erj-145mech
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,071
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
erj-145mech said:The masks are just there to muffle the screams of the 137 pax.
linecheck said:Taz, that was cute, thanks.
But back to the subject, I will concede that the probability of having a double emergency is slim to none. But nonetheless, it can not be precluded. ie. UAL232 comes to mind.
Regardless if the crew was in an emergency situation at the bottom of descent, the crew/company elected to continue for 75 minutes after an emergency event, with the rubber jungle hanging out, and with an important piece of cabin safety equipment expired: the pax O2 system and some of the crew O2 system. (and this of course is based on the information in the article which certainly can be heavily scrutinized.)
So why do we as "risk managers" want to take that risk? Why do pilots feel they need to place passenger/company needs above safety? This isn't directed specifically towards SWA, but I think the answer to this can be found within the company's culture.
To me its interesting comparing various company cultures and correlating that information to safety data as well as profitibility.
furlough-boy said:Those guys at KBUR were heroes too. Saved like 3 minutes on the approach by flying 250 to the numbers.