"Somewhat scary one near Winnipeg" - The AC Master Incidents Thread
Jul 13, 2018, 10:39 am
#3466
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
OK. Pilot did not dismiss, company did. Still not acted upon as it should have. (Criticism was never meant to be particularly targeting the pilots. Just the overall scenario.)
Bottom line remains, there was a warning, but it did not have the effect that it should have had. Indeed the next flight happened although it never should have. Because maintenance apparently did not figure out that the inertial switch that was triggered by this hard landing cuts power to the FDR. Admittedly the material they got from the manufacturer may not have been crystal clear either.
Bottom line remains, there was a warning, but it did not have the effect that it should have had. Indeed the next flight happened although it never should have. Because maintenance apparently did not figure out that the inertial switch that was triggered by this hard landing cuts power to the FDR. Admittedly the material they got from the manufacturer may not have been crystal clear either.
The issue herein lies with the SOP and what was followed and while I'm confident that the learnings from this incident will be beneficial for the industry, I am shocked that here in 2018 the SOP was what it was and permitted the aircraft to fly back to YUL.
Jul 13, 2018, 11:24 am
#3467
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,804
Jul 13, 2018, 12:53 pm
#3468
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: YYZ most of the time
Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite
Posts: 3,921
Jul 13, 2018, 1:03 pm
#3469
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Halifax
Programs: AC SE100K, Marriott Lifetime Platinum Elite. NEXUS
Posts: 4,569
For what? They did not call for a visual inspection by maintenance personnel because the threshold for visual inspection by maintenance personnel was not met.
Violating a procedure to get a good OTP score is one thing. They followed the procedure.
It's not like Jazz had bungie corded ladders to their aircraft to do visual inspections of half-hubs every 10 hours.
Violating a procedure to get a good OTP score is one thing. They followed the procedure.
It's not like Jazz had bungie corded ladders to their aircraft to do visual inspections of half-hubs every 10 hours.
Jul 13, 2018, 1:42 pm
#3470
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC SE100K MM
Posts: 588
I was diverted to YYZ for arriving at 2201. 2201!
Jul 13, 2018, 2:32 pm
#3471
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: YVR
Programs: Bottom feeder Star Gold
Posts: 2,652
Being in the year 2018 shouldn't be a factor - evolution is inexorable.
Jul 13, 2018, 2:40 pm
#3472
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: YYZ most of the time
Programs: AC SE100K MM, Princess Elite
Posts: 3,921
The CFS (Canada Flight supplement) as well as the CAP (Canada Air Pilot) both show the only restrictions as 2300-0645. Neither make mention of 2200.
Jul 13, 2018, 4:28 pm
#3473
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,804
For what? They did not call for a visual inspection by maintenance personnel because the threshold for visual inspection by maintenance personnel was not met.
Violating a procedure to get a good OTP score is one thing. They followed the procedure.
It's not like Jazz had bungie corded ladders to their aircraft to do visual inspections of half-hubs every 10 hours.
Violating a procedure to get a good OTP score is one thing. They followed the procedure.
It's not like Jazz had bungie corded ladders to their aircraft to do visual inspections of half-hubs every 10 hours.
That plane should in no instance have flown revenue in that shape. That story is actually pretty bad.
Jul 13, 2018, 5:20 pm
#3475
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2017
Programs: AC
Posts: 2,167
Those less confident in the system might opt to travel in future on a ground-based conveyance. The trouble with these incidents and their shocking-to-some revelations, is that they happen all the time, to all airlines flying all manner of aircraft, and like icebergs, the bulk of them are hidden from view. Many incidents lead to increases in redundancy in the form of procedural review that provides greater safety to all - reflected by the fact there has only been a single passenger fatality in scheduled Canadian aviation in the past five years (and it wasn't near Winnipeg).
Being in the year 2018 shouldn't be a factor - evolution is inexorable.
Being in the year 2018 shouldn't be a factor - evolution is inexorable.
Aviation is not risk free and no one is claiming it is despite your myopic view that any view that highlights potential issues or at least issues that demonstrates some concerns with recent events means that those that have that viewpoint must be inexperienced.
Hard landings or landings whereby aircraft bounce back into the air after the initial touchdown are common. How it is that we got here in 2018 without a fatality anywhere in the world whereby SOP was followed and no one died is impressive. Several airplanes have encountered hard landings and these are not one off events.
That said perhaps you can lay off a bit and just agree to disagree without seeming condescending in your posts?
Jul 13, 2018, 6:52 pm
#3476
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,449
The discussion regarding general concerns about Air Canada's safety culture is already open for discussion here so let's please keep this thread for incident specific discussion.
tcook052
AC forum Mod.
tcook052
AC forum Mod.
Jul 13, 2018, 6:56 pm
#3477
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YYC
Posts: 23,804
That a plane damaged like this one was should not have flown, let alone with paying customers, does not require one bit of visual acuity, or perfect insight. It is just plain evident. Which must be 100% obvious to anyone in the aviation community.
That it happened because the scenario fell through the cracks so there is no one obviously to blame does not mean it was a non-event. Surely if you look at regulations and procedures, thee is plenty on the books that's there to make sure this sort of things don't happen. Except, the specific one was missed.
Jul 13, 2018, 8:33 pm
#3478
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 2002
Location: YEG
Programs: HH Silver
Posts: 56,449
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...sion-1.4745567
Jail time, fine for Dutch passenger who caused flight diversion to Labrador
Elke Van de Voort was handed 21-day sentence and must pay Air Canada $3,474
Jail time, fine for Dutch passenger who caused flight diversion to Labrador
Elke Van de Voort was handed 21-day sentence and must pay Air Canada $3,474
Jul 13, 2018, 9:37 pm
#3479
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
Jul 15, 2018, 9:16 am
#3480
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,005
Last edited by tracon; Jul 15, 2018 at 10:38 pm
