Well, well... Watch these two pros!

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

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

Jet Jockey
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:42 am
Location: CYUL

Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by Jet Jockey »

I think these two deserve to be fired or at the very least be suspended without pay for an undetermined time...

The 1000 foot call is heard (EGPWS), then 14 seconds later one of the pilots ask for "Gear Down" which makes me wonder at what altitude they were at when the gears were down and locked. I hear no "gear down" checklist and another EGPWS call rings out but I can't make out the call.

It's not bad enough the guy is still filming at a very low altitude that we as he pans right the other pilot is doing the same...

Who's minding the ship?

And what's with fireworks so close to an approach like this?

https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/austral ... 4Ni1J.html
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by AuxBatOn »

Jet Jockey wrote: Sun Oct 06, 2019 7:08 pm I think these two deserve to be fired or at the very least be suspended without pay for an undetermined time...

The 1000 foot call is heard (EGPWS), then 14 seconds later one of the pilots ask for "Gear Down" which makes me wonder at what altitude they were at when the gears were down and locked. I hear no "gear down" checklist and another EGPWS call rings out but I can't make out the call.

It's not bad enough the guy is still filming at a very low altitude that we as he pans right the other pilot is doing the same...

Who's minding the ship?

And what's with fireworks so close to an approach like this?

https://www.clarin.com/sociedad/austral ... 4Ni1J.html
Fairly easy to figure out. 14 seconds at 650 ft/min means they lost 151 ft by the time they selected gear down. Add another 150 feet for the gear to come down that brings it down to 700 ft AGL or a little over a minute to landing. Plenty of time.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
User avatar
Jack Klumpus
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:46 pm
Location: In a van down by the river.

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by Jack Klumpus »

Plenty of time? Based on what?

Stabilization criteria is not based on time, but height. For us, by 1,500 fully configured. 1,000 fully stable. By 500, speed stable (if given a speed by ATC).

I don’t know how they operate, but I’ll check, as we have many pilots from their airline now working with us.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by AuxBatOn »

Jack Klumpus wrote: Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:11 pm Plenty of time? Based on what?

Stabilization criteria is not based on time, but height. For us, by 1,500 fully configured. 1,000 fully stable. By 500, speed stable (if given a speed by ATC).

I don’t know how they operate, but I’ll check, as we have many pilots from their airline now working with us.
Plenty of time based on time. More than 1 minute till touchdown.

Stabilization criteria have assumptions baked into them, such as approach speed and glide slope angle, both of which will affect the time to touchdown.

Also, because you don’t meet your “stabilization” criteria doesn’t mean it is unsafe.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
User avatar
Brantford Beech Boy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 660
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 9:34 am
Location: Brantford? Not so much...

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by Brantford Beech Boy »

When he says “landing gear”, the other pilot responds “down”...which suggests to me that is the landing checklist, the gear is already down..


But yeah, those fireworks do seem a bit close....

BBB
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Almost anywhere, almost anytime...worldwide(ish)"
skyhighh
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:55 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by skyhighh »

Landing gear was down above 500ft. Don't know the plane, don't know their SOP, don't know how long it took them to then touchdown but the video stopped and they still had quite a bit to go. Who are we to judge them based from our standards? Yes it was a bit close, was it unsafe? Doesn't look like it, especially in clear VMC weather. How many of the pilots currently working at the major have done things WAY closer...? A ton.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL_CH
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 252
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 8:59 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by FL_CH »

I think the bigger issues are:
a) both pilots filming the fireworks rather than monitoring the approach
b) the fireworks way too close to the approach path
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Then from 1000 ft AGL until the final capture altitude, the A/C accelerates backwards up along the altitude profile with idle thrust"
Mach1
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 512
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:04 am

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by Mach1 »

Did it occur to you that they may be arriving over higher terrain and approaching downhill? So, a 1000 foot call by a RAD ALT might not be 1000 feet above the touch down zone elevation?

Your stabilized approach criteria are not the rest of the worlds stabilized approach criteria. I suggest you see your Aviation Medical Examiner and ask for a Pole-ectamy as soon as you can to have that pole removed from the nether lands of your body.
---------- ADS -----------
 
I'm going to knock this up a notch with my spice weasle. Bam!
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by C.W.E. »

Also, because you don’t meet your “stabilization” criteria doesn’t mean it is unsafe.
Exactly:

We used to do three minute, three hundred feet on down wind touch and goes in the Airbus sim at the factory in Toulouse left and right one after the other just to relieve the boredom of flying an airline category airplane.

Never had a problem safety wise as far as a stabalized approach goes.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rxl
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:17 am
Location: Terminal 4

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by rxl »

C.W.E. wrote: Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:22 pm
Also, because you don’t meet your “stabilization” criteria doesn’t mean it is unsafe.
Exactly:

We used to do three minute, three hundred feet on down wind touch and goes in the Airbus sim at the factory in Toulouse left and right one after the other just to relieve the boredom of flying an airline category airplane.

Never had a problem safety wise as far as a stabalized approach goes.
Were you and your sim partner busy taking pictures of the nasty virtual reality "outside" that sim at the same time?
---------- ADS -----------
 
goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1858
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by goingnowherefast »

There's a difference between flying a plane, ignoring sterile cockpit rules, SOPs, etc. and horsing around in the sim.

Just cause you can do circuits at 300' in a A320 doesn't mean that you should or would do it in reality. Hell, most people screw around in the sim. It can be useful to learn the maneuvering characteristics of an airplane when there are no passengers or anything real to break. It's fun to do all the "yank and bank" and aggressive flying you wouldn't do in reality. Do the dirty 180 back to the runway after a V1 cut, shut off all the engines and glide in, circuits at 300', whatever.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by C.W.E. »

There's a difference between flying a plane, ignoring sterile cockpit rules, SOPs, etc. and horsing around in the sim.

That is the beauty of a really high tech. sim like Airbus has at their factory in Toulouse you can do what ever you want to do with it as there are no sterile cockpit rules or SOP's involved and it flies and handles just like the real airplane.

The biggest challenge for most pilots is getting in the position that Airbus will let you use their sim.

In my case I was employed by them.
---------- ADS -----------
 
moe
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 3:20 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by moe »

Oh the “toulouse tales”! from Cat Driver. God.
🙄🙄🙄🙄
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by C.W.E. »

Oh the “toulouse tales”! from Cat Driver. God.
I was under the impression that these forums were for people to share their flying experiences and I am sharing some of mine.

Obviously my story was not very interesting for you so why don't you share your experience / 's with those who read this site so they can read something really interesting?
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by C.W.E. »

Double post.
---------- ADS -----------
 
moe
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 3:20 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by moe »

Nope, i’m ok. Don’t need to boost my ego with tales from the past ad nauseum like some.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by C.W.E. »

Nope, i’m ok. Don’t need to boost my ego with tales from the past ad nauseum like some.
But you take the time to make snide remarks about others so does that make you feel better?

The way I look at it is if no one shares stories from the past about their flying experiences there would e no history to read about.

I can guarantee you I don't need to boost my ego as far as flying goes because ego boosting is generally done because one feels insecure.

I don't feel insecure, but I like to share flying stories and for sure I have a lot.
---------- ADS -----------
 
goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1858
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by goingnowherefast »

Flying an Airbus sim or really any sim isn't a special thing, or a noteworthy story and nobody cares. Thousands of pilots have flown an Airbus sim and tens of thousands more have flown a sim representing other models, from Caravan to A380. It's like saying I have experience in a 152, so does my dog and nobody cares.

I've flown a Herc sim and as a civie pilot, but I don't brag about it once a month. That's a much rarer experience than an A320 sim.

That's why we're annoyed by your constant reminders of your sim experience. A complete and total lack of humility.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by C.W.E. »

That's why we're annoyed by your constant reminders of your sim experience. A complete and total lack of humility.
Do you have any idea of the cost of buying time in a level D sim?
---------- ADS -----------
 
goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1858
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: Well, well... Watch these two pros!

Post by goingnowherefast »

Don't care, my employer pays for it. As does everybody else's employer. As did yours when you worked for them.

I go in, do my job and go home. I treat the plane the same way and it's even more expensive than a sim. Go in, do my job as trained, do it safely and efficiently, then go home. I don't count the number of dollars, that's the accountant's job.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”