PSA Procedures Page: 1 of 1

BFSGrad
September 27, 2025, 16:09:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11960626

Quote:

Originally Posted by layman54

The best (in my view) argument against the airlines is that it was PSA policy that their pilots should not accept a diversion from runway 1 to runway 33 if they had not already briefed this approach (in addition to briefing the approach to runway 1). The pilot in charge hadn't done this but nevertheless accepted the diversion. This looks bad of course but there is little reason to believe that the omission of the briefing made any difference.

I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn\x92t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident.

Reviewing the 5342 CVR, runway 33 was not included in the CA/PF\x92s approach briefing about 35 minutes prior to the expected landing time. The CA/PF did do an abbreviated briefing for 33 after the circle 33 option was accepted.

Subjects ATC PSA Procedures

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

RatherBeFlying
September 27, 2025, 16:33:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11960646

Quote:

I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn’t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident.

The airline lawyers will point to the many ignored near miss reports in arguing that this accident was waiting to happen and that it was just luck that this accident didn't happen sooner.

The plaintiff lawyers would have a better argument against the airline if they had deviated from the approach.

Subjects ATC Accident Waiting to Happen Close Calls PSA Procedures

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

layman54
September 29, 2025, 03:56:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11961297

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

I guess the question is what is the alternative world. The pilots could also have followed PSA procedures by briefing both approaches. Which seems to be the correct thing to do if they were willing to accept the alternative approach. In which case it seems likely that the crash would still have occurred in just about the same way. The legal complaint does make some (unconvincing in my view) suggestions that the delayed briefing could have distracted the pilots just enough so that they didn't recognize the danger from the helicopter in time.

Subjects ATC PSA Procedures

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Musician
September 29, 2025, 09:41:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11961394

Quote:

Originally Posted by layman54

I think it's not unreasonable to assume that words being exchanged in the cockpit/the extra workload prevented the pilots from noticing the ATC transmissions to the helicopter, and that would have impaired their situational awareness. Situational awareness is required for safe flight, especially in congested airspace.

If the SOP requirement was instituted by the airline out of a safety concern, to reduce the workload on the pilots during that critical phase of flight, then that has a bearing on how responsibility is apportioned.

Subjects ATC PSA Procedures Situational Awareness

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

ATC Watcher
September 29, 2025, 22:00:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11961755

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

Thais reminds me of the trail of the "Herald of Free Enterprise" ferry back in 80s. The Company procedure was clear : it was prohibited to start moving the RORO ferry if the front door was still open . But it had become common practice to gain time ,to leave harbor while the doors were closing When the guy in charge of the door overslept during his break the door remained fully open while the ship was leaving port , and when accelerating water came in and the boat capsized .killing 200 people . During the trail the company executives showed the SOP, and got away with blame , The Guy that overslept and the captain took all the blame . (All this from memory , check Internet for the full report if you want more info)

We could maybe potentially see something similar here , blaming the PSA captain for accepting without prior briefing a visual Circle 33 to gain time , things he probably had done many times before to the satisfaction of his employer .

@ WillowRun 6-3 : Is normalization of deviance a mitigating circumstances in the US legal system ?

Subjects ATC PSA Procedures

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

BFSGrad September 27, 2025, 16:09:00 GMT permalink Post: 11960626	Quote: Originally Posted by layman54 The best (in my view) argument against the airlines is that it was PSA policy that their pilots should not accept a diversion from runway 1 to runway 33 if they had not already briefed this approach (in addition to briefing the approach to runway 1). The pilot in charge hadn't done this but nevertheless accepted the diversion. This looks bad of course but there is little reason to believe that the omission of the briefing made any difference. I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn\x92t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident. Reviewing the 5342 CVR, runway 33 was not included in the CA/PF\x92s approach briefing about 35 minutes prior to the expected landing time. The CA/PF did do an abbreviated briefing for 33 after the circle 33 option was accepted. Subjects ATC PSA Procedures Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
RatherBeFlying September 27, 2025, 16:33:00 GMT permalink Post: 11960646	Quote: I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn’t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident. The airline lawyers will point to the many ignored near miss reports in arguing that this accident was waiting to happen and that it was just luck that this accident didn't happen sooner. The plaintiff lawyers would have a better argument against the airline if they had deviated from the approach. Subjects ATC Accident Waiting to Happen Close Calls PSA Procedures Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
layman54 September 29, 2025, 03:56:00 GMT permalink Post: 11961297	Quote: Originally Posted by BFSGrad I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn\x92t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident. Reviewing the 5342 CVR, runway 33 was not included in the CA/PF\x92s approach briefing about 35 minutes prior to the expected landing time. The CA/PF did do an abbreviated briefing for 33 after the circle 33 option was accepted. I guess the question is what is the alternative world. The pilots could also have followed PSA procedures by briefing both approaches. Which seems to be the correct thing to do if they were willing to accept the alternative approach. In which case it seems likely that the crash would still have occurred in just about the same way. The legal complaint does make some (unconvincing in my view) suggestions that the delayed briefing could have distracted the pilots just enough so that they didn't recognize the danger from the helicopter in time. Subjects ATC PSA Procedures Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
Musician September 29, 2025, 09:41:00 GMT permalink Post: 11961394	Quote: Originally Posted by layman54 I guess the question is what is the alternative world. The pilots could also have followed PSA procedures by briefing both approaches. Which seems to be the correct thing to do if they were willing to accept the alternative approach. In which case it seems likely that the crash would still have occurred in just about the same way. The legal complaint does make some (unconvincing in my view) suggestions that the delayed briefing could have distracted the pilots just enough so that they didn't recognize the danger from the helicopter in time. I think it's not unreasonable to assume that words being exchanged in the cockpit/the extra workload prevented the pilots from noticing the ATC transmissions to the helicopter, and that would have impaired their situational awareness. Situational awareness is required for safe flight, especially in congested airspace. If the SOP requirement was instituted by the airline out of a safety concern, to reduce the workload on the pilots during that critical phase of flight, then that has a bearing on how responsibility is apportioned. Subjects ATC PSA Procedures Situational Awareness Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.
ATC Watcher September 29, 2025, 22:00:00 GMT permalink Post: 11961755	Quote: Originally Posted by BFSGrad I think the point here is that, had the 5342 pilots followed PSA procedures (i.e., not accepting an approach that wasn\x92t previously briefed), they would have refused the circle 33 offer by ATC, thereby avoiding the accident. Reviewing the 5342 CVR, runway 33 was not included in the CA/PF\x92s approach briefing about 35 minutes prior to the expected landing time. The CA/PF did do an abbreviated briefing for 33 after the circle 33 option was accepted. Thais reminds me of the trail of the "Herald of Free Enterprise" ferry back in 80s. The Company procedure was clear : it was prohibited to start moving the RORO ferry if the front door was still open . But it had become common practice to gain time ,to leave harbor while the doors were closing When the guy in charge of the door overslept during his break the door remained fully open while the ship was leaving port , and when accelerating water came in and the boat capsized .killing 200 people . During the trail the company executives showed the SOP, and got away with blame , The Guy that overslept and the captain took all the blame . (All this from memory , check Internet for the full report if you want more info) We could maybe potentially see something similar here , blaming the PSA captain for accepting without prior briefing a visual Circle 33 to gain time , things he probably had done many times before to the satisfaction of his employer . @ WillowRun 6-3 : Is normalization of deviance a mitigating circumstances in the US legal system ? Subjects ATC PSA Procedures Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context. No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes'). Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Posts about: "PSA Procedures" [Posts: 5 Page: 1 of 1]¶