सभी
← Back to Squawk list
Asiana pilots raise 777 auto-throttle malfunction issue in the San Francisco crash
Pilots of the Asiana Airlines Boeing 777-200ER jet that crashed while trying to land in San Francisco are offering an account that differs from the preliminary findings of U.S. investigators, people familiar with the investigation said. The pilots have told the National Transportation Safety Board that an in-flight malfunction of an automated speed-control system was a major factor in the fatal accident on July 6, these people said. (airguideonline.com) और अधिक...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
We Tu Lo
Asiana are acting like a blind man looking for a black cat in a dark room which is not there .
Out of everything you have posted over the last few weeks, this is the most true statement that you have made. As myself and several others have said, It wouldn't matter if it was UAL or some other American Carrier, it was a simple mistake that anyone could have made, that had catastrophic results. The culture thing just compounds it. It is human nature to grasp at straws to shift blame and that is where Asiana is at now. They might make that sound believable to the non-flying public but not to this bunch
ThanX my friend preacher1. May be this is the first time I said some thing in American English !
Perhaps, so far I was using the conventional Queen's English, which itself is not so common even in its native land, UK !
And that's the language I know !
Sadly , :-(
I have never defended or supported ANY action or statement given by Asiana or by any one else which in any way defends them. Without knowing their training schedule I condemned it on basis of first principles of Human Resource Management ! I guess CRM in your parlance .
Blame shifting can never help in such serious accidents(crimes) where the procedure of fixing culpability will run its course in such details that even the minutest error or deviation will be thoroughly analysed thread bare, before trial and during trial.
I have always held, they are guilty prima facie (even unequivocally). And deserve every punishment, legal and social.
The only rider comes by way of procedure of crime and punishment. That has to run its natural course. Like it or not.
ThanX again.
Perhaps, so far I was using the conventional Queen's English, which itself is not so common even in its native land, UK !
And that's the language I know !
Sadly , :-(
I have never defended or supported ANY action or statement given by Asiana or by any one else which in any way defends them. Without knowing their training schedule I condemned it on basis of first principles of Human Resource Management ! I guess CRM in your parlance .
Blame shifting can never help in such serious accidents(crimes) where the procedure of fixing culpability will run its course in such details that even the minutest error or deviation will be thoroughly analysed thread bare, before trial and during trial.
I have always held, they are guilty prima facie (even unequivocally). And deserve every punishment, legal and social.
The only rider comes by way of procedure of crime and punishment. That has to run its natural course. Like it or not.
ThanX again.
CRM is short for CREW RESOURCES MANAGEMENT and was FAA Mandated in the early 80=s. In a nutshell it starting doing away with the "CAPTAIN IS GOD" attitude that was prevalent prior. Many other things but it basically puts everybody on a equal footing in the cockpit. There are a lot of other things in there as well. Captain is in charge but FO can speak or point out error. There is a fair synopsis in Wikipedia. Go to Google and type it in. It will come up. A lot of the younger pilots out there have never known that authoritarian world of which I speak. As I said, it was implemented in the early 80's but in reality it went into the 90's before it really started taking hold.
ThanX preacher1. I had done earlier. But did again.
I distinctly remember I asked you professionals long ago just post Asiana crash, about the technical functionality of the Right Seat(co pilot). Hence I held that in a case of crisis, flying matters and not seniority or right vs. left seat conflict, simple.
I am trained as a professional, by attitude also. I studied MBA and LlB by part time courses and was taught by teachers some of whom were younger to me ! I had no problem in learning from them.
That is how I have been groomed professionally.
Hence I can never pardon any pilot for not flying, unless incapacitated by physical reasons. Not psychological.
I am getting impatient to see how this aspect of flying vs. seniority is taken up , in the NTSB report and THEN during trial when Asiana will give their hollow and shallow 'defence' !
But, I can not go beyond a point in my views due to limited aviation knowledge. Using first principles is what I have been doing.
I distinctly remember I asked you professionals long ago just post Asiana crash, about the technical functionality of the Right Seat(co pilot). Hence I held that in a case of crisis, flying matters and not seniority or right vs. left seat conflict, simple.
I am trained as a professional, by attitude also. I studied MBA and LlB by part time courses and was taught by teachers some of whom were younger to me ! I had no problem in learning from them.
That is how I have been groomed professionally.
Hence I can never pardon any pilot for not flying, unless incapacitated by physical reasons. Not psychological.
I am getting impatient to see how this aspect of flying vs. seniority is taken up , in the NTSB report and THEN during trial when Asiana will give their hollow and shallow 'defence' !
But, I can not go beyond a point in my views due to limited aviation knowledge. Using first principles is what I have been doing.