Landing Incident @ SFO

Status
Not open for further replies.
lostplanetairman said:
Error chain:
new PIC, new check pilot
out of their time zone
ILS OTS
unstable approach
(new) 1 flight director on 1 off, don't know about Boeings but very bad in the Bus
everybody in the cockpit sight seeing, no one looking inside

break a link in the chain and we would be talking about something else
Click to expand...

That's usually the very opposite of the problem. Maybe no one looking forward would be a little more accurate?
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
Is it me, or does this just culture thing seem a little too similar to the "everybody is a winner" concept? I mean, yeah, we're all human and make mistakes, and some of them don't deserve the punishment that had previously been dished out, but damn...lets not get to the point of doing everything except admitting that someone screwed up.
Click to expand...

The point isn't to resolve them of their responsibility. It's to stop punishing errors, and encourage a reporting culture. For every accident/incident, there are countless other close calls. In a just culture, the close calls are reported, and the root causes are identified before the "big one" happens.

In an unjust culture, the close calls are not reported, and the first time anyone becomes aware that there's an issue is when the accident happens.
 
WacoFan said:
Unless Doug and the mod team have named you the official JC Ombudsman - and frankly, with the favortism shown you they may have - then who the hell are you to be the sole arbiter of what is "needless speculation", "acceptable speculation", a worthy opinion or an unworthy opinion?
Click to expand...

You and pullup can always ignore what I have to say as I do when you guys post.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
Is it me, or does this just culture thing seem a little too similar to the "everybody is a winner" concept? I mean, yeah, we're all human and make mistakes, and some of them don't deserve the punishment that had previously been dished out, but damn...lets not get to the point of doing everything except admitting that someone screwed up.
Click to expand...

No not at all.

It's about fixing mistakes in a way to prevent them from happening again.
 
Derg said:
At our airline, we can "hit the gym" at any point we think it's necessary.
Click to expand...
That is well and good, but could it come to bite you in the ass? Like, they put it in a special file? Or could it be held negatively against you?

My questions stand from pure curiosity and not this silly my Part# is better than yours.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Oh for the love of new-age Christ. That's what "negligence" MEANS. That's the DEFINITION of the word! What the word means is not conditional or dependent upon someone's notion of freaking "human factors".

I can't decide whether you got caught out making stuff up and are trying to hilariously backfill with that classic childhood zinger "Well, yes, Plebes like you think that's what 'negligence' means, but I have a more advanced understanding!", or whether you actually believe that the definition of words in the English language really are contingent upon the whims of the latest trendy pseudo-science, but in either case, please immediately cease your assault upon our language.
Click to expand...

Again. The reason that negligence and careless aren't used in contemporary safety is that they are too emotionally charged. It implies blame. Step outside of your comfort zone, read a book or two, then get back to me with your condescending BS.

Focus on these terms-

Error
At-risk behavior
Reckless behavior

This accident sure appears to be in the error category. (Depending on the findings, particularly surrounding the auto throttles.)

Anyway, I'm done beating the dead horse, either you've seen enough on here to spur yourself to read a book and educate yourself, or you'll choose to be willfully ignorant. In either case nothing I say will change your perspective.
 
zmiller4 said:
Who is denying someone screwed up?
Click to expand...

No one. Clearly they made an error. Some people on here want to insist it was negligent because in their worldview it is impossible to crash without being negligent in some way. Plus they don't understand the concept of culpability, so they throw terms around that they don't understand, and get pissy when someone tries to help them out.
 
scooter2525 said:
That is well and good, but could it come to bite you in the ass? Like, they put it in a special file? Or could it be held negatively against you?

My questions stand from pure curiosity and not this silly my Part# is better than yours.
Click to expand...

Yeah...it would make me nervous to go to the training department and say, "Hey guys, I'm a little weak on XYZ, can we do some training?" I can imagine that coming back to haunt someone, in the wrong sort of company.
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
No one. Clearly they made an error. Some people on here want to insist it was negligent because in their worldview it is impossible to crash without being negligent in some way. Plus they don't understand the concept of culpability, so they throw terms around that they don't understand, and get pissy when someone tries to help them out.
Click to expand...
They get pissy when people want to have discussion about semantics.

An error occurred, so let's discuss the meaning of words because someone might get their feelings hurt.

Negligence, carelessness, complacency, over looked, lack of focus, loss of awareness, who gives a crap. Its all basically the same to everyone not looking to split hairs.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
Boris,

This isn't about ego. I've worked really really hard to combat the attitudes you've demonstrated, particularly at the upper flight-ops management level. To achieve the next level of safety, we must step away from blame, and towards understanding the inevitability of error.

When I see people essentially throwing the same attitudes around that I've worked to combat, I get frustrated, and for that I apologize.

Online is such a poor place to discuss complicated topics, but my goal has been to help people to see the difference between traditional and contemporary safety. Maybe I've failed in that regard, but I do recommend you read "Whack a Mole."
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
No one. Clearly they made an error. Some people on here want to insist it was negligent because in their worldview it is impossible to crash without being negligent in some way. Plus they don't understand the concept of culpability, so they throw terms around that they don't understand, and get pissy when someone tries to help them out.
Click to expand...

I very sincerely hope that you are not in a cockpit when a 'human error' happens nearby. But if you did, I think I'd enjoy watching a trial with someone seeking damages for your negligent actions. I'd like to see the judges face as you explain how the definition of negligence has been changed, and how pilots can't be negligent any more, and that no one is to blame for your error.

I DO agree with a lot of what you are saying. I agree that identification and tracking of minor errors, identifying the causes and correcting them is an important safety concept. But that doesn't change the fact that pilots making careless mistakes is negligent. By every conceivable definition of the word.

There is a hypocrisy in arguing that airline pilots deserve better pay because of the high level of responsibility involved with the profession, when also trying to deny that same responsibility.
 
rjmore said:
We set ref+5 in calm conditions like that. If they got that slow they should have had an "AIRSPEED LOW" EICAS and a master caution. If the A/T kicked off they again would have a message and a master caution.
Click to expand...

Would the master caution just be a 'ding' noise or would there be an electronic voice saying "Airspeed" or "Stall Imminent" or something? From a human factors standpoint, wouldn't it make sense to have the latter? There are electronic voice warnings for glideslope deviations and such. If you're 20+ knots below Vref at or below 500' AGL you should probably get more than a ding and an EICAS message, both of which could potentially be ignored, misinterpreted, or deferred until it's too late.
 
canadian_atc said:
Agree 100%

However, with the time the AF crew had, if like to think I'd say "hey this isn't working"
Click to expand...
From the time the autopilot disconnected to it being unrecoverable was a bit over 60 seconds. Fro. The time of disconnect to hitting the water, about 4 minutes. You were saying?
 
desertdog71 said:
They get pissy when people want to have discussion about semantics.

An error occurred, so let's discuss the meaning of words because someone might get their feelings hurt.

Negligence, carelessness, complacency, over looked, lack of focus, loss of awareness, who gives a crap. Its all basically the same to everyone not looking to split hairs.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...



Well, I believe that the language we use does matter, particularly in high-profile events like this. It isn't about hurting people's feelings. In the contemporary view, they committed an error, not negligence. But like I said, I can only beat that horse for so long.
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
Well, I believe that the language we use does matter, particularly in high-profile events like this. It isn't about hurting people's feelings. In the contemporary view, they committed an error, not negligence. But like I said, I can only beat that horse for so long.
Click to expand...
That kind of language matters to lawyers and kids that play soccer past age 10.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 
seagull said:
From the time the autopilot disconnected to it being unrecoverable was a bit over 60 seconds. Fro. The time of disconnect to hitting the water, about 4 minutes. You were saying?
Click to expand...


In my profession 60 seconds is an eternity, literally, a hundred things can happen, plans change two-three times when the proverbial turd is hitting the fan, sitting there just watching things go bad for over a minute?? That's got nothing to do with pilot skill, sorry that's just sad to hear.

Only further proves my point.
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
The point isn't to resolve them of their responsibility. It's to stop punishing errors, and encourage a reporting culture. For every accident/incident, there are countless other close calls. In a just culture, the close calls are reported, and the root causes are identified before the "big one" happens.

In an unjust culture, the close calls are not reported, and the first time anyone becomes aware that there's an issue is when the accident happens.
Click to expand...

I think I understand what you're saying. However, when you have 200-300 lives in your hands the expectations are high, and rightfully so. I know it's not feasible to debrief and critique every flight and EVERY pilot will make mistakes.... but on the other hand not every pilot should be a pilot. The pendulum has to stay in the middle and can't swing towards the "I just made a mistake=get out of jail free card".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top