and I would have handled it differently. It would be considered pretty much 'normal practice'. Throw sun direction into the equation too.
None of the approaches on either runway as far as we know were 'legal' and that is the nub of it.
None of the approaches on either runway as far as we know were 'legal' and that is the nub of it.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, the question is not 'did they have a legal accident?' it is 'was a high risk taken?'.
Until airlines start accepting the concept or managing risk, uneccessary accidents will continue. Hiding behind regulations as a definition of safety is SO last century.
Incidentally I would hope that Manx2 conducted vigourous audits on their ACMI providers aganist a clear set of standards and didn't just rely on 'they have an AOC'.
Does the UK's Corporate Manslaughter law extend to IoM BTW?
Until airlines start accepting the concept or managing risk, uneccessary accidents will continue. Hiding behind regulations as a definition of safety is SO last century.
Incidentally I would hope that Manx2 conducted vigourous audits on their ACMI providers aganist a clear set of standards and didn't just rely on 'they have an AOC'.
Does the UK's Corporate Manslaughter law extend to IoM BTW?
