Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
New FACTS from NTSB on Colgan 3407 >

New FACTS from NTSB on Colgan 3407

Search

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

New FACTS from NTSB on Colgan 3407

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-20-2009 | 03:17 PM
  #221  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by texaspilot76
Yes, we do check the database.

In the latter stages of the approach, it did eventually stabilize.

Last, I am done with this thread. I can leave it to you guys (especially God's gift to aviation Purdue grads) to turn a safety reccommendation into a flamefest.

1)OK, but should you rely on that as your sole GS indication? I'm not saying I haven't done it, but we as pilots are taking a risk when we do it.

2)That was not mentioned at first, but based on that I would say that depending on the altitude at which the deviation and stabilization occured I also may have continued the approach.

3)No flaming intended, but before you go jumping down somebody's throat and telling them to save it for their Chickenhawk, you may want to actually to specify why you continued. Perhaps if you mentioned the GS stabilized above 1000 ft AGL, or some other specific detail then others wouldn't have jumped in.
Reply
Old 03-20-2009 | 03:23 PM
  #222  
texaspilot76's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat
Default

There was no deviation of the localizer. We were dead on it. I was aware of what obstacles were around me. I knew what the highest obstacles were that were in my flightpath. I also had the terrain mode backing me up. Those, in addition to the Captain wanting to continue, is why we did.
Reply
Old 03-20-2009 | 03:24 PM
  #223  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
From: Satan's Camaro
Default

Originally Posted by texaspilot76
Yes, we do check the database.

In the latter stages of the approach, it did eventually stabilize.

Last, I am done with this thread. I can leave it to you guys (especially God's gift to aviation Purdue grads) to turn a safety reccommendation into a flamefest.
I was simply trying to understand why you were using what in your own words was an unsafe situation as a safety recommendation.
Reply
Old 03-20-2009 | 03:29 PM
  #224  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by texaspilot76
There was no deviation of the localizer. We were dead on it. I was aware of what obstacles were around me. I knew what the highest obstacles were that were in my flightpath. I also had the terrain mode backing me up. Those, in addition to the Captain wanting to continue, is why we did.

Like I said, I'm not saying you were wrong. I just think you flamed boilerpilot, and he was just curious. Based on your original set of facts, it was a gray area as to if the decision was safe to continue. Thanks for sharing the rest of the facts. As I said earlier, there is a chance I would have made the same decision. I wasn't trying to armchair QB, I just think you overreacted.
Reply
Old 03-20-2009 | 03:33 PM
  #225  
ebl14's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 919
Likes: 45
From: 73N
Default

Originally Posted by texaspilot76
There was no deviation of the localizer. We were dead on it. I was aware of what obstacles were around me. I knew what the highest obstacles were that were in my flightpath. I also had the terrain mode backing me up. Those, in addition to the Captain wanting to continue, is why we did.
A chamilion shifiting to fit the latest revelation of holes in your story. Just admit that you shouldn't have continued, it would have been found in your NTSB investigation if it didn't work out so well anyways. If you or anyone is expierencing what you described, it is obvious that the best course of action is a go around, nothing you have responded with is an adequate reason for continuing. I think this is an embellished and over-inflated story, or at least I hope it is (cause I might have been unlcuky enough to try to j/s on this flight). If you weren't in VMC (which you already said you weren't) why the heck do you continue a ILS with this kind of indication?
Reply
Old 03-20-2009 | 03:43 PM
  #226  
texaspilot76's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat
Default

Originally Posted by ebl14
A chamilion shifiting to fit the latest revelation of holes in your story. Just admit that you shouldn't have continued, it would have been found in your NTSB investigation if it didn't work out so well anyways. If you or anyone is expierencing what you described, it is obvious that the best course of action is a go around, nothing you have responded with is an adequate reason for continuing. I think this is an embellished and over-inflated story, or at least I hope it is (cause I might have been unlcuky enough to try to j/s on this flight). If you weren't in VMC (which you already said you weren't) why the heck do you continue a ILS with this kind of indication?
You know what? Maybe Sully shouldn't have ditched in the Hudson, maybe he should have landed in Central Park, or on some freeway. Maybe he could have saved the plane from water damage.

Everyone is going to have a varying opinion on anything no matter what happens.
Reply
Old 03-21-2009 | 04:20 AM
  #227  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
From: TRYING TO STAY AWAKE
Default

Originally Posted by texaspilot76
You know what? Maybe Sully shouldn't have ditched in the Hudson, maybe he should have landed in Central Park, or on some freeway. Maybe he could have saved the plane from water damage.

Everyone is going to have a varying opinion on anything no matter what happens.
I post about once every 4months and it’s usually only on stuff I feel really compelled to talk about, this is one of them.
It was a very dump thing to do, but I have done worse things. The important thing is that you learn from it and hopefully have the courage to tell the captain he is an idiot putting everyone at risk. People die when we make mistakes and being at Colgan through this whole thing I can tell you it isn’t fun seeing the victim’s families cry their hearts out from losing their loved ones.
Please take this as constructive criticism and go talk to that Captain or somebody else if you have to. You could be saving other people and stopping another tragic event!
Reply
Old 03-21-2009 | 04:47 AM
  #228  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Default

So after reading all the new posts in this thread, i guess its safe to assume there are no new facts on 3407?
Reply
Old 03-21-2009 | 09:23 AM
  #229  
captain152's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,258
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by rightseater
So after reading all the new posts in this thread, i guess its safe to assume there are no new facts on 3407?
Although I too would disagree to continue an approach in IMC with a G/S that deviates, I'm not about to get into that here since this thread was created to update those who are interested flight 3407.

No, there are no new facts as of yet. Last I read the NTSB is in the fact-finding stage and no new information is being released to the public. They may be conducting a public hearing soon to find new information though.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
usmc-sgt
Regional
44
03-11-2012 02:04 PM
FlyJSH
Regional
19
08-11-2010 03:29 PM
aFflIgHt
Regional
1
01-16-2009 03:52 AM
whtever
Regional
110
12-15-2008 09:12 PM
cptmorgancrunch
Regional
5
10-21-2008 05:17 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices