Donating Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Vsplat last won the day on May 22

Vsplat had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

354 Excellent

1 Follower

About Vsplat

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

3,218 profile views
  1. Vsplat


    Kip, I think I heard a live rendition of that during a recent 'combined' session at ART, but the speaker was no longer in grade 5.... Vs
  2. Hmmm. This discussion seems familiar somehow. First comment - were the crew using their own devices in the flight deck. There would have been zero benefit in so doing and I have never seen this practiced at AC on any type. Even with the current generation of iPads (not available at the time of this accident), there is no vertical information of use during approach. Second, there is an error in the video - the crew saw cues which gave the impression they were runway lights, but in hindsight are believed to be from a different source. As for the PAPI and actual runway lights, the situational awareness disconnect from the controller advising lights would be at strength 5, but then failing to actually do so, is significant. A large component of this event was due to expectation bias. While removing any one of a number of factors would have changed the entire outcome, this one presented a critical threat. The difference from strength 4 to 5 is not a small increment. FWIW Vs
  3. Vsplat

    Air Canada Buy-Out Pkg

    Kip, your post reminds me of some advice a financial planner once gave my bride and me. - the best legacy one can leave their kids is a life well lived. Hope the overall trend is climbing.... Vs
  4. Vsplat

    Air Canada fined $65K

    Well, they have jurisdiction over Air Canada's dealings with consumers in India, so if the airline intends to continue operating there, they'll have to resolve this, one way or another. IMO, it is critical that this this brought back to a fact based finding, otherwise it is going to be open season for opportunists and the airlines will look like the victims in a bad zombie movie. Vs
  5. Vsplat

    Air Canada fined $65K

    Interesting juxtaposition with the article about the Emirates quarantine. It's impossible to know how sick someone actually is on the basis of symptoms on boarding. Someone sick enough to vomit while boarding could have a lot of things, some of them pretty bad. Imagine if they had taken this person and they had gone critically bad during a long haul flight - or spread an illness to passengers around them who went on to suffer bad outcomes. What would the press or courts have made of that? No winning here. I am clearly biased, but the whole thing looks a bit opportunistic to me. Vs
  6. Vsplat

    Wrong Airport

    Hmmm. While it is embarassing to line up on the wrong runway, worse is actually touching down on it. As much as this makes for great news and commentary, as has been noted above, IT KEEPS HAPPENING. Military, civilian, high tech, low tech. To me, it signals that, for all of the opinion as to what has taken place, we as an industry still have some work to do. I would suggest that ATC is part of the equation here. One of the things I keep noticing as our aircraft become better equipped is how strongly the flight deck is biased toward IFR, to the detriment of visual navigation. If I am at my minimum clean speed with flaps up, navigation by visual reference to the ground is just not that easy. We see a fraction of what 172 might. A glimpse of the wrong runway at the wrong time might look a lot like the right runway. While one can easily point to the moving map and ask, 'why did they not notice', it's hard to know what scale they had up or what approach. I would assume DOLPN was loaded and so visible, but on some older, limited databases, it is remarkable what ISN'T there. There's also the possibility that the crew had loaded the RNAV 06, which doesn't include DOLPN, so were caught off guard by the clearance, then saw the runway before they had things set up and thought they didn't have the time to go heads down. I'm pretty sure this will all be known shortly, will stand by to hear what the FAA/TSB comes out with. Vs
  7. AIP, that is true but also a very bad practice IMO. It is the antithesis of what Threat and Error Management is based on. We don't design aircraft on the premise that everything is going to work out. Most of what we train for is based on failures, including some low probability ones. The likelihood of a go around from any one of a myriad of issues, especially at a major hub, is pretty high by comparison, yet this practice of issuing a clearance which may be invalid and need to be rescinded persists. Why issue that clearance so early? The aircraft can do nothing with it at that point. I understand frequency congestion and the risk of an aircraft not getting a landing clearance when they should, short final. But in that case, what is the worst case? A go around. The same threat that would deny a crew a landing clearance has, as it turned out, reared its ugly head and prevented a crew from hearing or processing the more important 'go around' rescinding of said clearance. What is the worst case with the existing setup? Not a go around... Just another opinion...Vs
  8. The issue of both being number 2, 3 or more and also cleared to land is, well, AN ISSUE, for the very reason stated above. The landing clearance creates an expectation of landing. Expectation bias has been coming up a lot lately in assocation with bad outcomes. The fact, as stated above, is that an aircraft who is not next to touch down, but cleared to land, is in a sucker hole if the traffic ahead has an issue. We saw this recently in an SFO missed GA call, maybe this flight as well. I was out playing the other day and I got 'number 5, cleared to land' I wasn't at the marker yet.. Not all of the aircraft ahead were on TCAS. I queried my landing clearance short final as we really did not have complete visibility on the runway (smoke). I can appreciate the expediency of getting that clearance out of the way, but I don't think the tradeoff is a good one. All just my opinion Vs
  9. Vsplat

    Paging Kip

    Good to hear from you Kip. To your observation about those who have suffered... My limited time here has taught that there are those who have been lucky enough to have found the life and love that they now miss. These few never seem to say 'I know what you are going through' - they know it's not so. Instead, there is a standing close by, and with, understanding that words won't help and aren't needed. This forum is a poor substitute. But we stand with you, Kip. close by. Vs
  10. Vsplat

    Paging Kip

    I know the thread is no longer active. Same cannot be said of thoughts and concern for you and yours. When the time is right, I hope you can check in here. No expectations on how things are going, just hope for some peace down the road. Vs
  11. Vsplat

    YVR security scam at US check in?

    Thanks everyone. This was pre-screening, at the check in kiosk. I had the same read, what would a Garda person be doing that far ahead of the screening point. So maybe worth a follow up. I'll send a more formal query. Thanks again. Vs
  12. I'm not sure if this is real or fake, but I was asked and didn't have a good answer, so thought I would run it by the group here. I was told the following story. At check in for Delta, YVR to New York, while at a kiosk, the traveler was approached by someone wearing a Garda uniform. The 'Garda guy' proceeded to ask questions about travel itinerary and asked to see a passport. 'Uh, who are you?' the traveler asked. 'I am here on behalf of Delta, the TSA and Homeland Security'. (That's the part that really raised flags for me - pick one agency...). The encounter ended pretty quickly, a rather puzzling exchange. Seemed rather odd so I got the question. I asked if there was an ID badge or anything memorable, no joy. Anyone aware of Garda personnel doing this kind of thing in YVR US Check in Area? Thanks Vs
  13. Vsplat

    low-speed rejected takeoff guidance

    My $0.02. A reject at 54 knots sounds pretty benign, and can be on a low automation aircraft with a low Vmcg, where the crew conducts actions like braking and spoilers manually. Try a reject at this speed range in an A330 at full thrust on a wet or slippery runway, so far below Vmcg when the crew is trained to use autobrakes MAX (symmetric braking would be part of that) and it's a handful. ( I know this event was in an A300, never flew that type, using the closest one I know for comparison). Human factors being what they are, a crew seeing a reject would follow their reflex first, and sometime later - even half a second equates to a long distance when your gear is less than 100' from the grass - they would realise they had to revert to manual, then get a feel for the braking, (asymmetry at first application would not be that surprising), then get things aimed at centreline while the reverse was, presumably coming up asymmetrically as well. Not too hard to imagine getting some mud on the airplane in this situation. It's a scenario I've discussed more than a few times with a newcomer to the aircraft, faced with a wet runway and favoring TOGA when there is plenty of room for derate and flex. Yes, thrust is great, but it doesn't come for free. All just my opinion Vs
  14. Vsplat

    Degrees True vs Magnetic

    If the baseline assumption behind moving away from magnetic navigation is that GNSS is omnipresent and funded forever, then consider what happens if the constellation is degraded. There are a lot of scenarios where that can happen, some less likely than others, but some based on promises from the US not to dither the signal. A lot of US promises seem to be getting cancelled lately..... Vs
  15. I agree, in their current state, TC has nothing close to the resources or mandate needed to deal with 'the Georgian's of the world'. But it was not always so. SMS has meant cuts to funding, training, staff levels and a confusing, shifting, largely shrinking mandate at Transport Canada. The Minister would rather spend his time shilling for private new entrants and taking credit for their business strategies than fulfilling his mandate of protecting public interest, i.e. our passengers and employees in the sector. IMO we need another Moshansky-level look at the drift, aka the federal level of normalization of deviance, and get Transport's collective head out of the dark damp hole it is in and looking at real issues with the ability to address them. Given the missed opportunities following several significant accidents and incidents, I quake to think what it is going to take for that wakeup call. All just my opinion Vs