Ryanair 737 winglet hits AA 767 elevator, causing damage to both. Ryanair captain disregards information from purser and passengers and doesn't inform the AA crew of a potential collision. The 767 took off with the damaged elevator. The 737 flew two sectors until the damage was noticed.
AirlineCritic From Finland, joined Mar 2009, 612 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (9 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 32424 times:
Quoting 777236ER (Thread starter): Ryanair captain disregards information from purser and passengers and doesn't inform the AA crew of a potential collision.
zkojq From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 784 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (9 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 32295 times:
Quoting shufflemoomin (Reply 1): Wow. I assume that Ryanair pilot will be looking for a new career immediately? I would advocate fines or criminal charges if this story is true.
One of the Avherald comments says that the captain was demoted to first officer. Not sure how reliable that source is.
shufflemoomin From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 432 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (9 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 31449 times:
This is just a failure all round. The crew ignored information from people that a collision has definitely taken place and also didn't notice anything on the go around. The crew of the Ryanair crew knew nothing about the severity of the damage. They didn't even know if the AA was capable of flight due to the damage, yet ignored it. If it's true that this Captain has just been demoted rather than stripped of their job, of even license, then that's crazy.
cuban8 From Kiribati, joined Sep 2009, 207 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (9 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 31020 times:
Quoting 777236ER (Thread starter): The 737 flew two sectors until the damage was noticed.
This is what happens when you fly with a lot of pressure from your commercial department. You end up in stressed situations with fatigues pilots, bad decision making and ill performed pre-flight inspections due to short turn-arounds.
Quoting shufflemoomin (Reply 8): The crew ignored information from people that a collision has definitely taken place and also didn't notice anything on the go around.
NorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1713 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (9 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 30804 times:
After reading the article, I'm going to refrain from making any comments related to women drivers......
One thing does confuse me, wouldn't BCN Air Traffic Control have told the Ryanair to hold short and wait for the 763 to commence it's takeoff roll? Or did ATC think there was enough clearance for the 738 to get past the 763?
Either way, it seems that someone wasn't exercising proper judgement.
Then again, I can remember the first time I flew Iberia, from BCN to LPA, we took off, climbed out, and another 727 passed under us so close that I could literally see it's registration. That made me more than a little nervous. Has BCN ATC never heard of one mile separation?
Lastly, as damaged as that left stabilizer was, wouldn't that have presented issues in the cockpit of the 763?
I could have elite status if I wanted it, but flying the same airline all the time is boring.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (9 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 30143 times:
Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 11): One thing does confuse me, wouldn't BCN Air Traffic Control have told the Ryanair to hold short and wait for the 763 to commence it's takeoff roll? Or did ATC think there was enough clearance for the 738 to get past the 763?
Both airplanes were on the holding area short of the runway. Neither was actually on the runway. They were both in an area shown in the photo where dozens of planes taxi past each other every day.
Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 11): wouldn't that have presented issues in the cockpit of the 763?
No. The photo of the damage to the B767 shows a very minor dent in the elevator. The angle and the zoom makes it look a lot bigger than it really is. The impact would not have been noticable in the cockpit of the B767, or the B737. It would have had no impact on the flight controls of the airplane.
Quoting bennett123 (Reply 4): How come the damage was not noticed for 2 sectors.
Any damage to the B737 would have been on the very top of the winglet. Those things are high, and hard to see unless you can get above the winglet and look down. My understanding is that many Ryanair aircraft park at remote stands. The damage likely could not be seen until the plane was parked at a jetway.
EagleBoy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1621 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (9 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 30061 times:
Quoting kl911 (Reply 9): Crew didnt notice due to the very bumby taxiway, plus it wasnt a hit, more like a brush.
Well that all OK then. Being an FR fanboy does not allow you to make moronic comments.
A commercial airliner made contact with another aircraft before both took-off, the flight deck didn't investigate the 'brush' when they were informed of it, and didn't inform the other aircraft/ATC.......and you seem to be fine with this incident?
LU9092 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 65 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (9 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 29950 times:
This strikes me as a very serious issue deserving a thorough investigation into the FR captain's actions that day, as well as the business, cultural, and training issues that may have contributed to it. Especially damning is that in this case, the captain put at risk the crew and passengers of another plane. Any airline that would keep a pilot guilty of such gross negligence and dereliction of duty should have its certification carefully reconsidered. I hope the proper authorities have a good look.
Luckily both aircraft remained airworthy, but it seems particularly dangerous in that the 763 crew had likely already performed all of their control surface checks, no? Had the impact impaired function of the elevator, the AA crew may not have known until their plane failed to rotate as expected. That's a very bad time to find out your airplane is broken. I hope that AA pursues this matter as well, if for no other reason than to be sure FR sees consequences that it might wish to avoid in the future.
neutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 353 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (9 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 29794 times:
From the picture, it appears that the impact is not forceful enough to be noticeably felt by the occupants of both planes. The 767's horstab is quite high up and dihedral. The topmost tip of the 737's winglet just barely sliced into the stab's trailing edge which is also slightly lower to the ground than the leading edge. The winglet then exited under the stab, causing no further damage other than maybe a little linear indent and gradually fainter scratchline on the upward and outward slanting underside. A glancing blow that caused a small part of the thin trailing edge to break off and an area of the upper skin further in to pop up.
Quoting bennett123 (Reply 4): I thought that a "walk around" is done before every flight.
How come the damage was not noticed for 2 sectors.
My take is that as the damage to the winglet is at the top and is not heavy, it could be missed by the ground crew who are not aware of the accident and are therefore not specifically looking for anything unusual. As for the pilots, did they miss performing the required walkabout or did they just nonchalantly do a cursory one?
spiritair97 From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 1231 posts, RR: 1 Reply 20, posted (9 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 29504 times:
Sorry if this is a bit off-topic and is the STUPIDEST question I have ever asked, but in the comments, somebody mentions that Ryanair only has only pilot for flight. That isn't true, is it? Once again, I sincerely doubt that that is true, but I just want to clarify.
travelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1381 posts, RR: 5 Reply 21, posted (9 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 29460 times:
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 20): Sorry if this is a bit off-topic and is the STUPIDEST question I have ever asked, but in the comments, somebody mentions that Ryanair only has only pilot for flight. That isn't true, is it? Once again, I sincerely doubt that that is true, but I just want to clarify.
The quite flamboyant (if you can call it that) CEO of Ryanair mentioned it a few times, probably to get media attention (a strategy that worked quite well IIRC). But it's luckily impossible with current regulations.
kl911 From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4977 posts, RR: 14 Reply 23, posted (9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 29387 times:
Quoting EagleBoy (Reply 15): A commercial airliner made contact with another aircraft before both took-off, the flight deck didn't investigate the 'brush' when they were informed of it, and didn't inform the other aircraft/ATC.......and you seem to be fine with this incident?
No, I didnt say that. But judging from the number of posts of AA planes hitting their own planes at airports they should be used to it. To me this sounds like FR bashing again. Every airline can get away with it exept for FR....typical..
" The European consumer would crawl naked over broken glass to get low fares." Michael O'Leary
lppr95 From Portugal, joined Mar 2010, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 25, posted (9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 30023 times:
Quoting bennett123 (Reply 4):
I thought that a "walk around" is done before every flight.
How come the damage was not noticed for 2 sectors.
A few days ago I was at FAO waiting for my flight and noticed a FR pilot leaving the cockpit for a walk around. What shocked me was that the pilot went srtaight to the main gear and only checked the breaks and tyres! During the 30 minuts that the aircraft was on ground that was the only external check the pilots made.
Maybe this is the way FR pilots are trainned for walk arounds, to allow short turn arounds.
"Cathay 018, expect very late landing clearance, 747 departing ahead", tower said.
BigSaabowski From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 137 posts, RR: 0 Reply 26, posted (9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 29622 times:
Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 11): Then again, I can remember the first time I flew Iberia, from BCN to LPA, we took off, climbed out, and another 727 passed under us so close that I could literally see it's registration. That made me more than a little nervous. Has BCN ATC never heard of one mile separation?
I haven't heard of one mile separation either, is that new?
LJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4149 posts, RR: 1 Reply 28, posted (9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 30153 times:
Quoting Burkhard (Reply 18): Before any conclusion, we need better facts, but it sounds serious up to now. How can it be this came as news only about 4 months after it happened?
As stated on Avherald, there is no official report yet and Avherald didn't know which aircraft were involved until somebody gave Avherald some additional information. Wonders why it takes the Spanish authorities to take more than 15 months to issue an official report.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 30, posted (9 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 29710 times:
Quoting kl911 (Reply 23): Every airline can get away with it exept for FR....typical..
No one could "get away" with failing to investigate after being informed of a collision. It's indefensible and would remain so no matter what the airline was.
I'll accept for the sake of argument that they might not have felt it, but they were informed of it by cabin crew.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
Quoting HAL (Reply 6): That was a milk-out-the-nose laughter causing statement!
Hilarious!
Quoting LU9092 (Reply 16): Had the impact impaired function of the elevator, the AA crew may not have known until their plane failed to rotate as expected.
The elevator could have failed at any time during the flight had it been severely enough damaged.
I think this was an egregious error, and criminally negligent on the part of the Ryanair Pilot. He did not assess the damage, and he did not report the incident. I expect that there is monitoring by regulatory bodies to ensure that airlines' corporate cultures do not, neither subliminally, nor not so subliminally, pressure pilots to fly without following safety protocols?
I boarded a (happened to be AA) MD-80 once, but we had to exit the A/C because the air bridge had slightly scratched it. The captain said that he knew there was no structural damage to the A/C, but that there was protocol to follow in the interest of safety. Maintenance was called, and whereas I couldn't see the scratch from the concourse, close to the entry door, they did "buff" the area with an electric tool to smooth the scratch down, and the resulting "scar" I could definitely see, even though it was an unpainted area. That took about 2 hours.
Once on a United Express CRJ, we had to taxi back to the terminal without taking off because a light in the cockpit indicated that the door was not fully closed. The captain said,"We know the door IS closed, however we still have to return to the tarmac and have this light checked out."
Though tedious in both cases, and expensive for the airline in terms of the rigorous daily schedule of an A/C, this protocol, I think is much more prudent, sane, and I would expect, regulation.
The article has just been updated with quite a bit more information. Specifically the captain stated she was only aware of one passenger seeing the collision, and had she understood that it was more than one passenger, she wouldn't reacted differently.
SEA From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 215 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 29014 times:
There was a good point on the AV Herald article: Would the FR crew have been able to spot the damage to the winglet from a walk around? It's near the very top portion, I'm not sure that would have been easily visible.
neutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 353 posts, RR: 0 Reply 35, posted (9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 28913 times:
Quoting MikeCT (Reply 33): Specifically the captain stated she was only aware of one passenger seeing the collision, and had she understood that it was more than one passenger, she wouldn't reacted differently.
You got it the other way round.
The article states: "...she continued to say in the interview that had she been aware of multiple passengers observing the collision she would have reacted differently."
MikeCT From United States of America, joined May 2008, 137 posts, RR: 0 Reply 36, posted (9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 28735 times:
Quoting neutrino (Reply 35): The article states: "...she continued to say in the interview that had she been aware of multiple passengers observing the collision she would have reacted differently."
Right, she stated she was only aware of one passenger, not multiple passengers witnessing the collision. But I wrote, "wouldn't" reacted differently instead of "would've." My bad, I was just typing too fast.
neutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 353 posts, RR: 0 Reply 38, posted (9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 27432 times:
Quoting SEA (Reply 34): There was a good point on the AV Herald article: Would the FR crew have been able to spot the damage to the winglet from a walk around? It's near the very top portion, I'm not sure that would have been easily visible.
That was my earlier opinion on viewing the photo of the 767 damage.
Its hard to discern looking up so high from ground level.
Did the pilots actually perform a walk around after landing/before next takeoff and if they did, have they tried hard enough to spot it?
Quoting neutrino (Reply 17):
My take is that as the damage to the winglet is at the top and is not heavy, it could be missed by the ground crew who are not aware of the accident and are therefore not specifically looking for anything unusual.
Gulfstream650 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 489 posts, RR: 0 Reply 39, posted (9 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 27092 times:
Quoting a comment on Avherald:
Quote: By The Wrench on Monday, Jul 30th 2012 11:29Z
This is not a defence, but if the captain already had a previous incident of leaving the paved surface in Scotland, how much did the "trouble" she faced over that incident play into her terribly flawed decision making after the incident in Barcelona? I also believe that culture plays a big role in how comanders behave and in a culture where time is money and missing a slot is the Ryanair equivalent of an own goal, I suspect that it affected her very flawed thinking. If she's human, she should still have trouble sleeping at night over the potential disaster that she set in motion when the AA B767 departed on a long flight across the Atlantic.
I don't proclaim to be the best pilot in the world but I'm safe
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 40, posted (9 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 26664 times:
Quoting MikeCT (Reply 33): The article has just been updated with quite a bit more information.
From the Ryanair damage photo in the article (it is also included in post #37 above) - I don't see how anyone could see that doing a walkaround. There is no bent metal, nothing but some scrapes on the paint. The winglet is 8 ft 2 inches above the wing, 21 ft 1 in above the ground.
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 42, posted (9 months 4 weeks ago) and read 24087 times:
Quoting MikeCT (Reply 41): To play Devil's advocate a little bit, couldn't you also assume if the captain of the 767 knew of the damage he would have elected not to fly?
I'm certain the captain would have it checked if he knew that the contact had occured.
I don't know the full regs on that type of damage, if it is a ground the aircraft, or fly to a major airline station with repair capability requirement.
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6260 posts, RR: 39 Reply 43, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 21346 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 42): I don't know the full regs on that type of damage, if it is a ground the aircraft, or fly to a major airline station with repair capability requirement.
I'm pretty sure that ANY visible damage to a control surface renders the aircraft instantly unairworthy. A very small amount of damage could induce flutter, or cause other undesirable aerodynamic effects. And since the certification requirements do not include testing with damaged control surfaces, the pilot has just been promoted (unknowingly in this case) to test pilot status.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
cf6ppe From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 44, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 20748 times:
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 43): I'm pretty sure that ANY visible damage to a control surface renders the aircraft instantly unairworthy. A very small amount of damage could induce flutter, or cause other undesirable aerodynamic effects. And since the certification requirements do not include testing with damaged control surfaces, the pilot has just been promoted (unknowingly in this case) to test pilot status.
SEPilot, Good post to the point. (you're probably startled to have me make that statement... )
In an instance such as this, consultation of the MEL (Minimum Equipment List), CDL (Configuration Deviation List), and definitely the AMM (Aircraft Maintenance Manual) followed by the Aircraft Structural Repair Manual and possibly company repair manuals is a must. And if necessary you bring in the Companies Aircraft Structures Engineer(s) and if required the Manufacturers Representatives who are able to talk to their experts on the subject at hand.
Anyway, this from someone that has operated in the small world that some of you haven't...... ok..!!
slinky09 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2009, 593 posts, RR: 0 Reply 45, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 18289 times:
I'm wondering what would you do if you were on the plane and witnessed the contact. Alert the cabin crewm yes, but how far would you take things if no response was given - let's use this scenario as a use case perhaps?
ZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3249 posts, RR: 0 Reply 46, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 17362 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 40): What - maybe two inches long and a quarter inch wide?
The angle of the photo and the zoom lense really distort the outer section of the elevator - making the 'damage' look much worse than it is.
It's not a dent, that's for sure. Torn metal with honeycomb showing....
Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
blueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3126 posts, RR: 1 Reply 47, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 16623 times:
Frankly the other reaction I don't understand is the passengers'. If I know I have seen an impact between the plane I am in and another aircraft, there's nothing the captain can say that'll keep me onboard that plane without an inspection!
captainstefan From United States of America, joined May 2007, 338 posts, RR: 0 Reply 48, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14851 times:
Quoting kl911 (Reply 22): At Budapest they do walk arounds.
jreuschl From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 413 posts, RR: 0 Reply 49, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 14698 times:
At least in the US, if you questioned aircraft security, you probably would be taken off the plane and questioned to no end by the TSA and FBI!
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 51, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 12424 times:
Quoting bennett123 (Reply 50): I frankly see nothing that would merit TSA/FBI involvement.
he was responding to this statement:
Quoting blueflyer (Reply 47): Frankly the other reaction I don't understand is the passengers'. If I know I have seen an impact between the plane I am in and another aircraft, there's nothing the captain can say that'll keep me onboard that plane without an inspection!
If a passenger raises a big enough argument to force the crew to let him off the airplane, initially he is going to be investigated and possibly charged with interference with a flight crew - a federal crime with potential prison time. If the investigation showed actual damage to the aircraft, the passenger would likely not be prosecuted.
Of course - if you are concerned about the ability of the aircraft to safely fly - TSA/FBI or other local nation similar authorities is the lesser of two evils.
Though one thing almost for certain - the passenger would end up on the airline's private "No Fly" list.
DarkSnowyNight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 982 posts, RR: 1 Reply 54, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8141 times:
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 40):
From the Ryanair damage photo in the article (it is also included in post #37 above) - I don't see how anyone could see that doing a walkaround.
If the damage is atop the winglet, you'd pretty much have to be looking for it, and then, no promises...
Quoting Acheron (Reply 53):
There are better and safer options than FR, anyway, so no big loss.
Like who, exactly? I'll give you better, that's easy. But safer? It is true that the all-time highest body count resulting from pilot error/neglect (actually from any plane wreck for that matter) was from a european carrier. But it wasn't FR. They've had no fatalities in their history.
Posting without Talent is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
Dano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 55, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7992 times:
Quoting gingersnap (Reply 32): I read on PPRuNe that because she was demoted, she actually left FR altogether.
Well if that is her attitude, I hope she never finds another pilot job. She made a mistake, failed to inform the relevant parties involved... Man up love, deal with it!
Quoting kl911 (Reply 23): No, I didnt say that. But judging from the number of posts of AA planes hitting their own planes at airports they should be used to it. To me this sounds like FR bashing again. Every airline can get away with it exept for FR....typical..
This is not FR bashing, I think people can't believe that a commander of the 737-800 that struck another aircraft, passengers reported seeing the hit, but she still elects to continue her flight and not inform the American 767 nor the tower to what happened. You have to ask, and again not FR bashing, what kind of flight deck culture is at FR.
Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6260 posts, RR: 39 Reply 56, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7615 times:
Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 55): This is not FR bashing, I think people can't believe that a commander of the 737-800 that struck another aircraft, passengers reported seeing the hit, but she still elects to continue her flight and not inform the American 767 nor the tower to what happened. You have to ask, and again not FR bashing, what kind of flight deck culture is at FR.
Basically it is aeronautical hit and run. The really bad part is that the AA pilot, having no knowledge that his plane has been damaged, is led into an illegal and very possibly unsafe takeoff. I cannot imagine any pilot, seeing the damage in the photo posted, would then proceed with a takeoff. The fact that the flight did not have any problems is good fortune, but it certainly was not guaranteed.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
icna05e From France, joined Feb 2006, 289 posts, RR: 0 Reply 57, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7541 times:
Well. They could at least have done it LH-style and just got out to check visually... This Is Why I Love JFK (by Contrails15 Nov 4 2009 in Civil Aviation)
And then turned around to the gate. Voilà! But really, what happened here is crazy, scary, and inexcusable. What if....
acelanzarote From Spain, joined Nov 2005, 783 posts, RR: 0 Reply 58, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7488 times:
Since the Plane is Irish reg, would their (CAA or whatever) also investigate? Would the FAA be involved since it involved an American reg plane, asking the Spanish the outcome as well?
Thankfully this had a safe ending, but had that AA flight crashed into the Atlantic, would the poss cause ever have been found I wonder....
from the Island with sun and great photo's.. Why not visit Lanzarote
pliersinsight From United States of America, joined May 2008, 446 posts, RR: 0 Reply 60, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 7429 times:
Quoting Gulfstream650 (Reply 59):
I'm non legal expert but is there any case for AA's passengers to sue Ryanair for perhaps putting their lives in jeopardy?
One of the key elements for a cause of action would be damages. Here, what are the AA passengers damages? They didn't even know they were flying on a damaged plane. So the answer is no. They would have had to have been injured somehow or were killed. You can't collect for what could have happened, only what damage did occur to the passengers. Here there was no damage, so no case. Before everyone chooses to disagree with me on this point of law, I'm finishing up my first decade in practice as a personal injury attorney and hold a private certificate.
The only one with damages here is AA.
The key lesson out of all off this is that you need to speak up when you see something not right. Everyone in society needs to buck the fat, dumb and happy ethos prevalent today. Within reason, you shouldn't take no for an answer and question "authority". If a situation doesn't seem right, it probably isn't. I think we'd have a lot less death and destruction if people stood up and said what they were really thinking, not to mention standing their ground after they do so.
Gulfstream650 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 489 posts, RR: 0 Reply 61, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 7297 times:
Quoting pliersinsight (Reply 60): The key lesson out of all off this is that you need to speak up when you see something not right. Everyone in society needs to buck the fat, dumb and happy ethos prevalent today. Within reason, you shouldn't take no for an answer and question "authority". If a situation doesn't seem right, it probably isn't. I think we'd have a lot less death and destruction if people stood up and said what they were really thinking, not to mention standing their ground after they do so.
Agree with your point. That being said, I think it is fair point to say that many a passenger on a US carrier would fear doing so.
Take the Comair crash in Lexington - if I were a passenger on board and I noticed that the plane was on the wrong runway and I came charging down the aisle of the plane during take off. An air-marshal on board - food for thought.
Taking my point to the extreme - I do believe to some extent that these days passengers are in some ways intimidated to the extent that they will keep their mouth shut. We have all seen examples on the news where passengers have been arrested (even shot (MIA)). Now it's not that you are a security risk but you don't want to be MISTAKEN for being one if you cause a scene.
I don't proclaim to be the best pilot in the world but I'm safe
rfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6150 posts, RR: 25 Reply 62, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7119 times:
Quoting acelanzarote (Reply 58): Since the Plane is Irish reg, would their (CAA or whatever) also investigate? Would the FAA be involved since it involved an American reg plane, asking the Spanish the outcome as well?
I'm certain the Irish authorities and the US NTSB were given the opportunity to participate in the investigation. The various aircraft accident investigation authorities actually cooperate very well among most nations.
seabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 4277 posts, RR: 4 Reply 63, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 7095 times:
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 56): The really bad part is that the AA pilot, having no knowledge that his plane has been damaged, is led into an illegal and very possibly unsafe takeoff. I cannot imagine any pilot, seeing the damage in the photo posted, would then proceed with a takeoff.
The lack of notice to AA is the problem that stands out above all others here. The FR crew (actually the FO) could see from the cockpit that their own winglet was basically intact. But they could not see whether the AA aircraft was damaged. When they had been informed that a collision occurred, they had to speak up so that the AA crew could ensure its aircraft was safe to fly (which it likely wasn't).
Quoting pliersinsight (Reply 60): One of the key elements for a cause of action would be damages. Here, what are the AA passengers damages?
But if the AA aircraft had crashed, FR would absolutely be facing a very, very large chunk of liability.
Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
neutrino From Singapore, joined May 2012, 353 posts, RR: 0 Reply 64, posted (9 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 6888 times:
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 63): The FR crew (actually the FO) could see from the cockpit that their own winglet was basically intact. But they could not see whether the AA aircraft was damaged.
At both aircrafts' stationary lineup position after the hit, they might not have been able to discern it. The least they should have done when the 767 moved off to the runway proper is to keep a close lookout on its tail emphange. The chances of spotting the damage then would have been very much higher. Perhaps they just caught the ostrich syndrome and did not care to see.
Gulfstream650 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 489 posts, RR: 0 Reply 65, posted (9 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6691 times:
Quoting neutrino (Reply 64): At both aircrafts' stationary lineup position after the hit, they might not have been able to discern it. The least they should have done when the 767 moved off to the runway proper is to keep a close lookout on its tail emphange. The chances of spotting the damage then would have been very much higher. Perhaps they just caught the ostrich syndrome and did not care to see.
Remember - a passenger notified a crew member who in turn notified the Captain. Simply inexcusable.
I don't proclaim to be the best pilot in the world but I'm safe
B6JFKH81 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2767 posts, RR: 7 Reply 67, posted (9 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6325 times:
Quoting icna05e (Reply 57): Well. They could at least have done it LH-style and just got out to check visually...
This Is Why I Love JFK (by Contrails15 Nov 4 2009 in Civil Aviation)
That is a blast from the past!!! That controller cracks me up, one of the best tower/local controllers out there.
"If you do not learn from history, you are doomed to repeat it"
icna05e From France, joined Feb 2006, 289 posts, RR: 0 Reply 68, posted (9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 6014 times:
Yep! After diggin out that old thread, I indulged myself into Youtube clips of him and Boston John. Those guys are actors and ATC mutants, sooooo funny!
pliersinsight From United States of America, joined May 2008, 446 posts, RR: 0 Reply 69, posted (9 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 5312 times:
Quoting Gulfstream650 (Reply 61): aking my point to the extreme - I do believe to some extent that these days passengers are in some ways intimidated to the extent that they will keep their mouth shut. We have all seen examples on the news where passengers have been arrested (even shot (MIA)). Now it's not that you are a security risk but you don't want to be MISTAKEN for being one if you cause a scene.
I think the way to handle it would just stay standing, calmly announce the issue, maintain an even tone...and not go bounding up the aisle. In the case of the LEX crash, with certain death as the result, I might take my chances with a few rounds of .357 sig in my direction versus certain death. If the government is paying for air marshals on regional jets at LEX when our Sheik friends are NOT there buying horses, they really are wasting money.
cf6ppe From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 306 posts, RR: 0 Reply 71, posted (9 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3742 times:
Idea from another thread re: Ryanair possibly charging for use of overhead bins got me to wondering if Ryanair had sent a bill to AA for the magical alterations carried out on the stabilizer on the AA 767. I would suppose that Ryanair could also bill for the winglet tip damage caused by the AA equipment...
Both of the above are things that I wouldn't be surprised as seeing Ryanair doing...
Maintnence might not even Do walkarounds anymore, AA is in bankruptcy and might have taken mechanics off the gate like united did some years ago to opt for less expensive ramp people to do the pushbacks and only use mechanics for inbound gripes and last minute Service checks.
I find this odd as well.. perhaps they rushed through the walkaround?
What about maintenance walkaround......
Actually I know airlines, which stopped maintenance walkarounds as too expensive. They argued that the pref-flight walkaround by the pilots would be enough and that anything else would be wasting time and money on doing the same work twice. Hapag Lloyd did it a few years ago, during daily check we were only supposed to look at the wheels, brakes and fan blades. Similarly there were only minimal cockpit checks for us. Also no cabin emergency light test, "since the hosties would do it in the morning during pre-flight". Since the motion was coupled with making maintenance staff redundant (because there is now less work), the union representing Hapag at this time worked strictly to rules, so that the result were plenty of delays because the pilot found something in the morning during his preflight check ("Didn´t you see the bird strike on the tail?" "No, sir, we are not supposed to go looking there!") in an area which was not supposed to be inspected by the engineers during the daily check and which could have easily been repaired during the night, but now cost a massive delay.
FR tried the same game for a while, but went away from it again due to the increase of delays.
FR also have unmanned stations with no technical presence. Their daily check is valid for 48 hours (originally though as in case of emergency if an aircraft gets diverted over night to an airport outside the FR network, so that the plane could fly out from there next morning without having to fly in an engineer, but at this time is was stil done every 24 hours). Now on these bases the aircraft get shut down by the pilots and the daily check is done on some other base with engineering presence during a turnaround.
In any case, I´m sure In would have missed the damaged on top of the winglet as well. You simply cannot see it from ground without using a ladder or cherrypicker. On the other hand the winglet is such a lght structure that it has very restrictive damage limits.
HAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, RR: 58 Reply 74, posted (9 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2695 times:
Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 72): Maintnence might not even Do walkarounds anymore, AA is in bankruptcy and might have taken mechanics off the gate like united did some years ago to opt for less expensive ramp people to do the pushbacks and only use mechanics for inbound gripes and last minute Service checks.
Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 73): Actually I know airlines, which stopped maintenance walkarounds as too expensive. They argued that the pref-flight walkaround by the pilots would be enough a
Im surprised....The detailed checks by Maintenance compared to Flt crew walkaround cannot be compared.Every check from the Transit to the more detailed Layover/Check A/B/C or D is Important to Maintenance.
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Denmark, joined Jun 2010, 432 posts, 
From Finland, joined Mar 2009, 612 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 128 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Sep 2011, 784 posts, 
From India, joined Jan 2001, 31201 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Jul 2003, 4977 posts, 
From Kiribati, joined Sep 2009, 207 posts, 
From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1621 posts, 
From Singapore, joined May 2012, 353 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4249 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1381 posts, 
From Portugal, joined Mar 2010, 99 posts, 
From Spain, joined Sep 2005, 1418 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, 
From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 409 posts, 
From France, joined Feb 2006, 289 posts, 
The lack of notice to AA is the problem that stands out above all others here. The FR crew (actually the FO) could see from the cockpit that their own winglet was basically intact. But they could not see whether the AA aircraft was damaged. When they had been informed that a collision occurred, they had to speak up so that the AA crew could ensure its aircraft was safe to fly (which it likely wasn't).
Printer friendly format 
