Revelation wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

We live in a world that is dominated by results. Automation did wonders for aviation that pilots with proper feel and great hand skills could not. Your typical 'dumbed' down pilot today will go through his entire career without ever having encountered a scenario where he has to hand fly. With automation, he will rarely have to intervene unless you have a Qantas 72 edge of the envelope case scenario, and they will average fewer crashes as a result.

How does your "average pilot" deal with a TCAS RA? Not a QF72 edge of the envelope situation at all, something they are likely to run into in their careers.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

1. Aviation is logistics. It is the same line of work as Door Dash, Uber Eats, shipping, bus transport, cruise ship, rail..........just in the air with more expensive equipment.

If the Uber Eats guy does not pay attention with his bicycle, he eats pavement or loses his life in an accident.
If a rail operator does not pay attention, he will derail, if switches are not done well trains collide.
If a ship does not have the proper people managing, you have Cahaya Bahari, or Costa Concordia.
Trucking and bus transport problems are way too many.

Does it mean that the people who work in these other lines do not care? They do, but sometimes people make mistakes they should not make and management needs to make a decision as to whether they remain on the job or not.

It is an employee's job work in such a way that they continue keeping their job. It is management's job to ensure that an enterprise is not injured by the people they have entrusted with people's lives and expensive equipment.

Emirates once paid $7,000 to every passenger on the jet that crashed in India. The reputation cost that comes with a plane crash is vastly more expensive because passengers begin to doubt the product.

Finally, why are we questioning everything bar the pilots? Or a far better question is why are they they only ones that encountered such an issue? Sometimes answers are found in simplicity.

It is management's job to ensure that an enterprise is not injured by the people they have entrusted with people's lives and expensive equipment.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

We live in a world that is dominated by results. Automation did wonders for aviation that pilots with proper feel and great hand skills could not. Your typical 'dumbed' down pilot today will go through his entire career without ever having encountered a scenario where he has to hand fly. With automation, he will rarely have to intervene unless you have a Qantas 72 edge of the envelope case scenario, and they will average fewer crashes as a result.

How does your "average pilot" deal with a TCAS RA? Not a QF72 edge of the envelope situation at all, something they are likely to run into in their careers.

How common is this?

An RA occurs on average every 1,000 flight hours on short/medium-haul aircraft and every 3,000 hours for long-haul aircraft.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

NW747-400 wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

1. Airbus is trying to get to single pilot operations. You think they are doing that and dumping more duties on pilots?

We are not going back because there is no rollback. Calhoun on the other hand said that for their next plane they are possibly going to take the competition's approach. No going back.

2. We do not need to be fly planes to have an opinion. Can you imagine how debates would be on here if we only had a single voice coming from pilots and pilots alone?

3. You can hold, dump fuel and return to point of origin. It is a myth that you need to continue with the flight to the target destination. It has been done many times, even by Emirates on the A380. This is why we should never let people dictate that you can only have an opinion if you have been in the cockpit.


https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/emirates-airline/airbus-a380-to-dubai-u-a-e-returns-to-toronto-canada-after-an-engine-issue/

Another example. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2020/01/24/did-the-delta-airlines-fuel-dump-possibly-prevent-a-larger-disaster/


This comment is patently false. Even if you were on a 767 which was not built with fuel dumping, you would still like to stay close to the airport of origin refer to Blue Panorama, 2004 in Rome.

4. Who told you Emirates does not know what happened?

5. Last comment is you arguing minutiae.

Another untrue statement. The 767 CAN fuel dump. I know because I’ve flown it and dumped fuel.

I only point this out to show that you are dead set on stating what you don’t know as fact.

Blue Panorama. Rome. 2004.

There was no fuel dumping system. I am not pulling stuff from thin air.

Revelation wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Revelation wrote:

How does your "average pilot" deal with a TCAS RA? Not a QF72 edge of the envelope situation at all, something they are likely to run into in their careers.

How common is this?

I'm glad you seek to be better informed.

An RA occurs on average every 1,000 flight hours on short/medium-haul aircraft and every 3,000 hours for long-haul aircraft.

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_c ... nce_system

So, definitely not a "Qantas 72 edge of the envelope case scenario".

bigb wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

NW747-400 wrote:

Another untrue statement. The 767 CAN fuel dump. I know because I’ve flown it and dumped fuel.

I only point this out to show that you are dead set on stating what you don’t know as fact.

Blue Panorama. Rome. 2004.

There was no fuel dumping system. I am not pulling stuff from thin air.

How about backing up the claim that, that particular 767 didn’t have a fuel dumping system like moderator has suggested?

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

I'm sorry but none of that makes any sense at all. You're conflating, confusing and simplifying a whole bunch of things which have nothing to do with one another.

Pilots transport people and goods. It is just like any other logistics job. It is what it is.

Results. Companies are rated by results and so is safety.

Emirates has one of the best safety records of any airline. They have not got to where they are being led by incompetent people. Proof is in the pudding.
They may do things differently, but guess what, such is life.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

I'm sorry but none of that makes any sense at all. You're conflating, confusing and simplifying a whole bunch of things which have nothing to do with one another.

Pilots transport people and goods. It is just like any other logistics job. It is what it is.

Results. Companies are rated by results and so is safety.

Emirates has one of the best safety records of any airline. They have not got to where they are being led by incompetent people. Proof is in the pudding.
They may do things differently, but guess what, such is life.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

1. Airbus is trying to get to single pilot operations. You think they are doing that and dumping more duties on pilots?

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

2. We do not need to be fly planes to have an opinion.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

3. You can hold, dump fuel and return to point of origin. It is a myth that you need to continue with the flight to the target destination.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

It can take over 10 hours for an aircraft on a long haul flight to get below maximum landing weight. With tyre issues on takeoff it is preferable to have the aircraft as light as possible for landing, which just happens to occur at the destination.

This comment is patently false. Even if you were on a 767 which was not built with fuel dumping, you would still like to stay close to the airport of origin refer to Blue Panorama, 2004 in Rome.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

4. Who told you Emirates does not know what happened?

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

We live in a world that is dominated by results. Automation did wonders for aviation that pilots with proper feel and great hand skills could not. Your typical 'dumbed' down pilot today will go through his entire career without ever having encountered a scenario where he has to hand fly.

9w748capt wrote:

NW747-400 wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

1. Airbus is trying to get to single pilot operations. You think they are doing that and dumping more duties on pilots?

We are not going back because there is no rollback. Calhoun on the other hand said that for their next plane they are possibly going to take the competition's approach. No going back.

2. We do not need to be fly planes to have an opinion. Can you imagine how debates would be on here if we only had a single voice coming from pilots and pilots alone?

3. You can hold, dump fuel and return to point of origin. It is a myth that you need to continue with the flight to the target destination. It has been done many times, even by Emirates on the A380. This is why we should never let people dictate that you can only have an opinion if you have been in the cockpit.


https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/emirates-airline/airbus-a380-to-dubai-u-a-e-returns-to-toronto-canada-after-an-engine-issue/

Another example. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2020/01/24/did-the-delta-airlines-fuel-dump-possibly-prevent-a-larger-disaster/


This comment is patently false. Even if you were on a 767 which was not built with fuel dumping, you would still like to stay close to the airport of origin refer to Blue Panorama, 2004 in Rome.

4. Who told you Emirates does not know what happened?

5. Last comment is you arguing minutiae.

Another untrue statement. The 767 CAN fuel dump. I know because I’ve flown it and dumped fuel.

I only point this out to show that you are dead set on stating what you don’t know as fact.

Just curious - is it possible that some 767s were built without the capability to dump fuel? Gremlinzz has linked to that accident report which says something like "fuel dumping was not a possibility" - but the way I read it is that fuel dumping wasn't possible but not necessarily because the aircraft wasn't physically capable, but could have been due to safety concerns (not a pilot but it would make sense to me that if you have an engine on fire and suspect you're leaking fuel that you wouldn't want to purposely dump more?).

bigb wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

NW747-400 wrote:

Another untrue statement. The 767 CAN fuel dump. I know because I’ve flown it and dumped fuel.

I only point this out to show that you are dead set on stating what you don’t know as fact.

Just curious - is it possible that some 767s were built without the capability to dump fuel? Gremlinzz has linked to that accident report which says something like "fuel dumping was not a possibility" - but the way I read it is that fuel dumping wasn't possible but not necessarily because the aircraft wasn't physically capable, but could have been due to safety concerns (not a pilot but it would make sense to me that if you have an engine on fire and suspect you're leaking fuel that you wouldn't want to purposely dump more?).

If you look at the photo of the aircraft, on the aft of the wing just inside of the wingtip you’ll see the fuel jettison nozzle. Since the aircraft experienced uncontained engine fire in the right engine. With the direction of the air flow, location of the fire being on the right side and location of the fuel jettison nozzle on the right wing. By jettison fuel in that situation, you are asking yourself to set your wing on fire thus putting your ability to safety return back to the field in jeopardy even more so.

Does that make sense?

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Emirates has one of the best safety records of any airline. They have not got to where they are being led by incompetent people. Proof is in the pudding.

DeltaMD90 wrote:

I'll add and start off by saying that there are definitely fireable offenses.

I can't tell you the amount of times I have learned from the mistakes of other pilots. Almost every single one of the hundreds of lessons I've learned have been voluntarily shared. I have made dozens and dozens of mistakes... I have NEVER feared my superiors and have happily shared all of my goof ups.

Over the years, I have heard many say they learned from the talk I gave to others regarding my mistake, and I've told others the same (the lessons I learned from them.)

When you're super harsh and fire-first-ask-questions-later, all you do is encourage pilots to cover up mistakes. Who knows if I would be here had I not heard that one or two lessons from others over the years, if those pilots kept things to themselves. Aviation safety is one of the best communities I've been a part of.

If what I've read here and other places is correct about EK, their approach is nothing new... It is outdated, the old way of doing things which (through hundreds of deaths over the years) led to the safety climate we have today.

Which other airline has terrifying mistakes like this EK flight? Kind of telling that these incidents are rare, no? There is a lot that goes into it, it's a complex subject

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Blue Panorama. Rome. 2004.

There was no fuel dumping system. I am not pulling stuff from thin air.

Gatorman96 wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Blue Panorama. Rome. 2004.

There was no fuel dumping system. I am not pulling stuff from thin air.

You can see in this image that the accident aircraft in question clearly had the ability to dump fuel (left wingtip just behind the “EI” in the reg, you can see the fuel dump nozzle)

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blue_Panorama_Airlines_Boeing_767-3G5(ER)_EI-CXO_Flying_Over_My_Rooftop_(8201885887).jpg

(Photo credit: Faisal Akram, original image)

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Aquila3 wrote:

Following all the evidence so far presented, why FAA/EASA/others do NOT downgrade Emirates and/or UAE operators in their ruled airspace on safety concerns? It was done in the past for much less, as I understand.

I had a post taken down, and I was not going to reply.

My thinking, there is a lot o casual racism that goes on over here that people might not even be aware of.

There is someone that states that this is an enterprise that is stuck in the 12th century. Off site, I asked what this means. Does it mean that if you make a mistake you never have to answer? Or what is it, going by some of what has been posted, making an error so serious as the one made just because someone did not take time to counter check should be solved by simply putting a company wide memo. Do people really understand what is at stake? Human lives. Sometimes you sack people and send a message out on what to watch out for.

You then have people coming in and having an opinion that there is not a lot of meritocracy. Why on Earth would anyone expect to go and work in another country and believe that they would not want to promote their own first and foremost? This is the freaking aviation industry where most nations will not even let you own a majority stake if you are not from the same country or even the same trading block like EU. So yes, they promote their own and my thinking is that in time they would want to have Emiratis running most aspects of the airline. What is wrong in that?

I have similarly seen some opine that there is an issue with ATC and maintenance. Since Emirates started off in 1985, they have one hull loss that led to loss of life on the ground. There is a FlyDubai fatal accident in Russia and they have not had the runway issues that we have seen in the US or Europe. Outside this, they have fewer crashes than most other countries despite flying a tonne of miles each year. All the 'poor practices' have not led to a maintenance associated crash, yet we have had so many of these in the US and even Japan Airlines. Poor training as pointed out so many times on this topic has not led to what one would assume would be a crash every so often to justify this stance.

We are also told that these pilots might not have the skills. This company flies into monsoon country, and even in England when storms are bad, they have no problems landing planes without issue. Maybe, they are doing something right as opposed to what is parroted and repeated on here. Why else would you also see people bringing standards like 'the FAA does this, and US airlines do that' as if this is the standard everyone has to aspire to achieve? I tried pointing this out without going into detail, drawing parallels with ET302, how that was covered in the media, US hearings before Boeing admitted that they had an issue. It is so ingrained in some that there is one way of doing things. It is a blinkered way of looking at things and imagining that other people have nothing to contribute rather than copy the would be standard bearers. It is so common that some might not even see the folly in this type of thinking.

Different cultures evolve differently, and different companies behave differently. People need to stop behaving like there is only one way of doing things and getting the desired results. That said, it does not mean that the ME3 do not have issues. Those issues are aspects one needs to be comfortable with when they go to work there, otherwise, stay at home.

People need to stop behaving like there is only one way of doing things and getting the desired results.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

reltney wrote:

It’s simple as this…. FLY the PLANE.

Are people forgetting how to fly or never taught in the first place….that is the question of the day.

It's not so much pilots forgetting to fly. It's pilots not being allowed to. First off in EK long haul they only get a few sectors per month as PF.

And then you have a punitive culture which not only demands automation but pretty much wants to eradicate any "flying out of the box" ie on LNAV/VNAV as much as possible, no track shortening, no creativity. Just do what the FMC and ATC tell you to do.

Any attempt at thinking out of the box and the slightest mistake and you are immediately dismissed without investigation. It's a 12th century justice system in a 2021 global carrier.

Wouldn't surprise me to think the crew on the Flight Deck decided to continue to IAD rather than return to DXB lest they draw attention to their mistake. It's a culture of fear and cover ups.

reltney wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

reltney wrote:

It’s simple as this…. FLY the PLANE.

Are people forgetting how to fly or never taught in the first place….that is the question of the day.

It's not so much pilots forgetting to fly. It's pilots not being allowed to. First off in EK long haul they only get a few sectors per month as PF.

And then you have a punitive culture which not only demands automation but pretty much wants to eradicate any "flying out of the box" ie on LNAV/VNAV as much as possible, no track shortening, no creativity. Just do what the FMC and ATC tell you to do.

Any attempt at thinking out of the box and the slightest mistake and you are immediately dismissed without investigation. It's a 12th century justice system in a 2021 global carrier.

Wouldn't surprise me to think the crew on the Flight Deck decided to continue to IAD rather than return to DXB lest they draw attention to their mistake. It's a culture of fear and cover ups.

True and sad. The termination thing is idiotic at the highest levels. I am a super long haul pilot for the last 10 years and because I am, I teach them to fly the plane and back up with automation. If you can’t fly, you cannot use automation. As for proficiency, I actually was the high landing pilot for 2 years on thr 747-400. 30 landings in 2 years. I think out of the box and teach others to do so. Any other formula is trouble…. No, how much automation do I use? I takeoff flying manually with flight directors and auto throttles until climbing above 10000 ft. Sometimes all the way up to cruise I’ll hand fly and it’s legal in RVSM as long as you don’t Intermediately level off. If work load is high, autopilot comes on around 2000-5000 ft. Somewhere in decent if workload permits, autopilot is off about 18000 . Autothrottles off about 10000 ft and I’ll do 2-3 landings with manual brakes then 1-2 with auto brakes.

I stay proficient in both manual flying and full up automation. If an airline doesn’t allow it, that airline is a questionable airline.

Cheers…

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

What do people think will happen in aviation? That there will be no incidents and accidents? That is an impossible ask, in an industry that has way too many moving parts and different parties that rely on one another to offer service. So you look to have minimal crash landings and hope that incidents remain manageable and minimal. This is all someone could ask for if they are being realistic.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

zkojq wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

It's not so much pilots forgetting to fly. It's pilots not being allowed to.

And then you have a punitive culture which not only demands automation but pretty much wants to eradicate any "flying out of the box" ie on LNAV/VNAV as much as possible, no track shortening, no creativity. Just do what the FMC and ATC tell you to do.

Exactly, it's a dire indictment of what management thinks of their pilot group's abilities when they don't even trust them enough to be able to fly a raw data approach or use manual thrust.

At the end of the day, the degradation of hand flying skills is something that every Training Department should be proactively trying to counter. Allowing crew to hand fly an approach or departure where/when it's appropriate to do so goes a long way to achieving this. Ignoring the issue or pretending it's not happening is obviously not going to solve anything.

Though, to be fair, EK is far from the only carrier to do such practices. Especially with LCCs, it's fairly common to highly discourage if not completely disallow the use of anything but the highest level of automation in non-emergency situations. A worrying trend but one that's not new.

Give EK's route network, you do wonder how often crew are faced with, for example, having to fly a VOR Approach and how much the "average" crew would struggle with doing so.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Any attempt at thinking out of the box and the slightest mistake and you are immediately dismissed without investigation. It's a 12th century justice system in a 2021 global carrier.

Completely the antithesis of an open safety culture. I find these issues really fascinating. I often wonder how long it would take to instill a healthy safety culture in a large pilot group like Emirates' even if you suddenly had the right people in leadership positions starting tomorrow. Not really something that can be changed quickly. It's one thing to allow crew members to hand fly an approach. It's quite another for them to actually do so for fear of management repercussions if they mess something up and are forced to execute a go around.

By the way, some on this site overrate hand flying and underestimate why an airline would want to minimize pilots flying aircraft. Or the fact that majority of pilots embrace automation, as do aviation authorities worldwide.

Some may not like to listen to that, or even admit it. When there was more hand flying, there were more accidents caused by human error more than anything else. So why on Earth would you not encourage your staff to actually use automation?

Aviation is safer today than it has ever been because of automation.

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Gatorman96 wrote:

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Blue Panorama. Rome. 2004.

There was no fuel dumping system. I am not pulling stuff from thin air.

You can see in this image that the accident aircraft in question clearly had the ability to dump fuel (left wingtip just behind the “EI” in the reg, you can see the fuel dump nozzle)

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blue_Panorama_Airlines_Boeing_767-3G5(ER)_EI-CXO_Flying_Over_My_Rooftop_(8201885887).jpg

(Photo credit: Faisal Akram, original image)

I went with what I read, presented that including the accident report referenced.

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

ayirpamar wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

I can understand how it can be during the latter phases but can fatigue be a factor even at the start of a fresh leg when it isn't a stopover?

jeffrey0032j wrote:

ayirpamar wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

I can understand how it can be during the latter phases but can fatigue be a factor even at the start of a fresh leg when it isn't a stopover?

0225 is right smack in the middle of the deep sleep part of a human's circadian rythmn. This is why there is a disproportionate number of road accidents vs traffic volume during this period (2-4 am)

Cubsrule wrote:

jeffrey0032j wrote:

ayirpamar wrote:

I can understand how it can be during the latter phases but can fatigue be a factor even at the start of a fresh leg when it isn't a stopover?

0225 is right smack in the middle of the deep sleep part of a human's circadian rythmn. This is why there is a disproportionate number of road accidents vs traffic volume during this period (2-4 am)

Perhaps this is a hair off topic, but do you have a link on the causal link between fatigue and nighttime auto accidents? The fatigue situation is similar between autos and aircraft, but the percentage of intoxicated drivers is a lot higher at that hour and intoxication isn't--or shouldn't be--an issue amongst pilots.

jeffrey0032j wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

jeffrey0032j wrote:

0225 is right smack in the middle of the deep sleep part of a human's circadian rythmn. This is why there is a disproportionate number of road accidents vs traffic volume during this period (2-4 am)

Perhaps this is a hair off topic, but do you have a link on the causal link between fatigue and nighttime auto accidents? The fatigue situation is similar between autos and aircraft, but the percentage of intoxicated drivers is a lot higher at that hour and intoxication isn't--or shouldn't be--an issue amongst pilots.

One that is a little old, and specific for truck drivers, although this is a group least likely to drink.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.10 ... 4-2529-1_8

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

It was a factor in FZ981:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35855678

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... s-flydubai

Given the last two years of pandemic rules pilots have been largely kept in hotel rooms in layovers and subject to all kinds of additional measures like testing, quarantine etc that add to stress which is a factor in fatigue. The simple act of getting out of a hotel room and walking around on a layover is a fantastic tool to manage stress and reduce fatigue, but that has largely been denied to pilots for two years without a care what the long term effect would be. Eventually it will catch up to them.

ayirpamar wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

I can understand how it can be during the latter phases but can fatigue be a factor even at the start of a fresh leg when it isn't a stopover?

9w748capt wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

It was a factor in FZ981:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35855678

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... s-flydubai

Given the last two years of pandemic rules pilots have been largely kept in hotel rooms in layovers and subject to all kinds of additional measures like testing, quarantine etc that add to stress which is a factor in fatigue. The simple act of getting out of a hotel room and walking around on a layover is a fantastic tool to manage stress and reduce fatigue, but that has largely been denied to pilots for two years without a care what the long term effect would be. Eventually it will catch up to them.

Idk - if a 0225 departure time is unsafe then that's going to cause global problems. That's a pretty normal departure time for westbound long-hauls. Surely EK pilots plan their daily (nightly) routines as best they can, given their regularly irregular schedules.

9w748capt wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

It was a factor in FZ981:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35855678

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... s-flydubai

Given the last two years of pandemic rules pilots have been largely kept in hotel rooms in layovers and subject to all kinds of additional measures like testing, quarantine etc that add to stress which is a factor in fatigue. The simple act of getting out of a hotel room and walking around on a layover is a fantastic tool to manage stress and reduce fatigue, but that has largely been denied to pilots for two years without a care what the long term effect would be. Eventually it will catch up to them.

Idk - if a 0225 departure time is unsafe then that's going to cause global problems. That's a pretty normal departure time for westbound long-hauls. Surely EK pilots plan their daily (nightly) routines as best they can, given their regularly irregular schedules.

9w748capt wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

It was a factor in FZ981:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35855678

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... s-flydubai

Given the last two years of pandemic rules pilots have been largely kept in hotel rooms in layovers and subject to all kinds of additional measures like testing, quarantine etc that add to stress which is a factor in fatigue. The simple act of getting out of a hotel room and walking around on a layover is a fantastic tool to manage stress and reduce fatigue, but that has largely been denied to pilots for two years without a care what the long term effect would be. Eventually it will catch up to them.[/quote

Idk - if a 0225 departure time is unsafe then that's going to cause global problems. That's a pretty normal departure time for westbound long-hauls. Surely EK pilots plan their daily (nightly) routines as best they can, given their regularly irregular schedules.

MartijnNL wrote:

In the meantime Emirates is named safest airline in the world.
https://www.dpa-international.com/topic ... -99-570905

Desertboki wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

Another factor not being discussed - fatigue. It was a 0225 local time departure.

It was a factor in FZ981:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35855678

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... s-flydubai

Given the last two years of pandemic rules pilots have been largely kept in hotel rooms in layovers and subject to all kinds of additional measures like testing, quarantine etc that add to stress which is a factor in fatigue. The simple act of getting out of a hotel room and walking around on a layover is a fantastic tool to manage stress and reduce fatigue, but that has largely been denied to pilots for two years without a care what the long term effect would be. Eventually it will catch up to them.[/quote

Idk - if a 0225 departure time is unsafe then that's going to cause global problems. That's a pretty normal departure time for westbound long-hauls. Surely EK pilots plan their daily (nightly) routines as best they can, given their regularly irregular schedules.

Fatigue was a huge issue in the crash of FZ981. The report time itself is not the issue. It’s the environment in which it is in, operating at max FTLs at that time constantly.Your westbound example would not have to get a weather delay landing. Then de ice and another weather delay departing. Flydubai operate like this, landing back at 11-12pm with minimum rest then to do it all again the next night. 18 hours off into a day flight. Over time this causes huge fatigue. You do not see euro carriers doing 2 sector night turn around to Eastern Europe. Would you see an American airline for example JetBlue operate JFK -DEN-JFK with a sign on at 1am departing at 2am landing back at mid day ?

joeblow10 wrote:

Desertboki wrote:

9w748capt wrote:

Fatigue was a huge issue in the crash of FZ981. The report time itself is not the issue. It’s the environment in which it is in, operating at max FTLs at that time constantly.Your westbound example would not have to get a weather delay landing. Then de ice and another weather delay departing. Flydubai operate like this, landing back at 11-12pm with minimum rest then to do it all again the next night. 18 hours off into a day flight. Over time this causes huge fatigue. You do not see euro carriers doing 2 sector night turn around to Eastern Europe. Would you see an American airline for example JetBlue operate JFK -DEN-JFK with a sign on at 1am departing at 2am landing back at mid day ?

In the US it is actually quite common to do something like this except the first departure is around 8-9pm, landing back at 5-6am the next morning. The most “extreme” examples I’ve seen are things like G4 doing 11pm redeyes out of LAS to ATW and other places, not returning until 8-9am the next morning. Those trips aren’t exactly structured to reduce fatigue - though not to FlyDubai levels

Gremlinzzzz wrote:

Are they dealing with it or not? They are prepared and handling it. When was the last time you consistently saw a plane brought down by such? We really are arguing for the sake of it.

MartijnNL wrote:

In the meantime Emirates is named safest airline in the world.
https://www.dpa-international.com/topic ... -99-570905

sierrakilo44 wrote:

MartijnNL wrote:

In the meantime Emirates is named safest airline in the world.
https://www.dpa-international.com/topic ... -99-570905

Who are this JACDEC group? What is their methodology? They are not transparent.

Here's their 2020 rankings:

https://www.jacdec.de/Order/2020_JACDEC ... gq_ENG.pdf

What a laugh!

Emirates the only airline in the top 18 with a hull loss in the last decade but still takes the #1 position?
Swiss Air at #51!
Lufthansa at #56!
FlyDubai ranks higher than Scandanavian!
Jetstar 14 places higher than Qantas!
Korean Air higher than Alaskan and Southwest!
Jet2.com 41 places higher than BA!

Which 12 year old compiled those "rankings"? Or how much did Emirates pay that company?

santi319 wrote:

sierrakilo44 wrote:

MartijnNL wrote:

In the meantime Emirates is named safest airline in the world.
https://www.dpa-international.com/topic ... -99-570905

Who are this JACDEC group? What is their methodology? They are not transparent.

Here's their 2020 rankings:

https://www.jacdec.de/Order/2020_JACDEC ... gq_ENG.pdf

What a laugh!

Emirates the only airline in the top 18 with a hull loss in the last decade but still takes the #1 position?
Swiss Air at #51!
Lufthansa at #56!
FlyDubai ranks higher than Scandanavian!
Jetstar 14 places higher than Qantas!
Korean Air higher than Alaskan and Southwest!
Jet2.com 41 places higher than BA!

Which 12 year old compiled those "rankings"? Or how much did Emirates pay that company?

The fact that the #1 Emirates has 33 incidents and the last one Garuda has 32 incidents makes absolutely no sense.

Kiwiandrew wrote:

FluidFlow wrote:

santi319 wrote:

The fact that the #1 Emirates has 33 incidents and the last one Garuda has 32 incidents makes absolutely no sense.

According to their website they use RPK as base and a time weighting factor.

So if you take that and the pandemic into account, the whole thing is worthless because airlines that kept flying during the pandemic (even if empty) generated way more RPK. This helped to generate nice safety score for the year compared to airlines that had very reduced flying that could not generate good score. Combine this with the time weighting factor and airlines that flew a lot last year compared to their piers will be catapulted upwards even if they had lots of incidents.

Then they also pop in environmental factors like topography and weather???

Isn't RPK REVENUE passenger kilometre ? Therefore, empty seats would not be counted as there is no revenue ( Though I still think the survey itself looks pretty dodgy ).

sierrakilo44 wrote:

The whole idea of apportioning a risk rating to individual airlines is a bit silly in 2022.

If you think of the last 10 years. What fatal incidents have there been on carriers in which the majority of posters on this forum would class as relatively "safe"?

2013
Asiana 214

2014
Transasia 222
Malaysian 370 and 17
Airasia 8501

2015
Transasia 235
Germanwings 9525
Metrojet 9268

2016
Egyptair 802

2017
Westwind 282

2018
Southwest 1380
Lion Max

2019
Ethiopian 302
Aeroflot 1492

The rest I'd probably skip. And I'm drawing a long bow on calling some of those "safe". In the last 10 years there's been 315 million scheduled flight departures for total of 14 fatal incidents on carriers most would consider to be reputable enough to not be crashing. How can we then calculate the absolute risk of dying per carrier? There's just not enough crashes out there to make a sample. And fatal incidents in of themselves are the be all and end all of safety, I'd rather board a Southwest or Germanwings(now EuroWings) flight over a lot of other carriers that have remained accident free in the last then years.