Instructor: CMR 5191 Pilots Violated Rules

[WateryGrave]

If the sterile cockpit is a joke, then there are going to be a lot more of these kinds of accidents. It is up to every CA and F/O to stop this chatter in the cockpit during critical flight phases. If you do not step up and call "Sterile Cockpit" you are part of the problem. Pilots who violate sterile cockpit are not professionals.

Really?? And I suppose from the time the door closes until ten thousand feet you have never uttered a word other than a checklist item or callout right??? Right!!!!

Moron

 

[wmuflyguy]

How often do you guys talk during Sterile Cockpit during a Line-check or a LOFT?

Yes it happens in the day to day operations, but i would venture to guess during line-checks and lofts the outside chatter is minimal.

Its a rule...like it or not. If you choose to talk, you chose to break the rule (I'm not saying I have never talked below 10).

Stupid or not, the rule is on the books, and we all know if we screw up we will get nailed for it, even if it had nothing to do with what happened.

 

[doh]

For now on when I see CAPT. Scharold I will only say "Hello God"... DICK

He had no choice but to tell the truth under oath. And he had no choice but to say he would not have let them take off. I hope one day you get to walk in his shoes! You wouldn't last 5 minutes. I know him and this is not what he wanted to do. You might want to educate yourself a little on what this process is like. It ain't voluntary.:angryfire

 

[samballs]

Those of you who keep ragging on the instructor must have never given a deposition. You answer direct questions. You don't get to explain your answers.

I haven't seen the depositions but it would go something like this:

Lawyer: What is sterile cockpit?

You: Explain the concept...blah, blah, blah...

Lawyer: Did this crew violate sterile cockpit?

You: Well...kind of...

Lawyer: Is a simple question; did this crew violate sterile cockpit, yes or no?

You: Yes.

lawyer: Again, a simple yes or no. Had you been in the cockpit, giving this crew a line check, and heard those extraneous conversations, would they have failed the line check?

You: Yes.

Again, I've not seen this particular deposition, but I have been involved in a number of them.

So please cut the guy some slack.

that is where the lie is god and all the others talk non stop

 

[zawillif]

Going back to the Title of this thread. . its not just comair. I've noticed that the regionals harbor an attitude of "breaking the rules" and non-standard flying. It seems the vast majority of regional pilots half-a$$ checklists, callouts, profiles, etc. on a regular basis. Don't get me wrong I'll be the first to admit I find myself doing the same things.

When you look at Delta for example (I commute on them and ride the jumpseat frequently) you will almost NEVER see a non-standard crew. And you can be standard without being a double breasted d!ckhead also. I've met some really cool Delta guys that were all very standard. I think this might have something to do with the millitary history/culture at mainline airlines.

I'd be interested to see the regional guys newly appointed at Delta and whether or not they conform to the high standards.

 

[samballs]

He had no choice but to tell the truth under oath. And he had no choice but to say he would not have let them take off. I hope one day you get to walk in his shoes! You wouldn't last 5 minutes. I know him and this is not what he wanted to do. You might want to educate yourself a little on what this process is like. It ain't voluntary.:angryfire

His briefings while your taxing, does break the sterile cockpit or is that allowed sice its a line check? seems to me briefing during sterile breaks the rule..

 

[captainv]

you don't suppose the crew is flying standard because they have some other company's pilot on their jumpseat, do you?

Going back to the Title of this thread. . its not just comair. I've noticed that the regionals harbor an attitude of "breaking the rules" and non-standard flying. It seems the vast majority of regional pilots half-a$$ checklists, callouts, profiles, etc. on a regular basis. Don't get me wrong I'll be the first to admit I find myself doing the same things.

When you look at Delta for example (I commute on them and ride the jumpseat frequently) you will almost NEVER see a non-standard crew. And you can be standard without being a double breasted d!ckhead also. I've met some really cool Delta guys that were all very standard. I think this might have something to do with the millitary history/culture at mainline airlines.

 

[IronCityBlue]

He had no choice but to tell the truth under oath. And he had no choice but to say he would not have let them take off. I hope one day you get to walk in his shoes! You wouldn't last 5 minutes. I know him and this is not what he wanted to do. You might want to educate yourself a little on what this process is like. It ain't voluntary.:angryfire

Of course he had a choice. He could have told the TRUTH. But instead he chose to LIE to cover his own LCA letter. Is it your contention that of all the hundreds or thousands of line checks this guy has done, that if EVER even one time someone utters "nice sunset" or "dumb paint job" then BAM!!! line check failed, return to the gate, get a new crew?

What he should have said was "No, I would not have failed the crew for the extremely small ammount of post-pushback conversation that were uttered. I would have maybe held up a finger and softly said "sterile cockpit" but it would not have resulted in an on the sopt "failure" as you are trying to lead me into saying. Overall the rule is obeyed by flight crews and enforced by the FAA and their LCA represenatives, but as an experienced professional I can assure you that out of the thousands and thousands of commercial flights every day in our country, it is not normal, realistic or even psycholoically possible to even think for one moment that not one single extraneous word is uttered in any of them."

Instead he took the path that was easiest for HIM. Like I said, every pilot he flies with should promptly stop the aircraft, declare an emergency and refuse to fly with him until he gets retrained the moment he utters even a single "extra" word. I bet he would beg for mercy like a little coward "Why are you doing this? Please don't do this to me!"

I've seen LCA and Feds briefly say something below 10 many, many times, and most of you in the 121 world have too. This is not about safety or professionalisim. This is about liability. 99.99% of all part 121 flights have sterile cockpit "violations" by its strictest definition on their CVR's, and that includes when Feds and LCA's are in the J/S.

As far as safety and professionalisim, its a matter of degree and we all know it. Jamming on your iPod while the other pilot is chatting it up on their cell phone while recieving a hold short clearance? Unsafe and unprofessional. Two pilots heads up and paying attention, but one quickly utters "nice sunset"...perfectly safe, professional and normal.

I'm sure like many rules we have this one as someone said "because of the blood of others" but that is not what this discussion is about. This is about falesly pinning causes and liability on pilots, period. Since almost every flight's CVR will have at least some small ammount of sterile cockpit "violations" in it, anything whatsoever that happens can at least be partially "blamed" on the flight crew.

That's what this whole thing is about. Nothing more, nothing less. That "instructor" had an opportunity to set the record straight and he chose to make himself look good instead, while stepping over the graves of the fallen in the process.

 

[pilotyip]

Watery, here is the way I handle sterile cockpit, someone starts a conversation that breaks the rule. I state, "Why don't you hold that thought and we can pick it up in cruise" If they persist in talking I will then call "Lets observe sterile cockpit" Yes I may have from time to time have broken sterile cockpit, but because it is almost impossible to be perfect. But to ignore this rule which is meant to prevent accidents is not the mark of a professional pilot.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Just shut the F up until the AP has things well under control and you've rung for a beverage. imp:

 

[zawillif]

you don't suppose the crew is flying standard because they have some other company's pilot on their jumpseat, do you?

No. I don't. I know I don't change how I fly just because I have a line pilot in the jump seat. I highly doubt a mainline guy is gonna change the way he flies cause an RJ FO is in his jumpseat.

 

[Homer Jay]

Going back to the Title of this thread. . its not just comair. I've noticed that the regionals harbor an attitude of "breaking the rules" and non-standard flying. It seems the vast majority of regional pilots half-a$$ checklists, callouts, profiles, etc. on a regular basis. Don't get me wrong I'll be the first to admit I find myself doing the same things.

When you look at Delta for example (I commute on them and ride the jumpseat frequently) you will almost NEVER see a non-standard crew. And you can be standard without being a double breasted d!ckhead also. I've met some really cool Delta guys that were all very standard. I think this might have something to do with the millitary history/culture at mainline airlines.

I'd be interested to see the regional guys newly appointed at Delta and whether or not they conform to the high standards.

YOU MUST BE JOKING, RIGHT?!?! I ride in their jumpseats all the time and I see NO difference between any airline whether it be a regional or a major. Same sh!t, different plane...

 

[DrewBlows]

Of course he had a choice. He could have told the TRUTH. But instead he chose to LIE to cover his own LCA letter. Is it your contention that of all the hundreds or thousands of line checks this guy has done, that if EVER even one time someone utters "nice sunset" or "dumb paint job" then BAM!!! line check failed, return to the gate, get a new crew?

IronCity, you hit the nail on the head with this post (the quote is edited for length). Sterile cockpit is a debrief item, plain and simple. If that LCA, or any other Comair LCA has ever in the history of the company failed someone on a line check for not observing sterile cockpit I'll change my tune.

Those who have read the transcript can decide for yourself, but in my opinion there was very little transgression from sterile cockpit by the 5191 crew. There was a sentence or two uttered which, again in my opinion, had zero to do with the accident.

There is no question they shouldn't have taken off from the wrong runway. They screwed up, but not because of sterile cockpit and there is plenty of blame to go around.

 

[zawillif]

YOU MUST BE JOKING, RIGHT?!?! I ride in their jumpseats all the time and I see NO difference between any airline whether it be a regional or a major. Same sh!t, different plane...

Nope, definately not joking. I ride in the jumpseat twice a week in DAL MD-88s, 738s, 757s, and Airtran 717s and 737s. There is a difference. More of a difference with ASA and Delta than with Airtran.

 

[Napoleon TNT]

I have the actual clip from the IP's disposition.

It all makes sense now!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8hGvQtumNAY

 

[captainv]

I've ridden my share of DAL, CMR and ASA jumpseats and I have yet to note anything out of bounds on any of them. The biggest thing I can say in DAL's favor is that I can't recall ever seeing a newspaper or magazine on the flight deck.

Still, I'm surprised that they (DAL) do a departure briefing at the end of the runway. I suppose that keeps it fresh in your mind vs. briefing at the gate, but every now and then the CA is in the middle of the brief as he swings onto the runway and pushes the throttles up.

Nope, definately not joking. I ride in the jumpseat twice a week in DAL MD-88s, 738s, 757s, and Airtran 717s and 737s. There is a difference. More of a difference with ASA and Delta than with Airtran.

 

[PCL_128]

Nope, definately not joking. I ride in the jumpseat twice a week in DAL MD-88s, 738s, 757s, and Airtran 717s and 737s. There is a difference. More of a difference with ASA and Delta than with Airtran.

I agree with you on this. I spent the last few years commuting from ATL to DTW, and there is definitely a noticeable difference between the Delta and NWA crews.

 

[doh]

Of course he had a choice. He could have told the TRUTH. But instead he chose to LIE to cover his own LCA letter. Is it your contention that of all the hundreds or thousands of line checks this guy has done, that if EVER even one time someone utters "nice sunset" or "dumb paint job" then BAM!!! line check failed, return to the gate, get a new crew?

What he should have said was "No, I would not have failed the crew for the extremely small ammount of post-pushback conversation that were uttered. I would have maybe held up a finger and softly said "sterile cockpit" but it would not have resulted in an on the sopt "failure" as you are trying to lead me into saying. Overall the rule is obeyed by flight crews and enforced by the FAA and their LCA represenatives, but as an experienced professional I can assure you that out of the thousands and thousands of commercial flights every day in our country, it is not normal, realistic or even psycholoically possible to even think for one moment that not one single extraneous word is uttered in any of them."

I don't see anywhere in the original post that he would have failed them. I take the "would not have let them take off" comment to mean he would have said "we're on the wrong runway, don't take off".

 

[Sandhawk]

Has the FO recovered okay ?

 

[IronCityBlue]

I don't see anywhere in the original post that he would have failed them. I take the "would not have let them take off" comment to mean he would have said "we're on the wrong runway, don't take off".

If that's what was meant then I see what you're saying, but I don't think that's what was meant. Of course if he knew they were about to take off from the wrong runway, he would have spoken up and not let them take off. I mean, duh.

I think the question that was asked and the answer he provided expressly implied that he would have busted them for sterile cockpit violations and tagged them as improperly trained. IOW he wouldn't have allowed them to takeoff because of their failure to obey safety regulations because of a few extraneous words after push back.

By making such an implication, he reinforced some dirt bag lawyer's contention that the crew was negligent because they were willfully violating safety rules. That is the same gutless, cowardly, shameful line of reasoning the powers that be use to go after pilots with their clear cut abuse of power "careless and wreckless" broad brush. Filled out a NASA because you busted an altitude? Doesn't matter cause we're not prosecuting you for that, we're procecuting you for being careless, otherwise you wouldn't have busted it in the first place, etc.

He wasn't answering a theoretical question, but even if he was he lied about it and he knows it. He was answering a specific question about that specific instance and he chose to intentionally and strongly imply that a rogue crew, through careless disregard for safety rules, threw caution to the wind and that's what caused the tragedy.

He further implied that he was too good to have ever made that mistake of taking off on the wrong runway, that the mistake was significantly related to the sterile cockpit violation, and had his high and mighty skill set and esteemed regard for dicipline been present that day on the flight deck, none of it would have happened.

I believe the question at hand wasn't would you have let them take off on the wrong runway that would have led to a crash. The question was would you have grounded them because of sterile cockpit violation. He could have answered truthfully and provided real professional insight into that event as well as similar situations. Instead he chose to lie to make himself look good as an almighty perfectionist.

Comair Capt. Thomas Scharold testified in his deposition that the Flight 5191 pilots violated briefing, taxi and "sterile cockpit" rules, which say pilots should maintain a distraction-free cockpit. Scharold is a line check pilot, a veteran pilot who trains other pilots.
Scharold said that if he had been instructing Flight 5191's pilots- he would not have let them take off."

As if it couldn't get more disgusting, some other Sky God piled on:

Capt. Timothy David Patrick, another instructor, said Lexington is a "staple city" that Comair pilots were familiar with. He said the airport's layout, which features intersecting runways, is not considered confusing.

Another bold faced liar. It was confusing enough to cause multipile confusions and safety reports over the years and that was before the taxiways were redesigned to make things even more confusing, not to mention the incorrect charts and signs. Confusing enough to cause a similar event that happened to be caught at the last minute thank goodness, not long before the fatal crash, by another regional airline. "Staple City"? WTF is that know it all smoking?

Comair, like many regional airlines, flies to (depending on the year and season) well over 100 airports. A pilot may go quite some time without being into or out of a particular field. Not to mention the changes (and reference errors previouslly mentioned) to the taxiway and runway layout were recent, and at least one of the pilots deadheaded in the day prior, and had not seen that one tiny patch of pavement where the difference between heading 220 and 260 meant life and death.

Staple City? YGTBSM. I guess some pilots just can't pass up an opportunity to put their superior airmanship on display for all the world to see. Even if it means smearing the reputations of dead and critically injured pilots who, in all honesty, made a mistake that any humble aviator could see himself and every single pilot they've ever flown with, potentially maybe making under the same circumstances.

Well, maybe not at a "Staple City" of course. And in any case, those few words of sterile cockpit violations that occured well before taxiing on to the runway were probably a significant contributing factor. Right.