Should This Pilot Be Fired?

[NoJoy]

Cherry I have to say you have one of the better Avatars on FI.

 

[cherry20's]

Haha, Thanks. I kinda liked my old one of humping a Falcon 20 engine, but didn't think it was appropriate when I was looking for a job... I also liked the Texas one I had too, but people didn't get it was just a joke!

 

[NoJoy]

My other fav floating around here is two AT-ATs having "relations"

 

[Flex-ible]

Rendezvous BBQ. Memphis.

Jim's Interstate BBQ, Gate B-16 at Memphis Intl. Northwest employees ts line up there for the pulled pork BBQ sandwich (flight crews during thepush, ground crews other times), with the cole slaw on the sandwich. Best $5 meal in any airport in the country! It's a 20 minute wait from the "T" in Tavern (look at the overhead sign and you'll understand)

 

[www.]

None in the 121 world. Last 121 PC was in June of '07, and wasn't PIC that year, PC before that was June '06.

The previous 5 years were at PCL in the MEM FSDO, and I'm here to tell you, I didn't do zero-flap approaches or brake failures on our 6 month checks as PIC, and very rarely did stalls on those, either (never steep turns) - I do have to say, talking of all this made me remember I *DID* do a stall series exactly once at PCL on a 6 month check, I only remember because the guy next to me nearly failed the checkride over it... The PC we had to have once a year encompassed all of those, of course.

QUOTE]

Wasn't that one of the issues with the CL65 at F410 flame out deal and the FAA?

As for Part 121, for 20 years of PCs, stall profiles and flapless landings every year on PC checks, lofts or RT on the other 6 months.

 

[www.]

Rendezvous BBQ. Memphis.

BB Kings. It falls off the bone.

 

[Lear70]

Wasn't that one of the issues with the CL65 at F410 flame out deal and the FAA?

Kinda, but not really... The issues behind FLG5701 were:

1. Two inexperienced pilots at the controls, the guy in the left seat was a street CA with ZERO jet time before getting hired at PCL, all turboprop PIC from GIA. The guy in the right seat (nice kid, flew with him the month before the accident) was a GIA 500 hour wunderkid and was pretty much along for the ride. Good stick, but not enough experience to know that what he was doing was stupid.

2. Two inexperienced pilots "having fun" with the airplane, not understanding the aerodynamics, getting behind the L/D curve at high altitude, being outside the envelope for temp/weight anyway.

3. The PIC reading the d*mn paper and getting Pepsis from the galley while the airspeed slowly decayed in the climb and not paying attention or cross-checking the F/O.

4. Improper recovery technique during the initial phase of the event. In other words, the pusher kept activating because they were about to stall the aircraft and both pilots kept overriding the pusher and forcing the airplane to stay at altitude until it actually DID stall.

5. Improper recovery technique in the 2nd phase of the event, where they didn't realize they had lost both engines, didn't perform the memory items (immediately getting back to speed in the descent to keep the cores rotating), didn't perform the loss of all generators memory items (luckily, the rat auto-deployed for them, anyway, good design), and never got an engine started because of it.

6. Lied all the way down, passing 3 perfectly suitable airports and not telling the truth until it was too late and by the time they did and the controller pointed out the closest airport (Jefferson City), it was too late - they didn't have enough altitude to glide to it.

In other words, intentional stalls didn't kill them, repeated stupidity killed them. Harsh, but then again, this isn't some desk job. We screw up badly enough, we die, and possibly kill people in the process. I've done stalls in the actual aircraft before (not the CRJ, but others), and I've also taken the CRJ up to 41,0 before several times. Both are non-events IF you approach it in a safe manner, understand what you're doing, and respect the limits of the aircraft. Those guys didn't, and it killed them. End of story.

I only had one PT and one PC after 5701, that PT was turned into a PC and jammed through the checkride as quickly as possible to knock it out so that we would have time to duplicate the 5701 accident sequence. Of course, the sim is programmed to respond properly (not core lock if you don't keep your speed up at high altitude), but let me tell you, lowering the nose at 41,0 enough to keep 220 kts with both engines failed is EYE WATERING. About 10 degrees down-pitch initially, shallowing slightly as you get lower, but if done properly, you have about 12 minutes to get it done.

Step 1: Get control of aircraft.
Step 2: Accomplish memory items.
Step 3: Advise ATC, get vectors to closest, suitable airport, start heading that direction.
Step 4: Checklist, establish APU power at proper altitude.
Step 5: Start an engine as early as the checklist allows in the envelope.

You're down around 15,000 feet before you can get one lit off and producing power if you do the procedures properly and quickly. These guys had ONE chance, really, to get it right, once they got themselves into that situation. ugly...