Swissair 111 CVR finally made public

[igneousy2]

Swiss Air, Valu Jet, Alaska all have taught us to get the airplane on the ground right now. An airplane with smoke/flgiht control problems with paying pax on board is not the time to be troubleshooting.

As far as an overweight landing...If we are talking structual limits it is NOT a big deal. It is a minor inspection and a logbook entry....in any case who cares, no matter how overweight you are you will still be okay...so you trash the main gear strut on landing...whatever.

If we are talking performance limits - remember all the fudge factors (60% - no reverse) in the calculations and the fact that a lot of times the limitations are because of the go-around, not the runway itself.

On an airplane the size of an MD-11 losing 10,000 - 20,000 pounds of landing weight doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference. I would have dumped fuel but only until I needed to turn it off to land.

I was shocked at this accident because they had smoke that was not obvious where it was coming from (i.e. smoldering cigarrete left in lav). Smoke is a no brainer...you land the plane...I don't care how heavy you are, where it's coming from, etc.

I am not sorry I am second guessing these pilots - I second guess every accident - I second guess every decision I make - I think it makes me a better pilot - Heaven forbid I get killed in an accident, I hope that every pilot scrutinizes everything I did so they can learn from it.

Later

 

[mule]

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/1998/a98h0003/01report/03conclusions/rep3_03_00.asp

See #5...

 

[TWA Dude]

Thanks for the link, Mule.

4. The flight crew were trained to dump fuel without restrictions and to land the aircraft in an overweight condition in an emergency situation, if required.

5. From any point along the Swissair Flight 111 flight path after the initial odour in the cockpit, the time required to complete an approach and landing to the Halifax International Airport would have exceeded the time available before the fire-related conditions in the aircraft cockpit would have precluded a safe landing.

I stand corrected and retract my statements. I didn't remember this.

 

[PAPA FOX!]

Swiss Air, Valu Jet, Alaska all have taught us to get the airplane on the ground right now. An airplane with smoke/flgiht control problems with paying pax on board is not the time to be troubleshooting.

As far as an overweight landing...If we are talking structual limits it is NOT a big deal. It is a minor inspection and a logbook entry....in any case who cares, no matter how overweight you are you will still be okay...so you trash the main gear strut on landing...whatever.

If we are talking performance limits - remember all the fudge factors (60% - no reverse) in the calculations and the fact that a lot of times the limitations are because of the go-around, not the runway itself.

On an airplane the size of an MD-11 losing 10,000 - 20,000 pounds of landing weight doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference. I would have dumped fuel but only until I needed to turn it off to land.

I was shocked at this accident because they had smoke that was not obvious where it was coming from (i.e. smoldering cigarrete left in lav). Smoke is a no brainer...you land the plane...I don't care how heavy you are, where it's coming from, etc.

I am not sorry I am second guessing these pilots - I second guess every accident - I second guess every decision I make - I think it makes me a better pilot - Heaven forbid I get killed in an accident, I hope that every pilot scrutinizes everything I did so they can learn from it.

Later

I agree with everything you mentioned here. I'd like to add something. If you were flying the N Atlantic and you were overhead Goose Bay with unknown smoke and an RVR 300 ft below mins there, would you excersise your emergency authority and attempt a below min ldg at Goose Bay or take the chance and continue to Gander with MVFR WX?