Canoehead

Members
  • Content count

    276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Canoehead last won the day on February 8

Canoehead had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

63 Excellent

About Canoehead

  • Rank
    3
  1. It would depend on why the airplane got to this place to begin with, not the go-around itself. If there were difficulties in aircraft control due to a system malfunction of any type, that would classify as a TSB reportable incident. That's not likely the case here. However I'm sure that WJ has their own list "company reportable incidents", and I'd be surprised if a go-around isn't one of the many items (as it is at our company).
  2. Thanks Malcom. I understand that the prop brake was possibly a contributing factor to a similar incident of an Inter Canadien ATR-42 back in the 90's. Although I'm not sure it was a complete prop assembly loss. Surely someone here is familiar with that incident.
  3. Does anyone know if the Saab has a "prop brake" like the ATR-42 did/does? Or is the GE engine even a free-turbine like the Pratts?
  4. I disagree boestar. If there's a procedure in place that requires this to be done, the contracted outstation handlers aren't following it. And I'll point out that the picture posted is at a "mini-hub" complete with our own ground-handlers and line maintenance. And again, that was forecast to happen... Nothing diligent there.
  5. Unfortunately they aren't used enough. Porter is quite diligent though in using theirs from what I've seen. It took 2 deice crews at this base over 1h40min to clean this airplane up. Props can be sprayed with low pressure only (or deiced by hand with mops or whatever). Covers would have saved significant time and money. And yes this was forecast to happen precisely. blues what I suspect you might've seen is an airplane that was brought over from the hangar where mx crews probably had it covered up. I saw it too (YYZ gate 110).
  6. Careful DEFCON! That information would require an additional 6 months of "studies and research" before releasing the report....
  7. Jazz 7795 final report In my opinion not even close to a "2-year report". I seriously am disappointed. Way too much emphasis on Stabilized Approach criteria (I'm not dismissing the importance of the factor) but not nearly enough on the loss of visual cues and the visual and VNAV aids associated. I see bullpoop remarks about why the investigators believe the TAWS wasn't heard counting down. The grammatical errors in it are just icing on the cake. Way too much "softening" down on the technical so that the layman can read and understand it maybe? What the hell is going on at this agency? Even the font is irritating me! Can't wait to see the AC YHZ gem...
  8. I don't know. Maybe we are looking at it differently but sure looks like the thing came down with a bang...
  9. SAS did yes but I believe that there was some improper maintenance that lead to the incidents. I'll have a look back. Regarding the FlyBE incident, that rate of descent at touchdown sure looked pretty uncomfortable to me.
  10. I've seen that before but without the audio. That made me laugh!
  11. Way more interesting than that lunatic down south... (in my opinion anyways)
  12. From a reliable source, FA@AC is right...
  13. Pretty good, detailed report. But upwards of 3 years later? There must be an insane amount of bureaucracy to deal with. It's the year 2017 now. We have better communication and computing power than ever. That information should not take this long to be disseminated, especially when they knew within days what happened. Is this a function of lawyers and official languages act or am I missing something?
  14. Attitude + Power = Performance At 200 or 300 hours, a cadet might understand the "theory" behind this, but there's likely minimal understanding of it in practice. I mean real understanding. The real understanding is the stuff that we (the majority of us pilots on here) learned flying in our early years sans autopilot/AT/FBW etc. I remember my "aha" moment where it all "clicked". And there were moments on each airplane I flew that it clicked and I felt I understood the machine was finally strapped onto me. I was flying it, and not the other way around. Sorry, but at 2 or 300 hours of total time, an A320 is still driving. That we don't see more of this stuff is kind of a miracle. If the tail came to within an inch of contacting the runway, we wouldn't be reading about it though, but still a critical showing of poor flying ability. You get what you pay for. (Just my 2 cents)
  15. Looks to me like a Cabin Training device as opposed to a flight simulator... complete with real smoke.