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.
