WSJ Article on PSA at CRW

I'm thinking Meyer's meant TOLD or take off and landing distance cards.

Just a couple of things of note here.

In the past, despite his habit to some times sensationalize the "danger" in the industry Andy has been pretty fair about reporting stuff in the past.

The WSJ (despite what many say) is a mainstream publication that probably makes a pretty good effort at vetting their sources.

While there are a lot of inconsistencies in the article (rotating at 85 knots etc) the official report has yet to come out yet so we really don't know what happened.

I AM NOT hanging the crew here but rather simply saying that while the story certainly does the crew no favors, we DON'T KNOW the truth one way or the other and are making assumptions about what happened, just like we are blaming the author for doing.

The biggest issue as far as I am concerned is where did he get his information. The NTSB has not officially released anything so unless Andy was just writing a novel, this "information" (true or not) was leaked from somebody party to the investigation.

As far as I know there are a pretty limited number of groups working on this consisting of ALPA, USAirways/PSA, Bombardier, the NTSB and the FAA. If you think back to the Colgan crash and the USAirways landing on the Hudson, in both those cases information from the CVR appeared in news articles long before the NTSB released any kind of report about the contents of the CVR. This leaking of information in, regrettably, not new.

If you look at those three incidents and start looking for constants there are only two. USAirways was only part of two of them. Bombardier was only part of two of them. The NTSB and the FAA were involved in all three of them. My money is on the FAA.

My point is, let's continue to be the professionals we've been up until know and wait until the official verdict comes out from the NTSB before we go hang anybody, whether they be a pilot or a reporter.
 
Aviation is not the only industry that gets hung out by "questionable" reporting by the media. It happens all the time. Just keep doing your jobs professionally, wait for the official report, and learn from the mistakes that were made.

I've learned to stop getting worked up about things like this. It's never going to end.
 
BobDDuck said:
In the past, despite his habit to some times sensationalize the "danger" in the industry Andy has been pretty fair about reporting stuff in the past.
Click to expand...

I actually just had pepsi come out my nose (damn that burns) when you said that....He lives only to scare the public about airplanes...why, because it sells papers and advertising space. I'm sure his bosses are quite happy.
 
The article says they incorrectly set the flaps. It does not say what the setting was. Could they have had full flaps on the takeoff roll? Would this give a config warning? Would this account for the early rotation at 85 knots? What if they tried to change the flap setting from full to 20 during the roll?

I've never flown a CRJ, just trying to account for the discrepancies between the article's "industry sources" and the huge knowledge base here at JC.
 
Joe Sixpack wants to read, get outraged, then click on Orbitz's lowest fare. He doesn't give a toss about anyone but himself and wants his infotainment bloody, short, and full of condemnation. Deep down, he's a solipsist of the worst kind (the kind that doesn't even know what the word means), and he will gleefully clap his flippers at the troubles of others, particularly if they are more highly regarded than he is.

The "reporter"'s job is to give Joe what he wants. That's what he did. Don't lose any sleep over it because it's never going to change. The masses are asses and they don't and never will care about "the Profession". The sooner we all realize this, the sooner we stop wasting effort on Joe and start affecting meaningful strategies.
 
matt152 said:
The article says they incorrectly set the flaps. It does not say what the setting was. Could they have had full flaps on the takeoff roll? Would this give a config warning? Would this account for the early rotation at 85 knots? What if they tried to change the flap setting from full to 20 during the roll?

I've never flown a CRJ, just trying to account for the discrepancies between the article's "industry sources" and the huge knowledge base here at JC.
Click to expand...

The WSJ reporter is not a pilot so he's going to have some verbiage wrong like the speeds. Nothing new. Seems like he has some very good sources though. What I gather from this is that the crew was not completely concentrated on their job duties on the taxi out and took off with flaps 8 instead of flaps 20. They realized their mistake during the takeoff roll, and moved the flaps to 20 triggering the T/O config warning, in which they then aborted the t/o past v1 and the rest is history.

This is a very easy mistake to make that is not as uncommon as most would believe. Here at ASA we had a crew T/O flaps 8 instead of 20 out Key West and from what I heard kicked up ALOT of sand and ocean water from being so close to beach/water on liftoff.

Boris Badenov said:
Joe Sixpack wants to read, get outraged, then click on Orbitz's lowest fare. He doesn't give a toss about anyone but himself and wants his infotainment bloody, short, and full of condemnation. Deep down, he's a solipsist of the worst kind (the kind that doesn't even know what the word means), and he will gleefully clap his flippers at the troubles of others, particularly if they are more highly regarded than he is.

The "reporter"'s job is to give Joe what he wants. That's what he did. Don't lose any sleep over it because it's never going to change. The masses are asses and they don't and never will care about "the Profession". The sooner we all realize this, the sooner we stop wasting effort on Joe and start affecting meaningful strategies.
Click to expand...

Why do pilots have this attitude towards the general public than are making pleas on forums and websites for the public to watch PBS Frontline Flying Cheap and programs alike?

Joe Sixpack doesn't read WSJ. High paying business customers do. Also, Joe Sixpack is the customer that is fueling Allegiant, SWA, AirTran, Jetblue and most LLCs to record profits. Its time to give Joe Sixpack more credit.
 
<small>"FEBRUARY 9, 2010, 9:12 P.M. ET"

That is when the article was posted. When did the PBS program air?

Funny "strange." Not funny "ha-ha."
</small>
 
I can't really make sense of where the incorrect flap setting actually occurred. What are all the numbers the FO says during the taxi flap checks?
takeoff data forty four thousand pounds. flaps eight twenty seven twenty
eight thirty four seventy three eighty seven point eight set.
Click to expand...
 
Boris Badenov said:
I like the part where they're talking about their Corvettes and ten car garages. Is PSA hiring?
Click to expand...
No they are not. You wouldn't make it through the interview. If you made it through the interview you would wash out it indoc. I am friends with all 3 of the crew and your maturity level is disgusting. Keep opening your piehole and making friends. Hay ellos que quiere pero no puede. That's you pal. peace out :)
 
granlistillo said:
No they are not. You wouldn't make it through the interview. If you made it through the interview you would wash out it indoc. I am friends with all 3 of the crew and your maturity level is disgusting. Keep opening your piehole and making friends. Hay ellos que quiere pero no puede. That's you pal. peace out :)
Click to expand...

ohsnap-1.gif
 
The only thing about it that makes me really wonder is why the flaps were changed from 8 to 20 during the roll. I'm just a low time guy flying 172s so I don't know anything about flying the CRJ, but wouldn't first instinct be "Crap, I set the flaps wrong, better abort"? They ended up aborting anyway of course, but perhaps that could have been the difference between an over-run and a normal aborted take off?
 
meyers9163 said:
I just do not personally see a crew "freaking" out and putting the flaps in during a roll..... Pilots know what happens when you change the configuration, or shoud, and I just do not see this being factual information.... The WSJ should be ashamed for publishing such an article without one shread of factual information from a prem or complete report from the NTSB.... They should be ashamed....
Click to expand...

An NTSB or FAA official leaked this information to the reporter. My money is on the NTSB because want access to our CVR's and the timing for this was perfect. If you're concerned you could e-mail the reporter and voice your concern.
 
granlistillo said:
No they are not. You wouldn't make it through the interview. If you made it through the interview you would wash out it indoc. I am friends with all 3 of the crew and your maturity level is disgusting. Keep opening your piehole and making friends. Hay ellos que quiere pero no puede. That's you pal. peace out :)
Click to expand...

Is this sarcasm?

"There are those who want, but cannot" - is that the correct translation?
 
No it isn't. He prefaced his post with a wink smilie, and that is not the type of maturity necessary for this business. If after the continental accident if I made a comment like that I would have been roasted (and rightfully so). Just because he is the "class clown", no one calls him on it, and as far as I know his experience level is proportional to his maturity. This would come out in an interview, or discovered early on in the training process. As I noted, I know the crew and doubt he does and I didn't appreciate it. Any more comments should go to PMs.
:beer:

Your translation is right on Waco.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top