Here's why AA aircraft taxi so slow....
12-15-2006, 08:42 PM
#81
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 394
Who said anything about slow airspeeds? The NY accident was not a slow speed accident. In any case, please expand on that a little. What do you mean by that?
You specifically said that rudder would be used in inverted recoveries. Now quit dodging my question! How would rudder be used in inverted recoveries?
What do you mean by this..."Note--slow airspeeds...meaning...low stress loads."?
Then you said, "That's what was taught". What was taught?
It seems to me that you have implied that the NTSB has deliberately lied in its findings regarding the NY accident. Is that your intent?
AA leads all other US airlines in fatalities due to pilot error accidents in the last 10-15 years. Not TWA.
American Airlines.
If there is an 'ego' aspect to all of this, I suggest you look closer to home.
12-16-2006, 12:09 AM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Still Swinging props!
Posts: 297
How do we ever survive single pilot IFR operations requiring multitasking in multiengine recips? Recips require so much more babysitting than a turbine, to add to the list!
I guess all things are relative....
I guess all things are relative....
12-17-2006, 10:15 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
>>>>Those three accidents were all due to pilot error.<<<
Wrong--except to say that any and all accidents--except the tail falling off--are at least partially due to the crew missing something along the way.
Cali, certainly, but the software of the 767 was also a major issue.
LIT, poor decision-making but a pilot-pushing management and dispatcher coupled with a want-to-climb-the-ladder Chief pilot and brand-new FO at the controls, coupled with the fact that the Captain had been on duty over 18 hours when he died in the wreckage at the end of the runway, four inches of standing water on the runway (fire trucks couldn't even find the runway because they said it was "a lake") and the rudder nulling phenomena on the MD-80 that was a finding of that investigation all contributed. Not simple pilot error.
AA 587: you want to tell me that the tail cracks off an airframe and you buy off on "the pilot did it?" Take a step back from that position and think about it. (Hint: to get this scenario to be physically possible, the NTSB had to change the long-standing definition of Maneuvering Speed...)
Yes, the NTSB lied. About a lot of stuff. AA 587 FO Sten Molin no more made that tail fall off than the Captain of TWA 800 made his 747 explode. (Are you so naive as to think the NTSB is not conflicted and manipulated by almost every player in the accident investigation equation? Really? How charmingly trusting...in the face of a total of four ruptured or compromised-beyond-use tails on the A300/A310...you still buy the NTSB line. Amazing.)
Aircrews are still in danger and the A300s and A310s especially are just waiting for another tail rupture. Count on this--it will happen as long as they refuse to properly inspect those tails.
You get the last word.
Jetblaster
Wrong--except to say that any and all accidents--except the tail falling off--are at least partially due to the crew missing something along the way.
Cali, certainly, but the software of the 767 was also a major issue.
LIT, poor decision-making but a pilot-pushing management and dispatcher coupled with a want-to-climb-the-ladder Chief pilot and brand-new FO at the controls, coupled with the fact that the Captain had been on duty over 18 hours when he died in the wreckage at the end of the runway, four inches of standing water on the runway (fire trucks couldn't even find the runway because they said it was "a lake") and the rudder nulling phenomena on the MD-80 that was a finding of that investigation all contributed. Not simple pilot error.
AA 587: you want to tell me that the tail cracks off an airframe and you buy off on "the pilot did it?" Take a step back from that position and think about it. (Hint: to get this scenario to be physically possible, the NTSB had to change the long-standing definition of Maneuvering Speed...)
Yes, the NTSB lied. About a lot of stuff. AA 587 FO Sten Molin no more made that tail fall off than the Captain of TWA 800 made his 747 explode. (Are you so naive as to think the NTSB is not conflicted and manipulated by almost every player in the accident investigation equation? Really? How charmingly trusting...in the face of a total of four ruptured or compromised-beyond-use tails on the A300/A310...you still buy the NTSB line. Amazing.)
Aircrews are still in danger and the A300s and A310s especially are just waiting for another tail rupture. Count on this--it will happen as long as they refuse to properly inspect those tails.
You get the last word.
Jetblaster
12-17-2006, 06:44 PM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 394
Wrong?
Cali - navigation error. Failed to retract speed brakes.
Little Rock - tried to land in a thunderstorm. Failed to arm ground spoilers.
AA587 - excessive rudder inputs. You allege the tail failed due to factors other than pilot-induced sideloads. The engines also separated from the aircraft in flight. Did the engine mounts also have this same manufacturing defect?
You have accused me of denigrating the dead pilots a number of times. I have not. Yet you just did.
What gives?
No one has ever suggested anything remotely like that about TWA 800. Unfortunately, the NTSB thinks differently about AA 587.
But if you think they are lying...
Thank you.
I'm really far more interested in your ideas on how to use the rudder in unusual attitude recoveries. Care to answer my questions in my last post?
Cali - navigation error. Failed to retract speed brakes.
Little Rock - tried to land in a thunderstorm. Failed to arm ground spoilers.
AA587 - excessive rudder inputs. You allege the tail failed due to factors other than pilot-induced sideloads. The engines also separated from the aircraft in flight. Did the engine mounts also have this same manufacturing defect?
What gives?
But if you think they are lying...
Thank you.
I'm really far more interested in your ideas on how to use the rudder in unusual attitude recoveries. Care to answer my questions in my last post?
Last edited by shackone; 12-18-2006 at 11:12 AM.
12-18-2006, 08:56 AM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,918
Shackone and Jetblaster,
I, for one enjoy reading this exchange. But it doesn't help the conversation and it doesn't help the families of the deceased reading this when we drudge up screwups of the past.
As both of you know, EVERY major airline has had its share of "chain accidents". USAir in the early 90s... DAL in the late 80s... AA mid to late 90s... etc etc. No one is immune, no matter what airline we work for. Those are the statistics, no sense in arguing it. Let's instead learn from those unfortunate events and move on.
I started this thread with the aim to educate my fellow airline pilots as to why we taxi slow. That's AA's way, and regardless of who likes it and who doesn't, it is what it is. Sorry for the guys stuck behind us, but if you had our takeoff check list to go through, you'd taxi slow as well.
To turn it into a "my airline is better than yours" bash fest - especially when it is fueled by past merger sentiments - is pointless, and belongs on Flighinfo, not here. I believe every AA pilot knows very much about our past record, and we are all striving as a group to learn from the past and run a safe operation. So far, so good.
Group hug,
73
I, for one enjoy reading this exchange. But it doesn't help the conversation and it doesn't help the families of the deceased reading this when we drudge up screwups of the past.
As both of you know, EVERY major airline has had its share of "chain accidents". USAir in the early 90s... DAL in the late 80s... AA mid to late 90s... etc etc. No one is immune, no matter what airline we work for. Those are the statistics, no sense in arguing it. Let's instead learn from those unfortunate events and move on.
I started this thread with the aim to educate my fellow airline pilots as to why we taxi slow. That's AA's way, and regardless of who likes it and who doesn't, it is what it is. Sorry for the guys stuck behind us, but if you had our takeoff check list to go through, you'd taxi slow as well.
To turn it into a "my airline is better than yours" bash fest - especially when it is fueled by past merger sentiments - is pointless, and belongs on Flighinfo, not here. I believe every AA pilot knows very much about our past record, and we are all striving as a group to learn from the past and run a safe operation. So far, so good.
Group hug,
73
12-18-2006, 09:13 AM
#86
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: Over 60 and Still Living the Dream
Posts: 122
Shackone and Jetblaster,
I, for one enjoy reading this exchange. But it doesn't help the conversation and it doesn't help the families of the deceased reading this when we drudge up screwups of the past.
As both of you know, EVERY major airline has had its share of "chain accidents". USAir in the early 90s... DAL in the late 80s... AA mid to late 90s... etc etc. No one is immune, no matter what airline we work for. Those are the statistics, no sense in arguing it. Let's instead learn from those unfortunate events and move on.
I started this thread with the aim to educate my fellow airline pilots as to why we taxi slow. That's AA's way, and regardless of who likes it and who doesn't, it is what it is. Sorry for the guys stuck behind us, but if you had our takeoff check list to go through, you'd taxi slow as well.
To turn it into a "my airline is better than yours" bash fest - especially when it is fueled by past merger sentiments - is pointless, and belongs on Flighinfo, not here. I believe every AA pilot knows very much about our past record, and we are all striving as a group to learn from the past and run a safe operation. So far, so good.
Group hug,
73
I, for one enjoy reading this exchange. But it doesn't help the conversation and it doesn't help the families of the deceased reading this when we drudge up screwups of the past.
As both of you know, EVERY major airline has had its share of "chain accidents". USAir in the early 90s... DAL in the late 80s... AA mid to late 90s... etc etc. No one is immune, no matter what airline we work for. Those are the statistics, no sense in arguing it. Let's instead learn from those unfortunate events and move on.
I started this thread with the aim to educate my fellow airline pilots as to why we taxi slow. That's AA's way, and regardless of who likes it and who doesn't, it is what it is. Sorry for the guys stuck behind us, but if you had our takeoff check list to go through, you'd taxi slow as well.
To turn it into a "my airline is better than yours" bash fest - especially when it is fueled by past merger sentiments - is pointless, and belongs on Flighinfo, not here. I believe every AA pilot knows very much about our past record, and we are all striving as a group to learn from the past and run a safe operation. So far, so good.
Group hug,
73
12-18-2006, 11:42 AM
#87
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
Shackone and Jetblaster,
I, for one enjoy reading this exchange. But it doesn't help the conversation and it doesn't help the families of the deceased reading this when we drudge up screwups of the past.<<<<
Hmmm...seems like this was EXACTLY my point in my criticism of this man's cavalier abuse of dead pilots. He still oversimplifies complex aviation accidents into the pilot error catch-all. The main point is: why do fellow pilots feel the need to highlight the deaths of their peers in abusive fashion...even IF pilot errors were the major cause?
>>>As both of you know, EVERY major airline has had its share of "chain accidents". USAir in the early 90s... DAL in the late 80s... AA mid to late 90s... etc etc. No one is immune, no matter what airline we work for. Those are the statistics, no sense in arguing it. Let's instead learn from those unfortunate events and move on.<<<
Again, my point. The claim that TWA procedures would've made any difference was too obvious a false brag--and too insulting to the deceased--to ignore, let alone flawed logic.
>>>I started this thread with the aim to educate my fellow airline pilots as to why we taxi slow. That's AA's way, and regardless of who likes it and who doesn't, it is what it is. Sorry for the guys stuck behind us, but if you had our takeoff check list to go through, you'd taxi slow as well.<<<
And...I made the same point in support--management dictates the checklist, we have little control. Sure, changes could be made and even, perhaps, past cockpit procedures from other carriers might contribute...but, AA management has not been too receptive in the past to cockpit procedures changes, no reason to thing they will now.
>>>To turn it into a "my airline is better than yours" bash fest - especially when it is fueled by past merger sentiments - is pointless, and belongs on Flighinfo, not here. I believe every AA pilot knows very much about our past record, and we are all striving as a group to learn from the past and run a safe operation. So far, so good. <<<
Well, hence my point! A guy comes onto the chat room and arrogantly characterizes past AA crashes as caused by a "Sky Nazi" attitude...he is ripe for a little analysis of his own airline's pilots actions in the view of the profession, which are pretty dismal .
>>Group hug,
73
I, for one enjoy reading this exchange. But it doesn't help the conversation and it doesn't help the families of the deceased reading this when we drudge up screwups of the past.<<<<
Hmmm...seems like this was EXACTLY my point in my criticism of this man's cavalier abuse of dead pilots. He still oversimplifies complex aviation accidents into the pilot error catch-all. The main point is: why do fellow pilots feel the need to highlight the deaths of their peers in abusive fashion...even IF pilot errors were the major cause?
>>>As both of you know, EVERY major airline has had its share of "chain accidents". USAir in the early 90s... DAL in the late 80s... AA mid to late 90s... etc etc. No one is immune, no matter what airline we work for. Those are the statistics, no sense in arguing it. Let's instead learn from those unfortunate events and move on.<<<
Again, my point. The claim that TWA procedures would've made any difference was too obvious a false brag--and too insulting to the deceased--to ignore, let alone flawed logic.
>>>I started this thread with the aim to educate my fellow airline pilots as to why we taxi slow. That's AA's way, and regardless of who likes it and who doesn't, it is what it is. Sorry for the guys stuck behind us, but if you had our takeoff check list to go through, you'd taxi slow as well.<<<
And...I made the same point in support--management dictates the checklist, we have little control. Sure, changes could be made and even, perhaps, past cockpit procedures from other carriers might contribute...but, AA management has not been too receptive in the past to cockpit procedures changes, no reason to thing they will now.
>>>To turn it into a "my airline is better than yours" bash fest - especially when it is fueled by past merger sentiments - is pointless, and belongs on Flighinfo, not here. I believe every AA pilot knows very much about our past record, and we are all striving as a group to learn from the past and run a safe operation. So far, so good. <<<
Well, hence my point! A guy comes onto the chat room and arrogantly characterizes past AA crashes as caused by a "Sky Nazi" attitude...he is ripe for a little analysis of his own airline's pilots actions in the view of the profession, which are pretty dismal .
>>Group hug,
73
Fair enough. It is just disappointing how much of an intellectual vacuum exists on so many issues within our collective.
Jetblaster
12-18-2006, 01:43 PM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 394
But enough of this squabbling. I doubt that any of this is going to make any difference as far as you are concerned.
So why not just deal with my other questions...the ones that had to do with rudder use in unusual attitude recoveries?
12-18-2006, 01:53 PM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
>>>I said those accidents were due to pilot error.<<<
Those who believe this as the Gospel need to re-read the previous thread--especially AA73's last post.
>>>As for the 'Sky Nazi' label that you folks wear, it speaks of an arrogance unmatched in any other pilot group in the industry.<<<
Actually, my experience, shared in this thread, is that ex-TWA at least matches, if not exceeds, any arrogance by any pilot group. But this is irrelevant, because TWA no longer exists--so, just add the ex-TWA arrogance at the bottom of the "AA Sky Nazi" spread-sheet tabulator. What irony.
>>>It's unfortunate that the attitudes of some such as yourself perpetuate an image that gets stuck on the AA pilot group as a whole.<<<
See the previous account of the ex-TWA actions on AA property for real "attitude" and "image" stigma. And, by the way, my attitude is not really the issue...the truth is the issue.
>>>But enough of this squabbling.<<<
Finally...you are going to apologize for denigrating deceased airmen to perpetuate the myth that TWA cockpit procedures would've made all the difference?
This has little to do with slow taxiing speeds, so if Shackone would like to start a thread on the record of TWA pilots as they threw the future of the entire profession on the bonfire to save their paychecks for another day instead of standing up and saying "no more" to Carl Icahn...I'll happily log on and contribute my knowledge on the events that shape all of our futures. But I will defer to those who plead for the thread to return to its original subject and sign off.
Jetblaster
Those who believe this as the Gospel need to re-read the previous thread--especially AA73's last post.
>>>As for the 'Sky Nazi' label that you folks wear, it speaks of an arrogance unmatched in any other pilot group in the industry.<<<
Actually, my experience, shared in this thread, is that ex-TWA at least matches, if not exceeds, any arrogance by any pilot group. But this is irrelevant, because TWA no longer exists--so, just add the ex-TWA arrogance at the bottom of the "AA Sky Nazi" spread-sheet tabulator. What irony.
>>>It's unfortunate that the attitudes of some such as yourself perpetuate an image that gets stuck on the AA pilot group as a whole.<<<
See the previous account of the ex-TWA actions on AA property for real "attitude" and "image" stigma. And, by the way, my attitude is not really the issue...the truth is the issue.
>>>But enough of this squabbling.<<<
Finally...you are going to apologize for denigrating deceased airmen to perpetuate the myth that TWA cockpit procedures would've made all the difference?
This has little to do with slow taxiing speeds, so if Shackone would like to start a thread on the record of TWA pilots as they threw the future of the entire profession on the bonfire to save their paychecks for another day instead of standing up and saying "no more" to Carl Icahn...I'll happily log on and contribute my knowledge on the events that shape all of our futures. But I will defer to those who plead for the thread to return to its original subject and sign off.
Jetblaster
12-18-2006, 02:45 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 394
OK...you won't, can't, or don't want to defend your comments about rudder use in unusual attitude recoveries.
Moving on...
No need to start a new thread.
I have only one thing to say to your remark about pilot group actions that have affected everyone's careers...
B-Scale.
Why don't you happily paint that pig pretty?
Moving on...
so if Shackone would like to start a thread on the record of TWA pilots as they threw the future of the entire profession on the bonfire to save their paychecks for another day instead of standing up and saying "no more" to Carl Icahn...I'll happily log on and contribute my knowledge on the events that shape all of our futures.
I have only one thing to say to your remark about pilot group actions that have affected everyone's careers...
B-Scale.
Why don't you happily paint that pig pretty?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Imeneo
Engineers & Technicians
33
01-13-2007 08:44 AM
