FAA to scrutinize AA

[chignutsak]

ruh roh:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704876104574632493767660078.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

 

[Soccer Stud]

Don't you love how the proactive the FAA is. Let's not try to be part of the solution and fix something before there is a problem. We'll just just punish the pilots or hammer the airline after the fact.

 

[Paul R. Smith]

Can't read the whole thing...
Care to paste it here?

Thanks.

 

[chignutsak]

The Federal Aviation Administration on Friday said it is stepping up oversight of American Airlines in the wake of three botched landings by the carrier over an 11-day period.
The latest incident, which prompted heightened FAA scrutiny of American's operations, involved a jetliner whose wingtip struck the ground while landing in Austin, Texas, on Christmas Eve. There were no injuries and the McDonnell Douglas MD-80 aircraft was inspected and returned to service. But the incident raised concern inside the FAA, according to people familiar with the matter, because it followed two more-serious landing mistakes on aircraft operated by the AMR Corp. unit in December.
View Full Image

Associated Press American suffered three landing mishaps in less than two weeks, including a Dec. 22 flight that careened off a runway in Kingston, Jamaica.

Based on past responses, the FAA could look through records and assess American's efforts to retrain pilots who do poorly on evaluation rides. It may increase the number of inspectors placed inside American cockpits. The FAA can open an enforcement action if it finds systemic weaknesses. In extreme cases, the agency also can impose financial penalties, it said.
On Dec. 13, an American MD-82 ended up with a damaged wingtip after part of its main landing gear veered off the runway while touching down in low visibility in Charlotte, N.C. In Kingston, Jamaica, on Dec. 22 another American Boeing 737 careened off the end of a runway while landing on the island amid heavy rain. The jet's fuselage broke into three sections and its crumpled nose slid to a halt barely feet from the shoreline. Several people were hospitalized, but there were no fatalities.
The three events prompted FAA officials to start analyzing Fort Worth, Texas-based American's data on landing incidents as well as voluntary pilot reports about such past occurrences. Agency officials are expected to focus on assessing certain aspects of the carrier's pilot-training programs, and how American's safety managers have responded to the spate of landing slip ups, the people familiar said.
"Where there may be several incidents involving a single carrier over a short period of time, FAA inspectors increase their oversight, which we're doing now, and conduct a review of those events to determine whether they might be indicative of a larger issue," the FAA spokesman said in a statement.
If that is the conclusion, according to the agency's statement, "the FAA communicates its findings to the air carrier and assists in the development of the appropriate corrective action."
The review comes as new details emerged about the Jamaica crash. The wheels of the jet first touched the runway some 4,000 feet down the nearly 9,000-foot long airstrip, according to one person familiar with the matter. Water on the runway could have made it difficult to stop, this person said.
Since the accident occurred during the Christmas holiday season, investigators are expected to look into the total weight of checked baggage and carry-on bags. They already weighed many of the suitcases and bags.
An American spokesman said the carrier is conducting internal investigations of both incidents in which wingtips scraped on the ground. Asked if American sees a trend, spokesman Tim Wagner said Thursday: "We take each event as an individual event."
Still, Mr. Wagner said, "We want a perfect landing every time."
It isn't clear whether the stepped-up oversight will result in high-level meetings between the carrier and the agency. American already is on the defensive from various FAA enforcement actions and special reviews primarily targeting compliance lapses with maintenance directives. But the latest FAA scrutiny, according to people familiar with the issue, is bound to delve more deeply into operational issues such as pilot decisions and landing procedures in stormy weather. Mechanical problems don't appear to have been major factors in any of the three recent incidents.

 

[AA717driver]

I see more bull$h!t policies, directives and procedures headed our way that detract from the safe operation rather than enhancing it.

You have a bunch of FAA people who don't fly discussing solutions with management pilots who don't fly making rules to govern those who do fly.

Not one single "real" line pilot will be consulted on these issues.

TC

 

[waveflyer]

Well- I get that- how about don't scrape wingtips. With all the automation- it takes discipline to click it all off and practice.

We all need that. AA does not have a hand flying culture. That will eventually find it's way into the landings- just like at Fedex.

At 18000' descending into the hub- where you'll get the vectors, level offs, airspeed and configuration changes- click off everything. If you're uncomfortable and can't do it while still staring out the window- or without making the aft FA puke- you need to be handflying MORE. Start with clear days and work your way into approaches to mins-

You WILL see your landings improve and get more consistent

Then try clicking off the flight director.

And if you can 150% ID the correct rwy- tune off the ILS

it's a shame as so many of us rightly complain about our pay- yet I'd question whether a majority could see a runway and land on a point with no help- no ILS, no PAPI, no FD no autopilot.

We're human and need to practice. Be worth the pay raise you seek. Be worth the lack of oversight you seek. Paycheck wise- turboprop drivers should not have better BAI skills than us and they largely do.

 

[OK3]

I don't disagree with everything you posted but airline pilots should not be "practicing" hand flying in IMC.

 

[Abernathy]

At 18000' descending into the hub- where you'll get the vectors, level offs, airspeed and configuration changes- click off everything. If you're uncomfortable and can't do it while still staring out the window- or without making the aft FA puke- you need to be handflying MORE. Start with clear days and work your way into approaches to mins-

While I see where you are coming from and agree with the sentiment, I don't see how handflying raw data into a hub taking vectors and altitude changes, such as ATL or ORD, is a good idea. Mostly I see it as a really bad idea. Oftentimes I, and many captains I fly with, depart from Class D and C airports raw data, intercepting and tracking, up to maybe 10,000 or 18,000 ft. But these are nonterminal areas with little or no traffic in the vicinity of the airport.

I really don't think these accidents had much to do with the pilots not having enough practice handflying around. It just seems like poor technique. As far as the FAA getting involved, better late than never. When we had a runway incursion over a year back, the FAA was all over our jumpseats making sure everyone was heads up paying attention when crossing any runways. Standard stuff.

 

[Rough67]

I don't disagree with everything you posted but airline pilots should not be "practicing" hand flying in IMC.

please tell me you are kidding..

 

[CaptSeth]

I'm not sure how much hand flying at altitude or while maneuvering for the approach has to do with landing in the landing zone at Vref and using proper braking and thrust reverse. I hand flew once in a while, not a whole lot, and I never put an airplane off a 8,900' foot runway....or even a 6,446' snow covered runway.

 

[waveflyer]

And I think 90% of us would have the same career. The problem are those that really do need more practice and the culture and egos don't let that work be done. Those who think to themselves- I should hand fly, but... Noone else does it. If you doubt it, try it- landings are generally very good the longer you hand fly. I know it's different- but it works, focuses and zones you in.

Sorry- you guys are probably very safe- I know I'm in the minority here- but if you think it's a bad idea to handfly in IMC to mins- you're the one I'm talking to.
Don't begin with it- start vmc into an easy visual. Work up to it from there. Yes- I have routinely hand- flown jets into o'hare.

Handflying the climbout provides very little effort- most climbs do not even level off- and the configuration changes are routine and simple- it's flying down from at least 10,000' that has the effect.

I'm sorry, but we've had WAY too many landing incidents and too many of us haven't had the turbine hand flying experience. It is showing. We aren't robots- the autopilot doesn't need the work- we do.

What my mentors taught me was to ask myself honest questions- "are you a good pilot? Or were you a good pilot?"

I've seen this debate in training departments for too long. If you suck at handflying- that means you should do more handflying until you don't-not less. Be smart about it, pick good opportunities and don't endanger your plane- but do the work. If you're not CAPABLE of not sucking at hand flying - pick another career. Too many of us aren't critical of our own abilities enough.

 

[embpic1]

please tell me you are kidding..

I was thinking the same thing.....

 

[AA717driver]

Waveflyer--The problem is, those who suck at hand flying are the LAST people who will do it. I understand what Ok3 is saying. It's a process.

I've gotten "addicted" to the autopilot and was hesitant to hand fly. So, I started handflying VFR ILS approaches. Then, I started turning everything off when being vectored. Eventually, I regained my "commuter flying" skills and could safely, reliably hand fly in IMC.

But, you have to take responsibility for maintaining your own skills. They certainly won't do it in recurrent and the check airmen (at least at AA) won't encourage you to click everything off and get back in the game on your next line check.

I will say that some people I've talked to who have been to recurrent lately have said some of the instructors are beginning to emphasize flying over rote repetition of call outs. I go this month so we'll see.

It may be that we need to start emphasizing the go-around as a 'good decision' once again.

TC

 

[Lear70]

I don't disagree with everything you posted but airline pilots should not be "practicing" hand flying in IMC.

Military straight into SWA?

Ummm... yeahhh... OK.

Back to real life... Yes, practicing basics in ACTUAL IMC is a good thing. Too many "children of the magenta" as it is. More people practicing those skills = better handling at the end of the approach when you kick off the autopilot and land the plane (not everyone is CAT IIIc autoland)...

 

[a320drivr]

If you cant hand fly in IMC you dont belong in the cockpit of an airplane. Its basic airmanship.

 

[b82rez]

IMC is when you should be hand flying...no see and avoid

 

[bubbers44]

Why would we allow pilots in an aircraft if they could not make a minimums approach with no autopilot?????? I know some foreign carriers have 250 hr guys that are considered qualified but in the US we should not let this happen. Autopilot failure should never constitute an emergency. We in the past have been dispatched many times with autopilot inop. Now we need to change the rules because we are hiring underqualified pilots?

 

[ron burgundy]

How can anybody even read or reply to this. Aren't we all busy pulling the ipod out of our backpacks,plugging in the headsets,spooling up our iphones to text instead of talking,turning on our sony ds/psp.....

 

[OK3]

I can hand fly just fine and my backround has nothing to do with it Lear. I am talking about risk managment. IMC into a busy hub is not the best time to "practice". That is all I was saying. I agree that an airline pilot should be proficient at hand flying, it's part of our job.

 

[waveflyer]

It shouldn't be practice - it ought to be COMFORTABLE. EASY. That takes doing it. And right now there are too many carriers that don't encourage clicking everything off and many captains that will forbid it. That's not okay

It's not about chest thumping and definitely not about showing off. We need to create cockpit environments that encourage those who really need te practice the freedom to do it- w/o ego, but with pride in the work

 

[Skyboy722]

Why would we allow pilots in an aircraft if they could not make a minimums approach with no autopilot?????? I know some foreign carriers have 250 hr guys that are considered qualified but in the US we should not let this happen. Autopilot failure should never constitute an emergency. We in the past have been dispatched many times with autopilot inop. Now we need to change the rules because we are hiring underqualified pilots?

The sad part of it is, that 250 hour guy just may be more current and more proficient at hand flying those "autopilot inop" approaches than the guys who only do it on their checkride every six months or a year.

I can hand fly just fine and my backround has nothing to do with it Lear. I am talking about risk managment. IMC into a busy hub is not the best time to "practice". That is all I was saying. I agree that an airline pilot should be proficient at hand flying, it's part of our job.

Then when do you propose we "practice"? What does the amount of other traffic have to do with flying a heading, altitude, or airspeed? Or an approach? You'd prefer what- a quieter frequency, so you can concentrate? I am also talking about risk management, and I'm saying that IMC into who-cares-where is exactly when you should be "practicing" your hand flying.

 

[IBNAV8R]

Busy hub (Class B) IMC is probably the SAFEST place to "practice." I'd add that you ought to be able to manage all regimes of flight with raw data. Don't practice, DO. If you can't DO, you shouldn't be flying the line.

 

[Lear70]

I can hand fly just fine and my backround has nothing to do with it Lear. I am talking about risk managment. IMC into a busy hub is not the best time to "practice". That is all I was saying. I agree that an airline pilot should be proficient at hand flying, it's part of our job.

I brought that up because background has EVERYTHING to do with it.

The IMC skills of a pilot who has been hand-flying single-pilot IFR in an old, beat-up Baron, then transitioned into a King Air or Lear where the approach mode on the autopilot didn't work well to begin with (if at all inside the marker), calculating their own VDP/PDP's, crossing restrictions with speeds, etc, are 10 times BETTER than the average airline pilot.

The BEST PLACE to practice those skills, including no FD, is going into a busy hub in IMC. Calculate YOUR OWN crossing restrictions, YOUR OWN lead-in turns to intercept the localizer on a sharp, large-turn intercept, YOUR OWN basic instrument skills,,, all while you have a non-loaded-up PNF beside you monitoring WITH their instrumentation up to make sure your safety is maintained.

Otherwise, the only place you get to practice is in VMC (which isn't practice at all) or into a small airport where you're not busy, jammed into the approach and made to maintain speed when you weren't expecting it, forced to recalculate things on the fly, etc, etc.

THEN, when the shinola hits the fan, you're flying with a "child of the magenta" with an abnormal or an emergency (or the other pilot is incapacitated) with an MEL'd autopilot, with an approach down to 200 and 1/2 with gusty winds, heavy rain, and you NEED to make the approach, and you botch it with only enough fuel to try it again or divert to your alternate... with the abnormal or emergency.

No thanks. I will continue to hand-fly an approach into a busy hub in IMC at least once a week (weather allowing) to keep my skills sharp, work load and situation-allowing. I will continue to challenge my F/O's to do the same. The responses on this board all saying the same thing should be your first indication that maybe your approach to this idea needs re-evaluating.

'nuff said.

 

[Lear70]

it shouldn't be practice - it ought to be comfortable. Easy. That takes doing it. And right now there are too many carriers that don't encourage clicking everything off and many captains that will forbid it. That's not okay

it's not about chest thumping and definitely not about showing off. We need to create cockpit environments that encourage those who really need te practice the freedom to do it- w/o ego, but with pride in the work

bingo!

 

[inline]

If you cant hand fly in IMC you dont belong in the cockpit of an airplane. Its basic airmanship.

Look at your post. If you can't punctuate "cant, dont, and its" try your spell check. It's basic English.

 

[AceOnTheRiver]

I can hand fly just fine and my backround has nothing to do with it Lear. I am talking about risk managment. IMC into a busy hub is not the best time to "practice". That is all I was saying. I agree that an airline pilot should be proficient at hand flying, it's part of our job.

PRACTICE, your talking about PRACTICE!

 

[contrail67]

I can hand fly just fine and my backround has nothing to do with it Lear. I am talking about risk managment. IMC into a busy hub is not the best time to "practice". That is all I was saying. I agree that an airline pilot should be proficient at hand flying, it's part of our job.

Most of us "practiced" when we were learning....it should be natural at this point.

 

[Lear70]

Most of us "practiced" when we were learning....it should be natural at this point.

I guess we don't need checkrides every year, either, because it should be "natural at this point"...

Just playing devil's advocate with your post because, fact is, people fail recurrent checks all the time because they're NOT proficient. Proficiency has to be maintained, and we do that with "practice".

 

[OK3]

Military straight into SWA?

Lear, it seemed to me you were disparaging pilots who come from a military background. I am tired of the civ/mil arguments. We are all civilians now. Maybe that is not what you intended. I have read a lot of your posts and you seem like a good guy, so I'll leave it at that.

I did not explain my opinion very well in my first post of this thread because I was on my phone and it is hard to type.

We all agree that we should be proficient at hand flying the airplane. I just think it is better to gain that proficiency by hand flying in a lower workload environment. To me it is a risk management decision, not a "can I do it" decision. Each airline has a different view of automation, some strongly discourage or in certain conditions forbid hand flying, some require it in those same conditions. You guys write as if I am stupid to have the opinion I do. We can respectfully agree to disagree. In any case I do not think a lack of ability caused the incidents that started this thread. It could happen to any of us.

 

[contrail67]

I guess we don't need checkrides every year, either, because it should be "natural at this point"...

Just playing devil's advocate with your post because, fact is, people fail recurrent checks all the time because they're NOT proficient. Proficiency has to be maintained, and we do that with "practice".

Last time I checked, Proficency checkrides were to remain profecient on procedures that are not normal....ie: engine failure/fire procedures, ect. Pc's are not usually to train hand flying.

I have NEVER had a checkride in 15000 hours where the examiner said lets see your hand flying skills....except the requirement to do so on a single engine ILS marker inbound approach.