Last I heard he was expected to recover. When asked about the crash he said he doesn't recall anything.

The newspaper article quoted just above said:
"The co-pilot, James Polehinke, was the sole survivor and is undergoing rehabilitation at a Lexington hospital."
I think we all hope he'll make it....

New NTSB recommendations :ugh:

I find this comment interesting:
“The board is concerned that, in the case of the Comair flight 5191 accident, both pilots recognized the unlighted runway during the takeoff roll but did not use that information to reevaluate whether they were on the correct runway for takeoff,” the letter says.

Regarding the health of F/O Polehinke..
Business and Commercial Aviation magazine reported in the November 2006 issue, that his family said that his left leg has been amputated and he faces several more major sugeries.
A low level of an "over-the-counter" decongestant was detected in his blood, but no other illicit substance or alcohol. As stated, he has still no recollection of the accident.
I wish him the best in what will no doubt be a long difficult road to recovery.

Anniversary article
 

The easiest thing in the world to do, says the 35-year-old widow, is "blame the dead guy."

http://kentucky.com/news/state/story/153138.html

Sadly, this response from the pilot's widow was expected. It must be very hard for her.

Dumb Question
 

Silly question from non-pilot. Why not mark the bearing and possibly distance remaining at intervals on the runway? It's cheap, never goes wrong, and is used extensively by road engineers.

OK. Steel helmet, flak jacket, entrenching tool.

fyi
 

TGOP

Simple explanation:

http://www.pilotfriend.com/training/.../rnwy_mark.htm

A little more informative:

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...M/chap2toc.htm

SADLY
 

you see, many airports do have distance remaining signs...they are very nice

as far as bearing, the numbers at the beginning of the runway are the bearing with the "0" left off the end...

all takeoffs should be made with the plane sitting on top of the "NUMBERS", but they aren't always that way.

the answer to "why don't they"...MONEY.

Its all about money. Pilots are encouraged to move things along by their company, by ATC...time is money...so why taxi back 200 feet to start from the numbers...that would take an extra 2 minutes.

Aviation knows the right thing to do, but sadly its all about cost


Cost like making sure pilots from day one check compass to runway bearing

(when I was an active flight instructor, even my newest, lowest time students knew: TLC upon line up, cleared for takeoff

T=transponder on
L= lights on
C= compass...check with runway bearing.

and these students were with some 10 flying hours...not thousands.

Rant is through...put away your entrenching tool...a spoon will do.

ML, at least in the first link I find absolutely no answer to TGOP's question (?)

:confused:

I always thought those big white stripes and fat white numbers on the runway meant something. I'd better write a damning letter to ICAO and tell them they've got it all wrong

we are talking about

in which way does your (tongue in cheek) remark about "big white stripes and fat white numbers on the runway" (which the pilot steering Comair 5191 could not see) help answer the question?

Chill!
 

:ouch:

The top of the page for the first link has a diagram of some basic distance markings on the runway. If you're being directed to another webpage with different information then my apologies.

The question asked by TGOP has nothing to do with whether the pilots saw the markings or not, but what information exists on any runway to denote distance remaining. Your typical FAA standard precision/non precision approach runway in the States will always have distance markers running alongside the centreline to tell you how much runway you've eaten up and once you're past the midpoint, how much is remaining (unless either end has a displaced threshold, in which case, a little maths is needed). So for TGOP's benefit, I put up that first link to show a simple diagram that illustrates one part of his/her question. The second link is there if he/she feels like expanding on that first diagram.

By asking about 'bearing' of the runway I'm assuming the question is with regards to the direction of the runway. Though it's not strictly the correct term as a runway has a 'heading' and is not considered 'bearing' from anything, unless you're using it as a navigation reference in relation to something else. I've heard plenty of non aviators/maritimers use the terms bearing/heading interchangeably, so if i've misunderstood TGOP's question then please feel free to add substance here.

Anyone, jump in here anytime if I've kakked up. TGOP, if you revisit this page please let me know if I've misunderstood your question.

1. actually the runway has a static bearing...but we call it a heading as a short cut.

2. Those nice big ICAO markings are reserved for instrument runways...the shorter runway that the plane took off from was a day vfr runway only and didn't have the big fat stripes etc.

And if any pilots on this forum went to the same flying school/flight training that the captain and copilot went to, could you please let us know if checking runway alignment with compass was SOP prior to crash?

And did they ever get instructed in using the Localizer receiver to verify centerline of ILS equipped runways?

both are used, I've taught both.

just would like to know.

SMall correction, ML, they are always distance remaining, it does not change at the mid-point of the runway.

GF

Runway markings.
 

Thank you ML for the runway marking links. I was using "bearing" in the nautical sense as shorthand for magnetic compass bearing. Of course heading is the correct term. Such are the dangers of using jargon when one is not familiar with the subject.

As TH says, the pilots did not see the markings that would have alerted them to their mistake and considering the extraordinarily high level of safety in aviation training and equipment I wondered if the obvious had been overlooked.

My post was prompted by the poster who mentioned of the Honeywell ground GPS guidance system which would be very costly and slow to adopt. The saying; "to a man with a hammer all problems look like nails", came to mind.

Right, back to the bunker.

TGOP hope it helps; GF, oops, thanks for the correction!

ground guidance equipment
 

the heck with it...just buy a bucket of high visibility paint and make darn sure you put it in the right places on the airport.

Factual Report from the NTSB:

http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2007/AAR0705.pdf


And the media:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...ucky-Crash.php

It could have been deja vu all over again :ugh:

Mullah Lite:

Those are valid questions, but if those pilots were in a hurry (they had begun a preflight on the wrong aircraft, then switched to the correct ship number) or did not use their taxi lights until they were pushing the throttles forward and reading their "Lineup" or "Before Takeoff" checklist fairly quickly, they would not be looking much outside.

But heck, they did not mind that the runway lights were off. Why did they not ask the Tower to switch them on? This might have prevented a tragedy.

By the way, at our hubs, many pilots leave their taxi lights off much of the time. I guess that is a symptom of being cool. But I really don't know. It goes way beyond courtesy. It must be some sort of fashion-it has happened for many years.
Some of the original 727s never had taxi lights installed.

Ignition :
Recommendation # 7 from USALPA Report after the Tenerife crash in 1977 :

I would really like to know how Comair trains their pilots and whether the training had line up compass check...does anyone know???

It seems that they don't:)

Comair trains their pilots rather well, IMHO. And yes, the training does include a heading check at lineup.

flyboyike...does the written checklist include words to the effect: compass heading/runway alignment check?

Negative, at least not yet.

Flyboyike:

since before comair existed:

TLC has been my line up checklist:

Transponder:on

Lights: on

Compass: check

fly safe.

As it has mine and every CA I've flown with so far. However, the written checklist still doesn't mention it, neither here, nor at a few carriers that I've had a chance to jumpseat on.

You can't have a checklist response for every single threat that we deal with in avitaion. If that was the case, why don't we have a "check weather" or "check for traffic on runway" readout on the checklist? That is because we are profesional pilots and hopefully we are of the caliber to think of these things when we are at work. But even profesionals mess up sometimes.

These guys royally f****d up, and it should serve as a reminder that we should be paying attention as we get ready to blast off. That is the only lesson we can take away from this tragedy.

You can have a checklist item for threats...it is a choice by those who run the airline.


When I taught flying, I explained what had to be done on taking the runway for takeoff...checking final for traffic was one of them

checking the compass/dg/heading indicator was something also part of the training.

IF pilots are checking things because it is a part of their training, the checklist might be shorter.

Who really forked up? Look at the training department for the real answer...and both pilots first instructors.

"These guys royally f****d up, and it should serve as a reminder that we should be paying attention as we get ready to blast off. That is the only lesson we can take away from this tragedy."

Hi Sqwak, first off I am neither pilot nor aviation professional, only interested observer and occasional pax. That said, I have followed the thread with interest and disagree with some of your statement.

Certainly they messed up royally, agreed.

That is the only lesson, disagree. Consider the swiss cheese model, it has many holes, but the event only occurs when they all line up. In the instance at hand, there was runway construction, lights absent, possibly ambiguous or obscure or unread or unremembered notifications, possible lack of required ATC personnel, possible inattendence or poor attention of ATC, possible poor signage or runway markings, possible weather or time of day factors, and I could continue. All these have been mentioned.

My point is that absent any one of these possibles, there would be no incident and no discussion here. ALL the factors were in place, and some of them were beyond control of the pilots. Yes they should have observed factors beyond their control, and yes they had ultimate responsibility in which they failed. The other factors were also mistakes in the system for which the pilots were not prepared, despite their extensive training, and which should not have been operative. They fell victim to a combination of circumstances including but not limited to their own inattention. JHMO.

IMO you can't make aviation fool proof by adding more BS to a checklist, it's not on my checklist and I seem to make it to the right runway despite. I feel that a lot of the responsibility falls on the way the FO is weighted down with paper work during a critical phase of flight, we need to free up crews on the way out to the runway so they are both in the loop, rant over. :}

Ah, no, but what one can do instead is have the checklist properly constructed, to wit...

Last item on the before takeoff check list....

Configuration check.
1. Flaps.... Set, and agree with the takeoff data
2. Spoilers ...down
3. Stab trim....Set
4. Compasses...compared, and checked for runway alignment

It really is that simple folks...as PanAmerican learned a long time ago, after a rather serious accident.

Sadly, most in aviation don't (won't) learn from others mistakes.

411A may have overstated...It's not QUITE that bad, but in aviation (as in every other endeavor):

1) There are those who learn from the mistakes of others

2) There are those who learn from their own mistakes

3) There are those who never learn

:(

411A

you make a fine point about learning from past mistakes...one very sad thing is there is no real mechanism other than personal study, on how things came to be in flying.

why we do things.

I'll wager that a number of people can't tell us why the low altitude airway structure is called Victor airways.

What the airways were called before they were Victor airways.

how the runway markings came about.

and why we check the compass on runway line up.

There is an old axiom about how to remove your bayone from your rifle in the US Army. There is the Army way, and the obvious way. The obvious way is to grab the rifle barrel and pull off the bayonet. The army way is to put the rifle stock between your legs and pull off the bayonet.

If someone explains why the army has you look dorky to take off your bayonet, then you realize how smart the old ways are.

And if you can't figure out this bayonet drill, then you might learn the hard way.

Sadly, the modern "ratings factory" method of producing pilots often leaves gaps in Airmanship and Aeronanutical knowledge.

FWIW.... 'not much' I hear you say.:}

I think OVER reliance on checklists is what causes stuff like this to happen.

Folk have it drummed into them that they MUST follow the C/L at all costs.

This leads them to think that as long as the DO follow the C/L ,that all will be well.

People need, ABOVE ALL ELSE, to think-and to be aware of their surroundings.

Also to realise that Airmen, above all else, rely on Airmanship and NOT checklists or slavish adherence to SOP's (invaluable tho' they certainly are) to keep themselves alive!

Applevid :
I, for one, would be interested to know the history behind.
Off topic :
Until after 1st World War, there were no airports and runways, just airfields , where you always took off and landed against the wind. I guess the price of land near large cities and that of concrete dictated the design of runways.

ATC watcher

I don't know about the 'Victor' ones but the 'Alpha' ones were 'Amber'

the Bravo ones were 'Blue' and Golf were Green.

'Violet' maybe?