BA 747 crew commended for escaping near-stall on take-off

[Papa Woody]

I can see in this scenario US airlines have the captain do the flying. I wonder what would've happened had he barked out "My Aircraft!" at a such low alt and a/s. It's a good thing he did not try to emulate Sully and did let his FO do the flying.

Yeah....with a 300-hour "diversity" F/O, like United Airlines, would have been a fireball.....

 

[Flyer1015]

What's the big deal? He got the shaker, and unlike the Colgan 3407 crew, he lowered the nose (pushed down on yoke), gained airspeed, until stick shaker went away and airplane climbed. This is what common sense would dictate, what else are you suppose to do when the shaker goes off. I guess I commend this crew, but they only did what any competent pilot should have done.

 

[grog_sit_reserv]

First rule of flying:
"Maintain A Safe Airspeed."

At Airways the FO is supposed to fly and the Captain works the problem. Now, I hate the East as much as any Westie, but I think Sully taking the controls was probably in the best interests of the operation that day since Skiles (if I'm remembering correctly) only had 35 hours of Airbus time. You read that right, 35 hours.

Now, I know that Skiles has 20,000 hours, but it's mostly in the 73, sorry. Think about it, your FO is a veteran pilot, but he's got 35 hours in type and now you're at 3000ft with no engines. . . . Did you think what I thought? Say it with me: "My Aircraft."

Sully was right to take the plane that day, it wasn't an exercise in the simulator. Letting the 35 hour guy dead stick an Airbus would have been a big mistake.

Now, on a different vein, The crew of that 74 did a great job. Turning this and every thread into an east west thing is pretty lame.

 

[RadioClash]

Says who?

I have flown for 4 Part 135 carriers and 3 Part 121 carriers. Not a single one has EVER had the CA take the airplane at a low altitude. Engine failure, engine fire, stall recovery, anything.

AFTER the aircraft is STABILIZED, some airlines have the F/O fly while the CA troubleshoots the problem, while some have the PF direct the memory items and checklists, so *that* is different from airline to airline, but I've never seen a carrier with a standardized practice of taking the airplane with a problem right at or after V1.

Not sure what you're talking about here...

It is not in the FOM but I vividly remember a Capt at AT on the B717 briefing me on a takeoff (it was my leg) out of MIA one night, gusty winds etc, that "if we get into windshear on takeoff I will take the controls from you and fly us out of it."

Thankfully we didn't get into windshear and I never flew with that d-bag again.

 

[waveflyer]

What a standard bs FI thread-
(shakes head) what's wrong with you guys?

nice job BA !!!

A very good job.
Leave it at that-

 

[Lear70]

It is not in the FOM but I vividly remember a Capt at AT on the B717 briefing me on a takeoff (it was my leg) out of MIA one night, gusty winds etc, that "if we get into windshear on takeoff I will take the controls from you and fly us out of it."

Thankfully we didn't get into windshear and I never flew with that d-bag again.

Well, it's aviation, and we all know, d-bags happen...

There's all types everywhere, just glad I've never flown for an operator who thinks switching controls on a problem that close to the ground is a good enough idea to make it standard practice.

 

[wms]

I believe the FO loses instruments on the bus when the ADG deploys so the CA has to take the controls.

Kudos to the BA crew.

 

[Quiet Flight]

All single engine landings at SWA are to be made by the CA. Period.

Trash bags are to placed in the cockpit by the F/O. Period.

 

[Mr Wu]

nice job BA !!!

A very good job.
Leave it at that-

Are all you tools F'ing kidding? HE GOT A REVERSE UNLOCK LIGHT AT 125kts!!!!!!!!!!!

ABORT! ABORT! ABORT!


They put themselves in the stall that could be avoided.

 

[get2flyin]

First rule of flying:
"Maintain A Safe Airspeed."

At Airways the FO is supposed to fly and the Captain works the problem. Now, I hate the East as much as any Westie, but I think Sully taking the controls was probably in the best interests of the operation that day since Skiles (if I'm remembering correctly) only had 35 hours of Airbus time. You read that right, 35 hours.

Now, I know that Skiles has 20,000 hours, but it's mostly in the 73, sorry. Think about it, your FO is a veteran pilot, but he's got 35 hours in type and now you're at 3000ft with no engines. . . . Did you think what I thought? Say it with me: "My Aircraft."

Sully was right to take the plane that day, it wasn't an exercise in the simulator. Letting the 35 hour guy dead stick an Airbus would have been a big mistake.

Agreed

Turning this and every thread into an east west thing is pretty lame.[/I]

Can I get a 'hallelujah"? Amen!

 

[Dan Roman]

Are all you tools F'ing kidding? HE GOT A REVERSE UNLOCK LIGHT AT 125kts!!!!!!!!!!!

ABORT! ABORT! ABORT!


They put themselves in the stall that could be avoided.

Good point, reading that in the update raised my eyebrow. 25kts below V-1, 14000' runway, problem with a thrust reverser..........

Better to be on the ground wishing you were flying than to be flying wishing you were on the ground.

 

[tailwindz]

Are all you tools F'ing kidding? HE GOT A REVERSE UNLOCK LIGHT AT 125kts!!!!!!!!!!!

ABORT! ABORT! ABORT!


They put themselves in the stall that could be avoided.

Do you talking heads have any clue what you are talking about?

Do you know what the indication would be?

Do you know what an "unlock" indication means?

Do you know understand the problem?

Do you understand the probable outcome of a high-speed reject near gross in a whale?

Educate yourself before putting your DC-9 mouth into gear.

 

[SLOTH]

Gotta love all of the Monday morning quarter-backing on this situation and every other one that comes up regardless of outcome!!

 

[avbug]

ABORT! ABORT! ABORT!

Not in a Boeing.

One rejects a takeoff, and aborts an engine start. You don't know that?

You probably don't know enough to be second guessing the crew, either.

 

[Dan Roman]

I'm not second guessing, I flew the 74 25 years ago and flat don't remember the significance of the warning. The Boeings I fly now don't display a warning during the takeoff role unless it's important enough to rejsct for.
Reverser unlocked sounds worthy of consideration, but I really don't remember.

 

[bubbers44]

Sully was in the left seat, in command, and best to try to get back to LGA visually. The FO was unable to see anything in their left bank back. Of course you would take control. Letting the flying pilot continue flying works best in most situations but not if he is new and on the outside of the turn back with no engines. Since they couldn't safely land downwind at LGA they landed in the Hudson. The FO might have done the same thing but was in the wrong seat to plan the ditching.

 

[UALRATT]

Yeah....with a 300-hour "diversity" F/O, like United Airlines, would have been a fireball.....

Papaa but Colgan was a Caucasian? How can that be? You foo oops! I can't say that.

 

[Mr Wu]

Do you know what the indication would be?

EICAS message, just like the summary said?

Do you know what an "unlock" indication means?

Sleeve somewhere between stowed and extended.

Do you know understand the problem?

Yes/No/Maybe. Good enough reason to abort (reject if you want to make up a story about how it happened to you and spout shi)

Do you understand the probable outcome of a high-speed reject near gross in a whale?

Probably better than continuing with one engine in reverse when you're high, hot and humid.

Educate yourself before putting your DC-9 mouth into gear.

So educate me. How much runway does a "whale" near gross weight need to get from 125kts to 167kts on 3 engines and one in reverse at T/O power?

 

[Abernathy]

What's the big deal? He got the shaker, and unlike the Colgan 3407 crew, he lowered the nose (pushed down on yoke), gained airspeed, until stick shaker went away and airplane climbed. This is what common sense would dictate, what else are you suppose to do when the shaker goes off. I guess I commend this crew, but they only did what any competent pilot should have done.

Unfortunately that has become the new standard. NOT doing what the Colgan crew did makes you a hero. But I'm not complaining. A little good public attention for flight crews doesn't hurt.

 

[b707guy]

.....!