The NW overflight, what REALLY happened

Well. An interesting story, but there's a stink of heavy, cheap perfume
around it.

If events occured as described here, why then did they not state the
facts immediately and lie that they had slept? And then later change
their story about being completely engrossed in their laptops.

I simply don't believe that "the NTSB official came over to Tim and said he
did not know why they even called them in for this event. There was no
safety issue." Oh, please. Sure as hell there was a safety issue, when
an airliner overflies its destination and is out of communication for
that long.

The Captain and F.O. were careless and sloppy. Period. They got a good
deal by merely having their licenses revoked. I don't think they should
be banned for life, but having to re-do all the training again from
ab-initio is perfectly fair for what they did to their passengers,
flight attendants, their fellow professional pilots, and the national
air control system.
--
Turn over the pages of history and read the damning record of the
church's opposition to every advance in every field of science.
~ Upton Sinclair

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Ash writes:

Please elaborate. Offhand, I can't think of any change which would have
killed people here.

Fuel exhaustion, weather, system failures (pressurization, engines, you name
it), and so on.

If you want to fly on airplanes with pilots who are asleep at the switch,
that's your choice, but I don't.

Should have known better than to talk to you. Did I ever say I wanted to
fly on airplanes with pilots who are asleep at the switch? No, I did not.

Do not put words in my mouth.

If you feel like addressing what I actually say rather than making ****
up, let me know.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Mike Ash writes:

Should have known better than to talk to you. Did I ever say I wanted to
fly on airplanes with pilots who are asleep at the switch? No, I did not.

You imply that there actions put no one in any real danger, therefore there is
no reason why you wouldn't want them as your pilots, since there's nothing
that they've done that would put you in any real danger if they did it again.

Either you have a problem with the way they conducted themselves, or you
don't. If you do, then logically you wouldn't want to fly with them. If you
don't, then logically you wouldn't mind flying with them.

I have a problem with their conduct, and so I would not want to have them
piloting any aircraft on which I might be a passenger.

Bug Dout writes:

The Captain and F.O. were careless and sloppy. Period. They got a good
deal by merely having their licenses revoked. I don't think they should
be banned for life, but having to re-do all the training again from
ab-initio is perfectly fair for what they did to their passengers,
flight attendants, their fellow professional pilots, and the national
air control system.

Agreed.

remember, one way or another you are talking to a village idiot, and that is
part of the problem.
--
Jim in NC

On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:15:47 +0800, Mike Ash wrote:

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Ash writes:

Please elaborate. Offhand, I can't think of any change which would have
killed people here.

Fuel exhaustion, weather, system failures (pressurization, engines, you name
it), and so on.

If you want to fly on airplanes with pilots who are asleep at the switch,
that's your choice, but I don't.

Should have known better than to talk to you.

So much for having brains, GliderBoi.
--
http://www.tronguy.net (Yeppers, that's me!!)
http://current.com/items/88931310_tron_guy

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 15:07:43 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Subject: NWA overflight

snipped complete set of Bull****

Of course I snip your nonsense. Just because you've wandered into a
quagmire of inanities, irrelevances, and stupidities doesn't mean I have
to follow you in.

Bug Dout wrote:
If events occured as described here, why then did they not state the
facts immediately and lie that they had slept?

What report said they claimed they had slept? All the news reports I saw
claimed the pilots said they weren't asleep at any time during the flight.

So the above appears to be at complete variance with the reports I've seen
- perhaps you have a different incident in mind?

And then later change
their story about being completely engrossed in their laptops.

I simply don't believe that "the NTSB official came over to Tim and
said he did not know why they even called them in for this event.
There was no safety issue." Oh, please. Sure as hell there was a
safety issue, when an airliner overflies its destination and is out of
communication for that long.

Actually the posting explicitly claims they didn't actually overfly their
destination - they at first thought they had. Radar records would indicate
whether this was true.

They may have flown past the fix they were last cleared to, but news
reports claimed they flew past their final destination.

The Captain and F.O. were careless and sloppy. Period. They got a
good deal by merely having their licenses revoked. I don't think they
should be banned for life, but having to re-do all the training again
from ab-initio is perfectly fair for what they did to their
passengers, flight attendants, their fellow professional pilots, and
the national air control system.

And Ming the Merciless would simply execute their trainers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNUcpXKiNZo

wrote:
When a pilot leaves to use the restroom, it is customary for the other
pilot to brief him on his return on "any changes", such as altitude,
heading, course changes or atc center frequency changes, etc. In this
instance, nothing was said....even though the f/o had received a
frequency change. The problem that occurred was that the f/o never got
a response on the new frequency....it was not the correct
frequency....it was a Winnipeg Canada Center Freq.

It really sounds like the F/O screwed up at this point, for reasons that
aren't given. If I understand the regs correctly, he was technically PIC
when this pivotal error in procedure happened.

Then Tim told the f/o that the new bidding system was horrible and
that his November schedule was not what he hoped for. He mentioned
that his son was going into the Army in Dec. and he wanted certain
days off so he could see him off.....the f/o said he could help him,
he knew more about the new bidding system. Tim got his lap top out and
put it on his left leg and showed the f/o how he bid.. He told me he
had his lap top out for maybe 2 minutes. Then the f/o said that he
would show him how to do it on his laptop. He had his laptop out
maximum of 5 minutes.

Let's also add the 100 kt tail wind that they had to the discussion,
not helping matters.

It really sounds like the captain screwed up at this point, for reasons
that are given. Sounds like a classic case of loss of situational
awareness. I don't see how tail wind should matter if navigation is being
attended to periodically.

The f/a's called the cockpit on the interphone (no they did not kick
the door, no, no one was sleeping, no, no one was fighting) and asked
when they will get there. They looked at their nav screens and were
directly over MSP. Because they had their screens set on the max, 320
kt setting, when the f/o called on the frequency, which of course was
Winnipeg Center, he saw Eau Claire and Duluth on his screen. They
asked where they were and the f/o told them over Eau Claire, which was
not even close, but MSP had disappeared from the screen even though
they were right over the city.

So they didn't fly past their destination (much?) - but did they fly past
their clearance limit? I presume they should have alert and prepared for
the expected handoff from center to approach well before arriving over
MSP in any case.

ATL FAA is really big on this new regulation which will allow pilots
to take a short nap in flight so they will be rested for the
approach...they were insistent that they were sleeping.

Not sure I follow - ATL FAA was insistent they were sleeping?

When Tim and his wife were in MSP for a meeting with the NTSB, they
happen to be staying at the same hotel as the NTSB was. The next
morning in the lobby, the NTSB official came over to Tim and said he
did not know why they even called them in for this event. There was no
safety issue. Also, MSP Center informed Delta that there never was a
problem and no aircraft were near their plane. Even though no radio
communications, they had been followed and separated.

Put bluntly, if comm failure to _one_ aircraft were considered an
immediate safety issue to any other aircraft, then the whole point of ATC
would seem to be a big joke.

Jim Logajan writes:

Actually the posting explicitly claims they didn't actually overfly their
destination - they at first thought they had. Radar records would indicate
whether this was true.

Here you go:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N...135Z/KSAN/KMSP