FEDEX Hard Landing in MEM

[AceCrackshot]

FedEx's safety record speaks for itself, I personally believe the hiring department and training should share the blame.

Obviously, something in the corporate culture is allowing these things to occur. I don't work there, but other organizations fly similar equipment, and still other organizations fly in as demanding conditions, and don't bend metal like FEDEX does.

I hope the crew makes a speedy recovery.

 

[Malter1]

Hey AceCrackshot,

I bet you have your application on file at FedEx, don't you? Make sure you tell them in your M&G that you know how to fix things once you get on property.

 

[rayford steele]

I hope for the best for everyone in this business but this has got to be getting the attention of the FAA.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=1&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1%2F1%2F2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=Federal+Express&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=2&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1/1/2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=Federal+Express&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

 

[twgordy]

Hey Malter, I've been around here over five years and I'm beginning to wonder the same thing. I'm certainly not perfect by any standards and flying around the world at night is very demanding at times but I knew what I was getting into because thats what I signed up for.

 

[Malter1]

Hey Malter, I've been around here over five years and I'm beginning to wonder the same thing. I'm certainly not perfect by any standards and flying around the world at night is very demanding at times but I knew what I was getting into because thats what I signed up for.

Please clarify....I'm not sure where you're going with this one.

 

[AceCrackshot]

Hey AceCrackshot,

I bet you have your application on file at FedEx, don't you? Make sure you tell them in your M&G that you know how to fix things once you get on property

Excellent response, Malter1.

One, I don't have the minimums for FedEx, so I don't have an application there.

Two, my company had two crew caused overruns. But my company is actually trying to fix itself. Both were stupid.

Three, if asked, I would tell them. My integrity isn't for sale. I would explain, that, in my humble and inexperienced opinion, a rash of accidents from the OM inbound suggest a few things to me. One, the hiring should reflect people that have high cycle experience (fighters, regional, fractional) over heavy time. Two, go-arounds are an option. All the time. These accidents are the result, IMHO, of people salvaging bad approaches. So instead we get to salvage the airplane.

Four, FEDEX has a Safety Issue. I'd deal with it. More Aggressively, Now.

You have good taste in movies, though.

 

[mule]

I hope for the best for everyone in this business but this has got to be getting the attention of the FAA.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=1&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1%2F1%2F2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=Federal+Express&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=2&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1/1/2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=Federal+Express&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

Well, then this should too:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=1&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1%2F1%2F2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=southwest&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

and this:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=1&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1%2F1%2F2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=united+air+lines&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

and this:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=1&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1%2F1%2F2001&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=delta&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

and this:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.asp?spage=1&x_page_size=10&sql=Y&p1=1%2F1%2F1999&p2=7%2F28%2F2006&p3=&p4=&p5=&p6=&p7=&p8=&p9=&p10=&p11=&p12=american+airlines&p13=&p14=&p15=&p16=ev%5Fdate&p17=Desc&p18=&p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=

My point isn't to single out just these airlines that I searched. My point is almost every airline that you search is going to have a laundry list of incidents. It is part of the game. It is something that every company tries to mitigate, but no matter what they do, there will always be bent metal. FedEx just happened to have two incidents within a couple of days. Nobody has died. Heck, we don't even know anything about who was at fault yet! Maybe it has absolutely nothing to do with the training program?

None of the FedEx accidents on the NTSB website list a fatality (except one tug operator that was crushed by his buddy). I would say that this is a pretty good record. There aren't too many 121 operators that can say they have never had a death. Sure, FedEx has lost some hulls, but when you are making $568 Million in a quarter, what is a hull or two?

 

[TriStar_drvr]

Sure, FedEx has lost some hulls, but when you are making $568 Million in a quarter, what is a hull or two?

I had a comment for this, but since I've probably had one too many tonight, I've edited it out.

 

[sandman2122]

Acecrack and other knuckleheads like to come to their obvious conclusion that the MD-10 and 727 in SDF are due to pilot error. Airplane maintence is never the cause in any acccidents - it's always the pilot's fault.......keep telling yourself that.


Flightinfo.com............home of the Monday morning quarterbacks..

 

[active_herk]

Excellent response, Malter1.

One, the hiring should reflect people that have high cycle experience (fighters, regional, fractional) over heavy time.

People like........ AceCrackshot!!!

 

[Laughing_Jakal]

apples to apples

Compare the incident rate not in how many per year, etc, but how many per flight hour or flight mile. For all you Monday morning Quarterbacks...nevermind....suffice it to say, the hiring system of today didn't put anyone ...well like I said. Nevermind.

 

[AceCrackshot]

Acecrack and other knuckleheads like to come to their obvious conclusion that the MD-10 and 727 in SDF are due to pilot error. Airplane maintence is never the cause in any acccidents - it's always the pilot's fault.......keep telling yourself that.


Flightinfo.com............home of the Monday morning quarterbacks

I think I'd say, FedEx, home of the ad hominum attack.

Look, I think there is a safety problem at FedEx. I think your management agrees with me. Its behind the push to implement FOQA. I think its demostrated in a poor charting system, and number of hull losses. Prove me wrong, I love nothing more than a good argument, especially when I learn something.

If it is a maintenence problem, then fix it. If it is a pilot problem, fix that too. Look, I'll tell you my organization has a Class A CRM problem. Starts from the top and percolates on down. Some of us are trying to fix it. But I don't resort to name calling.

Also, whatever it is, it is the pilot's problem. The solution to every problem in aviation ends up in the cockpit.

 

[AceCrackshot]

Quote:
Originally Posted by AceCrackshot
Excellent response, Malter1.

One, the hiring should reflect people that have high cycle experience (fighters, regional, fractional) over heavy time.


People like........ AceCrackshot!!!

OK, now we're getting somewhere in the conversation. I'll forward my resume to you in the morning.

Seriously, its my own humble, inexperienced suggestion. Take it or leave it. HR departments love easily comparable metrics, like flight time. It does provide some basis for comparing two individual aviators, but is the type of experience someone is bringing to the table what our organization needs?
I don't know. I do know people that interviewed aviators at TWA, and some of the regionals. All spoke of the type of flying, versus time, as being more important than amount, and attitude as most important of all.
So, perhaps the answer is to politely excuse the HR departments from the process. I'd like to see it industrywide. I'd also like to hit the powerball, while I'm dreaming. Or get on at FEDEX.

Landing accidents would suggest to me that bad approaches are being salvaged. Why? I don't know. Pressure to get to the sort on time? Cowboy flying? There is an answer. Can't write them all off to bad luck.

 

[Malter1]

.....Also, whatever it is, it is the pilot's problem. The solution to every problem in aviation ends up in the cockpit.

WOW! Ignorance is truly bliss! So, TWA 800 exploding over the Atlantic was a pilot problem. And the solution is in the cockpit. Good one. AceCrackshot, you need a whole lot more experience under your belt before you attempt to shoot that one across the bow.

 

[AceCrackshot]

WOW! Ignorance is truly bliss! So, TWA 800 exploding over the Atlantic was a pilot problem. And the solution is in the cockpit. Good one. AceCrackshot, you need a whole lot more experience under your belt before you attempt to shoot that one across the bow

Yes, in a sense it is a HUGE pilot problem. Potential MANPADS threat to civil aviation is a pilot problem. How the NTSB runs high profile investigations is an HUGE pilot problem. I know people that were at Calverton. People I knew were on that plane. If you care to discuss 800, I'd love to. Let's get a new thread.

My point in my statement was simply to point out that the pilot community can take the lead in fixing our problems or we can have the solution dictated to us. I prefer the former. The first step is stowing the infallibility and ego. Or you can continue to kick and scream.

 

[Juvat]

We're all professionals here (for the most part), so lets see what the facts are first.

Yeah, but this is not a professional forum, so go blow it out your a$$ you uptight mf.

Oh, sorry, was that unprofessional?

Lighten up, Francis.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

As much as I want to get hired there... I have to say that I have never seen an airplane get landed harder than some of those purples in MEM.

 

[PurpleTail]

Landing accidents would suggest to me that bad approaches are being salvaged. Why? I don't know. Pressure to get to the sort on time? Cowboy flying? There is an answer. Can't write them all off to bad luck.

You sure do know how to make friends...

First, a look at safety and training got put under the microscope after the 72 TLH and MD-10 MEM incidents. That kind of goes without saying. FOM issues have been looked at and addressed, sim training has been revised, emphises has been made to change the culture but for some reason bad things keep happening.

Not too many people flying 727's any more, or DC-10's converted to MD-10's...old airframes man with countless cycles. Is it strictly a crew force prblem? Old aircraft issues? Combination of many factors I think is the best answer.

And as far as your hiring theories go throw them out the window. You could log 1000 hours a year with 500+ landing and get hired at FedEx...sit sideways on the panel for a year...upgrade to FO on the MadDog...sit reserve and the fly RFO trips with no T/O or landings. Lets see how you do with a 20 kt crosswind...might not be as easy as you think. I use to be a pretty solid stick before coming to work here...I still got it but each landing is an adventure and I always respect the airplane. I have to make an effort to keep my 3/3 every 90 days.

Also, we don't 'salvage' approaches at FedEx. It is stated in our FOM that at 1000 ft AGL you MUST be on LOC, G/S, final flaps, engines spooled and on speed or it is a mandatory Go-Around.

 

[propjob27]

Here's another, more "dramatic" pic. I bet a lot of people saw this one; I wonder if UPS has it posted somewhere on their homepage. Thankfully it happened in MEM, can you image the posts if this happened in Louisville??

http://files.wmctv.com/planefire.jpg

Go full screen on it, it pretty much fills a 1152 x 864 res.


I hope to GOD that we find out the left main just sheared off and that it definately was not our (ie, pilot) fault.

 

[Fox-Tree]

Not to speculate on the crash, but I do have an issue with the way FedEx trains the MD-10. They want you to fly it like an MD-11. NEWS FLASH!!!!!! IT IS NOT AN MD-11. On a flight once in the MD-10 I clicked the autothrottles off at about 100 feet during the approach, the Capt (a check airman) debreifed me about it. So now I just guard the autothrottles and don't let them retard until I am just about established in the flare. I will never let the MD-10 throttles retard on landing on their own.

Mr. Zog,
This isn’t directed at yesterday’s event or an attack on you. Your post just got me thinking about how screwed up some of our training/standards folks are.
How about TURNING OFF the auto throttles every once in a while? I can't believe the culture that's been created at Fedex where it's totally acceptable to turn the A/P on at 1000' on departure and turn it off a mile out on short final. MD-11/MD-10 pilots at Fedex are AFRAID to hand fly the aircraft (really hand-fly with auto-throttles off too). The training department needs an enema. Get rid of these idiots that are so in love with automation. These are the same idiots that want everyone to have crosswind controls in out on final instead of in the flare. If you like doing that, great but some of us like to do it in the flare. Overall, it’s not a difficult fix. Encourage pilots to hand fly when appropriate and use automation when it's not. We need to be proficient in ALL types of operations. I shouldn't have to convince the Captain to let me hand fly the aircraft for my proficiency.

 

[filejw]

Fox Tree , Something as little as handling skills could be the answer. I can't believe people wouldn't hand fly just a bit more anyway to make sure they are awake.
Purple Tail, A 20 kt crosswind shouldn't be an event ever.

 

[Gearup727]

Fox - Tree,
I think you hit the nail on the head. These guys fly around with automation all day, then kick it off and have a hand full of MD-11 or MD-10 at 300 feet. Throw in a cross wind and it's a bad situation. I think if we were flying pax this problem would have been fixed by now.

 

[FedExFlyer]

Mr. Zog,
This isn’t directed at yesterday’s event or an attack on you. Your post just got me thinking about how screwed up some of our training/standards folks are.
How about TURNING OFF the auto throttles every once in a while? I can't believe the culture that's been created at Fedex where it's totally acceptable to turn the A/P on at 1000' on departure and turn it off a mile out on short final. MD-11/MD-10 pilots at Fedex are AFRAID to hand fly the aircraft (really hand-fly with auto-throttles off too). The training department needs an enema. Get rid of these idiots that are so in love with automation. These are the same idiots that want everyone to have crosswind controls in out on final instead of in the flare. If you like doing that, great but some of us like to do it in the flare. Overall, it’s not a difficult fix. Encourage pilots to hand fly when appropriate and use automation when it's not. We need to be proficient in ALL types of operations. I shouldn't have to convince the Captain to let me hand fly the aircraft for my proficiency.

Well said Foxtree............

Same goes for the Bus dept

 

[skykid]

Mule - excellent post with the NTSB website data.

Couple of points - it is too premature to even speculate on what the cause was yesterday. Also, I saw many attempts to salvage a bad approach at my last airline (a major). I've never seen that happen once at FedEx, granted I've only been on the 727. The criteria for being stable at 1,000 feet is not something I've seen anyone disregard.

 

[PastV1]

Fox-Tree,

I take exception to the point you made about 11/10 pilots and automation. I hand fly it often with the auto throttles off. I also tell my FO's to do the same if they are so inclined. Don't put us all in the same basket lest we think all 727 pilots like to land short...

By the way, we can turn the autopilot on at 500 ft.

Past...

 

[FedEx1]

The SDF incident was mechanical. All three pilots are back on the line. (yes, in ONE day!!) Trust me, if there was an inkling of pilot error, they would not have closed the issue up this fast.

It is not only unprofessional, but just plain RUDE to speculate on the MD-10 issue.

Nuff said.

Just for the record, WE DID bring in an outside source that investigated us for a long time- and when they wrote up the report, the company refused to make the results of the Enders Safety Report public. The pilots have no idea what they found. But you can bet that if the source of the problem was us, the pilots, the company WOULD have let that info out.

 

[Fox-Tree]

Fox-Tree,

I take exception to the point you made about 11/10 pilots and automation. I hand fly it often with the auto throttles off. I also tell my FO's to do the same if they are so inclined. Don't put us all in the same basket lest we think all 727 pilots like to land short...

By the way, we can turn the autopilot on at 500 ft.

Past...

I'm glad you do. IMO, you appear to be the exception. I was generalizing about the A/P on departure (sometimes some of the problem children get task saturated and miss their chance to get HAL involved for ~500' or so ).

 

[Big Beer Belly]

(sometimes some of the problem children get task saturated and miss their chance to get HAL involved for ~500' or so ).

Now THAT was funny! :laugh:

BBB

 

[TheDogsBollocks]

Excellent response, Malter1.

One, I don't have the minimums for FedEx, so I don't have an application there.

Two, my company had two crew caused overruns. But my company is actually trying to fix itself. Both were stupid.

Three, if asked, I would tell them. My integrity isn't for sale. I would explain, that, in my humble and inexperienced opinion, a rash of accidents from the OM inbound suggest a few things to me. One, the hiring should reflect people that have high cycle experience (fighters, regional, fractional) over heavy time. Two, go-arounds are an option. All the time. These accidents are the result, IMHO, of people salvaging bad approaches. So instead we get to salvage the airplane.

Four, FEDEX has a Safety Issue. I'd deal with it. More Aggressively, Now.

You have good taste in movies, though.

Well said dear sir,

Despite hiring the "best and brightest", Fedex regretfully seems rather "incident prone". It is a shame that the "Oracle of Fedex" Malter1 lacks the humility to possibly consider that the Fedex training dept. may have to evaluate its methods to reduce these unfortunate events.

 

[Malter1]

Well said dear sir,

Despite hiring the "best and brightest", Fedex regretfully seems rather "incident prone". It is a shame that the "Oracle of Fedex" Malter1 lacks the humility to possibly consider that the Fedex training dept. may have to evaluate its methods to reduce these unfortunate events.

Just because I happen to be one of the best pilots in the world, does not mean I lack humility!