Who Needs the NTSB When NetJet's Pilots are "Experts"?

[100-1/2]

http://www.wxii12.com/video/27390379/detail.html

Next guy/gal that gets a trip with this duche...tell him so.

"Expert"?? How? because "NetJets" is under his name in the CG?

Ashley runs a tight ship over there in Raleigh. I hope I can catch
this punk in an FBO somewhere soon.

a55hole.

There happened to be perfect conditions for tailplane Icing. 30 years
and thousands of hours of Barons, I can count 5 different times where
little or nothing was on the wing while the tail had some nasty rows of
Christmas Trees piercing the wind. Throw more than 20 degrees of
flaps out to slow and push the nose over to peer for the lights with
3500 RVR? I thought I would wait a couple of years for the NTSB to
release a Probable after exhausting every other option.

I am surprised Captain Exceptional Expert NetJets didn't voice this theory
on the identical circumstances with a C310 in E.KY just a couple of hours
earlier. That one killed the owner of the Company and a passenger (In a
Cargo Airplane, no less). Expert NetJet is probably right, weather likely
"had no role" in that one either.

100-1/2

 

[brokeflyer]

hopefully he had permission from netjets to give press releases otherwise they'll only be 299 pilots heavy.

 

[ProFracPilot]

Well, as a self proclaimed "expert" he sure is WRONG on more than one point. He needs to review of 14CFR Part 91.175.

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
-- Mark Twain

 

[jonjuan]

Are those glasses from the Sarah Palin collection?

 

[platinum750]

That's is a classic NerdJets pilot response. I'm sure he has it on his dvr and is watching it again right now, going lefty this time.

 

[x402]

Hopefully, the station added the Netjets caption under his name and it was not his doing. I learned a long time ago that talking to the press is never a good thing. They edit and screw it up 99% of the time.

 

[Pervis]

Throw more than 20 degrees of
flaps out to slow and push the nose over to peer for the lights with
3500 RVR?

When flying a stabilized precision approach in IMC, you don't configure and push the nose over approaching minimums to peer for the lights. SOPs may vary, but generally a stabilized approach means fully configured, established on speed (Vref-Vref+20), at the required rate of descent, with a power setting appropriate to that configuration at least 1000' above TDZE. Maybe you meant something else?

I do agree offering any opinions on the cause soon after the event is not prudent. There is a lot more than weather or pilot error that could contribute to any accident. I don't agree with your impication piling all Netjets pilots into one heap.

 

[Diesel]

There happened to be perfect conditions for tailplane Icing. 30 years
and thousands of hours of Barons, I can count 5 different times where
little or nothing was on the wing while the tail had some nasty rows of
Christmas Trees piercing the wind. Throw more than 20 degrees of
flaps out to slow and push the nose over to peer for the lights with
3500 RVR? I thought I would wait a couple of years for the NTSB to
release a Probable after exhausting every other option.

Good thing your not using your expert opinion either.

 

[G100driver]

Good thing your not using your expert opinion either.

Ouch ....

 

[say again]

What a complete fool! I'm sure most on here can figure out why.