Zan Vetter

Members
  • Content count

    399
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Zan Vetter last won the day on March 20

Zan Vetter had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

137 Excellent

About Zan Vetter

  • Rank
    3

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    YYZ

Recent Profile Visitors

2,801 profile views
  1. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/air-canada-flight-wheel-montreal-london-1.4073463 Lost a wheel before takeoff. Obviously the crew didn't know. I would love to know the circumstances under which the wheel was discovered to be missing. Was it found on the grass at YUL? Did the aircraft already land in LHR and it was discovered after landing by maintenance?
  2. I wonder what Dr. Dao's legal argument will be for felony disobeying a crewmember? Because I already paid, I crossed the threshold, they scanned my boarding pass, I already slipped my shoes off... He was wrong but he'll get paid. United should sue the cops.
  3. I can't see how a kind of knee-jerk ban of overselling might help avoid something like this. Denied boarding is different from overselling, and happens all the time. I can see United perhaps revising the cap on how much an agent can offer as compensation. But eliminating it entirely? Doubt it. As for just moving on to another passenger, it's definitely an option, although I think we sell the agent in this case a little short when we suggest something as obvious as that. Clearly, nobody on the plane was budging, even as the cops were preparing to bash that guy's head off the armrest, everyone in the cabin is sitting there with a, "glad that's not ME" look on their face, still snug in their seat. I'm alright Jack. Obviously, the cops went overboard. But as "pilot's wife" said, disobeying law enforcement on an airplane isn't going to end well, no matter how aggrieved you feel or how high the moral ground is that you believe you're occupying.
  4. I'm surprised at the quite frankly ignorant takes on this thread from people who work/worked in this business. It appears that, per United corporate comms and their CEO, that the oversold/deboarding process was followed. Yes, the passenger paid for his seat. No, that doesn't entitle him to unlimited rights. I can't support the injuries he sustained but, when asked by the airline- after their voluntary and involuntary deboarding process has been complete, and then by the police to deplane, and you refuse, what do you envision the next scene looking like? Police backing down/allowing you to travel? I imagine that the crew attempting to board were positioning for an early flight the next day. Let's say at 0600. If they travel on the 2100 departure instead of the 1740, the next mornings flight is delayed. So it isn't difficult to understand why United attempted to deboard 4 pax that day, give them each $800 or $1000, send them at 2100, rather than send the crew on the 2100 flight thereby inconveniencing 75 passengers and likely busting several dozen connections in ORD the next day. And, it bears mentioning that denied boarding is not the same as overselling. We don't know if this flight was oversold, only that, for some reason United wanted to deny boarding to 4 people. Three of whom, it bears mentioning, got off the plane without fanfare.
  5. I've been on the airbus for 8 years, and still learning every day. The other key difference with V/S is that you would, based on your crosscheck, adjust V/S inside the FAF to remain on your profile. With FPA, at least at my airline, we are prohibited from adjusting the selected FPA inside the FAF. This perhaps takes pilots a bit outside the mental space of maintaining a running groundspeed/altitude/descent rate(path) crosscheck because in blunt terms, you can't do anything about it anyway. Just fly to MDA and see or don't see the runway, and then land or go around. It's less work, perhaps less error prone, but it's also more reliant on the aircraft doing what it's been told to do.
  6. Story was that they had selected the neo after intense scrutiny and to the surprise of everyone not in the inner, innermost room, ended up ordering the MAX. That's all I know.
  7. So FPA is basically the same as having to increase V/S when manually creating a CDA the old way. Thanks to Rich for the math, it made clear that we're merely descending through more height loss in cold temps, something that was previously clear when having to just fly a higher V/S. My misunderstanding was due to the misconception that FPA was somehow an improvement on that method, when rather it is just another way. With respect to the lawsuit, it would be unlikely to fly a wildly incorrect V/S, and would be immediately obvious (by looking at the VSI) if the aircraft wasn't performing as selected. It is far less clear if or when the aircraft is flying a bad FPA; and mental math to crosscheck inside the FAF is difficult to keep up with from a workload perspective particularly on nights like the one in question. Which was the main improvement of FPA over V/S- less workload. Only it now appears that perhaps we lost a key crosscheck insofar as having to trust that the aircraft actually followed the selected FPA.
  8. Coulda had the Neo, if not for him. Now he's gone. Huh
  9. FPA on the airbus is an easily misunderstood feature, speaking for myself only. To wit, if you compensate your FAF-crossing altitude for cold temp by some nominal amount (300 feet, say), you've only just placed your flight path back on the normal profile. Yet, we also then add compensation (increase) to the FPA (-3.3 vs -3.0 say), directing the aircraft to fly a steeper approach angle, as if the aircraft were going to cross the FAF higher than the normal alt, thus needing to descend steeper to arrive at the MDA+50 at the MAP. Explanations as to why this is, to me, have always fallen short; mostly I get some kind of reference to FPA being a path "in space", calculated by the FMS, therefore this-and-that. Which has never made complete sense to me. If you cross the FAF at the right height AGL, which is what your compensated FAF-crossing altitude is for, I've always stumbled when attempting to understand why FPA needs to increase. It is after all a selected approach, not a managed approach, which has always meant to me that the crew inputs are primary, and there is no calculated- or pseudo-path angle in play. Anyhow, I follow the procedures as published, use the charts as directed and trained, as I'm sure this crew did as well. It's always worked out, but I've only done it in weather significantly better than that of this accident. Bottom line, how the airbus calculates and flies its flight path angle vis a vis the FPA angle selected by the flight crew is in no way transparent or clear. So the crew would not have a clear signal if it was in error somehow, until they got to the MAP. So without commenting on the possible outcome of the lawsuit, it doesn't surprise me at all that it exists.
  10. SNOTFARM (airbus) Status page, notams, oil level, temp corrections, fuel level, approach briefing, runway condition, missed approach intentions
  11. Like I said, it probably doesn't break even year to year. There is a moral component I believe that isn't quantifiable, per se. As for comparisons, look to USA, where many people's lives are just one health issue away from total destruction. It used to be referred to as the social safety net. I agree that it's warm embrace has expanded too far and begun to strangle, but the premise is valid. Ever notice that the fire department doesn't ask how the fire was started, they just put it out?
  12. I just hosted a B787 captain in the jump seat. He asked about my career progression which I said I'd been in the LHS for 3 yrs and with the company for 10. I'm 39. He said that he spent 8 yrs sideways, then 8 yrs RHS before upgrading at age 39, which can sound a bit like sour grapes but I know wasn't intended that way. Doing the math, note that I was hired at a major at 29, he at 23. Needless to say I take all "I spent almost two decades at a major before command" stories with a very large grain of salt. Today, it is possible although not likely to be hired at a major at age 25, and be in the LHS within 3 yrs. I'm also quite sure that neither of us would trade places with this fictional third pilot.
  13. Universal health care is just that- universal. Judgement just isn't part of it and that's why it works. The societal benefits outweigh the costs, and no it probably doesn't break even on a year by year basis. For example of an alternate system please observe the Americans.
  14. A hexagon or octagon might work, a circle not so much. A banked runway! Ha
  15. Shortage is like the oil 'shortage' back in 2007. We were just all out of the $30, $40, $50 oil. Now it's $150. Still lots of it, it just costs more. Same for pilots. Same for everything. FWIW I think the 1500-hr rule is as good as gone. So much of safety is at the org level, culture, training, support. I'll side with the notion that broadly, performance has more to do with attitude than hours. Hours help, and anyone who has lots knows, the job is easier when you have procedures AND experience to rely on. Can't help but notice though that many insurance companies still want hours. It's the quickest metric and there is no arguing the fact that a 2500+400 hour crew would be less safe on balance than a 4000+2000 hour crew. I don't think there is any evidence to suggest though that after a certain level, perhaps 10,000 hours that this makes any difference at all, and it is all down to the individual professionalism of the crew and the general culture of the airline.