Anything else you would like to add to your briefing to your co-pilot for the approach tonight. Imagine your Citation with both ILS's failed. What is your plan after hearing about this incident to make sure there is no repeat? Looks like there will be no response. 8,000 hours and no willingness to say what you would do the next night. OK, I guess you are right about nothing to offer. No one else seems interested either it seems.Cliff Jumper wrote:No, I didn't say it was impossible to prevent, just that with the proven info we have right now, and not knowing why it happened, it is impossible to guess how to prevent it.pelmet wrote:I disagree that is impossible to prevent but I check your remarks...so if you magically get a flight there tomorrow under the same circumstances as they had with no reliable electronics to align you with the runway, what is your plan to prevent a repeat captain?
Take your quoted example... the ILS. You are going on the premise that they didn't have it tuned, and that's likely true, but it isn't proven to be true. So, deciding now that AC should come up with new policies to always tune the ILS or replace the aircraft with newer ones, is a solution for a problem that only hypothetically exists.
What do we really know for sure? Distances, times, heights, couple of screen caps, atc tapes, notams, and weather. That's about it.
Based on those alone, I have no idea why what happened happened. Couple of wild theories perhaps, but it this moment, that's all they are.
Still a non-event eh. It needs to be investigated but yet it is a non-event. Riiight. And your example of what you consider to be an event is the worst aviation disaster ever. Uh-huh.complexintentions wrote:I stand by my comment. It was a non-event.
Tenerife. That was an event.
this one has been reported as if it WAS a disaster. When it was actually a disaster that was prevented. Obviously the press and some of the more excitable types here have picked which side of that equation they'd like to focus on, with the AC-bashers gleefully leading the charge. It's fine to argue all day long about how narrowly it was prevented, or by whom, whatever, but it gets old reading the hyperventilating rhetoric, that almost at times seems ghoulishly disappointed it was prevented, because hey then we could say those AC guys REALLY "effed up", right? This is the age we live in, when actual disasters are rare enough that "close calls" have to fill in for sensationalism.
As Rockie said, hysteria.
I feel somewhat vindicated by the fact they were already in a climb when ATC instructed the go-around.
Please show us where the media said it WAS a disaster. You won't because you can't. In reality, just stuff you have made up based on nothing, as most of your posts have been. And now you hint(based on nothing) that people here ghoulishly wished their had been an accident. Some people just can't admit when they are wrong despite the increasing eveidence being published that they are wrong. A good example of denial. I suppose if it turns out that they did a touch and go between airliners, it will still be a non-event.
You and Rockie are entertaining to say the least. At least Rockie started off the thread with several posts of good technical info. Of all your posts, only one had any and it was off-topic anyways.
Some vindication.