Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Post Reply
Message
Author
pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#1 Post by pelmet » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:17 am

Will it happen for the first time? Two weeks to go. No jet airliners-no turboprop airliners on the civilian side. Or was that Russian thing a fatal crash.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanJ
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:12 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#2 Post by DanJ » Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:16 pm

Is the "Russian thing" the Turkish Airlines cargo 747 that killed 4 crew and 35 on the ground in January?
---------- ADS -----------
  

7ECA
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 659
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#3 Post by 7ECA » Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:48 pm

---------- ADS -----------
  
Honour is a man's gift to himself ~Duke Elegant
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.

User avatar
raven54
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 548
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:14 am
Location: a dumpster

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#4 Post by raven54 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:07 pm

Airliners
---------- ADS -----------
  

7ECA
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 659
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#5 Post by 7ECA » Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:57 pm

I was unaware that that was the only facet of aviation from which one can come to a conclusion about safety. It seems to me, that one would be remiss, if not including all facets of commercial aviation into the equation.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Honour is a man's gift to himself ~Duke Elegant
Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.

User avatar
daedalusx
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:51 am

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#6 Post by daedalusx » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:34 pm

The absence of evidence doesn't mean the evidence of absence.
---------- ADS -----------
  
In twenty years time when your kids ask how you got into flying you want to be able to say "work and determination" not "I just kept taking money from your grandparents for type ratings until someone was stupid enough to give me a job"

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#7 Post by pelmet » Sun Dec 17, 2017 2:13 pm

7ECA wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 5:57 pm
I was unaware that that was the only facet of aviation from which one can come to a conclusion about safety.
An unfortunate misinterpretation of the intent of the thread by yourself.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#8 Post by pelmet » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:41 am

Looks like the unions have a unique interpretation of why 2017 was the safest year. Gee...could they have an alternative angle that get played up on the safety issue?


U.S. Experts Split On Drivers Of Airline Safety Record

Bill Carey
Airline safety experts concur that the aviation industry’s unwavering commitment to safety, and the efforts of international organizations over years, have reduced the occurrence of major airline accidents, even as air traffic increased. But in the U.S., which in 2017 achieved a fourth straight year without a passenger airline fatality, there are differences of opinion over the best approaches to maintaining safe operations.

In a widely reported release earlier this month, the Aviation Safety Network (ASN) declared last year the safest on record as measured by worldwide airline fatal accidents and number of fatalities, with an estimated one fatal passenger flight accident per 7.36 million flights. The Netherlands-based organization counted 10 fatal accidents involving commercial jetliners and regional and utility turboprops, resulting in a total of 44 passenger and crew deaths. This was the first time annual fatalities dipped below 100 since 1946, according to ASN records.

There were two fatal nonpassenger accidents in the U.S. in 2017. The first was the crash of a Grant Aviation Cessna 208B Grand Caravan single-engine turboprop in Alaska in May that killed the pilot, the aircraft’s sole occupant. The same month, both crewmembers were killed when their Air Cargo Carriers Shorts 330-200 twin-engine turboprop crashed while landing at Charleston-Yeager Airport, West Virginia.
Last year was safest on record for airline fatal accidents

1,500-hr. pilot qualification rule helped, ALPA says

Since 1997, the average number of airliner accidents worldwide “has shown a steady and persistent decline,” says the ASN, which credited ongoing safety efforts by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the International Air Transport Association, the Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) and aviation manufacturers and aircraft operators.

In the U.S., three passengers died in July 2013 after an Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-200ER crashed on final approach to San Francisco International Airport. But U.S.-based passenger airlines as of 2017 had not suffered a fatal accident since a Colgan Air Bombardier DHC-8-400 twin-engine turboprop crashed near Buffalo-Niagara International Airport, New York, in February 2009, killing 49 people on the aircraft and one on the ground.

Following the Colgan crash, then-FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt and then-Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood conducted a series of “call to action” meetings with airlines and labor unions aimed at strengthening safety standards. In the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010, Congress required the agency to implement new regulations for pilot qualification, flight duty and rest requirements and training.

Reacting to the 2017 safety results, the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) cited the FAA’s pilot qualification regulation, released in July 2013, requiring that new first officers hold an airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate with 1,500 flight hours as a pilot; previously they needed only a commercial pilot certificate with 250 hr. of flight time. There is allowance for military pilots and college graduates with less than 1,500 hr. to obtain a “restricted privileges” ATP certificate.

The pilots’ association opposes attempts to change the rule, including a proposal made last year by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, in FAA reauthorization legislation.

“Since new pilot training requirements were enacted in 2010, there has not been a single passenger fatality on a U.S. commercial airliner. That is an extraordinary achievement that everyone should be committed to maintaining,” ALPA said in an emailed statement to Aviation Week. “Unfortunately, there are some special interests in Washington who are trying to weaken these aviation safety rules and make our skies less safe. We look forward to continuing our work with the Trump administration, Congress and safety-minded stakeholders to stop special interests from undermining aviation safety in 2018.”

Not all pilots agree that the 1,500-hr. rule drives safety. “In my opinion, 1,500 hr. is a number,” says Scott Schleiffer, a Boeing 747 captain with cargo carrier Atlas Air who has served as safety chairman for the Airline Professionals Association, Teamsters Local 1224 union. “You can get 1,500 low-quality hours and be no better prepared to be an airline pilot than a guy with 700 high-quality hours, in terms of the type of operation you are involved in and the instruction or training you’re given from beginning through training at the level of preparing for operations at some kind of carrier,” he says.

Bill Voss, a former ICAO air navigation commissioner and FSF president and CEO, said there is no relationship between the 1,500-hr. rule and the present safety record. The rule is “a distraction from the real question of how we train to achieve the level of competencies in flight crews,” he said. “I’m not sure how the 1,500-hr. requirement of a first officer overcomes a captain without competence.”

Schleiffer believes the biggest demand pilots face is the increasing complexity of airspace operations. Specifically, he mentioned the pressure of monitoring systems to comply with precise, area navigation-based departures and arrivals, which include fixes for lateral, vertical and speed constraints.
“Those things [require an] extraordinarily high level of attention, higher than it used to be,” says Schleiffer. “The unforeseen circumstance there is we do have some erosion of basic hands-on flying skills because we get to hands-on fly less than we used to. There is a tradeoff; if we want to have more aircraft in the airspace and have a higher rate of departures and arrivals, we do not have any choice but to use these higher-precision procedures.”
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by pelmet on Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#9 Post by pelmet » Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:42 am

.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by pelmet on Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

J31
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 971
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#10 Post by J31 » Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:20 am

pelmet wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:42 am
Bill Voss, a former ICAO air navigation commissioner and FSF president and CEO, said there is no relationship between the 1,500-hr. rule and the present safety record.
What an arrogant uninformed attitude. :? However he did get one part right......training.

Edited to clarify my point.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by J31 on Fri Jan 26, 2018 8:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#11 Post by pelmet » Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:23 pm

J31 wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:20 am
pelmet wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:42 am
Bill Voss, a former ICAO air navigation commissioner and FSF president and CEO, said there is no relationship between the 1,500-hr. rule and the present safety record. The rule is “a distraction from the real question of how we train to achieve the level of competencies in flight crews,” he said. “I’m not sure how the 1,500-hr. requirement of a first officer overcomes a captain without competence.”
What an arrogant uninformed attitude. :? However he did get one part right......training.
Actually, he is absolutely correct. That is an example of why is is head of the highly respected Flight Safety Foundation.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 760
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#12 Post by confusedalot » Thu Jan 25, 2018 7:08 pm

So that means that the upgrade system is a failure? My my, lots of assumptions here, as in, getting a left seat is a process without checks or any sort of rigor. Also, if there are incompetent captains, who used to be first officers at one time, would there also be such a thing as incompetent first officers?

Slippery slope indeed.

Incomptent FO's don't make it through the system. Weak ones may, but they are eventually caught up with and get demoted/let go.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?

J31
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 971
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#13 Post by J31 » Fri Jan 26, 2018 8:15 am

pelmet wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:23 pm
J31 wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:20 am
pelmet wrote:
Tue Jan 23, 2018 1:42 am
Bill Voss, a former ICAO air navigation commissioner and FSF president and CEO, said there is no relationship between the 1,500-hr. rule and the present safety record.
What an arrogant uninformed attitude. :? However he did get one part right......training.
Actually, he is absolutely correct. That is an example of why is is head of the highly respected Flight Safety Foundation.
Ok. The point I was inferring to: "no relationship between the 1,500-hr. rule and the present safety record" Where are the stats to back up that claim for the esteemed gentleman from FSF?

I have been around the block a few times and can say that a f/o with 1500 hours is way more competent than they were at 250 hours.

He does have a point that the quality of training and standards has a large influence on flight safety.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Zaibatsu
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#14 Post by Zaibatsu » Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:37 am

Perhaps the most glaring example was Colgan 3407, the last fatal airline crash in the United States I believe, where both of the crew members met the as-yet non-existent 1500 rule.
---------- ADS -----------
  

upnatem
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 10:30 am

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#15 Post by upnatem » Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:04 am

I absolutely agree that there is no direct correlation between an arbitrary number and skill. However, there is no company with the resources and time to specifically monitor and evaluate the skills and abilities of each and every employee. And even if somehow they did implement such a system, people would bitch and complain that it's not fair as soon as it's criteria negatively impacted their personal prospects. Therefore, numbers are used as a proxy for skill development. It is accepted that at 1,500 hours you will have more skill than you did at 500 for every individual. It is understood that not all 1,500 hour pilots will have the same level of skill, however, each and every one of them will be better than they were before that threshold.

Some feel that in utopia there would be time to evaluate everyone as an individual and grant increased responsibility and remuneration based on that evaluation. However this is mainly due to most people having the opinion that in such a system they would evaluate on the high-end. Reality is that it may not exactly turn out that way. It would also do away with seniority as having any value because some young guy may evaluate above a long term employee and hence receive better job assignments and better pay. There go the unions!! (hmmmm....maybe it's not such a bad idea?)
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Two weeks to go-No fatal airline crashes for 2017

#16 Post by pelmet » Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:35 pm

J31 wrote:
Fri Jan 26, 2018 8:15 am
pelmet wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:23 pm
J31 wrote:
Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:20 am


What an arrogant uninformed attitude. :? However he did get one part right......training.
Actually, he is absolutely correct. That is an example of why is is head of the highly respected Flight Safety Foundation.
Ok. The point I was inferring to: "no relationship between the 1,500-hr. rule and the present safety record" Where are the stats to back up that claim for the esteemed gentleman from FSF?

I have been around the block a few times and can say that a f/o with 1500 hours is way more competent than they were at 250 hours.

He does have a point that the quality of training and standards has a large influence on flight safety.
I'm not saying that I don't like a 1500 hour rule but......there are a multitude of airlines around the world using ab initio pilots who have much less than 1500 hours when they go on the line yet......last year had no fatal accidents at any of those airlines or anywhere else for that matter with a few minor exceptions.

The unions like the 1500 hour rule because it creates a shortage leading to higher wages. Ok, it is nice to have higher wages in the industry and pleny of jobs available from my perspective but...all I am saying is that the union(s) are misleading you when they claim that this law in the US is the reason for the improved safety record.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”