Peace Air crash in YXJ report on the web.

[FlowPack]

i usually don't say much but Anonymous1, you're my hero. you have the audacity to spew ingorant bullshit, while maintaining unwavering obstinance.
bravo man, bravo.

[Dog]

Why was an F/O with 250 hours and never minimal IFR skills assigned to this position before a very thorough and extensive line indoc?

Because Transport Canada says you can. It really is that simple. If the regulating authority doesn't disallow it, and it will save a penny, then someone will do it.
If you're counting on someone elses morals and common sense to keep you safe you had better go out and buy a good helmet.

[Anonymous1]

Why is everyone so angry here? It seems that a lot of you cannot accept reality. Is is not the responsibility of an owner to hire the very best pilot (i.e. most experienced, with significant IFR time and time on type, along with exceptional references and outstanding sim performance) to assure that your passengers will have as safe a flight as possible?

Not all pilots are equal in all environments. It depends on what they are familiar with. You wouldn't put a 13,000 hour 737 pilot on a twin Otter in Antartica. So why would a Chief Pilot hire a 13,000 hour pilot with minimal IFR experience and little time on type and put him on as Captain on a high performance Jetstream with an new FO that had never flown an IFR approach to minimums?

I don't need the fu*king CARS to tell me that that is just a really, really stupid decision. If you think that running a company according to the CARS will make you safe, then you are dead wrong.

Why is the former Chief Pilot allowed to continue flying in Canada? He is obviously incompetent in making qualified hiring / crewing decisions, yet we are not allowed to make his name public on an internet forum that might save someone else's life someday?

I just don't understand the anger here....

[Dog]

People are responsible for safety in all levels of aviation. The only thing that happened here was that holes in the slices of Swiss cheese lined up. Why do you have such a hard-on for the CP?

[Raybanman]

Ajet1A, you are trying to tell me that this Captain is a stellar pilot who just had a bad day???? So if you were to look at his sim file, everything would have been commented as "outstanding"? Yet he failed to fly an ILS and crashed on the second try? And all his IFR performance prior to this day was well done?

Can you say that every ride you've ever done had each item marked outstanding? Have you never had a bad day? If you say no to either, you are full of sh*t. Just wait, your day will come.

PP

[pilatus4life]

anonomous1 i cant believe you are still bitter, i worked there too and i was bitter at the time but i have recently grown up! yes the capt of that flight was not known as the best pilot in the world but unfortuneatly companies like this still operate meeting the bare minimums as per TC. as for the CP he is a good guy, why is he being raged on?

[Anonymous1]

I'm not debating whether he is a good guy or not. I would like someone though to tell me why he decided to hire this pilot out of all the choices available to him, and secondly, why did he sign off on the Captain's sim performance as up to standard when he had trouble flying a straight ILS on a perfectly good airplane.

Everyone likes to criticize me for my comments, yet no one can answer some very simple questions that I have raised. Sure, all pilots have good and bad days...that's not the point. There were a lot of wrong decisions made in the hiring, training, and crew pairing that caused this accident, yet nothing is going to change. The same people that made these incorrect decisions are still in the industry at other companies and are not being held accountable for their mistakes. If I run out of gas as a pilot, I may go to jail. If I am a Chief Pilot and choose to hire an unqualified individual when there are other far more qualified pilots available and sign off his sim as acceptable when in fact it wasn't, should I not be held accountable when he crashes?

All you angry mob people here would kill a float operator that hired a 13,000 hour jet pilot to fly a twin otter on floats on the ocean with no float time, especially if he crashed shortly after getting hired. So why the hypocrisy when its the other way around?

[Flying Nutcracker]

Anus1, it is not that we are disputing your questions of fact, it is the fact that your confrontational and tact less approach to this begs questions of their own! Your question's integrity is rapidly losing it's value, drowned in an accusational tone without the sense of asking yourself the most important question... who the hell on this board, in their right mind, would even know the answers to your questions??? Nobody except one!

This industry, especially 703/704 level operations will suffer in the wake of the major's quest for qualified people. I agree that management owe it to their employees and customers to always seek the best qualified people. But sometimes the best that are left don't look like the best. And as Cat Driver has said for a long time, the best are the ones who can actually say no! Clearly, this situation was one of those where a no would have been the best option. But that's easy for us to say in lieu of all we now know!

Have a great day!

FN

[Cat Driver]

And as Cat Driver has said for a long time, the best are the ones who can actually say no! Clearly, this situation was one of those where a no would have been the best option. But that's easy for us to say in lieu of all we now know!

During my career I was chief pilot for several companies ( quite a few actually. ) from little bug smashers to scheduled airline with dozens of pilots on line.

My very top priority was to always err on the side of safety and to instill in those under me the knowledge that they could say no and together we would dissect why after the fact, however they also knew that I had zero tolerance for any pilot who deliberately broke the rules.

There is only one issue for a chief pilot and that is safety must not be compromised.



The position of chief pilot is very difficult in that you have to juggle the expectations of the employer who has profit as their goal, the regulator who used to have enforcement of law as their goal, and the needs of the pilots.....it is probably the most no win job in aviation if you do not know what has to be paramount....safety.

[. .]

Anonymous1: You must only hire 5000hr pilots with 4000hrs of Navajo command time? Surely those guys exist in the industry, so you'd be willing to pay the premium price to keep them from moving to larger planes. I've never noticed your adds saying you're looking for that kind of experience though, are you hiring the best you can, or just settling for what's out there?

[WJ700]

The past few years have had companies like Canadian North and Cargo Jet in a bind for not being able to expand due to 'lack or qualified pilots'. Yet this ass is on here expecting Albert Cooper to be able to acquire the perfect flight crew, to live in YPE, and accept the pay (and BTW, I have my first aviation pay cheque in a scrap book and it's $237 from Peace Air, signed by Wendy Cooper).
When the industry is moving... the seats are musical and its part of the risk. Carriers big or small still have to accept the risk that a brand new FO miight get the V1 cut ... day 1 on line indoc. A newly promoted Captain anywhere can have the best training but won't be '100%' until they get the real world time in at the job. The employer trains to the standard and then must accept the risk until that person develops. This is a common factor no matter which company you are at. If the Captain was marginal... he still can be passed 'legally' and then the hope is that the time at the job develops faster than the weather does, especially in the climate we've had for pilot selection the past few years.

[Cat Driver]

he still can be passed 'legally' and then the hope is that the time at the job develops faster than the weather does, especially in the climate we've had for pilot selection the past few years.

Looks like the rising cost of fuel will give the industry the chance to slow down so the learning process can catch up.

I bet that is why the price of fuel suddenly went way up, it is a correction in the pilot skills market brought on by market factors.

[snoopy]

"Is is not the responsibility of an owner to hire the very best pilot (i.e. most experienced, with significant IFR time and time on type, along with exceptional references and outstanding sim performance) to assure that your passengers will have as safe a flight as possible?"

Was this one of your experienced pilots?

CADORS Number: 2007O2472

Owner: SUPERIOR AIRWAYS LIMITED Operator: SUPERIOR AIRWAYS LIMITED (14801)
Operator Type: Commercial


Detail InformationUser Name: Laporte, Robert
Date: 2007/11/26
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: Commercial & Business Aviation
Narrative: The Piper PA31 –350 operated by Superior Airways Ltd. departed Pikangikum On (CYPM) for Polar Hill On (CPV7) with 1 crew and 4 passengers on board. The aircraft attempted a landing on runway 31 at CPV7 with the landing gear in the retracted (up) position. During the landing flare the propellers made contact with the runway surface. The pilot executed a missed approach and flew the aircraft to Red Lake (CYRL) 65 NM to the Southeast. Both propellers sustained damage and are slightly bent; they have been sent to a repair facility for assessment and repair. The aircraft was equipped with a P2-6000 voice advisory system. The system was set to advise the pilot of a gear up configuration with an airspeed less than 105 knots. Passengers reported hearing the gear warning; maintenance staff is inspecting the advisory system to determine its serviceability.

User Name: Donaldson, John
Date: 2007/11/27
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: Commercial & Business Aviation
Narrative: UPDATE Supplemental information received from T.S.B. Initial Notification (#A07C0219): The Superior Airways Piper PA-31-350 aircraft was on final approach into Poplar Hill Airport (CPV7). Prior to touchdown, it was determined that the landing gear was not extended and the pilot decided to conduct an overshoot. During the overshoot, blades on both propellers made contact with the runway. The aircraft continued to climb and the aircraft returned to its home base at Red Lake Airport (CYRL) without further incident. Damage was limited to the propeller blades and engines.

________________________________
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... /a625g.htm

Standard 625 Appendix G - Inspection after Abnormal Occurrences
(13) Propeller and Rotor Strikes

Engines and transmission systems which have been shockloaded as a result of the propeller or rotor striking the ground or some object while the engine is running shall be inspected in accordance with the following paragraphs:

(a) A preliminary inspection shall be made of the blade itself and, if possible, of the object which was struck to aid in estimating the level of shock which can have been transmitted. It is not expected that an accurate assessment be made, but rather that the inspector shall form a general impression of whether the impact was severe or mild. If the level of impact is in doubt, it shall be assumed that a severe shock has been transmitted. In addition to a visual examination, the propeller or rotor shall be checked for correct tracking. Out of track limits shall be found in the appropriate maintenance manual but, as a general guide, a propeller which is out of track by more than 0.125 inch (3,18 mm.) is cause for further investigation. A visual inspection of the reduction gear case for oil leaks or cracks shall also be carried out.

(b) The need for further investigation will depend upon the results of the preliminary examination, and on the assessment by a person specified in section 571.11 of the CARs of the probability of further damage, based on the nature of the incident. If further investigation is indicated, the propeller shaft or flange shall be checked for eccentricity (run out check). Limits are those specified by the manufacturer. If the propeller shaft or flange is out of limits, an internal inspection shall be required. In the case of a geared piston engine this shall entail removal of the reduction gear for a check of the crankshaft run out. With a direct drive engine the crankcase shall have to be opened and checked for distortion, cracks or other damage. This check shall include the crankshaft damper assemblies. If the impact was severe, consideration shall also be given to the possibility of structural damage due to loads being transmitted through the engine mounts.
(amended 2007/12/30; previous version)

[Widow]

Um, does that mean that the pilot either didn't notice the props made contact (how do you not notice that?) or that the pilot did notice and went back in the air and flew home? Would that be the prudent choice? What's with the pax reporting they heard the gear warning?

[snoopy]

The topic was discussed here: http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 54&t=38623

The point is, the "most experienced pilot" made a mistake, which is one thing, but they then left the safety of a perfectly good airport and flew 75 miles back to Red Lake without knowing the extent of the damage. Obviously the pilot knew there was damage because he/she didn't land at the intended airport, rather returned to Red Lake.

There is an inspection procedure for Prop Strike (added above), the performance of which would have determined the airworthiness (and hence the safety) of the aircraft.

Kind of hard for the pilot, who was likely not qualified under CAR 571.11, to conduct this, or even a "preliminary" inspection - on rapidly spinnning blades - in the air.

[TAWS]

[quote
"Is is not the responsibility of an owner to hire the very best pilot (i.e. most experienced, with significant IFR time and time on type, along with exceptional references and outstanding sim performance) to assure that your passengers will have as safe a flight as possible?"

Was this one of your experienced pilots?

CADORS Number: 2007O2472

Owner: SUPERIOR AIRWAYS LIMITED Operator: SUPERIOR AIRWAYS LIMITED (14801)
Operator Type: Commercial


Detail InformationUser Name: Laporte, Robert
Date: 2007/11/26
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: Commercial & Business Aviation
Narrative: The Piper PA31 –350 operated by Superior Airways Ltd. departed Pikangikum On (CYPM) for Polar Hill On (CPV7) with 1 crew and 4 passengers on board. The aircraft attempted a landing on runway 31 at CPV7 with the landing gear in the retracted (up) position. During the landing flare the propellers made contact with the runway surface. The pilot executed a missed approach and flew the aircraft to Red Lake (CYRL) 65 NM to the Southeast. Both propellers sustained damage and are slightly bent; they have been sent to a repair facility for assessment and repair. The aircraft was equipped with a P2-6000 voice advisory system. The system was set to advise the pilot of a gear up configuration with an airspeed less than 105 knots. Passengers reported hearing the gear warning; maintenance staff is inspecting the advisory system to determine its serviceability.

User Name: Donaldson, John
Date: 2007/11/27
Further Action Required: Yes
O.P.I.: Commercial & Business Aviation
Narrative: UPDATE Supplemental information received from T.S.B. Initial Notification (#A07C0219): The Superior Airways Piper PA-31-350 aircraft was on final approach into Poplar Hill Airport (CPV7). Prior to touchdown, it was determined that the landing gear was not extended and the pilot decided to conduct an overshoot. During the overshoot, blades on both propellers made contact with the runway. The aircraft continued to climb and the aircraft returned to its home base at Red Lake Airport (CYRL) without further incident. Damage was limited to the propeller blades and engines.

________________________________
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... /a625g.htm

Standard 625 Appendix G - Inspection after Abnormal Occurrences
(13) Propeller and Rotor Strikes

Engines and transmission systems which have been shockloaded as a result of the propeller or rotor striking the ground or some object while the engine is running shall be inspected in accordance with the following paragraphs:

(a) A preliminary inspection shall be made of the blade itself and, if possible, of the object which was struck to aid in estimating the level of shock which can have been transmitted. It is not expected that an accurate assessment be made, but rather that the inspector shall form a general impression of whether the impact was severe or mild. If the level of impact is in doubt, it shall be assumed that a severe shock has been transmitted. In addition to a visual examination, the propeller or rotor shall be checked for correct tracking. Out of track limits shall be found in the appropriate maintenance manual but, as a general guide, a propeller which is out of track by more than 0.125 inch (3,18 mm.) is cause for further investigation. A visual inspection of the reduction gear case for oil leaks or cracks shall also be carried out.

(b) The need for further investigation will depend upon the results of the preliminary examination, and on the assessment by a person specified in section 571.11 of the CARs of the probability of further damage, based on the nature of the incident. If further investigation is indicated, the propeller shaft or flange shall be checked for eccentricity (run out check). Limits are those specified by the manufacturer. If the propeller shaft or flange is out of limits, an internal inspection shall be required. In the case of a geared piston engine this shall entail removal of the reduction gear for a check of the crankshaft run out. With a direct drive engine the crankcase shall have to be opened and checked for distortion, cracks or other damage. This check shall include the crankshaft damper assemblies. If the impact was severe, consideration shall also be given to the possibility of structural damage due to loads being transmitted through the engine mounts.
(amended 2007/12/30; previous version)[/quote]

Ah Snoopy...you beat me to it!

Anonymous1,

You are one piece of work!

You seem to have all the answers for everyone else.

I wonder, was it as easy to armchair quarterback your own company as it is Peace Air's?