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

[slip and turn]

Originally Posted by yakmadrid

It would be great if this forum will be limited to professionals so we do not have to read uninformed comments.

Don't be so sure. From what I have seen, you'll still be reading heaps of uninformed comment from professionals who think they have learned enough already.

[xetroV]

Originally Posted by Aeromex

If we loose job because of forum like this, it is not nice. But skies are safer.

No, they are not. You apparantly still believe in the "Bad Apple Theory", which has already been debunked by human factors professionals. Punishing "bad" pilots actually reduces safety, although it may enhance your illusion of safety. Many people are still tempted by this illusion - in fact, it seems that the number of people who believe in this theory is on the rise in airline management, authorities, and public alike (as evidenced by this thread). Short-term "fixes" may provide better PR, but they often stand in the way of long-term advances in actual flight safety.

If you believe fundamental progress in safety is more important than short-term satisfaction, then here is some suggested reading material:

Thoughts on the New View of Human Error

• Part I: Do Bad Apples Exist?
• Part II: Hindsight Bias
• Part III: “New View” Accounts of Human Error

[alexantrea]

Yakmadrid, completely aggree with you, friend. You are absolutely right. The main reason our proffesion went down the drain is rumours and discusions about what other colleques are doing and if they do it right and if it was us we would have done it better and trying to be clever.
This is even worst if its done publicly and especialy when you are trying to judge others and their actions when you don't know all the facts.
Its easy to judge others decissions,when you are not the one who will take the decission.

I am sure IBERIA SOPs cater for such an event and their pilots are trained to comply with them. We are talking about a National Carrier now.

[slip and turn]

I am still amazed how some contributors just don't 'get it'.

I say again that this thread is not about egos, nor is it much about apportioning blame. Mostly it is about furthering understanding of the apparent hazard of the propensity of some pilots to fail to identify or acknowledge evidence of contaminated flying surfaces on their aircraft.

Taking a principal argument from one of the articles linked to in the xetroV's post above ('Do Bad Apples exist?') : "Punishment for wrongdoing is not a deterrent when the actions of the operators involved were actually examples of “right-doing”—the operators were acting in the best interests of those charged to their care, but made an “honest mistake” in the process; this is the case in many operational accidents."

How on earth does that sit with the example we have been discussing here? It doesn't, not at all.

Comprehension of the philosophy maybe as shallow as comprehension of the science in some quarters...

[Dusthog]

Airbus Fcom 3

ADVERSE WEATHER

"All surfaces (critical surfaces: leading edge and upper surfaces of wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, all control surfaces, slats and flaps) of the aircraft must be clear of snow, frost and ice for takeoff.

Thin hoarfrost is acceptable on the upper surface of the fuselage.

On the underside of the wing tank area, a maximum layer of 3 mm (1/8 inch)
of frost will not penalize takeoff performance"

[yakmadrid]

Exactly right, how do we do know in Iberia, engineiring gets on an elevated platform and looks at the wings to determine that, then aply the appropiate deicing fluid, if the crew is in the airplane they inform the captain before doing it. I haven´t flown to Boston yet, is a new destination for us, we started in june I think, but I can tell you that in Chicago and NY American Airlines provides the maintenance for IB, and they are damn good professionals, no cowboys here. I say again, I never preflight the airplanes parked nearby, but BA colleague thank you for your input, it is appreciated anytime, please do not blow it in public.

[DK_FCI]

Originally Posted by xetroV

No, they are not. You apparantly still believe in the "Bad Apple Theory", which has already been debunked by human factors professionals. Punishing "bad" pilots actually reduces safety, although it may enhance your illusion of safety. Many people are still tempted by this illusion - in fact, it seems that the number of people who believe in this theory is on the rise in airline management, authorities, and public alike (as evidenced by this thread). Short-term "fixes" may provide better PR, but they often stand in the way of long-term advances in actual flight safety.

Yes exactly

[DK_FCI]

Originally Posted by slip and turn

I am still amazed how some contributors just don't 'get it'.

Do you

[amos2]

What a total waste of time and space this thread is becoming!!!!

[GearDown&Locked]

What a total waste of time and space this thread is becoming

Well not quite. The contaminated wing surface subject has been debated, people were alerted to it, and for those pros who read Pprune it certainly revived their interest on this matter.

It also raised other concerns as a secondary effect, namely airmanship - or lack of it. It is also been debated, which is a good thing.

What bothers me is this blame thingy that popped up. I would accept the IB crew being identified if only the BA crew identified themselves as well on the first post. Still, not a nice thing to do, but acceptable to some extent. So LightTwin Driver, won't you break the radio silence to which you've committed yourself since Dec 3rd and care to id your own flight on BOS that day?

This would be a sad end for the crew. Oh my, what's next? Giant lettering on the tail of every aircarft: "How's my flying?" and a toll free number to call and inform on the crew?

brilliant stuff

[slip and turn]

Personally I think LTD has contributed all he can be expected to do. It is no secret what flight he was operating. It is all on the tapes if it matters to you.

LTD did however say here that he thought that the behaviour of the Iberia captain in ignoring 'all advice/hits/warnings from other aviators and ATC was bloody disgraceful and dangerous.' And with a view to curtailing bloody disgraceful and dangerous behaviour in aviation, identifying marks do actually matter.

That being the case, the "How's my Flying?" sticker on every carrier's aircraft - hands up who really thought there wasn't one? - is the obvious next step for any right-thinking observer.

To those in a good position to read them, there's actually several alternative numbers on those stickers. One prominent one isn't actually an 0800 number at all, it's a web addy ... pretty effective for getting a valuable point across too ... you know the one

[GearDown&Locked]

Personally I think LTD has contributed all he can be expected to do.

Allow me to disagree; LTD should have filed a proper written complaint to the proper authorities, and let the system do its thing. Has he done it? Does anybody here knows?

It is no secret what flight he was operating. It is all on the tapes if it matters to you.

That's not the point. I've also listened to the tapes, including the one of that lovely Continental lady R/T exchange. He should have done it himself when identifying others. Anonymous accusations?

[Cr4zy]

Rules in UK and USA are meant to avoid anyone claiming compensation ("Any deposit on wing surface = no go"). Rules in other parts of the world are based on experience and real life.

Have you seen so many yellow-painted kerbs, steps and "Mind your Head" signs in any other part of the world? No, they realize people are not dumb!

But, of course, the initial poster is a BA pilot (= GOD), against a pilot from another country (do it the UK way, robot and proud of it)

[despegue]

CR4zy,

Although I loathe the UK/US nanny behaviour regarding Health and Safety, I must strongly disagree here.
It is just plain stupid to depart with any deposits on the wing. That is not over-zealous rule-making, but the the reality of Supercritical- wing aerodynamics.

[Hand Solo]

Originally Posted by Cr4zy

Rules in UK and USA are meant to avoid anyone claiming compensation ("Any deposit on wing surface = no go"). Rules in other parts of the world are based on experience and real life.....................
.......But, of course, the initial poster is a BA pilot (= GOD), against a pilot from another country (do it the UK way, robot and proud of it)

Only on PPRuNe could somebody with no experience whatsoever of flying an airliner come and tell us all how it should be done.

Rules in the UK and USA are meant to avoid an aircraft crashing due to contaminated wing surfaces. I don't really care if other parts of the world think that's an acceptable risk to take.

[GearDown&Locked]

in what manner LTD brought Anonymous accusations to the table?

CommitedToStay, LTD did not identify himself in any post he made regarding this situation. We found out who he was after another poster pointed us to the source of those famous tapes and only after hearing them.

I am not against what LTD did on that day calling IB crew attention to a concern of his, either through ATC or directly to them. As professional he should know how things work, he makes the call, he tries all he can to bring the attention of others to the problem, he can even file a MOR or whatever, but then he has to let it go, the ball is on someone else’s court.

Coming here pointing fingers at "cowboys" won't solve anything, and distracts people from the main issue: contaminated wing surfaces.

Next time LTD calls someone because of something and that someone will disregard his advice; I would suggest that LTD blocks that someone’s pushback with his own aircraft. That should do the trick.

[fromTheShadows]

When prompting ATC to "pop on a [...] message to Iberia", he mentioned his full callsign ("Speedbird 45B") and apparently talked on the R/T himself.

So his identity only came to light when someone went to the trouble of digging out the tapes from LiveATC. To be fair he may not have a problem with this, but the original derogatory comments were definitely made anonymously.

[L337]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cr4zy
Rules in UK and USA are meant to avoid anyone claiming compensation ("Any deposit on wing surface = no go"). Rules in other parts of the world are based on experience and real life.....................
.......But, of course, the initial poster is a BA pilot (= GOD), against a pilot from another country (do it the UK way, robot and proud of it)

Only on PPRuNe could somebody with no experience whatsoever of flying an airliner come and tell us all how it should be done.

and give us the benefit of his personal prejudices against 3500 BA pilots.

[slip and turn]

Originally Posted by GD&L

Coming here pointing fingers at "cowboys" won't solve anything, and distracts people from the main issue: contaminated wing surfaces.

Again disagree. It's called 'rubbing their nose in it', a well known method of ingraining a degree of learning on the incalcitrant, using long-term association with a nasty taste. Net effect?
A. On the incalcitrant: "Bloody hell, I'd better not do anything as digraceful as that again. I was right royally embarassed".
B. On people reading about it: "Bloody hell, I'd better not do anything like that again either, especially since I now have a fresh take on why I shouldn't."

Next time LTD calls someone because of something and that someone will disregard his advice; I would suggest that LTD blocks that someone’s pushback with his own aircraft. That should do the trick.

You cannot be serious? That surely looks like incitement to road rage

[Scimitar]

For what little it's worth LTD, I think you did absolutely the right thing. You have been given a fair old knocking by several on this thread but I support you 100%. Given the same opportunity again I would encourage you not to hesitate.

Also for what it's worth, I speak not with the benefit of Flightsim experience, but with 45 years in aviation, mostly as a training captain and on equipment including Britannias, DC8s, and Boeing 737, 747, 757, 767.

Good luck to you!