Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

ntsb.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 297 posts

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#31

Post by stouset »

psunavy03 wrote: post #25
sscaryterry wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You're being downvoted because actual qualified aviators are telling you how egregious of a mistake this looks to be, and you're quibbling with them without any professional credibility on the subject. Sincerely, A former military aviator

In any aviation incident, it’s generally a good idea to wait for the full NTSB report before drawing any firm conclusions.

That said, it is exceedingly difficult to find any explanation for what happened in this case that doesn’t boil down to incompetence or gross negligence.

There were so many opportunities to avoid this accident. The crew seemingly more or less single-handedly punched a hole straight through the entire Swiss cheese model. It’s so bad it’s hard to imagine they weren’t drunk at the controls.

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#32

Post by randerson »

wanderingmoose wrote: post #14
imglorp wrote: post #2

tldw, per Blancolirio: unstable approach, crew should have done a go around at 1000 agl but did not attempt one until it was too late, then aborted the go around.

I think the real question is why didn't the pilots do a go around. I bet there are underlying pressures from the airlines and/or amazon to not do a go around to avoid schedule delays or fuel costs.

In one of the videos you can see dark clouds behind the plane. I suspect the pilots knew they'd have to divert to a different airport if they couldn't land and put pressure on themselves to not have to do that.

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#33

Post by dghlsakjg »

wanderingmoose wrote: post #14
imglorp wrote: post #2

tldw, per Blancolirio: unstable approach, crew should have done a go around at 1000 agl but did not attempt one until it was too late, then aborted the go around.

I think the real question is why didn't the pilots do a go around. I bet there are underlying pressures from the airlines and/or amazon to not do a go around to avoid schedule delays or fuel costs.

I've never heard of anything even close to this.

Airlines in the US do not pressure pilots to avoid go arounds. Pilots in the US do not delegate life or death decisions to ops, especially since the FAA legally holds them accountable for that. All pilots are aware that they are responsible for the decision to go around or not.

Any airline found to be pressuring pilots to avoid go arounds would be in a world of pain with the FAA.

On cargo flights in particular timing and fuel usage are less critical than passenger flights, and a go around doesn't affect either much.

Pressure to avoid go arounds would also be incredibly counter productive since go arounds exist to preserve life and property. Pilots do go arounds to avoid costly incidents.

You are correct that the question is why they didn't do a go around, but I would bet a large sum of money that airline pressure to avoid go arounds was not a factor.

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#34

Post by bayarearefugee »

wanderingmoose wrote: post #14
imglorp wrote: post #2

tldw, per Blancolirio: unstable approach, crew should have done a go around at 1000 agl but did not attempt one until it was too late, then aborted the go around.

I think the real question is why didn't the pilots do a go around. I bet there are underlying pressures from the airlines and/or amazon to not do a go around to avoid schedule delays or fuel costs.

[flagged]

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#35

Post by cjbprime »

collabs wrote: post #30
cjbprime wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They made a series of at least ten (and that's kind of charitable) this-must-never-happen mistakes that likely rise to the level of extraordinary criminal negligence, including ignoring checklists, alarms, configuring the plane for landing in general, and basically everything related to safety. You don't have to extend sympathy, just as you don't have to extend sympathy to drunk drivers who kill people.

I am not a pilot and I don't know anything about flying. I can go along with the idea that the pilot / crew made mistakes. So the next obvious question is how do we make sure this does not happen again? Is there anything that can be done at all here?

Maybe ATC could be expected to revoke landing clearance on extremely obviously unstable approaches? I wonder why that didn't happen.

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#36

Post by sscaryterry »

cjbprime wrote: post #24
sscaryterry wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

They made a series of at least ten (and that's kind of charitable) this-must-never-happen mistakes that likely rise to the level of extraordinary criminal negligence, including ignoring checklists, alarms, configuring the plane for landing in general, and basically everything related to safety. You don't have to extend sympathy, just as you don't have to extend sympathy to drunk drivers who kill people.

https://www.simplypsychology.org/sympathy-empathy-compassion...

I don't have sympathy. I also do know of drunk drivers that have been arrested, who are, good people. Shit happens. I'm not going to judge.

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#37

Post by cjbprime »

sscaryterry wrote: post #36
cjbprime wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They made a series of at least ten (and that's kind of charitable) this-must-never-happen mistakes that likely rise to the level of extraordinary criminal negligence, including ignoring checklists, alarms, configuring the plane for landing in general, and basically everything related to safety. You don't have to extend sympathy, just as you don't have to extend sympathy to drunk drivers who kill people.

https://www.simplypsychology.org/sympathy-empathy-compassion... I don't have sympathy. I also do know of drunk drivers that have been arrested, who are, good people. Shit happens. I'm not going to judge.

I mean, complete ethical nihilism is one way to try to avoid losing this particular argument, but I don't think you'll get many people to agree with you on it.

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#38

Post by sscaryterry »

psunavy03 wrote: post #25
sscaryterry wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You're being downvoted because actual qualified aviators are telling you how egregious of a mistake this looks to be, and you're quibbling with them without any professional credibility on the subject. Sincerely, A former military aviator

[flagged]

Re: NTSB issues investigative update on B-767 runway excursion accident in Miami

#40

Post by jtchang »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #33
wanderingmoose wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the real question is why didn't the pilots do a go around. I bet there are underlying pressures from the airlines and/or amazon to not do a go around to avoid schedule delays or fuel costs.

I've never heard of anything even close to this. Airlines in the US do not pressure pilots to avoid go arounds. Pilots in the US do not delegate life or death decisions to ops, especially since the FAA legally holds them accountable for that. All pilots are aware that they are responsible for the decision to go around or not. Any airline found to be pressuring pilots to avoid go arounds would be in a world of pain wi…

Southwest airlines had a culture of turning around fast at the gate. So maybe no explicit policy but culture can drive unintended consequences and decisions.
Post reply on HN