Air Canada safety culture sincerely worries me
May 7, 2018, 6:41 am
#46
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: YYG
Programs: airlines and hotels and rental cars - oh my!
Posts: 2,994
"Crashes" tend to suggest the plane touched down elsewhere, such as in a field ... as AC624 did at YHZ.
May 7, 2018, 8:24 am
#48
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
Originally Posted by The Lev
United management might disagree with you...
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/25/p...ing/index.html
https://abcnews.go.com/US/united-air...ry?id=29237744
https://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/25/p...ing/index.html
https://abcnews.go.com/US/united-air...ry?id=29237744
But I thought we had an industry insider on this forum attempt to convince us that flight operations data (ie: FDR) was only ever analyzed in the event of an accident.
I'm speculating here, but perhaps the flight data at United is beamed back to company servers directly from the aircraft, whereas cockpit voice data remains on the recording device within the aircraft itself. Lending the "insider" the benefit of some doubt, is that what he meant by 'pulled the data only after an accident' - that they only physically access the recording device itself after a prang?
Regardless, I would advocate 24hr CVR capability and endorse reviewing it and FDR material after any incident deemed serious, irrespective of bent metal.
Last edited by CZAMFlyer; May 7, 2018 at 8:30 am
May 7, 2018, 8:36 am
#49
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
Originally Posted by Adam Smith
The reason why regulations and regulators exist is that customers do not always have the necessary information, nor the expertise, to make informed decisions on things like flight safety.
Last edited by CZAMFlyer; May 7, 2018 at 8:57 am Reason: add reply to 2nd member
May 7, 2018, 8:50 am
#50
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
May 7, 2018, 8:51 am
#51
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,271
The ;law says you shall never speed in your car. Does that mean you never speed? Laws only apply AFTER the fact, not before.
May 7, 2018, 9:13 am
#52
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,130
I find that rather naive. Whether a business is regulated or not does not change the fact that they have to run at a profit or go out of business. If demand from the public is such that the airline cannot charge more for a seat in order to pay costs (including maintenance) and still maintain the profit that the shareholders expect, the outcome is inevitable. Corners will be cut.
The ;law says you shall never speed in your car. Does that mean you never speed? Laws only apply AFTER the fact, not before.
The ;law says you shall never speed in your car. Does that mean you never speed? Laws only apply AFTER the fact, not before.
If a business cannot run profitably within the confines of the law and regulations, it should not be in the business. One would have to be downright daft to argue that a business should be allowed to break laws to remain profitable.
In any event, the fallacy of your argument is evident in the poorly reasoned logic underlying it. If maximizing profit is the sole aim, why would airlines behave differently even if pax pay more. The profit-maximizing benefits of cutting corners don't disappear if pax pay more - if anything, they ensure even greater profits.
If airlines can't provide safe products, profitably or otherwise, they should get out of the business and maybe try their hand at whatever (apparently unregulated) field you're in.
May 7, 2018, 9:19 am
#53
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
It is also worth noting that airlines themselves do have interest in ensuring that accidents do not occur (especially fatal ones) because a headline such as "Air Canada 787 carrying 300 people crashes into side of mountain killing all crew and passengers" is a sure fire way to not only tank the stock price but also reputation and future sales. So it is worth reiterating that while regulatory bodies are there to help improve passenger safety, the airlines also have some skin in the game as well. Slightly off topic, but as one example Southwest Airlines recently announced their sales have decreased since that uncontained jet engine failure.
May 7, 2018, 9:28 am
#54
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,446
Unsurprisingly folks this thread is wandered all over the aviation landscape from UA topics to pilot fatigue which has already been under discussion for some time in this thread to rehashing and adding to the SFO incident which is also being discussed in a separate thread here so let's stick to this thread topic more closely. I understand if certain matters are mention in passing however sidebar conversations about other airlines or detailed debates about specific events belong in the appropriate thread within this forum.
tcook052
AC forum Mod.
Edited to add after the deletion of a few posts let's also drop the personal invective and stick to discussing the thread topic and not other posters
tcook052
AC forum Mod.
Edited to add after the deletion of a few posts let's also drop the personal invective and stick to discussing the thread topic and not other posters
Last edited by tcook052; May 7, 2018 at 10:24 am
May 7, 2018, 11:45 am
#55
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, BA Gold, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,316
After a hard landing, the plane will (eventually) fly again. 624 was not a hard landing.
From the ABC article: "As part of our commitment to safety, we constantly monitor flight operations data"
But I thought we had an industry insider on this forum attempt to convince us that flight operations data (ie: FDR) was only ever analyzed in the event of an accident.
I'm speculating here, but perhaps the flight data at United is beamed back to company servers directly from the aircraft, whereas cockpit voice data remains on the recording device within the aircraft itself. Lending the "insider" the benefit of some doubt, is that what he meant by 'pulled the data only after an accident' - that they only physically access the recording device itself after a prang?
Regardless, I would advocate 24hr CVR capability and endorse reviewing it and FDR material after any incident deemed serious, irrespective of bent metal.
But I thought we had an industry insider on this forum attempt to convince us that flight operations data (ie: FDR) was only ever analyzed in the event of an accident.
I'm speculating here, but perhaps the flight data at United is beamed back to company servers directly from the aircraft, whereas cockpit voice data remains on the recording device within the aircraft itself. Lending the "insider" the benefit of some doubt, is that what he meant by 'pulled the data only after an accident' - that they only physically access the recording device itself after a prang?
Regardless, I would advocate 24hr CVR capability and endorse reviewing it and FDR material after any incident deemed serious, irrespective of bent metal.
Though I disagree on 24 hours. How about 7 days. Or 7 months.
May 7, 2018, 12:04 pm
#56
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: YUL
Programs: AC SE (*A Gold), Bonvoy Platinum Elite, Hilton Gold, Amex Platinum / AP Reserve, NEXUS, Global Entry
Posts: 5,691
The 7M8s are all being equipped with HUD technology. One of the functions of the HUD is to alert the pilot if the aircraft is not aligned with the runway. If the information I was given is correct, acquisition of the HUD option was done as a direct result of the SFO incident. It wasn't part of the original sweet deal with Boeing and I'm told Boeing made AC pay a huge price for it.
From the ABC article: "As part of our commitment to safety, we constantly monitor flight operations data"
But I thought we had an industry insider on this forum attempt to convince us that flight operations data (ie: FDR) was only ever analyzed in the event of an accident.
But I thought we had an industry insider on this forum attempt to convince us that flight operations data (ie: FDR) was only ever analyzed in the event of an accident.
That being said, I fully agree with you and @canadiancow that there should be a much, much longer recording window on the CVR. The pilots' union's privacy concerns shouldn't trump safety.
May 7, 2018, 2:21 pm
#58
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: YYG
Programs: airlines and hotels and rental cars - oh my!
Posts: 2,994
Tell that to AC.
Absolutely agreed. My point was to note that a "hard landing" is usually something that occurs when the plane touches down on the actual runway ... as opposed to the AC624 experience of flying the plane into the ground and having most of it only arrive on the runway after plowing its way up an embankment, through some hydro lines and careening off the localizer antenna. The fact AC continues to downplay this incident - and two the incidents in SFO - significantly impacts my opinion about their overall safety culture.
Absolutely agreed. My point was to note that a "hard landing" is usually something that occurs when the plane touches down on the actual runway ... as opposed to the AC624 experience of flying the plane into the ground and having most of it only arrive on the runway after plowing its way up an embankment, through some hydro lines and careening off the localizer antenna. The fact AC continues to downplay this incident - and two the incidents in SFO - significantly impacts my opinion about their overall safety culture.
May 7, 2018, 3:40 pm
#59
Moderator, Air Canada; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: YYC
Programs: AC SE MM, FB Plat, WS Plat, BA Silver, DL GM, Marriott Plat, Hilton Gold, Accor Silver
Posts: 16,765
Re the whole "hard landing" vs "crash", didn't someone point out, in the early days of the YHZ thread, that the elegant solution was to call it a "crash landing"? Best of both worlds, really.
I think you missed the point. In dulciusexasperis's Friedman-esque world, there would be no need for regulations because customers would do sufficient due diligence on safety records such that bad operators would go out of business while safer ones would prosper. I pointed out that such a scenario isn't realistic, and therefore we have people like Transport Canada to monitor AC.
I'd argue the reason we have regs and regulators has little to do with the customer and everything to do with the tendency of many companies to do the least amount required when spending on items that don't directly contribute towards revenue. Safety management is a huge cost, one that must chomp a large bite out of profits. But as the old saying goes: "if you think safety is expensive, try having an accident".
May 7, 2018, 4:25 pm
#60
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: YVR
Programs: UA Premier Platinum
Posts: 3,759
I think AC deserves some credit, given how much they are spending on technology designed to prevent another SFO type of incident. The fact they've committed to such a large expenditure suggests they're taking safety seriously. That's a good sign.
Of course, cynically speaking, it shouldn't have required the nearly disastrous SFO incident to make AC decide to take this costly measure. Money spent on safety technology is always well-spent (IMO).
Of course, cynically speaking, it shouldn't have required the nearly disastrous SFO incident to make AC decide to take this costly measure. Money spent on safety technology is always well-spent (IMO).