FAA settles on CO Denver crash victims

[waveflyer]

If you had evidence that the FAA inadequately failed to train a controller they certified and that controller gave you wrong or incomplete information--then yes.

Are you serious?

Even a little?

Go back to your Ten

Better yet, with that mentality go be a financial advisor or something- YGTfSM

There's a wind sock-there's grass- there are pireps- wind is DYNAMIC, esp in Denver- you see it bouncing around- you know what's going on- you should be good enough to know when it's borderline and if you need clarification- ASK- in clear words- BUT THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE CAPTAIN, AND NOT 1/2" behind IT STOPS WITH THE FO.

This dude screwed up- fine- wont hang him for that- but to screw up, then make excuses? ??? and play a BS lawyer game? Piss off

 

[scoreboardII]

I think the vis was about 1/4 mile, so seeing a wind sock is NA, last time I checked, the cockpit wind readout didn't start working till we were airborne.

 

[CesnaCaptn]

Are you serious?

Even a little?

Go back to your Ten

Better yet, with that mentality go be a financial advisor or something- YGTfSM

There's a wind sock-there's grass- there are pireps- wind is DYNAMIC, esp in Denver- you see it bouncing around- you know what's going on- you should be good enough to know when it's borderline and if you need clarification- ASK- in clear words- BUT THE BUCK STOPS WITH THE CAPTAIN, AND NOT 1/2" behind IT STOPS WITH THE FO.

This dude screwed up- fine- wont hang him for that- but to screw up, then make excuses? ??? and play a BS lawyer game? Piss off

It was snowing that day, so there wasn't any grass to look at. Windsocks will give a general idea if you can see it, but it's not gonna give you the exact data we need.

Look, all I'm saying is that we make a lot of decisions based on the data we're given. If the data is wrong, you can't just automatically blame the captain. Well, I guess you and all the other Monday morning quarterbacks on FI can.

Let's say you were landing on a short icy runway. If you got a bad Mu or braking action report and you slid off the end, are you just gonna say, "oh, well. As the captain I should have known better?" I don't buy that.

How about you "piss off" and "go back to your Ten." Thanks for taking this discussion to the levels we've come to expect and enjoy here on FI.

 

[waveflyer]

You're welcome- its what the place is for. Uninhibited expression of opinions. Sorry, I don't want ultimate responsibility to be taken away from us. ATC wasn't flying that plane.

No- it's one of the draws to the career- the responsibility- that it is 100% on us to know, and if we don't, pro-actively find out- or wait until you're sure

I don't want to the mentality to creep in that I am dependent on what an ATC guy tells me. Unless he lied after I asked what the wind was-

You're saying he didn't know it was windy? Ok, no grass- now you got snowdrift- that strong of a crosswind even at a 1/4 you can see where it's coming from-

The NTSB is to determine causal factors- of which there are always many- I am still offended by taking it a step further and the CAPTAIN getting a payout - that's flat out insane to me

That said, I've seen many jet pilots throw crosswind techniques out the window bc they happen to be flying a big jet- the data on his inputs show that he didn't know how to takeoff in a strong crosswind- training is weak in the airlines- BECAUSE you are hired expecting to know how to handle crosswinds- now what, we're all going to fly out to a windy place and do touch and goes in the real thing bc the simulator isn't good enough-???

 

[j41driver]

I think the vis was about 1/4 mile, so seeing a wind sock is NA, last time I checked, the cockpit wind readout didn't start working till we were airborne.

Vis was good. From the NTSB report:

"The official weather observations around the time of the accident were as follows:

DEN weather at 1753: wind from 280° at 11 knots, visibility unrestricted at 10miles, a few clouds at 4,000 feet agl, scattered clouds at 10,000 feet, temperature minus 6° C, dew point temperature minus 16° C, altimeter setting 29.97 inches of Mercury (Hg). Remarks: peak wind from 290° at 27 knots at 1700.

DEN special weather observation at 1834: wind from 290° at 24 knots, gusts to 32 knots, visibility 10 miles, a few clouds at 4,000 feet agl, scattered clouds at 10,000 feet, temperature minus 4° C, dew point temperature minus 18° C, altimeter setting 29.98 inches of Hg. Remarks: peak wind from 280° at 36 knots at 1823."

They were at 90 kts going down the runway when the airplane veered toward the side of the runway. Had they just aborted the t/o, they may have been able to regain control. They kept the power up and continued to accelerate to 110+ kts when they departed the runway. It wasn't until 3 sec AFTER they left the runway that they finally pulled the power back.

The NTSB blamed the accident on the Capt's actions/inactions and then the FAA gives him a bunch of $$??? I agree with the YGBFKM sentiment....

 

[j41driver]

I've seen many jet pilots throw crosswind techniques out the window bc they happen to be flying a big jet..

Several years ago, I had a check airman at AT give me a real hard time because I used ailerons on the t/o roll despite the 25+ kts crosswind. He told me the we didn't have performance data for a t/o with one of the roll spoilers even partially deployed and the proper way to do a x-wind t/o is to leave the aileron neutral until rotation. Reeeaally? After some discussion at cruise, we ended up agreeing to disagree....

 

[CesnaCaptn]

Several years ago, I had a check airman at AT give me a real hard time because I used ailerons on the t/o roll despite the 25+ kts crosswind. He told me the we didn't have performance data for a t/o with one of the roll spoilers even partially deployed and the proper way to do a x-wind t/o is to leave the aileron neutral until rotation. Reeeaally? After some discussion at cruise, we ended up agreeing to disagree....

Two professional with a differing opinion. So who was right? Any facts to back up either style? I assert that being in this industry longer doesn't necessarily make you better a better pilot.

I'll eat crow on the captain getting a payout. I still stand by the fact that our decisions are only good if the data we are given is good.

 

[Popeye0537]

And if this was an embraer instead of a Boeing would you guys feel the same way? I can't believe he got a settlement for his explicit responsibility for the accident

 

[jetpig32]

I flew with the CA of this flight in and out of Den on a 4 day. While I have no comment on the settlement, he did open my eyes to the wind reporting procedures in place at Den. The wind you are given on takeoff or landing is read by the controller of the LLWAS system since the airport is quite large. The system is digital and has a fairly slow sampling rate and often does not capture peak gusts. The tower and centerfield winds are analog and do show max gusts.
On the first few legs in and out of Den, I was unaware of his previous accident. He was very insistent on getting a centerfield read out. While I was curious why, almost taking it as paranoia, it became obvious that the centerfield showed quite a stronger gust factor. Sometimes no gust was reported with the landing clearance, a centerfield check showed gusts of 10-15 kts over the steady state factor. I have not tried this in a while, but give it a check on a windy day in Den, you may be surprised like I was.

 

[Old School 737]

I landed about the time this happened .. Weather was fine a little windy / gusty but not that bad at all and bare dry runways..dumped the pax / picked new people up and then some SWA guy gave me a hard time for turning my strobes on as we took the runway for takeoff ...