MaydayMark

I "think" that UAL had (has?) a "bunkie" position that gets their landings in the sim. They seldom get landings in the jet ...


Mark

Blowtorch joc

I think they are mistaking World who just prang one in at BWI but It was the mighty DC-10, not the MD11. That takes a licking and keeps on tocking, only nose gear damage.

Jetjok

FLMD11CAPT,

I was going to roll in hot on your comment....thought it was one of the most myopic posts on this thread... but then I reread it and decided to continue.

Guess I fail to see the problem with what FDX727 said about the Boeing accident in Florida, and more specifically, how it had anything at all to do with the problems we've been experiencing with the larger aircraft fleets. The feeling I get from your post is that you seem to think that each of our wide-body accidents, in some way, shape, or form, have to do, primarily with either a fatigue issue, or a scheduling practice. That would mean that any amount of pilot error would be subservient, to the two aforementioned "issues." I don't agree, and my reasoning for my disagreement is this: 1) it is your responsibility to show up for your trip, rested, current on your medical, current on your passport, current on your takeoffs and landings, current on the appropriate FCIF's, and just basically capable of performing at your best. 2) if you cannot meet the conditions in #1 above, then you should remove yourself from the flight. If it's a two-week long pairing, so be it. My point is that once you sign on the dotted line (or put a check next to your name) as PIC, on the F/PR, you are responsible for the safe conduct of your flight. If there's an accident or incident during your flight, you're the one who will be standing tall, as you're the one held accountable. Would you like it another way?

I also disagree with your attitude that it's "incredibly dis-respectful and insensitive" for someone to bring up the fact that the Boeing accident was a controlled flight into Terrain, not a landing accident. Why? Is his statement not correct? Personally, what I find disrespectful and insensitive, is for guys to do such a poor job flying these jets, that we loose one every couple of years. And that's just the tip of the iceberg, if you consider all the heartache and grief that pilots' families, friends, and co-workers are exposed to, because someone probably screwed up.

No, accidents are primarily a result of poor airmanship. Sure, there are contributing factors.... lack of sleep, crosswinds, equipment issues, personal issues, crew issues, nighttime landings in bad weather, on foreign shores, etc, etc. But the fact remains... we are crashing aircraft, in the landing phase of flight, and something needs to be done about it.

As an aside, I like LivingInMemphis' idea: "we could have voluntary proficiency sims that ACTUALLY ARE non-threatening to your training record or ticket? We could have proficiency events where the event is tailored to the self-perceived weaknesses of the crewmember and participation is actually encouraged (ability to schedule event on an R-day, with the ability to trade an R-day for the sim event - manning allowed). Why not work on getting something like that to happen. After all you are an MD-11 Captain... should be easy.

JJ

JetPiedmont

This was posted on another forum:

It is understood the aircraft made a hard touchdown on runway 10 resulting in a tire burst on the nosegear. The pilots aborted the landing and made a go-around maneuvre. After the damage was asessed and the runway was checked for debris, the DC-10 landed on runwy 33L. After landing run was safely completed, the aircraft remained stuck on the runway. The airport remained closed until the DC-10 was removed. No serious injuries occured. Inside the passenger cabin, a number of overhead panels detached and hanging down until the remainder of the flight. Some reports inicate the aircraft may have suffered structural damage resulting from the first landing attempt.

XprsFr8r

Ask and ye shall receive.......(except it looks like we wouldn't get paid to do it).

CBA, Section 11.O - Training General
17. Proficiency Enhancement Partnership Program
As part of its proficiency enhancement partnership program, the Company will offer the following additional training for proficiency (non-jeopardy training) at the pilot’s election. This training is entirely voluntary on the pilot’s part. The pilot shall not be paid for this training, nor shall it count as duty or a day of work for purposes of this Agreement. The Company shall make a good faith effort to accommodate a pilot’s request for scheduling this type of training, however, this training shall not be scheduled to create a conflict with any other scheduled activities. Should a Captain or First Officer taking advantage of this program encounter any significant performance issues that require training, (other than debrief), prior to his return to line flying, his case shall be referred to the TRB; Second Officers cannot require additional training as a result of participation in this program. The Company shall offer the following four types of training pursuant to this program:
a. ITU Audit
Pilots holding an ITU award may audit ground school, and select AST and IOE events, at the discretion of the training manager, before their training date.
b. Proficiency Enhancement
Up to two times per year but not less than thirty days prior to scheduled recurrent training, a pilot may request proficiency enhancement training.
c. Second Officer Basic Airmanship Proficiency Retention
Up to two times per year, a second officer may request basic airmanship proficiency retention training.
d. Scan Rides
Basic airmanship and instrument refresher training will be offered in applicable ITU syllabi for pilots upgrading to their first flying crew seat.

pipe

Typical. Call it non-jeopardy in the sentence before describing the jeopardy. Any sim that can put you in front of the TRB is not a non-jeopardy event.

Don't you suppose that for a "significant performance issue" to be identified, someone would have to be EVALUATING that performance? In my world we call those checkrides.

PIPE

MD10PLT

You know I did one of these extra sims. I didn't know it was a jeopardy event, so I basically built a profile to work on all the things I thought I was having trouble with. I made the profile very difficult and managed to screw up quite a few things, on purpose, to see how it would turn out.

Didn't know I was setting myself up for failure....never again.

Although I don't think the instructor knew the above paragraph even existed.

FR8Hauler

Every time you put yourself in that box with an instructor pilot you are under the gun. Don't believe there is no jeopardy.

LivingInMEM

It's very instructor-dependent. Officially, it was a jeopardy event.