PSA CRJ 200 in CRW
02-10-2010, 02:51 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Waiting for retirements
Posts: 232
Originally Posted by IrishTiger
Possible.
That's kind of the same concept that JetPipeOvht said. But would moving the flaps between 8-20 give you a warning message? Both are allowable settings for takeoff. I don't know what it would do, but I would imagine it wouldn't freak out and start chiming if you moved it from 8 to 20 or vice versa. I've never contemplated actually doing that so I've never even thought about it. ha. Whenever I think of a wrong flap setting, I think of that poor Delta flight in Dallas. The flaps and trims are one of those things I try to triple check before we takeoff.
Ah, I didn't see the MPH part. so that's about 85 knots or so. Something is just not adding up. That's too slow for the nose to start coming off by itself isn't it? Even with a ridiculous trim setting. I don't know, but I'm really interested by this whole thing.
That's kind of the same concept that JetPipeOvht said. But would moving the flaps between 8-20 give you a warning message? Both are allowable settings for takeoff. I don't know what it would do, but I would imagine it wouldn't freak out and start chiming if you moved it from 8 to 20 or vice versa. I've never contemplated actually doing that so I've never even thought about it. ha. Whenever I think of a wrong flap setting, I think of that poor Delta flight in Dallas. The flaps and trims are one of those things I try to triple check before we takeoff.
Ah, I didn't see the MPH part. so that's about 85 knots or so. Something is just not adding up. That's too slow for the nose to start coming off by itself isn't it? Even with a ridiculous trim setting. I don't know, but I'm really interested by this whole thing.
02-10-2010, 03:10 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by The Juice
Check your PM's...as the Mods say, I'm "taking it to the PM's"
The WSJ, more importantly, Andy Pasztor is very good in his reporting. He was very accurate in the 3407 and all of his articles were backed up with facts.
The WSJ, more importantly, Andy Pasztor is very good in his reporting. He was very accurate in the 3407 and all of his articles were backed up with facts.
Originally Posted by meyers9163
Fair enough and agreed (to what you said in the PM).
Originally Posted by The Juice
Look at that Mods....peaceful resolutions here on APC. I should be able to bank this goodwill for my next infraction.
Following the rules duely noted. No goodwill banked for actually doing right, but I do thank both of you for your actions.USMCFLYR
02-10-2010, 03:38 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,511
Originally Posted by Airsupport
PSA got lucky. Colgan was not.
Delta got lucky. Comair was not.
02-10-2010, 04:00 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Position: Captain CR7/CR9
Posts: 104
[quote=seafeye;761785]Not talking below 10,000 isn't going to make flying that much safer.
Sure it will. 10,000 feet is not magic but the standard needed to be set somewhere. Focus is the only way to mitigate errors. You cannot focus on the task at hand while discussing non essential subjects. The time for that is above 10,000.
People get distracted for a number of reasons. Sometimes i wish something would be said to break up the silence. After 6 legs, short overnight, communicating with the other person is a good way to tell they are awake.
Call fatigued.
A real company will find out why a person misses a step on the checklist. Not just some blanket statement that some sterile rule was broken.
Don't break it it it won't be the reason. This is simple. its called discipline.
It's never that simple. Accidents are always a chain of events. We weren't there so we won't know 100%.
I agree 100% here. There are always multiple factors. However, if one of them involves the pilots willfully violating the rules then you can bet it will be the item most focused on by the media as well as our regulators.
After doing a 4 day consisting of 20 legs, things blend into eachother.
Did we do a taxi check? How about before takeoff?
How about....Were we cleared to land? I heard it 6 times today but was that 2 hours ago or 2 minutes?
Been there done that. Had to stop and review everything and re-run all checklists because we could not remember for sure what we had and had not done yet.
I'm not making excuses but you have to realize 100% of the pilots break the sterile rule
True enough. But now we see the consequences. And twice. I am a regional pilot. I am a professional. I am sick of the accidents and incidents. I am sick of the microsope. The problem is that we dont expect it to be us. It wont happen to me. Well guess what, it wasnt going to happen to the crew of 3407. It wasn't going to happen to the crew of Comair 5191. It wasn't going to happen to this crew but it nearly did.
My point is this. We are are worst enemy if we justify breaking sterile cockpit. We are are worst enemy when the last three major incidents all involve lack of cockpit discipline. We have to stop this. Sure we have all done it but now it is time to stop. We have seen the results and they are not pretty.
Here is an interesting read from a few years back dealing with sterile cockpit. http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/1997/AAR9701.pdf
Sure it will. 10,000 feet is not magic but the standard needed to be set somewhere. Focus is the only way to mitigate errors. You cannot focus on the task at hand while discussing non essential subjects. The time for that is above 10,000.
People get distracted for a number of reasons. Sometimes i wish something would be said to break up the silence. After 6 legs, short overnight, communicating with the other person is a good way to tell they are awake.
Call fatigued.
A real company will find out why a person misses a step on the checklist. Not just some blanket statement that some sterile rule was broken.
Don't break it it it won't be the reason. This is simple. its called discipline.
It's never that simple. Accidents are always a chain of events. We weren't there so we won't know 100%.
I agree 100% here. There are always multiple factors. However, if one of them involves the pilots willfully violating the rules then you can bet it will be the item most focused on by the media as well as our regulators.
After doing a 4 day consisting of 20 legs, things blend into eachother.
Did we do a taxi check? How about before takeoff?
How about....Were we cleared to land? I heard it 6 times today but was that 2 hours ago or 2 minutes?
Been there done that. Had to stop and review everything and re-run all checklists because we could not remember for sure what we had and had not done yet.
I'm not making excuses but you have to realize 100% of the pilots break the sterile rule
True enough. But now we see the consequences. And twice. I am a regional pilot. I am a professional. I am sick of the accidents and incidents. I am sick of the microsope. The problem is that we dont expect it to be us. It wont happen to me. Well guess what, it wasnt going to happen to the crew of 3407. It wasn't going to happen to the crew of Comair 5191. It wasn't going to happen to this crew but it nearly did.
My point is this. We are are worst enemy if we justify breaking sterile cockpit. We are are worst enemy when the last three major incidents all involve lack of cockpit discipline. We have to stop this. Sure we have all done it but now it is time to stop. We have seen the results and they are not pretty.
Here is an interesting read from a few years back dealing with sterile cockpit. http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/1997/AAR9701.pdf
02-10-2010, 04:06 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Position: Captain CR7/CR9
Posts: 104
Originally Posted by Boomer
Delta 60 landed on a runway without white edge lights. Comair 5191 launched from a runway without white edge lights.
Delta got lucky. Comair was not.
Delta got lucky. Comair was not.
02-10-2010, 04:27 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,837
Originally Posted by EVpilot
Here is an interesting read from a few years back dealing with sterile cockpit. http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/1997/AAR9701.pdf
USMCFLYR
02-10-2010, 05:40 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 1,114
Do we really think comparing situations is going to do anything to make a positive change? At the end of the day there is a human factor to flying a plane and doing our jobs. At the end of the day we all could make a mistake of some sort. Sure maybe it would not be to the extent of the events that brought down Colgan 3407, maybe it will not be the events that happen USairawys1549, or the events that happen with American Airlines down in Jamaica, or Delta landing on a taxi way.... Maybe it wont be the American jet that continue on with a CATII Approach in CLT when the controllers told them they were needing to correct and then ended up scraping a wing and causing damage... And maybe its not the events that led to this RTO of PSA flight at CRW......
However if you are a pilot in any of these events, would you want some article on the WJS to come out before any of the facts are released? Would you want other judging you without knowing on shred of evidence? Perhaps we need to focus on a possibly larger issue here and its the inability of either the FAA or NTSB to keep a tight lip on on-going investigations.....???
Listen we all do a job when things go great its easy.... However we do a job when something goes wrong we all need to be professional enough to correct it and prevent it from making a series of events that lead to something even worse...... So why not use the same professionalism we use when we condust our flights on a daily basis and prevent from any speculations that we may have until an official report is published?
And in the mean while perhaps we can write to some elected officials and push for more privacy for on going investigations and or strict punishment for anyone caught leaking information....
However if you are a pilot in any of these events, would you want some article on the WJS to come out before any of the facts are released? Would you want other judging you without knowing on shred of evidence? Perhaps we need to focus on a possibly larger issue here and its the inability of either the FAA or NTSB to keep a tight lip on on-going investigations.....???
Listen we all do a job when things go great its easy.... However we do a job when something goes wrong we all need to be professional enough to correct it and prevent it from making a series of events that lead to something even worse...... So why not use the same professionalism we use when we condust our flights on a daily basis and prevent from any speculations that we may have until an official report is published?
And in the mean while perhaps we can write to some elected officials and push for more privacy for on going investigations and or strict punishment for anyone caught leaking information....
02-10-2010, 05:47 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Posts: 239
It is absolutely absurd that any crewmember would have to justify aborting a take-off, missing an approach or executing a go-around. ALL three of those previously mentioned maneuvers are considered normal and a part of all airline training, checking and proficiency programs. I have seen this "oh crap, we better not even think about aborting, go-around or I have to fill out a damned irregularity report, get a call from the DO or the Chief Pilot." This is a failure of management to not have a "just culture" in place at their airline and being too damned worried about having to answer to the POI when he calls inquiring why one of his airplanes aborted a take-off.
When I first heard about this incident in CRW, I immediately had the "take-off config" scenario running around in my head, but I was troubled at why that would induce a high-speed abort. Trust me kiddies, you DON'T want to attempt a high-speed abort on RWY 23 in CRW!!!
Finally, as an example of how a just culture can work and increase flight safety. Continental Airlines analyzed their FOQA data and found that after creating a "no-fault" go-around policy (no phone calls, no paperwork..remember it's in the manual as a normal flight maneuver for crying out loud!) the number of UNSTABILIZED approaches dropped markedly. No more "******* I am *******in' high and fast, but I'll shoehorn this biatch in because otherwise some tool at HQ will be calling me into office *****ing at me for being late for a tennis match because I have to enter in your file that we "spoke" about your little ol' go-around the other day." Anyhow, you get the picture. Lastly, this isn't the first time that a high-speed abort has nearly caused or caused an accident nor will it be the last.
When I first heard about this incident in CRW, I immediately had the "take-off config" scenario running around in my head, but I was troubled at why that would induce a high-speed abort. Trust me kiddies, you DON'T want to attempt a high-speed abort on RWY 23 in CRW!!!
Finally, as an example of how a just culture can work and increase flight safety. Continental Airlines analyzed their FOQA data and found that after creating a "no-fault" go-around policy (no phone calls, no paperwork..remember it's in the manual as a normal flight maneuver for crying out loud!) the number of UNSTABILIZED approaches dropped markedly. No more "******* I am *******in' high and fast, but I'll shoehorn this biatch in because otherwise some tool at HQ will be calling me into office *****ing at me for being late for a tennis match because I have to enter in your file that we "spoke" about your little ol' go-around the other day." Anyhow, you get the picture. Lastly, this isn't the first time that a high-speed abort has nearly caused or caused an accident nor will it be the last.
02-10-2010, 09:18 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 298
Originally Posted by Airsupport
Flaps 8 and 20 are both allowable setting for takeoff. However flaps 9, 10, 11, 12 ,13, etc, etc all the way to 20 are not. That is what would cause the warning. And usually going from 8 to 20 would cause a nose down movement. So yeah i am not to sure about the nose wheel bouncing report.
Originally Posted by cubflyer
Yes it would cause a caution message. Remember, moving the flaps from 8 to 20 isn't instantanious. The flaps must move through all ranges. 9,10,11,12 degrees and so on. Since the RJ only allows for T/O in Flaps 8 OR 20, moving the flap selector and and having the flaps move even 1 degree should cause a caution message.
Thanks to two above for my systems refresher! That does make total sense. Obviously I've never experienced it, but that explains it! Good thinking.
Originally Posted by BE19Pilot
It is absolutely absurd that any crewmember would have to justify aborting a take-off, missing an approach or executing a go-around. ALL three of those previously mentioned maneuvers are considered normal and a part of all airline training, checking and proficiency programs. I have seen this "oh crap, we better not even think about aborting, go-around or I have to fill out a damned irregularity report, get a call from the DO or the Chief Pilot." This is a failure of management to not have a "just culture" in place at their airline and being too damned worried about having to answer to the POI when he calls inquiring why one of his airplanes aborted a take-off.
When I first heard about this incident in CRW, I immediately had the "take-off config" scenario running around in my head, but I was troubled at why that would induce a high-speed abort. Trust me kiddies, you DON'T want to attempt a high-speed abort on RWY 23 in CRW!!!
Finally, as an example of how a just culture can work and increase flight safety. Continental Airlines analyzed their FOQA data and found that after creating a "no-fault" go-around policy (no phone calls, no paperwork..remember it's in the manual as a normal flight maneuver for crying out loud!) the number of UNSTABILIZED approaches dropped markedly. No more "******* I am *******in' high and fast, but I'll shoehorn this biatch in because otherwise some tool at HQ will be calling me into office *****ing at me for being late for a tennis match because I have to enter in your file that we "spoke" about your little ol' go-around the other day." Anyhow, you get the picture. Lastly, this isn't the first time that a high-speed abort has nearly caused or caused an accident nor will it be the last.
When I first heard about this incident in CRW, I immediately had the "take-off config" scenario running around in my head, but I was troubled at why that would induce a high-speed abort. Trust me kiddies, you DON'T want to attempt a high-speed abort on RWY 23 in CRW!!!
Finally, as an example of how a just culture can work and increase flight safety. Continental Airlines analyzed their FOQA data and found that after creating a "no-fault" go-around policy (no phone calls, no paperwork..remember it's in the manual as a normal flight maneuver for crying out loud!) the number of UNSTABILIZED approaches dropped markedly. No more "******* I am *******in' high and fast, but I'll shoehorn this biatch in because otherwise some tool at HQ will be calling me into office *****ing at me for being late for a tennis match because I have to enter in your file that we "spoke" about your little ol' go-around the other day." Anyhow, you get the picture. Lastly, this isn't the first time that a high-speed abort has nearly caused or caused an accident nor will it be the last.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
