Originally Posted by
sl0wr0ll3r
Well said! Probably everyone involved in events like the EWR accident believed, until things went wrong, that they were up to the task. For all on this thread exuding confidence and even bravado, remember aviation’s ability to humble and kill. We’re paid to mitigate and minimize risks, not demonstrate our prowess while taking unnecessary risks.
I’m not saying this to castigate the EWR crew, as I wasn’t there and I’m not privy to all the facts. But this discussion should center on conservative decision making with a little humility sprinkled in.
I cannot agree. Landing on 29 does not presuppose bravado or undue confidence…as the last couple decades of heavies landing there safely have demonstrated. I've seen and done it numerous times. Certainly it doesn’t involve unnecessary risks, unless one considers some malfunction or personal pilot limitation we are not yet aware of.
The company, FAA and even Alpa, has spent enormous resources on human factors and CREMTEM, for all pilots. There were three on that deck. If this were a case of “ bravado or unnecessary risk” they would have all had to be “all in”. Unlikely.
As professional airline pilots we are trained and certified to be able to accept the risks the airline and faa have already certified to demonstrate. That is why we have sims. If a pilot cannot perform those tasks when conditions are within limits, and the equipment is not malfunctioning, that pilot should request additional training ( which United will happily supply), to bring his ability and confidence level up to standards.
The passengers that pay and depend on us will appreciate not landing at another airport, at the same time all other flights are safely landing at the intended destination.
I think the most telling thing will be the last minute of the CVR. I expect (unfortunately) to hear nothing out of the ordinary.