Redneck_pilot86 wrote:How much gas did they actually have? I heard somewhere enough to reach Goose Bay, was that their alternate? Did they still have enough fuel to reach their alternate if they missed in Iqaluit?
The Bare minimum fuel for the flight would have been:
Burn to YFB
1 Missed Approach in YFB
Burn to Alternate
30 Min of Hold at Alternate
Most northern carriers take extra gas on top of that of course, because the weather is unpredictable and forecasting is poor in the arctic. If the aircraft was holding CYVP for CYFB, if they had gas to make CYYR, I'm sure they could have easily made CYVP safely in the event of a miss at CYFB.
Having just re-read a number of your posts I realize the main theme of your commentaries are nothing more than "smart Alec" opinions with not much else on offer.
That said, your remarks on the relationship between the modernization of First Air's fleet and MH370, a B777, clearly indicate an inability, on your part, to understand the reference to a gross navigation error contributed to, in part, by antiquated equipment with antiquated navigation capability unlike the latest 3rd generation of airliners.
Good enough is nothing more than settling for something a lot less when better is available and has been for decades. Translation? More accurate options are out there...why not use them?
On a separate note, this is the jet age. We shouldn't even be using DC-3s in any commercial operation.
But that, of course, is nothing more than a personal opinion.
Gino Under
My point is/was pretty basic. Pilots have (obviously in the past) navigated the area in DC3s and the like many years (decades) before GPS came on line. My comparison with a certain 777, was that even with up to date stuff...shit happens. I assure you, I am no "smart Alec" I would venture to guess, I've been doing this at least as long as you have. I guarantee it, in fact. Even the most modern navigation systems in the industry, will only do what it's "told", unlike pilots, who often don't. Mate, people still cross oceans with sextants, in sailing craft, even though there are more modern choices. I guess you blame the "antiquated navigation capability" (your words) for flying grossly off course. I blame the human input.
Illya.
Gino Under wrote:More accurate options are out there...why not use them?
The aircraft that was off course had dual FMS with GPS input. How much more accurate can you get?
I think the equipment was not the problem here. It was more a case of not using the equipment effectively.
OK I'm with you. You're the first person to actually say what type of nav equipment the birds at First Air have. I have no idea, that's why I'm asking. Maybe they were still in heading mode, maybe something else was wrong, but with the accident and now this incident everybody jumps on the crew first when an airline installs the bare minimum equipment. I just look at those cockpits and compare them to the ones from buffalo's century old machines and they look the same, so as a company first air isn't doing much to help these guys stay on course.
The FMS can be using Nav data from a dozen sources simultaneously and if it had ONE single MFD, or EADI, or EHSI, or even a 4" LED screen it can display horizontal situational data to the crew, but with no display, you have to dig for situational awareness. I look at that panel and I see the bare bones minimum.
Now lets get back to blaming evertything on the crew...
Anything to improve situational awareness is a good thing, including moving maps and the like. It would be pretty weak, however, to blame "having to dig for situational awareness" on the fact that the GPS is reading out in numbers down by your knee instead of painting an explicit picture in front of your face.
Pilots are supposed to be able to assimilate all the data from the gauges, screens and numbers and use them to build a picture of where they are. I wholeheartedly support aircraft having the very best there is for their navigation because nothing is more important than getting where you intend to go. However, blaming an error of this magnitude on the fact that you don't have an MFD and can't figure out the old-fashioned "numbers" being given to you by a GPS is a whole new world of weakness. It's like a teenage girl telling her Dad she didn't realize it was past her curfew and didn't call, because he wouldn't buy her the current model of iPhone and she has to make do with her crappy one from 2012.
...not to mention, you guys are all making comments that would only be valid if we knew how the aircraft went off course. We don't!
I am pickin up what you're throwin down, but for arguments sake there's nothing made in 2012 in those pictures. More like 1912. So basically you're pissed at your daughter for coming home late when she forgot how to read her sun dial and you're too cheap to buy her a wrist watch.
There's little doubt that a qualified crew, with as much experience as this crew had, could navigate the north with the instrumentation and navigation equipment installed in one of the most successful aircraft ever built, without changing a thing.
What some don't seem to appreciate is the human factors aspect of these kinds of errors. It would be nice to know what SOPs they didn't follow. Perhaps in time, we will.
A friend offhandedly remarked to my defense of this crew, "it's a poor craftsman who blames his tools".
Well, sometimes the difference between a good craftsman and a better craftsman IS his tools.
Looking at Canadian North 300 flight decks, they would seem to me a better tool. First Air may benefit in the end.
Gino Under
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by Gino Under on Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I'll tell you what's wrong with society. No one drinks from the skulls of their enemies!"
Gino Under wrote:
A friend offhandedly remarked to my defense of this crew, "it's a poor craftsman who blames his tools".
Well, sometimes the difference between a good craftsman and a better craftsman IS his tools.
Gino Under
Your friend is correct. While a gifted craftsman might improve with better tools, a gifted craftsman will outshine a not so gifted craftsman with any tools.
You can take your whole bag of clubs to the course, Tiger Woods will still kick your ass using just a 5 iron!
Illya
After serving for several years as the MEC chair and as Association prez before that I am shocked at the First Air reaction to this incident -- firing without doing a proper and complete investigation is wrong and I know my successor will fight this just as hard as I would have.
Obviously there was and still is a deficiency in crew discipline -- but as we all should know that hanging the pilots is 1960's management style and in this era of SMS and human factors an incident and the cause there of is a lot more complicated than standing someone up against the wall and shooting him or her -- for those who think so stay in the bush -- work for mom and pop and act out your career in the "good old days"
This gross navigational error ended in a non event -- and -- yes they had lots of fuel -- only 30 minutes added to regular block time -- and at 450 kts 200 miles happens in very little time -- yes would a screen and moving map prevented this -- sure it would -- but how do we get companies to spend money on aging aircraft that have only a few years service left -- damn -- outfit it like their sister company with glass in the classic -- pretty cool stuff but corporate decisions will always make pilot's lives difficult --
The crew did adhere to SMS protocol and reported themselves - the company has no right to fire them at this point and even maybe at any point -- especially if there is no legal action taken -- this is a wrongful dismissal and I hope ALPA will hold the management's feet to the fire -- if the powers at be wish to make this an example they they should be prepared to answer in court and possibly fork out thousands of dollars for wrongful dismissal --
I just blows my mind when the old school are so obviously behind the times they can't see and exploit the positive aspect of something like this -- it demonstrates to me that management have a reluctance to aggressively address and fix the corporate decay because that will cost money -- much easier to have a knee jerk solution and try and duck the real issue -- seeing this has me concerned that the tragic crash in Resolute has not changed much around First Air -- unfortunately the same attitude and management style is very much alive and well across the whole aviation spectrum in Canada -- pilots are fodder - fact
Well said Liquid charlie, I really hope ALPA does something and that TC takes a good serious look at the corporate culture that could allow this kind of behaviour. This sort of reaction is expected and practiced in other parts of the world where a large number of Canadians fly. It is really disturbing to see it happen here in Canada.
Well hell ya -- a little comic relief is always needed -- sometimes it's all we have left to get a point across -- maybe I'll change the tag to read "extra fuel has no specific gravity" and add "pilots are a valuable commodity" -- I'm trying to keep the humour going and be facetious to the core
ajet32 wrote:I really hope ... that TC takes a good serious look at the corporate culture that could allow this kind of behaviour.
Not sure what you mean by this. The flight being way off course? Firing the pilots?
Firing the pilots is strictly company business with no need for TC involvement. The flight being way off course is TC's business and they should be all over it.
I suppose I meant both issues. I think TC should be wondering how the SMS is working if reporting an error gets you fired. That is not the point of non-punitive reporting. ( I have been in a company where lip service was paid to SMS but better look out if anything untoward happened that might be embarrassing to the company, finger pointing was the rule of the day.)
I also think they might want to review whatever SOP transgression they felt (the company) was serious enough to fire a crew over. Just appears to be an"a_s" covering response by Operations Management to cover up something else. "Just an opinion I have no facts to base it on."
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by ajet32 on Sun Apr 13, 2014 10:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The comments about self reporting are interesting. To the best of my knowledge SMS was never intended to deal with pilot negligence, if that was the case here.
But I can see it being used as a get out jail free card. Screw up. Get caught. And then self report and claim that means there should be no punitive action...hell yes, this is all about company culture. This crew is nothing but victims of the company culture. And of course the machinery.. No way are they responsible at all. We should commend them for overcoming the barriers and getting the plane safely back on the ground.
Yep,, I can see that clearly. I. Wonder if any pilots have been caught showing up drunk to fly and then when it is discovered, self report.
I would expect that the circumstances were clear enough , and serious enough, that the company was able to take immediate action. This was not a little oopsie.
It is quite commendable that so many here seem to think what they did was OK as long as they self reported. I have to wonder though, how many of them would want their families sitting in the back with this crew flying. Or how many of First Air's other customers.
Some of you who enjoy ignoring SOPs ( which BTW is perfectly OK if you claim the CP does not always follow them....your word is gold). Chatting or texting when you should be flying. Failing to do a proper monitoring job so that an error gets missed, seem to think there should be no consequences...or maybe feeling bad and promising never to do again what you never should have done to start with makes everything OK.
But then I am an old guy from the jurassic age, when people took ownership for their actions.
---------- ADS -----------
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Just for the record I am on "old guy" from the "jurassic age" myself. You are correct it was not created to allow for gross negligence but has there been any evidence of such. This not the first time something like this has happened in the north, Pacific Western, anybody know where Winnipeg is, a major flag carrier running a heavy out of fuel, they fired them for a day until it was shown what a comedy of errors had occurred and then they gave them medals.
The firings may be justified but since the management of said company are on the rocks so to speak I would be very interested in knowing what really happened. Finger trouble should get a crew remedial training or maybe at most suspension. Firing won't solve the problem and as I mentioned earlier will just drive problems underground for fear of retribution.
"Again my 2 cents, for what it's worth."
Photo...I dont see where reporting your incompetence (which is different from negligence) is part of their program, and I am actually a bit familiar with it.
Jurassic Jets..I agree with you, and I am not, as a rule prone to speculating. My response was directed towards those equally as ignorant of the facts that automatically assumed it was company culture, flinstone era avionics etc. and in particular to the empasis on their self reporting as if no one would have known about it if they had not reported .
---------- ADS -----------
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Gino
-- maybe I'll change the tag to read "extra fuel has no specific gravity" and add "pilots are a valuable commodity" -- I'm trying to keep the humour going and be facetious to the core 
