Comair (Delta) jet crash in KY

123456 said:
I guess that the NTSB Go Team can be recalled since you have already reviewed all the data avaialble and reached the conclusion. Will your written report be available for distribution later today? Sheesh. Low time experts.

Well that's one of the most arrogant replies I've heard in a long time. If you
don't like being in the company of pilots of all experience levels why do you
come here? Just to attack and feel good about yourself?

Unless the controller sent them to the 3500 ft runway (very doubtful, but
we'll find out), the crew screwed up big time.

Roger Tracy <---- please note .. using name instead of a number
 
RogerT said:
Unless the controller sent them to the 3500 ft runway (very doubtful, but
we'll find out), the crew screwed up big time.

Even if the tower cleared them to the shorter runway, the pilot should have refused it. Still his/her responsibility.
 
Anthony said:
Even if the tower cleared them to the shorter runway, the pilot should have refused it. Still his/her responsibility.

Between the CVR and FDR, most of the answers will come out..Tragic, no matter who or what is at fault. If the FO survives and remembers, maybe he can provide that little bit of insight that raw data doesn't give us - like what the heck were they thinking?
 
He ran out of airspeed, altitude and ideas all at the same time, then the ground rose up and smote him.

That is all that we know now, lets leave it up to the xperts at NTSB to decide the rest.
 
Something I don't quite get - did he ever get off the ground?

The report I read sounded like he ended up about a mile away. Maybe hopped it up in GE and then ran out, like wesley said, of AA&I?
 
lancefisher said:
The one I was on from Bakersfield to Phoenix used way more than half of a 10,857 ft runway on departure.

Same here. Last week from BFL departing to SLC. I thought for a while we'd never get that thing off the ground.
It was, as all the flights I've been on in the last few months filled to capacity. Apparently sometimes at BFL, due to the heat, luggage gets left behind ane comes on the next flight.
Load factors are waaaaaay up at Delta. I've got 4 flight coupons stuck to my fridge with a magnet from volunteering my seat just since May. Two of those came from Delta "downsizing" the equipment from a 757 to a 737. Mayhaps I'll take the family on a trip.... yeah, that's it.
I think the only people who like to fly on CRJ's are the guys in the cockpit, and then only because it's a flying job and they know it is a stepping stone to bigger planes.
 
Last edited:
Greebo said:
Something I don't quite get - did he ever get off the ground?

The report I read sounded like he ended up about a mile away. Maybe hopped it up in GE and then ran out, like wesley said, of AA&I?

I too wonder that. The news has not been clear on that but based on what i have been hearing about the takeoff distance i bet you they overran the runway then tried to get it up in the air.
 
Greebo said:
Something I don't quite get - did he ever get off the ground?

The report I read sounded like he ended up about a mile away. Maybe hopped it up in GE and then ran out, like wesley said, of AA&I?
I heard one report on TV last nigh -- either Fox or Abc, I forget which, that said the airplane struck the security fence at the airport perimeter and then struck tree. If he was flying in GE it was academic...
 
Why the lynching mob guys? We know only a few things:

Early AM departure
Airplane crashed, many killed
Runway appears to be shorter than nesscarry.

Yes, we've all "BTDT" and seen these crashes. Let's see what the NTSB brings out and discovers.

49 people are dead because of a horrible tragedy. We don't know what failure of ADM led them to their untimely death. Can't we leave it at that?

-Andrew
 
astanley said:
Why the lynching mob guys? We know only a few things:

Early AM departure
Airplane crashed, many killed
Runway appears to be shorter than nesscarry.

Yes, we've all "BTDT" and seen these crashes. Let's see what the NTSB brings out and discovers.

49 people are dead because of a horrible tragedy. We don't know what failure of ADM led them to their untimely death. Can't we leave it at that?

-Andrew
Fox has reported that the FDR confirms the a/c departed on 26 instead of 22 which it was cleared for.
 
astanley said:
Why the lynching mob guys? We know only a few things:

Early AM departure
Airplane crashed, many killed
Runway appears to be shorter than nesscarry.

Yes, we've all "BTDT" and seen these crashes. Let's see what the NTSB brings out and discovers.

49 people are dead because of a horrible tragedy. We don't know what failure of ADM led them to their untimely death. Can't we leave it at that?

-Andrew

Well not to be too harsh but...

No we don't have all the facts yet BUT i can tell you this is a rookie mistake. For 2 experienced pilots to make such a big mistake baffles me. We do know they took off on the wrong runway, we do know that all but one person was killed. I don't care what they find out, these pilots should have been very clear on such a simple thing. First off these pilots would have had airport diagrams and would have been VERY aware not to use a 3500 ft runway, they would have known they would have had to taxi across another runway. I don't know about you but i always make a point to look before i taxi across another runway regardless of conditions or time of day. Maybe they were overloaded with something that took their attention away as they were taxing, maybe there was a problem they were trying to troubleshoot, we wont know for prob a couple of weeks. I don't want to scald these guys since i know ALL of us at one point or another have made some kind of mistake that if not caught early enough could have killed us but at the same time we need to learn from this.
 
RotaryWingBob said:
Fox has reported that the FDR confirms the a/c departed on 26 instead of 22 which it was cleared for.

As with many accidents, figuring out what happened is likely to be much easier than figuring out why it happened. This is the kind of error procedures and the system are intended to catch before they happen. The NTSB will do the analysis and make the reccomendations, they will look at all the areas I list below and more. I for one am glad they are on the job.

Some other posts have touched on the distinction and some of the other areas of concern. Here are some of my thoughts, not speculation - just questions:

Cockpit Procedures: Was there a breakdown and if yes what caused the breakdown? were co. policies followed?were regulations followed (sterile cockpit, etc.)? were avionics properly set or was their human/avionics interface issue? Was the taxi chart out and available to both crewmembers, and if it was was it electronic or paper and does that seem to matter? Was there a breakdown in CRM?

ATC clearance: Was the clearance a set up for an error, (example of possible situation - aircraft is cleared to depart 22 with a right turn to 26 - this could result in confusion or a misset heading bug)? Were they given a clearance that required they move quickly (I can clear you to go if you can off in 2 minutes or less, can you do that?)? Was the taxi clearance proper and adequate ("taxi runway 26" is proper, but may not be adequate - perhaps "taxi runway 26 via A cross 22 use A-7"?) Or were they just told taxi 26 cleared for take off.?

Airport signage and lighting: Were they proper? Were they confusing? Were they being operated properly?

Flight Procedures: Did they realize the error? Did they continue prior to V1?

Flight Crew: Fatigue: how long was the rest period, what was the expected amount of sleep? were both pilots healthy? were they taking medication that was approved, but nonetheless could intefer with judgment/thinking/reasoning?

Flight Crew Training: Was the crew trained to look for subtle cues that indicate errors? The difference in runway markings and lighting between a a precision runway and one with no approach? The inherent hazards of doing things quickly (efficiency yes, but no hurrying).

A/C equipment: was the a/c fit for flight? were there deferred items that caused concerns and confusion?

ATC monitoring: did the tower controller see the error, did s/he attempt to notify the crew? if s/he did not see what were they doing was that appropriate? If they did see and did not alert - why not? <I do not contend that it is ATC's responsibility to save the crew's asxxx when the err, but it is fundamental to the system that we are checking on each other and while ATC is unlikely to be found culpable - could they have prevented this and if so should they be asked to take that on?>

As I said, just areas to look at, I do not know why it happened, just where I'd start to look to find out.
 
On CNN

"
The lights on Runway 26 were "out of service" at the time Comair Flight 5191 took off on the runway, according Debbie Hersman, NTSB member. Watch the NTSB briefing live on CNN Pipeline now."

So basically they took off from the wrong runway AND the lights on the runway were off. WOW!!
 
Greebo said:
Something I don't quite get - did he ever get off the ground?

The report I read sounded like he ended up about a mile away. Maybe hopped it up in GE and then ran out, like wesley said, of AA&I?

It looks like he may have been flying a little. There were reports from witness of "engine explosions" Those are most likely compressor stalls of the engines at extreme angle of attack interupting the air flow. He could have been in and out of ground affect. The on pic makes it look like he mayu have gotten over a house or some structure near the edge of the field.
 
Darrell111 said:
Well not to be too harsh but...

...snip.....
I don't care what they find out, these pilots should have been very clear on such a simple thing. First off these pilots would have had airport diagrams and would have been VERY aware not to use a 3500 ft runway, they would have known they would have had to taxi across another runway.

had they been to this airport before? If so, that's usually something that sticks in the brain, especially if it were critical to pick the correct runway.
 
astanley said:
Why the lynching mob guys?
Interesting. We have people here living in structures that range from glass houses to bunkers...
 
DeeG said:
had they been to this airport before? If so, that's usually something that sticks in the brain, especially if it were critical to pick the correct runway.
One report said it was raining. The visibility may have been reduced, but not between the crew and the DG.

There was also a pilot in the jump seat which may have been more of a distraction then a help in they were being nonchalant and had poor CRM.
 
DeeG said:
had they been to this airport before? If so, that's usually something that sticks in the brain, especially if it were critical to pick the correct runway.

I know that years ago when I made a few trips to Kansas City
downtown a very similar arrangement in runways was confusing at first.
Runway markings were not as good back in the 70s and I had some confusion
when taxiing around the south end to take off to the north. You taxi
across the threshold of one runway to get to the next one. I didn't use
the wrong one .. but it was forever etched in my mind to be very careful
going around that end of the airport.

One thing I haven't heard discussed much was the jump seater in the cockpit. I also wonder if that could have been a distraction.
 
Last edited:
From CNN.com
A pretty dramatic picture of just how short that RWY26 is compared to RWY22. The end of that runway must've come up awfully fast, especially in the dark. A really scary thought.
spopup.lexington.airport.3.jpg
 
Keith Lane said:
From CNN.com
A pretty dramatic picture of just how short that RWY26 is compared to RWY22. The end of that runway must've come up awfully fast, especially in the dark. A really scary thought.
spopup.lexington.airport.3.jpg

Great post Keith
 
Well i googled this airport and to ME i can see how if they made the turn on ruway 26 without taxiing to the end they would have not seen the runway numbers. However it is painted with non precision markings. That should have been a give away as well. Im sure though when your spooling those jets up your not really paying attenton to the TYPE of markings on the runway. Just another thought

untitledlx4.png
 
I think, looking back at the picture I just posted, it wouldn't take a whole lot of distraction in a dark, rainy situation to take the first left onto RWY 26 and immediately start a takeoff roll without stopping to "position and hold" or some such to get things spooled up. Now, having said that, it still would be imperative for the crew to confirm that they were rolling on a heading of 22 not 26, and those numbers are awfully close to each other on a heading indicator. Not making excuses for the crew, just observations.
In the dark? In the rain? under pressure to get airborne and on down to Atlanta?
There but for the grace of God go a lot of otherwise good and careful human pilots.
Any way you look at it, it is a tragedy that will haunt many, many people for the rest of their lives.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Well, it's maybe not quite that extreme (if the engine coughs when you add power, you can abort)

I'd think once you reach the point of the opening of the trees (about where Nick's airplane was parked maybe 100 or 200 feet down) you really are going to be dedicated to a takeoff. If something were to be obviously very wrong before this point you could stop.
 
DeeG said:
had they been to this airport before? If so, that's usually something that sticks in the brain, especially if it were critical to pick the correct runway.

Even if they had been there before, if they took off from runway 4 they probably wouldn't have noticed. I've taken off from both 4 and 22 there, an let me tell you, 22 and 26 are even closer than they look on the diagrams and sat photos when you're in the cockpit. There may not even be enough room between the two hold short lines for an RJ...
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Even if they had been there before, if they took off from runway 4 they probably wouldn't have noticed. I've taken off from both 4 and 22 there, an let me tell you, 22 and 26 are even closer than they look on the diagrams and sat photos when you're in the cockpit. There may not even be enough room between the two hold short lines for an RJ...

Also with the lights being out , im starting to get a better picture of how this could have happened, even for an experienced pilot.
 
Measuring on Google Earth, it's less than 255ft hold short-to-hold short on the A-7 taxiway.

Jim
 
RotaryWingBob said:
Sorry, I reacted to the first part of your post, not the part about saying a prayer for the victims. As far as I am concerned, those pilots killed all the PAX just as surely as if they had put guns to their heads.

I disagree with this statement. I believe the pilots made a mistake, and that the effect was the same as if they had put killed the passengers with a gun (i.e., they ended up dead). I hope by your statement you didn't mean that the pilots actions were intentional... if I put a gun to somebody's head and pull the trigger, I'm intending to kill them. I doubt those pilots had that 'intent' when they woke up Sunday morning.
 
Google search for Comair 5191 brought up the following as the top result: lawyersforclients.com

Wonder how it got up there ;-)

Best,

Dave
 
We know so little here. Things are being leaked to the press, everyone is hunting for a story. The facts are pretty slim, for sure.

There are probably some considerable human factors issues here, and maybe some systems/design factors (runway, lighting INOP, etc).

We had a United jet get lost on an active runway at PVD a few years back, which involved quite the NMAC (the NTSB had a video sim of it, really creepy), and there was blame and issues to go around. Why must we rampantly speculate?

I ask this because, as much as I think this is like the hangar, it isn't. The public can see what we say, and all it takes is one newshound with a deadline and google to find us and say "See! Other pilots are saying these guys screwed up!" This isn't the hangar where we all relax and unwind and talk about such things; as public as it is, it's still a group of friends and we all know who is listening.

Sigh, this is a sad tragedy, and the NTSB will have plenty of blame to go around when the time comes. I doubt CNN will even pay attention to it when it happens, either. Just a 30 second sound bite, followed by "Mitzy the Wonder Dog" or something equally vapid.

-Andrew
 
Keith Lane said:
Any way you look at it, it is a tragedy that will haunt many, many people for the rest of their lives.

Sure is Keith... and that picture gives me the heebie jeebies.

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
astanley said:
We know so little here. Things are being leaked to the press, everyone is hunting for a story. The facts are pretty slim, for sure.

There are probably some considerable human factors issues here, and maybe some systems/design factors (runway, lighting INOP, etc).

We had a United jet get lost on an active runway at PVD a few years back, which involved quite the NMAC (the NTSB had a video sim of it, really creepy), and there was blame and issues to go around. Why must we rampantly speculate?

I ask this because, as much as I think this is like the hangar, it isn't. The public can see what we say, and all it takes is one newshound with a deadline and google to find us and say "See! Other pilots are saying these guys screwed up!" This isn't the hangar where we all relax and unwind and talk about such things; as public as it is, it's still a group of friends and we all know who is listening.

Sigh, this is a sad tragedy, and the NTSB will have plenty of blame to go around when the time comes. I doubt CNN will even pay attention to it when it happens, either. Just a 30 second sound bite, followed by "Mitzy the Wonder Dog" or something equally vapid.

-Andrew

With all do respect Andrew, when two professional pilots take off on a runway 3500ft in length in an AC that needs 5500 give or take they did screw up. There is sufficient evidence to support that. We are not talking about this to scald them but more to discuss the mistakes that DID happen. Regardless of HOW they made the wrong decisions we all need to talk about this so it never happens to any of us.
 
Darrell111 said:
With all do respect Andrew, when two professional pilots take off on a runway 3500ft in length in an AC that needs 5500 give or take they did screw up. There is sufficient evidence to support that. We are not talking about this to scald them but more to discuss the mistakes that DID happen. Regardless of HOW they made the wrong decisions we all need to talk about this so it never happens to any of us.

There is sufficent evidence that, somehow, a plane ended up on the wrong runway and 49 people are dead. That's it. We know time of day, weather conditions, and runway conditions. What else do we know? What is on the ATC transcripts? What was the in-cockpit conversation?

We know relatively nothing. Just because news outlet A leaks something doesn't make it true. When we see the facts, let's talk about it. We aren't debating facts. We are pulling theories out of very little that is publicly known. Why debate points for which we have NO information? That is my point.

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
astanley said:
There is sufficent evidence that, somehow, a plane ended up on the wrong runway and 49 people are dead.

The airplane did not taxi itself. It did not bring the power up to full power by itself. The runway didn't move itself. The runway didn't just instantly become half the size. The airplane was not warped onto the wrong runway by the tooth ferry.

The pilots messed up. It's that simple.
 
Just talked to a friend of mine at the scene, said they took down the boundary fence, then some trees, finally settled back to ground, looks like they struggled from the time they left the runway.

AA&I all at same time.
 
I'm reluctant to come down too hard on the pilots here, any pilot who tells you that they have never made a mistake in an airplane is either lying or never flys.
Granted I've never taken off from the wrong runway, but I haven't spent each and every day of my life flying for 8 hours. Like everybody on this board, I've done a thing or two which I'm not enormously proud of. Usually our small mistakes don't kill you or come even close. I'm going to withhold judgement about the pilots until all the chips are in. If they were screwing around, then, fine, roast 'em but up until that point, I think that the flight crew deserves the respect that all fallen aviators should recieve.

I too am confused about how this accident happened, but then again, I've never been in an airplane at 6 in the morning after having flown 14 hours the previous day. I'd wager that few of us on this board have.

I'm willing to bet that there were a confluence of events here which all contributed to the crash, because I'm confused as to how TWO experienced pilots could commit such an error. Still these accidents have happened before (think Singapore airlines at Taipei.) and I guess they will happen again. I've really enjoyed hearing the insights of the pilots who have flown to Lex. Reading about the runway configurations and seeing the ACARS report of pilots who made the same mistake but were lucky is very helpful. I'm guessing that a multitude of factors will come to light as having caused the accident, such as runway lights being off/on etc. I also imagine that we will hear more about the basic survivability of the aircraft. It seems that if the FO who is presumablably in the most vulnerable position survived by being plucked out of the flames, (impact forces didn't kill him) others should have been able to as well. I think that this corresponds to the coroners report. Perhaps we need to look into the basic design of the aircraft which allowed pax to survive initial impact, but created fire hazards.

Ultimately, this accident was a human one. I know that like many people involved in the business of aviation I tend to forget that aircraft are amazingly high tech, super complicated super expensive super fast pieces of equipment which are ultimately driven around by human beings. Recently all accidents have been caused by equipment failures.

At the end of the day it's certainly humbling to see one that may have been caused simply by a confused bleary-eyed set of pilots taking a wrong turn. It certainly gives you a great deal of respect for all of those guys upfront who have managed to not have a single accident in four years.
 
From a buds' blog....

I somewhat doubt anyone in the media is going to delve too deeply into the goings-on in the RJ cockpit of yesterday's accident in Kentucky, other than to imply they were criminally negligent, sloppy, poorly trained or otherwise AFU. But, because you rarely get a look at what a normal day "up front" in your airliner is like 'cause it doesn't sell papers and journalists are hardly ever interested in the Big Picture anyway, here's some background...
1. The vast majority of today's passenger jets are crewed by two pilots, the Captain and a First Officer--the pilot and co-pilot, respectively. You probably knew that, but what you probably don't have completely nailed down is what each does.

The Captain is responsible for everything, from a safe flight (and not getting a ticket from the FAA, otherwise known as a "violation") to making sure the crew, flight attendants included, are supported/protected on that flight, get timely transportation to the hotel, etc., etc., etc. He/She gets paid the "big" bucks for taking the FULL responsibility for the crew, passengers and safe operation of the jet from push-back to parking and engine shutdown.

The First Officer backs up the boss and either does the flying or backs up the Captain when the latter is actuating the stick.

As far as flying is concerned, the two flight deck types usually swap off--one takes the first leg and then they switch back and forth until the day's done. Sometimes only the Captain can do the flying, based on FAA guidance and/or company policy. For example, in some jets, only the Captain can land out of a full-up autopilot approach and landing--usually a CAT III ILS or "Category Three Instrument Landing System" approach--but the First officer flies the approach down to X number of feet above the ground, at which time the Capt must take it or the F/O automatically initiates a missed approach. This is because this relieves the Capt, in the initial and intermediate portions of the approach, of the task of flying while he's keeping up with where he is in the queue, potential traffic conflicts, where the terrain is, where the weather is, and, finally, looking for the landing surface. In other words, the F/O is "heads down" glued to the instruments following air traffic control vectors and then making sure the jet is on course, on glidepath and configured to land while the Boss is "heads up" safely getting the airplane into the terminal environment for that critical transition from flying in the clouds to seeing the runway and bringing the airplane to a safe and expeditious touchdown, rollout and runway exit at the appropriate/directed taxiway.

2. Some stuff is done exclusively by one or the other. Typically, the only person who taxies the jet is the Captain. That's 'cause the nosewheel steering control--the principal way to get the jet to go where you want it to go at taxi speeds--is only on his/her left side. That leaves the F/O to make the radio calls for clearance, taxi (including clearances to cross runways enroute to the runway you've been assigned, etc.) and takeoff. If it's the F/O's leg, i.e., he/she'll be doing the flying, the F/O still has the radios until the Capt turns the jet over to him/her for the actual takeoff...that happens once the airplane is lined up on the active runway for takeoff. After landing, if the F/O was flying, the roles then swap again, back to the Capt maneuvering the jet to the gate and the F/O picking up the comm responsibilities. Now, having two people involved--one maneuvering the airplane and the other doing the communicating with Ground and Tower--provides a potential for miscommunication or even no communication. However, these jets aren't single-seat for a reason. It takes two to fly them efficiently, thanks to those kinds of design conventions and the nature of the environment they find themselves in. Nine hundred ninety-nine times out of a thousand two craniums/sets of eyeballs are better than one. However, because the roles are split, the airlines and the FAA have come up with procedures and conventions to help mitigate the risks--"sterile cockpit" procedures, i.e., no unnecessary talking below 10,000 feet, within 1000 feet of leveling off at an assigned altitude, and no conversation other than that associated with ground operations after pushing back (leaving) from the gate or blocking in (arriving) at a gate. There are exceptions (cruising below 10 grand you can talk; if you're stopped on the ground and the parking brake is set you can talk) but my point is the rules recognize the potential for mishap and mandate behavior and procedures accordingly...unfortunately, nobody's perfect.

3. Most of these commuter flights are one of several a crew flies in a given day. Some of my co-workers, having come from "the regionals" (like ComAir) have flown 10-11 legs in one day. That's a lot of flying and every one of those legs may involve negotiating an airport you may never have been to, flying an approach you've never flown, maybe flying a jet on which the systems may not be all functioning, in an environment the human body wasn't entirely designed to operate in, etc. You'd be surprised how fatiguing sitting in a cockpit all day can be, especially if the weather's bad, the traffic's heavy, the schedule's changing due to that weather, the passengers are ****ed, etc. NOTE: A buddy of mine was welcoming PAX on board in his old job and was called a "c**ksuc**r" to his face by an irate businessman stepping into the cabin who would not make his connection due to weather...he just had to smile, apologize and resist the urge to choke the bastid.

Ever heard a flight attendant get the flight number and/or destination wrong on his/her initial announcement as people are finishing the boarding process?

I always thought it was weird/dumb/funny...until I started doing this job myself. After a week of this kind of thing, you lose track of both time and geography. In the last three weeks, I've landed at 11 different airports in 8 different states...and I fly a VERY sedate schedule compared to the little guys. By ride #9, the Captain/First Officer/flight attendant probably has to look at his/her schedule or the flight plan/release to make sure the correct flight number/destination is used during the passenger welcome/safety brief. And don't EVEN ask what time/day it is (that's cruel).

4. Mistakes happen...and we, more than anyone, know it. That's why we're in in a state of mild paranoia throughout a flight, from block out to block in, especially on the ground. Every time Ground tells us where to go (so to speak), the instructions are repeated between us, to make sure what we thought we heard was what was said. If there's a question, we ask. If there's confusion, we stop (if necessary) and ask again.

At the bigger airports, there's A LOT of pressure not to ask to repeat a taxi instruction and the Ground Controller's delivery is somewhere around 15,000 words per minute. Don't even think about screwing up a taxi procedure at O'Hare...you will be shunted off into what's called a "penalty box" and sit there, with engines running, burning fuel (at, what? $70+ dollars a barrel?) and the flight attendants fending off passengers with a whip and a chair while the traffic thins out and you proceed, tail between legs, to your now-probably-occupied-by-somebody-else gate.
What do I do when cleared for takeoff? I repeat to the Tower Controller that I have been so cleared and, as I'm doing that, I specifically look at the runway numbers as we roll out onto the takeoff position. If what I'm saying doesn't jive with what I'm seeing, I say something and make sure nothing else happens until we get it sorted out. Why? Because I know I can do exactly the same thing that these guys did.

Bottom line: You can get "set up" and/or set yourself up for a mistake very easily. You avoid the traps by sticking to procedures, not trusting anyone (especially yourself) and singing out when something doesn't look quite right. Alas, as I said, nobody's perfect and circumstances can build to a point where the consequences can be disastrous.

Where these guys tired? Maybe. Were they new to the jet? Maybe. New to the seat (Capt or F/O)? Maybe. Disoriented? Obviously. Did they not follow procedure? Well, yeah...but they didn't recognize it, apparently. Could it have been avoided? Of course...but this will happen again.
 
Speed said:
So true... I had one pax getting on, asked how the weather was in Little Rock. I think my response was something on the order of, "oh, that's where we're going? It's fine, don't worry."

Been there done that. Unlike small GA aircraft, large aircraft have plenty of places to put things in the cockpit and so the yoke clip was not the only option. My Jepp book was usually open on top of my kit bag to my left and my enroute chart was on the little clippy thing by the side window, but the one thing that was on the yoke clip at all times (I'd put the approach chart up for the approach, etc.) was the printout of the trip schedule. Fltight number, origin and Desination, sched out time, sched in time. I used it often!
 
Any one see on CNN the video clip "Pilots view of crash"?

Makes me laugh!! They say .. "using SPECIAL software" This so called special software is MS flight sim 04. I like how they try to make it seem credible (even though it pretty much is) without saying its just a computer video game.
 
Back
Top