Continental Buffalo Crash

An open discussion of aviation safety related issues.

Moderators: el, FrankM, Dmmoore

User avatar
Giles
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Giles » Tue May 19, 2009 12:42 am

suited for those with a short attention span (flyturd, giles, et al)
how did you come to that conclusion?

PurduePilot
Posts: 2130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:02 am

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby PurduePilot » Tue May 19, 2009 2:54 am

suited for those with a short attention span (flyturd, giles, et al)
how did you come to that conclusion?
I would also like to know. I find that Gabriel almost always seems to have well-constructed and intelligent posts on technical subjects such as this.

User avatar
flyboy2548m
Posts: 4418
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:32 am
Location: Ormond Beach, FL

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby flyboy2548m » Tue May 19, 2009 3:45 am

I find that Gabriel almost always seems to have well-constructed and intelligent posts on technical subjects such as this.
Put the Vicodin(R) down, Bradley, you're delirious.
"Lav sinks on 737 Max are too small"

-TeeVee, one of America's finest legal minds.

User avatar
supersean
Posts: 1120
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 6:45 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby supersean » Tue May 19, 2009 4:50 am

suited for those with a short attention span (flyturd, giles, et al)
how did you come to that conclusion?
I would also like to know. I find that Gabriel almost always seems to have well-constructed and intelligent posts on technical subjects such as this.
Like explaining what a stick shaker does... and basic airmanship
proudly serving WTF comments since 2003

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8760
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby 3WE » Tue May 19, 2009 12:20 pm

The first time it caught me off guard but I correctly identifed it as being false as did my Co-Pilot.
Do you recall what phase of flight you were in the first time it activated? Also, do you recall whether you were flying manually or on autopilot? Even if your memory is fuzzy on these points, I'd find it valuable if you'd share a few thoughts on any differences you might expect in your own reaction to a false shaker if it happened shortly after rotation vs. happening later in the climb or after autopilot was turned on.
I infer that you don't think ITS was scared enough with his incident, and that he been scared like the Colgan crew he would have crashed too.

However, I infer that the issue isn't how scared you have to be, but that ITS would not have responded with a 7-second attempt to do a loop-the-loop.

ITS: I see that you have already replied, but just for grins- how scared/what phase of flight would you need to be in for a stick shaker to scare you into a 7-second, 30-degree pull up?

Since you are the ISGPOM, it's probably impossible, so perhaps you could tell us how scared the average pilot must be to respond with a 7-second, 30-degree pull up.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Half Bottle
Posts: 2012
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:39 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Half Bottle » Tue May 19, 2009 1:21 pm

The first time it caught me off guard but I correctly identifed it as being false as did my Co-Pilot.
Do you recall what phase of flight you were in the first time it activated? Also, do you recall whether you were flying manually or on autopilot? Even if your memory is fuzzy on these points, I'd find it valuable if you'd share a few thoughts on any differences you might expect in your own reaction to a false shaker if it happened shortly after rotation vs. happening later in the climb or after autopilot was turned on.
I infer that you don't think ITS was scared enough with his incident, and that he been scared like the Colgan crew he would have crashed too.
Your inference is wildly incorrect and logically unfounded.
~~~ In Oxford Town, you smell like dead lab rats. ~~~

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8760
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby 3WE » Tue May 19, 2009 5:55 pm

Your inference is wildly incorrect and logically unfounded.
Acknowledged.

However, I had hoped it would spur ITS to comment further.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

Putt4Par
Posts: 460
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 1:03 am
Location: U.S.A.

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Putt4Par » Tue May 19, 2009 7:01 pm

Today's USA Today has a few letters in regards to the crash...at least the printed version. One of them comes from Jeff Skiles, the C/O of the A320 that landed on the Hudson. He says that when he was hired he had more total hours than the two Colgan pilots combined and that cost cutting measures force some airlines to pay less and hire people with less experience. Then there is a letter from somebody saying that the captain's previous failed tests have nothing to do with this accident (???) and that the true blame should to go Colgan Air for not checking his record prior to hiring him (contradiction).

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8760
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby 3WE » Tue May 19, 2009 8:29 pm

Today's USA Today has a few letters in regards to the crash...at least the printed version. One of them comes from Jeff Skiles, the C/O of the A320 that landed on the Hudson. He says that when he was hired he had more total hours than the two Colgan pilots combined and that cost cutting measures force some airlines to pay less and hire people with less experience. Then there is a letter from somebody saying that the captain's previous failed tests have nothing to do with this accident (???) and that the true blame should to go Colgan Air for not checking his record prior to hiring him (contradiction).
This is nitpicky- but for this crash, I don't think it's the hours of experience.

Now, the fact that the captain is failing some tests, but still flying, and ITS's and others rants on "just what the hell were these folks being taught" (or NOT being taught).....yeah, absolutely.

And to be redundant- A lot of pilots are trained and know how to recognize and recover from a stall warning at the completion of flight training hour NUMBER ONE.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 3908
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Gabriel » Tue May 19, 2009 9:40 pm

This is nitpicky- but for this crash, I don't think it's the hours of experience.
I fully agree. It's the quality of the experience, not the quantity.

I bet ITS was a much better pilot when he had half of the hours of this one.

IntheShade
ISGPOTM, 2nd only to Capt. Chesley "Sully" Sullenberger
Posts: 1444
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:26 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby IntheShade » Tue May 19, 2009 9:50 pm

The first time it caught me off guard but I correctly identifed it as being false as did my Co-Pilot.
Do you recall what phase of flight you were in the first time it activated? Also, do you recall whether you were flying manually or on autopilot? Even if your memory is fuzzy on these points, I'd find it valuable if you'd share a few thoughts on any differences you might expect in your own reaction to a false shaker if it happened shortly after rotation vs. happening later in the climb or after autopilot was turned on.
I infer that you don't think ITS was scared enough with his incident, and that he been scared like the Colgan crew he would have crashed too.

However, I infer that the issue isn't how scared you have to be, but that ITS would not have responded with a 7-second attempt to do a loop-the-loop.

ITS: I see that you have already replied, but just for grins- how scared/what phase of flight would you need to be in for a stick shaker to scare you into a 7-second, 30-degree pull up?

Since you are the ISGPOM, it's probably impossible, so perhaps you could tell us how scared the average pilot must be to respond with a 7-second, 30-degree pull up.

1. Your inference is that I fly around scared. I don't. I operate with a complete understanding to the phase of flight and implications of it. The most exposure in flight I have are T/O, trans-oceanic cruise, and of course ground operations. So when engaged in these I operate in a hightened state of awareness.

2. 30 deg pitch is not a flight attitude for any commercial transport. Even in a GPWS event we only pitch to 20. deg.

3. I have have flown aerobatics since I was 15/16 years old. In doing so I learned that unless the airplane has a catostrophic structural failure there isn't much that one cannot safefuly continue to fly the airplane to a landing---that most mistakes are made by panic and over-reaction to a situation instead of careful, concise, directed actions.

4. The reaction by the Colgan Capt. was of panic and misdirection. He lost control of the situation, lost command of the airplane and lost situational awareness of the cockpit.

5. Had he maintained control of one of the above there is a good chance they would have survived.
Aviation Pilot, Author, Genius

Dummy Pilot
Posts: 850
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:19 am

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Dummy Pilot » Wed May 20, 2009 1:44 am

Some thoughts about the whole "Regional Pilot" debate...

There are plenty of good Regional pilots being produced even in the 'puppy mills'. For the past two years, I've flown with large numbers of Regional produced F/Os for the first time in my career and there are some excellent pilots in the group. In fact, if I had to pick the top 2 or 3 F/Os that I've flown with, they would be former Regional pilots (as opposed to former military). These top guys were mature, prepared, used sound judgement and were always thinking ahead of the jet. In short, it was like flying with a second Captain because, in fact they have been Captains. Further, they were intelligent folks who could hold a decent conversation and express their viewpoints on a wide variety of topics. They were professionals.

So by no means are all Regional pilots accidents waiting to happen....the problem with the way we currently produce these pilots is that there's no barrier to the immature, unintelligent applicants with poor decision making skills. The Captain from the the Colgan accident, the flying pilot from Comair 5191, and both pilots from Pinnacle 3701 (four-one oh it, dude!) were all graduates of the Gulfstream Academy. I don't believe this is a coincidence. Gulfstream is the essence of the puppy mill where under their "First Officer" program, you pay the airline and they will put you in the right seat of revenue flights and you get 250 hours of multi engine airline time. These places don't care what kind of decision maker you are or whether you are comeptent enough to be a pilot....they simply care that you have a good enough credit rating to get the loan to pay the tuition. Gulfstream is proud of their 98% program completion rate and they advertise it....they have a finacial incentive to 'push' pilots along. It doesn't pay to be known as the school that actually fails incompetent pilots. That's not good for business.

I'm sure Captain Renslow was a terrific guy....but there's probably a reason that he spent the first half of his life kicking around menial jobs like reservation agent and phone company salesman. But suddenly he comes into some cash from a severance package and in 3.5 years he's a Captain at a Regional. Because with $29,900 and the Gulfstream Academy, you too can be an airline pilot. And that's what this job has been reduced to....similar to those late night Ads you see on TV urging you to become a dental assistant or a truck driver. 'You too can be an airline pilot'. And with today's training, we can teach many people to manipulate the controls and land a plane. But under the current system we don't screen for intelligence, judgment, and maturity, and those are the things that really make for a safe pilot. Stick and rudder skills are a given, and we can teach those. The other skills are what differentiates a button pusher from a 'Captain'.

It's not that the military produces superhuman pilots when compared to the Regionals. Its that the military has a much stricter initial screening process to select quality candidates and then continues to weed them out along the way. I started with 3 buddies at Pensacola , the 4 of us in a big apartment. Only two of us got our wings. You won't see any Pupply mill advertising a %50 completion rate. So again, while some of the best pilots I've flown with are from the Regionals, the other end of the spectrum is also populated with Regional pilots. I've come across some serious rocks who are immature, unprepared, and painful to talk to because they are morons. However they had the requisite money and they wanted to be able to sit in a shiny jet wearing a leather jacket and texting their friends....so they too can become a pilot.

The good news is that so many phases of aviation have become so good, be it aircraft systems and engines, dispatch and weather capabilities, ATC and warning systems, that even with subpar pilots the overall system is very safe and has great statistics. However, there are times when the conditions are just right and some real actions and decsions need to be made by the pilot and I'm not sure we're doing enough to ensure that the most competent person is in that position. And while there are certainly unprofessional pilots who slip into the majors (as well as the military), as ITS metioned, there are also some who simply become 'unhireable' and spend their days at the Regional level 'mentoring' others.

There's a lot of blame to go around for the dumbing down of this profession, and ironically, I blame the puppy mill pilots the least. Sometimes it's human nature to take the path of least resistance, and if someone is claiming they offer the 'fastest route' to the airlines and it's gauranteed, it's not surprising that many head in that direction. A ton of blame has to go to airline managers who became convinced anything they can call 'regional' and low cost must be good for the bottom line. The more flying they can push in that direction, the better. From their perspcetive, a pilot suffering from SJS who's just happy to be there will make less waves and demand less money anyway. They simply want bums in the seats and they've been pushing for 'Cruise Pilots' at the mainline level, and they'd love to get that too (it's already happening in Europe) Again, ironically, the 50 seat 'RJ Revolution' may turn out to be one of the most financially disastrous decisions ever made in this business. I could also make a case that there's an entire aircraft manufacturer who would prefer a pilot make no decsions and simply monitor buttons. But we, as pilots have to take some blame as well. We want to be paid and respected as professionals,but many of us don't want to learn aircraft systems, we want fewer and easier training checks, we don't want to interact with our customers, the PAX, an many of us even piss and moan about wearing the uniform properly. Part of being a 'professional' is demandng a certain level of competence and skill from yourself and your fellow members, but we've allowed it to come to a point where 'anybody' can become a pilot

User avatar
Gabriel
Posts: 3908
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Gabriel » Wed May 20, 2009 3:17 am

Excelent post DP. Thanks and one question. What do you do or what can you do when...
I've come across some serious rocks who are immature, unprepared, and painful to talk to because they are morons. However they had the requisite money and they wanted to be able to sit in a shiny jet wearing a leather jacket and texting their friends....so they too can become a pilot.
... and...
don't want to learn aircraft systems, want fewer and easier training checks, don't want to interact with customers, the PAX, an even piss and moan about wearing the uniform properly.
?

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8760
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby 3WE » Wed May 20, 2009 4:19 pm

After much thought, I have figured out why this plane crashed:


FO: There's a stall warning.

Captain: Ok, give me the stall checklist.

FO: Thumbing through checklists.......Here it is: It says pull up sharply and maintain a nose-high attitude while your speed decays....

Captain: Thanks...Like they teach you in flight school: Always follow your checklists!
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
Dmmoore
08/12/1946 - 06/05/2009 Rest In Peace
Posts: 1002
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Prescott, AZ. USA

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Dmmoore » Wed May 20, 2009 5:47 pm

DP,
Thanks for taking the time to create and post your thoughts.
Very nicely done.
Don
As accomplished by managers around the world
READY - FIRE - AIM!

OldSowBreath
Posts: 1420
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:16 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby OldSowBreath » Fri May 22, 2009 12:16 am

I think DP hits the nail on the head. Real food for thought.

User avatar
Schorsch
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:33 am
Location: Just next door to the German Poker Club
Contact:

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Schorsch » Sat May 23, 2009 12:38 pm

After much thought, I have figured out why this plane crashed:


FO: There's a stall warning.

Captain: Ok, give me the stall checklist.

FO: Thumbing through checklists.......Here it is: It says pull up sharply and maintain a nose-high attitude while your speed decays....

Captain: Thanks...Like they teach you in flight school: Always follow your checklists!
Actually, taking a few seconds to check the instruments and in that time just letting the aircraft help itself, should normally be a reasonable reaction, provided you have some altitude to trade. All current aircraft are stable in roll, pitch and yaw at stall AOA. In this case, the aircraft would have helped itself in a matter of seconds. In a standard jet aircraft with underwing engines, I would even be careful with drastic thrust increase, as it results in a rapid pitch up momentum. No problem for Flu-Boy.

Fact that the pilot reacted incorrectly to a stall. People maybe understand now better why one airframer uses a semi-automatic stall recovery mechanism.

Question to primarily commercial pilots (opinions of others of course welcome): how often does a normal line pilot experience a stick-shaker event outside simulator training?
Publicly, we say one thing... Actually, we do another.

User avatar
Schorsch
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:33 am
Location: Just next door to the German Poker Club
Contact:

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Schorsch » Sat May 23, 2009 12:42 pm

Part of being a 'professional' is demandng a certain level of competence and skill from yourself and your fellow members, but we've allowed it to come to a point where 'anybody' can become a pilot
That should be avoided by building aircraft that are more fool-proof. Of course an offense for you or ITS, but especially the less gifted pilot will have less problems flying an Airbus in such situations.
The A400M has a direct law switch (it has a red blocker, which means in Airbus terms: "Warning, I am a dangerous button and will remove the dog in front of you!", maybe we should put into an A320 and make it available to pilots with proven capabilities.
Publicly, we say one thing... Actually, we do another.

User avatar
3WE
Posts: 8760
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 pm
Location: Flyover, America

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby 3WE » Sat May 23, 2009 2:17 pm

...Actually, taking a few seconds to check the instruments and in that time just letting the aircraft help itself, should normally be a reasonable reaction, provided you have some altitude to trade...

...Question to primarily commercial pilots.......normal line pilot experience a stick-shaker event..........
This point has been made repeatedly (I've been a major offender in saying this).

Whatever horizontal surface stalls, however the warning manifests itself, and whatever the plane, the recovery goes back to basic basic basic training fundamentals, and is pretty much the same.

How many line pilots-if they were sleep deprived- think they would spend six seconds....six seconds....pulling up has hard as you can in response to a stick shaker?

How often do you need to experience a stick shaker training event to know to not spend six seconds pulling up as hard as you can in response to a stick shaker?

To date, Dummy has said, "We don't really practice stalling a lot", which suggests that the Colgan crew either forgot their stall lessons from flying lesson #1, or totally freaked out and lost the ability to think logically for six seconds.

I am hung up on six seconds, because I have been bad a few times in my life, driving late into the night....you drift out of your lane, you jerk the wheel back, but after that split second reaction time, you have recovered---you don't just sit there for six seconds continuing to turn the car sharply off the highway.

Oh, they were in IMC....sorry, there's this thing called the "artificial horizon" and another thing called a flight director, that you are supposed to interpret.

Could it be that we need to practice more "recovery from unusual attitudes" during our sim training, along with a stall recovery, instead of losing an engine within 1 kt of V1.
Commercial Pilot, Vandelay Industries, Inc., Plant Nutrient Division.

User avatar
flyboy2548m
Posts: 4418
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:32 am
Location: Ormond Beach, FL

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby flyboy2548m » Sat May 23, 2009 2:30 pm

Could it be that we need to practice more "recovery from unusual attitudes" during our sim training, along with a stall recovery, instead of losing an engine within 1 kt of V1.
We? If by "we" you mean you and all your personalities, you just need to practice more basic agronomy, like planting corn.
"Lav sinks on 737 Max are too small"

-TeeVee, one of America's finest legal minds.

User avatar
Giles
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Giles » Sat May 23, 2009 4:34 pm

That should be avoided by building aircraft that are more fool-proof.
Like the Air New Zealand one that crashed off the coast of France back in November?

User avatar
Schorsch
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:33 am
Location: Just next door to the German Poker Club
Contact:

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Schorsch » Sun May 24, 2009 11:34 am

That should be avoided by building aircraft that are more fool-proof.
Like the Air New Zealand one that crashed off the coast of France back in November?
Giles, you once again proved you lack either the will or the brains to participate in discussions like this (I guess that is why you hardly spill out more than one line of half-baken BS).

That aircraft was on a test flight after heavy maintenance. It is called a test flight because it is a test. Normal procedures don't apply. The aircraft was in a failure state due to several systems being switched on and off. Additionally, the crew even disobeyed the test procedure (they were too low for the test).
Publicly, we say one thing... Actually, we do another.

User avatar
Giles
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Giles » Sun May 24, 2009 4:10 pm

That aircraft was on a test flight after heavy maintenance. It is called a test flight because it is a test. Normal procedures don't apply. The aircraft was in a failure state due to several systems being switched on and off. Additionally, the crew even disobeyed the test procedure (they were too low for the test).
I've read major portions of the report, and I have no idea what might have happened.
so which is it?

User avatar
Schorsch
Posts: 473
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:33 am
Location: Just next door to the German Poker Club
Contact:

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Schorsch » Mon May 25, 2009 10:02 am

That aircraft was on a test flight after heavy maintenance. It is called a test flight because it is a test. Normal procedures don't apply. The aircraft was in a failure state due to several systems being switched on and off. Additionally, the crew even disobeyed the test procedure (they were too low for the test).
I've read major portions of the report, and I have no idea what might have happened.
so which is it?
Your command of the written English language is breath-taking. Damaged shift-key? High school drop-out?

I have read the report and the fact that they were too low is not that hard to get (especially if you have access to additional information).
Publicly, we say one thing... Actually, we do another.

User avatar
Giles
Posts: 1791
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: Continental Buffalo Crash

Postby Giles » Mon May 25, 2009 1:36 pm

I have read the report and the fact that they were too low is not that hard to get (especially if you have access to additional information).
what additional information?


Return to “Aviation Safety Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests