disgruntledemployee Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 Changes AA to procedures aside, why the hell did that crew continue the flight? They nearly caused a WB/NB collision. I'll bet the entire flight was a distraction of what they just did. I'm willing to bet the controller that made the abort call (not exact words, I know) was taken off shift, because, ATC needed to review everything to see where the mistakes were made and can't have a controller continue duties until cleared. Delta crew made the right call. If the AA crew called someone, that someone should have pulled them from the flight, so that's at least two levels of poor decision making. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ratner Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 hour ago, disgruntledemployee said: Changes AA to procedures aside, why the hell did that crew continue the flight? They nearly caused a WB/NB collision. I'll bet the entire flight was a distraction of what they just did. I'm willing to bet the controller that made the abort call (not exact words, I know) was taken off shift, because, ATC needed to review everything to see where the mistakes were made and can't have a controller continue duties until cleared. Delta crew made the right call. If the AA crew called someone, that someone should have pulled them from the flight, so that's at least two levels of poor decision making. We had a crew in the tanker fail to pressurize. The maintainers in the back all passed out, pissed themselves, etc. One even busted his head. The boom had to drag one up front to get him on oxygen. When they finally pressurized the AC decided to fly another 6 hours, at altitude, to the Died. When people fuck up, they tend to convince themselves that completing the mission will somehow minimize the reality of the fuck up, even if it actually makes it worse. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhhello Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 54 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said: We had a crew in the tanker fail to pressurize. The maintainers in the back all passed out, pissed themselves, etc. One even busted his head. The boom had to drag one up front to get him on oxygen. When they finally pressurized the AC decided to fly another 6 hours, at altitude, to the Died. When people fuck up, they tend to convince themselves that completing the mission will somehow minimize the reality of the fuck up, even if it actually makes it worse. holy shit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prozac Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said: We had a crew in the tanker fail to pressurize. The maintainers in the back all passed out, pissed themselves, etc. One even busted his head. The boom had to drag one up front to get him on oxygen. When they finally pressurized the AC decided to fly another 6 hours, at altitude, to the Died. When people fuck up, they tend to convince themselves that completing the mission will somehow minimize the reality of the fuck up, even if it actually makes it worse. That crew was more wrong than a football bat. IIRC we had some “leadership” in the community at the time that was admonishing crews for RTBing after pressurization failures (quite common in the airframe at the time). Couldn’t have helped their already questionable decision making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 4 hours ago, disgruntledemployee said: Changes AA to procedures aside, why the hell did that crew continue the flight? They nearly caused a WB/NB collision. I'll bet the entire flight was a distraction of what they just did. I'm willing to bet the controller that made the abort call (not exact words, I know) was taken off shift, because, ATC needed to review everything to see where the mistakes were made and can't have a controller continue duties until cleared. Delta crew made the right call. If the AA crew called someone, that someone should have pulled them from the flight, so that's at least two levels of poor decision making. Last I read it was a CKA and "new" (to the 777) FO. I can't believe they continued either...I guess it must have been premium. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLEA Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 15 minutes ago, Prozac said: That crew was more wrong than a football bat. IIRC we had some “leadership” in the community at the time that was admonishing crews for RTBing after pressurization failures (quite common in the airframe at the time). Couldn’t have helped their already questionable decision making. I lol'd here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 10 hours ago, SurelySerious said: I ASAP’d some problems that happened due to this confusion earlier this month, and the response from the safety people was that “these things happen with any change.” That’s pretty fucked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuggyU2 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 The plot thickens... Maybe the company could occasionally listen to the union inputs on safety. Having a stellar safety record for many years doesn't happen without cost and effort. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed/2023/01/19/first-officer-on-american-jfk-runway-incursion-flight-had-added-task-at-departure-source-says/?sh=5f15e6cd67ac 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Maybe the company could occasionally listen to the union inputs on safety. What? No wAAy.-Bobby “we won’t spend a cent more than we have to” Isom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 19 minutes ago, HuggyU2 said: The plot thickens... Maybe the company could occasionally listen to the union inputs on safety. Having a stellar safety record for many years doesn't happen without cost and effort. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed/2023/01/19/first-officer-on-american-jfk-runway-incursion-flight-had-added-task-at-departure-source-says/?sh=5f15e6cd67ac Great article, provides a lot of amplifying detail. Thanks for posting. Why might the Delta pilots not have seen the aircraft crossing in front of them? Not throwing spears at anyone, and I’ve never been to JFK; just curious what I’m missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prozac Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 53 minutes ago, tac airlifter said: Great article, provides a lot of amplifying detail. Thanks for posting. Why might the Delta pilots not have seen the aircraft crossing in front of them? Not throwing spears at anyone, and I’ve never been to JFK; just curious what I’m missing. Evidence seems to suggest that Delta had pushed up the power and was rolling at a good clip before American entered the runway (positions are always approximate with apps like flightradar24). They may well have initiated the reject before, or just as tower was canceling their clearance. Tower was right on top of it though so good on them for vigilance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 1 hour ago, Prozac said: Evidence seems to suggest that Delta had pushed up the power and was rolling at a good clip before American entered the runway (positions are always approximate with apps like flightradar24). They may well have initiated the reject before, or just as tower was canceling their clearance. Tower was right on top of it though so good on them for vigilance. That makes sense, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgruntledemployee Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Regardless of FO duties and changes to such, it's the captain moving the plane. The taxi instructions were given and read back. If those instructions differed from the initial taxi plan, the capt should have amended that plan to the crew. Maybe he/she did, but in moving the plane, fucked it up. Runway crossings should be a more highly crew coordinated event. That Forbes article uses a "friend" of the FO source, and as the only source, paints this as the FO was too busy with new changes to make sure the driver followed directions. So another strike on the capt as he/she didn't properly manage the crew workload if task saturation was an issue. Maybe at AA, they let FOs do whatever vs stop all tasks for runway crossings. The last part about the crew not knowing what they caused, I don't buy it. If you're asked to jot down an ATC phone number and hear the words "possible pilot deviation" those two items should send tons of warning bells off to the crew. One of them had to realize that they taxied to the wrong runway while they sat there for 30 minutes. My guess is they set up for 31L and that's why they went there. If anyone is wondering, my throwing spear is aimed at the AA capt. I bet a beer the bunkie was texting, but at a minimum was spaced out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Regardless of FO duties and changes to such, it's the captain moving the plane. The taxi instructions were given and read back. If those instructions differed from the initial taxi plan, the capt should have amended that plan to the crew. Maybe he/she did, but in moving the plane, ed it up. Runway crossings should be a more highly crew coordinated event. That Forbes article uses a "friend" of the FO source, and as the only source, paints this as the FO was too busy with new changes to make sure the driver followed directions. So another strike on the capt as he/she didn't properly manage the crew workload if task saturation was an issue. Maybe at AA, they let FOs do whatever vs stop all tasks for runway crossings. The last part about the crew not knowing what they caused, I don't buy it. If you're asked to jot down an ATC phone number and hear the words "possible pilot deviation" those two items should send tons of warning bells off to the crew. One of them had to realize that they taxied to the wrong runway while they sat there for 30 minutes. My guess is they set up for 31L and that's why they went there. If anyone is wondering, my throwing spear is aimed at the AA capt. I bet a beer the bunkie was texting, but at a minimum was spaced out.In theory I agree with you that the buck stops with the CA (also a CKA nonetheless in this instance, definitely ought to know better), but I also keep CAs from doing stupid things constantly. AA loves to tout their Threat Error Management model where all the barriers stop things from getting through all the swiss cheese, but they then they just punched a huge hole through the Standard Procedures barrier at the beginning of the month. That’s where my perspective comes from on saying the company played a role. Absolutely, captain could have stopped or queried any time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Just finished recurrent training and lots of conversation about the JFK incursion and the new procedures. My sim partner was another high time 787 FO and we came close to the new procedures covering everything but erred as to was supposed to do them. We had the same new CKA under supervision on the two sims and they said we did great because we got everything. I figure it's AAs jet and we can do whatever procedure they want. However, what would have made more sense would have been to implement before start/taxi the first quarter, before takeoff second quarter etc. And this is without even raising the question why the 787 even needs this crap because we have the awesome ECL (Electronic Checklist). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SurelySerious Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 Just finished recurrent training and lots of conversation about the JFK incursion and the new procedures. My sim partner was another high time 787 FO and we came close to the new procedures covering everything but erred as to was supposed to do them. We had the same new CKA under supervision on the two sims and they said we did great because we got everything. I figure it's AAs jet and we can do whatever procedure they want. However, what would have made more sense would have been to implement before start/taxi the first quarter, before takeoff second quarter etc. And this is without even raising the question why the 787 even needs this crap because we have the awesome ECL (Electronic Checklist).Right, it’s their jet I’ll twist knobs how they prefer sts, but the rollout with no training is dumb. No one knows who’s getting the ATIS, and what bigger tragedy is there? Phased probably would have been better. And there’s rumor at one point Bobby et al were trying to kill the 787 ECL, which is funny to me. How many pennies can we pinch? Could be a totally bogus story, but sadly believable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HossHarris Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 (edited) ATIS decisions are ALWAYS the number one threat. (I see what you did there) Edited January 20 by HossHarris 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 2 hours ago, SurelySerious said: Right, it’s their jet I’ll twist knobs how they prefer sts, but the rollout with no training is dumb. No one knows who’s getting the ATIS, and what bigger tragedy is there? Phased probably would have been better. And there’s rumor at one point Bobby et al were trying to kill the 787 ECL, which is funny to me. How many pennies can we pinch? Could be a totally bogus story, but sadly believable. Boeing said"Hell no" because the jet is certified with the ECL system. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoleIt Posted January 22 Share Posted January 22 Also, what happened to "clear left/right" before crossing a runway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brabus Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 5 hours ago, StoleIt said: Also, what happened to "clear left/right" before crossing a runway? Probably task misprioritization of some type, with likely several CFs leading to that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smokin Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 That also assumes the visibility was good enough. Strange that the visibility and weather has not been mentioned in any report I've seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 this could happen to anyone here. in both airplanes. in both seats. 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirGuardianC141747 Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 Good point. Besides JFK, ORD, LAX, MIA and many others - try overseas adding to the confusion to include language barriers. I guess some outfits/aircraft will not let the FO taxi like we do in the 74. Captains may have the authority, but I will not hesitate to stop a bad situation if it comes down to the wire. Staying alive to explain is better than the worst alternative. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bfargin Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 All right, which one of you clowns just had to make it home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItnStln Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 6 hours ago, bfargin said: All right, which one of you clowns just had to make it home? His videos are good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now