Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > Safety, CRM, QA & Emergency Response Planning
Reload this Page >

Iberia IB6166, BOS-MAD, 2nd Dec, Cowboys !!!!

Safety, CRM, QA & Emergency Response Planning A wide ranging forum for issues facing Aviation Professionals and Academics

Iberia IB6166, BOS-MAD, 2nd Dec, Cowboys !!!!

Old 17th Dec 2007, 17:22
  #361 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: home
Posts: 1,562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Scimitar I agree.
Well done LTD you did all you could, & if your thread makes just a handful of people think more carefully about just winging it then it has served a purpose.
Right Way Up is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2007, 17:30
  #362 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...if your thread makes just a handful of people think more carefully about just winging it then it has served a purpose.
Was it necessary to identify the airline and crew for that to happen?
Clarence Oveur is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 05:54
  #363 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: asia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Surely the point about identifying the callsign/airline/whatever is reasonanbly irrelevant in this case?

Given that all the transmissions are recorded and available for public analysis just naming the airport would be enough for someone with enough time to extract the gory details of who said what, etc.
stickyb is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 06:16
  #364 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: home
Posts: 1,562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Clarence,
Unfortunately it might be the case. Those people who push the boundaries because they think they can get away with it, will do so until proven otherwise. This is a blunt way of doing it, but does anyone really believe an MOR submitted by LTD would have made any difference. I have at least 2 MORS re ATC in Europe that have never officially been dealt with by those country's authorities.
Right Way Up is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 10:15
  #365 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MOR's only achieve anything if the issue is within the airline concerned (and then it's not guaranteed).

For example, over the hump on take-off at CDG we came across a vehicle on the runway. He rapidly left the paved surface heading for the grass, MOR filed (+ ATC informed). The outcome? The French stated that there had never been a vehicle on the runway!!!


LTD has my vote, but then I was also a "LTD" with the same airline so my vote is obviously null and void.
woodpecker is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 11:36
  #366 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 57
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From LTDs last post (my bold):
It may be wrong for me to post up here about this guy,but for him to ignore all advice/hits/warnings from other aviators and ATC is bloody disgraceful and dangerous.
As I've said before I agree with all LTDs actions and efforts at BOS, period.

I've also stated in a previous post that I think that crew made a mistake IMHO; big or small it's not for me to judge it.

And I don't really care if the crew was IB, TAP, LH, SAS, GARUDA or BA, so that the "Latino Background" argument doesn't come into play here.

I have only expressed my opinion regarding "name & shame" attitude used by a professional, an attitude that LTD himself had second thoughts about being the correct one.

I do sympathize with his anger, it's perfectly understandable. Maybe the error is mine; maybe I was expecting another way of stating this situation from a Captain of Big Airways, a gentlemanís way perhaps. ASS-U-ME.

And maybe the true reason for his anger has other causes:

MOR's only achieve anything if the issue is within the airline concerned (and then it's not guaranteed).
Maybe it's time to rethink this type of actions. If they're pretty much ineffective that is a big problem in itself, and a major one too safety wise.
GearDown&Locked is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 14:48
  #367 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 57
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nuff said.
well... not quite Sir.

CommitedToStay, personal attacks won't lead you anywhere.
I don't pretend (and I don't feel that need) to be someone else, like many of you in here, those MS Flight Sim Professionals you all are constantly referring to. Never did, never will.

More. If I was a real professional, I wouldn't be coming here stating that I was one, never mind how many hours or types I've flown over how many years. I would be just another regular Joe, watching a bunch of pseudo-professionals making themselves look ridiculous in front of a large audience. As I'm not one, I still like to enjoy those very same pseudo-professionals making the same sorry spectacle. But get this, the true pros rarely post anything, they just watch in awe, probably thinking "thank gawd retirement isn't too far away".

So then, does that remove any importance to what I've said in my previous post? If you think it does then think again. That type of behavior from a so called professional is what I was referring to as a side effect of the thread, but yours Sir, is far worse than LTD ever was.

GD&L

Last edited by GearDown&Locked; 18th Dec 2007 at 15:43.
GearDown&Locked is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 18:01
  #368 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anyone see some toys flying out of a pram around here?
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 18:28
  #369 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Location: Location!
Posts: 2,259
Received 18 Likes on 13 Posts
Forgive me Mods if this has already been covered, or is considered out of order in any sense, but am I alone in wondering why the use of a specific name in Post No 257 appears not to have led to any further comment, so far as I can see?

Jack

PS On a lighter note, if LTD had called the IB crew "The Three Caballeros" instead, perhaps there might have been less apparent discord .....
Union Jack is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 18:37
  #370 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oxford
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Union Jack,
Do you really think that was a specific name reference? Err, perhaps it was just a Spanish name picked from thin air?!
Chris777 is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 18:38
  #371 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From post 257:

Company's OM specify the de-icing or anti-icing procedures and maybe that day the Captain has met the requirements and despite all of us being overwhelmed over this case the Captain Rodriguez was quite happy and relaxed to not undertake the icing procedures.
I don't think Captain Rodriguez is actually the guys name, I think it was just a generalization of Spaniards.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2007, 21:31
  #372 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
MOR's only achieve anything if the issue is within the airline concerned (and then it

Can anyone suggest an effective way to report this case? For professionals or SLF (like self).
I have sent the details to the FAA, with the aim of increasing safety, for all operators and pax.
John Marsh is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2007, 07:20
  #373 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: heathrow
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
John Marsh, what 'details' have you sent to the FAA??? Those gleaned from a site where members remain anonymous and is known for inaccuracy and speculation? How did you word it?

'...well I have this concern with safety that i've heard from someone I've never met or can prove was actually there with several people on both sides speculating as to what actually happenned whom I have also never met so can not substantiate what they are saying or how qualified they are to comment...' I could go on but trust you get the gist of my concerns with your role here.

LTD claims he was there (and I have no reason to doubt him) but it is his and only his call to report it to authorities, not someone whos only knowledge of an incident is from here. What are you going to report that you read on here next to save us all from grave danger? Drunken pilots? after all a friend of a friend told you a pilot was drunk before report. Leave sensationalism to the papers.

You admit to being slf, and whilst I believe you shouldnt be excluded from conversations and threads such as these your actions are imho disgraceful.
tablelover is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2007, 07:47
  #374 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
tablelover,

All "John Marsh" has to write is that he believes there has been a violation of FARs which could have adversely affected safety, specify what, point to the ATC tapes for the location and time, and ask that it be looked into.

I can't see any reason for condemning him for that.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2007, 08:05
  #375 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some actual facts...from SaturnV

Based on a chronology posted ^^^, the conversation between IB, BA, and Boston Tower occurred between 2320 and 2325 hours. The Metars covering that period are:

METAR KBOS 022254Z 22004KT 5SM -SN OVC025 M03/M11 A3024

SPECI KBOS 022340Z 21003KT 1 3/4SM -SN BKN025 OVC060 M04/M09 A3023 RMK AO2 P0000

The special observation reporting visibility as 1 3/4 with light snow was made 15-20 minutes after the pertinent conversation; 25-30 minutes prior to the conversation, the regular Metars reported visibility as 5 miles in what would be very light snow.

As the temperature at 2340 is -4C and the dewpoint is -9C, the light snow that was falling was almost certainly fluffy and unlikely to be adhering to surfaces.

The total snowfall measured for KBOS for all of December 2 was 0.3 inches.
Hmmm, seems reasonable.
Was de-icing required?
The Captain concerned didn't think so.
Note I say...concerned, as in...the actual Commander in charge.
All the rest is speculation, and from some of the other comments noted here, not much in the way of facts from those speculators.
Why am I not surprised?
411A is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2007, 08:46
  #376 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: heathrow
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PBL, but where does it end?

Are you saying you believe its acceptable for anyone to come on here read a potentially inaccurate and false set of statements and then report it to the authorities every time? Or is there a list of accepted supposedly dangerous practices that we in this aviation business can deal with, but some where we need the help of slf to report for our benefit. I do not believe that is healthy for any industry especially ours. We are generally very successful at looking after ourselves and there are many agencies that work tremendously hard to uphold the high levels of professionalism with safety as paramount be it the CAA,FAA,ICAO,CHIRP to name but a few. What we have in this thread is wildly differring offerings of facts, then someone with no professinal knowledge comes along cherry picks what he wants and hands it in to the 'feds.' ANd to write in suggesting there has been a breach of FAR's when the individual almost certainly has no knowledge of them is no different to me walking into the ER and saying the doctor is doing it all wrong, with no knowledge of the medical profession then reporting him. Those who know me would agree Im arrogant but not so much to do that.

411A, thanks hadnt seen saturn v's post and have to agree with your sentiments.
tablelover is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2007, 20:52
  #377 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Details as sent to FAA:

This is to report a worrying occurrence at Boston, on December 2nd.
Iberia flight 6166, flying to Madrid, using an Airbus A340, apparently took off with substantial wing contamination due to snow. The crew were notified of the contamination a number of times, by control and by a BA crewmember in an adjacent aircraft who could see the contamination. The IB crew refused de-icing. All other departing flights at BOS at that time were accepting de-icing.
Please could you look into this. It seems that the IB6166 crew and passengers were lucky - in that there was sufficient lift available from the impaired wings, there was no windshear, no engine failure, no bird ingestion or runway incursion. The IB crew had no way of knowing that all these conditions would apply.
The BA pilot has posted details of this occurrence at www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=302971 , where interesting comments from fellow aircrew can also be found.

I sent this after reviewing the postings to this thread and concluding that the basic safety issue has received strong support. The points of contention have mainly been the nature of LTD's message to IB6166 and the correctness of identifying the flight here.
Taking off with contaminated wings is dangerous. In this specific case, I also note from this thread that it is against Iberia SOPs and Airbus instructions to pilots.
If the FAA should find my message to be unworthy of action on their part, they are entirely free to forget it.
John Marsh is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2007, 10:46
  #378 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: heathrow
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Disgraceful

Now we have SLF reporting incidents they read about on here demanding action from the FAA!! Absolutely disgraceful! There were professinals involved who are more than capable of reporting the incident if they deem it necessary.

John Marsh what makes you think you should be reporting things to the FAA or any other agency that you were not party to and as SLF have no knowledge of other than that gleaned from an anonymous forum? You dont know anything about Ib sops's and I would assume precious little if anything about aircraft. Do you honestly see yourself as some sort of St George charging in on his white steed to slay the dragon that is pilot incompetence and complacency? Christ what is your next crusade? And what are the requirements necessary for you to gallantly save the travelling public from these pesky pilots? You strike me as a fantasist of the Walter Mitty type who probably has thousands of hours on ms fltsim and therefore believes himself an expert, obviously all backed up with knowledge from that unbias infinitely accurate fountain of gen PPRUNE. What you up to now? Down the pub boasting to your few mates how you've gone and reported something that is rumoured to have occured from an anonymous forum about a subject you know f#c# all about to the authorities? Harsh? it was bl00dy meant to be!

(edited to cr4p grammer)
tablelover is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2007, 11:17
  #379 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't believe I have just read that post (397).
glad rag is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2007, 11:40
  #380 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't believe I have just read that post (397).
Sadly, that kind of post only serves to demonstrate that very few here are actually pilots, and have the bonefides to back it up.
Perhaps JM would care to enlighten those of us who actually are heavy jet drivers on his particular 'qualifications'?

No, I suspect not.
411A is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.