Flg 3701 Audio Tape

[Flying Illini]

This got me thinking...I've said some stuff that could be taken waaaay out of context if someone was listening to the CVR.
Here's one that I'm sure more than a few of us have said, "What's it doing now?!" The headlines would read, "Pilots don't know how to fly their plane."

The tentacles comment is pretty hilarious.

 

[Flechas]

That article is sick, those fukcing reporters don't know ther a$$es from their heads.
I've never thought about the things I say in the cockpit, but I guess it's a good idea to start doing it now, you never know what may save or bury your a$$ in the future.
As far as that accident is concerned, only they know what happened up there that night, so lets not judge them, It may be us next time.

Fly safe.

 

[urflyingme?!]

freakin fladging ahhhh!

Why the hell do they publish those tapes!?!?!?

What happened to accident investigation only?

I highly doubt the NTSB has hired the Crack podunk nbc news team to investigate....

Why/How do these tapes get out?

 

[Mel Sharples]

Why/How do these tapes get out?

ATC audio feed is different from the CVR or FDR. They come out all the time. There are even some from 9/11 out there. If I'm not mistaken, ATC tapes being released has something to do with the Freedom of Information Act.

 

[Dr.Hwang]

At AWAC we use flip charts. We look at current aircraft weight and ISA deviation, then refer to a chart that tells what maxium altitude we can attain, and then accellerate to a given cruise speed. Our charts are really conservative. I think the highest it showed a CRJ200 could get to is 37000 ft (approx) and accellerate to .74 mach. That altitude might be a little off, but none of our charts show FL410.

 

[DiverDriver]

That article is sick, those fukcing reporters don't know ther a$$es from their heads.
I've never thought about the things I say in the cockpit, but I guess it's a good idea to start doing it now, you never know what may save or bury your a$$ in the future.
As far as that accident is concerned, only they know what happened up there that night, so lets not judge them, It may be us next time.

Fly safe.

How do you expect to learn if you do not want to judge? You have to look at what happened and determine what caused the accident to happen. Each step is important.

"Having a little fun" shows a part of the mindset of the pilot responding. We're professionals. This is our job. We're not here to "have fun". If you want fun go skydiving or rent a Decatholon and do acrobatics.

In skydiving we have a saying that says "If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough". It's harsh. But it gets a lot of testosterone driven newbies to listen. Maybe a dose of that among our ranks would be a good thing. The harsh reality of aviation is that you can parish (along with everyone on board) by making some wrong decisions that don't seem very important at first glance. I've had plenty of friends killed in skydiving over the past 10 years so I'm quite familiar with the mindset of "woowhoo! OH SH!T!!"

It's always an arguement about how we shouldn't talk ill of the dead. I always respond with "how is it talking ill of their total life accomplishments by talking about something that could save someone else's life?" The final moments don't summarize how they lived their total life. (well, sometimes it does) Many times it's the mindset going into a situtaion that gets you killed and nothing else. The rest is just details for the report.

I would keep this in the back of my mind the next time I start to think I'm board at work and want to "have a little fun."

Not judging the crew as being "bad" people. Just offering some insight into what I've observed over some years in this harsh, unforgiving activity called aviation. We can't reach into the past and yank our friends out of the situation just before it goes bad. But we can look forward and carry their experience with us. I've sat on the crew room couch and thought about all the things that might have been going on right then:

Night, double engine failure, triple chimes and single chimes that don't seem to want to stop, ADG noise, aircraft stall, flying over dark turrain that you are possibly unfamiliar with and can't see the nearest airport, never flown a glider before let alone a 46,000 pound glider, depressurizing cabin, the list goes on and on. It's not a place I want to go ever and how this crew go into that situation has my attention very much. "Having a little fun".

God Bless them and their families.

 

[BayAreaPilot]

Some of the phraseology seems a little off, such as them reporting at 41,000 instead of FL 410 and. Also is that how they say the type for a CRJ-200, as RJ200?

 

[Flechas]

How do you expect to learn if you do not want to judge? You have to look at what happened and determine what caused the accident to happen. Each step is important.

"Having a little fun" shows a part of the mindset of the pilot responding. We're professionals. This is our job. We're not here to "have fun". If you want fun go skydiving or rent a Decatholon and do acrobatics.

In skydiving we have a saying that says "If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough". It's harsh. But it gets a lot of testosterone driven newbies to listen. Maybe a dose of that among our ranks would be a good thing. The harsh reality of aviation is that you can parish (along with everyone on board) by making some wrong decisions that don't seem very important at first glance. I've had plenty of friends killed in skydiving over the past 10 years so I'm quite familiar with the mindset of "woowhoo! OH SH!T!!"

It's always an arguement about how we shouldn't talk ill of the dead. I always respond with "how is it talking ill of their total life accomplishments by talking about something that could save someone else's life?" The final moments don't summarize how they lived their total life. (well, sometimes it does) Many times it's the mindset going into a situtaion that gets you killed and nothing else. The rest is just details for the report.

I would keep this in the back of my mind the next time I start to think I'm board at work and want to "have a little fun."

Not judging the crew as being "bad" people. Just offering some insight into what I've observed over some years in this harsh, unforgiving activity called aviation. We can't reach into the past and yank our friends out of the situation just before it goes bad. But we can look forward and carry their experience with us. I've sat on the crew room couch and thought about all the things that might have been going on right then:

Night, double engine failure, triple chimes and single chimes that don't seem to want to stop, ADG noise, aircraft stall, flying over dark turrain that you are possibly unfamiliar with and can't see the nearest airport, never flown a glider before let alone a 46,000 pound glider, depressurizing cabin, the list goes on and on. It's not a place I want to go ever and how this crew go into that situation has my attention very much. "Having a little fun".

God Bless them and their families.

I never said we should not learn from what happen, but the comment of having a little fun is being maipulated here. Maybe they meant having fun by just being at that altitude, and there's nothing wrong with thinking being that high is fun. That's the kind of judging I'm refering to, "oh they were having fun up there, that's why they crashed", just because some stupid reporter that doen's know zhit about aviation twisted what was found in the tapes.
When we find out what really went wrong, other than having fun, then we may look into it and learn from it, knowing that it could have been any of us.

 

[DirkkDiggler]

Diver, Good post. It's okay to study other people's mistakes and still allow them to maintain their dignity. If we never looked at any pilot's mistakes, we'd never have the incredible safety record we have in this country's airline industry. I think accident case studies should be a mandatory part of applying for a commercial pilot's license. If we don't learn from other's mistakes, we're only condemned to repeat them ourselves.

 

[jarhead]

Some of the phraseology seems a little off, such as them reporting at 41,000 instead of FL 410 and. Also is that how they say the type for a CRJ-200, as RJ200?

No, not "off". These were audio transcripts between control and the cockpit. The voice recordings aired on the ABC station in MSP were not reinactments. They were the ATC recordings. There was no spin on the broadcast I listened to. Just some file video of a Pinnacle CRJ in the TV background as the recordings played out over the aiwaves.

 

[Flechas]

Diver, Good post. It's okay to study other people's mistakes and still allow them to maintain their dignity.

If we don't learn from other's mistakes, we're only condemned to repeat them ourselves.

That's what I'm trying to say, and that's not what the press does, they should not even be allowed to write about that. If we want to study accidents, we can go to the NTSB and read about it. This is like a pilot writting about why a doctor fukced up an operation and the patient died, give me a break, mind your own business and write about something you have knowledge on.

 

[6'0 AGL]

Some of the phraseology seems a little off, such as them reporting at 41,000 instead of FL 410 and. Also is that how they say the type for a CRJ-200, as RJ200?

questions questions questions!!!! the news media will do anything for a story ie Dan Rather. So you never really know!!! I have not heard the tapes hopefully the NTSB has and something can be learned from this...

 

[Smacktard]

...they <press> should not even be allowed to write about that.

Dang, so much for freedom of information/speech/press ehh?

 

[jarhead]

That's what I'm trying to say, and that's not what the press does, they should not even be allowed to write about that. If we want to study accidents, we can go to the NTSB and read about it. This is like a pilot writting about why a doctor fukced up an operation and the patient died, give me a break, mind your own business and write about something you have knowledge on.

Ya know, if their is a doctor out there killing people by screw ups, I'd like to know about it. It allows me to avoid that guy. Or, do you feel only the AMA should have privy to quacks who botch operations.

Freedom of the press is what lets all of us make somewhat informed decisions. Pilots are not immune to public scrutiny if they make deadly errors. This has nothing to do with sensitivity to the families. Any occupation that can mess up other peoples live is subject to investigation and reporting. Would you have the greyhound bus driver who took a load of 60 people over a cliff be exempt from public scrutiny? There have been times when that bus driver has been found to have been under the influence of drugs. Should that have been kept quiet.

Should the two NWA pilots who flew a load of pax from Fargo to MSP while drunk, been quietly prosecuted, and the public be kept in the dark because they are not knowledgeable enough?

Perhaps there are inadequate training issues that need to be addressed at Pinnacle. I am not saying that there is, but the public at least who buys the tickets should have an idea of what they might be stepping into.

The aired transcripts are only one item that the public at large uses to make a decision on how they might travel.

 

[crashpad]

At AWAC we use flip charts. We look at current aircraft weight and ISA deviation, then refer to a chart that tells what maxium altitude we can attain, and then accellerate to a given cruise speed. Our charts are really conservative. I think the highest it showed a CRJ200 could get to is 37000 ft (approx) and accellerate to .74 mach. That altitude might be a little off, but none of our charts show FL410.

OK, Everyone listen up!!! This is how AWAC does it...........

 

[Flechas]

Ya know, if their is a doctor out there killing people by screw ups, I'd like to know about it. It allows me to avoid that guy. Or, do you feel only the AMA should have privy to quacks who botch operations.

Freedom of the press is what lets all of us make somewhat informed decisions. Pilots are not immune to public scrutiny if they make deadly errors. This has nothing to do with sensitivity to the families. Any occupation that can mess up other peoples live is subject to investigation and reporting. Would you have the greyhound bus driver who took a load of 60 people over a cliff be exempt from public scrutiny? There have been times when that bus driver has been found to have been under the influence of drugs. Should that have been kept quiet.

Should the two NWA pilots who flew a load of pax from Fargo to MSP while drunk, been quietly prosecuted, and the public be kept in the dark because they are not knowledgeable enough?

Perhaps there are inadequate training issues that need to be addressed at Pinnacle. I am not saying that there is, but the public at least who buys the tickets should have an idea of what they might be stepping into.

The aired transcripts are only one item that the public at large uses to make a decision on how they might travel.

Of course the public is allowed to know what's going on, same with the doctor example. But the person writting about thi issue should at least know ehat he/she is talking about. I would not be the one writting about how a doctor fukced up, because I don't know anything about medicine. The guy who wrote this article doesn't know anything about flying, he should let someone who knows write about it.

 

[DiverDriver]

Diver, Good post. It's okay to study other people's mistakes and still allow them to maintain their dignity. If we never looked at any pilot's mistakes, we'd never have the incredible safety record we have in this country's airline industry. I think accident case studies should be a mandatory part of applying for a commercial pilot's license. If we don't learn from other's mistakes, we're only condemned to repeat them ourselves.

I couldn't agree with you more. As part of my running a website for Jump Pilots I read accident reports every day from the FAA and NTSB. It doesn't make me an expert investigator. I'm just really good at reading reports. Some of the reports I've gotten to talk with people who were actually there and involved. I've learned so much from that process and I know others could benefit from constant case study reading.

 

[Sgt. Hartman]

F. the media.

 

[FL000]

This is my Monday quarterbacking: it's 237nm from KMEM to KJEF. In that distance, they climbed to and descended from FL410. If they averaged 2000fpm down at 250kts, that would leave about 153nm for the climb to FL410. Granted, the plane will do 4000fpm for a short while when it's empty, but quickly peters out at any weight to 500-700fpm above FL250 on profile.

I have no idea what happened in the cockpit up to FL410 (or after), but I do know that if climb speed is too low, 250KIAS and below, that the plane just isn't going to get traction at altitude, if it even reaches it. In certain borderline circumstances, it won't even gain traction when on profile.

 

[jarhead]

Of course the public is allowed to know what's going on, same with the doctor example. But the person writting about thi issue should at least know ehat he/she is talking about. I would not be the one writting about how a doctor fukced up, because I don't know anything about medicine. The guy who wrote this article doesn't know anything about flying, he should let someone who knows write about it.

I think I see what you are saying, but I see some problems with your assessment. You seem to expect that “the media” have on its staff, an expert in every field of science, human endeavor, or politics. That’s an awfully high standard to be set for any organization. True, sometimes on a particular aspect of something, an expert can be available to a local news organization. But even then, there are experts who will disagree with each other. I see it all the time, and I’m sure you do as well.

To me, the purest form of reporting, is simply broadcasting “facts”, without any explanation or spin from an expert. In the case of the audio tapes of the final minutes of flight 3701, they are the exact words of ATC and the pilots. The newscast I watched presented an accurate presentation of what was recorded from just before the emergency, right up to the crash. What is inaccurate about that reporting? You could even hear the increasing levels of stress in the pilot’s voices……something the printed word does not convey. Yes, it is sad news, but I don’t want my news to be just about who married who, and who won best actor Oscar at the Academy Awards show.

For the guy that posted “F. the media”, well, that’s about the most brilliant comment I’ve yet to hear on this. Perhaps he should go live in a cave somewhere, and avoid any news at all about anything at all. Best to remain ignorant your whole life, and the only news events worth knowing about are from his own personal limited experiences.