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

Ntsb Notes First Officer's Failure....in 2003 Fedex 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

SuperFLUF

lazy Mc Donald's pilot
Joined
Jul 9, 2003
Posts
639
**************************************************
NTSB PRESS RELEASE
************************************************** **********

National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 17, 2005
SB-05-14

************************************************** **********

NTSB NOTES FIRST OFFICER'S FAILURE TO APPLY PROPER
TECHNIQUES FOR LANDING IN CROSSWIND IN 2003 FEDEX CRASH

************************************************** **********

Washington, DC --The National Transportation Safety Board
today determined the probable cause of the crash on landing
of a FedEx cargo aircraft was the first officer's failure to
properly apply crosswind landing techniques to align the
airplane with the runway centerline and to properly arrest
the airplanes descent rate before the airplane's touchdown.
Additionally, the captain's failure to adequately monitor
the first officer's performance and command or initiate
corrective action during the final approach and landing
contributed to the accident, the Board said.

On December 18, 2003, Federal Express Corporation flight 647
crashed while landing at Memphis International Airport.
Following the crash, the right main landing gear of the Boeing
MD 10 -10F collapsed, and there was a post-crash fire. There
were two crewmen and five nonrevenue FedEx pilots aboard the
airplane. The first officer and one nonrevenue pilot received
minor injuries during the evacuation.

"This accident highlights the need for proper training," said
NTSB Acting Chairman, Mark Rosenker. "If the accident
crewmembers had applied techniques in accordance with their
training, the landing would have been uneventful, he added.

The investigation found that the first officer had
demonstrated unsatisfactory performance during proficiency
checkrides at a previous employer and at Federal Express.

During her career at FedEx, she had two unsatisfactory
proficiency checkrides. Although the first officer's
proficiency checkrides demonstrated deficiencies in multiple
areas, the investigation was unable to directly link her
previous deficiencies to her actions on the day of the
accident. During the accident flight, the captain was serving
as both check airman and pilot in command; he was expected to
continually monitor the first officer's performance while at
the same time being responsible for the overall safe conduct
of the flight.

After the flight 647 accident and as a result of several other
accidents and incidents, the FedEx Flight Operations
Directorate developed its Enhanced Oversight Program (EOP) to
improve air safety through early identification of pilots who
exhibit deficiencies during training or checkrides.

After the Memphis accident plane came to a rest and as the
right wing was on fire, flightcrew and jumpseaters attempted
to evacuate the airplane via the L1 door slide; however, the
slide separated from the airplane during the inflation
sequence. Therefore, everyone aboard the aircraft was forced
to exit the airplane using the cockpit window. During the
evacuation and while persons were still aboard the plane at
least 13 pieces of personal baggage were thrown from the
airplane. FedEx issued additional guidance following this
accidents requiring its pilots involved in an accident to
evacuate in the most expeditious manner possible, without
salvaging their baggage.

As a result of this accident, the Safety Board made the
following recommendations:

To the Federal Aviation Administration:

1. Require all Part 121 air carrier operators
to establish programs for flight crewmembers
who have demonstrated performance deficiencies
or experienced failures in the training
environment that would require a review of
their whole performance history at the company
and administer additional oversight and
training to ensure that performance
deficiencies are addressed and corrected.

2. Amend the emergency exit training information
contained in the flight crew and cabin crew
sections in Federal Aviation Administration
Order 8400.10 (Air Transportation Aviation
Inspector's Handbook) to make the emergency
exit door/slide training described in the
flight crew section as comprehensive as the
cabin crew emergency training section of the
principal operations inspector handbook.

3. Verify that all Part 121 operators' emergency
door/slide trainers are configured to
accurately represent the actual airplane exit
door/slide and that their flight crew
emergency exit door/slide training provides
the intended hands-on emergency procedures
training as described in 14 Code of Federal
Regulations Section 121.417, to include
pulling the manual inflation handle.

4. Inform all air traffic control tower
controllers of the circumstances of this
accident, including the need to ensure that
aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF)
vehicles are not delayed without good cause
when en route to an emergency and the need to
relay the number of airplanes.

A synopsis of the accident investigation report, including
the findings, probable cause and safety recommendations, can
be found on the "Publications" page of the Board's web site,
www.ntsb.gov.

NTSB Media Contact: Terry N. Williams
202-314-6100
[email protected]
 
HA! That's the exact same thing I was wondering!
 
But they needed their luggage, it was obviously going to be an overnight!

Rattler71
 
I love the luggage thing!

F this aiplane, I want my bag!
 
Dad owned an aviation paper.
 
Gulfstream 200 said:
I love the luggage thing!

F this aiplane, I want my bag!

Those 5 non-revs had trips to fly. They need their bags.
 
On the subject of luggage...

So there they were, standing in line to exit the Captain's window and slide down the rope. There stood the open L1 door, useless without the slide, and there on the floor beside them were the bags. They could twiddle their thumbs while they waited their turn through the window, or they could do something that cost absolutely nothing, and had potential benefit.

If they had in some way delayed their own exit, I would join in the criticism. However, given the circumstances (which are not fully explained in the report) I would do the very same thing.
 
Guess this is so post-worthy because the FO's a chick -- usually it's a dude who screws the pooch.

I'd have thrown my bags out the window, too.
 
I have a pair of Nike Shox ($120) in my luggage and you can bet your arse they will be saved (and the catering).;)
 
I really feel for the Captain in that deal. It's one thing to critique a weak F/O for being behind the airplane on an approach, or starting a descent too late. At least there, you have some time to correct their mistake. But not flaring the d**n airplane? You really have no way of knowing they're not going to do it until they haven't done it. By then, it's too late.

Flaring. Pretty basic stuff for eveybody except carrier pilots, and even they can be taught.

I hope the Captain comes out of this with his career intact.

As for the crew bags, "no harm, no foul." I'm sure these guys assessed the situation and did what they thought was reasonable under the circumstances. You don't need a procedure in your FOM to tell people to run away from FIRE...they're usually pretty good at figuring that out for themselves.
 
Guess its hard to give adequate xwind correction in heels. Equal opportunity employment at its finest! Another plane down, yet FedEx maintains its position as #5 top equal opportunity employer of the Fortune 500.
 
seems to me M/F three strikes and you are definitely out. Bent airplane or not.

Capt did get a shady deal though. Every critique would certaintly loom of harassment as a response. Likely contributed to a greater benefit of the doubt than she should have received.

The object of a checkride is to demonstrate an obvious master of command of the aircraft without any doubt as to the outcome of every maneuver. had the Capt taken the controls and saved the aircraft. He would have (hindsight) heroically saved the day. AND likely been subject himself and the company to harassment by the applicant of the failed checkride. You cannot take positive control of an aircraft during any maneuver of a checkride without following-up with a pinkslip. For the FO it would likely resultedin walking papers and a huge mess. Political Correctness screwed the capt, the airline, the training department and the airframe.

100-1/2
 
but is the f/o still flying?

The best answer I can get from guys I fly with, is that she has "left" the company. I have no idea if she was actually fired, or "given" the option to quit, or what. She might even still be here, no one seems to know.

She used to have this utterly stupid personal website about her career exploits, including comments like "My husband at America West gets jealous of me because my plane is bigger than his..." No where did she post the # of PC checks she failed here, or at her previous commuter. Someone on Flightinfo found it and posted the link. The thread got about 1000 responses and she took down her website.

If anyone has her name, I can look it up on the senoirty list and see if shes still listed.
 
DetoXJ said:

Anybody ever have those nights when you drank too much? You know, when you try to lay down but get the spins. So you go to bathroom to talk to ralph on the big white telephone but cant seem to make any headway and ease your situation.

Well, I think I have a cure for the problem. I'm just going to click on the above link and start reading. I'm pretty sure that a technicolor yawn will ensue within seconds and cure my malady and I'll be fast asleep.

Thanks for posting the link.
 
Rumor is she was fired, but sued the company since she was considered Non-qual when she did that last flight. She said since she was NOQ, she was not responsible for the accident. I heard, but do not know, that she won the lawsuit and might be back soon.

Keep in mind, we have now had 3 MD-10's have gear collapses (EWR, hers, and the one last week). While I am not defending her, there may be more to this story than the simple pilot error explanation. I realize that this is the official conclusion on the accident, but things could change.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom