Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Air Crashes Due To Hazardous Crew Attitudes (HELP)  
User currently offlineNZ747 From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 967 posts, RR: 4
Posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17800 times:

hey guys

I'm currently doing a crew resource management assignment on hazardous attitudes and my question is (that I need help on);

what major air disasters have resulted due to hazardous crew attitudes that have compromised safety of the flight?

Feed back will be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance
NZ747  

[Edited 2006-11-27 01:24:42]

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1619 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17818 times:

There is this one:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20041015X01633&key=1

I'd have to look and find some, but it seems there are many that are a result of bad CRM rather than hazardous attitudes.

M


User currently offlineSwissy From Switzerland, joined Jan 2005, 1734 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17768 times:

If you are talking about "careless" there would be the Aeroflot Airbus....
there are other ones I myself consider somewhat "careless" crews which resulted in fatalities and there is always the NTSB web site....

Cheers,


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21589 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17755 times:

I think the premise is sound, as the rate of crashes have declined as the technology in place to prevent crew from doing something wrong has grown more sophisticated. Other than bad maintenance, planes in the developed world are crashing now only when pilots make decisions the plane can't prevent them from making (or ATC screws up). Taking off/landing from the wrong runway, refusing to divert in bad weather, being vectored into each other, flying without a transponder, being spaced too closely by ATC.

If we can eliminate those mistakes, crashes of properly maintained aircraft would be nearly eliminated.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17748 times:

As long as it's not due tomorrow and you have a little time for some library research, try this:

1. Get a copy of the NTSB report on Air Florida 90 (737 taking off from DCA in a snow storm), which crashed in January 1982. It's available online and I'll re-edit this message once I find a link. Use it to get familiar with the accident. Then...

2. At the library, look up a couple magazine articles from later in 1982 (Oct or Nov, I think), in Science Digest and Psychology Today. Both magazines had articles related to airline safety and aeronautical decsionmaking, but one great article in particular was the one written by Robert Trivers and Huey Newton. Both guys were biologists, not aviation experts, and they discuss the crew aspects of the Air Florida accident in great detail, especially where it came to reality-evasion and self-deception.

I worked for Air Florida at the time, and knowing both pilots, I thought the observations in the Trivers/Newton article were spot-on. I think the article should be required reading for anyone connected with flight operations.

Good luck!


User currently offlineJetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2987 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17754 times:

The American Airlines crash at Little Rock takes the cake for me.

The pilot was a real cowboy. Too bad he died.



Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17695 times:

Quoting Jetdeltamsy (Reply 5):
The American Airlines crash at Little Rock takes the cake for me.

The pilot was a real cowboy. Too bad he died.

I always saw that one as another example of the self-deceptive and reality evasive behavior I refered to previously.

Case in point, they're on approach and the RVR drops below landing minimums, and the F/O announces such. The captain says that they're inside the final approach fix and, indeed they are, and can continue the approach.

What this didn't consider was exactly what was causing the reduced visibility as expressed in RVR. If it'd been fog that was driving the reduced RVR, it'd have been no problem, but the RVR was being driven down by heavy rain from the thunderstorm cell attacking the airport from the northwest side. Put another way, it could have been RVR 3000 in ping pong balls or RVR 3000 in bowling balls, and one's no problem and the other is a big problem. By focusing on the RVR value itself and not what was causing it, the PIC saw want he wanted to see, and we know what happened...


User currently offlineCoronado990 From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 1614 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 17686 times:

The one that will always stick in my mind is the KAL flight in Guam back in AUG 1997 because our agency had two passengers on the flight that never came home...

On August 6, 1997, about 0142:26 Guam local time, Korean Air flight 801, a Boeing 747-3B5B (747-300), Korean registration HL7468, operated by Korean Air Company, Ltd., crashed at Nimitz Hill, Guam. Flight 801 departed from Kimpo International Airport, Seoul, Korea, with 2 pilots, 1 flight engineer, 14 flight attendants, and 237 passengers on board. The airplane had been cleared to land on runway 6 Left at A.B. Won Guam International Airport, Agana, Guam, and crashed into high terrain about 3 miles southwest of the airport. Of the 254 persons on board, 228 were killed, and 23 passengers and 3 flight attendants survived the accident with serious injuries. The airplane was destroyed by impact forces and postcrash fire. Flight 801 was operating in U.S. airspace as a regularly scheduled international passenger service flight under the convention on International Civil Aviation and the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 1239 and was on an instrument flight rules flight plan.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

the captain's failure to adequately brief and execute the nonprecision approach and the first officer's and flight engineer's failure to effectively monitor and cross-check the captain's execution of the approach. Contributing to these failures were the captain's fatigue and Korean Air’s inadequate flight crew training. Contributing to the accident was the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) intentional inhibition of the minimum safe altitude warning system (MSAW) at Guam and the agency's failure to adequately manage the system.



Uncle SAN at your service!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17681 times:

Quoting NZ747 (Thread starter):
hazardous crew attitudes that have compromised safety of the flight?

NZ747, I can think of three accidents offhand where 'hazardous crew attitudes' CONTRIBUTED to accidents. But they were not the SOLE cause - nor would one expect them to be, since virtually all accidents are found to have had multiple contributory causes.

A further complication is that there is almost always a big element of uncertainty as to what really happened, especially in 'all killed' accidents.

The three that immediately come to mind are:-

1. KLM/PanAm Teneriffe - impatience on the part of the KLM pilot. However contributing causes were fog, inexpert Air Traffic Control, and radio interference.

2. Aeroflot 593 - the pilot let his kids 'fly' the aeroplane. Contributing causes were thought to have been lack of a 'mode change' warning system on the autopilot and inadequate 'upset recovery' training.

3. American 587 - the 'pilot flying' (First Officer) was unhappy about following too close behind a 'heavy' that had just taken off, but the Captain told him to proceed; and they ran into wake turbulence. Other contributing causes are thought to have included pilot error, over-sensitive rudder controls, inadequate training, and (on recent evidence) possible weakening of the rudder structure due to chemical contamination.

If any of those three would fit your bill I'd be happy to look out details/links for you.

[Edited 2006-11-27 02:46:41]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineTeneriffe77 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 472 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17651 times:

The 1974 Eastern DC9 accident at CLT is another example where the NTSB determined that the cause was "The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the accident was the flightcrew’s lack of altitude awareness at critical points during the approach due to poor cockpit discipline in that the crew did not follow prescribed procedures."
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19740911-1&lang=en


User currently offlineRedngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 44
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17609 times:

You could also consider Eastern Airlines Flight 401, an L1011 crash in the Florida Everglades outside of Miami, Florida in 1972. The crew were working together on a problem with an indicator light and lost track of the aircraft's altitude; by the time someone realized their mistake, they were less than 100 ft AGL and the plane crashed. A major contributing factor was a design flaw which allowed the autopilot to be disconnected on the copilot's yoke.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19721229-0&lang=en



Up, up and away!
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8691 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17548 times:

Aeroflot 593? Havent heard that one.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineN702ML From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 17528 times:

I recall one training class in Crew Resource Management when the crash of the Air Ontario F28 in snowy condition was discussed.....

The "attitude" of a commuting or deadheading pilot was that it was not his place to mention to the pilots that he thought there was snow/ice on the wings.

If I recall correctly, he survived and still testified that he would not have changed a thing about what he did: the pilot in command is the pilot in command and you do not question him or her.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17500 times:

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 11):
Aeroflot 593? Havent heard that one.

Pretty well-known case, MCOflyer:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8691 posts, RR: 16
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17464 times:

I didn't know about it. My bad.

MCOflyer



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineUN_B732 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 4289 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17462 times:

Don't forget Pinnacle 3701, the only reason that plane went down was because the crew were "pushing it to the limit"
The CVR really attests to how laid back that cockpit sounded.



What now?
User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17405 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 8):
1. KLM/PanAm Teneriffe - impatience on the part of the KLM pilot. However contributing causes were fog, inexpert Air Traffic Control, and radio interference.

Yes.

The others that spring to mind are:

2) a NW ferry flight of a CRJ in which the two pilots (no passengers) tried, for fun, to take the A/C to it's absolute operational height. The engines flamed out and they were not able to be restarted for technical reasons that escape me. Both pilots perished. There is a very sad transcript of them realising their dilemma and trying desperately to get out of it. I suggest a google search.

3) I recall AC had a 767 run out of fuel about 20 years ago and glide to a landing on a closed airport runway because of confusion at fueling between kilograms and pounds. It landed at Gimli Industrial Park Airport (which I believe was being used that day for drag racing) under no power, so it was then nicknamed the Gimli Glider. However - I don't think that this can be fairly attributed to "recklessness." Besides, some pretty heroic flying saved the passengers.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider



I come in peace
User currently offlineAbrelosojos From Venezuela, joined May 2005, 5130 posts, RR: 55
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17389 times:

Dont forget the utterly moronic incompetent crews of:

1/ SV 163: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudia_Flight_163
2/ AV 52: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avianca_Flight_52

Good luck with the project.

Cheers,
A.



Live, and let live.
User currently offlineTg 747-300 From Norway, joined Nov 1999, 1318 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 17393 times:

What about the Western Dc-10 wher the crew started experimenting with the engines during cruise..

tg 747-300



intentionally left blank
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 17311 times:

NZ747, in case it helps, it looks as if 'impatience' is quite a frequent feature of such accidents. It's not often mentioned, but pilots are often chided by their alrines for not 'keeping to schedule', which is pretty hard on them since so many factors outside their control can lead to delays.

This factor is fairly clearly shown in the CVR transcripts of two of the accidents I mentioned:-

AA587 (HOT2 is First Officer, HOT1 is Captain) - if they'd waited a few seconds the accident might not have happened:-

0912:40
HOT-2 lights to go. I'm gonna make... left turn two twenty. go out the
Bridge five thousand feet's the top. if we have a problem, I'll
clean it up at six.... ten.... left traffic for this runway....
0913:05
TWR Japan Air forty seven heavy, fly the Bridge Cimb, contact New
York departure, good morning.
0913:10
JAL47 Bridge Climb, switch to departure, Japan Air four seven, good
morning.
0913:21
HOT-1 you have the airplane.
HOT-2 I got the brakes.
0913:22
HOT-1 I have the radios.
0913:27.6
TWR American five eight seven heavy, wind three zero zero at
niner, runway three one left, cleared for takeoff.
0913:31.7
RDO-1 cleared for takeoff, American ah, five eight seven heavy.
0913:35.3
HOT-2 you happy with that distance?
0913:38.5
HOT-1 aah, he's.... we'll be all right once we get rollin'. he's supposed
to be five miles by the time we're airborne, that's the idea.
0913:45.5
HOT-2 so you're happy. lights?
0913:47.1
HOT-1 yeah, lights are on.
0913:47.8
HOT-2 takeoff check's complete, I'm on the roll. thank you sir."


http://www.airdisaster.com/cvr/aa587.shtml

KLM 4805 (RDO is PanAm, APP is ATC) - if the Controller had given them their route clearance sooner, or just said 'Continue holding' after giving it - or if the pilot hadn't mistaken it for takeoff clearance - or if he'd responded in English instead of Dutch - or if ATC hadn't said 'OK' - or if there hadn't been a screech on the radio - there would have been no accident:-

"1705:44.8 KLM Uh, the KLM ... four eight zero five is now ready for take-off ... uh and we're waiting for our ATC clearance.
1705:53.4 APP KLM eight seven * zero five uh you are cleared to the Papa Beacon climb to and maintain flight level nine zero right turn after take-off proceed with heading zero four zero until intercepting the three two five radial from Las Palmas VOR. (1706:08.2)
1706:09.6 KLM Ah roger, sir, we're cleared to the Papa Beacon flight level nine zero, right turn out zero four zero until intercepting the three two five and we're now (at take-off). (1706:17.9)
ca. 1706:13 KLM-1 We gaan. (We're going)
1706:18.19 APP OK.
1706:19.3 RDO No .. eh.
1706:20.08 APP Stand by for take-off, I will call you.
1706:20.3 RDO And we're still taxiing down the runway, the clipper one seven three six.
1706:19.39 - 1706:23.19 RDO and APP communications caused a shrill noise in KLM cockpit - messages not heard by KLM crew.
1706:25.6 APP
APP Thank you
1706:32.43 KLM-3 Is hij er niet af dan? {Is he not clear then?}
1706:34.1 KLM-1 Wat zeg je? {What do you say?}
1706:34.15 KLM-? Yup.
1706:34.7 KLM-3 Is hij er niet af, die Pan American? {Is he not clear that Pan American?}
1706:35.7 KLM-1 Jawel. {Oh yes. - emphatic}"


http://www.airdisaster.com/cvr/tenetr.shtml

[Edited 2006-11-27 04:44:01]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineDon From Japan, joined Jun 2003, 274 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 17275 times:

In addition to the examples given above, the following accidents are also due to the human factors.

1. Flying tigers B747 Freighter Crash in Kuala Lumpur in 1989 due to crew fatigue and no proper briefing

2. UA 173 running out of fuel in Portland, OR in 1978

3. Western Airlines DC10 crash in Mexico City in 1979 after landing on a wrong RW

The best example for advantages of CRM is the United 232 DC-10 incident in Sioux City, Iowa in 1989.


User currently offlineMav75 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 228 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 17234 times:

Quoting Tg 747-300 (Reply 18):
What about the Western DC-10 wher the crew started experimenting with the engines during cruise..

That was actually National Airlines flight 27 from MIA-SFO on 11/3/1973 .(DC-10-10 N60NA) The fan blades pierced the cabin and a passenger was killed. I think the poor guy was sucked out of the aircraft. They diverted to ABQ.

There was an infamous Western DC-10 crash though. It was flight 2605 (DC-10-10 N903WA) on October 31, 1979 from LAX-MEX. The aircraft mistakenly landed on a runway that was under construction and killed 72 people. IIRC, one of the contributing factors to this crash was a poor dynamic between the Captain and the F/O. The Captain was giving the F/O a hard time (about really stupid stuff) and the F/O basically clammed up and let the Captain crash the plane into construction equipment on the closed runway.


User currently offlinePHLJJS From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 418 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 17210 times:

Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 16):
3) I recall AC had a 767 run out of fuel about 20 years ago and glide to a landing on a closed airport runway because of confusion at fueling between kilograms and pounds. It landed at Gimli Industrial Park Airport (which I believe was being used that day for drag racing) under no power, so it was then nicknamed the Gimli Glider. However - I don't think that this can be fairly attributed to "recklessness." Besides, some pretty heroic flying saved the passengers.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

That was actually Air Transat, not Air Canada. The pilots were hailed as heros, but not trusting the computers and warning signals in the cockpit that pointed out the fuel leak put them that position in the first place. National Geographic featured it on their "Air Emergency" series last year.


User currently offlineTg 747-300 From Norway, joined Nov 1999, 1318 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 17194 times:

The G-III accident in Houston back in May or June 2004 also comes to mind.

And also the Chanllenger in Colorado.


tg 747-300



intentionally left blank
User currently offlineOPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 17189 times:

Quoting PHLJJS (Reply 22):
That was actually Air Transat, not Air Canada. The pilots were hailed as heros, but not trusting the computers and warning signals in the cockpit that pointed out the fuel leak put them that position in the first place. National Geographic featured it on their "Air Emergency" series last year.

Actually, he's correct--the 767 at Gimli was Air Canada. The Air Transat was an A330 that dead-sticked into the Azores. Two separate incidents, with Air Transat being the more current of the two.


25 Lucky42 : I think you mean National Airlines DC-10 over ABQ crew was determined to have caused #3 eng to overspeed and suffered an uncontained engine failure t
26 Post contains links NAV20 : PHLJJS, I think you're confusing the 'Gimli Glider' with the 'Azores Glider.' Further, in the latter case, I believe that the instruments warned of a
27 Jeffry747 : Wasn't AF358 partially due to the pilots disagreeing whether or not to land the plane?
28 LongbowPilot : Another item that might be of interest for you.. Eventhough the airplanes today have modern marvels that keep the sometimes tired, weary, and cowboyis
29 EMBQA : The Delta 727 crash in DFW. The flight crew spent part of the pre-flight BS'ing with a Flight Attendent... forgot to set the slats for take of and cra
30 PHLJJS : Yes, you guys are right. Thanks for correcting me.
31 Post contains links NAV20 : No problem, PHLJJS. One thing I forgot to mention; the primary cause of the 'Azores glider' case was actually bad maintenance, not bad piloting:- "The
32 Mav75 : I agree. Here is what happens when you stick to the topic at hand and not go off on half baked, flame baiting tangents. It was nice to participate in
33 Post contains links Bill142 : What about the Bashkirian Airlines 2937 and DHL 611 collision over germany. It would relate more to the attitudes at Sky Guide more so then the flight
34 Peh : This is interesting. I hadn't heard this. What's your source?
35 BCAL : Rather surprising that nobody has mentioned the crash of BEA’s (British Airways) Hawker Siddeley Trident 1C G-ARPI at Staines, near LHR, on 18 June
36 Post contains links Wunala : have you tried http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...nvestigation_reports.aspx?mode=avi there are several ones that mention crew attitude, and how th
37 Flyfisher1976 : Neither had I...where did you read this?
38 777236ER : You don't need to look any further than Pinnacle 3701.
39 Post contains links and images FlyingColours : There was also the case of the British Midland 737-400 at EMA, The Kegworth Air Disaster. Although the crews attitudes were not really wreckless there
40 David L : Just to be picky, I think the confusion was between kilograms and litres.
41 Post contains images OPNLguy : From aviation-safety.net: "They dripped the tanks and the flightcrew calculated the total amount of fuel by using 1.77 pounds/liter as the specific g
42 Post contains links ChrisI1024 : Black Box might give you some ideas.
43 Post contains links and images NZ747 : Thank you all so much for your help. The information provided has been very useful for my crm assignment. I have to illustrate hazardous attitudes wit
44 Nbgskygod : Another good one was the crash of a NEA F-27 in Hanover, NH. The crew decended lower than the reccomended altitude and struck Moose Mountain, killing
45 David L : Fair enough. I knew it was a conversion between weight and volume that caused the problem, rather than a direct conversion between metric and imperia
46 Post contains links NAV20 : It's recent information, guys, which was the subject of an urgent NTSB Safety Recommendation earlier this year. As briefly as I can put it, NTSB inve
47 Post contains links NAV20 : NZ747, other factors - probably contributing to the impatience/confusion - included diversions due to a bomb threat, fog, delays, taxiing mixups, etc
48 Post contains links Lemurs : Funnily enough, I like reading NTSB reports. I've probably skimmed through a few dozen of the most interesting ones over the last 50 years, and the on
49 Flyfisher1976 : Sorry to be nit picky...but to suggest: ...is a rather bold statement considering. The NTSB report does not list this as a contributing factor in thi
50 Post contains links NAV20 : Funny thing, FlyFisher - you could come on here and deny the existence of God, and get little or no reaction; but any suggestion that AA587 was cause
51 Flyfisher1976 : Hardly an attack...I never said that it was 100% pilot error. There were several contributing factors, all of which are clearly listed in the NTSB re
52 Curmudgeon : Due respect and all, but there was no deadheading pilot on that flight. There was also the complicating factor of operating a scheduled jet service i
53 Post contains links and images NAV20 : NZ747, re-reading my #45, I realised that it wasn't very helpful to you in carrying out the assignment. I'm afraid that, in my view, the cause of KLM
54 OPNLguy : Might I ask what you base this statement on?
55 Curmudgeon : A more than passing intimacy with the details, and the memory of the funerals is still fresh too. There was an RCMP officer on board who was vocal abo
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Air Crashes Due To Hazardous Crew Attitudes (HELP)
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Delay Due To "fuel Imbalance" - Real Or An Excuse? posted Tue Jan 24 2006 11:35:36 by Cxsjr
Can I Descend Due To Icing? Says The 737 Pilot posted Fri Dec 16 2005 18:22:39 by Julesmusician
In-Flight Shutdown Due To Heavy Rain posted Fri Sep 16 2005 11:52:13 by 777
Any Plane Incidents Due To Oxygen Tank Explosions? posted Thu Aug 12 2004 04:40:19 by Eksath
Trimming Due To Bathroom Queues posted Fri Mar 26 2004 11:09:06 by EconoBoy
Back To Origin Due To Tire Blow. Why? posted Sun Nov 17 2002 23:02:29 by Turbulence
Going Around Due To 'unsecure Cabin' posted Sat Oct 19 2002 23:01:56 by Donder10
Question On Air Feed To An Afterburning Turbojet posted Thu Oct 19 2006 17:55:41 by TripleDelta
How To Deal With Air Sickness posted Fri Aug 4 2006 06:14:07 by AAden
What Happens To The Air Carrier After The Accident posted Thu Jun 8 2006 04:50:24 by Nanjack

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format