AA Flight 48 oopsy

[AA717driver]

Your logic just mirrors that of the hysterical, clueless rantings of the elderly cat rancher who blew this non event into a national issue. Poor "Bitzi" had her paranoid mind short-circuit at the irrational thought of her cats, Fluffy, Snowball and Mr Pickles living without her after she was sucked through the mix-valve and out the open pack door. Her blood ran cold at the thought of her kittys getting fed the wrong can of fancy feast out of sequence, which any legacy pilot knows is a true emergency.

Feel free to give the group a pilot report after landing a 767-300 at 390K+ sometime Mr D-Weed.

Now, THAT'S funny! Spoken like a true Int'l. 767 pilot... TC

 

[svcta]

yes LJDRVR, I am an arrogant D-Weed.

But seriously, the key words are UNKNOWN and PROBLEM.

You know you have a problem, but you don't know what it is, or more importantly...WHAT IT MIGHT TURN INTO.
Thats the "gotcha'" the Feds are going to use.



Pilots calling Mommy (The Company), asking what to do, and deferring their ultimate responsibility to others on the ground.

In the end YOU will be held ultimately responsible for whatever happens.

And , yes, I would have just landed overweight on a nice long runway and written my Report .

Thank you.

YKMKR

The primary flaw from the armchair is that there was no "unknown problem". I've heard airplanes make lots of noises in just about every phase of a flight, I never assumed that it was broken because of what somebody heard. Especially in modern aircraft with a million crew alert items, if we have no clear(or even subtle) indication of a problem we can't say there's a problem. So there was NO UNKNOWN PROBLEM. Just an unidentified noise, which happens all the time. No indications, no airframe vibrations(according to the crew), no system abnormalities. Where's the problem, from a crew standpoint?

And we all know that FAs can be a little dramatic. It sounds as if the crew did everything perfectly to me. Including "calling mommy" as you put it. The captain used every resource at his disposal to arrive at a decision that ultimately lead to a safely executed flight. If 4 or 5 professionals can arrive at the same conclusion after consideration and monitoring then the job is done. I would have acted the same way and would have felt good about our decision were I a part of that crew.

Overweight landing is the best option to you. Can anyone find the landing #s for that configuration?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Another unknown:

Why did the FA go public? She might by psycho or she was treated poorly in the decision/team process. Which means poor CRM. Perhaps she wanted to land and was over ruled too harsly. Maybe she is just a boitch.... another factor for us armchairs...

Since this even turned out well... like the LH Xwind Airbus landing.. the company is turining it into a internal PR positive....

And if the missing panel was visible from any given window? Press on or land?


No likes the idea of landing in JFK or BOS....


Oh well.... can someone help me handprop my Citabria... I hate doing alone....

 

[C-150ETOPS]

Another unknown:

Why did the FA go public? She might by psycho or she was treated poorly in the decision/team process. Which means poor CRM. Perhaps she wanted to land and was over ruled too harsly. Maybe she is just a boitch.... another factor for us armchairs...

The FA didn't go "public", the FA circulated a clueless, snotty email amongst the FA's and it took a life of it's own. Other exceptionally stupid and clueless FA's sent it outside AA.

Was she treated poorly in the process? I doubt it. I've flown with the Captain involved a few years ago, he's a super nice guy and a good decison maker. The
FACTS on how he handled the non-event only confirm my previous experience, and if my memory is correct, his wife is an AA FA.

More than likely, this issue has been blown out of proportion by a member of a certain small disgruntled clueless group (AA's thrice divorced, age 50+ clueless cat ranchers) I can tell you that no amount of touchy feely validation along with an explanation of the facts will change their preconceived opinions.

Most of their thinking is that every decison should be a committee meeting of pilots and FA's in the forward galley, one equal vote for each person, and anyone voicing a dissenting view from the groupthink is branded an infidel heretic. In fact, it's just like the description of a democracy where 5 wolves and 2 sheep voting on what's for dinner, except it's 9 FA's deciding if they accept the decisons of 3 pilots. Usually, the end point of thought with this clueless minority is not what is right or legal, it's what they "feel" to be "fair". When that happens, any legitimate authority such as a Captain, Customs/Immigration, law enforcement, TSA, ect is discounted as mean, condescending and insensitive to their "feelings".

This is still a minority of mostly a pretty good professional group of FA's. First place we go to when getting info regarding unannunciated sounds from the back is the FA's.

FA's saved AA when they jumped a 6'5" AL-Queda shoe bomber, I never forget that.

 

[say again]

And if the missing panel was visible from any given window? Press on or land?


No likes the idea of landing in JFK or BOS....


Oh well.... can someone help me handprop my Citabria... I hate doing alone....

If there was a visible problem then you land, BUT this was not visible.

It's funny that people say say land in JFK or BOS when this happened a few minutes after T/O. If you were so "worried" about a noise then why not land somewhere closer to DFW??

 

[LJDRVR]

The FA didn't go "public", the FA circulated a clueless, snotty email amongst the FA's and it took a life of it's own. Other exceptionally stupid and clueless FA's sent it outside AA.

Was she treated poorly in the process? I doubt it. I've flown with the Captain involved a few years ago, he's a super nice guy and a good decison maker. The
FACTS on how he handled the non-event only confirm my previous experience, and if my memory is correct, his wife is an AA FA.

More than likely, this issue has been blown out of proportion by a member of a certain small disgruntled clueless group (AA's thrice divorced, age 50+ clueless cat ranchers) I can tell you that no amount of touchy feely validation along with an explanation of the facts will change their preconceived opinions.

Most of their thinking is that every decison should be a committee meeting of pilots and FA's in the forward galley, one equal vote for each person, and anyone voicing a dissenting view from the groupthink is branded an infidel heretic. In fact, it's just like the description of a democracy where 5 wolves and 2 sheep voting on what's for dinner, except it's 9 FA's deciding if they accept the decisons of 3 pilots. Usually, the end point of thought with this clueless minority is not what is right or legal, it's what they "feel" to be "fair". When that happens, any legitimate authority such as a Captain, Customs/Immigration, law enforcement, TSA, ect is discounted as mean, condescending and insensitive to their "feelings".

This is still a minority of mostly a pretty good professional group of FA's. First place we go to when getting info regarding unannunciated sounds from the back is the FA's.

FA's saved AA when they jumped a 6'5" AL-Queda shoe bomber, I never forget that.

Post of the day! Please take your well-reasoned, logical thinking elsewhere.

 

[Mooneymite]

This incident is a good example where making a sound "operational decision" may not be good enough.

I remember when a Delta captain inadvertently shut down both engines on a B-767 climbing out of LAX. After turning the fuel ignition switches back on, he confered with the "head shed" all the way up to the VP of flight operations. The decision was unanimous: There was nothing wrong with the airplane and the flight should continue to Atlanta.

However operationally correct the decision was, or was not, it was a PR nightmare. As I recall, Delta got beaten up in the press and sued by the passengers even though the aircraft made it to ATL just fine.

Lesson here: the decision makers sometimes have to think outside of the "operations box" and look at the bigger picture. Pilots don't get too much training in this arena. Maybe we can all learn from someone else's OJT.

 

[Whine Lover]

Man you guys are TOO easy to get going.

Thanks for the entertainment.

I'm really not as BIG a D-Weed as the posts on this thread would lead you to believe...But, I can be a D-Weed nonetheless.

I figure, why not pick something I'm good at and stick with it?

Besides, watching some of these responses is as much fun as teasing my younger Brothers when I was a Kid...Spin em' up and watch em' GO!

That said, I still would have done a turnback and landed.

Buh-Bye Kids...No further transmissions. ( If your Lucky.)

Sincerely,

Richard Weed

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

If there was a visible problem then you land, BUT this was not visible.

It's funny that people say say land in JFK or BOS when this happened a few minutes after T/O. If you were so "worried" about a noise then why not land somewhere closer to DFW??

Closer to DFW was over MLW. If all was good but uncertain then fly to New England... land. If nothing is wrong, take off and continue....

Is that so hard?


But if a panel was missing would you take off again without it? Anyone want to tackle this tough question?

 

[TOOL CRIB]

More than likely, this issue has been blown out of proportion by a member of a certain small disgruntled clueless group (AA's thrice divorced, age 50+ clueless cat ranchers) I can tell you that no amount of touchy feely validation along with an explanation of the facts will change their preconceived opinions.

Most of their thinking is that every decison should be a committee meeting of pilots and FA's in the forward galley, one equal vote for each person, and anyone voicing a dissenting view from the groupthink is branded an infidel heretic. In fact, it's just like the description of a democracy where 5 wolves and 2 sheep voting on what's for dinner, except it's 9 FA's deciding if they accept the decisons of 3 pilots. Usually, the end point of thought with this clueless minority is not what is right or legal, it's what they "feel" to be "fair". When that happens, any legitimate authority such as a Captain, Customs/Immigration, law enforcement, TSA, ect is discounted as mean, condescending and insensitive to their "feelings".

I guess that's one good thing about flying an RJ... or cargo...

 

[bubbers44]

I think most 767 pilots on this site agree the crew did a fine job and we would have done the same thing. The hardest part of the job sometimes are the flight attendants in back who don't understand what the cockpit is dealing with. We don't write the email to the press when a flight attendant totally screws up in the back because it is not professional and honestly, no one cares. A very few flight attendants take joy on degrading pilots and will do most anything to fullfill their vengence. My flight attendant wife has verified it.

 

[Say Again Over]

Hop on the "Logic Train" Girls and Boys:


- YOU HAVE JUST Departed and then discover you have a "Problem".

- YOU DON'T know what the "Problem" is. Your Manuals, QRH, and Training give you no guidance.

- Your Company tells you: "Just go ahead." ( Based on Economics.)

- YOU are the PILOT-IN-COMMAND.

- YOU continue to Destination ( How many hours?) , with an UNKNOWN PROBLEM.

- YOU are an IDIOT.

Glad it worked out for these Fools. This time....


YKMKR

Good post, I agree considering the first reports indicated a sound of an explosion when it initially came off, of course they will tell you to continue, that's a no brainer, the last thing I would do is take an unknown problem such as this across the pond, no thanks.

If it was such a great decision to continue, why are they trying to sweep it under the rug?

 

[dispatchguy]

But if a panel was missing would you take off again without it? Anyone want to tackle this tough question?

Only in accordance with the B767-300 CDL. And after having looked in the CDL - this panel isnt listed, therefore it is required for DISPATCH. If they had landed short, the aircraft would be dead in the water, unless they landed at a MX base who just so had that particular panel in stock, and since they didnt know which panel they wouldve required (they didnt know they needed a panel at all); it is a very good chance that if they landed short - say a JFK or ORD (and I dont know if those are MX bases for the 763, or if they were along the flight path), a good chance they wouldve been dead in the water.

They were past the point of dispatch, hence, the QRH is guiding - no guidance in there, and none in the B767-300 FRM, and having read that DECS message, it appears the crew used good CRM; had trained people (read additional pilot crewmembers) monitoring the cabin area for funky noises - they used all of their resources (like we ALL are trained to do) and pressed on.

The sticking point for some is proceeding with a POSSIBLE problem; maybe we have a problem, maybe not. Someone heard something, we dont know what. The airplane was flying just fine - the fuel flows were where they should be, all other indications were normal. Dump 100K of fuel and do an air return to DFW for a maybe, a could be. Unfortunately the Boeing folks didnt rig in a MISSING PANEL light which triggers the master warning. Sorry, I'm not buying it.

Good job by all attached with the operation - TUL MX, Dispatch, and of course the flight crew. I wouldve concurred with everything they did.

 

[Nightrain_080]

Hop on the "Logic Train" Girls and Boys:


- YOU HAVE JUST Departed and then discover you have a "Problem".

- YOU DON'T know what the "Problem" is. Your Manuals, QRH, and Training give you no guidance.

- Your Company tells you: "Just go ahead." ( Based on Economics.)

- YOU are the PILOT-IN-COMMAND.

- YOU continue to Destination ( How many hours?) , with an UNKNOWN PROBLEM.

- YOU are an IDIOT.

Glad it worked out for these Fools. This time....


YKMKR

This is the best answer. It's almost a canned interview question. WWYD.

 

[Papa Woody]

The main problem is that the media found out!

 

[Dizel8]

You know Rez, you are really smart, in this case, just a smart a##.

Hell, for all the crew knew, it could have been a gear door seal sticking out in the slip stream.

You would have done differently, great, however, they did what they thought was best and the rest is history.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

An inspection panel blew off my Citabria... so I landed... and checked it out... it was easy..

 

[DashTrash400]

An inspection panel blew off my Citabria... so I landed... and checked it out... it was easy..

pu$$y :laugh:

 

[Cobra17]

Closer to DFW was over MLW. If all was good but uncertain then fly to New England... land. If nothing is wrong, take off and continue....

Is that so hard?


But if a panel was missing would you take off again without it? Anyone want to tackle this tough question?

Sure, I'll give it a shot...




....ummm





You're an idiot?

 

[Amish RakeFight]

An inspection panel blew off my Citabria... so I landed... and checked it out... it was easy..

thanks for the enourmous laugh I just let out. BAHAHAHAHAAHA..... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: