P2 has been following the ‘Sully’ saga with great interest, as have we all. I noted many of comments regarding the NTSB analysis and subsequent salutary lessons for all. It is a very fine thing to see ‘Reason’ and open discussion providing so much food for thought; particularly to the ‘inexperienced’ generation of pilots.
I mean nothing derogatory by using the term ‘inexperienced’, but throughout aviation history there are those who have had the ‘experience’ of a serious situation and those who have not; well, not in real life anyway. The real thing is an abnormal, rare event in these days of incredible engine performance, wondrous computerized systems, advanced operating techniques and the collective experience of those who have survived that ‘unpleasant’ event.
One of the main reasons for the increased safety levels is that the lessons, some of them bitter, from the past have been analysed and the hard lessons learned. These lessons have been built into every facet of aviation, from loading baggage to a tricky approach on a bad night with recalcitrant systems.
The one reason we have been able to develop improved safety systems , SOP and the like is due to the efforts of ‘accident investigators’ and the fine work they do. Once the analysis is complete and the conclusions drawn, the lessons are provided, free of charge to industry. Without clear, succinct reporting, analysis and action - based on reports, from both operators and regulators; the accident and incident ratio would be significantly higher. That is an incontestable fact.
The article published in the well respected Airwaysmag – HERE - by Capt. Aux provides two equally important points for consideration.
1) The NTSB report has provided much in the way of ‘lessons’ and presents experienced pilots with ‘new’ thoughts – the ‘how would I’ thought being predominant. In short it makes you think; run scenario’s through your mind, talk to other crew members, run the accident in the Sim, and discuss. The NTSB report provides something for everyone; everyone learns and the industry gains valuable knowledge and shared experience. I defy anyone to provide an ATSB report from the past six years which has promoted any ‘learning’ or shared experience of value to this industry. There has been nothing of value provided in any report which has sparked peer discussion, let alone improved safety. Take Mildura as an example; or the ‘SHEED’ approach into Melbourne. Much chatter among flight crew about what ‘they’ would have done – but not one item of value to that discussion has been provided by ATSB. Capt. Aux has read and considered the NTSB report and has gained from spending the time. I read the Mildura report and wanted to throw up.
2) While I’m ‘at it’. I note there is an increase in ‘generational’ incidents and accidents. The old ‘Crash comic’ regularly – once every generation – trotted out words of wisdom and caution for the ‘new’ crews to reflect upon; VMC into IMC; last light; gear up, running on the apron; propellers as shotguns; water in the fuel; carby ice; icing; etc all the little things which were learnt by the previous generation but somehow fail to impress the importance on the newer mind. The “I learned about flying” articles always created discussion and the pearls of wisdom were polished again, to worn by the new generation.
These topics are the prime responsibility of the ATSB, getting the message out, in a timely manner and providing the bare bones of a case for consideration after a preventable event; even an unpreventable one, such as Sully’s. Without factual and operational analysis, supported by an ‘expert’ body, the lessons will be diluted or ignored. Mildura was a very close call as are many of the other ‘events’ which were provided by the ATSB soft shoe shuffle sytstem
Bravo NTSB, well done Capt Aux. Shame on you ATSB and your ‘Beyond all Reason’ PC approach to reporting and recommending. Read the Aux article, read the NTSB report; see the difference and lift your bloody game back to a world standard.
Toot - toot
I mean nothing derogatory by using the term ‘inexperienced’, but throughout aviation history there are those who have had the ‘experience’ of a serious situation and those who have not; well, not in real life anyway. The real thing is an abnormal, rare event in these days of incredible engine performance, wondrous computerized systems, advanced operating techniques and the collective experience of those who have survived that ‘unpleasant’ event.
One of the main reasons for the increased safety levels is that the lessons, some of them bitter, from the past have been analysed and the hard lessons learned. These lessons have been built into every facet of aviation, from loading baggage to a tricky approach on a bad night with recalcitrant systems.
The one reason we have been able to develop improved safety systems , SOP and the like is due to the efforts of ‘accident investigators’ and the fine work they do. Once the analysis is complete and the conclusions drawn, the lessons are provided, free of charge to industry. Without clear, succinct reporting, analysis and action - based on reports, from both operators and regulators; the accident and incident ratio would be significantly higher. That is an incontestable fact.
The article published in the well respected Airwaysmag – HERE - by Capt. Aux provides two equally important points for consideration.
1) The NTSB report has provided much in the way of ‘lessons’ and presents experienced pilots with ‘new’ thoughts – the ‘how would I’ thought being predominant. In short it makes you think; run scenario’s through your mind, talk to other crew members, run the accident in the Sim, and discuss. The NTSB report provides something for everyone; everyone learns and the industry gains valuable knowledge and shared experience. I defy anyone to provide an ATSB report from the past six years which has promoted any ‘learning’ or shared experience of value to this industry. There has been nothing of value provided in any report which has sparked peer discussion, let alone improved safety. Take Mildura as an example; or the ‘SHEED’ approach into Melbourne. Much chatter among flight crew about what ‘they’ would have done – but not one item of value to that discussion has been provided by ATSB. Capt. Aux has read and considered the NTSB report and has gained from spending the time. I read the Mildura report and wanted to throw up.
2) While I’m ‘at it’. I note there is an increase in ‘generational’ incidents and accidents. The old ‘Crash comic’ regularly – once every generation – trotted out words of wisdom and caution for the ‘new’ crews to reflect upon; VMC into IMC; last light; gear up, running on the apron; propellers as shotguns; water in the fuel; carby ice; icing; etc all the little things which were learnt by the previous generation but somehow fail to impress the importance on the newer mind. The “I learned about flying” articles always created discussion and the pearls of wisdom were polished again, to worn by the new generation.
These topics are the prime responsibility of the ATSB, getting the message out, in a timely manner and providing the bare bones of a case for consideration after a preventable event; even an unpreventable one, such as Sully’s. Without factual and operational analysis, supported by an ‘expert’ body, the lessons will be diluted or ignored. Mildura was a very close call as are many of the other ‘events’ which were provided by the ATSB soft shoe shuffle sytstem
Bravo NTSB, well done Capt Aux. Shame on you ATSB and your ‘Beyond all Reason’ PC approach to reporting and recommending. Read the Aux article, read the NTSB report; see the difference and lift your bloody game back to a world standard.
Toot - toot