Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Ok first off I am not sure which crashes in Little Rock or Columbia you are referring to. But did those crashes involve TWO pilots just not paying attention on final and stall short of the runway???

Originally Posted by newarkblows

i disagree to an extent. Everybody makes mistakes. The company is as much to blame as the pilots. Why were two very inexperienced pilots in the same cockpit, both fatigued, both almost unable to afford a house in their base at their current salaries so almost forced to commute.... there is plenty of blame to go around.

You can even blame ourselves. Look back into the old threads and read the people that defended colgan as the best option to get to the majors ASAP. For those of us entering this screwed up industry we didnt cause the problems that put regionals where they are but we were pounding the nails in our own coffins. Everyone wants to turn a blind eye to common sense as long as it is in our best short term interest. Ethically looking at peoples career progression you know it is wrong. Hopefully this is just what many needed to wake up. The regulations were written in blood... the airlines dont care unless it affects their bottom line. We cant expect them to do what is safe or ethical but we can

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Ok first off I am not sure which crashes in Little Rock or Columbia you are referring to. But did those crashes involve TWO pilots just not paying attention on final and stall short of the runway???

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

There was a crash in Little Rock where a Southwest Jet went off the runway due to ice, I believe the reverse thrust quit working...I cant respond to your "points" with out a better reference from your point of view. What specific accidents are you talking about?

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Lastly, have you ever flown 135 single pilot IFR???

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Of course anyone can mess up, but you are a fool if you think 135 single pilot IFR does not make one a MUCH more situationally aware pilot with a much stronger sense of PIC decision making ability.

Originally Posted by dojetdriver

So let me get this straight, you have NEVER heard of the AA MD in LIT, or the AA 757 on Colombia?



LIT, chief pilot, flying with a new hire FO, BOTH had been "on duty" for most of the day. Made poor decisions, poor SA, poor SOP's, poor judgment, poor airmanship. Landed in a T-storm, bent metal, killed people.

Colombia, night time, non radar, poor SOPS, poor SA, failure to crosscheck waypoint entry into the FMS, got "lost", tried to climb out of a valley with the speed brake out. Hit a mountain. SEVERELY bent metal, dead people.

Colgan, we don't need to review it.

What could have possibly happened? We can point out the obvious differences in the crews experience level, the pay, the quality of the airline, etc.

The common theme? They all managed to kill people in the EXACT same way.



Try google, probably point you in the right direction if you need more info.



Nope. Does that make me some kind of sub par pilot to you?


Occupying both seats in the 121 world, some of the best pilots I've flown with were prior single pilot 135. Some of the crappiest pilots I've flown with were prior single pilot 135. Some of the best pilots I've flown with were prior military. Some of the crappiest pilots I've flown with were military. Some of the best pilot I've flown with were only CFI's a short time prior, some of the worst pilot I've flown with were only CFI's a short time prior.

You are [crazy] if you think that just because somebody has a SPECIFIC background they are a superpilot.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

I never said that a specific background makes one a "superpilot," but any civillian, who doesnt do any fair amount of early career PIC as a CFI, 91 Commercial op, or 135 flying is missing a very valuable experience if he just goes to an airline with around 300-1,000 hours.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

These accidents were not the same. The LIT crash may have been caused by pride/complacency due to experience.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Maybe their wx info wasnt as accurate as they thought.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Did they make a bad decison...obviously. But you cant say this is the same as 2 pilots just not paying attention and stalling an airplane when wx, the airplane, or any other issues were not a factor.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

With the Columbia crash, yeah they messed up big time, but it is still not the same. They became too reliant with the technology and let it take them where they didnt need to be.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

They became overloaded with tasks that although werent neccessarily the appropriate tasks, but they still had a lot on their plates.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

It was a poor loss of situational awareness, but you cant compare that to 2pilots on final with a perfectly good airplane, wx not being a factor, and all they had to do was look at the airspeed indicator, but they didnt so they stalled and crashed.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

And as for you not flying 135...I cant say if you are subpar or not, but if you didnt ever instruct, and at 300 hour bought a 121 job, then went to the the airlines waited your turn in line, and finally upgraded, then yes you are a danger or were able to learn a lot with 50+ people behind you. I wouldnt want anyone learning how to be the boss with 50 peoples lives in his hand though.

Originally Posted by dojetdriver

You keep ranting and seem to think that there is ONLY one kind of experience that makes a good pilot. Sorry, disagree with you.



"May" have been? Did you read the report?



AGAIN, did you read the report and see the diagrams of the weather, the reports the controller gave them, etc?



It's EXACTLY the same. Two pilots with poor SA, poor decision making skills, no SOPS, being fatigued, etc.



Again, did you read the report? They weren't "too reliant", they FAILED to cross check, didn't follow SOP, had NO SA what so ever.



But how did they become task saturated? Again, poor SA, lack of SOP, etc.
Thats like saying if Colgan would have just pushed forward instead of pulled back it might be different. Well, that's no excuse for how they got themselves there in the FIRST place.



It was poor SA that killed LIT and Colombia, it's not ANY different.



Nope, I instructed. Sat FO for 7 years, and NOT because I wanted too. Been displaced out of the CA's seat twice. I didn't "buy" either of my 121 jobs.

If you have never had the experience of flying with people from very diverse backgrounds, sorry, I can't really put much stock in your opinion that ONLY single pilot 135 makes a good pilot.

Third time I'm saying it, a pilot with (insert your favorite type of experience here) IS JUST AS CAPABLE of killing people as one without it. It's been happening for years.

Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy

How greedy of you. Is that what you think you are entitled to? A house?

I've got news for you, you aren't entitled to anything. The "kids" of this generation need to learn that. And again, this is NO EXCUSE for being derelict in your duties !!!

I'm not saying that the pay doesn't suck, because it does. But even if they made enough money to afford living in NJ, they probably wouldn't live there anyways. I know many pilots who make much more than Colgan pilots and they wouldn't be caught dead living there.

They had a fundamental obligation to their company and to their passengers and they violated that trust. She commuted all night and he was up late logging into company websites.

Just because they were poorly trained or treated DOES NOT give them the right to kill 49 people.

If you want to make an argument, the company is fallable for allowing the pilots to get makeup sleep in the pilot's lounge.

I'm sorry guys ... the pilots screwed this up ... nobody else. PILOT ERROR at it's worst.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

I never said their is only one kind of experience that counts. Military training is excellent because it is much more sink or swim. So if someone has ANY problems or doesnt work very hard they will weed themselves out quickly. A guy who instructs to 1500 hours has a very strong foundation to become a CFI. And of course 135 single pilot IFR is also a great foundation builder to become a PIC. What do you disagree with about this?

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

My whole argument which for some reason you seem to have taken real personally...is that if a guy goes straight to an airline with low time, will never be tested as a PIC decision maker until the first day of work on the line as a Captain.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

I will go thoroughly read the 2 reports, but my point about the Colgan crash is that, their mistake was taught is basic pilot 101. Keep the airspeed up high enough so that you dont stall.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

And after re-reading the reports...you cant say that these accidents were the same. The American accident was based on pushing the limits.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

The B757 was one of those little mistakes that can turn into a big mistake in a hurry if the conditions are right...and they were.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

And yes they were too dependent on the magic box...they believe in it and they let it lie to them.

Originally Posted by CaptainTeezy

Yes they all had horrible SA...but to say that these guys are equal to the Colgan crew is rediculous. They had no wx issues, or aircraft problems, and they just stalled. (If the black box is reliable).

Originally Posted by dojetdriver

Don't disagree. And it's not till just recently that you've opened up the scope to include OTHER things besides SP 135. I answered a background question about myself, you haven't responded in kind. What type of flying do you do? I'm guessing it's the type you seem so hell bent on boasting of. But how many varying backgrounds of aviators have REALLY flown with? What position do you , or have you held where you can accurately determine one's skills? Are you an LCA, sim instructor, or APD/DE? If you haven't leaned the lesson yet to never put too much faith in the verbal resume somebody gives you, OR underestimates somebody's abilities because they don't "measure up" in your eyes, well, good luck with being a PIC. Strange, of the groups of pilots I listed, the ones in the "crappiest" category were the ones that usually tell you of their background before you even got of the ground. The ones in the "best" category are the ones where you never find out till the typical chit chat of "what did you do before you came here".



I'm not taking it personally. The problem lies with the ignorance that only a certain background makes a good pilot. As well as it being dismissed that a pilot with high pay, an extensive background, etc is somehow exempt from killing people, and that an excuse is made as to why it happened. Sorry, the reasons for dead people in the accidents outlined are the SAME.



Yep, it's a fundamental task learned in private pilot training. But so is keeping SA. Doesn't matter if it's trying to recover from a stall in a single engine bug smasher, or transport category aircraft.



It the same, poor SA led to pushing the limits



Which brings up the point I made before. How did they get themselves into the position in the FIRST PLACE to make that mistake? No SA. How did Colgan get themselves into a position they shouldn't have? Poor SA.

We can play the "if only this happened, this would not have happened" game all day long.



You're not reading the report properly. But that, you're not picking up on the underling root of the problem. They didn't let it "lie" to them. The FMS is nothing but a computer, garbage in = garbage out. It only did what it let them tell it to do, and failed to crosscheck and verify. They gave up SA, and it cost them.



You know what's "rediculous"? That very skilled, competent, well paid pilots killed people the SAME way Colgan did. Did the FAA suddenly go riding along on AA flights after these accidents to make sure they were making the proper decisions when faced with varying situations? Did the FAA start riding along to make sure the pilots were able to maintain SA and properly input waypoints into the FMS, as well as verify and crosscheck, maintain SA, as well as follow SOP's?