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

191–200 of 297 posts

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

#191

Post by rob74 »

b112 wrote: post #189
jsmith45 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the spitting image of old pre-CRM thinking: If I try to force the captain to go around, (or follow procedures or whatever), then i am exceeding my authority and will probably be fired. Some cultures have this sort of mentality a lot stronger than others, and it has zero place in the modern cockpit. While a captain can pull rank, they really should only ever do it with respect to the first officer if: an inexp…

Is this legislated, required policy, or is this something that you believe should be the case? The reason I ask is, case in point, do you think the PM is going to be penalized in some way?

I don't think there's a law mandating it, but CRM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_resource_management) has been used and trained by all major airlines since the 1980s. The reason is simple: it doesn't really help to have two people in the cockpit if only one of them is making all the decisions.

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

#192

Post by gib444 »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #174
gib444 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder: would PM have taken control if they had more experience on the 767?

Having pilots fighting over the controls is not a situation anyone wants. The pilot monitoring saying go around should have caused an immediate reaction, the human factors behind why it didn't will probably feature prominently in the post-accident actions.

Your comment doesn't answer my question.

> Having pilots fighting over the controls is not a situation anyone wants

Nor crashing and killing 5 people.

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

#193

Post by cucumber3732842 »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #76
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pilot gets more veto power than the crane guy who gets more veto power than the residential concrete crew but they all still get talked to if they can't get their jobs done. I didn't say the same. I said the pressure was probably there too. But you can construe it as the former because that's a way easier thing to argue with.

Fair enough. I assume that since the NTSB database makes every single incident investigation public you can point to at least one instance where an ATP was pressured into avoiding a go around?

Specifically avoid a go around? IDK.

Commit to an action that ultimately caused a crash because they wanted to achieve ancillary goals (e.g. not be late)? Tons.

They call this "get-there-itis" (makes me feel so dirty trotting out buzzwords like that).

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

#194

Post by KineticLensman »

overfeed wrote: post #124
arcfour wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> unclear how speed didn't increase How can you comment as if you are knowledgeable enough about aviation to speak on this with authority, but you aren't aware that turbofan engines don't have instant throttle response and need time (up to 8 seconds) to spool up? I think a little more restraint is warranted in something like this if you don't know something that basic. You can actually do the math to work backwards a…

> How can you comment as if you are knowledgeable enough about aviation to speak on this with authority, but you aren't aware that ... This is par for the course for HN; smart people applying first-principle thinking on unfamiliar domains for about a minute, which confirms the biases of other outsiders who vote the plausible, but not-quite-right comments to the top.

Lots of armchair experts incorrecting each other

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

#195

Post by shakna »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #174
gib444 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder: would PM have taken control if they had more experience on the 767?

Having pilots fighting over the controls is not a situation anyone wants. The pilot monitoring saying go around should have caused an immediate reaction, the human factors behind why it didn't will probably feature prominently in the post-accident actions.

Isn't it? Pretty sure its actually the drilled and trained commandment. If you doubt, speak up, and if that fails, take control. [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_resource_management

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

#196

Post by implements »

sen wrote: post #154
stackghost wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is particularly notorious for armchair aviation experts. I am an aerospace engineer having worked in airworthiness & certification as well as maintenance/repair/overhaul on multiple different aircraft types both fixed and rotary. I mention this only to establish my bona fides as someone who knows their shit: The comments here during the 737 MAX MCAS thing were fucking wild. So many randoms spitting out confidently…

That’s all forums in a nut shell. Any time you read about something you’re not personally familiar with it’s “look at all these people who know what they’re talking about… “, as soon as it’s something you are personally familiar with it’s “wtf are these people on about?!”

“Gell-Mann Amnesia“ - usually applied to media when experts scoff at stories they know to be sometimes woefully inaccurate but still accept all the other pages as gospel.

Coined by Michael Crichton (the famous author).

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

#197

Post by ibejoeb »

gib444 wrote: post #163
drillsteps5 wrote: post #126

A few observations to add context (partially stolen from PPRuNe): - Pilot Flying (PF) was the Captain, 55 yo (presumably) more experienced pilot, who only got certified to fly that type (B767) in May - Pilot Monitoring (PM) was a 38 yo first officer, also not very experienced on B767 - PF made a number of mistakes, going too high, too fast (partially because he was descending too fast), not catching the glidescope on…

I wonder: would PM have taken control if they had more experience on the 767?

The PM got his rating about 18 months ago. The PF only got his this past May. The PM had more overall hours, but this is looking a lot like a skills issue. He was flying an unstable approach. He wasn't configured for landing.

This pairing, considering past incidents with similar airframe vs. total hours disparity, really does look to be bad practice. You've got to acknowledge the human psychology. Part of it is probably the crazy pipeline over the past few years where people are racing to 1500 hours no matter how they log them, or they're getting on restricted certs with lower hours.

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

#199

Post by netsharc »

rob74 wrote: post #186
VBprogrammer wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having pilots fighting over the controls is not a situation anyone wants. The pilot monitoring saying go around should have caused an immediate reaction, the human factors behind why it didn't will probably feature prominently in the post-accident actions.

If any of the two pilots feel uncomfortable about the approach, they are actually drilled to just order a go-around, not politely ask and hint that they would prefer to do it like this FO did (wastes time). Ideally the pilot flying should then do it, but if they don't, the pilot monitoring can also take control (while clearly stating "my controls, going around") and do it. One major issue that I bet the NTSB will not…

Also not an expert, I wonder if there's some rule where a "Go around!" order has precedence over any other activity anyone in the cockpit wishes to perform.

As a passenger I had my first go around a few days ago, but we were 5km away from the runway.

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

#200

Post by VBprogrammer »

shakna wrote: post #195
VBprogrammer wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having pilots fighting over the controls is not a situation anyone wants. The pilot monitoring saying go around should have caused an immediate reaction, the human factors behind why it didn't will probably feature prominently in the post-accident actions.

Isn't it? Pretty sure its actually the drilled and trained commandment. If you doubt, speak up, and if that fails, take control. [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_resource_management

There are a lot of things which are drilled and trained which have gone wrong in this incident.
Post reply on HN