Comair Pilot Error

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
I agree that there is enough info known to establish that the pilots
screwed up and many people died. Anger or specific legal definitions
are not worth quibbling over.

And yet you do quibble. Odd.

If there is the possibility that information you don't yet have would
change
your mind, then by definition your current opinion is premature.

I don't think so. I just leave open the possibility (rare that it is)
that I am wrong.

You have an odd way of looking at things (though that was already
apparent...see above). You specifically say that you don't have enough
information to know for sure that you aren't wrong, and yet you feel your
current judgment of the situation isn't premature?

Why? What possible justification do you have for claiming this is gross
negligence?

I am not a lawyer but what would you call it when someone screws up
and 49 people die?

An accident. Get a dictionary and look up "gross negligence". It has a
very specific meaning, and the simple act of causing ANY number of people to
die is not part of the definition.

Some want to know about how much sleep they got, whether they had
coffee, etc but those points are irrelevant. You have two
professional pilots who screwed up. 49 people died.

Yup, those are pretty much the facts we know. So which of those facts
justify your judgment of "gross negligence"?

Pete

AS I gather from reading the news as the NTSB and news media
release data, runway 26 had been operating in the day time
and the runway light had been NOTAM'd OTS.. But the lights
were ON again. Perhaps the crew did not expect to have
runway 26 lighted and when they saw it, assumed it was 22.

As has been said, they should have checked the compass and
perhaps even the LOC , but they did not perhaps because VFR
taxiing is so easy and requires minimal crew attention.

It was reported that the First Officer [the survivor] was
flying so that means the Caption was taxiing, since the nose
wheel steering is probably only on the left side. This also
means that the co-pilot did not have a good view of the taxi
route and left turn on the runway.

I do hope the co-pilot is able to talk, to fill in the
details that are not spoken on the CVR.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com...
|I am getting tired of comments like "controller should have
warned the
| pilots", or "taxiway was confusing", or "runway lights
were off" etc..
| One could not find a better example of a pure and simple
pilot error.
| The runway was clear, the weather was VFR, and the
airplane was working
| fine. It is highly likely that this was the only airplane
maneuvering
| at the airport. Even if the controller had cleared him to
takeoff on
| runway 26, the responsibility would have been on the pilot
to decline
| that clearance. Yet, a perfectly good airplane was run off
the runway
| and ploughed into the woods.
|
| NTSB is investigating whether the pilots had coffee that
morning, and
| how much sleep they got. This is a futile exercise.
Taxiing and
| departing from a relatively quiet airport under VFR
conditions is an
| extremely low workload situation. We are not talking about
shooting a
| non-precision approach to minimums in a thunderstorm after
a full day
| of flying. A pilot should be able to do this even if he
had partied all
| night at the bar. What happened was gross negligence.
|
| I shudder to think that my wife and baby flew the Comair
CRJ only a few
| days prior to this accident. Fortunately they are flying
back with me
| in our trusty GA airplane. I feel a lot better about it
than trusting
| my family to stupid mistakes that even my students pilots
know how to
| avoid. I sincerely feel for those who lost loved ones.
They have the
| right be very angry. I am angry, and I did not lose
anything.
|

Jim Macklin wrote:


It was reported that the First Officer [the survivor] was
flying so that means the Caption was taxiing, since the nose
wheel steering is probably only on the left side. This also
means that the co-pilot did not have a good view of the taxi
route and left turn on the runway.

There is only a tiller on the captain's side. There's a limitted
amount of nose wheel steering through the rudder pedals, but
insufficient for the hard right turn onto the runway here.

It has become standard practice for most airlines when lined up for takeoff
to call out and confirm the runway heading and any pertinent immediate
profile data. If that aircraft has a setable heading bug on the HSI most
operators set the runway heading during preflight. If so, it wouldn't have
been lined up correctly when they began their takeoff.

--
Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: (see below)
http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am getting tired of comments like "controller should have warned the
pilots", or "taxiway was confusing", or "runway lights were off" etc..
One could not find a better example of a pure and simple pilot error.
The runway was clear, the weather was VFR, and the airplane was working
fine. It is highly likely that this was the only airplane maneuvering
at the airport. Even if the controller had cleared him to takeoff on
runway 26, the responsibility would have been on the pilot to decline
that clearance. Yet, a perfectly good airplane was run off the runway
and ploughed into the woods.

NTSB is investigating whether the pilots had coffee that morning, and
how much sleep they got. This is a futile exercise. Taxiing and
departing from a relatively quiet airport under VFR conditions is an
extremely low workload situation. We are not talking about shooting a
non-precision approach to minimums in a thunderstorm after a full day
of flying. A pilot should be able to do this even if he had partied all
night at the bar. What happened was gross negligence.

I shudder to think that my wife and baby flew the Comair CRJ only a few
days prior to this accident. Fortunately they are flying back with me
in our trusty GA airplane. I feel a lot better about it than trusting
my family to stupid mistakes that even my students pilots know how to
avoid. I sincerely feel for those who lost loved ones. They have the
right be very angry. I am angry, and I did not lose anything.

Andrew Andrew Andrew...surely you jest. Fatigue is a really big factor in
many accidents. The work loads on t/o VFR or not is high necessitating "a
sterile cockpit" in the ops manual. That is there for a reason...that's
right to prevent mistakes. If you have ever ridden jump seat, you would know
that the atmosphere in the cockpit is different with a jump seater...those
that have, know what I mean...I am not speculating what went wrong but my
bet would be fatigue, and maybe even distraction.


"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am getting tired of comments like "controller should have warned the
pilots", or "taxiway was confusing", or "runway lights were off" etc..
One could not find a better example of a pure and simple pilot error.
The runway was clear, the weather was VFR, and the airplane was working
fine. It is highly likely that this was the only airplane maneuvering
at the airport. Even if the controller had cleared him to takeoff on
runway 26, the responsibility would have been on the pilot to decline
that clearance. Yet, a perfectly good airplane was run off the runway
and ploughed into the woods.

NTSB is investigating whether the pilots had coffee that morning, and
how much sleep they got. This is a futile exercise. Taxiing and
departing from a relatively quiet airport under VFR conditions is an
extremely low workload situation. We are not talking about shooting a
non-precision approach to minimums in a thunderstorm after a full day
of flying. A pilot should be able to do this even if he had partied all
night at the bar. What happened was gross negligence.

I shudder to think that my wife and baby flew the Comair CRJ only a few
days prior to this accident. Fortunately they are flying back with me
in our trusty GA airplane. I feel a lot better about it than trusting
my family to stupid mistakes that even my students pilots know how to
avoid. I sincerely feel for those who lost loved ones. They have the
right be very angry. I am angry, and I did not lose anything.

Here's a lovely fact I just found about the crash's lone survivor and, most
probably, the responsible party for 49 deaths:

In 1999, his wife, Ida, shot Polehinke in the stomach with a Smith & Wesson
9mm semiautomatic handgun.
...
Polehinke said the shooting was an accident. His wife told police she shot
Polehinke because she was in ''fear'' for her life after her husband
threatened to kill her during an argument, according to the police report.

Source:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...y/15384875.htm

This criminaly negligent travesty of a pilot is also a spousal abuser. Emily
et al, still going to defend this guy?

-- CD


"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
oups.com...
I am getting tired of comments like "controller should have warned the
pilots", or "taxiway was confusing", or "runway lights were off" etc..
One could not find a better example of a pure and simple pilot error.
The runway was clear, the weather was VFR, and the airplane was working
fine. It is highly likely that this was the only airplane maneuvering
at the airport. Even if the controller had cleared him to takeoff on
runway 26, the responsibility would have been on the pilot to decline
that clearance. Yet, a perfectly good airplane was run off the runway
and ploughed into the woods.

NTSB is investigating whether the pilots had coffee that morning, and
how much sleep they got. This is a futile exercise. Taxiing and
departing from a relatively quiet airport under VFR conditions is an
extremely low workload situation. We are not talking about shooting a
non-precision approach to minimums in a thunderstorm after a full day
of flying. A pilot should be able to do this even if he had partied all
night at the bar. What happened was gross negligence.

I shudder to think that my wife and baby flew the Comair CRJ only a few
days prior to this accident. Fortunately they are flying back with me
in our trusty GA airplane. I feel a lot better about it than trusting
my family to stupid mistakes that even my students pilots know how to
avoid. I sincerely feel for those who lost loved ones. They have the
right be very angry. I am angry, and I did not lose anything.

"City Dweller" wrote in message news:Gk7Jg.48303

Here's a lovely fact I just found

Your single confirmed fact is that she shot him, and on this basis you
conclude that he is an abuser. Your logic is beyond all ken.

You must be a very small person.

("City Dweller" wrote)
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/states/florida/counties/broward_county/15384875.htm

This criminaly negligent travesty of a pilot is also a spousal abuser.
Emily et al, still going to defend this guy?


How does SHE SHOT HIM (and left him to die, in a heap, on the kitchen floor)
make him a spousal abuser?

Wonder if SHE (who SHOT HIM) got any jail time? Apparently not. And yet, if
he had slapped her (with more than words) he would have been hauled away.


Montblack

Montblack wrote:
("City Dweller" wrote)
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/states/florida/counties/broward_county/15384875.htm


This criminaly negligent travesty of a pilot is also a spousal abuser.
Emily et al, still going to defend this guy?


How does SHE SHOT HIM (and left him to die, in a heap, on the kitchen
floor) make him a spousal abuser?

Wonder if SHE (who SHOT HIM) got any jail time? Apparently not. And yet,
if he had slapped her (with more than words) he would have been hauled
away.

Since my name was mentioned...

I don't think I'd like to live in a world where when a man is shot by
his wife, he's considered an abuser. Once again, you've (not you,
Montblack) crucified this poor man without knowing ANYTHING about the
situation.

First, it has zero to do with the accident and second, don't you have
ANY respect for a guy who might not survive his injuries?

That gunshot incident does have one thing to do with the plane crash. If
that brave women had aimed a little higher back in 1999, maybe those poor 49
souls would still have been alive.


"Emily" wrote in message
. ..
Montblack wrote:
("City Dweller" wrote)
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/states/florida/counties/broward_county/15384875.htm

This criminaly negligent travesty of a pilot is also a spousal abuser.
Emily et al, still going to defend this guy?


How does SHE SHOT HIM (and left him to die, in a heap, on the kitchen
floor) make him a spousal abuser?

Wonder if SHE (who SHOT HIM) got any jail time? Apparently not. And yet,
if he had slapped her (with more than words) he would have been hauled
away.

Since my name was mentioned...

I don't think I'd like to live in a world where when a man is shot by his
wife, he's considered an abuser. Once again, you've (not you, Montblack)
crucified this poor man without knowing ANYTHING about the situation.

First, it has zero to do with the accident and second, don't you have ANY
respect for a guy who might not survive his injuries?