Teterboro Accident - CL600

[jimpilot]

Professional Pilots

Jimbo,


And I wouldn't brag about meeting the same FAA requirements....the last I checked they said 70% was good enough.

Hmm 70% won't get you through a corporate flight check.

Isn't it possible that their are prefessionals who are good pilots flying in all segments of this business. And just like there are good, well run airlines and others who have questionalble practices, their are charter and corporate flight departments who also fill both ends of quality. There have been some stupid mistakes made by corporate pilots and by airline pilots. Why would any pilot want to knock any other pilot and his chosen part of this business? What personal need are they filling to talk down another segment of aviation?

By the way I grew up in the air line business. My Dad was the VP of Flight Ops for Delta many years ago. I chose the military and then corporate route as right for me. Those of you who fly airlines, more power to you. Those of you who fly corporate more power to you too. There is room for all kinds is this business, if we can accept each other as professionals and not spend time telling each other why we are better than guys is another part of this business.

 

[jimpilot]

Ok

Completely correct. I have seen complete loosers get type ratings after completions of these courses. They may fail once or twice, but they keep on testing until they pass. There is the occational wash out. The only one I ever knew could not fly out of a wet paper bag.

And I know guys who were unable to progress to aircraft commanders as military transport pilots who are now senior capt for major airlines. Your point is???????????????

 

[Vortilon]

I know I've generalized and painted with a large brush. But I've always been told my brush is large.

I am certainly not speaking of Corporate 91 operators, they seem to do it right and those jobs are the coveted ones for good reason.

My opinion is only that, but I hope it bears some credibility because unlike many others I have seen both sides. I just think it stinks that Charter represents itself as something its not and the people that can afford it over airlines aren't paying for anything more than convenience and privacy...not safety.

The latest news from the NTSB says the FDR only had 10 seconds of data on it vs. 25 hours. Nice. Could just be a freak malfunction or the NTSB is not correct, but it certainly fits the my broad brush painting....

The pilots and passengers that fly Charter Business jets deserve better than they get from the operators. Its a shame.

and btw, what's the number for that hot flight attendant in Frankfurt?

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

Anyone can say, yes. You get paid to say, "no."

I think that is the major difference in 121 and corporate. Too many corporate pilots are pushed by the owners into making stupid judgement errors. During my interview for my current job I made one thing clear to the owner. I will do everything possible to complete the mission, and on the rare occasion that I say it cannot be done, it is 100% because of safety reasons. I he ever tells me that I must do something that I judge as being unsafe, that is the day he is looking for a new pilot.

To answer you million dollar question, I am still employed, so I guess he wants a pilot that calls it as they see it. He takes a keen interest in all corporate accidents and likes for me to forward the NTSB reports to him. Not long after I refused the flight, some operator stuck one in the bushes due to similar disregard for aircraft performace factors........I have never been questioned about an operational decision since then.

 

[G100driver]

And I know guys who were unable to progress to aircraft commanders as military transport pilots who are now senior capt for major airlines. Your point is???????????????

Sad isn't it ....

I am not knocking corp. I have been doing all my professional career. I just see a lot of goof balls out there. The only difference that I can see, is these goof balls are in charge without SOP's or firm direction of a strong CP.

At least in the airlines you have company SOP's, dispatch and the like. If FSI of SimuFlite is not willing to wash the crappy ones, what protection do owners and charter clients have.

Just a thought.

 

[G100driver]

I think that is the major difference in 121 and corporate. Too many corporate pilots are pushed by the owners into making stupid judgement errors. During my interview for my current job I made one thing clear to the owner. I will do everything possible to complete the mission, and on the rare occasion that I say it cannot be done, it is 100% because of safety reasons. I he ever tells me that I must do something that I judge as being unsafe, that is the day he is looking for a new pilot.

To answer you million dollar question, I am still employed, so I guess he wants a pilot that calls it as they see it. He takes a keen interest in all corporate accidents and likes for me to forward the NTSB reports to him. Not long after I refused the flight, some operator stuck one in the bushes due to similar disregard for aircraft performace factors........I have never been questioned about an operational decision since then.

Good point. My boss and I have a similar understanding. It goes something like this:

So long as he realizes that he is the 2nd most important person on the airplane he will get to his meetings on time (almost all the time) and always home to his children safely .

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

RE: LEVEL OF TRAINING FOR CORPORATE PILOTS
This may not be everyone’s experience, however, during my last recurrent at SimuFlite, and on one flight, we had a total hydraulic failure with a circling no flap landing. After my arms and legs quit quivering we departed again. This time, as we rotated, the two DU’s on the pilots side slowly faded to black. I quickly handed the flight over to the right seat, only to have his two DU’s fade slowly to black. We quickly engaged the autopilot, thinking there might be some help there as the small emergency gauges are never fun to fly (and the instructor failed the lights there too). The autopilot worked and the instructor asked what we planned to do and what was remaining. Technology being what it is we were able to determine all speeds, altitudes and set up an RNAV / VNAV approach back to the airport with the FMS’s. We broke out at 800’ with the runway insight. So I do not see corporate training as being a give away.

Oh…and no mug or tee-shirt for our efforts either.

Now that's a great session. From what I've seen, you get out of training what you put into it. I've seen plenty of other pilots who want to get out of the 'box' as soon as possible. I always tell the instructor to 'lay it on'. To all of those who (rightfully) think that anyone can pass a ride, just tell the instructor that he's a whimp and you have more time in right turns than he has total. I'm sure you'll get you money's worth.

Where do you fly, Seawings.

Ace

 

[Hawker rider]

and back to the issue at hand please.....

 

[XTW]

FWIW,

The FA is on the "Today" show right now. That didn't take very long.

XTW

 

[Spooky 1]

Getting back to the accident in question and I will state for the record I am clueless about the cause, but has anyone given thought to the duty time issues that may be involved? It would appear that the crew arrived around 12:30 am at Teterboro from where I don't know. Then they repositioned the airplane to another FBO around 06:30 for the purpose of picking up their passengers. Sounds like they may have had a long night already before they even departed.

 

[Bandit60]

Just to set the record straight. The accident rates that come out from the goverment, Corporate Jet catergory has the best record of all. It has the lowest accident rate of any catergory including 121 airline flying. They show it in the number of accidents per 100000 hours of flying Aviation Internatioal news just came out with an article showing my point. All of the accidents with copororate jets have been with 135 operators and not 91 jet operators.

ainonline.com/issues/02_05/02_05_businessfatalp1.html


You here all this bashing about these guys over running this runway, but its seems to me there has been alot of airlines doing off road landings and taxiing.

The incident here is 135 not 91 corporate.

 

[Bandit60]

Getting back to the accident in question and I will state for the record I am clueless about the cause, but has anyone given thought to the duty time issues that may be involved? It would appear that the crew arrived around 12:30 am at Teterboro from where I don't know. Then they repositioned the airplane to another FBO around 06:30 for the purpose of picking up their passengers. Sounds like they may have had a long night already before they even departed.

They did a crew swap that night so there was a fresh crew.

 

[Spooky 1]

Okay that would make sense. Thanks for setting the record straight.

 

[HalinTexas]

RE: LEVEL OF TRAINING FOR CORPORATE PILOTS
This may not be everyone’s experience, however, during my last recurrent at SimuFlite, and on one flight, we had a total hydraulic failure with a circling no flap landing. After my arms and legs quit quivering we departed again. This time, as we rotated, the two DU’s on the pilots side slowly faded to black. I quickly handed the flight over to the right seat, only to have his two DU’s fade slowly to black. We quickly engaged the autopilot, thinking there might be some help there as the small emergency gauges are never fun to fly (and the instructor failed the lights there too). The autopilot worked and the instructor asked what we planned to do and what was remaining. Technology being what it is we were able to determine all speeds, altitudes and set up an RNAV / VNAV approach back to the airport with the FMS’s. We broke out at 800’ with the runway insight. So I do not see corporate training as being a give away. Oh…and no mug or tee-shirt for our efforts either.

This has to be the dumbest scenario I've ever heard of. Sounds like the instructor is a little too big for his britches, trying to fail the student, or the student is too big for his britches. Why would you ever chose to fly a circling, no hydraulic approach? What were the mins for that approach? Under what conditions could you lose one set of DU's, then the other, but still have FMS? Under these conditions, continuing a circling approach is probably the lease safe option.

Declare an emgency and do what's safe, not what the instructor's trying to force down your throat.

 

[Texasskicker]

Perplexin'

First off, wanna apologize for multiple posting of previous CL600 accident information previous in this thread. Seems the moderators compacted all the posts about this accident and put em in here, and I cannot go back to delete them.

My posts referred to a previous CL 600 aborted takeoff at TEB a couple of years ago. Captain could not rotate for some reason, they suggest cause the CG was too far forward or the ship was over MTOW.

I don't fly the Challenger, so been tryin to find a reason why this happened. Could have been the same problem as those poor fellas had in '03 takin off on rwy 24.

Is there a control lock on the CL600, was there ice, forward cg, incorrect t.o. config, we will find out sooner or later. Makin the suggestion that training is inadequate, that is uncalled for boys. Way I was taught, after V1 you go. Smoke, you still are goin, cause otherwise you are gonna make a sudden stop.

While it isn't good to speculate (while the tv cameras are rollin and someones writin down what your sayin) I think pilots always try to figure this stuff out, its the nature of professional flyboys. But please dont show total ignorance by sayin they werent trained up to standards or stuff like that you have no idea is true.

What did the FA say on tv this mornin?

Tex.

 

[mayday1]

What did the FA say on tv this mornin?

Tex.

FA didn't say anything too insightful, although I continued to watch because she's pretty easy on the eyes. She was sitting in the jumpseat in the cockpit (I didn't know that's where the jumpseat was on the CL600), noticed the lack of remaining runway.. she didn't remember too much past that except for the building looming in front of them.

She didn't mention anything about smoke in the cockpit on the takeoff roll... seems like she did pretty well for only being on the job 4 months.

 

[Texasskicker]

New York Times article clear as mud.

There is an article in the New York Times today that is very enlightening. Go to www.nytimes.com to read, its called, "First Findings See No Brakes Used in Most Of Jet's Path." You can find it in the local news section.

The captain told his lawyer that "something broke." No kiddin', huh? 15000 hours and 3000 in type, he knows what broke, for sure.

God bless that crew.

Tex.

 

[Spooky 1]

Maybe you can enlighten the rest of us regarding what broke or is this just a smart remark made at the pilots expense? Please share your information with the rest of us clueless soles.

 

[Texasskicker]

Read the article for yourself

Maybe you can enlighten the rest of us regarding what broke or is this just a smart remark made at the pilots expense? Please share your information with the rest of us clueless soles.

I dont know, ask the authors of the article. I'd cut and paste, but thats breakin some copyright laws, so just go and read.

They also said the Captain made a valiant attempt to stop the aircraft after a mechanical problem prevented it from taking off.

 

[Texasskicker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/04/nyregion/04crash.html