Originally Posted by
newKnow
After reading the transcript, I don't see how it can't be pilot error. Fatigue? Poor scan? Lack of situational awareness? Violation of sterile cockpit? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
I am not one to Monday morning Quarterback and typically will always side with the pilot, because I know we are human. But, look at the transcript. There is constant conversation -- most of it non-flight related -- for the entire 58 minuets of the flight.
If I was involved in a constant conversation for 58 minuets after I woke up at noon with 10 hours of sleep I would be fatigued while I laid in bed. Let alone to fly an approach into an airport with low visibility and gusty winds.
Am I just old? Am I just flying an old aircraft? But, can you guys really check out with conversation for an entire flight then pop back in somewhere inside the initial approach fix?
I think the real question should be if we are so reliant on automation that we feel we can get away with not putting flying the airplane first until sometime after the gear is lowered. Because in my mind, there aren't too many airplanes out there that will let you do that.
Fire away.
They didn't sound fatigued that's for sure. The CA kept making speeches about nothing the whole flight. And the rather quiet FO who just kept saying uh huh the whole flight finally spoke up and told him that she wanted to fly for Alaska or even Fedex or UPS too on the approach. Not to mention the dagger about her fear of icing that that she has no experience with it about 10 minutes before landing. Still it looks like the CAs actions doomed this flight not the FOs. Why the plane had the shaker go off is still under investigation though. It was 6 seconds before the pusher went off that's a long time to do something about it. Parts of the puzzle are missing unless they truly didn't know what to do.