Landing Incident @ SFO

Status
Not open for further replies.
RedBaron2000 said:
deadpixel - very interesting write-up. I have no experience with Korean pilots, but his experience with the culture is very similar to what I experience in Indonesia.
Click to expand...

I wonder if some of the cultural aspects come from Asian cultures being typically defined as a high context culture.
http://www2.pacific.edu/sis/culture/pub/Context_Cultures_High_and_Lo.htm

That kind of just gives a quick comparison of a high context culture (e.g. Korea) vs a low context culture (e.g. the United States).
 
Not to hop back on the Korean culture thing again but I was curious if age plays a big role on respect and authority there. Nothing to do with this crash, Im just generally curious. It may have already been discussed, I just dont feel like weeding through 900+ posts ;)
 
NickH said:
Not quite. Careless is simply not giving enough attention or thought to avoiding errors.
Click to expand...

Here is an excerpt from a Just Culture presentation. The word "careless" isn't used because it is too charged with the old way of thinking about risk. To the NTSB, careless is/was simply the very act of making a mistake. That old way of thinking is slowly changing. The very concept of careless = not avoiding error is exactly the type of thinking that we are trying to fix.


• Human error – an inadvertent action; inadvertently doing other that what should have been done; slip, lapse, mistake.

• At-risk behavior – a behavioral choice that increases risk where risk is not recognized, or is mistakenly believed to be justified.

• Reckless behavior – a behavioral choice to consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk.

Copyright 2007, Outcome Engineering, LLC. All rights reserved.
 
I did not say that careless = not avoiding error. Careless is not giving enough attention to avoiding error. You can define it in any way you like, it's still an event which would have been avoided were it not for the negligence of the flight crew. All the newspeak in the world won't change that.
 
NickH said:
I did not say that careless = not avoiding error. Careless is not giving enough attention to avoiding error. You can define it in any way you like, it's still an event which would have been avoided were it not for the negligence of the flight crew. All the newspeak in the world won't change that.
Click to expand...

It's not about newspeak. It's about recognizing human factors, and how to fix them, and about increasing safety.

They weren't negligent, they made a mistake. At least, we don't have enough information yet to determine if they were negligent or not. Negligent means they had intent to increase the risk. They probably didn't.

This matters. It isn't just semantics!
 
Referring to the Comair crash, we certainly have enough information to know they were negligent.

Your understanding of negligence is incorrect. The definition of Negligent is 'failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstance' (merriam webster).

Intent is irrelevant.
 
Seggy said:
It was in a 121 environment at Colgan. Where is your proof that culture did NOT play a role in this accident?
Click to expand...

So one or two quiet FOs? You had in the best of days maybe 600 pilots, there couldn't have been too many Koreans, at least not enough to judge an entire race on.

I don't have proof, just as YOU don't either that culture played a role. However, based on what's released, the airspeed was fine until 500 ft AGL. Based on what the NTSB has released so far, I think you're going to find that the autothrottle setting was involved, the airspeed fell below what it was suppose to hold, but I doubt this is like the Guam case with the FO and SO screaming "go around! go around!" and the CA not doing that. All likeliness so far shows that it was something both missed altogether until *finally* one noticed it, which the NTSB is saying was at 200 ft or maybe a lil lower. Power came up (correcting) but it a go around was too late. This doesn't sound like a junior versus senior respect-cultural issue. This sounds like all 3 pilots in the cockpit missed something.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I think everyone is going a little too far with the speculation. At first, most of it was within the bounds of not pissing on the crew. Not so much now. Perhaps everyone should wait for the NTSB to actually do their investigation before blaming anyone for this.
Click to expand...

ATN Pilot, someone hacked your account and posted this. Please make sure you log out of computers.
 
NickH said:
Referring to the Comair crash, we certainly have enough information to know they were negligent.

Your understanding of negligence is incorrect. The definition of Negligent is 'failing to exercise the care expected of a reasonably prudent person in like circumstance' (merriam webster).

Intent is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Sigh... You guys just need to learn about Just Culture. It's all about intent, and culpability. It's way too involved to do any justice on here, but yes, intent matters.

Our culture is a "blame culture" and that's why Webster dictionary still defines negligence in that way. If you want to be safer, you've got to move away from blame and move towards a just culture model.

I'll stop harping on it here, but you guys who don't get it need to read a book or three.
 
Thread drift for the best boobtube comments ever.

"If it was not engine failure. The landing should have been Basic. A 10 year old could have landed that plain... Water Updraft AND Contraction atmosphere..."

and then...

"What was the Temperature of The Water that day. The Tail Lost Lift. The Computer IS NOT and Does Not have the Ability to respond with sudden change at such low altitude. We're talking SECONDS HERE. Gravity..."


Carry on, carry on.
 
You all do realize that the underpinnings of ASAP are based upon the Just Culture model, right? Tell about your mistakes, so we can learn from them vs. if you make a mistake you are fired.

What gets an ASAP thrown out? Intentional acts...

This event was NOT intentional. They didn't go "hey man, I'm gonna fly into the seawall today."
 
flyingbum said:
Thread drift for the best boobtube comments ever.

"If it was not engine failure. The landing should have been Basic. A 10 year old could have landed that plain... Water Updraft AND Contraction atmosphere..."

and then...

"What was the Temperature of The Water that day. The Tail Lost Lift. The Computer IS NOT and Does Not have the Ability to respond with sudden change at such low altitude. We're talking SECONDS HERE. Gravity..."


Carry on, carry on.
Click to expand...

I heard gravity did it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top