Comair Pilots At Fault In Crash

[DrewBlows]

I like jumpseating on ComAir, they help me out a lot, and the crews are very professional. But I was in the actual a couple weeks ago and noticed that they still made no runway callout or confirmation and had no checklist item regarding verifying the correct runway or heading either. My guess is their legal counsel is preventing them from changing their checklist and/or callouts for fear of that change being used as implicit evidence in favor of victims being rewarded damages in a lawsuit.

My company already (fortunately, due to iron and fuel farms in the ground in ORD) had a heading callout/checklist item and they changed it after the accident.

The heading bug is supposed to be set at the gate and is to be checked during the RADIOS/NAVAIDS/PPAS portion of the BEFORE STARTING ENGINES checklist. This is in the Flight Standards Manual and hasn't changed since the accident.

It is my opinion that Comair's checklists need to get smaller before they get bigger. There are 22 items (21 in the -700) to complete after push back and before thrust lever advancement for takeoff. These items don't take long to complete, but I would rather be heads-up helping the Captain taxi, than heads-down doing checklist items that are redundant, unimportant, or that could have been completed at the gate.

 

[skiddriver]

The heading bug is supposed to be set early on by the checklist, but I wish I had a fiver for every time I saw a guy reach up and center the heading bug as we lined up on the runway without checking the actual heading. Two years at Comair and it happened all the time.

 

[Papps]

The FAA says chronic fatigue (not the medical condition, but the accumulation of general fatigue in this context) results when there is insufficent time to recover from periods of acute fatigue (acute fatigue is what you feel after little/no sleep). What the FAA is saying is that fatigue is cummulative you can end up with symptoms of acute fatigue even after a 1 or several long layovers. Kingnothing, no ones crying, most people get the feeling that rest requirements aren't quite right in 121, and they end up sending some people into persistent fatigue. If everybody is tired in this profession like you say then maybe crew rest should be on the front burner. and like drewblows says, you are an idiot.

 

[172driver]

Actually, I believe one had 17 hours rest and the other 13. You'll have to look it up on the earlier threads, but it was well above the minimum. I am the last one to knock those guys! I just don't see rest as the driver of this. Mental fatigue from the CMR beat down maybe, but not lack of sleep on this one. Fatigue is a major issue in other accidents, and still needs to be addressed.

As others have said, fatigue has little to do with lack of sleep the night before. It is a cumulative process involving biorhythms, sleep cycles, scheduling patterns, outside distractions, etc.

The FO actually had closer to 26 hrs rest but that does not mean he was rested. Think about what 26 hrs rest means in this case:

The FO started work on Friday around 1200. Delays at JFK caused him to be rerouted and to work a 15.5 hr day. He got into LEX at around 0330 Saturday. As we know, that means he probably didn't get to sleep till at least 0500. At this point, he has been awake for at least 19 hrs, but being a commuter, probably 24+.

So now he gets his 26 hrs rest but probably can't sleep for more than a few hrs in the morning because it's light outside and he's trying to rest at exactly the time his body is used to waking up. Then he has trouble sleeping that night because he just got up at noon or so.

Now, he has an 0430 wake up on Sunday to go fly out of LEX with a new crew. He is beginning duty at the same time he released from duty the previous day and his body clock is telling him it's time to sleep.

Lots of rest, yes. Fatigue? Very possible. I don't remember the exact times anymore, but these are very close to what actually took place.

 

[DrProc]

As others have said, fatigue has little to do with lack of sleep the night before. It is a cumulative process involving biorhythms, sleep cycles, scheduling patterns, outside distractions, etc.

The FO actually had closer to 26 hrs rest but that does not mean he was rested. Think about what 26 hrs rest means in this case:

The FO started work on Friday around 1200. Delays at JFK caused him to be rerouted and to work a 15.5 hr day. He got into LEX at around 0330 Saturday. As we know, that means he probably didn't get to sleep till at least 0500. At this point, he has been awake for at least 19 hrs, but being a commuter, probably 24+.

So now he gets his 26 hrs rest but probably can't sleep for more than a few hrs in the morning because it's light outside and he's trying to rest at exactly the time his body is used to waking up. Then he has trouble sleeping that night because he just got up at noon or so.

Now, he has an 0430 wake up on Sunday to go fly out of LEX with a new crew. He is beginning duty at the same time he released from duty the previous day and his body clock is telling him it's time to sleep.

Lots of rest, yes. Fatigue? Very possible. I don't remember the exact times anymore, but these are very close to what actually took place.

Sounds like a freightdog schedule. Throw in a half a dozen time zone changes there and flying a 40 year old DC-8 freighter, now you will understand fatigue and flying. I flew for Comair for 3 years and during that time I was no where near as fatigued as I was flying freight.

 

[DrewBlows]

172, I didn't realize this is what happened (I'll take your word for it). This has happened to me many times on reserve at Comair, and it sucks each time. A friend of mine had one extreme case where she started flying at about 2200 until about 530 the next day. She had about 11 hours rest and did two deadhead legs to the outstation, where they gave her reduced rest and she started an assignment at about 600 the very next day. On top of that she was scheduled for over 7 hours of flying on a poor weather day in JFK. Eventually she was taken off the trip by a very supportive Chief Pilot. She witnessed a scheduler actually arguing with the Chief Pilot about taking her off the trip.

 

[AerroMatt]

The heading bug is supposed to be set early on by the checklist, but I wish I had a fiver for every time I saw a guy reach up and center the heading bug as we lined up on the runway without checking the actual heading. Two years at Comair and it happened all the time.

Here is the simple oversight that killed 50 people.

All it takes is two callouts:

Line up on Rwy, PF "Heading is xxx degrees, bug set at xxx degrees."
PNF "Heading xxx degrees, bug set at xxx degrees."
Then, and only then, should power be applied.

Skid, if your statement is true, it would appear Comair is in serious need of shaking up their flight crews about adhearance to company SOP's. The accident flight's heading bug (if set at the gate) was about 50 degrees off the runway heading and the flight crew did not notice it, but simply centered the bug and advanced the power levers.

We all feel bad over what happened, but there is a lesson to be learned here.

I'm hoping the FO is recovering OK.

 

[Crossky]

The heading bug is supposed to be set at the gate and is to be checked during the RADIOS/NAVAIDS/PPAS portion of the BEFORE STARTING ENGINES checklist. This is in the Flight Standards Manual and hasn't changed since the accident.

My company requires this as well.

What I'm referring to occurs as the aircraft is taxied onto and aligned with the runway centerline: the crew verifying that the aircraft is on the assigned runway, and that the indicated heading on the PFD and MFD matches the published assigned runway heading. The setting of the heading bug, if set to the published runway heading, makes this check fairly easy.

I did not see the Comair crew do this when I was graciously in their jumpseat.

 

[imacdog]

Comair does not require the heading bug to be set to runway heading if a turn after departure is assigned. The company did make an addition to the operations manual advising crews to verify the aircraft is properly aligned on the correct runway heading before advancing power, but it is not verbalized on the takeoff checklist. I have also set the heading bug to the exact runway heading while setting up the aircraft, only to have captains center the bug as we are aligning on the runway. That is a bad practice on their part.

 

[Papps]

Here is the simple oversight that killed 50 people.

All it takes is two callouts:

Line up on Rwy, PF "Heading is xxx degrees, bug set at xxx degrees."
PNF "Heading xxx degrees, bug set at xxx degrees."
Then, and only then, should power be applied.

Skid, if your statement is true, it would appear Comair is in serious need of shaking up their flight crews about adhearance to company SOP's. The accident flight's heading bug (if set at the gate) was about 50 degrees off the runway heading and the flight crew did not notice it, but simply centered the bug and advanced the power levers.

We all feel bad over what happened, but there is a lesson to be learned here.

I'm hoping the FO is recovering OK.

Totally agree, its a good callout and may be a comair norm. If its not the check airman starts to get annoyed when everyone starts making their own homemade callouts. I have flown with a bunch of guys who put together a huge killer item verbal checklist when they cross the holdshort line.

One guy did that in the sim, and the instructor stopped it and asked him WTF are you talking about where is that in the book, are you makiing S..t up again. Its up to standards to fix stuff like that.

 

[DrewBlows]

I did not see the Comair crew do this when I was graciously in their jumpseat.

They didn't do it because it's not a procedure. You probably did see them go through the other 22 pre-takeoff items, which required the FO to be heads down during that time. Simplifying the checklists, in my opinion, would solve many more problems than adding a heading bug check to the checklist, though both would probably be best.

 

[wmuflyguy]

Comair does not require the heading bug to be set to runway heading if a turn after departure is assigned. The company did make an addition to the operations manual advising crews to verify the aircraft is properly aligned on the correct runway heading before advancing power, but it is not verbalized on the takeoff checklist. I have also set the heading bug to the exact runway heading while setting up the aircraft, only to have captains center the bug as we are aligning on the runway. That is a bad practice on their part.

I think (per comair ops) the heading bug is supposed to be on runway heading unless the turn is going to be conducted below 400' agl, which is fairly rare.

Unfortunatly many people just bug the assigned heading while on the runway.

 

[wmuflyguy]

They didn't do it because it's not a procedure. You probably did see them go through the other 22 pre-takeoff items, which required the FO to be heads down during that time. Simplifying the checklists, in my opinion, would solve many more problems than adding a heading bug check to the checklist, though both would probably be best.

Not to mention first flight of the day checks take longer and increase the FO's workload during a short taxi.

 

[Papps]

Some places have you bug runway heading, some places have to bug the first turn on the departure/atc clearance/obstical departure/company proceedure.

 

[Rally]

The only thing you can really do at this point is remember it happened and try your hardest to make sure it does'nt happen again.

 

[Crossky]

They didn't do it because it's not a procedure.

Yes, I realized that, as I expressed so in my first post.

Peace.

 

[pilotmyf]

In 8000 hrs you still haven't learned that accidents are not the result of a single event, but rather a chain. Oh, I suppose you have an argument to negate all the NTSB and FAA research. Must be nice to be so perfect. Pray that no one pi$$es on your grave if you ball one.

You are pretty much a d0uche

 

[pilotmyf]

SOPs don't tell you to do everything you are suppose to. You learn very early in you flying career to takeoff on the right runway, the crew screwed up, not Comair...

 

[DrewBlows]

SOPs don't tell you to do everything you are suppose to. You learn very early in you flying career to takeoff on the right runway, the crew screwed up, not Comair...

Do you feel better now?

 

[HelloNewman]

Sorry to say but adding commuting to reasons why you are fatigued is simply a careless and awful thing to do to your passengers. If your commute causes you to be more tired then you either need to take earlier flights or move. Time and time again guys will take a red eye flight or a super early flight so they don't have to commute in the day before for an early show. Sometimes it will make it so they are awake past the 16 hour duty limit.

It is their own darn fault for being tired. Those who commute and freely admit to being tired because of their commute are a danger to this profession. It's funny to hear commuters whine about fatigue when a most of their fatigue is self induced. If you find yourself always fatigued on overnights where you have plenty of rest then you have a responsibility to your passengers to either move or bite the bullet and commute in the day before.