• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ILB last won the day on May 30 2015

ILB had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

24 Excellent


About ILB

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,242 profile views
  1. Summary here: On March 20, 2019, a civilian passenger was accidentally ejected from a twin-seat Rafale B fighter jet as the aircraft was taking off from Saint-Dizier 113 airbase, eastern France. The final report of the French investigation bureau for State aviation safety (BEA-E) on the incident outlines a chain reaction of both human and technical failures, one of which unexpectedly prevented the fighter jet from crashing. The civilian passenger, identified by the report as a 64-year-old employee of a French defense manufacturer, was offered a discovery flight on a Dassault Rafale B fighter jet as a surprise by four of his colleagues, including a former pilot of the French Air Force that organized the gift. ...The passenger was examined by a doctor four hours before the flight. He was declared apt to participate in the flight, under the condition that he would not be submitted to a negative load factor. That information was not communicated to the pilot. The civilian was already nervous when he entered the cockpit, with his heart rate recorded between 136 and 142 beats per minute. The investigation found that the safety checks of the passenger had been approximate at best. He carried out most of his installation into the cockpit by himself. As a consequence, his visor was up, his anti-g pants were not worn properly, his helmet and oxygen mask were both unattached, and his seat straps were not tight enough. Following orders of a regular training mission that involved two other Rafales, the pilot took off and climbed at 47°, generating a load factor of around +4G. Then, as he leveled off, he subjected his passenger to a negative load factor of about -0.6G. “Discovering the feeling of the negative load factor, the insufficiently strapped and totally surprised passenger held onto the ejector handle and activated it unintentionally,” states the report. During the ejection, the civilian lost his helmet and oxygen mask. Due to a technical flaw of the seat, the dinghy failed to inflate, but fortunately, the incident happened above land. The passenger sustained minor injuries. The BEA-E states that the absence of experience and the lack of preparation due to the surprise caused a lot of stress on the passenger, who had “never expressed a desire to carry out this type of flight, and in particular on Rafale”. The victim said he was given close to no possibility to refuse the flight from the moment it was announced to him. The social pressure of his colleagues also contributed to the stress. Additionally to the mishandling of the passenger, the incident revealed something else: a malfunction of the ejection seat. The fighter jet was set up to, under normal conditions, eject both the pilot and his passenger when one of them pulls on the ejection handle. The BEA-E explains the procedure of a Rafale double ejection in four stages: first, the back canopy is shattered by a line of explosives embedded into the glass, before the passenger seat is ejected. Then, the front canopy is also destroyed, and the pilot seat is the last to leave the fighter jet. But in this case, the last stage failed and, despite his canopy being ejected, the pilot remained in his seat. Local media reported at the time that the glass of the canopy had slightly injured his hands. Nonetheless, he remained master of his aircraft. “He then remained calm to pilot his plane despite the multitude of failure messages that the on-board computer displays and an unusual aircraft centering following the loss of the rear seat and the canopy,” says the investigation, which analyzed the radio recordings. Strictly following the safety procedure, he set his transponder on 7700, avoided flying over inhabited areas, dumped fuel and landed successfully back at the airbase. He then evacuated the cockpit by himself, fearing that the ejection seat could activate at any time. A safety perimeter was established around the Rafale for 24 hours, after which the ejection seat was defused.
  2. My first thought was, "I'll have what she's having." My second thought was, "I don't think I'm allowed to." Sounds like someone who would vote for someone who knows how "the budget will balance itself." In fact, she might make a fine cabinet minister in said government.
  3. Damage from deadhead (tree) can be seen in video I posted above.
  4. Sounds like the hit a deadhead in the water.
  5. Our family renewed last fall when the window for renewal opened. Uneventful, completely comfortably before expiry.
  6. CADORS 2020O0353 The pilot of a Bearskin Airlines Fairchild SA227-DC (C-GJVB/BLS344) from Dryden, ON (CYHD) to Sioux Lookout, ON (CYXL) reported a loss of control during take-off, resulting in the aircraft sustaining damage. One minor injury was reported
  7. I hand-fly to about 14 000 most departures, and find that the FOs that need the practice the least, do the same. To be clear, I do need the practice. Perishable skill and all. Agree not many 738 overruns due braking performance. Landing fast is not ideal but can be managed. Land long, and there's not much hope of staying on the hard surface. Land long, and there's a higher chance other items will be delayed or forgotten, like reverse thrust. Given the sheer number of 738 overruns, you'd think Boeing and the airlines would hasten towards implementing and installing RSAT/ROPS or some version thereof. I don't think it's a matter of changing SOPs, and I'm not optimistic pilot technique will improve, once again a technology might help, like EGPWS and TCAS. Boeing Runways Situation Awareness Tools Airbus Runway Overrun Prevention System
  8. Thanks very much for sharing this, Don. Your link may be broken, is this the document? Report of the Flight Crew Human Factors Investigation for the DSB TK1951
  9. 1. Approach no. 1, hit cloud of locusts, obscured windshield, went around, climbed to 8500, depressurized, opened flight deck window, cleaned window. 2. Approach no. 2, hit cloud of locusts, obscured windshield, went around, climbed to 8500, depressurized, opened flight deck window, cleaned window. 3. Diverted. Details and pics at
  10. Are there any penalties for budgets that fail to balance themselves?
  11. A Phoenix-based Southwest Airlines flight attendant has sued the airline, accusing the Dallas-based carrier of retaliation after she reported spotting two pilots livestreaming video from the lavatory to an iPad in the cockpit on one of her flights. A suit filed in federal court for the District of Arizona alleges that on Feb. 27, 2017, Renee Steinaker was working as a flight attendant on Flight 1088 between Pittsburgh and Phoenix. The suit alleges that 2½ hours into the flight, the pilot, Capt. Terry Graham, asked Steinaker to come to the cockpit so that he could leave to use the restroom. Southwest Airlines policy requires two crew members in the cockpit at all times, so Steinaker was asked to staff the cockpit with co-pilot Ryan Russell in Graham's absence. The suit states that when Steinaker entered the cockpit, she spotted an iPad mounted to the windshield to the left of the captain’s seat. On it, she reportedly could see a live stream of what appeared to be Graham in the bathroom. The filing states that Russell looked panicked and told her the cameras were a new top-secret security measure that had been installed in all Southwest Airlines planes, which Steinaker did not believe to be true. "They led her to believe that she and others had been filmed — had been videotaped if you will — while they were using the lavatory. It's really hard to imagine a more outrageous kind of conduct," aviation attorney Ronald L.M. Goldman, who is representing Steinaker, told the Arizona Republic. Goldman is a senior partner at Baum Hedlund Aristei Goldman, with offices in California, Pennsylvania and Washington, DC. According to the court filing, Steinaker took a photograph of the iPad with her cellphone to document the incident. Upon landing, the pilots violated airline protocol and "disembarked, leaving the aircraft unattended by piloting staff," Steinaker alleges in the suit. It also claims that Graham "left a loaded firearm unattended in the cockpit, a violation of FAA regulations." Steinaker and other crew members reported the incident to the airline. The suit claims the pilots were allowed to proceed to their next flight and they continue to fly with the airline today. Steinaker claims she was told not to talk to anybody about the incident and was warned that "if this got out, if this went public, no one, I mean no one, would ever fly our airline again." Goldman also represents Steinaker's husband, David, also a Southwest flight attendant. The suit alleges the Steinakers have faced retaliation through stalking, being monitored by managers in a "threatening and bizarre manner" and being subjected to an increased number of performance audits. "In my view, Southwest Airlines has treated this as 'how dare they report it' rather than 'thank you for letting us know,'" Goldman said. In an emailed statement to the Arizona Republic, a representative for Southwest Airlines said: "The safety and security of our employees and customers is Southwest’s uncompromising priority. As such, Southwest does not place cameras in the lavatories of our aircraft. At this time, we have no other comment on the pending litigation." We reached out to the attorney representing the two pilots named in the suit by email and phone. We will update this story when we receive a response. In court, attorneys for the pilots have denied that the two engaged in livestreaming the lavatory. Court filings also deny that the two violated any airline policy or protocol. To Goldman, the incident indicates both privacy and safety concerns. "In my opinion as an aviation lawyer with many years of experience, this does compromise the safety of flight and the safety of passengers, not even to mention for the potential of violating the privacy of all of the passengers as well as the crew," Goldman said.
  12. Sometimes forgotten is that while women were enfranchised federally in 1918, for provincial elections Quebec was the last province to grant this right to women in 1940--well before non-status Indians who generally got this right in the early 50s and status Indians around 1960. Men who didn't own property also couldn't vote until around 1920.