Posts by user "CayleysCoachman" [Posts: 5 Total up-votes: 36 Pages: 1]

What a profoundly disappointing thread. In my days at the cutting edge, sometimes working the kinds of events which make big headlines here, we’d sometimes sit in the bar, on day four or five, seldom sooner as it was so full-on, and joke about the garbage being posted here, and by then in more-or-less full knowledge of the facts. I don’t have that inside line anymore but I still understand its nature, its scope, its precision, its clarity.

Ladies and gentlemen, get a hobby. Go fishing, read books, arrange flowers, spot birds, do crosswords. All of those things have some purpose and deliver some sense of achievement. What’s happening here is just puerile, pointless, conjecture. It’s ill-informed, if I’m kind, and importantly it’s hugely damaging to the many bereaved folk who ARE READING THIS THREAD in the hope of enlightenment, and whose night terrors may be filled with your ramblings. To them I apologise, on behalf of the industry. I’m sorry you have to be confused by these things.

I am hopeful that the investigation team will have almost full comprehension in a few days, curtesy of the flight recorders. It would be wonderful if they shared it promptly, but I suspect we’ll wait at least two years, perhaps much more. For me, that’s the issue here, the investigatory world’s unwillingness to share facts.

I'm really trying to resist engaging here, but anyone who states what pilots, 'would', do in a given situation, simply hasn't grasped the most elementary, 1.01, fundamentals of human behaviour.

Again and again, I've listened to CVRs, or looked at FDR plots, or sat next to people in a flight deck or crew room, or restaurant, or anywhere (but especially in the back of a simulator)... and pondered what on earth led competent individuals to do what I had just witnessed. Of course, if the individuals aren't competent to start with (and that is NOT directed at this crew, but embellishes my point) there may be less mystery.

Also worth remembering, for those of us who do, the ludicrous training delivered by Airbus on the A320 family at the start, when they told people that, (a) pulling the stick back and holding it there will save you, and, (b) you don't need unusual attitude training in an FBW aircraft. I think we know how that played out. I'll add an element of my briefing for a departure in a single-engined aircraft, if a forced landing was not an option (eg Rochester, Biggin Hill), which also covers what I have always thought I would do faced with total power loss in a bigger machine, 'I will manoeuvre the aircraft to hit the softest thing I can, as slowly as possible'. Very glad I never had to see that through.

No. The investigation team will. \x91We\x92 might in 2028 perhaps. That\x92s the fundamental failing of Annex 13 and all who play by its rules now. It worked in 1980, just, but it\x92s totally unfit for purpose in 2025.

No. The investigation team will. ‘We’ might in 2028 perhaps. That’s the fundamental failing of Annex 13 and all who play by its rules now. It worked in 1980, just, but it’s totally unfit for purpose in 2025.

No, because people have answers but unreasonably keep them secret.. I don’t think you’ve been a State SIA investigator. I’ve worked many cases in which we had a very clear, comprehensive, understanding, months or at worst several years before it was shared. I do understand why SIAs take so long, I just came to realise there’s no reason for it, and I’ve seen the damage it does. The huge majority of crashes don’t involve a, ‘major technical flaw’, why should that be the qualification for telling people, including those very grievously and deeply affected, the truth? Then there’s the awful history of secretive draft reports (the old 12.1) and final reports - Clutha qv. It’s beyond time for change.