"Wow, pulled back the wrong side throttle"

Maxed-out

Maxed-out

Pre-Flight
Joined
Feb 14, 2014
Messages
81
Display Name
Display name:
Maxed-out
No problem determining the cause of this crash. At least he made it easier on the crash investigators. Chalk another one up to pilot error.

http://news.yahoo.com/wow-pulled-back-wrong-throttle-captain-crashed-transasia-033212133--finance.html

TAIPEI (Reuters) - The captain of a TransAsia Airways ATR plane that crashed in Taiwan in February, killing 43 people, had switched off the working engine after the other lost power, the Aviation Safety Council (ASC) confirmed on Thursday in its latest report.

About three minutes after takeoff, the captain who was piloting the plane was heard to say, "Wow, pulled back the wrong side throttle", the latest report of the investigation released on Thursday showed.
A source with direct knowledge of the report told Reuters on Wednesday the working engine had been shut off. Data readings showed the almost-new turboprop ATR 72-600 stalled and crashed shortly after it was switched off.
Click to expand...
 
Ya, the one with the dashcam video from the truck right? That video was crazy.
 
Last edited:
Naive question here, but would it be difficult to place a red LED on each throttle lever that would indicate the engine isn't producing power?

Help idiot-proof the loss of engine scenario -- especially on takeoff.
 
I don't see what a light on the throttle lever will do when your hands are on them at the time.
Go to any of the Sim training schools and all the instructors will tell you that they've seen a few pilots shut down the wrong engine. Part of the training is to verify with both pilots before doing anything like shutting off the fuel lever.
It's easier than you think with all the adrenalin running in an actual engine out emergency to make mistakes.
 
In light twins I was taught to quickly go Idle, Feather and Off because they didn't have the power reserve to handle a delayed clean up. In jets, you maintain directional control and in my airplane now call for Eng Out and the non flying pilot selects Eng Out on the FMC (ALL this does is put the computers into an engine out mode of direction and altitude). We fly up to the Eng Out altitude, clean up and then finally say "What happened?" As an old friend said one time when asked about engine failures...."hey oh, oh hey....well I guess we had better do something".

As with the Taiwanese crash...haste makes waste. We don't move any fuel control or throttle to off without both pilots confirming it is correct.
 
Well, the real world results for Asian pilots/airlines reacting properly (and timely) is less than stellar (and that includes some French also)
We cannot change the culture over there - bravado in place of competence, slavish obeisance to seniority/authority, saving face at all costs (even death).
The only thing we can do is to never set foot on those airlines.
 
The issue with the Asian airlines is well documented and has been the source of many management / psychological studies. Sadly it appears the problems remain. The two things most commonly blamed are:

1) Bad management in the cockpit, with deference to authority even when that might get people killed

2) A poor training trajectory, where many airplane pilots are simply trained from the start to be airline pilots... vs in the U.S. and much of Europe where airline pilots nearly all started as Private Pilots and/or military pilots

When you see things like this or the Asiana crash a bit back where the crew quite literally just didn't know how to fly a 777 manually, you have to just shake your head.
 
Even in a light twin haste makes waste. Identify. Verify. Feather. Secure.
 
Kritchlow said:
Was that the one that hit the bridge wing low?

Wonder why he just didn't push the throttle back up... Unless he pulled it over the gate without verification.
Click to expand...
According to the reports issued within a day or two of the crash, they secured the fuel cutoff lever as well. It was not just a simple case of pulling back the wrong lever.
 
champ driver said:
Go to any of the Sim training schools and all the instructors will tell you that they've seen a few pilots shut down the wrong engine. Part of the training is to verify with both pilots before doing anything like shutting off the fuel lever.
It's easier than you think with all the adrenalin running in an actual engine out emergency to make mistakes.
Click to expand...
What was disturbing about this particular case is that there was considerable time (I think it was something like 7 seconds) between pulling the wrong throttle back and then securing the wrong fuel cutoff.

That is substandard performance no matter how much adrenalin you have pumping.
 
See, I told you singles were safer. :stirpot:

I always hesitate when making a joke in an accident thread (even a bad one) so apologies and condolences to those affected by this tragedy.
 
I will never fly on an Asian airliner. I have heard several reports from pilots who flew in Asian cockpits with Asian pilots that their submissive, hierarchical culture is toxic in the cockpit since they will run with a bad course of action and line of reasoning instead of trying to fix it even if both of the pilots know it is wrong.

Some of those guys over there sitting in the right seat have as much time as the girl sitting in the right seat of the Colgan air flight in Buffalo back in 2009(?). Maybe even less than that.
 
More training is needed,can't be giving a pilot a walk in the simulator,if he's getting it wrong. That and the class culture,aren't working lately.
 
Last edited:
nimdabew said:
Some of those guys over there sitting in the right seat have as much time as the girl sitting in the right seat of the Colgan air flight in Buffalo back in 2009(?). Maybe even less than that.
Click to expand...
You do know that the First Officer in the Colgan crash had more than 1500 TT which is the new 'Post-Colgan' Part 121 requirement for FOs?
 
Fearless Tower said:
You do know that the First Officer in the Colgan crash had more than 1500 TT which is the new 'Post-Colgan' Part 121 requirement for FOs?
Click to expand...

Because 1,500TT in a 172 makes you an excellent RJ pilot.
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
Because 1,500TT in a 172 makes you an excellent RJ pilot.
Click to expand...
Well, its worse now. That is what you're going to get with the new rules. Pilots with 1200 hrs experience sitting in the right seat of a 172.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Well, its worse now. That is what you're going to get with the new rules. Pilots with 1200 hrs experience sitting in the right seat of a 172.
Click to expand...

I think that's what he's saying sarcastically.
 
Fearless Tower said:
What was disturbing about this particular case is that there was considerable time (I think it was something like 7 seconds) between pulling the wrong throttle back and then securing the wrong fuel cutoff.

That is substandard performance no matter how much adrenalin you have pumping.
Click to expand...


actually, way to little time. when an engine fails in that aircraft you will get multiple warning on the CAS. the proper procedure is for the first pilot to notice it to call engine failure number X. the only thing that needs to be done right now is to confirm autofeather if in TO mode. If there is negative autofeather, then the shut down must be done pronto. otherwise, you do nothing except maintain directional control until acceleration altitude. at acceleration altitude you select altitude hold and run the memory items which is a crew operation. the flying pilot calls confirm engine failure #x the PM checks the torque gauge,fuel flow, ITT and cas to confirm the engine that failed. then the FP calls for power lever #x flight idle, the PM grabs the power lever and says power lever #x and the FP visually confirms he has the right lever. then the PM pulls it to idle. then the FP calls condition lever #x feather, fuel shut off and the same procedure is used for that lever. there is no reason in that aircraft to hurry the procedure if there was a positive autofeather, which from the pictures i have seen there was. that aircraft will climb at gross weight on one engine just fine.

bob
 
woodchucker said:
Naive question here, but would it be difficult to place a red LED on each throttle lever that would indicate the engine isn't producing power?

Help idiot-proof the loss of engine scenario -- especially on takeoff.
Click to expand...


to answer the question directly, there is a better option, its called a torque gauge and its the top gauge in the engine stack.

bob
 
Fearless Tower said:
Well, its worse now. That is what you're going to get with the new rules. Pilots with 1200 hrs experience sitting in the right seat of a 172.
Click to expand...

So your saying it's scary that I'm going to the airlines with 970TT and 25 Multi? Even though I will be trained and given a FAA ATP ride that shows I'm safe.
 
ARFlyer said:
So your saying it's scary that I'm going to the airlines with 970TT and 25 Multi? Even though I will be trained and given a FAA ATP ride that shows I'm safe.
Click to expand...
No, I'm commenting on the fact that the Congressional knee-jerk (championed by Sully himself) had absolutely nothing to do with the problems associated with Colgan 3407.
 
Fearless Tower said:
No, I'm commenting on the fact that the Congressional knee-jerk (championed by Sully himself) had absolutely nothing to do with the problems associated with Colgan 3407.
Click to expand...

Ah, I apologize then! :yes:

I totally agree with you on that! I've talked to a guy who worked for them during all of that. He told me the real story on what went down.
 
ARFlyer said:
Ah, I apologize then! :yes:

I totally agree with you on that! I've talked to a guy who worked for them during all of that. He told me the real story on what went down.
Click to expand...

So you know the real story and the NTSB report is not the real story?
 
champ driver said:
I don't see what a light on the throttle lever will do when your hands are on them at the time.
Go to any of the Sim training schools and all the instructors will tell you that they've seen a few pilots shut down the wrong engine. Part of the training is to verify with both pilots before doing anything like shutting off the fuel lever.
It's easier than you think with all the adrenalin running in an actual engine out emergency to make mistakes.
Click to expand...

I've seen it done in the sim. By my sim partner. But this was in the middle of about as toxic a cockpit environment as I have ever experienced. I would never get in a real airplane with him. He was my assigned sim partner, not someone I worked with. By that time we were basically not speaking to each other so I didn't verify which engine he was shutting down. He wasn't in a rush either, just doing the engine failure checklist while rolling his eyes because I had asked him to do so.

He did get it restarted and we didn't crash. But he didn't show up the next day.
 
Last edited:
ARFlyer said:
So your saying it's scary that I'm going to the airlines with 970TT and 25 Multi? Even though I will be trained and given a FAA ATP ride that shows I'm safe.
Click to expand...

It's only scary to the person in the left seat:D

Seriously, I've only had a couple of new hires that were in way over their heads. One got it together by his proby ride and was great to fly with. He recently upgraded to captain. The other was just not ready and did not make it through his proby ride.

Where the problem is at airlines that have fast upgrade times and low time new hires. For the most part nobody is ready to be captain with only a year or so of 121 transport time under their belt. I know I wasnt.

Bob
 
Well, it's not necessarily a matter of training will solve all problems.

For example there was the accident involving a USAF C5 Galaxy where they shut down the correct engine but then tried to throttle it up while leaving a healthy engine at idle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeEMiW1vMvU

And there's BMA Ltd Flight 92 http://lessonslearned.faa.gov/ll_main.cfm?TabID=2&LLID=62&LLTypeID=2 which crashed due to shutting down the healthy engine.

But, that said, it sounds like adequate training wasn't here and it likely contributed to the accident.
 
ARFlyer said:
So your saying it's scary that I'm going to the airlines with 970TT and 25 Multi? Even though I will be trained and given a FAA ATP ride that shows I'm safe.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have a clue as to your abilities until I fly with you, but.... Statistically speaking it would not go as smoothly as someone with more experience. Multi time, turbine time, doesn't really mean what it sounds like. It means more to the level of flying you have done, vs the engine type. In other words, if you have PIC Multi turbine time you are more likely to have done complex arrivals with profile descents to large airports.
It's just playing the odds...
 
ARFlyer said:
So your saying it's scary that I'm going to the airlines with 970TT and 25 Multi? Even though I will be trained and given a FAA ATP ride that shows I'm safe.
Click to expand...


How did you get to the airlines with 970TT instead of 1500?
 
How is this any surprise for the folks they let fly transport category aircraft over there.
 
I'm guessing that the translator cleaned up the language a bit, when coming up with the word "Wow".

Reminds me of the Soviet fighter pilot who purportedly said "fiddlesticks" over the radio, before shooting down KAL 007.
 
DavidWhite said:
I know pilots who have less than 1500TT and fly 172s in Alaska, and can guarantee they are better stick and rudder pilots than 99% who post on this board.
Click to expand...

Give me a break, AK is cool, but it's not going to make you into a aviation god.

Plenty of high time guys up there turned their perfectly good planes and pax into smears in the snow doing dumb crap, flying into wx that they knew was a bad idea, etc.

So no, don't bring that AK god garbage into this topic.
 
James331 said:
Give me a break, AK is cool, but it's not going to make you into a aviation god.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, it doesn't. Does it make you a better pilot than the weekend warriors out of necessity? Absolutely.

I also stand by my earlier statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top