Smartwings B738 over Aegean Sea on Aug 22nd 2019
I´d advise for a little caution with that Austrianwings article.
First of all, Austrianwings does not enjoy the highest reputation as a news source. I´d liken it to the Daily Mail or similar.
Secondly, all this article does is *claim* that the name of Smartwings chief pilot has been found in Czech media. " Bereits kurz nach dem Vorfall wurde in Branchenkreisen sowie in tschechischen Medien immer wieder ein Name genannt: Pavel Vesely. " translates as: "Already shortly after the incident, circles and the Czech media repeatedly reported one name: P. V.". Nowhere in this article is it claimed that Austrianwings had achieved own investigation results:
"Mehrere Mailanfragen an die Smartwings-Pressestelle und an Pavel Vesely selbst, ob er tatsächlich der Pilot des betreffenden Fluges war, blieben bis dato unbeantwortet. Sollte Vesely der Pilot in Command gewesen sein, würde das generelle Fragen nach der Sicherheitskultur im Unternehmen aufwerfen."
...translates as: "Multiple email requests for information directed to Smartwings public relation and P. V. himself, asking whether or not he was indeed piloting the concerned flight remained unanswered until now. Should V. have been PIC, it would pose some general questions on the companies safety culture."
So, to sum it up, the quoted article makes much ado about very little except for rehashing some (as to now) rumours and is IMHO not furthering the issue at hand.
First of all, Austrianwings does not enjoy the highest reputation as a news source. I´d liken it to the Daily Mail or similar.
Secondly, all this article does is *claim* that the name of Smartwings chief pilot has been found in Czech media. " Bereits kurz nach dem Vorfall wurde in Branchenkreisen sowie in tschechischen Medien immer wieder ein Name genannt: Pavel Vesely. " translates as: "Already shortly after the incident, circles and the Czech media repeatedly reported one name: P. V.". Nowhere in this article is it claimed that Austrianwings had achieved own investigation results:
"Mehrere Mailanfragen an die Smartwings-Pressestelle und an Pavel Vesely selbst, ob er tatsächlich der Pilot des betreffenden Fluges war, blieben bis dato unbeantwortet. Sollte Vesely der Pilot in Command gewesen sein, würde das generelle Fragen nach der Sicherheitskultur im Unternehmen aufwerfen."
...translates as: "Multiple email requests for information directed to Smartwings public relation and P. V. himself, asking whether or not he was indeed piloting the concerned flight remained unanswered until now. Should V. have been PIC, it would pose some general questions on the companies safety culture."
So, to sum it up, the quoted article makes much ado about very little except for rehashing some (as to now) rumours and is IMHO not furthering the issue at hand.
Thread Starter
I´d advise for a little caution with that Austrianwings article.
First of all, Austrianwings does not enjoy the highest reputation as a news source. I´d liken it to the Daily Mail or similar.
Secondly, all this article does is *claim* that the name of Smartwings chief pilot has been found in Czech media. " Bereits kurz nach dem Vorfall wurde in Branchenkreisen sowie in tschechischen Medien immer wieder ein Name genannt: Pavel Vesely. " translates as: "Already shortly after the incident, circles and the Czech media repeatedly reported one name: P. V.". Nowhere in this article is it claimed that Austrianwings had achieved own investigation results:
"Mehrere Mailanfragen an die Smartwings-Pressestelle und an Pavel Vesely selbst, ob er tatsächlich der Pilot des betreffenden Fluges war, blieben bis dato unbeantwortet. Sollte Vesely der Pilot in Command gewesen sein, würde das generelle Fragen nach der Sicherheitskultur im Unternehmen aufwerfen."
...translates as: "Multiple email requests for information directed to Smartwings public relation and P. V. himself, asking whether or not he was indeed piloting the concerned flight remained unanswered until now. Should V. have been PIC, it would pose some general questions on the companies safety culture."
So, to sum it up, the quoted article makes much ado about very little except for rehashing some (as to now) rumours and is IMHO not furthering the issue at hand.
First of all, Austrianwings does not enjoy the highest reputation as a news source. I´d liken it to the Daily Mail or similar.
Secondly, all this article does is *claim* that the name of Smartwings chief pilot has been found in Czech media. " Bereits kurz nach dem Vorfall wurde in Branchenkreisen sowie in tschechischen Medien immer wieder ein Name genannt: Pavel Vesely. " translates as: "Already shortly after the incident, circles and the Czech media repeatedly reported one name: P. V.". Nowhere in this article is it claimed that Austrianwings had achieved own investigation results:
"Mehrere Mailanfragen an die Smartwings-Pressestelle und an Pavel Vesely selbst, ob er tatsächlich der Pilot des betreffenden Fluges war, blieben bis dato unbeantwortet. Sollte Vesely der Pilot in Command gewesen sein, würde das generelle Fragen nach der Sicherheitskultur im Unternehmen aufwerfen."
...translates as: "Multiple email requests for information directed to Smartwings public relation and P. V. himself, asking whether or not he was indeed piloting the concerned flight remained unanswered until now. Should V. have been PIC, it would pose some general questions on the companies safety culture."
So, to sum it up, the quoted article makes much ado about very little except for rehashing some (as to now) rumours and is IMHO not furthering the issue at hand.
Secondly, multiple email requests directed to Smartwings public relation and P. V. himself are showing clearly austrianwing's effort to shed some light on the dark.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: FR
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I understand that the 'who the Cpt was' makes the situation 'even worse'. But it is so bad to start with, and "apparently" it is a Company problem, that in the end does not (should not) matter who was flying that day?
Then let me clarify my point.
There may be an "effort to shed some light", but did it come to fruition? Did Austrianwings find out anything on the issue it spreads rumours on? It would have befitted a reputable media house to wait until they had "hardened" their accusations instead of blaring them out as mere insinuations. Compare the title as well, bearing a question mark instead of a full stop. All those are signs of yellow press style journalism.
The same can be said for the anonymous quotations of supposed experts - a reputable publication would have at least stated that the name of the contribuant is known to them but not stated for some reason. Also, typically of Austrianwings, the article is not signed by any author, just "red" for redaction.
So again, Austrianwings is in my opinion not a reputable news outlet and should be in no ways considered authoritative when it comes to such an investigation.
There may be an "effort to shed some light", but did it come to fruition? Did Austrianwings find out anything on the issue it spreads rumours on? It would have befitted a reputable media house to wait until they had "hardened" their accusations instead of blaring them out as mere insinuations. Compare the title as well, bearing a question mark instead of a full stop. All those are signs of yellow press style journalism.
The same can be said for the anonymous quotations of supposed experts - a reputable publication would have at least stated that the name of the contribuant is known to them but not stated for some reason. Also, typically of Austrianwings, the article is not signed by any author, just "red" for redaction.
So again, Austrianwings is in my opinion not a reputable news outlet and should be in no ways considered authoritative when it comes to such an investigation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Czechia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those not speaking Czech, the gist of the memo above is a request for Smartwings employees "not to comment on social networks and publish internal information on internet". It also says that "several gross violations" of the company policy prohibiting such behaviour are being investigated.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It also says that "several gross violations" of the company policy prohibiting such behaviour are being investigated.
I wonder why the authorities do not pull the AOC. The CVR seems already be unavailable. If the PIC was an officer of the airline, they have no place in this BIZ.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: FR
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: STR
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any source on the CVR being erased already? Or since the plane went back into ops is had been overwrote? Does EASA not go straight to the plane and pull the data when an illegal fuel landing is reported?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Switzerland ... oh wait: Swaziland
Posts: 797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definitely the main problem of the whole occurence...
Thread Starter
BTW it took the effort of an aviation website to uncover this incident.
Last edited by gearlever; 30th Aug 2019 at 08:29.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moreover and more of a problem is the pre-justice done. An inquiry board should not have the public opinion towering over them. (as it happens so often!)
Your second sentence does not make sense to me - you meant to un - cover ?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Third planet from the sun
Posts: 33
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Hungarian ATC person made a seemingly reasonable and informed submission. I've had reason to comment on poor aviation safety in my career too. Do you really think safety is maintained by aviation authority audits of paperwork and a few information bulletins? Sometimes you have to call out bad practice for what it is.
Remember every dodgy operator out there puts pressure on the the ones that do it right to further cut costs, training, maintenance and customer service. We are in a race to the bottom on this industry and we may have seen an example of why this is so.
Remember every dodgy operator out there puts pressure on the the ones that do it right to further cut costs, training, maintenance and customer service. We are in a race to the bottom on this industry and we may have seen an example of why this is so.
Is it just me or are people completely missing the plot here.
A certified airline carried well over 100 passengers for several hundred miles in a twin with a failed engine and low fuel warnings, contrary to a truckload of regulations.
In response, posters want to focus on the perceived illegality of listening to A to G communications.
A certified airline carried well over 100 passengers for several hundred miles in a twin with a failed engine and low fuel warnings, contrary to a truckload of regulations.
In response, posters want to focus on the perceived illegality of listening to A to G communications.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just me or are people completely missing the plot here.
A certified airline carried well over 100 passengers for several hundred miles in a twin with a failed engine and low fuel warnings, contrary to a truckload of regulations.
In response, posters want to focus on the perceived illegality of listening to A to G communications.
A certified airline carried well over 100 passengers for several hundred miles in a twin with a failed engine and low fuel warnings, contrary to a truckload of regulations.
In response, posters want to focus on the perceived illegality of listening to A to G communications.
Thread Starter
EASA versus FAA
While FAA is very clear on OEI issues, are there similar EASA regulations?
Thx
While FAA is very clear on OEI issues, are there similar EASA regulations?
Thx
CFR § 121.565 Engine inoperative: Landing; reporting.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, whenever an airplane engine fails or whenever an engine is shutdown to prevent possible damage, the pilot in command must land the airplane at the nearest suitable airport, in point of time, at which a safe landing can be made.
(b) If not more than one engine of an airplane that has three or more engines fails or is shut down to prevent possible damage, the pilot-in-command may proceed to an airport that the pilot selects if, after considering the following, the pilot makes a reasonable decision that proceeding to that airport is as safe as landing at the nearest suitable airport:
(1) The nature of the malfunction and the possible mechanical difficulties that may occur if flight is continued.
(2) The altitude, weight, and useable fuel at the time that the engine is shutdown.
(3) The weather conditions en route and at possible landing points.
(4) The air traffic congestion.
(5) The kind of terrain.
(6) His familiarity with the airport to be used.
(c) The pilot-in-command must report each engine shutdown in flight to the appropriate communication facility as soon as practicable and must keep that facility fully informed of the progress of the flight.
(d) If the pilot in command lands at an airport other than the nearest suitable airport, in point of time, he or she shall (upon completing the trip) send a written report, in duplicate, to his or her director of operations stating the reasons for determining that the selection of an airport, other than the nearest airport, was as safe a course of action as landing at the nearest suitable airport. The director of operations shall, within 10 days after the pilot returns to his or her home base, send a copy of this report with the director of operation's comments to the responsible Flight Standards office.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, whenever an airplane engine fails or whenever an engine is shutdown to prevent possible damage, the pilot in command must land the airplane at the nearest suitable airport, in point of time, at which a safe landing can be made.
(b) If not more than one engine of an airplane that has three or more engines fails or is shut down to prevent possible damage, the pilot-in-command may proceed to an airport that the pilot selects if, after considering the following, the pilot makes a reasonable decision that proceeding to that airport is as safe as landing at the nearest suitable airport:
(1) The nature of the malfunction and the possible mechanical difficulties that may occur if flight is continued.
(2) The altitude, weight, and useable fuel at the time that the engine is shutdown.
(3) The weather conditions en route and at possible landing points.
(4) The air traffic congestion.
(5) The kind of terrain.
(6) His familiarity with the airport to be used.
(c) The pilot-in-command must report each engine shutdown in flight to the appropriate communication facility as soon as practicable and must keep that facility fully informed of the progress of the flight.
(d) If the pilot in command lands at an airport other than the nearest suitable airport, in point of time, he or she shall (upon completing the trip) send a written report, in duplicate, to his or her director of operations stating the reasons for determining that the selection of an airport, other than the nearest airport, was as safe a course of action as landing at the nearest suitable airport. The director of operations shall, within 10 days after the pilot returns to his or her home base, send a copy of this report with the director of operation's comments to the responsible Flight Standards office.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Athens, Greece
Age: 40
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things are simple.
EASA OPA.GEN.160 Occurrence Reporting:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/def...ORA.pdf#page15
All European airlines should report to the competent authority any occurrence of one of the following:
http://emsa.europa.eu/retro/Docs/mar...e_200342ec.pdf
Aircraft technical, iii, b: ”Flameout, shutdown or malfunction of any engine.“
Now if the airline actually reported that, this is another thing...
EASA OPA.GEN.160 Occurrence Reporting:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/def...ORA.pdf#page15
All European airlines should report to the competent authority any occurrence of one of the following:
http://emsa.europa.eu/retro/Docs/mar...e_200342ec.pdf
Aircraft technical, iii, b: ”Flameout, shutdown or malfunction of any engine.“
Now if the airline actually reported that, this is another thing...
