Both of these pilots were qualified on the airplane. They by no means "slipped through the cracks". How many hours did you have when you got hired?

How many FO's at PSA were icing prior to being hired? I would venture to say NONE.

Do you have a source about Becky Shaw being fired from CHQ? I think you're talking about someone else, who by the way was recently released from Colgan Air.

All right SS, you should probably chill just a bit. Your concerns are valid, but you also need to understand that these 2 pilots do not deserve to be slandered. I have stated in previous posts that this accident, much like over 80% of others, was caused by pilot error in some form. However, I believe these 2 pilots are not villains that should be spoken harshly of. The "guilty" party is the "system" that allows inexperienced or ill-equipped pilots into the cockpit of an airliner.

When it comes down to it, it's all about money. It starts with the majors who farm out their lift to regionals to save money. They use other regionals to whipsaw against each other which reduces the quality of EVERYTHING!!! The regionals can't afford to pay pilots what they should make because if they do they'll lose money. If they bid too high for flying they'll lose it to another regional that is willing to do it for cheaper at the expense of the labor group. The system is broken. The majors will never admit it, but they are the root of the problem!!! You notice how although these passengers purchased a ticket on Continental Airlines, Continental is distancing themselves from this accident as much as they possibly can.

Continental and these other majors DISGUST me with these practices, which is why I left the regionals, and the airline industry. I've flown fatigued, done more reduced rest overnights than I can count, eaten sh*t out of vending machines for dinner....all for pennies. It's crap what regional pilots have to go through to try to get to a major.

I hope my previous posts have not come across as personal attacks or slanders against these pilots. My heart breaks for them and the other victims.


P.S. I'd like to hear Larry Kellner's opinion on this topic. After Gordon Bethune left, he made it his mission to destroy/dismantle ExpressJet (which, WAS one of the only decent regionals and has TOP NOTCH training) and go to the lowest bidder, which just happened to be flying these passengers to Buffalo that night.

With all the talk about the fatigue factor I am seriously hoping we get real reforms in this area.

FAR reform so that ALL airlines must comply with an imposed federal law rather then use it as a bargaining carrot largely ignored by the regionals trying to reclaim their ongoing concessions.

Especially the use of High Speeds, Continuous Duty Overnights etc.. I know some people enjoy them for their commuter friendliness. But they are also largely abused. After just completing one this morning It may be my own fatigue but I feel passionately they aren't contributing to the safety of a carrier as a whole. How about we put someone who just came off three of these overnights through a normal PC and see how that compares to their scheduled PC and note the change?

Having flown for 3 121 carriers I know they aren't necessary, and the cost of more crews on overnights in my opinion is definitely worth it.

I am also thinking many pilots put this fatigue on themselves with their own life choices. I would be willing to wager many pilots are not fatigue due to working two jobs, (like the BBC piece insinuates,) but because of the ridiculous commutes that are self imposed. We all know the stories of cross-continent/ocean commutes. I'm thinking there could be some company recourse for employees who choose these commutes without allowing proper rest before flights.

My deepest sympathies and condolences to the friends and family of all lost.

RIP- Colgan 3407 Crew and Passengers, KK, PDC

Its sad that these pilots are dead and now are going to be dragged through the streets and can't defend themselves. Think about what it would be like if the world got to listen to the tapes from the last few flights you flew or got to second guess everything you did. Take it easy.

My thoughts and concerns regarding this incident exactly!

Best post I have read in a very long time, but you'll never get our media crazy/hyper capitalist "cut costs at all costs" culture to admit it. Not as long as they can fly from New York to Vegas for $79!

Just quoting what the news said. Not my words, dude.

The argument is that people that are truly smart are either not becoming pilots and/or are leaving the industry. This as a result has lowered the standards and experience required to get a job. If you paid more you would attract more people and could better screen pilots. This is the argument at least.

As to this idle chatter below 10,000, they were breaking cockpit procedures but I see no way this played any part in the accident. The chatter stopped a few minutes before everything hit the fan.

Anyone....? I think this was discussed at length soon after the accident. It's the stuff you don't see every day that can get ya.

...and I would have to say you are wrong.

"How do you train unusual attitudes in an aircraft that is part 25 certified and isnt certified for unusual attitudes???"

Uhhh... I'm going out on a limb here.... simulator training? I'm pretty sure my plane is not certified for a no-engine approach, but we train for them.

Also, it is the pergogative of the flight crew member to repo from Seattle to Jersey to start a tour. Don't even try to lay this on the airline. Her base was Newark. Plain and simple. Consider it a privlidge to commute for free, but don't use it as an excuse for fatigue.

Just a couple of things...

Not being very specific here...but it does not seem to get us anywhere to say "pilot error" was the leading cause of any accident(again...not saying any of you guys are saying that...just speaking in general). While there is nothing wrong at all, with mentioning that a pilot made this mistake and this mistake during this stage of flight...etc.(those things do need to be pointed out) However, when the final cause of accident is listed as "pilot error," that seems to be an easy way out of bringing closure and resolve to an accident/incident.

There is almost always something systematically wrong, that when changed, can have a better chance of preventing accidents, as opposed to labeling everything "pilot error." To give a completely fictional example, take the Comair accident in Lexington. Yes we known the pilots made mistakes that caused the lives of so many people, but why can we now change things such, making sure all airport runways must have operational night lighting or else the runway is closed (blocked off) during night hours?(Subject to temporary exemptions for single strip airports etc...) That is not a great example i understand, try not to analyze it, in that i am being very general.

I'm sure the answer to that question is money...understandable...but at that point we are placing a price on aviation safety. That will never change of course, but how about we add to the conclusion of some reports...."Due to insufficient funds...the airport/airline/airplane/training/(fill in blank) were not able to provide the most advanced safety measures aimed at preventing accident XYZ." Or..."due to scheduling restraints and current regulations[FAA] outlining flight crew scheduling and duty/rest times, the airline was allowed to schedule crew members into potentially over fatiguing circumstances, and will continue to do so on a regular basis." It still does not mean anything will get done for certain, but at least it gets that into the publics head. Seems all they ever read/hear about on the news is pilot error.

This brings me to my second point...the NTSB will list their findings and make their recommendations, which many times are spot-on, to give them some credit, but the FAA has to actually act on them. Many times that does not happen, and for many reasons; such as money, feasibility, etc..

What you said would correlate IF and ONLY IF we never had an accident or incident with Pilots who were paid more and had over 5000+ hours However their are NUMEROUS accidents where very well compensated and experienced pilots made Major Boo Boos ie Tenerife, Cali, the 14 street bridge "Air Florida"
Denver Cal 1404 ect ect..

Not so easy to afford to live in the greater NYC area on first year pay as a regional F/O.

Most (not all) accidents like that took place before a strong CRM concept had been developed and practiced by the airlines. Tenerife is ancient history. How many accidents caused by pilot error in the Majors have occurred in the last 10 years????

Experienced pilots are statistically safer than less-experienced ones. Call AIG Aviation and ask them why they require pilot information forms for flight departments they insure.

That is what's known in debate parlance as a "Red Herring" .. which is to say, that the fact that one is true, makes not the other true. While good pilots will occasionally make mistakes.. bad (or completely inexperienced) ones will likely make them more often, and when they make them, they're unlikely to know how to recover from them. The post-CRM era of "major" airline pilot safety is near impeccable.

This accident, as with the Roselawn ATR, or the Pinnacle CRJ are all examples of completely unprofessional and inexperienced pilots who can only get away with it under our corrupt FAA system which relies on the crutch of the US Airspace / ATC system and the over automation of airplanes today... Take these same caliber crews to some of the same places I flew to at Gemini, with no radar, minimal ATC, and in airplanes that are far less forgiving to the situationally imparred... and your accident rate would go thru the roof.

It's all a cost benefit issue and the "regionals" are relying on the American short attention span to keep hiring low quality pilots and rolling the proverbial dice.

Shimmydamp... they can live where they want. Just don't use it as an excuse for fatigue... that's all. I mean you can live an hour away from the New York area in BFE West Virginia. Certainly it must be cheaper to live there than in Seattle. You want to tell me a pilot based out of EWR must live on the other side of the country for economical reasons? Do you realize how absurd this is??

And TYPICAL41, yes... this accident was absolutely pilot error.

As a result of a *%#$Bag system overseen by the FAA that allows bottom feeder outfits like Colgan to employ such error prone pilots.. THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN.

You can't MEL the left engine but you practice V1 cuts, right?

Come on, that's what the simulator is for......

I thought that was ex-wives and attorneys...

I don't believe i ever said whether it was or was not pilot error. Did I??(I will reread my rediculously long post) I mentioned i was speaking in general...and after all....i don't believe they have even released their final report have they?????

If the regionals were smart, they'd give a fair but tough pc check to all captains that were hired in the last boom.

Rank the results, fire the dipsticks and hire straight to captain those "5000 hour with 5 type ratings guys/gals sitting at home."

fire the dipsticks ok. Street captains, bypassing my seniority NO

Unless I missed something, the FAA sets the standards on who gets to fly. The tests are objective, and everyone must go through the same hoops.

The "argument" that current work conditions are discouraging more generally desirable candidates may have merit, but this tragic incident has little or nothing to bolster it. In the eyes of the FAA, these two pilots (whatever their other faults) were fully qualified and had to go through some very specific and demanding training hurdles.

If this incident does bolster this "argument" in a peripheral fashion, the only NTSB recommendation I could see coming out of it would be for the FAA to make the barriers to entry and retention even more stringent (health, age, training qualification, tighter parameters and "wildcard" scenarios on checkrides, etc.).

I suspect pilot labor groups would strenuously object to harder checkrides that offer more realistic evaluations of pilot skill and judgment. The "canned" checkride is very much the career aviator's friend, particularly as the years go by.

Alternately, the FAA could institute a "2 strikes and you're out" policy. Two failed training events in the course of a career and that's the end of your flying (because a pattern has been established). This is a regulatory way to "weed-out" weak but technically proficient pilots and has the virtue of being objective and "fair". But man oh man . . . talk about checkride-itis!

(IMHO.)

Seniority used to work great back in the day when 90% of pilots came form the military and/or had a lot of flight time before their first job... in this era of 250TT new hires, and upgrades at 1501TT... might be time to "re-thing" how seniority works.

You know you and DUDE sound like you have an AX to grind I am not going to reason with you guys I simply dont have the time.. EARLY report have fun GENTS

Seriously!

If you want run a business well, you should hire the most qualified candidates from the outside if you can't find qualified internal candidates.

On another note, for the press, someone needs to post a thread that explains the 5 failures. At the 121 airlines I flew for if you failed a second attempt, you were fired.

If you were struggling at 25 hours of IOE, you were fired...

Guilty.. I do have an ax(e) to grind...

Is this thread about the hearing?
 

She commuted in from SEA the night prior, true. However:

• I don't believe there is anywhere on the CVR where she states or suggests she is tired.
• She did not call fatigued (though this may be due to the way Colgan deals with fatigue calls).
• She told the Fed Ex Captain who flew her from MEM-EWR that she slept well on the SEA-MEM flight.
• The Fed Ex crew on that flight, as well as the other jumpseater, all have testified she appeared to have slept soundly on that flight.
• She had a show time of 1330, so she had the opportunity to sleep in EWR (in the crew room with the lights on so nobody steals the TV - inside joke for the few posters who actually listened to the hearing)

As someone else pointed out, if IRO's can 'rest' on an aircraft, than why can't a Colgan FO choose to do so on her time off? For all we know, she may sleep more soundly to the soothing sounds of aircraft white noise than any of us sleep in our beds, and only require 5 hours of sleep per night, while some of us require 9 (which is 1 hour longer than domestic minimum reduced rest, something every regional pilot has done, and some major airline pilots too).

Fatigue has not been discussed at all so far in the NTSB hearings. Nor has human factors. I don't know who this poster is referring to re: using fatigue as an excuse, but it's not being used as an excuse by any of the parties to this investigation.

The hearing is on-going. Perhaps this thread could stick to the topics discussed today in the hearing (icing certification, aircraft handling qualities and performance characteristics; stall recovery and cold weather operations; and company training programs and pilot oversight), rather than speculating about issues that will surely be addressed in a thorough manner in the next 48 hours.

So far we know the following through testimony:

• Colgan's training at the time of the accident was not as thorough as it could have been. It has since been improved. It likely could be some more.
• It is clear the stall recovery technique employed on this flight by both pilots was not something they learned from Colgan, nor something recommended by Bombardier or NASA.
• We also know that there appear to be VERY few 121 passenger aircraft out there that are susceptible to tailplane stalls today (the FAA has issued AD's to make the 'susceptible' aircraft 'non-susceptible', so, most every 'regional' turboprop pilot does not need to be trained on tail stalls, the last of which happened almost 20 years ago).
• We know that it is virtually impossible to tailplane stall a Q400 (requires -1.5 G's and a high speed flap extension) though Bombardier didn't actually tell any Q400 operators this till after the accident.

There's a good amount we know, and could discuss. I don't see why this thread has gone down a different path.

Sorry to interrupt the discussion/speculation.

I do not believe a pilot must live on the other side of the country for economical reasons, but I don't believe it is feasible on regional FO pay to live anywhere close to EWR, LGA, JFK, (or IAD or DCA for that matter).

Either way the burden has been put on the pilot to find an affordable living situation somewhere. The low pay creates the need to commute to work whether that be to West Virginia or Washington. So yes, I think that when low pay forces you to commute, you can use it as an underlying factor as to why you are fatigued.

As another poster noted we will find out more about fatigue and its role in the accident later on in the hearing.

After watching this video I am a bit disturned with some of the things the crew did. I understand we all will defend out fellow crewmembers to the death because that's what we do and it's a part of our culture. Maybe their actions can be blamed on the training department or something instead of just piloting skills.

I've never flown the Q but from what watching the CVR/FDR overlapped some things really struck me hard. Forget the sterile cockpit for this even though that will be mentioned a million times during this investigation. I'm even looking past the autopilot flying the airplane until the dooming pitch-up. As pilots, it's out job the monitor the autopilots performance and airplanes trends and current state of flight while it's engaged. I don't see how them leaving the airplane on autopilot has anything to do with it. I'd rather the autopilot fly the plane in conditions like that so I can concentrate more on airspeed, trim, and planning ahead instead of keeping it in the bars tight. As we all know it really decreases the workload. Towards the end the snake is really coming up fast and the pitch is increasing while the speed slows. At the point the snake starting moving up, we can all pretty much agree that's the point where most would start taking action and applying more power and abandoning the approach possibly. After the plane pitched up the proper inputs to recover didn't really line up with the actual inputs. Again, I'm not here to place blame or doubt the crews skill. What hit me especially hard was the monitoring pilot retracting the flaps without the pilot flying's command. After the flaps were retracted at 80-100 knots it was all over at that point, or maybe even before.

I'm interested in seeing the final probable cause of this accident and hope more blame is placed at a root problem rather than just blaming the pilots.

Another reporter.
 

Just a single thing....your a reporter, fishing for a story. Notice number of post and sign in date.

Yeah, I know, I'm in trouble again....

They're one rung above reporters on the evolutionary latter.

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.

ok.....not sure how you came up with that...but ok.Did not even ask a question. Actually, i just registered b.c. i finally got access to a non free email account. Or, actually finally realized i had an email address with my isp. Aside from that, everyone has to start somewhere.

I have been viewing these forums for i dunno at least 6-7 years, not sure when i started. I am currently in the left seat of a 121 carrier, and certaintly don't news report on my off days, nor while sitting rsv, which by the way i am doing this very moment.

And even if you are a reporter (And I don't think you are).. so what? It's the reporters that are going to shed some light on the broken racket mess that the "Regional" airlines are and the disaster they've been to not only our profession, but as will soon be very clear, to the traveling public.

Transparency Obama calls it, right?

All of the above hogwash aside, how about the biggest issue here: the release of the CVR tapes, and the broadcast of them to the nation tonight on ABC.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but CVRs were installed on airplanes to aid the INVESTIGATION. This was a collective agreement by airline pilots to solely aid in the investigation of aircraft accidents. I wasn't aware they would be used to drag dead pilots through the streets after a crash/incident.

We don't have these things(CVRs) in cars, trains, buses or boats. If this is how these tapes are going to be used, then CVRs need to be ripped out of every airplane. Under no circumstances should the last words of any person or pilot be heralded to the nation, and then stomped on by John Nance.

Side note: John Nance is a worthless piece of garbage.

We're the pilots at fault? Sounds like it, unfortunately.

Do they, or their families deserve for their last words to be plastered across the front page for the world to see? Hell no.

This is unacceptable and deplorable.

Was it the CVR tapes or the ATC tapes?

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.

If my negligent actions cause the deaths of myself, my crew and my passengers, feel free to blast me all you want. I deserve it. What's sad is the massive loss of innocent life in this accident due to the mistakes of the two trained professionals up front. People put their trust in us everyday, and if I break that trust, they have every right to "bash" me. I'm sorry if it hurts, but we as pilots have to take this criticism when we make a mistake like this.

The broadcast of what was on the CVR, via ABC. No actual recordings.