CRJ crash at KLEX:

The talking heads are are making an issue of only one tower controller
being on duty.
Has the controllers union started a behind the scenes whisper campaign?

Reducing the risk of it happening again isn't the only objective.
Somtimes people need to take responsibility.

They did. By dying.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Emily" wrote in message

It's not a criminal act. It was a horrible mistake.

While I generally support your outlook, Emly, it is worth pointing out that
courts in the past have established the precedent of holding air carrier
pilots to the "highest degree of care", the same professional standard to
which physicians, attornies, and other highly trained professionals are held
in questions of liability, rather than the broader "reasonable degree of
care" standard, usually applied to the general population.

JG

"Tony" wrote in message

And isn't it true that both would have had to operate from that airport
before they could carry passengers?

No.

Ron Natalie wrote:
Stefan wrote:
Dice wrote:

Before you start blaming the crew, look at how the plane would taxi
from the terminal building on taxiway alpha to the departure end of
either 22 or 26.

Or, better yet, take a direct look with Google earth. The picture
quality is very detailed for this area. When I looked at the picture and
imagined the situation of the pilots, I *have* understood how such an
error can occur. Note: I say understand, I don't say excuse.


Here's where a well equipped GA aircraft trumps the airlines (possibly).
When I'm on the ground at an airport with an approach, I get my position
superimposed over the aircraft diagram. I'm surprised though. Close
to 20 years ago I was in the cockpit of one of UPS's 767's. Their
inertial nav system displayed the position we were on the cargo ramp
to the programmed departure runway as well.

Even when I am a passenger on an airline, I often watch the black &
white numbers on the side of the runway that tells you how much runway
is left.

wrote:

Emily wrote:

I believe cause is the better word. Instead of blaming the crew for
choosing the wrong runway, we need to find out WHY they did. Without
the why, the same mistake can be repeated. When I get word that someone
at work screwed up, I don't "blame" them, I work through the situation
to find out what happened and how to keep it from happening again. The
key is learning what happened so it can't be repeated, not finding out
who's to blame.


Well put.
I hope pilots look for the cause.
Looking for blame? Leave that to the lawyers; I'm sure they've already
started.

Personally, I think it better if pilots and people skilled in the
"trade" are involved in both cause determination and blame assessment.
Both are too important to leave to lawyers.

Matt

Emily wrote:

Bob Noel wrote:

In article ,
Emily wrote:

Blaming doesn't keep it from happening again.


Reducing the risk of it happening again isn't the only objective.
Somtimes people need to take responsibility.


It's not a criminal act. It was a horrible mistake. Get over yourself.

Assigning blame has nothing to do with being a crime or not. It is
simply a matter of determining who is responsible for the accident.

Matt

"Tony" wrote in message
ups.com...
In fact, I'd appreciate someone offering a
reasonable theory that does not implicate the pilots.

This OP states
"Accelerate-stop for this A/C at this weight should be some 5356 feet."

OK, but what is the ground roll for this A/C at this weight. If
Accellerate-Stop distance is 5356 ft, couldn't it get off the ground in 3500
ft?

I doubt the *CAUSE* of the crash was use of a short runway. I suspect it was
a contributing factor.

"The grace of God", and training, and checklists as well as attentive
crew in the cockpit.

Think about the sequence of errors that had to cascade for this
accident to happen. The guy in the tower's line of sight didn't allow
him to see the airplane was at the wrong threshold: in fact, I wouldn't
be surprised if whoever was manning the radios in the airplane didn't
switch to tower well before the threshold so they could roll on and
start their takeoff right away. If it was standard language, it might
have gone like "Delta (or whoever) flight NNNN is ready for takeoff on
Runway 22" and was cleared to go. Just thinking about it, that's a
pretty safe bet.

I hate when the price for an error is death but that price is paid
every day but usually though, it takes a goodly number of accidents to
that many innocent deaths.

If it's not on your checklist, add "verify the DG matches the runway
heading before advancing power for takeoff." My experience is, that
will catch a failed vacuum pump, not a wrong runway. I also like to
have one of the navs tuned to the ILS frequency and it's NOT because I
never see the localizer needle centered when I fly an approach!




HankPilot2002 wrote:
I also fly Regional Jets for another carrier. As to "Jees they let
anyone fly them" ...thats an apalling statement and totally uncalled
for.

We are required by company policy to have the airport diagram open and
in view at all times on the ground. Checking taxiway signage and the
red and white runway numbering signs is common practice for both
crewmembers. We are required to read back all taxi and hold short
clearances. I am surprised that such an experienced crew made that
fatal mistake.

We are also required to verify adequate performance from any runway we
are going to use. Do we have enough runway and do we have climb
performance based on our weight, temperature and runway length?

I have made my share of mistakes as a pilot but thanks to some great
Captains and very comprehensive training it always turned out well.

There but for the grace of God go I.

Hank


Bush wrote:
6:10 PM the National Transportation Safety Board confirmed that
the Comair flight was assigned departure from runway 22, however
departed runway 26 (3500 ft.) since it was closer to the terminal.
Accelerate-stop for this A/C at this weight should be some 5356 feet.
Jees they'll let anyone fly them.

"It is that large chain of events, with no intervening variable, that
produces the accident"

Bush

Tony schrieb:

If it was standard language, it might
have gone like "Delta (or whoever) flight NNNN is ready for takeoff

No. "Ready for departure" would be standard phraseology. Written with
blood in Teneriffa.

Stefan