Trans States D.O. in Hot Water...

Seggy

Well-Known Member
There were 4 deadheading pilots on board when it happened. 2 of them are union officers.

Any chance it's a case of trying to stick it to management? I'm actually asking and not trying to provoke anyone. This could be a BFD.
 
I guess I am not sure how this happened. I mean, you don't notice a panel full of red and orange messages on the EICAS? What confused me more was when they said a few monthes ago someone tried to take off with both engines off and only noticed it after they "tried to rev up". Ummm...how did you get on the runway to take off with both shut down? I guess I am missing the big deal. I didn't think this would cause that big of a stink. Just taxi off, crank it up and go.
 
There aren't a whole bunch of indicators on EICAS when you just have one engine going on the ERJ (well, unless you count all those pesky gauges pointing to 0/ambient). There is only an EICAS advisory message that says "CHECK A1P PERF" to remind you that an engine is not turning. A single MEL can easily generate triple that number of EICAS messages. Also, the T/O configuration check button does not check to see that both engines are in fact running. In only checks for flaps, spoilers, pitch trim, and parking brake. My company compensates for this with checklist items.

Aborted takeoffs for forgetting to start an engine do happen, oh I'd guess at least a few times a year in the ERJ. There was an even a rumor out there that someone didn't reject for it and actually completed a full takeoff on one engine, then started the second one in the air.
 
And to clarify the above, I'm not referring to events at my company, but worldwide ERJ operators in general.
 
Any chance it's a case of trying to stick it to management? I'm actually asking and not trying to provoke anyone. This could be a BFD.

Nope, not sticking it to them, but it is a very BFD...from what I've heard, it's all legit. The other 2 who were in the back all had the exact same story which was quite different than the story that was coming out of the flight deck.

Both pilots had to do 709 rides. He was temporarily removed from the DO position, but now is back in it. I think what's rubbing alot of pilots the wrong way, besides the alleged lying, is the lack of discipline. If it had been a regular line pilot, odds are they'd be suspended or worse by now. It seems to be the way it goes...a DO can allegedly attempt take off without the engine running and keep his job, yet an FO can delay a flight and get a 3-day suspension. Doesn't make sense to me...
 
There aren't a whole bunch of indicators on EICAS when you just have one engine going on the ERJ (well, unless you count all those pesky gauges pointing to 0/ambient). There is only an EICAS advisory message that says "CHECK A1P PERF" to remind you that an engine is not turning. A single MEL can easily generate triple that number of EICAS messages. Also, the T/O configuration check button does not check to see that both engines are in fact running. In only checks for flaps, spoilers, pitch trim, and parking brake. My company compensates for this with checklist items.

Aborted takeoffs for forgetting to start an engine do happen, oh I'd guess at least a few times a year in the ERJ. There was an even a rumor out there that someone didn't reject for it and actually completed a full takeoff on one engine, then started the second one in the air.

Did it in the sim once, took about 12,000' of runway and it was like pulling teeth for the first 50 knots until the rudder became effective. I'm not sure how somebody could miss it, to tell you the truth.
 
I read stories about this happening on 727s back in the late 70s/early 80s. Mgmt wanted them to taxi with #2 shut down to save fuel. Despite 2 pilots and an FE it still happened.


As much as everyone would like to bash the management, remember that this is a simple mistake that ANY one of us could make.

That said, trying to BS the mistake to the FAA and asking other pilots to fudge their reports is inexcuseable.
 
Taking off with one engine shut down is not a simple mistake that anyone could make. At least I do not think it is. Granted, I've never flown the ERJ but I was in ground school for a couple of weeks on the ERJ (before they changed my class to the Dash) and it seemed like it would be in the before take off checklist to look at the EICAS.
 
While I appreciate the theory of keeping management pilots flyin so they are more "in touch" with what happens on the line, I think they really should either fly almost half a schedule or (more realistically) not at all.

We have all seen it and heard about it both at the airlines and in GA, people who fly "just enough to stay current" don't need to be carrying passengers around.

Not saying that the incident had everything to do with them being management pilots, just seemed like a good place to make this comment.
 
While I appreciate the theory of keeping management pilots flyin so they are more "in touch" with what happens on the line, I think they really should either fly almost half a schedule or (more realistically) not at all.

We have all seen it and heard about it both at the airlines and in GA, people who fly "just enough to stay current" don't need to be carrying passengers around.

Not saying that the incident had everything to do with them being management pilots, just seemed like a good place to make this comment.

Maybe make management pilots who fly only sporadically have to fly with a check airman? Not sure how 121 works exactly but wouldn't the check airman be used to sitting in the right seat and overseeing people on IOE/Checkrides? In fact, I would think that managment pilots are worse than IOE people - they are not fresh out of the schoolhouse, think they know what they are doing (subject to complacency) and generally need supervision in some ways. Not sure if that is a good idea or not, but perhaps a normal FO would be more reluctant to call out errors by a mangement guy - a check airman probably wouldn't care. Not sure about any of this obviously.
 
Maybe make management pilots who fly only sporadically have to fly with a check airman? Not sure how 121 works exactly but wouldn't the check airman be used to sitting in the right seat and overseeing people on IOE/Checkrides? In fact, I would think that managment pilots are worse than IOE people - they are not fresh out of the schoolhouse, think they know what they are doing (subject to complacency) and generally need supervision in some ways. Not sure if that is a good idea or not, but perhaps a normal FO would be more reluctant to call out errors by a mangement guy - a check airman probably wouldn't care. Not sure about any of this obviously.

Agree 100%. But it's not a failsafe. In this case, a check airman was sitting right seat for our DO. :eek:
 
Taking off with one engine shut down is not a simple mistake that anyone could make. At least I do not think it is. Granted, I've never flown the ERJ but I was in ground school for a couple of weeks on the ERJ (before they changed my class to the Dash) and it seemed like it would be in the before take off checklist to look at the EICAS.

It's simpler than you think. You can't hear the engines with how far you are in front of them.

Trust me, I didn't think it was possible, until I started flying the thing
 
I can't speak on the ERJ, but with the CRJ, you've got red and amber caution messages, and it won't give you a "T/O CONFIG OK" status message. If you takeoff single engine in the CRJ, you're ignoring more than a few messages on the EICAS. However, we're not talking CRJs. I got no clue what kind of failsafes are in place with the ERJ.
 
I read stories about this happening on 727s back in the late 70s/early 80s. Mgmt wanted them to taxi with #2 shut down to save fuel. Despite 2 pilots and an FE it still happened.


As much as everyone would like to bash the management, remember that this is a simple mistake that ANY one of us could make.

That said, trying to BS the mistake to the FAA and asking other pilots to fudge their reports is inexcuseable.

The only time I got close was on a 727.

Take the "Hot Tub Time Machine" back to the late 1990's...

Most 727 captains at my airline would say "Start #3 when you think it's appropriate" and that worked fine. However, there were a couple of micromanagers that thought that the FE and FO were there because he couldn't reach all of the controls himself and he needs someone to babysit the cockpit when he disappears for the occasional potty break.

Anyway, we're taxiing along in ATL with two engines and I'm getting a little antsy as we approach the runway, waiting for captain fabulous to give the universal sign to "spool 'em up", ATC calls about us taking an intersection departure.

"Hey! Check the numbers!"

So I start digging into the AWABS, figure the cutback distance and start cranking out performance data and the bonehead is already taxiing into position for an intersection takeoff.

At this point I just had it.

"STOP. The performance data isn't done and you've only got two engines running."

Of course Bonehead and Bonehead Junior, since I was a newbie, acted like I was an idiot because they were already in position at the new intersection and had to tell ATC they weren't ready after all.

That situation always stuck with me. Sometimes when you let external influences (ATC, cabin crew, company 'techniques', being 'mission oriented', 'get home -itis', self-developed quirky/weird techniques) intersect what the big picture of what we're trying to accomplish, these things happen very easily.

Plus, it's never the crime, it's the cover-up! ;)
 
Most 727 captains at my airline would say "Start #3 when you think it's appropriate" and that worked fine. However, there were a couple of micromanagers that thought that the FE and FO were there because he couldn't reach all of the controls himself and he needs someone to babysit the cockpit when he disappears for the occasional potty break.

I HATE micromanagers. I about pee myself with excitement when a captain starts out with "you know what you're doing, so start the other engine when you think its right, just let me know if you're doing anything non standard before you do it, etc".

We don't have any pilots flying who have less than 2.5 years here, so I would hope by now everyone has figured out when its bout time to spool up the other one. In my opinion its better to do it early and get stuck behind something you weren't expecting than to get close to the end and say "actually, we're not ready yet".

And that's not even mentioning the fact that I have a lot of other stuff I have to do that usually captain micromanager doesn't feel he needs to help me with if I happen to get behind.
 
So, the pilot thought it was normal that only one thrust lever moved forward when applying takeoff thrust?



I don't get it :dunno:
 
Back
Top