Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Havin' a lil fun....

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

A1FlyBoy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2002
Posts
682
WASHINGTON - Two pilots, in a jovial mood as they flew an empty commuter jet, wanted to "have a little fun" by taking the plane to an unusually high altitude last October, only to realize as the engines failed that they were not going to make it, according to transcripts released Monday.

The plane, which the two were ferrying from Little Rock, Ark. to Minneapolis, crashed and both Capt. Jesse Rhodes and First Officer Peter Cesarz perished.

The cockpit voice recording, released by the
National Transportation Safety Board at the start of a three-day hearing into the Oct. 14, 2004 accident, revealed how the pilots cracked jokes and decided to "have a little fun" and fly to 41,000 feet — the maximum altitude for their plane. Most commuter jets fly at lower altitudes.

"Man, we can do it, 41-it," said Cesarz at 9:48 p.m. A minute later, Rhodes said, "40 thousand, baby."

Two minutes later, "There's 41-0, my man," Cesarz said. "Made it, man."

At 9:52 p.m., one of the pilots popped a can of Pepsi and they joked about drinking beer. A minute later, Cesarz said, "This is the greatest thing, no way."

But at 10:03 p.m., the pilots reported their engine had failed. Five minutes later, they said both engines had failed and they wanted a direct route to any airport.

The transcript recounts their increasingly desperate efforts to restart the engines and regain altitude. They tried to land at the Jefferson City, Mo., airport but by 10:14 p.m., it was obvious they wouldn't reach it.

"We're not going to make it, man. We're not going to make it," Cesarz said. The plane crashed in a residential neighborhood of Jefferson City. No one was injured on the ground.

Accident investigators are examining how well the pilots were trained — a key safety question as the number of regional jets keeps growing.

The crash involved a Bombardier regional jet plane operated by Pinnacle Airlines, an affiliate of Northwest Airlines. Like many regional carriers, Pinnacle is growing rapidly as it teams up with a traditional network airline looking to offer more seats to more places.

Memphis, Tenn.-based Pinnacle grew by 700 percent in the past five years, according to Phil Reed, its marketing vice president. During that time, it switched its fleet from propeller-driven planes to small turbojets, known as regional jets, or RJs.

The number of regional jets rose to 1,630 last year from 570 in 2000, the
Federal Aviation Administration says. The question of whether government safety inspectors can keep up with such rapid changes in the airline industry was raised last week in a Transportation Department inspector general's report.

Jet engines work differently at higher altitudes, and it's unclear whether the relatively inexperienced Pinnacle pilots were aware that they had to be more careful in the thin air at 41,000 feet, the maximum altitude for their plane.

According to
FAA transcripts of air-to-ground conversations, an air traffic controller in Kansas City told the two pilots it was rare to see the plane flying that high.

"Yeah, we're actually ... we don't have any passengers on board, so we decided to have a little fun and come up here," one of the pilots said. The transcripts don't identify whether Jesse Rhodes or Cesarz made the statement.

First one, then the other engine shut down. The last contact that controllers had with the crew was at 9,000 feet, when the pilot reported an airport beacon in sight.

At the hearing,
NTSB investigators plan to delve into the plane's flight limits and the proper recovery techniques when engines fail. They also want to know if the pilots knew those procedures and to learn the engine's performance characteristics at high altitudes.

On June 2, the FAA issued a special bulletin clarifying what steps pilots need to take to restart an engine when there's a dual engine failure, agency spokeswoman Laura Brown said.

David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, said the issue may be reckless pilots rather than inadequate training or improper recovery procedures.

"This is more a story of pilots having time on their hands and playing with things in the cockpit that they shouldn't," he said.

Flying, he said, is as boring as truck driving most of the time.

"This was boredom and experimentation, these guys experimenting with things they had no business doing," Stempler said.
 
What Dave Stempler fails to mention is that the Aircraft was never flown outside of it's certified flight envelope......the pilot's did nothing that was illegal or against company policy (which was changed the next day to make FL370 the max altitude...hmmm....that was a quick investigation).

In terms of "playing with things in the cockpit they shouldn't", I don't know if something belongs in the cockpit if the pilots can't use it.

I knew the Captain of this Ill fated flight personally, so I take offense at anyone slandering his good name.

Maybe the airplane shouldn't have been certified to FL410 if it was at the edge of the envelope...maybe the procedures for a re-start were lacking.......The Pilot's aren't here to defend themselves, so I guess it makes them an easy target. Just because it's easy to call something "pilot error" doesn't make it right.
 
TheRaven said:
In terms of "playing with things in the cockpit they shouldn't", I don't know if something belongs in the cockpit if the pilots can't use it.
Well, the Captain shouldn't be playing in the right seat, and the FO shouldn't be playing in the left seat.





TheRaven said:
... the pilot's did nothing that was illegal or against company policy ...

[font=TimesNewRoman,Bold]
Flight Operations Manual
Rev: 25
[/font]
Date: 5/20/05
[font=TimesNewRoman,Bold]
4.30.6 Crew Composition
[/font]
14 CFR 121.385, 121.391,121.533
The minimum flight crew for all operations shall be a Captain and a First Officer.
The Captain must occupy the left seat and the First Officer must occupy the right
seat.​







.
 
Last edited:
Raven--

It's not BEING at 410--it's how they GOT there. If you are too slow in the climb (on the back of the power curve) you just can't accelerate--no matter how much power you apply. And if you're already at the ceiling with max power, you are going to have to descend.

Just like in a Cessna.
 
Their conversation doesn't sound too different than most normal conversations between 2 pilots when flying, let alone empty.

Question is, how many other times did people do this and come down just fine....they screwed the pooch and paid for it...

No need to bash them though.

T-Hawk
 
"This is more a story of pilots having time on their hands and playing with things in the cockpit that they shouldn't," he said.

Flying, he said, is as boring as truck driving most of the time.

"This was boredom and experimentation, these guys experimenting with things they had no business doing," Stempler said.

Moron
 
A1FlyBoy said:
WASHINGTON - Two pilots, in a jovial mood as they flew an empty commuter jet, wanted to "have a little fun" by taking the plane to an unusually high altitude last October, only to realize as the engines failed that they were not going to make it, according to transcripts released Monday.

The plane, which the two were ferrying from Little Rock, Ark. to Minneapolis, crashed and both Capt. Jesse Rhodes and First Officer Peter Cesarz perished.

The cockpit voice recording, released by the
National Transportation Safety Board at the start of a three-day hearing into the Oct. 14, 2004 accident, revealed how the pilots cracked jokes and decided to "have a little fun" and fly to 41,000 feet — the maximum altitude for their plane.(God forbid a pilot operates an aircraft within it's cretified envelope. :rolleyes: ) Most commuter jets fly at lower altitudes.

"Man, we can do it, 41-it," said Cesarz at 9:48 p.m. A minute later, Rhodes said, "40 thousand, baby."

Two minutes later, "There's 41-0, my man," Cesarz said. "Made it, man."

At 9:52 p.m., one of the pilots popped a can of Pepsi and they joked about drinking beer. (Key word here is JOKED. Lame attempt on the media to somehow associate this accident with alcohol) A minute later, Cesarz said, "This is the greatest thing, no way."

But at 10:03 p.m., the pilots reported their engine had failed. Five minutes later, they said both engines had failed and they wanted a direct route to any airport.

The transcript recounts their increasingly desperate efforts to restart the engines and regain altitude. They tried to land at the Jefferson City, Mo., airport but by 10:14 p.m., it was obvious they wouldn't reach it.

"We're not going to make it, man. We're not going to make it," Cesarz said. The plane crashed in a residential neighborhood of Jefferson City. No one was injured on the ground.

Accident investigators are examining how well the pilots were trained — a key safety question as the number of regional jets keeps growing.

The crash involved a Bombardier regional jet plane operated by Pinnacle Airlines, an affiliate of Northwest Airlines. Like many regional carriers, Pinnacle is growing rapidly as it teams up with a traditional network airline looking to offer more seats to more places.

Memphis, Tenn.-based Pinnacle grew by 700 percent in the past five years, according to Phil Reed, its marketing vice president. During that time, it switched its fleet from propeller-driven planes to small turbojets, known as regional jets, or RJs.

The number of regional jets rose to 1,630 last year from 570 in 2000, the
Federal Aviation Administration says. The question of whether government safety inspectors can keep up with such rapid changes in the airline industry was raised last week in a Transportation Department inspector general's report.

Jet engines work differently at higher altitudes, and it's unclear whether the relatively inexperienced Pinnacle pilots were aware that they had to be more careful in the thin air at 41,000 feet, the maximum altitude for their plane.

According to
FAA transcripts of air-to-ground conversations, an air traffic controller in Kansas City told the two pilots it was rare to see the plane flying that high.

"Yeah, we're actually ... we don't have any passengers on board, so we decided to have a little fun and come up here," one of the pilots said. The transcripts don't identify whether Jesse Rhodes or Cesarz made the statement.

First one, then the other engine shut down. The last contact that controllers had with the crew was at 9,000 feet, when the pilot reported an airport beacon in sight.

At the hearing,
NTSB investigators plan to delve into the plane's flight limits and the proper recovery techniques when engines fail. They also want to know if the pilots knew those procedures and to learn the engine's performance characteristics at high altitudes.

On June 2, the FAA issued a special bulletin clarifying what steps pilots need to take to restart an engine when there's a dual engine failure, agency spokeswoman Laura Brown said.

David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association, said the issue may be reckless pilots rather than inadequate training or improper recovery procedures.

"This is more a story of pilots having time on their hands and playing with things in the cockpit that they shouldn't," he said. (I find this part really offensive. Remember, this from the "president of the Air Travelers Association". I'd love to see just what piloting experience this guy has that he is basing this comment on. If its in the cockpit, I CAN **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** WELL PLAY WITH IT AS MUCH AS I WANT! And what exactly were they "playing with" that they shouldn't have been, the engines? throttles? ?????)

Flying, he said, is as boring as truck driving most of the time.

"This was boredom and experimentation, these guys experimenting with things they had no business doing," Stempler said.(Again, how is it they had no business operating the aircraft at an altitude that the aircraft was rated for??)[/QUOTE]
 
Again,


RIP guys.
 
bozt45 said:
And what exactly were they "playing with" that they shouldn't have been, the engines? throttles? ?????
The Captain shouldn't have been playing in the right seat, and the FO shouldn't have been playing in the left seat.

Not only did they swap seats during the climb, they swapped again during the descent, with both engines NOT OPERATING. After the second seat swap, the Captain's radio transmissions were never heard, likely due to the incorrect configuration of the Comm panels. Who needs that kind of distraction while passing through 10,000 feet in a 50-seat glider?



I'd say there's plenty of blame to go around, but the crew is certainly not innocent.








.
 
bozt45 said:
God forbid a pilot operates an aircraft within it's cretified envelope. :rolleyes:
410 is a max. That doesn't mean it can always get there or is always "certified" to do so. The POH contains charts which consider weight and ISA deviation to set the plane's max altitude in a given environment.
 
I'm really getting pissed off about this right now (again). We all want to (and will) learn from all of this, but I can't stomach people with little or no experience in the industry (with the exception of riding in the back) having diarrhea of the mouth. From the un-official information I have heard and read, the crew doesn’t appear blameless, but to portray their actions in the light Mr. Stempler did is just plain sensationalism. He didn’t have to use the language that he did, so why did he? It would appear that he wants to get a sound bite on FOX, CNN and Headline News. Why? Because it drums up business for his fee-based Air Travelers Association.


In my opinion, he is just another guy (and aviation lawyer) trying to make a buck at the expense of others.


A search of the airman registry for D Stempler returned 0 records, but I found this interesting article.

Again,


RIP guys.
 
Last edited:
The Lear 55 is certified to 510. I remember being at 470 once, and thinking that we are sure flying slow, .74(I wasn't flying). Just because its certified to fly there doesn't mean its okay.

In fact isn't the ceiling certification mainly predicated on time to descend, and other factors are secondary(such as engine parameters, and pressurization, because they are so variable)?

I think they probably were so slow when they got to 41-0, that they had a flame out. Instead of descending immediately and dealing with the problem, were distracted and didn't want to get in trouble or whatever. Five minutes later the other engine flamed out. This implies that the stayed at 410 with one engine for five minutes. Then because of the speed they were flying at the second one goes.

No offense meant, but I have always kept the Gremlin on my back quite when it comes to dicking around. We all have this little voice in our head, saying "lets have some fun." And if you don't curb it early in your career you become more apt to doing things down the road you have no business doing. I hear stories from some pilots that are proud of doing things that are ridiculous, and I don't even humor them with a laugh.
 
Traumahawk said:
Their conversation doesn't sound too different than most normal conversations between 2 pilots when flying, let alone empty.

Question is, how many other times did people do this and come down just fine....they screwed the pooch and paid for it...

No need to bash them though.

T-Hawk


Normal conversation? --- "dude"---

Maybe where YOU fly....(really?)

Everything these guys did was FAR from normal.

These fools should not have been at the controls of a wet dream, nevermind a jet.

Thank God Yours or My family was not on board or in their crash path.

All we can hope is that these ratty operators learn something from it. (Like hire qualified people and train them to accpetable standards)
 
Last edited:
Gulfstream 200 said:
Normal conversation? --- "dude"---

Maybe where YOU fly....(really?)

Everything these guys did was FAR from normal.

These fools should not have been at the controls of a wet dream, nevermind a jet.

Thank God Yours or My family was not on board or in their crash path.

All we can hope is that these ratty operators learn something from it. (Like hire qualified people and train them to accpetable standards)



Yea T-Hawk, didn't you know you're not allowed to say "dude" int he cockpit??
 
Gulfstream 200 said:
Normal conversation? --- "dude"---

Maybe where YOU fly....(really?)

Everything these guys did was FAR from normal.

These fools should not have been at the controls of a wet dream, nevermind a jet.

Thank God Yours or My family was not on board or in their crash path.

All we can hope is that these ratty operators learn something from it. (Like hire qualified people and train them to accpetable standards)

Ratty Operators? "Grotteny Borther's Flying Service" was a ratty operator.

I'm sure these guys were just the biggest cowboys with 50 pax on board too. Prob did loops and rolls in IMC all the time, and noone ever knew. :rolleyes:

Glad the b@stards aren't around to bring down another ratty operator. I'm sure that was what they were trying to do.

These guys got caught with their pants down. They died. But if you think for one second it's not in the nature of a lot of perfectly decent guys to screw around when the things are empty you're wrong. I'm not saying it's right, but it's gone on before this plenty. That plane has been in service for quite a while.

Lets not sit here in the wake of something that is OVER and speculate and criticize.

T-Hawk
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom