Laser beam hits WestJet pilot in the eye on Calgary takeoff

[tailgunner]

Huge Hammer,
Safety first. Core value.
How was safety enhanced by continuing to YLW????
The FO's eyes have just been exposed to a laser? ......
Safety first makes a great poster in the flight planning room, perhaps it looks nice silk- screened on to a t- shirt, however, what really matters if it is demonstrated in day to day operations.

[Rebel]

Ummm, I work for WS, and I kinda agree with Rebel (ducks for cover..)

IF he/she said they were fit to carry on, then why the check-up at the other end? As a precaution? Too late, damage (if any) done.

IF he/she had any inclination that there had been any side effects from the laser, then land. End of story. Do not worry about the pax at that point, we will find another pilot. I have seen guys come to work sick because they are worried about calling in sick, just in case there is no one available to come in. Not your problem. Sick is sick. Same with this case. You are either ok, or not.

Yep you got it right; no company wants the expense of defending their employee’s actions in a court case or the resulting expensive bad publicity. The days of the cowboy flying are long over it’s a business now. Oh and you don't have to duck if your're telling it how it is.

[C-MNOP]

When mistakes are made they should be a learning tool. This is not the first time that there has been a problem onboard and the flight has continued to the destination instead of landing when they should have. That makes it a policy and not an exception. The flying public might not be aware that you can land somewhere other then the planned destination, but as pilots we do, and should.

[Rebel]

Right on..

[Phileas Fogg]

hey Huge (probably small) Hammer,

Thanks i;'ve only seen that poster a million times...try something original.

Quit nerding up this forum.


blah blah blah.....

[ToFlyIsDivine]

where did this laser come from? it must have to be a fairly strong laser to be able to reach an aircraft, not only that there shouldn't be any buildings at the end of the runways.....so where o where

[Four1oh]

Thanks rebel for your input, I think it's now safe to say:

[Troubleshot]

where did this laser come from? it must have to be a fairly strong laser to be able to reach an aircraft, not only that there shouldn't be any buildings at the end of the runways.....so where o where

The Port O' Call...lord knows there were enough aircraft flying past that when was hung over during training. OR MAYBE the Mactavish building itself...hmmmm, in house sabotage.

[CanadaEH]

Wow this issue got blown out of proportion.

[yycflyguy]

Damn ALF is hung!

where did this laser come from? it must have to be a fairly strong laser to be able to reach an aircraft, not only that there shouldn't be any buildings at the end of the runways.....so where o where

Where did it come from? Sharks, sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their frickin heads.

[WJ700]

If this was in the fact the Director of Flight Technical that is an absolute ‘thread-ender’ for me. I can probably take credit for being his First Officer for no less than 400 hours. That was 12 years ago at a previous company and even then, If there is anyone I think of having to answer to when I’m making a safety decision it is he. He’s a black and white thinker and doesn’t take any chances. He’s never going to question you taking the safest course of action because that is what he would do in any circumstance. If you’re going to take a chance, he’ll still be there for you, but don’t expect it to be a short conversation ...oh and he’ll win. A couple of years ago I had to turn down a red-eye extension by crewsked from being too tired (newborn at home). I was on everyone's shit-list until it got to him where he backed me 100%. He told the people involved that if we're going to safely fly redeye's, that we're going to do it right. That was the day they started avoiding use of the redeye in to YYZ for extra sections or IROPS. Personally I was nervous when he first took the position that he did at WestJet for fear of him being too hard-assed but it turns out I'm very wrong and he's doing the exact job he was meant to do in life; I also expect to see him promote much further from his natural managerial skills. If the FO involved here went to be checked out on the other end, it was just overkill, and I'm now sure it was on insistance of the Captain.
Sorry Rebel, but you’ve lost any creditability many times in the past when commenting on WestJet and being very wrong there too. You're shooting your mouth off here about one of WestJet's safest pilots (if I had to pick on because they're all safe). I can appreciate the news articles you post but the constant vitrol towards us makes it obvious you should limit your input to avoid suffering such 'foot-in-mouth' disease.

[Rebel]

WJ700

Ahh perhaps you shouldn’t shoot off your mouth and re-read the article, which I did not post. All you are offering is your speculation instead of the newspaper quotes of what actually happened. If this incident went down as reported then you have a safety problem of pushing the envelope. You have claimed in the past to be a WJ safety officer, which from your interpretation of this and other events I highly doubt. Your little story although cute simply doesn’t cut it with me. Perhaps you should read the post by C-MNOP that I have posted for your consideration. On second thought re-read the whole thread to bring yourself up to speed before commenting. The thread contains some good posts by others, hopefully WJ employees, concerned with safety..

“When mistakes are made they should be a learning tool. This is not the first time that there has been a problem onboard and the flight has continued to the destination instead of landing when they should have. That makes it a policy and not an exception. The flying public might not be aware that you can land somewhere other then the planned destination, but as pilots we do, and should”

I especially like the comment “That makes it a policy and not an exception” so you see others simply do not agree with your view. Frankly I don’t care what carrier is pushing the envelope if its not the safest avenue then they shouldn’t be doing it. I suspect the BOD’s of any company that gets wind of what could be considered unsafe practices will terminate the guilty parties as they should. The potential lawsuits simply don’t make pushing the envelope worthwhile.

That’s it for me on this thread as my intent was to make this incident a learning tool and not endure the boorish comments of the inexperienced WJ crowd. WJ is my competitor and if their practices cause them to have an accident so be it. Oh and Thanks to the WJ crowd that actually posted comments that made sense. It takes balls to stand up for whats right..

[ahramin]

newspaper quotes of what actually happened.

Nuff said.

[CanadaEH]

That’s it for me on this thread as my intent was to make this incident a learning tool and not endure the boorish comments of the inexperienced WJ crowd. WJ is my competitor and if their practices cause them to have an accident so be it. Oh and Thanks to the WJ crowd that actually posted comments that made sense. It takes balls to stand up for whats right..

Your intent is and always has been to discredit Westjet and its employees. You've been full of shit for years.

[Biff]

Someone was potentially lasered in the eye, meaning that person would potentially have damage to his eye. From what I understand the damage is now done and shouldn't get worse. Should he have his eyes checked? Absolutely. Should they be checked in 50 minutes(landing back in Calgary and driving to an optometrist) or 1 hour and 20 minutes(continuing on to Kelowna)? I don't think it really matters much. Once you've being lasered the damage is done, without further exposure there should be no further deterioration so waiting an extra 30 to 40 minutes should not be an issue.

Now the safety issue is being brought up. I really don't get the concern over continuing. A landing will have to be made with a potentially compromised pair of eyes, does it really matter if that landing is made in 20 min or 40 min? I don't think so, in fact it could be argued that the crew member should be better able to accertain his impairment with a few more minutes of flying.

[WJ700]

That's the point, the damage wasn't done. The FO assessed himself as fine and this was verified correct by two doctors. The correct choice was to continue.

Rebel, I've never claimed to be a safety officer. I've only claimed that you are a sensationalist idiot with a chip on your shoulder towards WestJet.

[Four1oh]

Rebel takes any opportunity to bash Westjet and he does a good job making it look like he actually cares... buuuut, those who know Rebel know better than to give much weight to his thinly veiled shots.

[E-Flyer]

There are far too many things in the eyes that might be damaged even though you might feel fine... it's the same concept like when you fly at night and have seen something bright prior to your flight; your vision will be impaired for those approximate 30 minutes, but you might still feel fine... are you necessarily safe though

Remember that incident with the Canucks? One of the audience members got hit hard with a puck in the head and said she was fine, ended up dying due to internal bleeding within 12 hours. Assessing yourself as fine isn't always safe; one might asses themselves as fine because they can't wait to get home and think they can suck it up for 50 odd minutes and carry out a safe flight. I would personally not do this but it's basic human psychology to say to themselves; " I feel fine, do I really want to land, go through that checklist, extend my lay over, get checked out, and find out I am fine or suck it up for a little bit and check it out later ?" I know it's our job as pilot's to carry out a safe flight, which was the case here. But the other scenario can equally be a possibility.

It worked out to be the right decision here though, so no complaint; just a thought.

My 2 cents.

[Biff]

Remember that incident with the Canucks? One of the audience members got hit hard with a puck in the head and said she was fine, ended up dying due to internal bleeding within 12 hours. Assessing yourself as fine isn't always safe; one might asses themselves as fine because they can't wait to get home and think they can suck it up for 50 odd minutes and carry out a safe flight. I would personally not do this but it's basic human psychology to say to themselves; " I feel fine, do I really want to land, go through that checklist, extend my lay over, get checked out, and find out I am fine or suck it up for a little bit and check it out later ?" I know it's our job as pilot's to carry out a safe flight, which was the case here. But the other scenario can equally be a possibility.

It worked out to be the right decision here though, so no complaint; just a thought.

My 2 cents.

I think the point I was trying to make is that he was going to be in the flightdeck for a landing, does it make a difference if it was 20 minutes from when it happened or 50 minutes? I don't think so in the case of a laser. The damage that could be done is done, I don't believe that laser injuries get worse once the cause is removed.

The only way I think it would have being a better idea to come back right away, is if the injury had a chance of getting worse, making the later landing a less safe one. JMHO

You are absolutely correct though, that if he had been hit in the head with a hockey puck, he should have returned to Calgary.

[rightseatwonder]

FO "what was that!?!"


Capt "what"

"i just saw a really bright green light"

"are you ok?"

"yeah i think so, wait a minute...... yeah I seem ok"

"are you sure?"

"yeah no problem"

.....


"wait a minute...did you say green light?"

"yeah"

"damn that might have been one of those idiots with a laser!"

"oh damn, yeah I saw that memo"

"are you sure your eyes are alright?"


"yeah... i have no reason to believe otherwise"

"well neither do I but what do we know..... plus we will have to report it anyways...."



10 seconds later .........


"Calgary... we need an immediate return to the airport... my first officer has been assaulted with what we think is a ..oh my god.. LASER!!!" "although he feels fine, and we both have no reason to think otherwise, his vision must be compromised... his decision making ability is also now null and void.... he has no no legal authority to determine his own fitness to continue operating as a flight crew member.. regardless of what he says, or what I think as captain, we are now returning to the airport to go make sure that everything is ok, and no we cannot do that in Kelowna.. what do they know about eyes and LASERS. I would rather do an unplanned return on my own with the help of my helpless first officer... it is by FAR the most conservative course of action."

does this really make any sense to anyone?

[Four1oh]

Are you asking people armed with common sense?

[E-Flyer]

Remember that incident with the Canucks? One of the audience members got hit hard with a puck in the head and said she was fine, ended up dying due to internal bleeding within 12 hours. Assessing yourself as fine isn't always safe; one might asses themselves as fine because they can't wait to get home and think they can suck it up for 50 odd minutes and carry out a safe flight. I would personally not do this but it's basic human psychology to say to themselves; " I feel fine, do I really want to land, go through that checklist, extend my lay over, get checked out, and find out I am fine or suck it up for a little bit and check it out later ?" I know it's our job as pilot's to carry out a safe flight, which was the case here. But the other scenario can equally be a possibility.

It worked out to be the right decision here though, so no complaint; just a thought.

My 2 cents.

I think the point I was trying to make is that he was going to be in the flightdeck for a landing, does it make a difference if it was 20 minutes from when it happened or 50 minutes? I don't think so in the case of a laser. The damage that could be done is done, I don't believe that laser injuries get worse once the cause is removed.

The only way I think it would have being a better idea to come back right away, is if the injury had a chance of getting worse, making the later landing a less safe one. JMHO

You are absolutely correct though, that if he had been hit in the head with a hockey puck, he should have returned to Calgary.

Lol ... nice ending to your response there chaps Hopefully nobody gets the idea to invent a laser integrated puck firing system ! That would suck for pilots flying in and out of calgary as it seems to be a regular mishap there with respect to lasers !

Oh well, at the end of the day it all turned out to be okay and passengers were safe

[Four1oh]

on departure out of YWG tonight, had to rotate a few extra degrees to avoid a flock of geese. I considered returning to land, as we 'almost' had a birdstrike, and I got a little stressed out, but after talking to my FO, he calmed me down and we continued to destination. Whew. Bullet dodged there!

[TFTMB heavy]

Why would you want to return to the same airport where you just got "lit up"? If you're already down one crew who's gonna fly if you get hit again on the way back in?


Edited to clarify.

[YCL Boy]

Some of you guys are so easy to entertain, LOL...
So here some more stuff for you all to have fun with...


=============================================

Laser beam was pointed at plane landing in Winnipeg
Last Updated: Friday, October 31, 2008 | 9:23 AM CT Comments63Recommend50
CBC News
Laser pointers can damage the retina or cause temporary blindness or dazzling if shone into someone's eyes. (CBC)
Someone on the ground south of Winnipeg aimed a green laser directly at the cockpit of a plane landing at the Winnipeg airport earlier this week, CBC News has learned.

A piercing green light shot into the cockpit of an Air Canada plane as the crew was about to land at Richardson International Airport around 4 a.m. CT Wednesday, according to an incident report.

The crew landed the aircraft safely, but the captain will have to have his eyes checked. Permanent damage to the eyes can jeopardize a pilot's career.

The device was likely a hand-held laser pointer originating from the St. Adolphe area, about 25 kilometres south of Winnipeg.

"It's not a good thing. I don't appreciate it at all — it's a safety hazard," said Adam Penner, a fellow pilot.

Laser pointers are widely available and safe if used according to their instructions, but they can damage the retina or cause temporary blindness or dazzling if shone into someone's eyes. The green ones, mostly used in astronomy, send light the farthest — some can distract a pilot flying as high as 10,000 feet.

Astronomer Blair Colborne said he can't believe someone would misuse one of the tools of his trade in this manner.

"They are idiots that are just looking for some form of glory," he said. " I don't understand the mentality to it, because shooting down a plane is really a no-no."

Laser incidents on the rise

Transport Canada said incidents involving lasers are occurring more often.

Lasers have been pointed at pilots 53 times in 2008, according to the federal department — more than double the total number of incidents in all of 2007. In 2006, only three cases were reported.

Three separate planes were targeted with lasers at the airport in Calgary on Tuesday night.

Police are investigating Wednesday morning's Winnipeg incident.