So that's what Bill Voss meant when he said "This is not about better stick and rudder skills".

Page 17 of the report is... impressive, to say the least.

EDIT: found the original thread.

I haven't read the report, but is it possible that the captain, having determined that they had taken gear damage from the strike, used an old jedi trick that we used to call airmanship, and put the dunlops back down before they uplocked?

Willy waving
 

I refer to my previous comment regarding "airmanship":)

ps. there is no fuel dump on the 73.

There's just no thought process going on with the children of the magenta line is there.
SOPs and procedures are always a good place to start, but they cannot cover every eventuality. Sometimes experience,knowledge and skill (we used to call that sum total "airmanship"), may lead you to take another course of action.

I wasn't on that flight deck, and i suspect nobody else here was either. They may have had some indication, like a multiple heavy birdstrike, that their return to earth was going to be more immediate.

Did the crew of the swissair follow sops,yes, and it killed everyone.

Did Sully follow sop and the checklist blindly, no, they used knowledge, experience and skill to save the day.

Think about it, one day you may become a pilot, not a machine operator.

PURPLE

I suspect you are not an airline pilot. (Fact I know you aren't)

Utter ROT.

The EFATO is practiced and practiced until it should be almost second nature,

This crew got it wrong wrong wrong.

Purple pilot,

Are you really suggesting that there is a scenario in which the crews actions here could be considered good airmanship?

I'm all for good decision making, and SOP's don't cover every situation...however a v1 cut isn't really the place to be making stuff up. There are obstacle clearance climb limits to meet, and they are there for a very good reason. They are also based upon a MCT thrust setting, gear up and bank angle at 15 degrees or less etc. Anything less than the minimum standards here and you are a test pilot.

I would argue that the problem here and several other recent incidents is exactly that the crews involved are fine if everything goes right, they put the AP on and follow the magenta line to destination. As soon as something out of the ordinary happens though a complete LACK of airmanship, decision making skills and professional ability turns a abnormal situation into an accident or incident.

Once you have the aircraft cleaned up at a safe height and the immediate checklist items complete then that's a great time to show your pilot decision making skills and airmanship. Below 400' with an engine failure isn't the time to be making stuff up.

If you can't see the difference perhaps PM me with the airline you fly for and I can add it to my list of ones to avoid putting my family on.

You are still missing the point. And yes i am an airline pilot. None of us were there at the time. There may have been a valid reason why they made that decision. I'm not saying that they were right or wrong. I wasn't there, and nether were you.

He didn't leave the gear down. He put it up, then chose to put it back down again. Reducing power is"unconventional". What i am saying is that there may be a valid reason for his actions. I am in no position to judge, as i was not there. There will have been a reason for the decisions made, and i conceed that that could just be incompetence, but those reasons could have been valid if the crew determined so under the circumstances they found themselves in.

I was not there and nether were you.

Blindly following sop can kill you just as fast as maverick flying.

Purple Pilot.

I agree that there are times when you should diverge from SOP, but not many and certain not on an EFATO. By putting down the gear you have destroyed the certified performance of the aircraft. If you had made the decision that you were going to impact the ground,so it would be better with the gear down, then you have commited yourself to that action and must follow it through. Also a bank angle of 37egrees will also destroy the performance. I agree I was not there however there was an investigation and it does not appear that there was any problem with the aircraft that prevented a normal EFATO procedure. If there was I would think Boeing would be grounding all the 737's till the problem was sorted out.

Purple Pitot:

Not having been there is really not relevant. There are certain things you must do (and must not do) with OEI on lift-off.

I'm sure we are all aware of the effects of configuration and bank angle on performance. He made a decision to deviate from sop. There has to be a reason for that. Perhaps i am being too charitable in thinking that it may not have been incompetence. Having hit a wall of geese, he may have concluded that the aircraft was going to be unflyable. I wasn't there.

Must, Never. So you have encountered every eventuality in your career have you?

Wiggy

I would be interested to know what Type you are flying?

Purple Pilot

In my 18,000 odd hours I would be arrogant in the extreme to say that I have encountered all problems, but I hope that I have enough knowledge and experience to know when to deviate from SOP's. When you do deviate make sure you have thought out all the techinical reasons why the SOP was there. If you do then deviate remember that if it turns pear shaped and you survive the lawyers and judges are going to have a field day with your ass.

Tony, i have done so, complete with all the lawyers and insurance companies. Hence my standpoint.

I would rather be alive to make the argument, than posthumously take the blame.

Purple Pilot

What type do you fly?

Currently on the Global Express, not that it matters. I have done my Boeing time.

Oh, and my willy is the biggest you can imagine:O

( Just incase that doesn't translate, it was meant to be humor!)

Purple Pitot:

You know the answer to that. The statement is gratuitous and if pertinent, disqualifies everyone on this board from making any judgments or conclusions.

I do have, however, a lot more technical experience with peformance engineering in general, and OEI on takeoff in particular. I stand by my comments based on a released official report.

Ok, i have now read the report. In all probability these guys were muppets. I still stand by my view point, and fail to understand why others do not, that sometimes you may need to think for yourself.