Posts by user "Good Business Sense" [Posts: 11 Total up-votes: 0 Pages: 1]

Good Business Sense
June 12, 2025, 18:16:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11899563
Originally Posted by Sriajuda
You have heard AC with the RAT deployed HUNDREDS of times? The RAT is a last resort, when all other power sources have failed. All engines, the APU and (possibly) batteries on AC as the 787. Yet you have heard hundreds of RAT deployments passing overhead? Yeah, sure.
Yep, total rubbish - 45 years airline flying - deployed it only once and never saw it anywhere else.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): APU  RAT (All)  RAT (Deployment)

Good Business Sense
June 12, 2025, 18:21:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11899570
Don't know the TODA, TORA set up there but don't forget aircraft performance is to hit a 35 foot screen height and the use of reduced thrust means it will be at the very, very end of the runway - it's what's done almost every take-off of a jet to preserve engine performance

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
June 13, 2025, 06:07:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11900032
Couldn't agree more - never understood this - got to say, calling a mayday seconds into an event (particularly when still down in the dirt) does my head in - nobody is coming up to help. I think you need to keep the focus completely on the task at hand. In an emergency, external distractions destroy checklist SOPs, crew coordination etc etc - I try and keep ATC, company maintenance, etc etc disruptions out of the cockpit until everything is under control.

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): MAYDAY

Good Business Sense
June 13, 2025, 06:17:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11900050
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
No, no, no and again no.

This is a transport category aircraft. It will happily climb on one engine to a safe altitude where procedures are followed.

There is zero evidence of any engine "failures" or shutdowns by the crew.

However the gear is still down at around 500' agl.
Can I just strongly agree add a bit more ....... no, no, no

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
June 20, 2025, 17:26:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11907148
Originally Posted by Shep69
That\x92s what got me headed down the low altitude capture route. While the mind does really strange things post traumatic event \x97 and memory and recollection are greatly affected by it \x97 if true it means that thrust was lost but the engines stayed lit.

There may have been other electrical and systems malfunctioning. But if whatever happened, let\x92s say the auto throttle simply pulled power to idle \x97or a low power setting\x97at a critical time. Perhaps on its own perhaps with other systems failures.

We like to think it basic that we\x92d slam the throttles forward. Right away.

But Asiana didn\x92t.

And neither did Air Florida years ago.
I think you could be right - I've been thinking for some time that we may have had another similar incident - the Dubai incident was also an example, i.e. when nothing happened after pressing a button nobody took manual control - been getting worse over the last 25 years or so, i.e. people not taking control manually (assuming it's possible) when they don't get what they want or expect from the systems.

I guess we'll get some info soon

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
July 13, 2025, 18:07:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11921499
Originally Posted by wtsmg
I assure you, if both donkeys start rolling back and the other guy asks why I closed the masters when I hadn't, that fact is extremely likely to verbalised.

I would look at this from the other way and suggest it doesn't sit right as if someone had just done it deliberately, seconds after rotation, why would they bother denying it, if you see what I mean?

Agreed - our ex. colleagues facebook group of some 200 ex heavy guys thought that, perhaps, it was to shift the blame. The investigators only know the switches were set to off then on and who said what but not who did what.

If the FO was flying he would be rotating to a target climb out pitch / following FDs and probably glancing out too and he'd certainly be busy, probably too busy to see the Captain move the switches and his first indication would be a deceleration together with the EICAS/ECAM displaying dozens of warnings with associated audio ......can't imaging the FO, whilst flying, turned to the left and shutdown both engines and the Captain never saw it or intervened .... doing all this as he pretty much as he rotated. If I was in the left seat I would have caught the FO's arm before he touched a switch. The transcript, actual words and voice tones will be very illuminating and, of course, we may have more surprises to come.

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
July 13, 2025, 18:18:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11921508
Yeh, about 10,000 hours on both it was a general comment for those not familiar - can't remember on old Boeings and Douglas aircraft but it was the CAWP on Lockheeds - also and can't remember on the other dozen types - important stuff, this but the names don't matter, it's the "warning panel", if you like.

Last edited by Good Business Sense; 13th July 2025 at 18:29 .

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
July 13, 2025, 18:23:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11921515
You're just checking ! I would expect your comment from a low timer - good luck

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
July 13, 2025, 20:20:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11921606
Yep, it's the consensus of many. They know the switches went off then on, they know what each crew member said (perhaps) but they don't know who did the switching ....... no doubt more surprises on the way

Subjects: None

Good Business Sense
July 13, 2025, 20:22:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11921611
Good advice when talking into a mirror - what it's got to do with EICAS v ECAM I don't know but it does explain why you were "checking" - good luck

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): EICAS

Good Business Sense
July 13, 2025, 20:28:00 GMT
permalink
Post: 11921620
Could be - we have a group of some 200 or so oldies ex. airline who had a thrash at this subject this morning - if you know how the system works (FDR, CVR, accident investigation, etc.) you could suggest that you could manipulate the scenario and that it would be hard to prove who actually did it. The transcripts with the actual words, tones and emotions could well point to who did it but could it be proved?

Subjects (links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context): CVR  FDR