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

Inappropriate comments about RJ crash?

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
They tried to restart the engines outside of the relight envelope, with the engine ITT way out of limits. That pretty much melted the core.

Question: Does PCL have a limitation for Minimum Climb Speed? At CMR we can't go below 250/.70 above 10,000 feet.
 
Anyone who is listening to the NTSB webcast would agree with Stempler.

It sounds like a couple of children playing with a toy. I lost count how many times they INTENTIONALLY activated the pusher during their climb.

Unbeleivable--they are 15 minutes in discussing CVR/FDR data and are only to the restart attempts and I am already sick to my stomach.

Oh yeah, they switched seats in climb!! and only switched back below 10,000' on the way down.
 
acaTerry said:
Until the final report is out, I must disagree. "A little fun" can mean many things. Speculating on thisis unfair to the crew and especially their families.
Why is always the attitude no matter what the evidence points to? We must somehow reserve our judgments simply because no official report is out yet? Well, I don't buy it. This is one that people NEED to learn from NOW - not 18 - 24 months after the fact.

Look, the simple fact of the matter is that those guys were doing something they weren't familiar with doing. This really isn't open to dispute. Most times this wouldn't be a problem but this time something fell out of bed and once again the evidence is that the crew didn't respond appropriately.

Anyone who has been a commuter airline pilot can EASILY imagine how training (or a lack thereof) might be involved. Jets are not turboprops and yet the transition to them has been treated as though it's just another airplane. The bottom line is that in terms of the mechanics of how they fly that's true, but WHERE they can fly and the speeds at which they do it is altogether different and requires training. Likewise, wisdom comes from years of experience - IN JETS.

As unfortunate as this whole thing is, I suspect in the end the lesson will reflect something that has always been axiomatic when you fly for a living: Don't mess with stuff you don't know about. It's that simple.

TIS
 
......
 
Last edited:
JetPilot_Mike said:
Question: Does PCL have a limitation for Minimum Climb Speed? At CMR we can't go below 250/.70 above 10,000 feet.

We do now, but at the time of the accident we did not. It was somewhat implied however by the fact that the climb charts are for a 250/.70M climb.
 
I read the entire article and find it to be neither sensationalistic nor irresponsible -- even Stempler's comments.

Please don't let your natural response to defend our pilot brothers and our industry turn to unfounded righteous indignation. It is not disrespectful of those who have passed on to admit that they may have made some mistakes with lethal consequences. It is our job to learn from them.

If the collective "WE" are guilty of messing around on an empty leg (which I dare say most of us have done at some point in our careers), maybe it's time for the collective "US" to own up and grow up. I have nothing against having fun, but we must be mature enough to distinguish between fun and irresponsibility.

As someone pointed out above, just because the airplane is "certified" to FL410 doesn't mean you ought to take it there. With warmer weather and heavy loads, I am frequently concerned about FL350, let alone FL410.
 
In light of the replies to my post, I must be missing something. I didn't even know the NTSB put out a preliminary yet.

I'll go look it up.
 
acaTerry said:
In light of the replies to my post, I must be missing something. I didn't even know the NTSB put out a preliminary yet.

I'll go look it up.
The NTSB Public Hearings are in progress even as we type. (Click on the link to navigate to a live webcast video feed.)








.
 
It's easy to ridicule the pilots for this unfortunate accident. How come no one is outraged at this POS airplane? You should be able to fly an airplane up to it max altitude empty. My god, even an Embraer ERJ will do that.
 
So regardless of atmospheric conditions, I should be angry at Saab Fairchild for producing an aircraft that can't make it up to FL250 even if there is no one on board?
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top