Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

?thank you 60 minutes. do we agree with this?

Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

?thank you 60 minutes. do we agree with this?

Old 9th Mar 2010, 14:16
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 37
?thank you 60 minutes. do we agree with this?

Doomed on MSN Video
jhurditch is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2010, 14:48
  #2 (permalink)  
I call you back
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alpha quadrant
Posts: 355
That is a truly shocking piece of journalism.

There are questions to be answered alright but that idiot reporter is not the man for the job.

He seems to have decided that this is a heroes versus villains story (with him getting to decide which are which) and doesn't allow any latitude for any other possibility.

Certainly flying without fuel for an alternate is very odd. It being legal is even odder. That IMHO is what 15 of the 16 minutes should have been about.

Nonsense such as 'would you take off without a full tank of fuel?' and 'no one knew where to look because the pilot didn't issue a mayday' demonstrate the agenda clearly.

In addition he never examines the weather the Captain relied upon. He never examines how much fuel was taken versus the flight time. We are left to rely on an Air Traffic Controller's view of fuel load which is poor at best and the word of some retired guy who said he would never take off without a full tank of fuel. Is he really a pilot?

This is why most pilots never trust journalists.
Faire d'income is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2010, 14:56
  #3 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ... on an island!
Posts: 228
here the wikipedia version of the episode

2009 Pel-Air Westwind crash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

not an happy career for that pilot!
169west is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2010, 15:04
  #4 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 716
Quite interesting piece, this one. Glad I did see it.

On one hand, I find this to be highly biased and conclusive despite there being an ongoing investigation.

On the other hand it does pose some valid questions, such as why they chose depart without fuelling to capacity, and how that could be legal.

Could anyone share some light to weather information and briefing in this part of the world? And does anyone know if this can be a case of the Isolated Aerodrome fuel policy (what is it, 2 hours final reserve and certain wx conditions?)

One way or the other, credits to the crew for ditching successfully, when ditching was the only remaining option. Now it will be interesting to see how they got to that situation in the first place, hopefully we can all learn something.

Edit: it according to wikipedia, the crew flew ILSs, however according to the AIP there are only nonprecision approaches avaliable.

Last edited by bfisk; 9th Mar 2010 at 15:17.
bfisk is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2010, 15:13
  #5 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 877
Seems to be a rather meaningless video 97 percent concerned with the innate drama of the situation--screaming passengers, black-of-night ditching, miraculous rescue, lots of emotional shots of people saying, "It was horrible..."

The other three percent mentions some dispensation--never further explained--whereby Australian air-ambulance flights can apparently file VFR with only VFR fuel. And the chief pilot of Pel-Air (or whatever his position is) calmly explains to the "reporter," "I've already explained to you on the telephone all our reasons and explanations for this..." None of which are provided to the audience. Baffling.
stepwilk is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2010, 11:37
  #6 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CamelShitCity
Posts: 95
Supprised nobody has commented on the fact that the aircraft is on the bottom of the ocean standing on its main gear.

Gear down ditching.... this guy has a lot of questions to answer.
3REDS is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2010, 13:12
  #7 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 2,799
Nonsense such as 'would you take off without a full tank of fuel?' and 'no one knew where to look because the pilot didn't issue a mayday' demonstrate the agenda clearly.
Why do you think that stuff is nonsense?

If you are flying to a remote aerodrome known for having unpredictable weather, why would you only load the legal minimum fuel? Why not fill to your MAUW?

If you're going to do a controlled ditching with power and some time to prepare, why wouldn't you put out a mayday including your actual position? Why wouldn't you give the passengers enough time to get life jackets on?

Why was the Captain out before the passengers?

I think these are valid questions for this type of show to be asking and I'll be interested to read the ATSB report when it comes out.
AerocatS2A is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2010, 13:47
  #8 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,235
Thoroughly Discussed Here

RatherBeFlying is online now  
Old 10th Mar 2010, 18:03
  #9 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: North America
Age: 60
Posts: 364
The amazing double edged sword of aviation that I would love to unleash elsewhere....

I watched the MSN video link and read through some of the posts and the related discussion that ran at the time of this event. Here are a few ancillary things to point out to the “spotter’s balcony”.

Thousands of aviation regulations are in place. However, an operator/airline can apply for an “exemptions” a license not to comply with the regulation. If an operator can justify not complying with a rule they can petition to be exempted from that rule, if the reasons are good enough the petition is granted. Sruprised?

Virtually everything this crew and company did in relation to this flight will be brought out in the open and analyzed in detail; just as it should be.

As pilots, and a condition to continued employment, we have to certify medically every six months (Captains). If we do not pass the medical examination we are finished flying. Our backgrounds are reviewed by the medical and civil/federal authorities and any hint of substance abuse/addiction or trouble with the law (driving while intoxicated or other anti-social behavior) will result in the removal of authority to fly. Our blood and urine is analyzed, and breathalyzer exams administered-often randomly while at work.

On the job every word uttered is recorded as is every radio transmission, once by the jet and then again by the controlling air traffic facility. My phone conversations with the company flight operations center are all recorded. On the aircraft itself Flight Data Recorders (FDR) document sometimes hundreds of parameters simultaneously; virtually every switch, lever or pedal I move is digitally inscribed in memory with exhaustive detail.

As pilots we will be randomly inspected and our work directly observed, sometimes several times a year by, by government aviation inspectors and company designated examiners (Ramp & Line Checks). Each year, during annual recurrent training (for me this is 5 days), we are expected to demonstrate our flying ability under normal, abnormal and emergency conditions. We must be familiar with changing policies & regulations and possess a thorough mechanical knowledge of the airplanes we fly, the regulations we operate under and the policies commanded by the company along with all the changes therein. You could think of this in terms of sitting for (defending) your PHD, MD, Certified Public Accountant or other professional license exams each year, every year, throughout your working professional life.

I don’t complain one iota regarding the exhaustive oversight I work under. Other than astronauts and a few specialized instances in the military, your commercial airline pilots are likely the most scrutinized, observed and regulated working population on the planet; exactly as it should be.

When this accident investigation is complete the facts will be laid bare; the good, bad and ugly in a way that is unique to aviation. The passengers involved, the public and media will have access to virtually all the unadulterated evidence.

How I wish I could unleash the same level of transparency, accountability and public scrutiny along with the identical threat of jeopardy (we pilots face) on every elected members of my government, the Judiciary, the Law Profession and every Federal/Civil/State/County/Municipality/Public Works or City employee I am required to work with. What a different world this would be.

Last edited by Northbeach; 11th Mar 2010 at 05:44.
Northbeach is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2010, 00:25
  #10 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 2,799
I agree Northbeach.

A small nitpick, a Class 1 medical in Australia is only done once a year unless you are over a certain age. Your country must either have more strict requirements or perhaps you are over a certain age?
AerocatS2A is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2010, 00:49
  #11 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cornwall-on-Hudson, New York
Posts: 877
Class I USA every six months No matter how old or young you are.
stepwilk is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2010, 04:37
  #12 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Here and there
Posts: 2,799
More strict requirements then .
AerocatS2A is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.