131–140 of 173 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the main concern is that you created your account just to post this, and it can be interpreted as politically opinionated. In today’s social media climate, one needs to be fairly sceptical when it comes to this kind of stuff. Having said this, I confirm that this excerpt comes directly from the report.
Especially when their username is "godsplan1".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Thanks! Just out of curiosity, do the gulf carriers keep PIA in high regard and have a friendly relationship or they are continuously trying to bring it down? Pakistani airlines were not the only ones whom Gulf carriers have brought down. They dominate the entire region, and rightfully so (aside from heavy subsidies.) Their service is superb. PIA used to be a much more higher-end airline, and it was on top of globa…
That's a highly rosy history. I flew PIA from Tokyo to Karachi with my parents in 1985. Our unanimous conclusion: never, ever again. I don't have an axe to grind with them. My mother's uncle was head of maintenance for them in Karachi, and a good family friend the station chief in Paris. Sadly, like many other Pakistani institutions, it was overtaken by incompetence and corruption, long before the Gulf carriers burst…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly as Erlich_Bachman wrote. Also want to add one more reason: The pilot's neck is always on the line, while the ATC usually won't get physically hurt. The incentives are better aligned if it's the pilot who has final authority.
Sure, the pilot is the final authority. If it is unsafe, the pilot should declare an emergency, and ATC must get out of the way. Otherwise, if ATC says, "go around," the pilot should go around. And in this case, ATC should have said, "Go around."
This is an aviation rule that everyone lives by. There are many reasons for why that is the most sane and sensible approach to this problem, in addition to what is mentioned, the pilot's attention span is always under attack from various events that they have to correctly and swiftly respond to. This does not happen sometimes, this happens all the time during flight. Everyone has to be prepared for it. It is part of the job. You have to train for it, you have to prepare for your attention to be overflown, and you still have to make the most important decisions even under those conditions.
And this has an important consequence: ATC is at the end of that list ("communicate"). They are at the bottom of the attention span chain of the pilot, and it is better for everyone if ATC knows this and acts like it. In other words, leaves the final decision to the pilot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, the pilot is the final authority. If it is unsafe, the pilot should declare an emergency, and ATC must get out of the way. Otherwise, if ATC says, "go around," the pilot should go around. And in this case, ATC should have said, "Go around."
"Aviate, Navigate, Communicate". https://pea.com/blog/posts/6-pilot-rules-that-everyone-shoul... This is an aviation rule that everyone lives by. There are many reasons for why that is the most sane and sensible approach to this problem, in addition to what is mentioned, the pilot's attention span is always under attack from various events that they have to correctly and swiftly respond to. This does not happen somet…
Please don't get me wrong. The pilots bear the majority of the responsibility. But it does not sound to me like ATC did their job properly, either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my opinion, ATC is also culpable (though much less so). They could have and should have ordered a go around, but instead, they re-cleared the airplane to land.
That's not how ATC works. The tower controller is responsible for the runway environment. The only reason they can tell a plane to go around is if there is a traffic conflict or the runway is not available, and they're supposed to give the pilots a reason for the go around instruction. A go around for an unstable approach is 100% the decision of the pilots, because they have the complete picture. They also know the s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But how does the captain's last words tell you anything about his focus or confidence? There seems to be no reason to quote those words.
Its right there in the sentence if you go past your own interpretation of the sentence .. "The crew was overconfident and not focussed" Because they were talking about Corona and ignored the instructions .. Why are you so fixed by the use of word "Allah" .. I really dont see how it should bother anyone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The partition was a hideous mistake but it was decades ago and how long can you blame it for unrelated things anyway?. By that logic as an Englishman I can blame the French for all our screwups.
Well cosequences don't go away. Russia unified into a single state only because of the Mongoles, so you can blame Communism and cold war on them.
Another example of putting blame through 2 millennia - Space Shuttle booster width as result of the Roman chariot width https://dwanethomas.com/roman-chariots-and-the-space-shuttle...
If this doesn't apply to the UK as well, it is not enough. I would like to see a flyover ban as well, as PIA flies through the EU to the UK. I'm following the aviation industry closely and there are plenty of reports every now and then where PIA flights don't respond on radio anymore, triggering fighter intercepts. It is assumed that those pilots are oftentimes either sleeping or just don't bother because of their eg…
>I don't want to have PIA planes crashing into others or falling on my head. Even with sleeping pilots, you still are order of magnitude more likely to die by a car than by a plane.
In that sense, I don't want PIA planes falling on my own or anyone else's head, land, or property, anywhere in the world.
There's no reason to allow pilots and airlines to behave like that, and lots of reasons to sanction them very harshly if they do. After all, who's to believe they're current on their maintenance if they can't even make sure pilots respond when hailed?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Germany restricts US driving licences depending on issuing US state. Denmark is apparently far more willing to let it slide, and anyone with a US driving licence can get it converted to a Danish one with just a doctor's approval. Although, in Denmark, their US licence is only valid for a month. But you don't have to retake the test. I am frankly a bit puzzled by this decision.
This seems to be the current list of rules for non EU countries and US states to transfer the driver's license to the German one after six months (linked by ADAC): https://res.cloudinary.com/adacde/image/upload/v1572337531/A... After having lived 5+ years in Virginia in the US and knowing multiple people that got their driver's license in Virginia, I am really surprised that apparently people with Virginia issued dri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only on paper. Let's face it if the pilots weren't flying intercepts they'd need to be flying training missions. Anyway, the sunk cost of buying, maintaining and operating fighter jets is so high that the marginal cost of a mission is a bit of a wash.
>Let's face it if the pilots weren't flying intercepts they'd need to be flying training missions Is this really the case? Are there training missions 24/7? If not, does flying an intercept cause a future training mission to be canceled?