AA Crew involved in JFK near miss refuses to talk to NTSB

[fish4life]

I also don’t understand the issue, they were willing to have a professional court recording just not an audio to transcript one. It’s not like they are only remaining silent.

[Crys Stall Mighty]

If the N.T.S.B. is truly interested in treating this incident as a safety matter, then, the N.T.S.B. must give the crew full immunity.

If the N.T.S.B. will not give them full immunity, it must be treated as an investigation that can possibly lead to charges. The crew is to be commended for not saying anything.

[Crys Stall Mighty]

[rookiepilot]

FAA doesn't think it's a non event. Launching a review:

https://6abc.com/faa-ntsb-passenger-jet ... /12818751/

NEW YORK -- The FAA is reviewing airline safety after a series of terrifying near misses involving passenger jets.

The move follows two runway incidents that could have been catastrophic and a deep dive that brought one plane alarmingly close to slamming into the ocean.

"In the past few months there have been several incidents that could have cost a terrible loss of life," said Col Steve Ganyard, USMC (Ret.), ABC News Contributor.

A midair scare in December just recently came to light in which a United Airlines plane departing Maui took a nosedive. It plummeted more than 1,400 feet in about 20 seconds, coming within 775 feet of the Pacific Ocean.

Passengers say they "were praying for a miracle" while others were screaming.

The pilots regained altitude and flew on to San Francisco.

United says the pilots are receiving additional training.

Another recent close call was at New York's JFK Airport.

A Delta plane nearly collided with an American Airlines flight that was crossing an active runway.

"This could have been the worst aviation disaster in U.S. history," Ganyard said. (AVCan: "Nothing to see here")

The American Airlines pilots are now complying with subpoenas from the NTSB after they initially declined three requests to be interviewed as part of the investigation. (GOOD)

There is likely no cockpit recording from either of the American or United close calls.

That's because both planes continued with their flight plans and the cockpit data recordings only last for two hours.

"If an airplane takes off and flies a long distance, it gets overwritten and data is lost," Ganyard said. "The FAA is pushing for longer 25-hour recorder so even if a plane is on longer flight, we'll be able to look at what went wrong and create steps from it happening again."

The FAA says the new safety review will "examine the U.S. aerospace system's structure, culture, and processes."

Most recently, the FAA and NTSB are investigating a close call involved a United Boeing 777 and a Cessna in Honolulu that came within 1,170 feet from each other when the 777 crossed the same runway where the Cessna was landing. The United plane crossed the runway without ATC clearance. FAA and NTSB statements below. United is referring all questions about the incident to the NTSB. (Gotta be fake news -- wasn't the Cessna?)

The FAA says it will hold a "summit" next month with industry leaders to discuss what actions need to be taken to improve safety.

[digits_]

Stop making stuff up.

Nobody here is saying that event was 'nothing' or that there's 'nothing to see here'.

You started a topic specifically about the crew refusing to talk to the NTSB because they would be recorded.

*that* is not illogical or unexpected.

[rookiepilot]

Stop making stuff up.

Nobody here is saying that event was 'nothing' or that there's 'nothing to see here'.

You started a topic specifically about the crew refusing to talk to the NTSB because they would be recorded.

*that* is not illogical or unexpected.

What was said here after the AC SFO incident? I'm assuming its the same view. And silence...says a lot, too.

I will not defend this crew. I'm sure they feel horrible, but It's too serious for that.

[pelmet]

If the N.T.S.B. is truly interested in treating this incident as a safety matter, then, the N.T.S.B. must give the crew full immunity.

If the N.T.S.B. will not give them full immunity, it must be treated as an investigation that can possibly lead to charges. The crew is to be commended for not saying anything.

Do they have the authority for this....likely not. But I believe there is some sort of an immunity already in legislation that NTSB info cannot be used against them.

And lets face it....if you were confident that you did not screw up, you would want the recordings and transcripts out there to prove any naysayers wrong.

Obstruction of investigation procedure.

[digits_]

If the N.T.S.B. is truly interested in treating this incident as a safety matter, then, the N.T.S.B. must give the crew full immunity.

If the N.T.S.B. will not give them full immunity, it must be treated as an investigation that can possibly lead to charges. The crew is to be commended for not saying anything.

Do they have the authority for this....likely not. But I believe there is some sort of an immunity already in legislation that NTSB info cannot be used against them.

And lets face it....if you were confident that you did not screw up, you would want the recordings and transcripts out there to prove any naysayers wrong.

Obstruction of investigation procedure.

If you get recorded in a high profile case, it's very likely you will at some point be misquoted out of context.

In order to obstruct an investigation, the request from the investigator has to be relevant. I fail to see what the NTSB hopes to accomplish with a recording.

[rookiepilot]

If the N.T.S.B. is truly interested in treating this incident as a safety matter, then, the N.T.S.B. must give the crew full immunity.

If the N.T.S.B. will not give them full immunity, it must be treated as an investigation that can possibly lead to charges. The crew is to be commended for not saying anything.

Do they have the authority for this....likely not. But I believe there is some sort of an immunity already in legislation that NTSB info cannot be used against them.

And lets face it....if you were confident that you did not screw up, you would want the recordings and transcripts out there to prove any naysayers wrong.

Obstruction of investigation procedure.

If you get recorded in a high profile case, it's very likely you will at some point be misquoted out of context.

In order to obstruct an investigation, the request from the investigator has to be relevant. I fail to see what the NTSB hopes to accomplish with a recording.

They have been subpoenaed.

Do you think they should ignore the subpoena, Digits?

[PostmasterGeneral]

Do they have the authority for this....likely not. But I believe there is some sort of an immunity already in legislation that NTSB info cannot be used against them.

And lets face it....if you were confident that you did not screw up, you would want the recordings and transcripts out there to prove any naysayers wrong.

Obstruction of investigation procedure.

If you get recorded in a high profile case, it's very likely you will at some point be misquoted out of context.

In order to obstruct an investigation, the request from the investigator has to be relevant. I fail to see what the NTSB hopes to accomplish with a recording.

They have been subpoenaed.

Do you think they should ignore the subpoena, Digits?

Why do you care so much if the crew says anything? It doesn’t affect you. Let it go, man.

[rigpiggy]

Subpoena...... On advice of council, I will remain silent.

[digits_]

Do they have the authority for this....likely not. But I believe there is some sort of an immunity already in legislation that NTSB info cannot be used against them.

And lets face it....if you were confident that you did not screw up, you would want the recordings and transcripts out there to prove any naysayers wrong.

Obstruction of investigation procedure.

If you get recorded in a high profile case, it's very likely you will at some point be misquoted out of context.

In order to obstruct an investigation, the request from the investigator has to be relevant. I fail to see what the NTSB hopes to accomplish with a recording.

They have been subpoenaed.

Do you think they should ignore the subpoena, Digits?

So it went from a safety investigation into legal proceedings. What kind of useful information do you think the NTSB will get from this?

They shouldn't ignore the subpoena. They'll show up with lawyers paid by their union. No spontaneous conversation. Everything filtered 4 times. With any luck they'll be reading prepared statements. A major victory for safety!

[digits_]

Subpoena...... On advice of council, I will remain silent.

Exactly. And we'll never know what really happened.

[Eric Janson]

Exactly. And we'll never know what really happened.

We know exactly what happened - the facts are clearly stated imho.

The investigation is to find out why it happened.

[pelmet]

If the N.T.S.B. is truly interested in treating this incident as a safety matter, then, the N.T.S.B. must give the crew full immunity.

If the N.T.S.B. will not give them full immunity, it must be treated as an investigation that can possibly lead to charges. The crew is to be commended for not saying anything.

Do they have the authority for this....likely not. But I believe there is some sort of an immunity already in legislation that NTSB info cannot be used against them.

And lets face it....if you were confident that you did not screw up, you would want the recordings and transcripts out there to prove any naysayers wrong.

Obstruction of investigation procedure.

If you get recorded in a high profile case, it's very likely you will at some point be misquoted out of context.

In order to obstruct an investigation, the request from the investigator has to be relevant. I fail to see what the NTSB hopes to accomplish with a recording.

I suspect that when it is recorded, an accurate transcript can be made. That actually prevents misquotes.

[Meatservo]

There is more than sufficient evidence in the form of recorded radio transmissions, clearances that were received and read back, video and ground-radar recordings of the aircraft's route across runways and taxiways, to determine whether a violation occurred and whether or not the commander of the aircraft is responsible. Sensationalizing the crew's placement of conditions on the manner in which their verbal statements are recorded is a red herring.

The authorities already know what happened and who is responsible. You all know what the Americans are like. When this hits the news, some parasite from row 17 in the Delta plane is going to claim he has a whiplash injury from the aborted takeoff, or their emotional-support octopus is suffering from mental anguish due to the delay, and an army of lawyers will be ready to take that to court and make the next ten years a living hell for the AA crew. Their statements will be a matter of public record and will be open to interpretation by laypeople, judges and lawyers with no knowledge of aviation.

I don't blame them one bit for heeding their union's advice to say as little as possible until the integrity and disposal of their recorded interviews can be guaranteed. Everybody already knows what happened. The safety of future arrivals and departures from this airport is as assured now as it will be after these pilots make their statements. The repercussions to their careers, whatever they may be, are already under way. Recorded statements can serve little purpose other than resurfacing in a big dog-and-pony show for some ambulance-chasing lowlives.

This is a tempest in a teapot.

[rookiepilot]

I’m guessing the NTSB has a very, very good reason to take this kind of step.

Unlike many it seems on this thread, the NTSB has a heck of a lot more cred with me than some airline crew that screwed up royally and then covered it up by “accidentally” erasing the CVR. They didn’t forget. You don’t forget to preserve data in that scenario.

More to this story, I’ll bet, that ain’t good. Thinking — who was high, or who was bombed?

Oh Rookie. That has NEVER happened in history.

I’m no airline pilot, but have flown into a number of US class B airports — never crossed a runway without a clearance. I don’t get defending them for one second.

Hang em high.

The bizarre part to me is those pissing on the WJ crew in YLW for handling a difficult emergency safely and well, and defending this AA crew.

[TG]

There is more than sufficient evidence in the form of recorded radio transmissions, clearances that were received and read back, video and ground-radar recordings of the aircraft's route across runways and taxiways, to determine whether a violation occurred and whether or not the commander of the aircraft is responsible. Sensationalizing the crew's placement of conditions on the manner in which their verbal statements are recorded is a red herring.

The authorities already know what happened and who is responsible. You all know what the Americans are like. When this hits the news, some parasite from row 17 in the Delta plane is going to claim he has a whiplash injury from the aborted takeoff, or their emotional-support octopus is suffering from mental anguish due to the delay, and an army of lawyers will be ready to take that to court and make the next ten years a living hell for the AA crew. Their statements will be a matter of public record and will be open to interpretation by laypeople, judges and lawyers with no knowledge of aviation.

I don't blame them one bit for heeding their union's advice to say as little as possible until the integrity and disposal of their recorded interviews can be guaranteed. Everybody already knows what happened. The safety of future arrivals and departures from this airport is as assured now as it will be after these pilots make their statements. The repercussions to their careers, whatever they may be, are already under way. Recorded statements can serve little purpose other than resurfacing in a big dog-and-pony show for some ambulance-chasing lowlives.

This is a tempest in a teapot.

I'm quoting you because that's pretty much sums it up and rookiepilot seems to have "missed it"

[rookiepilot]

There is more than sufficient evidence in the form of recorded radio transmissions, clearances that were received and read back, video and ground-radar recordings of the aircraft's route across runways and taxiways, to determine whether a violation occurred and whether or not the commander of the aircraft is responsible. Sensationalizing the crew's placement of conditions on the manner in which their verbal statements are recorded is a red herring.

The authorities already know what happened and who is responsible. You all know what the Americans are like. When this hits the news, some parasite from row 17 in the Delta plane is going to claim he has a whiplash injury from the aborted takeoff, or their emotional-support octopus is suffering from mental anguish due to the delay, and an army of lawyers will be ready to take that to court and make the next ten years a living hell for the AA crew. Their statements will be a matter of public record and will be open to interpretation by laypeople, judges and lawyers with no knowledge of aviation.

I don't blame them one bit for heeding their union's advice to say as little as possible until the integrity and disposal of their recorded interviews can be guaranteed. Everybody already knows what happened. The safety of future arrivals and departures from this airport is as assured now as it will be after these pilots make their statements. The repercussions to their careers, whatever they may be, are already under way. Recorded statements can serve little purpose other than resurfacing in a big dog-and-pony show for some ambulance-chasing lowlives.

This is a tempest in a teapot.

I'm quoting you because that's pretty much sums it up and rookiepilot seems to have "missed it"

Guilty as charged.

[pelmet]

I’m guessing the NTSB has a very, very good reason to take this kind of step.

Unlike many it seems on this thread, the NTSB has a heck of a lot more cred with me than some airline crew that screwed up royally and then covered it up by “accidentally” erasing the CVR. They didn’t forget. You don’t forget to preserve data in that scenario.

More to this story, I’ll bet, that ain’t good. Thinking — who was high, or who was bombed?

Oh Rookie. That has NEVER happened in history.

I’m no airline pilot, but have flown into a number of US class B airports — never crossed a runway without a clearance. I don’t get defending them for one second.

Hang em high.

The bizarre part to me is those pissing on the WJ crew in YLW for handling a difficult emergency safely and well, and defending this AA crew.

I doubt they erased it. It would record over during their flight.

But I think the manufacturer of the CVR may have techniques to retrieve it.

A TSB guy told me how this was done when a CVR was erased in an incident in Canada quite a few years ago.