Posted on 03/22/2025 6:09:50 AM PDT by xxqqzz
the transportation safety board of 0:01 canada released this preliminary report 0:03 this morning on that delta plane crash 0:06 in toronto that happened um last month 0:08 the one that took off from msp was 0:10 landing in toronto and then as we all 0:12 remember you know flipped upside down 0:14 and we remember those images fortunately 0:16 everybody survived in that um today 0:19 though just a very small snippet of the 0:20 bigger report that will be released much 0:22 later um just about a two-minute video i 0:24 don't think there was any qu uh q&a or 0:26 anything so we wanted to do our own q&a 0:28 and uh who better to do it with uh with 0:30 us than this familiar face that we've 0:32 had on here on all day live uh matthew 0:34 whiz buckley former decorated navy pilot 0:36 among many other uh accolades thanks for 0:38 joining us whiz we appreciate it thanks 0:40 for having me so let's talk about uh 0:43 some of the i guess are there any big 0:44 takeaways from um from this preliminary
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
A 26-year-old, former beauty queen was actually flying the plane during the landing. This guy claiming that the male captain was “ultimately responsible” is BS. This was a harsh example of how DEI works in practice.
It only became a problem when Obama/Biden became President.
The girl may have been a good pilot. Look into her background.
Captain has the responsibility to take over when necessary
He should of tracked her rate of decent on the approach.
_______________________________________
This is politically correct BS. She was flying the plane and obviously should not have been behind the controls of a large, commercial airliner. She obviously panicked and crashed the plane, which is not surprising given that she is a 26 y/o former beauty queen. To try to whitewash this as the captain’s fault because he is the captain is LOL. This is Exhibit #1 for why DEI is dangerous.
To all: Please don’t fall for the politically correct BS theme that the male Captain was responsible. First, if he was good enough to teach other pilots, I seriously doubt that he lacked the experience/skills to land the plane in this type of weather. Second, the 26 y/o former beauty queen was actually flying and crashed the plane. She likely panicked in the difficult landing conditions and was undoubtedly completely unqualified to fly ANY commercial jet. We need some commercial airline pilots to weigh in on this situation, not a former Navy pilot, who has never flown an aircraft like the one that crashed.
They both were probably unqualified and both screwed up big time. The pilot in command was supposed to be monitoring the rate of descent, and should have taken the controls if necessary. The video was disingenuous putting most of the blame on him though.
Women can be effective pilots. It is not like firemen carrying someone out with heavy gear on. However, there are probably 5% women pilots for a reason. About 15% of engineers are woman and 20% of engineering graduates. Men are generally better at math and space relations. A pilot also needs courage and to stay totally calm in emergencies.
60 years ago, they had Help Wanted Men, Help Wanted Women, and Help Wanted Either. Now women are in a lot of fields there used to be few of them, but they are taking it way too far.
The cause was pilot error …coming in too fast at too steep an angle. The pilot’s gender is irrelevant, they simply didn’t have the skill or experience for the challenging conditions. DEI is the root cause. Pressure to have more women and minorities as pilots has caused airlines to hire for quotas rather than competence and experience.
Women make excellent pilots when trained to the same standards. If you select a pilot trainee based on his or her sex you have automatically taken out 50% of the pilots to choose from and thus have lowered admission standards. I do not care who you choose so long as you choose the best from the entire field of potential candidates.
Note: Kinetic energy is a function of velocity squared. Thus 600 feet per minute sink rate squared verses 1200 feet per minutes squared is 360,000 verses 1,440,000. That aircraft right main hit the runway with about 4 times more impact force than normal. Of course the gear and wing failed.
This is A LIE and those who insist on repeating it should be banned from this site.
Title 14 Chapter I Subchapter D Part 61 Subpart F — Commercial Pilots§ 61.129 Aeronautical experience.
For an airplane multiengine rating. Except as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, a person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category and multiengine class rating must log at least 250 hours of flight time as a pilot that consists of at least:
(1) 100 hours in powered aircraft, of which 50 hours must be in airplanes.
(2) 100 hours of pilot-in-command flight time, which includes at least—
(i) 50 hours in airplanes; and
(ii) 50 hours in cross-country flight of which at least 10 hours must be in airplanes.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-61/subpart-F
This is silly.
#1, a landing in that much crosswind is never routine. #2. Training flight or no, the Captain is responsible for everything that happens on the flight, ergo the term "Pilot IN COMMAND." If you think the FAA isn't going to jerk his ticket over this, you are mistaken --- again.
I stated,
(I have not seen sourcing)Careful...
The guy had the title “Pilot in Command”. That makes EVERYTHING his responsibility! Period.
“was undoubtedly completely unqualified to fly ANY commercial jet” - You are an idiot.
Endeavor Air Flight 4819
...don't suppose there is any way to find out if it was the same PF (pilot flying)?
Do not confuse captain with Pilot In Command (PIC). The PIC is the one who, as I wrote, is the "sole manipulator of the controls".
The PIC changes throughout the flight and communicating that is more than a courtesy. You'll hear it on the cockpit tapes:
"You have command of the aircraft." ~"I have command of the aircraft."
"I have command of the aircraft." ~"You have command of the aircraft."
The FAA is not going to "jerk his ticket" because the FAR is very specific that the PIC is responsible. She was signed off on her Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certification by the FAA; not the airline and not by the captain.
This was not a training flight. She had the certifications and was the PIC. She wasn't showing any signs of being drunk or incapacitated. There is no room for fighting over controls like in cartoons and movies. There is no room for doubting or second-guessing.
I am not an expert, but shouldn’t it have been obvious to both of them that the rate of descent was too high, that it isn’t safe to land descending at 1,100 feet per minute? The snow and cross winds might make the landing more difficult, but they wouldn’t mostly cause the rate of descent, which is what broke the landing gear.
It isn’t fighting for controls, but the pilot can take control. He could also have taken control for the landing in difficult conditions before there were any problems.
The pilot was in control; that's the point. She was the PIC. If she couldn't make that landing, that's on her and the FAA.
He could also have taken control for the landing in difficult conditions...
Certainly, IF it was difficult conditions. This wasn't difficult conditions. The airport in Toronto has had the same weather conditions since it opened. Hundreds of thousands of similar landings have successfully taken place there without pancaking a commercial jet onto the runway so hard that it overturns and tears the wings tear off.
Same airport, same runway, same weather, same aircraft (non-experimental, no untested systems, no damaged or failed systems). What changed is the pilot and the Didn't Earn It (DEI) policy that put her there.
The airlines are pushing less competent pilots into the cockpit due to the pilot shortage that has been progressively worsening since the 1990s, and the FAA is complicit in the crime of aiding them.
Calling someone an idiot really shows a lot of maturity. The “pilot in charge” is the pilot who is operating the controls of the plane, which was the female pilot. Second, the fact that she crashed and flipped an airplane seems to back up by point that she was completely unqualified to fly any commercial jet. Third, the commentator is a former navy pilot, not a commercial pilot. Accordingly, his expertise as to protocol of a commercial flight is questionable.
The PIC changes throughout the flight...
You are wrong about this. The Pilot in Command is the captain, it does not change throughout the flight. The pilot flying changes obviously, but the captain is the PIC, the first officer is the SIC (second in command). The captain is ultimately responsible for the safe conduct of the flight, that's why he'll be held responsible by the NTSB and FAA also. I'm a captain at a major airline so I'm familiar with the rules.
https://simpleflying.com/captain-first-officer-difference/
The airline needed her to get PIC hours, not him.
If you ARE an idiot, you deserve to be called one!
There is no title “Pilot in charge”. It is “Pilot in COMMAND”. Writing as a former WSO (rated as a navigator) with a few thousand hours in F-4s & F-111s, I often was FLYING the jet but NEVER the PILOT, let alone the “pilot in command”!
Per the FAA: “Pilot Responsibility and Authority
The pilot-in-command of an aircraft is directly responsible for and is the final authority as to the operation of that aircraft.”
You really ARE an idiot and need to give your misogyny a rest!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.