GoAllegheny From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 340 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 19993 times:
This is unbelieveable - two Pinnacle (Northwest affiliate) pilots ferrying an empty Bombardier commuter jet last October decided to take it to 41'000 feet for "fun," both engines quit, plane crashed, they died. I feel sympathy for their families. However, like the drunken AmWest pilots in Florida, this gives all pilots a bad name.
Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 31 Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 19576 times:
There was a very long thread on this awhile back when it happened, and it seems the pilot's comment may have been taken a bit out of context. The plane was indeed certified to that altitude, so don't go crucifying the pilots right away.
Aa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 19573 times:
Anyone that is a member of this site knows how much you have to go through to become a pilot. This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. "Lets have some fun!" Just like the HP pilots that tried to fly drunk, I don't have any sympathy for stupidity.
FinnWings From Finland, joined Oct 2003, 640 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19452 times:
Yes, they wanted to have fun and climbed to FL410... However, CRJ200 is certified for that altitude so there shouldn't be a problem at all. This is more a journalist thing again as they don't know what they are talking about. Lesson number one is that don't EVER believe what journalists write about aviation as there is almost always wrong information. This aircraft was not crashed because pilots were having fun but because they experienced flame out of both engines for some reason on normal cruise flight when flying at service ceiling. It isn't wrong to climb for a max altitude "for fun" if the plane is flown according to operation manual.
ContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1442 posts, RR: 50 Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19402 times:
I think you guys should read the article more carefully before making some of these comments. Important things may be found therein, like:
(1) The plane is certified for 41,000 ft.
(2) There are strict procedures for flying that high.
(3) There is a question as to how well the pilots were trained.
It seems to me, then, that there is something else at work here. The CRJ is an advanced airplane, capable of maintaining itself within the close parameters necessary for flying at 41,000 feet. If anything, I would have questioned what the pilots did *after* the first engine failed. Don't know about you guys, but the first thing I'm doing when one engine fails at 41k is to make for a lower altitude, *as fast as I can*.
All in all, we don't know anything else. What was their airspeed when the the first engine flamed out? What was their reaction? If they had 5 to 10 minutes' glide time, why couldn't they make an airport? Did one of them "fly the airplane" while the other performed troubleshooting, or did they just lose their minds? Something is fishy here, and it's not flying the plane at its rated altitude.
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4998 posts, RR: 29 Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19372 times:
Quoting DeltaA380 (Reply 3): Well, at least their place in this year's Darwin Award's is assured... seems like the Pinnacle of stupidity to me.
That being said; I too feel sympathy for their friends and families.
Well, it wasn't like they went nuts or suicidal. I think we can extend just a little compassion to them as well. I'm not a pilot, and obviously things went horribly wrong, but to proclaim them Darwin award winners over an incomplete investigation seems very cavalier.
Are there other airline employees reading this who feel the same as Delta380? I can't imagine getting killed on the job, perhaps due to my own fault, and having others call me a Darwin award winner.
PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2875 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19305 times:
Their "stupidity" was a result of poor training by the company, and the fact that this aircraft is certified to fly at FL410, as stated in the article. These facts lead to a bad decision to fly at FL410. The "Lets have some fun" quote does not imply anything of substance, other than the crew wanting to take the opportunity to fly at FL410 when they could (with an empty airplane). A decision that shows lack of experience in this aircraft, but nothing more. Pilots know that violating "bottle to throttle" rules are illegal and unsafe. Wanting to fly an airplane at it's certified FL is not illegal and should not be unsafe either. Comparing the America West crew to this crew is ridiculous.
Stop armchair quarterbacking, and let the NTSB do the work on this one.
Barney Captain From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 825 posts, RR: 13 Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19293 times:
This just doesn't add up. Sure, he may have said "Let's have a little fun", but flying an aircraft to it's maximum certified altitude can hardly be considered reckless. I've never understood this accident, there seems as if something else was amiss, quite possibly through no fault of the crew. The reason ATC commented that they rarely see the CRJ that high is simple; it needs to be very light (as was the case) to achieve the higher FL's. Without knowing what else was going on, I would hardly grant these two guys the "Darwin Award", or equate them with the HP pilots in MIA.
Lee From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 148 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19271 times:
Quoting ContnlEliteCMH (Reply 13): don't know about you guys, but the first thing I'm doing when one engine fails at 41k is to make for a lower altitude, *as fast as I can*.
i dont fly twins but i would have thought the first thing i would do would be to find a suitable airport and try and troubleshoot the problem. descending would only give you less time to find somewhere safe to land.
Redngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 47 Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19169 times:
Coffin corner, anyone?
41K may be certified, but I wonder about the maximum airspeed at such an altitude. Regardless of the weight of the aircraft, there has to be some risk associated with pushing more than one critical factor.
PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2875 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 19017 times:
core lock - The core of an engine is locked, specifically the high pressure compressor and turbine. This may happen as a result of expansion due to engine temperature limitations being exceeded, or the result of other physical damage to the engine.
coffin corner - With respect to airspeed, as altitude increases the difference between stall speed and maximum allowable airspeed decreases. At very high altitudes, the difference between stall and max. airspeed may be very small (perhaps only 10-15 knots in some aircraft). Therefore, it does not take much to exceed one of these limitations, getting one self into trouble.
25 GoAllegheny: I am certain that there is more to this story than has been reported - perhaps my comparison to the AmWest pilots was wrong. I look forward to the fin
26 Kaneporta1: Although flying at 410 is tricky, for the reasons PITrules explained, and has been demonstrated in the past by that China Airlines 747SP that lost an
27 LTBEWR: Don't forget that this a/c was being ferried after having mechanical problems earler in that day. Going to the higher and near max certified altitude
28 Tornado82: It was discussed in the earlier thread on here that "Have some fun" meant that a CRJ-200 with a Pax/fuel load would never have the wing/power to make
29 Azjubilee: Any of you brilliant armchair quarterbacking flightsim wanna be pilots ever think about the tempurature on that day? Sure the plane can go to FL410...
30 Loggat: I agree with Azjubilee... The CRJ cannot go up to FL410 with certain temps and weights. This information would be found in the supplemental performanc
31 Bucky707: I would not read too much into the "have some fun" comment. One of the best and most professional captains I ever flew with would make the comment "le
32 Jeb94: Where an aircraft is certified to fly is often more a pressurization deal. The MD80 for instance is certified to fl370 but is capable of flying higher
33 AMSSFO: Is it already available online somewhere? Can't find it.
34 Lowrider: Having read the transcript and being somewhat familiar with the CRJ, it comes down to this: The aircraft was allowed to get too slow at 41. The crew d
35 Travatl: All of this JUDGEMENT by immature, ignorant, blowhards is why I've come to loathe a.net. These men perished...yet so many here are quick to point out
36 B744F: So what if they made a comment like wanting to have fun? What's the big deal? There were no passengers and they just had to get the airplane from one