Time Served
Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2009
- Posts
- 14
Flying when you want to versus flying when you have to are completely different levels of experience.
Quote of the year!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Flying when you want to versus flying when you have to are completely different levels of experience.
You've got such a raging hard-on against Comair pilots that you really can't see it, can you? Here's his first paragraph, and part of the second, again:
He makes the great point that exactly zero regional airline accidents have been attributed to FOs with less than 1500tt, and that all recent regional airline accidents have been the direct result of the captain's actions (or inactions). He uses his professional experience to advocate for additional training after hiring at regional airlines, especially for captains, as a much better means to improve operational safety than an arbitrary minimum time requirement for newhire pilots.
He mentioned nothing about his career decisions, or those of other pilots, or any inferiority or superiority of those who decide to make their career at a "regional" airline.
You're the only one here talking about that nonsense.
Which directly relates back to his very first paragraph.
Set your hatred for regional pilots (and Comair pilots in particular) aside for just a minute and consider WTF the guy is advocating - better and continued training for new captains at regional airlines. OH THE HORROR
Nope...but a newly-minted MD on their internship can kill you just as dead with the wrong medication, a bad IV insertion, slip of the scalpel, or similar mistake as somebody with 30 years on the job. Which, when you think about it, isn't a hell of a lot different than flying airplanes...
Did the Colgan crash have an FO with less than 1500 hours? Looking at the tapes, sounds like the raising of the flaps without the Captain knowing it might have not helped the situation. Are you sure about your ZERO comment?
"As for the Colgan accident, the FO may have been inexperienced but that had nothing to do with the accident. The problem came about due to the inexperience of the Captain, not the FO, and he had way more than 1500 hours."
While I agree and stated in my post that the captain did create this problem and didn't manage it properly, I have to disagree and say the FO did in fact have something to do with this accident. If she hadn't changed the aircraft configuration during the stall the aircraft may have powered out of it. But, by raising the flaps on her own, she basically took away lift and added about 40 to 50 knots of speed to recover the aircraft. At 1800' above the ground, at night, in the clouds with an FO doing whatever they want, I doubt even a 25 year veteran captain could pull that one off. The NTSB faulting the captain and not the FO is just reminding us all who has the ultimate responsibility for the aircraft.
In the instance of Colgan, the FO had more than 1500 hours, and while her actions certainly wouldn't have helped the situation retracting the flaps wasn't what caused the plane to auger in - the CA pulling the yoke to his chest when the shaker fired did.
Actually that is what caused the airpalne to augure in. It's the other way around, the CA did not help but the FO did worse. The purpose of having two warm bodies in the cockpit is so that they can double check eachother, not make things worse.