Hawker Down near AKR

somewhereupthere said:
And yes, I am a pilot, ~3100 hours, ATP, type ratings etc, of which ~2700 is turbine PIC. I have flown 135 and 91 corporate operations. I know the game, and know it well.
Click to expand...

Wow, 3,100 hours? A WHOLE 3,100 hours? Damn, thats impressive. Clearly you know what your talking about with that high level of experience. When I had 3,100 hours I thought I knew it all. Now, when I think back to 3,100 hours, i'm amazed I didn't kill myself.

Although 3,100 hours isn't much time by any stretch of the imagination, it is enough time for me to say that if you are afraid to shoot a non precision approach to minimums, er, 1/4 mile above minimums, you should really do some soul searching.

Mountainous ILS at night with no ALS, minimums and a 90 degree wind blowing to 30?.....Maybe I don't try the approach.

Daytime, mile and a half, 400-500 over with winds straight down the runway? If that is setting off alarms, I don't want to be flown by you.

Also, i'd love to hear how you have 3,100 total time and 2,700 turbine PIC?
 
Cat-of-the-Templar_o_143432.jpg
images
 
MikeOH58 said:
Wow, 3,100 hours? A WHOLE 3,100 hours? Damn, thats impressive. Clearly you know what your talking about with that high level of experience. When I had 3,100 hours I thought I knew it all. Now, when I think back to 3,100 hours, i'm amazed I didn't kill myself.

Although 3,100 hours isn't much time by any stretch of the imagination, it is enough time for me to say that if you are afraid to shoot a non precision approach to minimums, er, 1/4 mile above minimums, you should really do some soul searching.

Mountainous ILS at night with no ALS, minimums and a 90 degree wind blowing to 30?.....Maybe I don't try the approach.

Daytime, mile and a half, 400-500 over with winds straight down the runway? If that is setting off alarms, I don't want to be flown by you.

Also, i'd love to hear how you have 3,100 total time and 2,700 turbine PIC?
Click to expand...

I never said it was. I was simply stating my qualifications as a pilot to him. As far as my knowledge of how this company operates, and the fact that I would be carrying a low time FO, I would probably consider this airport a no-go. It's my decision in the end as to what I think is safe for the operation. What amazes me is that all of you guys are advocating what is legal, and not having a discussion as to what is safe, taking the different factors into consideration. I have 3100 hours. 450 of that is single engine turbine, 1833 total turboprop spread out among the King Air 90/200/350 and Twin Otter. The remainder is spread out in straight wing citations westwinds and hawkers. A good portion is flying as SIC. A good portion is flying as PIC.

My point is this. I'm advocating choosing the safer alternative. I'm not afreaid to shoot a non precision approach to minimums. But because I understand how the chips get stacked against you, even more so when perhaps you're carrying and monitoring a weaker pilot (FO), mistakes are made. So why should I not give myself the option to elect the safer alternative?

Please explain your thoughts on this. Even more so, can you explain it to the families of the deceased as to why this is okay, simply because it's legal?
 
somewhereupthere said:
I have 3100 hours. 450 of that is single engine turbine, 1833 total turboprop spread out among the King Air 90/200/350 and Twin Otter. The remainder is spread out in straight wing citations westwinds and hawkers. A good portion is flying as SIC. A good portion is flying as PIC.
Click to expand...


At the risk of derailing this thread further, didn't you just say you had 2700 TPIC and 3100TT? Your being weird.
 
To err on the side of caution is fine, that is a great quality in a pilot. I think all of us are responding directly to what you wrote, because i'm willing to wager that every single pilot on this forum other then you does not consider a daylight, non precision approach with 1 1/2 mile vis, ceilings 400-500 feet and wind down the runway anything abnormal, or other then routine. That isn't being reckless, it's just not the type of weather or situation that most people are diverting for.

That being said when you are PIC do what you feel is safe. Who gives a crap what anyone else thinks.
 
Got my wires crossed somewhere.. had to check the logbook.

3033TT
2831 PIC
2231 MEL
2662 Turbine
1833 TP
2831 PIC
693 Jet PIC
138 Jet SIC

Just to clarify.. numbers weren't adding up so I had to check to make sure myself :)

As I said, I'm not at all saying I'm somehow super qualified or God's gift to aviation. All I'm doing is looking at the factors, and the end result.

With some internal knowledge thrown into the mix, I can't help but look at a generalized analysis, even of somewhat non factual data (such as the flightaware track), and come to the conclusion that I did.

I think if you paint yourself into a corner, you paint yourself into a corner. If, before you depart, a better option is available, why not act on it.

Sadly, they believed they could get into the airport with the given conditions, and it didn't work out.

The end result, as someone else posted, is that 9 people are dead. I'm sure, once the official investigation concludes, some of the factors I am discussing and bringing to light, will also be discussed in the NTSB summary and conclusion.
 
Last edited:
somewhereupthere said:
I never said it was. I was simply stating my qualifications as a pilot to him. As far as my knowledge of how this company operates, and the fact that I would be carrying a low time FO, I would probably consider this airport a no-go. It's my decision in the end as to what I think is safe for the operation. What amazes me is that all of you guys are advocating what is legal, and not having a discussion as to what is safe, taking the different factors into consideration. I have 3100 hours. 450 of that is single engine turbine, 1833 total turboprop spread out among the King Air 90/200/350 and Twin Otter. The remainder is spread out in straight wing citations westwinds and hawkers. A good portion is flying as SIC. A good portion is flying as PIC.

My point is this. I'm advocating choosing the safer alternative. I'm not afreaid to shoot a non precision approach to minimums. But because I understand how the chips get stacked against you, even more so when perhaps you're carrying and monitoring a weaker pilot (FO), mistakes are made. So why should I not give myself the option to elect the safer alternative?

Please explain your thoughts on this. Even more so, can you explain it to the families of the deceased as to why this is okay, simply because it's legal?
Click to expand...

You're approach to solving the mystery is the problem. Sure you lined up the approach course, the timing according to flight aware and liveatc. Nice work gumshoe. Capper solved, the NTSB can go home now.

A hawker hit an unoccupied dwelling, but why? Avionics failure, crew failure, incorrect use of automation, etc... We all want to know why in order to help understand the event and prevent it in the future. All you seem to be doing is pounding your chest and saying "3100TT 2700TPIC and I haven't hit anything yet!"




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
"My point is this. I'm advocating choosing the safer alternative. I'm not afreaid to shoot a non precision approach to minimums. But because I understand how the chips get stacked against you, even more so when perhaps you're carrying and monitoring a weaker pilot (FO), mistakes are made. So why should I not given myself the option to elect the safer alternative? Please explain your thoughts on this."

This. Even if it was legal, if it's beyond your skill level, you've got pax and you're in someone else's airplane you have to choose the safer alternative. If it costs you your job, so be it. Walk away with your head held high knowing you did the right thing. If money and status are so important to you that you're willing to risk the lives of others, you're in the wrong business.

At our shop the first thing the CP said to me was: "Nothing we're doing here is so important that we have to take chances. If you cancel a flight because you're uncomfortable with the weather, it will soon be forgotten. If you push it and something bad happens, it will be remembered forever."
And sure enough, since I was still a bit shaky during my first few months at the company I did indeed cancel/turn back once or twice because I felt over my head. The result, they complimented me for my decision making.

Dirty Harry: "A man has to know his limitations."
 
Derg said:
Didn't they spend a whole hour of a show disproving the "airline on a treadmill" question which, with anyone with a junior high schools level of basic physics would be able to prove in 30 seconds? :)

(easy shot, I had to take it)
Click to expand...
Best quote I've heard in a month! Thanks for making my day!
 
Besides his flight time not adding up, I think going straight to your alternate when the destination is at legal minimums is ridiculous (besides fatigue or a few other circumstances). Blaming it on a low time FO shows a weak pilot. Might as well start making other arbitrary restrictions as well, like never landing with less than 3 hours of fuel.

Hell, I assume the flight school plane that landed before them was a CFI and an instrument student, you don't get much more low time and babysitting than that.
 
gliderboy said:
"My point is this. I'm advocating choosing the safer alternative. I'm not afreaid to shoot a non precision approach to minimums. But because I understand how the chips get stacked against you, even more so when perhaps you're carrying and monitoring a weaker pilot (FO), mistakes are made. So why should I not given myself the option to elect the safer alternative? Please explain your thoughts on this."

This. Even if it was legal, if it's beyond your skill level, you've got pax and you're in someone else's airplane you have to choose the safer alternative. If it costs you your job, so be it. Walk away with your head held high knowing you did the right thing. If money and status are so important to you that you're willing to risk the lives of others, you're in the wrong business.

At our shop the first thing the CP said to me was: "Nothing we're doing here is so important that we have to take chances. If you cancel a flight because you're uncomfortable with the weather, it will soon be forgotten. If you push it and something bad happens, it will be remembered forever."
And sure enough, since I was still a bit shaky during my first few months at the company I did indeed cancel/turn back once or twice because I felt over my head. The result, they complimented me for my decision making.

Dirty Harry: "A man has to know his limitations."
Click to expand...


100% agree. BUT it shouldn't be beyond the skill level of a professional crew flying a turbojet on demand. There is nothing about this approach or the weather that screams "pushing the limits".
 
Are people (really a person) in this thread really suggesting that a localizer approach to minimums is unsafe? Jesus, I'd hate to have to justify some of the approaches I've flown to them over my career. What are your thoughts on NDB approaches to minimums? Or EGADS! An LDA? I don't even want to get started on all the circling approaches to minimums I've flown...
 
CFI A&P said:
All you seem to be doing is pounding your chest and saying "3100TT 2700TPIC and I haven't hit anything yet!" Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Sir, I was simply answering z987k's questing me being a pilot. I do think though that my experience, limited as it may be, does qualify me to intelligently discuss factors possibly involved in this accident.

But think what you may.. it's your opinion.. you're entitled to it :)
 
Come on guys, leave the noobi alone. It's anybody's guess and my guess is something else was happening on the flight deck.

Hunter? He's fair game.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top