|
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 1861431)
They don't have a hair on their a$$ unless they STILL made the commute home.
Point I'm getting at dude, is that people can live in glass houses if they choose. They can poke holes at other airlines screwups if they want. NO AIRLINE is immune........... I still strongly disagree with WN's practice, as does virtually every other airline in the world. |
What 717 are you talking about?
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1861417)
You also didn't believe me when I took one look at the LGA landing video and immediately identified that is a very unstable approach. I know you've got your bias, but open up your eyes!
|
Originally Posted by shoelu
(Post 1861437)
As far as I know, the NTSB has not issued any final report. Please enlighten me if you are omnipotent and able to issue a snap judgement concerning accident causal factors long before the investigative body assigned by the U.S. government to make these determinations.
By all means, keep living in denial! I've got plenty of time in the 737 to know that via the video when the thrust is pulled back to idle at flaps 40 that the thing was going to come out of the sky. You should have enough pitch/power awareness as well. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1861438)
"Get down, gotta get down!".
|
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 1861439)
Maybe she had the words to one or both Kool and the Gang songs in her head?
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1861440)
She also wanted my ramper friend to hand push up a broken jet bridge to the plane at his station. Stuck her head out of the open cockpit window yelling at them to get the jetbridge to the plane.
|
Originally Posted by John Carr
(Post 1861441)
I don't think that was ever in a 70's disco song.
|
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1861438)
"Get down, gotta get down!" from the CA to the FO via the CVR ... changing the flaps to 40 below 1000 feet then grabbing the plane from the FO and slamming the plane into the runway might be clues to what will be focused on. Those have all been released.
Stabilized approach criteria were actually met at the time the FOM requires them: 1000 feet above TDZE, aircraft on glide slope and speed, fully configured. Why the Captain made the decision to take control of the aircraft and subsequently violate stabilized approach criteria is anyone's guess except yours, you obviosly have it all figured out long before the NTSB. |
Originally Posted by shoelu
(Post 1861444)
When you made the statements you made concerning an unstable approach, no CVR data had been released. I chastised you for jumping to unverified conclusions with no evidence to support your claims other than a blurry and unsubstantiated video.
Stabilized approach criteria were actually met at the time the FOM requires them: 1000 feet above TDZE, aircraft on glide slope and speed, fully configured. Why the Captain made the decision to take control of the aircraft and subsequently violate stabilized approach criteria is anyone's guess except yours, you obviosly have it all figured out long before the NTSB. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:30 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands