Fake news!  

The stuff was in his checked baggage and posed no threat to the flight in question.  Obvious illegal activity with the fake ID, loaded mags, possession of firearms when prohibited and others but the fact that he was boarding a flight is irrelevant.

On 12/4/2022 at 9:28 PM, st27 said:

Not many of these left….Packard M 2500 v 12

 

I like this - at the beginning the guy at the controls says, "It's going to be loud, does anyone want ear protection?"  There's one guy with ear protection walking around in the background - the rest of the old coots have done this before and DIDN'T HEAR THE QUESTION!

3 hours ago, Kip Powick said:

Technically we were restricted to 60 degrees of bank but I took students up and showed them that 120 degrees was easily attainable, with the correct airspeed, and light hands on the CW, as well as a very low G rollout.

120 degrees of bank and a very low G rollout?   Seems like those two things don't go together.  Unless you're talking about recovering 3000' below your entry altitude.

Well, it's fine if you only travel once or twice per year but if you're a commuter travelling 4-6 times per month the calculation becomes a little harder to justify.

Sent to me for posting by Maverick.

I'd be very surprised if anyone can get this one (the location, not the type which should be pretty easy).

Noordyn Norseman location identified correctly by J.O.

Name that aircraft.  Oh wait, that's clearly too easy.  How about; name the location.

Very impressed with the state of the aircraft - so clean and shiny.  Obviously well-cared for.  Most aircraft you see hanging in lobbies and airport terminals have faded paint and an inch of dust.

Feel free to post pictures of aircraft and aviation related places, items for others to guess.  Please send guesses to admin (or whoever posted) rather than in the thread.

33 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

Go to  http://www.avherald.com/  and see the story concerning their flight from Cancun to Toronto....and the problems associated with the flight after a loss of pressurization.....

Lots of unhappy customers..

Really?  Unhappy?  Guess that reduced fare ticket doesn't seem like such a deal now, does it?  Oh well, by the time they decide to fly again they will have forgotten about it and will buy the cheapest ticket again.  Personally, no sympathy at all.

It's odd that people will pay thousands more to buy a Toyota or Honda instead of a Chevy because they understand the value but act completely opposite when buying airline tickets and insist on choosing the absolute cheapest fare without any other consideration.

Sure, single-pilot ops or even no-pilot ops under one condition; that the executives and engineers of the company who designed the system and executives and flight ops managers of the airlines doing so and government regulators that give approval all accept personal legal and financial responsibility for any failure.  None of this shifting the costs to the shareholders and giving themselves bonuses when one splashes somewhere due to a bad circuit board or rogue voltage spike.

If they are confident enough to allow my family to fly on such a flight they should have no problem accepting responsibility.

P.S.  My family will never fly on such a flight!

7 hours ago, FA@AC said:

Curious to hear comment from our pilot members on this incident.

https://onemileatatime.com/news/qatar-airways-pilot-loses-situational-awareness/

Sounds like a somatogravic illusion.  Here is an article that describes it:

https://www.skybrary.aero/articles/somatogravic-and-somatogyral-illusions

I can tell you that the sensations and illusions that can be induced on the body by accelerations in 3 dimensions coupled with head movements and unusual visual data can be intense.  The general rule is that the pilots always follow the direction of their instruments.  In the event that the sensations the pilot is feeling do not agree with the instruments - you still follow the instruments.  This is because the instruments are usually correct and the pilot sensations are usually wrong.  This can be extremely difficult to do.

Once, in a Dash-8 I had an AHRS failure (attitude, heading reference system).  The aircraft was telling me that I was turning and climbing when I really wasn't.  Even though I was in visual conditions it was challenging due to terrain that was higher on on side than the other which made it hard to reconcile what I was seeing, what I was feeling and what the instruments were telling me.  If I was in cloud when it happened, well, you might have read about in the papers.  

Another time I was taking off at night into a blackhole with a lightly loaded aircraft.  I was using full power because of the threat of windshear.  This lead to much higher acceleration than I was used to seeing/feeling.  Shortly after takeoff I had an (almost) overpowering sensation the the nose was pitching up.  I felt that I needed to push forward HARD.  Everything in my body wanted to descend right now, push forward.  The instruments were telling me that, in fact, I needed to do the exact opposite - my higher thrust and lighter weight meant I was accelerating above the climb speed and I needed to pitch up  - this lead to an even stronger sensation to descend.  My instruments were telling me to climb, climb more, while my body was screaming descend right now!  I reverted to my training and followed the instrument while simultaneously remembering the time that the instruments failed and my body sensations were correct!  I suspect this is very similar to the situation described in your article.

A CF-18 crashed on take-off in Summerside and, as I recall, it was due to the same situation.

With all that being said I would place the 787 near the top of the list of aircraft least likely to experience this.  Modern, redundant, systems and a heads-up display along with, typically, stronger SOPs and higher use of the autopilot being the reasons.  Another reason is that the 787 is usually following some complicated SID which is really best done with the automation turned on.  The article says the pilot was hand flying without the flight director.  This is quite unusual and would not be allowed at most airlines.  I certainly don't know any pilot that would do it even if allowed - it's something for the SIM.  

The cause of the sensations the pilot felt are well-known and the way to avoid it is also well-known;  use the flight director, heads-up display and autopilot.  Of course some will say (and I've said it myself) that we should encourage hand-flying for competency.  This is true but, if a pilot wants to do this, they must backstop it with techniques to mitigate the threats.  When my partner says, "I'm going to hand fly for a while" I stop everything else I'm doing that is non-essential and closely watch the instruments to easier catch the incipient stage of the situations described above rather than pulling out the logbook and doing paperwork or looking at the charts.

10 minutes ago, st27 said:

There are concerns about increased union dues…but you get what you pay for.

I think this has be debunked.  ALPA has been reducing dues as their numbers have grown and ACPA is set to raise their's.  From what I've seen the difference is trivial and, in any case, from what I've heard most pilots would gladly pay double for "something" rather than what they currently pay for "nothing" as you said.

8 hours ago, Vsplat said:

Probably the biggest weakness ACPA has is that it is wholly bounded within Air Canada.  As the track record so sadly shows, every time the association/union/whatever ACPA thinks it is this week goes to the table, the company threatens the big red button and the MEC folds.  

 

This is what I think too.  AC knows if they can control the handful of pilots on the MEC they control the whole pilot group.  At least with ALPA there will be some part of the union structure, some advice or consultation process that exists outside of MEC or AC control.  

I'm under no delusions, as some are, that joining ALPA will provide "adult supervision" and wholly prevent incompetence and malfeasance. I know that each airline group essentially runs their own operation but at least with ALPA there will be occasional opportunities for outside comment, advice and even criticism unlike the current closed-loop where virtually everything is hidden behind NDAs and communication protocols.

1 hour ago, UpperDeck said:

 

ACPA has enjoyed a fairly productive relationship with AC from its inception.

Are we talking about the same ACPA?  Yeah, productive - if you're talking about "producing" bonus payouts for management!

Yes, I know, someone will send me a PM telling me my participation will taint the discussion.  I won't say more and, naturally,  encourage any and all opinion.

11 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

However, their suitcases remained there for more than three months.

 

 

I am not defending the airline's colossal screw up   but........

I guess I am just too simple minded........but if it was me, the moment I knew it was in Etobicoke, and knew the location ,....... I would be on my skateboard heading for the "luggage dump" . 

If the damned luggage was that important why would anyone wait over 3 months ??????

Yeah, actually 4 months.  My opinion is that it was a setup from the get go.  Self serve baggage tagging in YUL.  So they print a tag but don't put it on the bag, remove any id and contact information, drop an airtag into the inside pocket and send the bag down the belt.  Wait 4 months until the bag moves and drop a bunch of videos, tweets - fame and notoriety follows.  High likelihood of cash and prizes (free trips, etc).  

The Caproni Ca.60 Transaereo, often referred to as the Noviplano (nine-wing) or Capronissimo, was the prototype of a large nine-wing flying boat intended to become a 100-passenger transatlantic airliner. It featured eight engines and three sets of triple wings.

Only one example of this aircraft, designed by Italian aviation pioneer Gianni Caproni, was built by the Caproni company. It was tested on Lake Maggiore in 1921: its brief maiden flight took place on February 12 or March 2.  Its second flight was March 4; shortly after takeoff, the aircraft crashed on the water surface and broke up upon impact. The Ca.60 was further damaged when the wreck was towed to shore and, in spite of Caproni's intention to rebuild the aircraft, the project was soon abandoned because of its excessive cost. The few surviving parts are on display at the Gianni Caproni Museum of Aeronautics and at the Volandia aviation museum in Italy.

Crazy stuff.  For the guys who think regular drag racing lacks excitement I guess.

On 1/17/2023 at 11:25 AM, Kip Powick said:

Khatiwada was a captain and was flying with an instructor pilot for additional training at the time of the crash, Bartaula added.

Not often you hear of a crash with an instructor as a crew member.

Air Canada came to their pilots asking for contract concessions to have the ability to train the huge number of pilots they projected they would need for summer 2023.  This was rejected (no gain for the pilots).  I would say that the schedule for summer 2023 is not designed to "withhold flights and boost demand" but rather a realistic schedule based on the crews they project they will actually have to fly the aircraft..

Kip, you're not wrong.  An experienced pilot will often intuitively understand what needs to be done.  For a simple example;  an uncontrollable pitch up situation could be managed with rolling the aircraft to reduce the lift vector - throw the aircraft into a 45 or 60 degree bank and the pitch up is "controlled".  This leads to other situations that must be managed but deals with the initial problem at least.

This reminds me of a situation described to me by a student pilot - engine failure in a light twin at low speed and low altitude.  Tough situation no doubt.  The correct recovery is a combination of lowering the nose, banking into the good engine and (possibly) reducing power.  All in relation to how much climb you need and how much rudder authority you have.  This is not really "trainable"  it must come from experience and seat-of-the-pants.

I recently had a situation where the modern, complex aircraft I fly did not follow the FMS programming for the complicated SID departure and I had to disconnect and hand fly it.  Not a Chuck Yeager level intervention but I could totally see how someone with less experience would have defaulted to trying to use the automation to save it rather than hand flying with a different outcome.  The probable outcome would have been an airspace violation rather than an accident but still - turning off the automation was the correct thing to do.

3 hours ago, Skeptic said:

and of course Lawyers may make some money out of the events.

Passengers encouraged to sue after spending hours stuck on planes at YVR during snowstorm

Passengers encouraged to sue over travel nightmare at YVR | CTV News

Gabor Lukacs, naturally.  Well, in this case he's right, the passengers should sue but not the airlines.  The passengers should sue the airport authority.  Frozen bridges and impassable ramps are not the airlines' responsibility.

Personally, just once I'd like to see Gabor get his wish - at exactly 4:00 hrs, blow the slides and deplane the passengers to the ramp because you know after 4:00 hrs they must be deplaned!

9 minutes ago, deicer said:

 

The same mistakes are made every year with the same excuses made every year.  

No changes are made with regards to preparation or execution.

 

The changes aren't made because the changes would cost money.  They know a major storm will happen eventually and they know the system will collapse and just accept it rather than spending money to prepare.

It's like what just happened in Vancouver; not enough trucks to clear the runways, not enough deicing capacity so everything cancelled for 4 days, thousands stranded.  Do you think this is a surprise to the airport authority?   Hah!  They'll pay themselves bonuses for how well they handled the "crisis".  These are not "mistakes" - they are decisions made with consequences known.

I do have to say however that over the last 10 years or so I have seen more proactive moves made by airlines in advance of major weather events - cancelling flights well ahead of the storm, flying all the aircraft out of the forecast storm area.  This does nothing to help the passengers get where they need to be but does say the airlines lots of money.