Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Plane Crash


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Plane Crash Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 12:38:33 AM   
Kedicat


Posts: 251
Joined: 3/13/2005
Status: offline 		I love flying. Lucky to have been in planes of all sizes and types. Even done takeoffs and moderate flying.
But even with My scientific bent and knowledge, I look at or am in a 747 on the ground or taking off and think IMPOSSIBLE!!!!

(in reply to cuddleheart50)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 12:47:48 AM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline 		What a beautiful sight though. To see a 747 or a B52 coming in to land. Wings very nearly flapping.
Marvellous.

(in reply to Kedicat)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 12:56:50 AM   
Kedicat


Posts: 251
Joined: 3/13/2005
Status: offline 		I never tire of it. It is incredible. Watching or being in. And it went from a short coast a few feet off the ground to what we have today in so short a time. Dreams come true and then some.

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 2:28:04 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline 		Experience does not prove competence. Not only do mistakes occasionally happen, incompetence is rampant in society. I remember back when I only had five or so years experience in my field, I showed the employer what to expect, much to the dismay of someone with four times the experience.

I agree with ND, if I read him right. It is the pilot's sole responsibility to know how not to crash the plane. Well, not exactly, the crew. Somehow the bunch of them is supposed to make sure things like this do not happen.

What did the FDR say ? Were they told to takeoff from the too-short runway ? Or did they simply make a wrong turn ? They were obviously cleared for takeoff somewhere, were they there ?

I am a firm believer in the fact that accidents do not just happen, they are caused. Every tragedy in life that does not involve an unexpected twist of nature is caused by human error. In the case of that space shuttle that went boom, the human error happened way before flight time, but it was still human error.

Remember the word professional only means that one is paid. People read alot into it regarding competence, as if they deserve to get paid. Now some idiot has decided to pay them, that is all it means. Reminds me of the hookers I dropped off yesterday, what would make me think they are better in bed than Women who simply want me ? Because somebody thinks they are worth paying for ? Basically it doesn't mean shit to me. They weren't giving out samples, something I could not avail myself of at the time anyway. If they were to show me that their skill level was such that I really would have a better time with them I would probably whip out the wallet.

In the same light, does a taxi driver drive better because he gets paid ? Don't get me wrong, most taxi drivers I've ridden with are quite competent drivers. But it is not because they are paid. They fell into the right job.

Human error caused that crash, just like any other. Nailing down exactly where that is can be problematic. ND states the crew was in familiar surroundings. Now which is it ? Did the tower direct them to the wrong runway, the one THEY should've known was too short, or did they take a wrong turn.

No matter what anyone says, culpability remains with the crew of the aircraft, period. Even as the driver of a car, you are responsible for what that car does. Even an equipment failure, such as the brakes going out, is laid in the driver's lap.

If they had been unfamiliar with that particular airport and got misdirected, there are other possibilities. That, however, is not what I have heard.

People have their perceptions.

I got this uniform so I must be competent (umm, so does a Walmart greeter)

I am a professional (pay)

I have experience (did you LEARN anything ?)

I have learned to trust noone until their actions and words merit it. And I don't fly either. I am not even that crasy about riding in a car when someone else is driving. I am, however, still alive, so there might be something to it.

Experienced professionals wearing uniforms make mistakes every day, but unless someone crashes and burns you generally don't hear about it.

T

(in reply to Kedicat)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 3:23:23 AM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline 		Termyn8tor.    Human behaviour is a system too. It will fail or deviate.  If I were to ask you to do a routine task at regular intervals it would not take long before you made a mistake. If you are flying an aircraft then it may well have fatal consequences.

Incidently I think flying a large hi tech 'plane is one of the most overrated jobs going. It takes more "motor" skills to reverse an articulated lorry into a narrow gap than it does to cause a plane to take off. Am I right ?

Another point Termyn8tor I wont hear a bad word against those Hookers you met. Did you still have your wallet when you left?

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 7:52:47 AM   
KatyLied


Posts: 13029
Joined: 2/24/2005
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		There is a good vido on cnn.com that talks about the errors made and the "point of no return".  It's a short video, yet informative.

_____________________________

“If you want to live a happy life, tie it to a goal, not to people or things.”
- Albert Einstein

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 10:22:50 AM   
peterK50


Posts: 433
Joined: 1/12/2006
Status: offline 		If the plane had been airborn 2 miles it would have landed on my farm

_____________________________

Religion Is About Seeking Knowledge, Not Knowing All The Answers.

(in reply to Kedicat)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 1:23:30 PM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

What a beautiful sight though. To see a 747 or a B52 coming in to land. Wings very nearly flapping.
Marvellous.


Big birds and crosswind landings:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-80213707862418883

Spoken by a carrier pilot, "Flying is the second greatest of all... the greatest thrill of all is Landing."

Lastest news updates say the copilot was at the controls and the pilot commented on the runway lights being out, yet they continued their takeoff run down the unlit short runway. Flight data recorder indicates top ground speed they achieved was about 157 mph. Rotation (liftoff) speed for the RJ100 is around 180 mph. The copilot remains in a coma, in critical condition with internal injuries/bleeding, broken bones and leg injuries which may require one of his legs to be amputated.

It looks like a simple error of not making one more left turn onto the longer lighted runway... which they crossed on the ill-fated takeoff run down the unlit short runway. Perhaps the copilot will be able to shed some light on decisions, prefilght briefings or conversations regarding departures, construction, taxiway markings/changes...

_____________________________

"You may be right, I may be crazy... but I may just be the lunatic you're looking for!"

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 1:39:20 PM   
KatyLied


Posts: 13029
Joined: 2/24/2005
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline 		Had they been reading the compass, they would've realized that they were on the wrong runway.  I never knew this before watching the video, but runways are numbered according to the compass bearing.

_____________________________

“If you want to live a happy life, tie it to a goal, not to people or things.”
- Albert Einstein

(in reply to NastyDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 2:11:46 PM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline 		Yes Katy, runway markings are relative to the compass heading, which measures 360 degrees full circle. The same runway (runway 22 for instance) from the opposite direction would be on a compass heading of 22 + 180 degrees, or a 202 degree compass heading. The lower of the two numbers are used for markings and charts, for two-digit simplicity.  Pilots are trained to "think plus 180" automatically regarding opposite-end runway headings.

Being lined up on a pre-takeoff compass heading of 26 as opposed to the expected 22 should have been a major red flag... as should have been the unlit runway... as should have been crossing the lighted runway... etc.

_____________________________

"You may be right, I may be crazy... but I may just be the lunatic you're looking for!"

(in reply to KatyLied)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Plane Crash - 8/29/2006 10:20:20 PM   
StrongButKind


Posts: 136
Joined: 10/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NastyDaddy

Yes Katy, runway markings are relative to the compass heading, which measures 360 degrees full circle. The same runway (runway 22 for instance) from the opposite direction would be on a compass heading of 22 + 180 degrees, or a 202 degree compass heading. The lower of the two numbers are used for markings and charts, for two-digit simplicity.  Pilots are trained to "think plus 180" automatically regarding opposite-end runway headings.

Being lined up on a pre-takeoff compass heading of 26 as opposed to the expected 22 should have been a major red flag... as should have been the unlit runway... as should have been crossing the lighted runway... etc.


This is in the ballpark but not correct. Runway numbers are the heading rounded to the nearest ten, dropping the third digit. Runway 22 is a heading around 220 degrees (could be 216, could be 224). Runway 26 is around 260 degrees. Runways actually have two names, accounting for the reverse. The runways would probably be called 4-22 and 8-26. In the case of parallel runways, R and L are added to disambiguate.

A difference of four degrees actually would not be a red flag -- could be quite normal rounding (as an aside, because magnetic North moves, runway numbers vary, and, over time, can even need to change. This is more true the closer you are to a pole. Much nearer the poles, true North is used instead of magnetic North, and the name has a T appended to designate that). A difference of around 40 degrees, as would have had to have been the case in this accident, should indeed have been noticed.

I'm not a pilot or air traffic controller or otherwise trained/educated in this, so better information could be obtained from the FAA or other reliable sources, but this is accurate to the best of my knowledge, and hopefully corrects some incorrect information posted here. If there are any experts on this in the forum, please give a better and more complete explanation.

(in reply to NastyDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 12:49:04 AM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline 		A brief ballpark explanation was offered to correlate to the aerial photo of KLEX being displayed in news media and linked in this thread. KLEX has no parallel runways and is not situated near a magnetic pole, so no need for a detailed explanation that would require further explantation as to why the aerial photo of KLEX in the news media is not marked as are the approach plates (http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0608/00697AD.PDF) which the pilots definitely had in their possession.

The annual rate of magnetic north drift for KLEX is listed as .01 degree west... it would only take 99 more years to constitute a one degree change in magnetic north for KLEX should earth's rotation and axis remain constant for 99 more years.  

Despite hair-splitting, there were many things that apparently slipped by the crew of Flight 5191 and the doomed RJ100, and each contributed directly to this disaster. Compass headings being only one of many missed flags, taxiing and turning onto an unlit runway being another major ... crossing a lighted runway while engaging in a takeoff run down an unlit runway being the biggest of all missed flags.

_____________________________

"You may be right, I may be crazy... but I may just be the lunatic you're looking for!"

(in reply to StrongButKind)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 1:09:20 AM   
Kedicat


Posts: 251
Joined: 3/13/2005
Status: offline 		I imagine there have been studies done on this. I notice in many recountings of disasterous mistakes, that there were often a series of warning signs. Or small mistakes that add up to the final disaster.
It seems to me that there is a habit to note an anomoly, judge it rightly or wrongly and then never go back to it. Something odd is noticed. It is judged wrongly. As these errors in judgement accumulate, it seems each preceding error is used to judge the next one in error.
Seems it is difficult for someone on a path to stop and recalculate the whole string of errors and take a fresh judgement.

Could it be an internal bias to not admit a small error, then use that tainted idea to judge the next item, etc...finally being unable to easily think that you have made a whole string of errors that add up to a huge mistake?

So often it seems to happen. But viewing it in hindsight and not being responsible or doing the judging, the errors seem  ever more obvious at each step. The addition of being the " Pro " might even reinforce the subconcious inability to back up and re-evaluate your decisions.

(in reply to cuddleheart50)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 1:27:05 AM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline 		Kedicat...I think that explanation is spot on.A series of  errors, with the error maker not being able to accept making them. Tho' are there not two pilots. Then the strength of personality of the two would enter the equation.

edit to say
Always find simple spelling errors after I have submitted the post

< Message edited by seeksfemslave -- 8/30/2006 1:29:22 AM >

(in reply to Kedicat)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 5:42:23 AM   
MrDiscipline44


Posts: 1776
Joined: 1/5/2005
Status: offline 		Have either of you two seen the cockpit of a commercial airliner. There are more buttons, lights, knobs and switches then is humanly possible to remember. For each light that indicates a something, there are four components that could be faulty, the light itself, the (miles) of wire connecting to it, the sending unit and the item the sending unit is monitoring. Now-a-days the only reasons why airliners have a piloting crew are 1) to take off from the runway (which actually has been proven the they aren't need for), to record lights that go on during flight and to land the aircraft (also proven to not need the crew for). Even getting a personal licence is nothing like flying an airliner. Maybe you should actually get a pilots licence and see what it like before judging them to be egocentric.

_____________________________

If you love somebody, you have to be willing to break them.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.

Have you slapped your slave today?

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 6:48:26 AM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline 		Mr D I think the explanation was a general one then applied to the particular events that PROBABLY  lead up to the crash.

With regard to the complexity of a cockpit, all of the instruments will split into various function relating to the aircraft performance. If pilot looks at attitude instruments when wheels wont lower thats HIS error.If any system malfunctions, throwing a switch or reading a dial wont help much. You admit yourself pilots are virtually redundant.
Grossly overrated job....in my opinion.  see ya. I am talking about the job. More skill required to fly an older earlier generation plane.....in my opinion.

(in reply to MrDiscipline44)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 8:47:45 AM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline 		Two pilots are required in jet aircraft, both in fare carriers and restricted non-fare carrying aircraft used for freight, airborne sensor platforms, etc. The requirement is actually mandated by aircraft insurers. It is not uncommon to have a rated PIC (pilot in command, or left seater who is rated in the airframe and has a minimum of 1500 hours stick time in that airframe) flying the jet, and have an unrated airframe pilot in the right seat as the copilot.

In the airline industry it is not uncommon to have First Officers (right seaters, or copilots) who are there for nothing more than to simply make it legal with the insurance company requirements. Often "required" right seaters seldom if ever actually fly the aircraft, but are there to basically fill a requirement. As time goes by, the right seater's "observed" checklist procedures, cockpit protocols and voice communications with controllers will gain the PIC's confidence... and actual training of the right seater occurs. This "training" environment along with formal training and simulator time enable the right seater to gradually fill-in squares and build the 1500 hours required for an aircraft "typing, or rating". It's a multi-year proposition, and the PIC always bears the responsibility for their aircraft... always sit left seat... as the right seater is in training -or- is merely there as a doublecheck mechanism for human functions.

To say the aircraft industry and aviation does not need pilots anymore, that flying can be done via remote control or instrumentation is way over generalizing the abilities of drones and remotely piloted vehicles... in the very least the insurance carriers would refuse coverage, leaving the air carrier to assume all liability.... which they of course won't.

In the case at hand, as sad and simple as it may be... the right seater missed a single left turn while taxiing the aircraft. The PIC obviously did not catch the first officer's error. That single error was basically the cause of the disaster because it placed the airliner on the shorter unlit runway.... where the final sequence of errors were not overcomeable, due to the initial error of failing to make the one left turn onto runway 22 as cleared by the tower.

One thought regarding all the controls, knobs and switches in the cockpit... There are redundant systems and displays, nearly all the controls and instruments in front of the pilot are duplicated on the right side for the copilot. This equates to four eyes observing two different sets of controls and instruments, but all the redundancy is for naught when a single left turn was not performed. Realizing their crossing of the lighted runway on their takeoff run would have saved this aircraft, crew and passengers... despite the initial taxiway final left turn error.

There are a lot more reasons now-a-days for mannned flight besides simply takeoffs and indicator lamp observances. Many of the greatest human disasters and preventable loss of life stems from simple human error. Often a rediculously simple error, combined with haste, complacency, lack of verification, and confidence in unrated performance can lead to total disaster.

_____________________________

"You may be right, I may be crazy... but I may just be the lunatic you're looking for!"

(in reply to seeksfemslave)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Plane Crash - 8/30/2006 11:59:40 AM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline 		Today's news is even more disheartening:  NTSB: Wrong runway wasn't Comair crew's only preflight error 

NTSB now says the crew actually got on the wrong airplane to begin with at 5:15am. They were seated in the cockpit powering up the aircraft systems when a ground crew member had to notify them they were on the wrong aircraft.

Who actually turned the plane onto the short runway was clarified, as only the pilot can ground steer the RJ100. It's nose wheel steering tiller can only be reached from the left seat.

It was also reported that a single on-duty controller in the tower, against FAA policy, did not cause the disaster but that a second controller may have been able to prevent it, as was done in a 1993 incident. 

_____________________________

"You may be right, I may be crazy... but I may just be the lunatic you're looking for!"

(in reply to NastyDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 38
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Plane Crash Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109