Crash-Cork Airport

[DB6]

Managing risk my arse. 'Vigorous audits', 'clear set of standards'; what a load of ****e. It's called airmanship and I'm guessing you are something to do with EASA if you're spouting that sort of crap. It doesn't matter how many 'clear sets of standards' you have when they are ignored.
JAR/EASA permits this sort of operation, and for pilots to be on the flight deck of an airliner with less than 200 hours; look there for your problem.

[Shell Management]

Thats why Manx2 need/needed tougther standards then the regulatory minium. Keep up old boy! We are in the 21stC!

[Tinwald]

Mr Shell

'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'.

I don't think you appreciate quite what your're dealing with here. manx2 aren't an airline, they don't have a chief pilot, they don't have a quality manager, they don't have a safety manager - they're just a ticket selling operator. So just who do you think was going to carry out a 'vigorous audit' and set their 'clear set of standards'?

They were/ have been/are quite happy to go with any the cheapest options with an AOC - simple as that.

Should they have asked questions and dug deeper? Of course they should have and that's where they're going to be exposed in the courts - duty of care and all that, yessir.

[His dudeness]

JAR/EASA permits this sort of operation, and for pilots to be on the flight deck of an airliner with less than 200 hours; look there for your problem.

Hmm, IIRC none of them had less than 200 hrs...so...?

Should they have asked questions and dug deeper? Of course they should have and that's where they're going to be exposed in the courts - duty of care and all that, yessir.

Should they really? So they charter an outfit that has an AOC and should firstly ask operation related questions?

Bollocks, me thinks. THATS why there is an AOC. Proof that you have standards, an organization suitable etcetc.

[DB6]

That's just a general anti-EASA rant, stop being so picky!

[Spitoon]

Originally Posted by Lippstadt

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?

I think you misunderstand the role of ATC in this sort of sutuation, certainly in the UK/Eire environment. In broad terms, and subject to common sense bounds (which includes consideration of the traffic levels at Cork), ATC is there to provide the service that pilots request.

In foggy conditions there is little wind and the runway in use selected is normally that which offers the best landing/lighting aids. Whatever the reason that a pilot asks for the reciprocal, if the traffic situation permits it, ATC will 'switch ends'. In my day (a few years ago now) at an airport with some similarities to Cork, this was quite common and certatainly didn't require anyone to declare an emergency.

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?

Again, as other have pointed out, this is not ATC's role.

Whilst there are a number of posts in this thread seeking to spread 'the blame about', professionals in this industry are aware of the respective responsibilities of each person involved. Sadly, as it turned out in this case, the pilots of this aircraft appear not to have discharged their responsibilities properly. It well may be that the regulators that issued the AOC may not have adequately discharged their responsibilities or that the EASA rule regime does not adequately control this type of activity, but that is something for the accident investigation to consider.

[Lurking_SLF]

Irish Times - 20th April - Safety concerns over operator of Cork crash aircraft

Published today in the Irish Times

AVIATION REGULATORS have raised serious safety concerns about the Spanish air carrier whose small passenger aircraft crashed at Cork airport in February with the loss of six lives.

The authorities in Spain took steps last month to suspend the air operator certificate of Barcelona-based Flightline, but it continues to fly pending the evaluation of a corrective plan to improve safety procedures on its flights......

Safety concerns over operator of Cork crash aircraft - The Irish Times - Wed, Apr 20, 2011

I am what my user name says, so I'm providing this link without any comment what so ever.

Darragh

[Owlery]

I won't comment on this either, but it's worth a read;

Airline boss hits out over MHK

[Che Guevara]

Please note that MANX2 boss, Noel Hayes, makes no mention about flight duty periods, indeed he is talking about actual flight time. It is therefore conceivable that his critic who, Peter Karran, who mentioned 14 hour duty days may well be correct in his criticism, it will certainly be interesting to find out.

[justanotherflyer]

From the article:

Spain informed the air safety committee that following discrepancies found during inspections of Flightline, AESA had initiated on 14th March 2011 a procedure to suspend the air operator certificate of Flightline and had introduced precautionary measures to address the immediate safety concern. AESA confirmed that Flightline had subsequently taken action to address the immediate safety concern and also provided a corrective action plan which was being evaluated by AESA.

Quite alarming, in fact astonishing, that a full month after the Cork crash, the Spanish authorities were forcing Flightline to "address... [an] immediate safety concern" at the risk of losing their AOC. Are Flightline still operating on behalf of Manx2? If not, who are they operating for?

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by Che Guevara

Please note that MANX2 boss, Noel Hayes, makes no mention about flight duty periods, indeed he is talking about actual flight time.

Well nobody from Manx2 would know anything about airline operation in the 50% of their time when they deny being an airline.

For the other 50% of their time they are, of course, encouraging the view that they are an airline, notable in the press article here where the smiling photograph is under the headline "Airline Boss".

"Excuse me, Airline Boss, Are Manx2 an airline or not ?"

"Well now, that all depends on what the next question is ....".

[White Knight]

Originally Posted by corsair

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.

Very much disagree! Pilots who struggle through their training are often totally ignorant of how useless they are as aviators - I've seen this over many years and outfits Give me an ace F/O over a useless F/O ANY day of the week

[silverknapper]

The examples he uses bear zero resemblance to his own shoddy outfit. I hope this is picked up on by the publication in question. To compare Manx 2 with Loganair, a professional, established, fully managed AOC holder in it's own right operating a franchise for another bigger operation is quite frankly laughable. And as Che points out he is quoting Flight hours not total duty hours. Please correct me if i'm wrong but last I looked a standard type of ops manual quoted 2000 hrs for this.

This chap Peter Karran sounds pretty much on the money, and I hope he presses on further in his questioning of this dubious setup.

Not only is this idiot being manipulative with the facts, but by blustering on like this when it is clear there were serious issues with his 'operation,' if it can be called that, he is doing a disservice to the families of those who perished as a result of their decision to buy a ticket from him.

[corsair]

Very much disagree! Pilots who struggle through their training are often totally ignorant of how useless they are as aviators - I've seen this over many years and outfits Give me an ace F/O over a useless F/O ANY day of the week

I take your point but in my experience an ace who finds it all too easy is all too often taken by surprise when it goes pear shaped. Someone who has had to work for it has seen it before and takes nothing for granted. It is a matter of degree though. Essentially I'm referring to someone who isn't useless but has to work harder than the aces of this world. As a result they take nothing for granted. Frankly that applies to most of us. Not everyone is a potential Red Arrows pilot.

People vary in their capabilities, hardly a profound statement. But such is life. Good pilots can be born or made.

But you are right, a genuinely useless pilot can get through, quite often they are oblivious to their uselessness even though it's glaringly obvious to all around them.

My point which I really didn't make clear was that being a good pilot isn't simply about sailing through the training and having it fall into place. It's also about attitude and taking the job seriously.

[sevenstrokeroll]

I remember one sort of odd instrument approach with a new copilot on the metroliner back in the middle 80's. (VOR apch to opposite end airfield instead of ILS to normal runway)

After we landed, I looked at him and said, I'd rather have another 170 pounds of fuel than you in the copilot seat.

He said he had been on reserve and hadn't flown in awhile. I said: great, you should have memorized every procedure in the book, but instead you probably were just sitting around goofing off.

[Shell Management]

The Manx2 style set up can work perfectly safely if the contract contains detailed standards (not simply requiring an AOC) and the standards are enforced by knowlagable aviation advisors and a regular QA audit programme.

Thats the model the oil industry uses.

[flydive1]

Looking forward to enjoy in aviation the same perfect safety record as in the oil industry..........well, actually, maybe not........

[Shell Management]

Aviation has a lot to learn from the oil and gas industry.

[silverknapper]

Agree that the type of setup has the potential to work, but only tightly regulated, using reputable operators and machinery and all working to standard which exceeds that which an airline on it's own would set. Therefore when the inevitable deterioration sets in due to having several operators, the standard actually achieved is still of a reasonable level.
Sadly Manx2 have never set out to achieve any standard at all, and were only interested in £££.

Aviation has a lot to learn from the oil and gas industry

Here we go again, Shell Management giving us all a telling off about how safe the oil industry is. If aviation ever deteriorates to the level of safety demonstrated by Shell in Nigeria I'll be off!

[Shell Management]

Shell Companies in Nigeria (SCiN) have a superb safety record. Despite working in an extremely demanding environment , they have had just one air accident in 25 years and that was a production defect on a helicopter component, and no injuries at all.