Does anyone know what the Mach speed was on initiation of recovery. I could only find that it was "in the red".

Speed was past mach 0.82(544 mph, 876 km/h, 473 kt)..... or should I say overspeed. according to the dfdr data
As has been said before .......easily recoverable situation from fl370.
I find it hard to accept this level of incompetence....in fact I would not accept this level of incompetence on my fight deck.period.

Jumpy, from the DFDR section of the DGCA report quoted earlier:
.
The report lists Vd as M 0.89. Beyond that, you are a test pilot.

I stand corrected ....thank you Machinbird.
Overspeed was indeed 0.88 (way too fast lol)
And still totally unacceptable.

punkalouver: that is the way the story strikes me as well. It's probably more a question of politics/corruption on the part of the so-called investigators than it is simple incompetence. But we'll never know I suppose.

Graybeard: I assumed you were being facetious. How could any Captain expect to discover incompetence on the part of the F/O, even at the level suggested by the facts here, in the short period of time prior to takeoff? Hardly a reasonable expectation. It is, after all, the job of the company, it's training staff and the regulators who set the rules, to try to ensure that incompetents like this don't darken the doors of a cockpit. I do not expect the Captain to do that except in very rare cases (e.g. gross intoxication).

There does seem to be something to the Buffalo analogy.

Not facetious at all. AIE captains should have enough judgement skills to see incompetence. After all, this is not likely the only under trained copilot on their roster.

I have a pic of a placard on a copilot's panel:

---------------------

Copilot Checklist:

1. Don't touch anything

2. Keep your mouth shut

-----------------

Graybeard
Doesn't help at all in an Egyptair 990 situation.
See this NTSB - Publication if you don't remember the circumstances.
That's why the DGCA report smells-no mention of that possible aspect to this event.

Graybeard: as I understand you, "deal with it" means "if I don't know this copilot, I must assume my copilot is a suicidal oxygen thief."

If that is what you mean, that's a pretty nasty occupational culture to be working in. :(

Graybeard: I still think you're being facetious to a degree. Precistly to what degree I wouldn't know.

The future - is it here?
 

Could / can / will something alike this ever happen in a FAA / EU based cockpit?

Are our training standards really up to par?

I have for example personally dealt with several student pilots who come back from Spain based FTOs with fresh IRME ratings. Now they want their CPL, but they can't fly. They can't take a VOR bearing and they cant fly attitude based flying, but merely re-act rather than pro-act. Basic flying skills are generally not up to par in my opinion.

Yet, they still have a JAR IRME just as valid as mine.

My personal opinion is that the bar is set too low and that schools/examinors are letting through people that should have been stopped.
Some of these guys WILL slip through again into bigger planes and they WILL someday cause bigger incidences.

http://dgca.nic.in/accident/reports/incident/VT-AXJ.pdf

I am hoping that this might enlighten some who think that a pilot who has a larger number of "flight hours" in his/her log book equates to a greater probability that he/she is, therefore, more competent.

Explain what you mean, Air Rabbit? Your comments make no sense to me.

Quote:

---

I am hoping that this might enlighten some who think that a pilot who has a larger number of "flight hours" in his/her log book equates to a greater probability that he/she is, therefore, more competent.

---

I think what rabbit is referring to is the debate regarding cadet FO going directly into the RHS. Not sure what side of the debate rabbit is on but let us look at this particular FO’s hours:
Total flying experience 1310 hours
Experience on type: 968 hours

So he has less than 1500 hours and would definitely be classed as inexperienced. Further, his non-type hours are 342 which also indicates that he was a direct entry cadet and had little more than flight training experience. Certainly no GA type flying was done by this novice and he would have little or no real airmanship skill. If the PIC became incapacitated for any reason, it is probable that this plane would have become a wreck.
A strong case AGAINST direct entry cadets if I ever saw one.

And this is assuming that all his hours were real:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/434529-fake-pilots-helps-explain-lot-things.html

Is there any information on what now happens to the involved crew?

PERJ,

I have found most Spanish FTO trained young collegues good pilots who know how to feel the aircraft. So I have to disagree with your opinion of Spanish FTO's.
In the case of the AIE incident, the FO clearly was suicidal or had never learned how to feel an aircraft. Maybe he was Oxford trained?:oh:

Sounds like the co-pilot knew how to operate the Auto-pilot and thats about it. Its a shame that pilots aren't forced to train in the most basic of planes so they learn the fundamentals. I cringe when I see g1000 in a training aircraft as they steal attention from actually flying the thing!! Out of the whole fleet Im flying I prefer the VFR only PA28-181 with half the stuff in it INOP because its good honest aviation and such a beautiful machine to fly. Autopilot, GPS430, fuel computers etc is not necessary if you are in touch with what your flying.

Its a shame a pilot in such a position has none of the necessary skills required when you take it back to basics. Its a motor action - trees getting bigger so pull stick back! I dont mean to rip on indians as im sure many are capable pilots but today we had one who couldn't find the right end of the runway, couldn't operate the self serve fuel pump and had no clue what he was doing while taxiing. Needless to say he was not given takeoff clearance and his instructor had to come pick him up.

Did not work well in Buffalo

Push forward trees get smaller, pull back trees get smaller, pull back more trees get bigger again ;)

"Could / can / will" - or has ?

Like, say, pulling back on the stick, presumably in some kind of panic, right through the stick shaker and against the full force of the stick pusher, and stalling into the ground as a result. Is that "alike" enough ?

" I cringe when I see g1000 in a training aircraft as they steal attention from actually flying the thing!! "

I began flight training around 1990....I never saw so much as a DME until I was about to start my IR. Just basic panel - fully agree this is how it should be! :ok:

" couldn't find the right end of the runway, couldn't operate the self serve fuel pump and had no clue what he was doing while taxiing."
First question....why did his instructor sign him off for solo? Or..was this similar to what I saw with some Asian cadets who had really severe language problems?