Esse site utiliza cookies. Ao usá-lo e continuar a navegar, você concorda com isso.
Ignorar
Você sabia que o rastreamento de voos da FlightAware é patrocinado por anúncios?
Você pode nos ajudar a manter o FlightAware gratuito, permitindo anúncios de FlightAware.com. Trabalhamos muito para manter nossa publicidade relevante e discreta para criar uma ótima experiência. É rápido e fácil permitir anúncios no FlightAware ou, caso prefira, considere nossas contas premium.
Ignorar
Back to Squawk list
  • 47

Southwest Fires Pilot Over LaGuardia Nose First Landing

Enviado há
 
Southwest Airlines Co. (LUV) said it fired the captain who was at the controls of a plane that landed nose first at New York’s LaGuardia Airport in July, injuring nine people and snarling air traffic for hours. The action came as Dallas-based Southwest completed its probe of the accident, Linda Rutherford, an airline spokeswoman, said today by e-mail, without giving details. Southwest ordered the first officer to undergo more training, Rutherford said. (www.bloomberg.com) Mais...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


projectabove35000feet
PATFTF PATFTF 2
First thing the airliner did that is ever smart. Nose first?
COYOTEHUNTER
COYOTEHUNTER 2
I bet that PIC now wishes that one of the fundamental rules of flying would have been followed. If the numbers are not right, go around, stabilize the next approach, land it properly.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal -3
Right you are, my friend COYOTEHUNTER.
If you fall while walking, get up to walk again but better. Get back to basics. Apply first principles of the game , no matter what game !
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 3
Sometimes you need to say screw the boss and fly the airplane.

If your schedule is so tight there is no time for a go around you need to rethink the exactly whether safety or profits are the number one business objective.

In this case look at the effect on profits by placing safety in second place. Any transportation system must have safety in the pole position. I don't care if it is planes, trains, automobiles, or the Disneyland Monorail. The person operating the vehicle needs cart blanche to operate the vehicle.

The union can be expected to defend their member, everyone in the union pays for that defense. Anyone can have an accident, even if they are doing everything right. Sully put one in the Hudson and there was not one word about discipline in a case like that. He flew the airplane, even after it was wet.

This woman was not flying the airplane. She needs to go. She allowed herself to succumb to management pressure to fly the schedule.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal -2
Dear friend Ric Wernicke, please allow me to echo your sentiments in following way.
Company wants an employee to work in the interest of the company. But the rider is 'to work safely as specified by laws'. Laws of the land. Profits or no profits. The inherent corollary is that laws are built to strike a balance between safety and profits.
About Unions, the laws related to them are meant to prevent exploitation of employees by the employer, whether collectively or singularly. Again the Union related laws are a balance between welfare and profits.
Every case has to be judged individually even if seemingly similar, on totality of circumstances. To highlight the distinction between the two events will depend on the ability of those representing the case, defending or prosecuting.
Laws applied can be similar BUT not the judgement ! It has to be tailor made.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Well, they didn't give any details as to why she took control at the last minute, which leaves one to believe that she did cause she could.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 2
A little temper/authority tantrum?
preacher1
preacher1 12
Well another word on the street from someone who has no love lost with them says that they weren't stabilized and FO was flying and started to initiate a go round and that she grabbed the controls to land it and make the schedule. They say the extra training for the FO is in CRM, basically to be able to say "my airplane bitch, leave it alone". LOL
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 6
Damn Preacherman, I didn't think you could utter those words...
preacher1
preacher1 2
It is what it is. LOL
jimcander
Jim Anderson 3
In the words of Jessie Pinkman... "Landing, Bitch!"
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
That's what she said.
canuck44
canuck44 2
Had heard she was on the block anyway but pc avoided LUV from acting sooner. Too bad it hadn't been done one incident earlier.

[This poster has been suspended.]

PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 5
If the FO (PF) called for a go around, and she insisted on landing (in fact she took control of the aircraft and crash landed it herself) she's got herself to blame. SW was justified in the dismissal.

It may have become a self-fulfilling prophecy. She may have legitimately concerned about her career, with multiple write-ups after previous incidents, so may have been more aggressive in trying to maintain her "numbers" so she wouldn't be canned. But get's canned because she crashed the plane.

That's what you'd call irony.
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
Yeah... But what happened with the CRM... maybe that is the retraining the FO is getting. They said they were sending him back through the training.
captainjman
Jason Feldman 1
Some pilots do the damnedest things. I had a captain who once got up to talk to passengers while on base/turning final at IAD in IMC to near minimums to tell them that their limo has not yet arrived at the FBO.... AND HE WAS THE PILOT FLYING!!!!!!

I had an FO with turrets (a neurological disorder) who lied about it during the interview and the company didn't want a lawsuit. He didn't tell me (or other captains he flew with) and he yells when he is nervous. He screamed at just about MDA into Gaithersburg, within the DC ADIZ for crying out loud, and I did a go around because I thought he saw something bad.

I had another FO who during climb-out with me as the flying pilot reached up and changed the Altitude on the autopilot FCP for no apparent reason - Thank god I noticed what he did because I contacted ATC and I was right. He later told me he thought it was a different altitude so he just changed it.

There was a pilot at Mesa flying the EMB's who briefed that the approach has no go around.. and was too high and fast to land but forced it - ballooned and then stalled and dropped onto runway - then returned to the airport in the middle of the night to erase the CVR - and flew the next day with a huge crack in the tail... and both crews got fired - hers and the next because the magnitude of the damage and lack of a walk around and trying to cover it up.

There are bad pilots out there - Its scary!!!
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 1
How does the airport have no go-around? Were they just making that up?
preacher1
preacher1 1
How you doing anyway. I must remind you that you are the one that told me once about getting to know somebody a little before you flew with them when we were talking about same vs. changing flight crews. LOL
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
In one of my past lives I managed semi truck operators. It's a little different from flying in that the purpose for team drivers is that one is in the sleeper birth, off duty while the other is driving 80,000 lb of truck at 60 and 70 mph with little spacing. Most drivers insisted on, at least, a friendly relatinship between the two but the wisest insisted on an intimate knowledge of how the on duty operator would react to situations while they were sleeping. A modern air transport requires two pilots in most cases, to operate. In many cases one pilot can't reach all the switches, in other casees the second pilot can land the aircraft safely if something happens to the other pilot as what happened recently when one had a heart attack and died in the saddle.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well said. I had a round of that too, and it was imperative to be able to sleep behind the one driving. We probably all have been there to a degree, being on a long drive and changing drivers to take a nap.
As with a modern plane, especially big iron, you must have a certain degree of confidence in the one seated beside you. As you say, 1 can probably land it if necessary but 2 is so much nicer.
WigzellRM
Ralph Wigzell 1
In that case, good move to remove her.
Musketeer1
Musketeer1 3
Holy crap. Swift justice. How often does that happen to an affirmative action employee backed by a union?
preacher1
preacher1 1
3 months ain't all that swift. Had it been me or you, it would probably have been the next day.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
It seems quite fast for a union employee. IMHO it speaks volume for the details (public and private) involved.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal -4
Dear friend Musketeer1, Answer as I see is, depends who is stronger at a given point of time !
Do we not see an employee discharged earlier is reinstated later ? Through what ever agency. Employer to Government to Courts of Law. It can happen any where, any country.
blueashflyer
blueashflyer 1
If you keep working there, but they payroll deduct the cost of the repairs, you'd have to work 872 years to pay it all off...
NotAPilotJustLikeUrNews
Kat Rose 1
What an asshole. 9 people injured! Shame on her...hope she doesnt ever fly again for the public.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
While I agree with you.. There may be some young eyes lurking, and other people do not necessarily want to see.. Language please.
NotAPilotJustLikeUrNews
Kat Rose 2
So sorry, I must be desensitized to that word. Noted, though.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 3
Those of us that didn't grow up in a PC world are hard to retrain. Lol. If there are people on this site so young that a slip of the tongue burns their young ears then there is a parenting problem too.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I have to disagree with you. As a father, grand father or otherwise, I wouldn't expect that Flight Aware would be a site I had to watch out for. We're not dealing with a bunch of truck drivers or truck mechanics here. Parents don't have a 7 second delay button as on radio and TV, so you can't bleep a bad phrase if you are monitoring at the time.. You guys and women are in some cases in possession of advanced degrees. Others are "just" engineers and still others came up through the school of hard knocks. None of us would use "salty" language or phrases while addressing the pax so why here? Maybe things have changed, but I always believed we are special and unique. Not everyone can maneuver in all three dimensions at once. We are privlidged. Why not act the part? It's not difficult.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 3
I'm not suggesting that we all just speak like drunken sailors. But if you have a child 10 or older they probably have heard words you don't even know about. And if a child under 10 is cruising the Internet and is on this site their parents are the real culprits. That said, I understand the concern and will do my part to help keep the opinions spicy and not the language.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Even those of us that did not grow up in a PC world, you said SLIP OF THE TONGUE. Most of us are not totally desensitized to some of the words now in regular use and do not use them on a regular basis.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I agree with ALL of you. But one thing baffles me about the hypocrisy exhibited.
Jack ass - no asshole - no
Jacka** - ok a**hole - ok
infinitum !
Why ?
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
I don't like see those modified either, but the younger people are less apt to know the meaning of a modified term... The ones that are spelled out in detail are the bad ones...

I once saw a 3 year old kid (in Walmart) with his mother and he wanted a toy and she said no.... It was just not a case of a kid whining and fussing... He was cussing her HARD CORE, and some very minor examples abbreviated (F'in whore, F'in B!, M F Slut) and then he got much much worse... They were standing behind me in line and I turned back and looked at the woman and she said very innocently, "I just don't know where he gets that from". I turned too her as if to say "Are you going to take that" and she said "I just don't know where he gets that from... I told her: "I Do... He Got it at Home!"

At that age or any age, it starts at home... Sometimes innocently, but if allowed to grow, you can see what it can get into.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Got it.
But how many here are from impressionable age bracket ?
So, why not call spade a spade , as the saying goes.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Sounds about right... But we must be careful in our wording if you know what I mean... Sure I know there are not that many younger ones here, but there are a lot of people who just don't want to see it... Some how it does not seem as bad when it is colored a little bit, but when it is clear it just seems so much worse.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
in lieu of entrenchment implement, personnel use?
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
You may if you wish. When I grew up a pilot was always a male. There was of course the occasional annomolie like Amelia Earhart but for the most part male dominated. Pilots were always a cut above. They were special folks who would stay cool under fire solving multifacited problems on the fly as it were. I have always considered one of our jobs to be a gentleman. My mother would turn colors before uttering one of today's four letter expletives and I was taught not to use them in her presence nor the presence of any lady. All women were to be treated as ladies until proven that they were not and then we were to part social company.

The world has changed and become one big truck shop as far as language is concerned. Women became adverse to being ladies for the sake of competition, but I still try to stick to the ideals I grew up with as I don't see any necesity to add forur letter expletives plus "i n" or "i n g" suffexes. As an ops. manager I learned to keep up with the best cussers in the land. but the transition to the country club dinner party with the boss and his bride became more difficult and no one seemed to have any trouble understanding me when I used five and seven letter words and I could be mistaken for a gentleman.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX. But I am not accustomed to using expletives. Hearing ? I am helpless, like many in the world !
:(
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend sparkie624, right you are about caution for language.
BUT many times I find such words being used on this forum by visibly senior and experienced persons !
Personally I am highly opposed to it. It shows your grooming over the years !
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear Friends of FightAware,
Today, in India we are celebrating DIWALI, the festival of lights. A day to rejoice.
Primarily a Hindu festival but celebrated by all .
A day when we Hindus invoke the Goddess Laxmi to pray for all year round Wealth and Prosperity for self and all.
Like Christmas the houses are decorated with lights , inside as well as outside.
May be some of you get to see some of it in various parts of the world where ever persons of Indian/Hindu origin live.
So, HAPPY DIWALI to you and your family members.
Derg
Roland Dent 1
Immediate dismissal..simple as that.
marknine
Wm. Mark Meiggs 1
I think the 1.7mil to not sue looked pretty good to the company and the pilot....it happens.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Does that include cost recovery to clean up all the lawyers business cards that were strewn over the crash site even before the aircraft stopped moving.
< end sarcasm alert>
preacher1
preacher1 1
It would have looked good to me but where did you find it.
marknine
Wm. Mark Meiggs 1
in the alls of mecca
garp
garp 1
Cool photo here of N753SW being hoisted from a barge into storage at Albany, New York (scroll down):
http://www.portofalbany.us
guylessard
Guy Lessard 1
When in doubt...try again..!! (Go-around,flaps,+ gear-up..)
preacher1
preacher1 1
boogety boogety boogety, fly heifer
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Pretty good D W impression. Lol
preacher1
preacher1 1
Sounds better than TOGA TOGA TOGA. LOL

[This poster has been suspended.]

preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, heck, you from Georgia; what else would you expect. As they transition to NBC next year, you may not have to deal with him anyway. LOL
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
His Citation may not be flying as much next year. Lol
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
From the story "Union pilots are “disappointed” by the captain’s dismissal...."
If so, doesn't sound like many union pilots posting here.


Such a little think to damage a career (where is that sarcasm font when you need it)
Derg
Roland Dent 1
I am not a pilot Joel. I am an engineer. Make a mistake like that you are out the door.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
<Sarcasm font failure on the "such a little...">
Other LUV incidents w/o cashiering leads me to infer that the pilot's action must have been egregious error.

I WAS rather taken with the Union Rep's comment- I've known shop stewards like that.

Am sure there are more details that may or may not come out.
Derg
Roland Dent 1
Several factors to consider...all of them terminal as far as this employee was concerned. Liability...out the door ASAP.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Right you are my friend, Rolland Dent.
Had it been the a/c fault, clearly some engineers would have been facing the firing squad !
My professor(Elect. Engg.) used to warn us to be careful by reminding, ' Mistakes of Doctors get buried, while of Engineers remain above'. Forever visible !
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
Not all of them. For a memorable exception, refer to "Tacoma Narrows Bridge"
and "Galloping Gertie".
One engineer's quote that stayed with me " I never knew concrete could bend like that".

8-)
Derg
Roland Dent 1
True Sir..well noted. By the way I love the skills your part of the world has in surgeons. They did a good job on me. I will forever be grateful to Asian surgeons. A warm thank you!
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
:-)

:-)
2moons
madeline luna 1
I WILL HOLD MY OPINION UNTIL THE FACTS SURFACE.....
thecohorts
Matt LaMay 3
I'm pretty sure that the facts have surfaced. The FO wasn't stabilized, and started to go around. The captain took control of the unstable aircraft and crashed it. She was fired. What more do you want?
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Probably the NTSB report.... just a SWAG
preacher1
preacher1 2
Ya'll are all way behind, in that the NTSB has already made a prelim statement within 2 days of the crash as to cause, and I think the firing says plenty. It took long enough to pretty much be sue proof because of the PC considerations of her gender. That said, she can sue away, that is her right but primary reasons have all been covered in this ensuing time.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal -2
madeline luna, my hats off to you.
How do I wish if most commentators were to follow it !
And that will reduce the number of comments drastically BUT will substantially improve the quality of comments.
Quantity vs Quality !
preacher1
preacher1 4
In regards to you and our comments, this is an aviation forum, in which various opinions about many different situations, are proffered, otherwise known as "hangar flying". This is an opinion forum and not necessarily tied to a reporting system that may take a yeas or so. While some of these issues may seem complicated to a no aviator as yourself, a large part are basic to aviators, from student to ATP. For that reason, one reason you have stirred up dislike for yourself is the chastising of the commenters on here. Admitting you are a non aviator is one thing. Chastising and putting down is another.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Not to mention there is often some speculation in the NTSB reports.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
Mr. Mittal..I have to give you that one but I believe less is more!! Take heed...I don't mean to be rude but you don't make any sense! Try to find a "Federal Court" forum. I feel this "Aviation" forum is not your "forte".
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dee Lowry, right you are . Aviation is NOT my forte nor will it ever be. I am here as a passenger trying to understand the under currents.
And I comment PURELY within my realm of knowledge. Never about aviation or flying per say.
Yes I may ask to learn or know some thing which I do not know !
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
It's very simple, Mr. Mittal...Educate yourself.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX, Dee Lowry, that's why I roam here ! To see from the perspective of a passenger.
These days it is impossible to enter the cockpit for security reasons. So, this is the only route to 'see' and visualise the happenings there. Youtube and google help, BUT only after reading comments here !
At one time FAA, NTSB, IFR and VFR seemed soooooooo alien. Not so much now !
ThanX to many friends here.
You can not imagine how good I feel when I travel as a better informed passenger. Howsoever infrequently I may travel.
:-)
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
Mr. Mittal-.I appreciate your wanting to educate yourself with aviation If more people would do the same...air travel would be recognized as a glamorous way to fly. But, in this day in age, people take flying for granted and there is no respect for the Flight Attendants or the Cockpit crew! I am grateful to have put in my 30yrs and retire when "Flying" way to travel..now. it's a "bus" taking. Thousands of people from "A" to "B"!!! I loved my job but I can't get over the people who think they have that "Dig Me" attitude!
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
May be I am lucky. the cabin crew of EVERY aircraft have been more than nice to me ! Always, during last 35+ years. Ofcourse, I do not fly very often now. Especially since last 10/15 years.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Your current realm of knowledge limits you until well after the fact and nobody cares for it in this forum. AS I told you the other day, this is a print forum that let's aviators hangar fly, which is speculation, about any given situation. You have created the ire for yourself by proffering your forte and condemning those here for speculating and not agreeing with your way, telling us we are all wrong. We may be but it is our choice, not your's.That is the nature of this column and any like minded group. As I have told you before, glean what you can and as Dee says above, go find you a lawyer's forum.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
preacher1, all I will say, that you have not read my comment/s fully.
1.It's normal on any portal like this to comment on the basis of speculation or partial information.
2.I never do and will never condemn . Nor am I qualified for doing so. Even if it happens in the realm of my profession.
I repeat, I do not comment on flying. I comment on the basis of common sense of engineering or management or law as applicable in any event or squawk.
But never on flying for obvious reasons.
I am not defending, but clarifying to remove misunderstandings. I am taught to be a good communicator. And that's what I am trying to be.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Methinks you need to go back and read some of your own posts over the past few weeks. Several of us have read your posts and have very well understood them. That is why you are catching so much flak on here. You seem like a halfway decent guy but a self admitted non aviator coming in here out of the blue and condemning a group of men from which he is attempting to learn just does not endear you to anyone. Maybe you don't think your are condemning or being critical/opinionated but you are.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
preacher1, commenting on non flying subject, is it wrong for a non aviator like me ?
Like firing of a pilot from job ?
preacher1
preacher1 1
By your own admission and from several others here, the Airline industry is different in a lot of ways from a run of the mill factory and those are things you need to learn, before trying to put the 2 together. You really seem to be hung up on finalities and absolutes and waiting for reports. This is a speculation column. Most here are on line for the NTSB reports and we will receive them in due time but as I said, there is a lot of "Hangar Flying here, just as I'm sure your lawyer friends talk about certain things. It is to those which you must listen to learn anything and one reason we do it is to help make us better in the long term. There are many things in an accident that would not be obvious to a non aviator but make perfect sense to us, things that are obvious and have no need to wait for a report. On the 214 crash, there were a couple of things that glared out; on the UPS crash, the NTSB was not near as forthcoming but you don't need to jump in here and start condemning a forum that has been in existence for several years. I am trying to be nice but that is all I have to say on the matter; if you cannot understand it, you have a long hard road ahead of you.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
OK, so what in your opinion should be done to Asiana pilots or Southwest pilots? They have been put on suspension already and put on desk jobs or something like that .
No doubt they all made mistakes and deserve all the bad name.
preacher1
preacher1 1
SWA took care of theirs. NEVER, unless there is incapacitation or some type Emergency, should a pilot forcefully take command of an aircraft and I believe the Korean culture will take care of the 214 pilots. I keep harping on that culture but in WW2, officers and officials of all oriental nations committed Hari-Kari after such a loss of face.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Hara-kiri ! Ofcourse.
Interesting , no doubt.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
1st smart thing that I have seen SWA do... Wonder if the Pilots union is going to fight it.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 0
A Southwest pilot has a rough landing on a short runway on a day of inclement weather, damaging the nose gear, and resulting in a few minor injuries mostly from the evacuation by regency slides gets fired.

A pair of experienced long-haul Asiana pilots grossly flubbed an easy landing on a long runway on a beautiful clear day, resulting in complete destruction of aircraft, multiple deaths and many severe injuries, seem to be getting a slap on the wrist, desk jobs and possibly a return to the cockpit.

Tells you something about how seriously each organization is about safety.
LenSmetona
Len Smetona 2
The Asiana pilots might be up for murder when they get home. I don't think you would see that in the USA.
preacher1
preacher1 2
Well, they announced yesterday that the 2 at the controls were back to work on desk jobs so that will be interesting.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
If so , my friend preacher1, then my standard procedure statement is true that it is a suspension with changed duty profile etc. !
preacher1
preacher1 1
True and there is and old saying over her " that the closer you get to the front office, you also get closer to the gate". This is a big loss of face and status for those 2, regardless of past achievements. In that culture there is no regression or forgiveness.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
How aptly put !
ysfsim
Ant Miraa 1
I agree. I heard some where that if you do CPR incorrectly in Korea and the patient dies, you get criminal charges.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Sometimes culture is at odds with rules and laws. It's my understanding that, in the oriental culture senior age is NEVER wrong and junior age always takes a back seat. I am at least suspicious that the Asiana incident is entangled with cultural "habits"which prevail as well as an attitude we saw years ago when hand held calculators became affordable and escalated with the advent of the auto pilot, speed control, ECM, BCM and PC.
preacher1
preacher1 1
If the NTSB has the gonads to call it, I believe that culture will be totally at the bottom of the 214 crash. As far as SWA, lack of CRM
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Do not be so hasty my friend PhotoFinish.
Wait for the investigation report of SFO accident. Asiana may be facing a dilemma which pilot or who all to fire considering their Korean laws and so on !
On prima facie basis, any where, at best a person can be put on suspension and be denied the regular duty and benefits !
I am sure that the pilot of Southwest in question has all the protection of local laws and so does the employer. So no action can be considered hasty or improper.
If it is so, where is the problem to sue the employer for wrong doing and seek reinstatement ?
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 3
I don't need to wait for an investigation report to see that pilots in US are held to a higher standard than pilots of some foreign carriers even when in US airspace.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Well said
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal -3
Where is the question of comparisons ?
Or is it there and I do not see ?
Does any one know with certainty the present working and social status of the erring pilots of Asiana ?
I assume it can not be good even from Korean standards.

[This poster has been suspended.]

akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Do you know the current status of job description of the erring pilots of Asiana ? I do not.
Do not intervene until then !
preacher1
preacher1 1
It's in one of these posts. You and I commented on it day before yesterday. They came back to a desk job.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX, preacher1. So this is a degradation. And suspension MUST have preceded it. Firing from job will need necessary details which may become available later .
No ?
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Necessary details?

How about you check out the charred airframe shell? The multiple graves (of mostly young girls)? The hospital and long-term care facilities of the paraplegics? The homes of all the passengers whose broken bodies are still showing signs of the incident that lasted seconds but with consequences that will last the remainder of their natural lives?

Then when you're done seeing the results personally, go check the weather report for that beautiful afternoon. When you're done shaking your head, if all you do is insist on their termination, you'll be showing a lot of restraint.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear Friends, details ?
USA gave the world the 'due process of law' clause.
And all civilised jurisdictions(of the world) follow it.
I guess that should explain .
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Formalities like due process are for courts of law (criminal prosecution, civil suit).

The folks here don't want formalities. They just want the facts. They also want to discuss and cone to preliminary conclusions based on tar available facts. Given that many here are in the industry, some amount of behind the scenes facts are contributed to the discussions.

There is not much appetite in forums like this to wait a year or two and be told in a report what to think about a long ago incident. There's great interest in reviewing the facts when they are available, both fresh right after and incident also later on when buried in a report.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I get the picture. So how do you propose to punish such erring persons or what should be done to them ?
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
You don't get it. Stop pushing a false alternate choice, that doesn't exist.

If you want to wait up to 2 years for an NTSB report, go ahead. No one here will make any effort to prevent you from doing so. Nor will anyone judge you for choosing to wait fir the report and electing not to participate in the rampant speculation here. In fact, many would be quite happy to be rid of your unnecessarily antagonistic interactions.

I'm coming to the conclusion that you're intentionally being a troll. Enough is enough. If your descriptions of yourself are true, you should behave better here like you must in real life situations.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Exactly. What details? That is a huge mistake for a professional pilot (actually 2). If I can't hit the runway on a benign weather day with no mechanical problems I'm a pretty sorry private pilot. If there are extenuating circumstances here, I haven't heard of them yet.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Me neither. The names that were posted by the TV that all those folks got fired over seem to fit those jobobs pretty well and I mean no insult to Jo and Bob.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
That's a fact.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 0
In my humble opinion...SouthWest Airlines are a bunch of "Cocky" characters...up front in the cockpit or box office...pending on gender....the cabin crew needs some serious training as the cockpit crew. CRM for all. The "nose dive" is a great example of lack of communication. Every Crew member has to be on the same page! I will not fly SWA. I don't feel the "female" Captain should have been fired. Something went on in the cockpit. The CVR will put the incident on the table. But guys...leave the sexism out of the the equation. There are some damn good female pilots out there!
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
IMHO:
I was once asked: describe 'wet' to a fish.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
I guess I missed the sexism part in here.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 3
Most references to pilot's gender seemed non-offensive. But a few colorful remarks may have floated in here or there.

But in real life, there may have been some sexism that may have created the environment for the accident. I mean that the pilot may have been perceived negatively as a bee-yatch, for acting like a man, who would be perceived as assertive, direct and communicative.

That unnecessarily negative perception may have led over the years to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The increased scrutiny creates more pressure which leads indirectly to the accident.

Then again the pilot may just not have been a great pilot. But the perceptions of the pilot (which may have a foundation in gender) may have helped to create an environment that makes an incident more likely.

So crazy as it sounds, sexism could've helped make the crash more likely. (Just don't tell the union rep.) Because on the flip side, fears of accusation of sexism may have delayed action against the pilot from past performance issues.
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
Photo...there was definately a lack of CRM and disregarding the sexism...if the PIC was not lined up and it didn't look good..I would have chosen to "Go Around". In addition one doesn't take over the controls at 400ft. That is a given and the result of doing so is the consequence of the "nose dive".
Doobs
Dee Lowry 1
I would really like to hear the CVR. There are very good women pilots and male pilots...something went terribly wrong and it was very unfortunate. Name calling is not nessessary. The cause will come out in the CVR when it is released.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Yes, unstabilized = go around
40ft = too late to take over
That's inappropriate behavior for a captain. That's why the termination.

But some report a history with this captain.

But the captain could be a great pilot with needless extra pressure, that led to a bad decision. Or the captain could be a terrible pilot that had lingered on the job for too long.

There being a history doesn't tell you which one. The history could just as well be from deficient performance, as it could be from more intense scrutiny from perceptions that may be colored by human interactions and expectations that may be perceived differently because of gender, independently of the actual performance.

So I agree both men and women can be great pilots. Both can also be terrible pilots.

The speculation was just explaining how gender could be factor not because of the pilot, but because of others.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
We'll see if the NTSB comes up with that as contributory. I just didn't see anything in the thread I thought was sexism. But I'm not a bi..h. Lol
preacher1
preacher1 1
I don't really think gender played a role here; fact is, control just changed way too late. It appears that FO(PF) was correct in his decision and Captain just made a bad decision in taking control for whatever reason. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. She lost.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Oh no, you're right, not in the incident/post-incident.

But maybe in the history. Simply sexism could've led to a more uptight pilot. Being unnecessarily over-scrutinized, may have led to an overzealous preoccupation with the numbers, to not allow a case fir dismissal for poor performance. So wanting desperately to make her numbers could've led to a bad decision and a nose-first landing. So ironically trying to avoid dismissal could've cause the crash. If that history was a result of sexism, then indirectly sexism caused the environment that made the crash possible.

(But not being familiar with the particular situation, I acknowledge the opposite is also possible. A bad pilot was kept on too long because of the optics/ potential suit.

Not to mention that even a good pilot can have a bad day/ make a bad decision. But the discussion is because of the reports of a history for the pilot in question, so one of other two options are likely.)
marknine
Wm. Mark Meiggs 1
A very intuitive analysis PhotoFinish.. and very much "On".
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend Dee Lowry, a highly belated response from me !
Correct me if wrong.
As of TODAY, the 2nd Nov., the pilot was only suspended, and not fired.
And 'perhaps' the NTSB report is not out as yet.
So NO FINAL action/s can't be taken either way !
Right ?
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Actually it was reported that her continued employment with SW was terminated as part of a settlement with an $million+ payment, in exchange for no future claims against SW. This likely included any pending pension payment, as well as potential action due to employment issues such as bias or harassment, or even accident resulting from working under company pressure to stick to the schedule,etc.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
The details of the settlement were not made public, but the title of this squawk starts with the title 'Southwest fires pilot...'

What more explanation do you need?
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Without sounding to be critical dear friend PhotoFinish, by your own account there was a SETTLEMENT for severance from service. So can it still be called 'fired' or dismissal from job ?
Your expert views solicited !
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
She likely had a pension coming that she had earned from years of service. Had she just been fired without compensation in lieu of pension, she round fight the termination. I'm not privy yo her years of service, not what issues she dealt with over those years, that could bd brought up in a defense or a separate claim against SW.

But they can include any of the above mentioned claims. The intense pressure to stay on schedule may gave been a factor in the call to NOT go around, take control and land the plane rushedly. Also there could have been a history of harassment, bias or sexism, that could make for a litigious claim.

So SW pays her now, for her pension. She walks away, releases SW from any future claim, and promises to not sue. Everyone gets something and everyone gives something. It's called a settlement. Simple, really.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend PhotoFinish, I must stop here for two reasons.
Firstly, I do not have sufficient details of the case.
Second and most important, many a time we use metaphors in speech as well in writing. Like, a person being 'compelled' to resign ! Which is same as facing the firing squad.
:-)
preacher1
preacher1 1
Fired is fired. If she hadn't crashed the plane she would still be working.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX preacher1. In the present case, what are her future prospects, as pilot and otherwise? Both in terms of law as well as general practice ?
What happens to her pilot licence ?
preacher1
preacher1 1
I would expect she would not be able to get another job but with that settlement, she might not want too.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX preacher1.
What about legal position ?
Her pilot licence ?
preacher1
preacher1 1
I would doubt that any termination or settlement would affect that. That is a personal thing and is a requirement for employment, not provided by the employer and to my knowledge, no action was taken by the FAA, which is where anything toward her license would have to come from
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
ThanX preacher1.
That means technically she can fly as usual.
Legally !
preacher1
preacher1 1
10-4 but as I said, it is doubtful anyone would hire her, but that is another matter.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
10-4 ? Meaning ?
Do you mean to say that if a pilot is involved in an aircraft accident s/he loses the right to fly ? Informally !
preacher1
preacher1 1
pretty much, although no legal reason. Just human nature, I doubt she would be anybody's 1st choice and with any length of term with SWA or anybody else, she would have to show that time on an app or resume`and once circumstances were known or even if sealed, they would still be questionable. Have a nice Holiday. later
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
So what will she good for ? Crop dusting ? Or worse ?
Because in the process of getting a CPL she may not have acquired any other qualifications !
preacher1
preacher1 1
She got a good settlement, probably realizing all this on the front end. talk to ya later. gone
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
They may not hire her because there are so many pilots to choose from in the US. But even with the accident she would be a better pilot than many pilots with little experience in many Asian countries with fast air travel growth and insufficient pilots. So, she may have some decent employment opportunities overseas.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
I must add this too. In criminal justice system all over the world, every convict is given a second chance to lead a normal life in society.
So why not in Aviation ? As commensurate with the profession ?
For example, she can be demoted to a lower category of aircraft OR to a lower rank like an FO ! And so on. She can even be a good trainer ! Provided she did not have or does not have any mental blocks due to the accident .
Good luck to her. I must say.
preacher1
preacher1 1
That may be what the law says but human nature, in most cases, circumvents that law if there are other qualified applicants. You will note the high recidivism rate for convicts and this is part of the reason. While she is no a convict, she carries a hellacious black mark on her career and most prospective employers would not want a potential liability. Sad but true.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dragging your logic a bit far and applying principles of management, she is gone for life. Because she has proved to be a BAD decision maker. Especially in crisis. An essential ability and prerequisite in the process of organisational decision making !
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dragging your logic a bit far and applying principles of management, she is gone for life. Because she has proved to be a BAD decision maker. Especially in crisis. An essential ability and prerequisite in the process of organisational decision making !
preacher1
preacher1 1
Let's put it like this, she has a long row to hoe to get a DECENT flying job, even if she wants one. With a million bucks and other stuff she got, she may not want to work. That is what those big settlements are for. I don't know her age but she was a Sr. Captain, who knows?
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Failure in life or in profession ! Difficult to look at yourself in the mirror !
Money and age notwithstanding.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Thank goodness, this is not the end of the road, for her or for any flier
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Only in America!
captlegs23
Bob Yarmey 0
Hey Dee Lowry. You sure are being extra sensitive. Even strongly sexist. If you were an insider to this abismal display of PIC authority, you would completely change your opinion. Are you trying to cover up terrible CRM with sexism? Who slapped your fanny last?
elainep8
Elaine Pate 0
I read the article and I didn't see anything about the gender of the pilots so you guys must know more than I do. From what I read, though, it sorta sounds like the copilot had the controls on final and still had them once they made the runway. Maybe the captain didn't like the nose-down attitude and took control too late to flare the airplane and land on the main gear. That's just my guess (and I am a pilot). But nobody's going to know for sure til the NTSB report comes out. Who knows when that will be since government employees are on furlough :-o
preacher1
preacher1 3
The gender and personal description of "Nazi Type B****" came from another SWA pilot a day or 2 after the crash. The NTSB did a prelim statement that said she took control before flare and went ahead and tried to land off a no stabilized approach. This article says there were some PC issues they had to go thru is they reason the firing took this long. It doesn't say it but I'm sure there was some union involvement as well. Under normal conditions, someone else would probably have been gone much sooner.
elainep8
Elaine Pate 1
She took the controls "before flare"? If it landed nose-gear first, there was no flare LOL.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
Mixup between

flare for landing

and

flair for landing?

Neither seem to fit the description in this case....
8-)
preacher1
preacher1 2
You said "too late to flare the airplane and land on the main gear. " I'm merely saying that the NTSB said she took control prior to that point. It appears that the FO, who was also PF at the time was correct in his decision for a go around as she did not have time to stabilize and flare as normal. There are times when you are luck and can get by with such stuff. This was not one of those times. Her luck ran out, and a couple of others in this thread also said she was on thin ice anyway for reasons unspecified.
elainep8
Elaine Pate 1
Sounds like she wasn't winning any popularity contests.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Kinda what it sounds like. LUV is like any other airline and she had apparently fell out of favor, with no support left. All the hours and experience in the world cannot over come adversity in the workplace.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
There was plenty of Flare... The Media provided plenty of it.... After the incident that is.. LOL.. :)
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
I would say SWA's action speaks volumes about what we can expect to see in the report.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 0
Sparkie624: \
I was hoping you'd check in to one of the other forums,the one about the 787 stuck in Iceland. The article made mention of one of that airline's, LOT I think, fleet was grounded for missing filters in both engines. Pretty nondescript, but how do do engines run without the filters?
JetMech24
JetMech24 1
The filter assembly can be installed on the aircraft without the actual filter element inside the housing, allowing the fluid to pass through, just unfiltered. When you need to replace the filter, you unscrew the filter "bowl" housing, replace the filter element inside, then reinstall the outer housing. It would be pretty dumb, but someone COULD forget to put the filter on before reinstalling the outer housing.
n3502w
Brad Benson -4
You don't go around in a 737. Period.
Unstabilized approach? Not acceptable.
Only exception to no go around a would be for a runway incursion with terrible timing.
Go arounds are for private pilots. By airline standards, you don't fukk up.
sparkie624
sparkie624 7
Your Statement "You don't go around in a 737. Period." is an awful bold statement... If things are not setup right, then go around... PERIOD. I was on a SWA flight (LONG TIME AGO) going into STL and lighting was between us and the runway and we were on close final. The crew Aborted rolling us out in a nice night 45.. Ended up diverting due to weather. I do not have any problems with a Go Around... Only one who will not go around is an ID-10-T :)
preacher1
preacher1 5
That is a BOLD statement. I agree that as a professional you should be set up and stabilized, BUT, as a professional, you should know that there are 1001 reasons that can happen during those last minutes that can cause things to change. I always err on the side of caution as it's me in the pointy end of that thing and those in the back rely on that judgment.

[This poster has been suspended.]

preacher1
preacher1 1
I don't know about you but I have had plenty of what were stabilized approaches go to hell in a handbasket, with causes from wx change to something on the runway. That is why landing is really the most critical part of a flight. Almost anybody can get one off the ground in some fashion but that coming back down can be a bummer at times.
pkslayton
Patrick Slayton 4
Rule one is don't go around? Hey, a few people had broken legs but at least we didn't waste any fuel? Remind me not to fly with you . . . EVER.
joelwiley
joel wiley 7
And here I thought rule #1 was fly the airplane- which implies landing with aircraft and pax intact.

Do it right, even if it takes two tries sounds like a better rule.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
fly me safe
fly me good
in that order, is all I seek of all ye pilots !
andrewstagg
Andrew Stagg 3
Seriously? If you are flying in and out of busy hubs especially with WX and low IMC, I guarantee you'll be doing a go around on occasion no matter how amazing a pilot you think you are. When I was based at HOU, go arounds due to traffic too close, still on the runway or not in sight were common. At HPN a few weeks ago, we had a last minute runway change causing us to be high and fast, we could have made it, but the go-around was safer than chopping the power and dropping it in, so I called for one. As PIC, you have final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight, sometimes that means going around and there's nothing wrong with that.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Slaton's remark is sarcasm. Up above is Bensen's the super pilot.
JetMech24
JetMech24 1
I can't believe so many people took Benson's comment seriously, he was being sarcastic in the "eye of airlines". LOL
preacher1
preacher1 1
I'll trust you on that if you know him but not knowing him, I can't see any sarcasm in it, just ego.
JetMech24
JetMech24 1
The last sentence of the last line says it all.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, if it is sarcasm, it went over the top of a bunch of folks. That is the problem with a print forum as opposed to hangar flying, you really can't tell the demeanor or tone of a person making the statement.
JetMech24
JetMech24 1
You are absolutely correct, but sometimes you got to use a little bit of coomon sense, in this case, there is no way that any pilot would think like his comment is written. And of course there are always internet trolls around.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Where is that <expletive deleted> sarcasm font when you need it?
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
Some of the best sarcasm is wasted here... down voted repeatedly... like pearls...
captlegs23
Bob Yarmey 1
Hey Brad, up till now (having flown and trained over 2,000 professional pilots in 18,000 hours), i never met the PERFECT PILOT". You are a true rare bird. Ever hear of target fixation? You best educate yourself. If knot, you are destined to become a perfect dead pilot!
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend, Bob Yarmey, I guess in your(aviation) circles a good(perfect) pilot is one who has flown/landed the bird safely, for 3Ms, 'men, machine and material' !
"How" may not matter most of the times.
Please do correct if necessary.
captlegs23
Bob Yarmey 1
The essence of my message is that a pilot who things he knows all the answers is a very dangerous person indeed!
You are on track with 3 M's. My extensive crash investigation focusing on human factors has led me to closely evaluate 1 - the man; 2- the machine and 3 - the enviroment. BTW, there are many "good" pilots but zero "perfect" pilots.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Dear friend Bob Yarney, IMHO, perfect people are so boring !
No ? Even a perfect lover ! ;p
On a serious note, and just to reinforce your opening sentence, one who says he knows all, knows so little. An age old saying. !
Hence, if in one's life time, one ends up being a good person or a good professional, the life has been well lived !
No ?
ChadPeters
ChadPeters 0
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Southwest Pilot Fired for July Mishap In New York

Southwest Airlines fired the captain who was piloting a plane that landed nose first at New York’s LaGuardia Airport in July, injuring nine people and snarling air traffic for hours.

The captain, a Southwest pilot for 13 years, took control from the first officer just before the Boeing 737 hit the runway, U.S. investigators said in August.

Southwest acted after completing its investigation into the July 22 accident, while the National Transportation Safety Board, continues its own inquiry after finding no evidence of a mechanical failure.

With its nose pointed three degrees downward, the 737-700 struck the runway first with the landing gear at the front of the plane instead of settling onto the main wheels located beneath the wings, the NTSB said in a July 25 release.

The forward gear broke, snapping rearward and damaging an electronics bay. Flight 345 was arriving from Nashville and carried 150 people.

http://www.planecrashes.org/southwest-pilot-fired-for-july-mishap-in-new-york.html

Entrar

Não tem uma conta? Registre-se agora (gratuito) para funcionalidades personalizáveis, alertas de vôo e mais!