Fort St John Accident topic #2

electraguy · Post by **electraguy** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:40 pm

Does the old syaing "you can't flog a dead horse" mean anything. Its over and done, everyone walked away and since none of us was sitting in the left seat we can only speculate on the causes. Lets move on and debate something more interesting!

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:10 pm

Well the horse might be dead in your mind electraguy, but there are still some loose ends here .

http://peaceair.net/jan_9.html

There seems to have been a Sigmet that should have been avaliable to the crew that was not mentioned in the above link as well as several pireps.

So what is wrong with trying to find out what happened?

Cat

electraguy · Post by **electraguy** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:35 pm

Well, I read the article that you linked and I standby my original statement. The statment released by the company may only be half the story, who knows for sure except the crew on board. I would say its a job for the Transport Canada Saftey people at this point, not us as the "armchair quaterbacks" I am sure the report will be out soon enough and we will all get the details. Let the horse lay!

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:59 pm

I would say its a job for the Transport Canada Saftey people at this point, not us as the "armchair quaterbacks" I am sure the report will be out soon enough and we will all get the details. Let the horse lay!

Fair comment, but I look at these accidents from an insurance point of view.

Each time there is a signifigant hull loss or repair bill we all are hurt by ever rising insurance costs.

In Europe we have been a bit more proactive in this area by instituting higher training standards to lower insurance claims, it works.

Just my slant on it though, for some " Shit happens " takes care of the subject.

Cat

looproll · Post by **looproll** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:58 am

I'm still waiting for someone to suggest why it is reasonable to even bother attempting an ILS with 1/4 vis and a 40kt crosswind in moderate blowing snow. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen (which, evidently, it was).

Maybe they didn't have enough gas to make a suitable alternate. The weather was down all over.

wanpaku-ed · Post by **wanpaku-ed** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 3:55 am

The doomed approach was their second attempt.

2milefinal · Post by **2milefinal** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 5:23 am

Cat Driver wrote:
In Europe we have been a bit more proactive in this area by instituting higher training standards to lower insurance claims, it works.

Ya there's a concept.
Spend more time/money on training...CAN,T have that.

rejd · Post by **rejd** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:54 am

Here are a couple of pics from this incident.

http://www.andreaandrej.com/photogaller ... p?album=26

Rej

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 9:09 am

2milefinal:

You need not worry about getting more training in Canada, you have the transferable PPC.

Cod Father · Post by **Cod Father** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:20 pm

bob sacamano wrote:Landing is like sex.

A good one, the girl goes somewhere else.

A great one, the girl comes back for more.

Which one do you want?

And all the news reports I heard stated all those passengers waited for another Peace Air airplane to finish the last leg of their journey instead of switching carriers or modes.

Cod Father · Post by **Cod Father** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:24 pm

Doc wrote: I can't say I've ever missed an ILS, and then done another one. For me, a missed ILS is a free ticket to an alternate. Unlike the postman, I never "ring" twice.

You weren't by chance flying a Canada 3000 757 on a YYT->YHZ->YYZ haul one Christmas? We made one attempt in Halifax and packed it in for Toronto.

ahramin · Post by **ahramin** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:14 pm

looproll wrote:Maybe they didn't have enough gas to make a suitable alternate. The weather was down all over.

I doubt they didn't have fuel for an alternate, plus Grande Prairie was still good for several hours after the incident.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:08 pm

I need help understanding the meaning of words.

I was always under the impression that when you damaged an airplane to the extent that this one was damaged it was an accident.

Why are these accidents now called incidents?

I see nothing incidental about causing hundreds of thousands of dollars damage to an airplane.

So what is it I'm missing here?

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:16 pm

Cat Driver wrote:So what is it I'm missing here?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAAMPS2MaTs

g5 · Post by g5 » Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:18 pm

Cat Driver,

I'm curious about your European theory. It's pretty hard to compare when most airports here have centerline lighting, CAT II approaches and RVR.

I'm concerned that certain LCC's in Europe are a blood bath waiting to happen, given their hiring practices of whatever 200hr wonder is willing to remortgage Daddy's house first can have the job.

Regardless, I'm sure few of them could proficiently fly a Navajo single pilot in a blizzard and put her down safely in High Prarie from a circling approach, not that they'll ever have to, but I digress...

CD · Post by CD » Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:51 pm

Cat Driver wrote:I was always under the impression that when you damaged an airplane to the extent that this one was damaged it was an accident.

Nothing at all has changed... For those folks calling this an incident, here are those definitions for you again:

"reportable aviation accident" means an accident resulting directly from the operation of an aircraft, where

(a) a person sustains a serious injury or is killed as a result of

(i) being on board the aircraft,
(ii) coming into contact with any part of the aircraft or its contents, or
(iii) being directly exposed to the jet blast or rotor downwash of the aircraft,

(b) the aircraft sustains damage or failure that adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft and that requires major repair or replacement of any affected component part, or

(c) the aircraft is missing or inaccessible;

"reportable aviation incident" means an incident resulting directly from the operation of an airplane having a maximum certificated take-off weight greater than 5 700 kg, or from the operation of a rotorcraft having a maximum certificated take-off weight greater than 2 250 kg, where

(a) an engine fails or is shut down as a precautionary measure,

(b) a transmission gearbox malfunction occurs,

(c) smoke or fire occurs,

(d) difficulties in controlling the aircraft are encountered owing to any aircraft system malfunction, weather phenomena, wake turbulence, uncontrolled vibrations or operations outside the flight envelope,

(e) the aircraft fails to remain within the intended landing or take-off area, lands with all or part of the landing gear retracted or drags a wing tip, an engine pod or any other part of the aircraft,

(f) any crew member whose duties are directly related to the safe operation of the aircraft is unable to perform the crew member’s duties as a result of a physical incapacitation that poses a threat to the safety of any person, property or the environment,

(g) depressurization occurs that necessitates an emergency descent,

(h) a fuel shortage occurs that necessitates a diversion or requires approach and landing priority at the destination of the aircraft,

(i) the aircraft is refuelled with the incorrect type of fuel or contaminated fuel,

(j) a collision, a risk of collision or a loss of separation occurs,

(k) a crew member declares an emergency or indicates any degree of emergency that requires priority handling by an air traffic control unit or the standing by of emergency response services,

(l) a slung load is released unintentionally or as a precautionary or emergency measure from the aircraft, or

(m) any dangerous goods are released in or from the aircraft;

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:26 pm

g5:

I will try and answer.

"

Cat Driver,

I'm curious about your European theory. It's pretty hard to compare when most airports here have centerline lighting, CAT II approaches and RVR.

What theory, I don't recall posting any European theorys?

" I'm concerned that certain LCC's in Europe are a blood bath waiting to happen, given their hiring practices of whatever 200hr wonder is willing to remortgage Daddy's house first can have the job. "

I can not really give an opinion on something that does not have a track record yet, all I know is in Europe you can buy a type rating say in the 738 for 40,000 Euros and get hired by Ryan Air. I only know this because I fly with one of the sim instructors who does sim training for Ryan Air.

Seems to me that the major airlines think they can train pilots right out of school to become FO's on Jets. For me it is irrelevant as I not only am to old to fly for an airline but find baby sitting a 500 knot computer to be boring.

" Regardless, I'm sure few of them could proficiently fly a Navajo single pilot in a blizzard and put her down safely in High Prarie from a circling approach, not that they'll ever have to, but I digress... "

You lost me with that comment, is there something exceptional about flying a Navajo IFR in High Prarie that pilots in the rest of the world would not be able to do?

But I got to admit just reading that heart stopping description of flying valor makes me wish I had been able to experience it.

Anyhow g5, I have at least tried to answer you.

bob sacamano · Post by **bob sacamano** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:47 pm

Cod Father wrote:
bob sacamano wrote:Landing is like sex.

A good one, the girl goes somewhere else.

A great one, the girl comes back for more.

Which one do you want?
And all the news reports I heard stated all those passengers waited for another Peace Air airplane to finish the last leg of their journey instead of switching carriers or modes.

That wasn't aimed at peace air or that flight. Don't take it personally.

merlin · Post by **merlin** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 2:53 pm

For me it is irrelevant as I not only am to old to fly for an airline but find baby sitting a 500 knot computer to be boring.

LOL.... thats awesome.... I feel the same way.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:17 pm

Yeh Merlin, the reason the airines are training pilots from zero hours to sitting as cruise pilot or direct FO position on a nintindo plane is simple, flying the modern airliner is a whole new dicipline and they feel that pilots can skip the hand fly single pilot sector of flying and train them in the deep immersion fast track zero to FO route.

There is one possible problem with this, what happens when all the high time Captains are phased out?

But fu.k it I don't have enough money to buy an airline so I'll let those who run that industry worry about it.

Quite frankly I was impressed with the three crew concept that KLM has on their long hauls, the cruise pilot gets to compare the sim training to watching the computer fly not bolted to the floor.

Here is a picture of my last flight on the flight deck of a MD11 April 29 of this year Amsterdam to Vancouver.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e353/ ... 138414.jpg

The guy in the left seat was a cruise pilot, that allows the Captain to get some rest or a B.J. to get ready for the approach and landing.

g5 · Post by g5 » Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:01 pm

Cat Driver wrote:
In Europe we have been a bit more proactive in this area by instituting higher training standards to lower insurance claims, it works.

I was referring to this comment, Cat.

Anyway, I don't want to take this thread off topic, I was just suggesting that pilots in Canada are facing a whole different set of challenges. While I appreciate that guys in Europe are sim trained, I don't think that flying an airplane with a playstation controller has anything to do with proper decision making and good CRM, which seems to be the cause of the YXJ accident of discussion here.

If you are in Amsterdam, we should go for some Heinies sometime, as I'm a quick LCC flight away.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:08 pm

" In Europe we have been a bit more proactive in this area by instituting higher training standards to lower insurance claims, it works. "

Aaahhh, that comment.

I am in the Warbird / Airshow flying business and have a training program set up for pilots getting type ratings on airplanes such as the PBY which is about as far as you can get from a playstation controller.

The training program is all about proper decision making and CRM backed up by a very in depth flying training program that when sucessfully completed qualifies the pilots for a very low insurance rate. The insurance policy has restrictions for the first few years as to the operating limits and therein lies some of the safety improvements.

My comment was meant to suggest that with proper training and culling the iffy ones the accident rate goes down signifigantly.

At least the underwriters at Lloyds think so, which is all I care about.

I am on Vancouver Island but may do some flying in Amsterdam this spring.

Cod Father · Post by **Cod Father** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:18 pm

bob sacamano wrote:
Cod Father wrote:
bob sacamano wrote:Landing is like sex.

A good one, the girl goes somewhere else.

A great one, the girl comes back for more.

Which one do you want?
And all the news reports I heard stated all those passengers waited for another Peace Air airplane to finish the last leg of their journey instead of switching carriers or modes.
That wasn't aimed at peace air or that flight. Don't take it personally.

I didn't, I thought it was cute, in this case, the "girls" decided to keep flying Peace Air (they came back for more).

Fort St John Accident topic #2

yikes

horse

Here are some pics that I got of the accident