Why so many charter crashes?

[Flying Illini]

A fellow pilot and I were discussing the recent CL-601 crash in Montrose and he said something concerning the recent corp. accidents that I had never even considered.

He said that the recent rash of corp. crashes may be the result of more longtime airline guys now flying corporate. They are used to having wx and other work done for them whereas in the corp. world you're on your own. Decisions can be made by dispatchers instead of the pilots which eliminates the Go/No Go decision having to be made by the pilots. (of course the pilots still have the final say but a dispatcher can decided to not dispatch a flight if the wx isn't good.)

I thought this was an interesting point of view but I really am not sure that it is a valid reason that can be used to help explain the recent crashes.

Before everyone starts seeing red, remember, this is not my opinion, I'm just posting it here to see what others think. (I highlighted the word MAY above because he emphasized it when he spoke.)

At first I thought there could be some validity to what he said but the more I think about it, the less I agree. When you move to a new job, you adapt accordingly. I think the transition to corp from airline is a little more difficult than the other way around, but not hard to do by any means. (It's obviously happening with regularity and every airplane with a former airline guy on board isn't crashing.)

Any thoughts?

 

[Caveman]

You can have bad weather, crappy pilots, or terrible MX but in the end it all comes down to one thing: GRAVITY. It's involved in every single crash but nobody seems to want to talk about it. Find a way to eliminate gravity from the seqence of events and there will be no more crashes.

 

[Smoking Man]

Hmmmm,

So many what if's in that question, to me one of the biggest things would be lack of pro standards. No where to go if there is a problem with crew, operational procedures (Lack of use of standardized call outs, CRM, flows and use of checklists).

After that it is just , "we do that better than you because we are "(Corp/Airline) Etc, etc.

 

[CL600Pilot]

Having weather and other things done for them huh?? This isn't meant to be a slam against you or your friend but it's obvious that neither of you have any 121 experience. I've been on both sides of the fence so I feel 'authorized' to make my following comments.....


The only thing that is 'done' for us is that a gate agent hands us a release - that is often times 4 to 6 hours old by the way - and a printout of the weather instead of us having to go to a flight planning room and look it up ourselves. Yeah maybe the dispatcher sometimes possibly might catch something and cancel/delay a flight before we see the weather but dispacthers often work dozens of flights at a time so don't count on it. We're very much 'on our own' to look at the weather and make decisions......and we all know that the weather never changes enroute, right??

There has not been a huge increase in corporate crashes as of late - there have just been a few high profile ones......a quick search of the NTSB database shows in 2003 6 Citation, 4 King Air, and 7 Learjet(didn't have time to search anymore aircraft types).


My point........not an increase in accidents, there are many more than you think every year - you just don't hear about them. Yes, airline and corporate flying is different - neither one is more/less difficult than the other - just different. Airline guys in corporate cockpits not necessarily the cause of accidents- I don't have any data to support that it is/is not the cause but I can tell you that the supposition that airline guys 'have everything done for them' is not accurate.

CL

 

[FN FAL]

You can have bad weather, crappy pilots, or terrible MX but in the end it all comes down to one thing: GRAVITY. It's involved in every single crash but nobody seems to want to talk about it. Find a way to eliminate gravity from the seqence of events and there will be no more crashes.

There is no such thing as gravity...
the earth sucks.

 

[xrayojilp]

I think some of these corporate guys just don't fly that much. Also a lot of them are much older, maybe very experienced, but much older.

 

[KeroseneSnorter]

A fellow pilot and I were discussing the recent CL-601 crash in Montrose and he said something concerning the recent corp. accidents that I had never even considered.

He said that the recent rash of corp. crashes may be the result of more longtime airline guys now flying corporate. They are used to having wx and other work done for them whereas in the corp. world you're on your own. Decisions can be made by dispatchers instead of the pilots which eliminates the Go/No Go decision having to be made by the pilots. (of course the pilots still have the final say but a dispatcher can decided to not dispatch a flight if the wx isn't good.)

I thought this was an interesting point of view but I really am not sure that it is a valid reason that can be used to help explain the recent crashes.

Before everyone starts seeing red, remember, this is not my opinion, I'm just posting it here to see what others think. (I highlighted the word MAY above because he emphasized it when he spoke.)

At first I thought there could be some validity to what he said but the more I think about it, the less I agree. When you move to a new job, you adapt accordingly. I think the transition to corp from airline is a little more difficult than the other way around, but not hard to do by any means. (It's obviously happening with regularity and every airplane with a former airline guy on board isn't crashing.)

Any thoughts?

How many of the crashes lately have had an ex airline guy flying? So far I have not seen what any of the pilots did prior to the accident job. I heard a rumor that the Hendricks Captain was ex Usair, But the dates that he was with hendrick as listed in the media do not match with a furloughed U pilot(He started with Hendrick 2 years prior to the layoffs.), and I could not find his name on any senority list. I guess he could have been from one of U's regionals, and the media screwed up the report. (Or ignored it for sensationalism)

What pilot or crash is the basis for your theory?

 

[trip]

Flying over CO on sunday morning I heard corp. jets showing up on freq. and they were surprised to findout that the airport they were going to was closed and most of the other mountain airports as well!! I just shook my head and was not surprised to hear of the accident later in the day.

Probably a lot of pressure on the crews being a holiday weekend and the clients wanting to get home and all. Still no excuse for poor planning.

 

[Vik]

Corporate/charter flying has increased A LOT since since 9/11 (it actually started a little prior to 9/11).

More flights means it is statistically more probable that there will be more corp/char incidents/accidents.

It is possible you hear it more now as well .. the one in Calif was the NASCAR guy's plane, this CL-601 was an NBC exec.

I don't buy your friend's theory.

 

[FN FAL]

Corporate/charter flying has increased A LOT since since 9/11 (it actually started a little prior to 9/11).

More flights means it is statistically more probable that there will be more corp/char incidents/accidents.

It is possible you hear it more now as well .. the one in Calif was the NASCAR guy's plane, this CL-601 was an NBC exec.

I don't buy your friend's theory.

Yes, with the election overwith and not much to talk about in the news, I would imagine a corporate plane crash is good enough for these ambulance chasers. Funny, a tire blew out on a car yesterday killing 6...you don't hear much speculation going on about that one? Tire blowouts was THE big story not to long ago...but the media grew tired of that subject. (get it...tired?)

I think the media is more into sensationalizing these stories...especially when the plane carries the rich and famous.

 

[rvsm410]

Corp Dispatch offices on the rise!

Having weather and other things done for them huh?? This isn't meant to be a slam against you or your friend but it's obvious that neither of you have any 121 experience. I've been on both sides of the fence so I feel 'authorized' to make my following comments.....

I feel the same, I have been on both pilot and dispatcher sides of the fence in corporate and 121 Domestic, Flag and Sup operations. I too feel qualified to comment:
Today the corporate world is seeing hugh increases in hiring of licensed flight dispatchers for their part 135 and 91 ops, even though the REGS dont require them...why is that do you supose? just to waste millions a year? I doubt it, maybe it has something to do with what "we prevent", a little safety net for the company, crews and PAX....

The only thing that is 'done' for us is that a gate agent hands us a release - that is often times 4 to 6 hours old by the way - and a printout of the weather instead of us having to go to a flight planning room and look it up ourselves. Yeah maybe the dispatcher sometimes possibly might catch something and cancel/delay a flight before we see the weather but dispacthers often work dozens of flights at a time so don't count on it.

I have to take "great" exception to your example above, I don't know what regional carrier you worked for, guaging by the aircraft type you list, your way off at any of the airlines I've worked for...."4 to 6 hours old"? No sir, not my releases, maybe 60 to 90 minutes old...and sure you can go to the ops room and see the current weather just like I do all day long, however I am always updating my crews before and enroute of "significant" weather changes as required by the Regs and common sense...The reason you don't see more accidents in 121, or the corporate aircraft is "Because those companies employ Licensed dispatchers or flight followers which provide an extra set of eyes on the flight, long before you get to the airport.
Yes most ALL the Fractional companies have Million dollar flight control areas just like the airlines, and make the same analysis to go or not go...yes you as the PIC have the final say this is true....but in the airline world (121) you wont even be pushing back with out my release in your hot little hand and the frax ops are doing the same by company procedure.

I am willing to bet that most of the corporate accidents we have seen lately DO NOT have dispatchers or a person designated to help the crews with preflight planning, and the pressure from the customers have major roles in getting the crews to leave when they otherwise would canx the flt themselves, or the dispatcher would just say "no way, Not now".....

Lets not forget that dispatchers look at everything, the aircrafts MELS/CDLS and performance reductions, the runway analysis, planned weight and balance, and of course setting up your alternate airports for weather, your fuel loads and safety margins, we look at Deicing requirements, we look at and flight plan what ATC is doing on any given day so you, the PIC, have less to worry about in the air.
Maybe your airline choose not to use the radios to contact you when you were enroute, voice, ACARS, SELCAL, smoke signals or what ever, but for me and the folks I work with, we do so every day on the flights that are faced with obvious weather changes.....we look ahead of your flights and if in the interest of safety or PAX comfort, we will arrange a diversion around weather or to an alternate with ATC before we even speak to guys like you in the pointy end of the can with a new game plan.

SO Mr. CL, before you go off bad mouthing or deminishing the role a dispatcher plays in everyday avaition you should take the time, you should be required, to sit at a dispatch desk for a week or two and see how we keep accident from happening everyday!...that is our job....we are the silent ones, without us there would be tons of accidents every month..

We're very much 'on our own' to look at the weather and make decisions......and we all know that the weather never changes enroute, right??

There has not been a huge increase in corporate crashes as of late - there have just been a few high profile ones......a quick search of the NTSB database shows in 2003 6 Citation, 4 King Air, and 7 Learjet(didn't have time to search anymore aircraft types).

If you feel "one your own" then you are not using your resources and its nobodys fault but yours (ref 121 ops).

My point........not an increase in accidents, there are many more than you think every year - you just don't hear about them. Yes, airline and corporate flying is different - neither one is more/less difficult than the other - just different. Airline guys in corporate cockpits not necessarily the cause of accidents- I don't have any data to support that it is/is not the cause but I can tell you that the supposition that airline guys 'have everything done for them' is not accurate.

CL[/QUOTE]CL

I am sure that many other dispatchers here will feel the same as I do, and add their comments as well, I'm sure I missed a few points...
but Dont forget, in a 121 operation, if things go really bad, our dispacher A$$ is in front of the NTSB and the FAA board of inquiry answering the 5 "W"'s, with out tickets and personal libility on the line for our part in that flight.

We are "jointly" responsible ref: 121.533 with the PIC. As a former pilot and current dispatcher, I think I speak for alot of dispatchers that are sick and tired of not even getting the common courtesy and respect from our crews for the roles we play everyday.....the things you dont see us doing, the "situations and catches" we discover and then FIX everyday.....

Have a nice flight and remember alot more happens on the gound than you are giving credit in your statement.

 

[Publishers]

The fact is that they are taking high performance jet aircraft into airports that are not simple in weather that is not good and trying to meet a schedule that may be ambitious with a celebrity client whose business you want to keep.

There may or may not have been good de icing available, may or may not have had good runway snow removal, may or may not have had good pilot reports from previous traffic. Both the Gulstream and Challenger had poor visability, high profile clients, both ahd busy days ahead of them.

It is the common recipe for things to go wrong at the worst possible time. Unfortunately it did in these two cases.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

I'm sure you have a valid point, but no one is arguing that dispatchers are not useful. I think that any operator who is interested in the smooth operation of a charter would have a dispatching centre. The only thing to worry about is the overloading of each dispatcher with too many flights to plan and track.... Sometimes things get forgotten, and add to my workload...

 

[TonyC]

... , without us there would be tons of accidents every month..

I appreciate your contribution to the operation, but don't you think you might be stretching it a weeeee bit?

 

[TonyC]

Educated in Guatemala, and responsible for "preventing" TONS of accidents per year....

Nice job, Oakum_Boy. Don't you hate it when somebody else's formatting error messes up your formatting?! I see you fixed it before the nasty "Last Edited..." label popped up.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

I rescind my unscrupulous remarks. I am now- an "editor".

 

[rvsm410]

I appreciate your contribution to the operation, but don't you think you might be stretching it a weeeee bit?

Do you really think this way Tony? When was the last time you were in your companies flight control area? Have you seen the coordination between dispatch and maintenance control, scheduling, ATC....

What are all those people doing there if they have no contribution to safety? I guess you feel the same as CL does in that you are "on your own"? if so, then
Heck I say fire all of us....save the company the $$$ you think your duty hours are long now? you go do all the foot work, and planning, MX issues, call for runway analysis, see what the ATC game plan is for the day, plan and file your flight....

And as always, Tony, sorry for the grammer and other off topic errors to my opinion.....weeeeee bit.....nah, but maybe oversensitive to this kind of attitude though.

 

[TonyC]

I rescind my unscrupulous remarks. I am now- an "editor".

Shucks, Oakum_Boy, I thought you did fine. I happened to see your post just after you originally posted, and then again a couple minutes later after you'd fixed the quote snafu. My comment was intended to be a compliment. Sorry if I miscommunicated. I'll leave off the smiles and winks next time and substitute real words.

Ooops. I did another smile thing.

 

[rvsm410]

Sorry for the Rant....

I'm sure you have a valid point, but no one is arguing that dispatchers are not useful. I think that any operator who is interested in the smooth operation of a charter would have a dispatching centre. The only thing to worry about is the overloading of each dispatcher with too many flights to plan and track.... Sometimes things get forgotten, and add to my workload...

Yep this is a sore spot for alot of NEW dispatchers, it takes some time to learn how to prioritize your daily flight release loads, sometimes we have 65 release to perform in a shift. The more experience you gain, the better you learn to seperate your flights by the weather. The CAVU flight are usualy slam dunks, the usual REG required stuff and off goes the release right on time, the bad weather areas of significant weather of conditions take alot of baby-sitting usually all the way to the destination.....

I tell my crews to always call me if they have a question or concern, I'm not perfect, but I am here to help the PIC!

Again, same as for Tony, sorry for any gramatical errors, go to get back to work..

 

[TonyC]

Do you really think this way Tony? When was the last time you were in your companies flight control area? Have you seen the coordination between dispatch and maintenance control, scheduling, ATC....

What are all those people doing there if they have no contribution to safety? I guess you feel the same as CL does in that you are "on your own"? if so, then
Heck I say fire all of us....save the company the $$$ you think your duty hours are long now? you go do all the foot work, and planning, MX issues, call for runway analysis, see what the ATC game plan is for the day, plan and file your flight....

And as always, Tony, sorry for the grammer and other off topic errors to my opinion.....weeeeee bit.....nah, but maybe oversensitive to this kind of attitude though.

Oversensitive? rvsm410, let's be clear here. I did not ridicule your spelling or grammar, and I did not make any comment that would in any way diminish your immense contribution to the safe progress of a flight. I acknowledge you as a valuable part of the process, a critical element of the team, a key part of the safety equation.

I do, however, take exception to that part of your essay that I quoted. That's why I quoted it, so you'd be sure to know exactly what part I quarrel with. (There's a dangling preposition to ease the grammar tension. ) I think that your claim that there would be "tons of accidents every month" without your contribution is somewhere on the scale of slight exaggeration to ludicrous. I tried to be tactful by phrasing my remark on the "slight exaggeration" end of the scale, even though my personal feelings are it is nearer the other extreme.

I did not say you make no contribution to safety. I did not say pilots are "on our own." I did not suggest your contribution is dispensible. Relax, and read what I DID say.


If I'm not mistaken, your background is military flying, and civilian dispatching. I think your advice to observe a dispatch operation is sound. I have. Pilots should have an appreciation of the activities that are involved in preparing a release. By the same token, it would do a dispatcher good to ride along with a crew sometime and get a feel for their perspective. Sometimes it's hard to make sense of what you see printed on the paper when it doesn't match what you can see out the window.

 

[350DRIVER]

The fact is that they are taking high performance jet aircraft into airports that are not simple in weather that is not good and trying to meet a schedule that may be ambitious with a celebrity client whose business you want to keep.

There may or may not have been good de icing available, may or may not have had good runway snow removal, may or may not have had good pilot reports from previous traffic. Both the Gulstream and Challenger had poor visability, high profile clients, both ahd busy days ahead of them.

It is the common recipe for things to go wrong at the worst possible time. Unfortunately it did in these two cases.

Publishers, some very good points in the above reply... The lack of standardization, crm, and procedures also adds into the mix of problems that many of these crews face on a daily basis. The flight crews should never give into pax or management demands when safety can be compromised in any way shape or form, unfortunately this happens more than one would like to admit.

3 5 0

 

[rvsm410]

I'M Cool Tony, clairification...

My comments were directed totally to CL600 which commented on the original posters question....I am quite sure you are aware of our role in dispatch.

My spelling and Grammer can get out out of hand especially when I am work, and I have been called down for it in the past with little time to check it...

As to my statement of "tons of accidents a month" well...it is over stated, but I dont think many 121 pilots appreciate the amount of work we do, the problems we do catch or avoid that would otherwise "if not caught" be real bad....its all in the days work for us....BUt it get under my skin when someone asks a question that regards dispatch and a pilot/person comments on something he either has little or no experience with, or worse contempt for because his/her dispatch office does not perform to a higher standard.....or something?

As for my time, Its all Civil aviation.....no military....I got to old to go after a airline flying job, so I did the next best thing and that was to dispatch....I do spend as many flights in the cockpit jumpseat as I am allowed to comute on, I love the view and the learning experience I get everytime....especially with a cool crew, which there are many....I spend my flight time, when I can, on private excursions in a rented C210....IFR of course....

Thanks for the rides to all, heck Tony, maybe you have given me a ride to and from as well....

 

[TonyC]

As to my statement of "tons of accidents a month" well...it is over stated, but I dont think many 121 pilots appreciate the amount of work we do, the problems we do catch or avoid that would otherwise "if not caught" be real bad....its all in the days work for us....

We agree.

BUt it get under my skin when someone asks a question that regards dispatch and a pilot/person comments on something he either has little or no experience with, or worse contempt for because his/her dispatch office does not perform to a higher standard.....or something?

I appreciate the fact that you take pride in the job you do. Unfortunately, and I'm sure you know this, not all dispatchers do. It is the minority that tarnish the reputation of all. It is the minority that was cited in CL600Pilot's post.

By the way, I think his post was a reaction to perceived pilot bashing in about the same fashion as your post was a response to perceived dispatcher bashing. Both contained elements of truth, and both contained exaggerations. I suppose I singled yours out because I'm a pilot, and the "tons of ... each month" just seemed... a wee bit over the top. His description of the role of a dispatcher may be tainted by experiences with bad dispatchers, but it (my opinion here) unfairly diminishes the role that a good dispatcher plays. The truth lies somewhere between those extremes. He reacted to someone implying pilots do nothing, you reacted to someone implying you do nothing.


Thread hijack over?

 

[Bandit60]

Corporate/charter flying has increased A LOT since since 9/11 (it actually started a little prior to 9/11).

More flights means it is statistically more probable that there will be more corp/char incidents/accidents.

It is possible you hear it more now as well .. the one in Calif was the NASCAR guy's plane, this CL-601 was an NBC exec.

I don't buy your friend's theory.

What do you mean about the one in Calif was the Nascar guy's plane?

 

[Ty Webb]

That isn't a "theory". A theory involves making an informed guess based upon facts. Sounds more like "wishful thinking".

 

[Bandit60]

RVSM410..

I have to disagree with you and the dispatch makes it more safe.
Example...I was flying out of DAL to the northeast (91 coporate) and one of our employees was flying on a fractional. There was a huge front running all the way up to the northeast. I ask the pilot of the fractional which way he was going. He said he was going on the front side. I thought he was crazy (lots of tstorms and rough air). I asked him why he wasnt going on the back side and he told me it was too much a pain to call dispatch and change his route of flight.
In this case he actually made the flight less safe not to mention a terrible ride for his passengers.

I check my weather at every stop and plan accordingly. What is it that you have learned being a dispatcher that I cannot do as equally good if not better?(better in the sense I just flew through the stuff)

 

[TonyC]

... I ask the pilot of the fractional which way he was going. He said he was going on the front side. I thought he was crazy (lots of tstorms and rough air). I asked him why he wasnt going on the back side and he told me it was too much a pain to call dispatch and change his route of flight.
In this case he actually made the flight less safe not to mention a terrible ride for his passengers.

Sounds like the problem in this scenario lies not in dispatch, but in a lazy pilot.

What did you say?

In this case he actually made the flight less safe ...

Who made it less safe?


Dispatchers have more tools at their fingertips and fewer distractions in their faces. They do a lot more than just check the weather at each stop. They can be a tremendous asset. Whether a pilot avails himself of that asset is another story entirely.

 

[Captn]

One mans view:

Bottom line in the vast majority of accidents at any level, is the PIC/SIC failure to continually make prudent decisions which may include a determination that a particular operation is not worth the risk. Regardless of info from Dispatch. Very difficult for some to do. I always have and always will believe, there is no person, place or thing worth dying for on my A/C. I have delayed, cancelled, gone to alternate quite a few times over the years, 91,135 and 121. Most people appreciate not playing roulette with their lives.
By no means am I infallable, I just do what I can to minimize my exposure to undesirable situations.

 

[GravityHater]

it all comes down to one thing: GRAVITY. It's involved in every single crash but nobody seems to want to talk about it.

That's why I am having a million-pilot march at DC next month, to protest the fed's inactivity to control this monster. If they can't suppress it completely, they should at least make a few regulations to keep this beast in check. Maybe sic a few scientists on the problem.

 

[100LL... Again!]

I've met a few ATCers who think that every plane in the sky would fall to earth if it was not for their services.

Personally, I think that dispatchers contribute greatly to efficiency, serve as a good backup for catching nitpicky little things on releases, and do contribute somewhat to safety.

Lots of dispatchers are not really that familiar with what flying in real weather is like, though. Familiarization flights should only occur on the worst weather days of the year.