forced landing

[400A]

Having been an SOF for many years at UND as well as an instructor I can say with almost 100% confidence that all of this ADM skills are not the fault of the instructor(s). Sure there are some instructors who are on cruise control mode that don't care, that is an individual thing, not a UND thing, you can't weed out all the idiots.

I had to cancel students launches MULTIPLE times a month while an SOF for things ranging from, smelling of booze, LIFR at their destination (VFR flight), WX conditions below SOP limits for their "class" of certificate, etc etc. You cannot teach common sense and basic decision making skills as made obvious by somone using ATC to fly around thunderstorms in a non radar equipped aircraft. Add to the fact the two guys last year who crashed in CKN, I would be on a hair trigger as well as an SOF.

From my time as a student at UND until I left I watched an almost complete 180 degree change in how students came into the program and what kind of attitude they had. "My generation" took responsibility for our training, studied, had questions, wanted to pushed to our limits. The "current generation" is only interested in completing the lesson in exactly 1.0 and that lesson had better be complete or I will go crying to mommy and daddy because my steep turns were only off by 200 feet.

Nobody takes accountability anymore, everything is someone elses fault, as TXaviator points out, it is UNDs fault for sending people out who aren't ready to make decisions, WRONG! That is the individuals fault for not realising they lack the ability to make decisions. Passing a checkride on a day that has no wind, not a cloud in the sky and you get to whine about not having to use the Bendix GPS so you get a 430 equipped airplane is not decision making.

I know it is hard to believe, but with 20 some odd years of life experience and maybe 300 hours of flight time you are not smarter than the collective at UND. Every annoying SOP that everyone thinks is some kind of UND bubble is written because some moron of a pilot thought it a good idea to do XYZ and probably got away with it for a while until someone either got hurt or metal was bent (case on point, the idiot who lied about where he was going, landed on a grass strip and cartwheeled the airplane).

You have to get out there and get experience, push your limits, but that doesn't mean as soon as you get your IFR ticket you blast off into 200 and 1/2 weather just because you can. But, since this current generation of "kids" thinks the world is owed to them on a platter and that everything they do should be awarded with a gold star that point is lost.

Don't get me wrong, there are many areas UND could be better in, the problem is for that to happen you need students who have an ounce of grey matter between their ears to start with, since that won't happen anytime soon, you have to play to the median of the lowest denominator.

 

[TXaviator]

well i certainly agree with 400A on the point that there are indeed a bunch of total IDIOTS who have NO BUSINESS flying a plane in the first place.

the real issue is then, how do we weed out the idiots, while allowing everyone else to progress and develop as safe and competent pilots?

 

[Snickersnwa]

im sure someone is going to turn around and say yeah yeah youre the king of hazardous attitudes.... whatever man. when im out in the middle of the night in a cessna that is 8 years older than i am, and no one looking out for you except yourself, then come talk to me about who wants to be safe and who wants to die alone in the middle of the mountains.

Nope, I wouldn’t say that. But, I’d say that you’ve shown yourself as an example with that first sentence you wrote in that paragraph.

Who are you to be calling out someone based on experience when your signature shows that you have very little? That seems a wee bit off base…





The SOF isn’t the “end-all-be-all” and, if I had to guess I’d say that examples such as these (where the SOF is calling for an aircraft to divert) do not happen as often as people are making it out to be on here.

Let me attempt to clarify, with an example of my own.

While working a flight from Toronto to Cleveland (aircraft swap in YYZ, so we were flying a different aircraft out of YYZ) we took off into IMC in an airplane with the weather radar working marginally at best (might as well have been inop though we didn’t know it at the time as there were no write-ups in the aircraft logbook), we ended up flying through a thunderstorm. Now, the area forecast had called for pop-up T-storms along the route, but we had planned on using the radar to pick our way around them. ATC in this case did not do the best job at vectoring us around these cells.

Back to the topic at hand…

If you’re taking off out of MSP for example enroute to GFK (IFR, solid IMC) in your training here and a popup storm develops West of Fargo moving East… flying an aircraft that doesn’t have weather radar in it… might you like to know about it before you reach it? Now, ATC here usually does a spot on job of giving you a heads up on it… but, that wasn’t the case when I was flying from YYZ-CLE in an ERJ135 at FL180.

UND is certainly not out to get you. And, a good instructor will develop the ability in his/her students to make competent decisions SOF or not. Ideally, the SOF shouldn’t have to say anything at all

 

[Snickersnwa]

Having been an SOF for many years at UND as well as an instructor I can say with almost 100% confidence that all of this ADM skills are not the fault of the instructor(s). Sure there are some instructors who are on cruise control mode that don't care, that is an individual thing, not a UND thing, you can't weed out all the idiots.

I had to cancel students launches MULTIPLE times a month while an SOF for things ranging from, smelling of booze, LIFR at their destination (VFR flight), WX conditions below SOP limits for their "class" of certificate, etc etc. You cannot teach common sense and basic decision making skills as made obvious by somone using ATC to fly around thunderstorms in a non radar equipped aircraft. Add to the fact the two guys last year who crashed in CKN, I would be on a hair trigger as well as an SOF.

From my time as a student at UND until I left I watched an almost complete 180 degree change in how students came into the program and what kind of attitude they had. "My generation" took responsibility for our training, studied, had questions, wanted to pushed to our limits. The "current generation" is only interested in completing the lesson in exactly 1.0 and that lesson had better be complete or I will go crying to mommy and daddy because my steep turns were only off by 200 feet.

Nobody takes accountability anymore, everything is someone elses fault, as TXaviator points out, it is UNDs fault for sending people out who aren't ready to make decisions, WRONG! That is the individuals fault for not realising they lack the ability to make decisions. Passing a checkride on a day that has no wind, not a cloud in the sky and you get to whine about not having to use the Bendix GPS so you get a 430 equipped airplane is not decision making.

I know it is hard to believe, but with 20 some odd years of life experience and maybe 300 hours of flight time you are not smarter than the collective at UND. Every annoying SOP that everyone thinks is some kind of UND bubble is written because some moron of a pilot thought it a good idea to do XYZ and probably got away with it for a while until someone either got hurt or metal was bent (case on point, the idiot who lied about where he was going, landed on a grass strip and cartwheeled the airplane).

You have to get out there and get experience, push your limits, but that doesn't mean as soon as you get your IFR ticket you blast off into 200 and 1/2 weather just because you can. But, since this current generation of "kids" thinks the world is owed to them on a platter and that everything they do should be awarded with a gold star that point is lost.

Don't get me wrong, there are many areas UND could be better in, the problem is for that to happen you need students who have an ounce of grey matter between their ears to start with, since that won't happen anytime soon, you have to play to the median of the lowest denominator.

Very well said :yeahthat:. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

the real issue is then, how do we weed out the idiots, while allowing everyone else to progress and develop as safe and competent pilots?

Preferably not by letting them go up and "figure it out on their own"

I still can't believe a few months ago you asked me to point out where you have shown yourself to be the poster boy of anti-authority. Add this thread to the list

 

[AngelFuree]

Ok folks, I've bit my tongue on this thread and tried not to post on it. I'm going to try to offer up a different perspective on this.

First, was everyone at the end of the day able to rest their head on their pillow and go to sleep? That's all that matters. At the end of the day folks were able to return home safe.

Second, you're not flying your "own" airplane. Who's airplane is it?

If UND asked these crews to divert so that they could communicate with them, that doesn't take out all PIC responsibility/decision making. In these cases where there's weather as a concern, you should constantly be evaluating your situation and figuring out an "out" should the weather not cooperate anyways. If a message gets relayed like this to divert and call, maybe they saw something that you weren't able to see/know. Either way, you were still making decisions and thinking about your flight as PIC.

I'll tell ya what... the airline that I was working at would via ACARS (text messaging, basically) have dispatch send updates to the crew, suggest/change alternates, etc. This method of communicating back and forth is not available on UND's airplanes (for now), so in certain circumstances they've decided to relay this information via ATC.

Again, at the end of the day folks are able to return home safe. And, that’s all that really matters

Disclaimer: This is my opinion only, and not necessarily that of UND’s

Here here. Folks this is words of wisdom and experience and well I can tell you that in the airline I fly we get messages over ACARS and the radio about our dispatcher wanting us to fly another route. If you people think the SOF is pulling you chain and making your life miserable then maybe you should leave the industry. you are always gonna be somebody pawn in this industry and well quite frankly safety is key over flying into a level 5 thunderstorm or rain. And for the person who said SOF wouldnt let you fly into the rain maybe it was because of icing concerns. remember your airplane has to be certified into known icing conditions to fly into icing. And well when I was a instructor at UND students in 222 never check weather and didnt even know what known icing conditions where and this was at Stage 53!! ( i picked this student up for his Lesson 52 and then was to put him in for stage 53, stated to say it was not my instructing that made this student a complete idiot and well Snickers has heard about this wonderful pilot who was put up for his stage 53.) Rock on snickers teach these punks some flying cause they clearly are ignorant to the world outside of there minds.

The only difference here is that in the Part 121 world, the dispatcher and PIC are JOINTLY responsible for these types of decisions. We're dealing part 91 here. The SOF is NOT a qualified and certificated dispatcher. Let's not get things confused.

 

[400A]

The only difference here is that in the Part 121 world, the dispatcher and PIC are JOINTLY responsible for these types of decisions. We're dealing part 91 here. The SOF is NOT a qualified and certificated dispatcher. Let's not get things confused.

PIC is still responsible for the flight however. In 121 and to some extent 135 a dispatcher can have operational control over a flight, but the buck still stops at the PIC. Yes, the SOF has no authority or dispatch ability over a flight, no one has ever said they did or do. All the screaming and hollering about this makes me wonder about some people(s) ability to act as PIC. Just because the SOF called and said "I want or would like you to do this" doesn't mean you have to, but people seem ready to surrender their authority as PIC right away OR maybe these folks were grateful for some thoughtful CRM and took advantage of it.

 

[Dj To Rule]

 

[AngelFuree]

PIC is still responsible for the flight however. In 121 and to some extent 135 a dispatcher can have operational control over a flight, but the buck still stops at the PIC. Yes, the SOF has no authority or dispatch ability over a flight, no one has ever said they did or do. All the screaming and hollering about this makes me wonder about some people(s) ability to act as PIC. Just because the SOF called and said "I want or would like you to do this" doesn't mean you have to, but people seem ready to surrender their authority as PIC right away OR maybe these folks were grateful for some thoughtful CRM and took advantage of it.

Without a doubt, the PIC has the final say on things. However, I was throwing out the differences between what the rest were saying. They make it sound like it's an airline operation.

 

[400A]

well i certainly agree with 400A on the point that there are indeed a bunch of total IDIOTS who have NO BUSINESS flying a plane in the first place.

the real issue is then, how do we weed out the idiots, while allowing everyone else to progress and develop as safe and competent pilots?

Safe and competent pilots come from training in a structured program that has standards and policies/procedures that must be followed. That can be anything from small mom and pop single Cessna 150 training outfit to the UNDesque type programs. Bigger programs require more oversite period, the smaller programs have a more "self correcting" way of handling things, ie, Joe Pilot is a moron he is no longer allowed to fly our airplanes. Sadly, UND and the like cannot do that. There has been more than one student I thought should be kicked out of the flight program, but for legal reasons (state school and such) UND just can't kick someone out, they have to fail out. Problem is the checkride system as a whole doesn't really allow for that (long theory there).

All that being said, I really think all of this is a very thinly veiled attempt to simply slam UND because a small few didn't like or enjoy their experience there, for whatever reasons. Had the student this thread was started about augered the airplane in because a VFR to IFR flight and the SOF was found to have known about the deterioating conditions, the outcry here would be deafening, UND is incompetant, worthless, etc etc.

Plain and simple UND plays things very conservatively when it comes to solo ops and cross country ops, the two places where most mishaps have occured dual or solo. This does not create a bubble or in any way take away from training, if anything it reinforces the fact that what we do can be very dangerous and snuff you out in an instant for making even the most minor of mistake.

I commend the SOF(s) for taking the iniative to be safe and err on the side of caution. It is cheaper to pay for .5 of flight time than two funerals and a hull loss.

 

[400A]

Without a doubt, the PIC has the final say on things. However, I was throwing out the differences between what the rest were saying. They make it sound like it's an airline operation.

I agree, but I don't think folks were trying to draw a parallel between the SOF and 121/135 ops, I think they were merely pointing out that even later in this career, for most of us anyway, someone else is looking at a bigger picture than you are and will call you to make a change to something. That simple action isn't negating the authority of the PIC the PIC still does what he or she thinks is best. These couple of examples these folks have shown here illustrate that they are not yet ready to be PIC because they didn't divert (at leat the XC from MSP) because they thought it was safe, they diverted because a voice on the radio said so, horrible way to operate an airplane and act as PIC. Nothing in the SOPs I know says the SOF can take over command of an aircraft and nothing in the Regs do either, but just blindly doing something and then getting mad because someone told you to do it, isn't the other persons fault, it is yours.

 

[Blip16]

From my time as a student at UND until I left I watched an almost complete 180 degree change in how students came into the program and what kind of attitude they had. "My generation" took responsibility for our training, studied, had questions, wanted to pushed to our limits. The "current generation" is only interested in completing the lesson in exactly 1.0 and that lesson had better be complete or I will go crying to mommy and daddy because my steep turns were only off by 200 feet.

Nobody takes accountability anymore, everything is someone elses fault, as TXaviator points out, it is UNDs fault for sending people out who aren't ready to make decisions, WRONG! That is the individuals fault for not realising they lack the ability to make decisions. Passing a checkride on a day that has no wind, not a cloud in the sky and you get to whine about not having to use the Bendix GPS so you get a 430 equipped airplane is not decision making.

I know it is hard to believe, but with 20 some odd years of life experience and maybe 300 hours of flight time you are not smarter than the collective at UND. Every annoying SOP that everyone thinks is some kind of UND bubble is written because some moron of a pilot thought it a good idea to do XYZ and probably got away with it for a while until someone either got hurt or metal was bent (case on point, the idiot who lied about where he was going, landed on a grass strip and cartwheeled the airplane).

You have to get out there and get experience, push your limits, but that doesn't mean as soon as you get your IFR ticket you blast off into 200 and 1/2 weather just because you can. But, since this current generation of "kids" thinks the world is owed to them on a platter and that everything they do should be awarded with a gold star that point is lost.

this x200%. this is a huge problem i have seen between being a student and instructing now. there are far too many people who are just in a hurry to get out there somewhere. there are far too many students who don't want to put in the work, they just want the end result.

 

[JaceTheAce]

Alright, I am going to say something in favor of what UND is doing - this is sort of out of my "tradition" of always putting down and disagreeing with UND, but, in the 121 world that I am in now, dispatch might contact us on the ARINC frequency (since we don't have ACARS in the old steam-gauged Dash 8) to advise us of any impeding weather ahead that we may not know of or that ATC may not have the capacity (due to ATC being busy with traffic) to tell us about (yay for run-on sentences! My college English teacher would be proud). If it is UND's interest to get their students prepared for the 121 world, they might involve the operation in a joint SOF-student/CFI decision making process to get their student, instructor, and airplane safely on the ground.

While the flights at UND are operated on Part 91 rules, it might be a valuable learning situation to get the entire flight operation into the Part 121 state of mind so that the student is better prepared for a career in the airlines. The Piper Warrior isn't radar equipped to navagate around thunderstorm cells like 121 airplanes are and any additional assistance available should be provided in order to make a safe decision. Even if the SOF isn't jointly responsible with the PIC to ensure that the flight completes safely, like in the airline world (Dispatcher and Captain are jointly responsible), it wouldn't hurt to consider involving the SOF in the decision making process to ensure that everyone is home safe and sound.

Something to think about...



Angel and Jeremy, my good friends, you are going to kill me. HAHA.


---> Go Sioux! <---

 

[TXaviator]

Angel and Jeremy, my good friends, you are going to kill me. HAHA.


---> Go Sioux! <---

why would i disagree with you jace? i am VERY interested in making the SAFE decision.... as i said above... now after UND, my job is flying MYSELF safely from a to b... i am NOT interested in making a poor decision and potentially KILLING myself and/or other people!!!

i think all resources should be used, but i think the OVERinvolvement of UND/SOF contributes to pilots not being able to make these decisions for themselves.

when you get into the real world, theres not always someone looking over you to make sure you make the 'right' choice... the only oversight is the REAPER!!!

 

[TXaviator]

Safe and competent pilots come from training in a structured program that has standards and policies/procedures that must be followed. That can be anything from small mom and pop single Cessna 150 training outfit to the UNDesque type programs. Bigger programs require more oversite period, the smaller programs have a more "self correcting" way of handling things, ie, Joe Pilot is a moron he is no longer allowed to fly our airplanes. Sadly, UND and the like cannot do that.

well i would ask... WHY IS THAT? why cannot we eliminate unsafe pilots or incapable students? law programs will fail out law students who cannot pass boards.... medical programs will fail out students who cannot pass practicals..... why is aviation different?

some people say "anyone can be taught to fly a plane".... i would argue that no, some people can NOT be taught to fly a plane SAFELY. combination of skill and aptitude.


/yes, some 'devil's advocate' going on here...

 

[LOGS]

Without a doubt, the PIC has the final say on things. However, I was throwing out the differences between what the rest were saying. They make it sound like it's an airline operation.

Well remember, UND is there not to make pilots, but AIRLINE pilots. It just feels to me that noone has faith in their student or Instructor decision making ie AutoWX and whatnot. There is no better lesson than asking your student if its alright to go today, they say yes, you say ok, go up and maybe scare him alittle and when your back on the ground show him why and where he can check and what not. Instead this kids are not learning why.

=Jason-

 

[TXaviator]

If you’re taking off out of MSP for example enroute to GFK (IFR, solid IMC) in your training here and a popup storm develops West of Fargo moving East… flying an aircraft that doesn’t have weather radar in it… might you like to know about it before you reach it?

UND is certainly not out to get you. And, a good instructor will develop the ability in his/her students to make competent decisions SOF or not. Ideally, the SOF shouldn’t have to say anything at all

I would not depart in a warrior from MSP to GFK if there was forecast TS along my route.

I make this decision based on my training.

seems fairly simple.

strawman?

 

[Hacker15e]

I thought I'd throw an opinion on here even though I am not a UND student. In fact, the only thing that caught my attention in this thread is the use of the term "SOF", which is something we also use in my line of work flying for the military.

I'm interested in the discussion about PIC decision-making -- lots of interesting points, but also some that seem to miss the point.

I'm going to give a military perspective just to shake it up a bit.

On a number of occasions, I have had a SOF, via radio, tell me to divert my aircraft to another base because he felt the weather at home station was not good enough for me to land there. I have never -- never -- felt that such a decision was an insult to or encroachment on my empowerment as the final authority for operation of my aircraft. Why?

1) The SOF is on the ground where I want to land. He is at 1G and travelling at zero knots. He has had the ability to watch weather conditions at that location for quite a long time...he's seen trends, has been talking to the weather people, and has a MUCH better idea of what things look like than I do. He's an "expert opinion".

2) The SOF is the representative of the Operations Group Commander...who is my boss' boss. He owns all the airplanes in flight, and is ultimately responsible for those assets. The SOF, in turn, makes on-the-spot decisions for the Commander as his eyes and ears. So, although I am the PIC of my aircraft, by definition, I don't own my aircraft. The person who owns the airplane has authority to decide where he wants that aircraft located. If he decides that location is somewhere other than home base, then so be it.

3) Someone telling me to go land at another field is NOT an encroachment on my PIC authority. Do you feel the same way when you want to fly an ILS to one particular runway, but the controller tells you to fly the approach to a different one?

4) What's the big deal, anyway? The worst that happens, you end up at another airport for a little bit, then you fly home. The worst that happens if you continue to press home is that you find out that the SOF was right, and something bad happens.

So, just a perspective from a military dude about the SOF's position in my decisionmaking matrix. Take it or leave it.

 

[TXaviator]

HACKER -

I fully agree that one should use all available resources, and yes also respect the observer on the ground who may have better/more access to information than the pilot in flight...

however, have you ever felt that the SOF (or equal position in the military) has made an overly conservative 'recommendation'?

suppose that the ground observer was always 'chicken little'... would you at some point begin to question their recommendations?

what do you feel would be a good check and balance to the PIC vs. SOF issue?

this is not at all intended to be in any way insulting. i am interesting in finding solutions to problems.

 

[Snickersnwa]

I would not depart in a warrior from MSP to GFK if there was forecast TS along my route.

I make this decision based on my training.

seems fairly simple.

strawman?

I said "pop up" storms... (not forecasted)