Heathrow 777 Crash
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DORSET
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heathrow 777 Crash
Anyone know the real reason why the captain (Peter Burkill) signed on for JSA following this? And what motive might an airline have in not supporting its staff? Curious.
Perhaps the spotter's forum won't elicit the kind of responses you seek, but in general terms large corporations are mired in legal and political influences pulling policy from one side to the other, not always making sense to you or I. From the outside it seems, as you say, very strange how things panned out in the aftermath.
SHJ
SHJ
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would suggest that this Book Details might be a good place to start.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DORSET
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, I already have the book, but I presume it may be biased (quite naturally).I suppose the crux would be the view taken by professional pilots as to the advisability of the captain taking control in an emergency- is there ever a scenario when that would not be advantageous?
Last edited by sharksandwich; 23rd Apr 2013 at 06:45.
Well, professional 777 Pilot/Instructor here, and the answer is yes.
Very often, the management of the situation is much more critical than the flying of the Aircraft. Both pilots are trained to fly, the Captains job entails running the show, which is often much better done without the additional distraction of flying the aircraft.
Indeed, if the Captain is PF, it is often a good practice for him to HAND OVER control and deal with the emergency.
In the case of the Heathrow incident, Burkill assessed the FO was doing as good a job as he could have at flying the aircraft, so he thought his time better spent trying to rectify the situation.
His decision to go to Flaps 25 actually saved everyone onboard. Had he taken control, is it probable that he then would not have had the extra mental capacity to try that solution, and the FO would probably not have done so independently.
I hope that clears up the situation to your satisfaction.
Very often, the management of the situation is much more critical than the flying of the Aircraft. Both pilots are trained to fly, the Captains job entails running the show, which is often much better done without the additional distraction of flying the aircraft.
Indeed, if the Captain is PF, it is often a good practice for him to HAND OVER control and deal with the emergency.
In the case of the Heathrow incident, Burkill assessed the FO was doing as good a job as he could have at flying the aircraft, so he thought his time better spent trying to rectify the situation.
His decision to go to Flaps 25 actually saved everyone onboard. Had he taken control, is it probable that he then would not have had the extra mental capacity to try that solution, and the FO would probably not have done so independently.
I hope that clears up the situation to your satisfaction.
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can search forums for information on this subject. Another thread is pointless and I am closing this.
The search button is within the yellow band 3 lines above.
This thread is closed.
The search button is within the yellow band 3 lines above.
This thread is closed.
