WSJ: United Sent Safety Warning to Pilots
 

United Sent Safety Warning to Pilots
Unusually blunt message followed several serious incidents caused by cockpit errors

United Continental Holdings Inc.’s management sent a dramatic safety warning to its pilots last month, calling for stepped-up compliance with rules and procedures following several serious incidents caused by cockpit errors.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/united-s...ots-1424900742

Very curious about the near terrain collision. Serious stuff.

pmUA had to pioneer cockpit resource management because miscommunication let a DC-8 run dry on fuel while trying to land in Portland during the 70s, resulting in a crash.

Here's a pay-wall free version of the link: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...JaftsKHxvxQraw

Wow.

Serious stuff, indeed. But I'm heartened that UA is calling attention among pilots to these problems, rather than trying to sweep them under the carpet.

I wonder how much the company's dynamic crew scheduling contributes to the problems? On Sunday, I was on a flight where one of the cockpit crew arrived 15 minutes before we pushed back from the gate. Presumably the other had done the walk around and some other pre-flight checks, but once everyone was boarded we sat another 10 minutes until the pilot or co-pilot boarded, then the cockpit and cabin doors closed, and then we pushed back.

I wonder how much time for briefing and teamwork there was in the cockpit before takeoff on that flight? We landed quite safely in YVR, I must add.

This is pretty serious and hopefully UA brings back some of the sUA training and guides.

Also, I think some of the sUA pilots are getting into the 739's. Lots of pilot shuffle between different aircraft.

Yep. The "sCO training" is exactly what's to blame here.

Honestly, a lay frequent flyer's forum is really no place for meaningful analysis of flight safety and training issues based on anecdotal evidence and newspaper articles.

For the most part, all fleets except the 747 and 787 are pretty well homogenized now, and the 76T (which is comprised of the sUA 757/767) pilot group is being integrated into the 756 fleet. There has been a great deal of movement in the pilot ranks, but transition training to a new fleet is quite comprehensive. As a general rule, pilots transitioning to different fleets should not be a widespread safety concern.

+1

Sorry but sUA pilots have complained of new policies that were brought in from sCO. Nothing to get upset about its a fact. Manuals were changed also to match sCO even though sUA made safery concerns about them.

Truth is the truth, and with plenty of family members flying for UA, I know.

Training time has also been reduced.

This is criminal. As a retired military pilot and trained safety officer/accident investigator, this makes my blood boil.



:mad::mad::mad:

This is scary. I had two mx on Saturday and it took three planes to get me from EWR to MCO. Now this. WOW

Great... Not only MX to worry about but crashing into the ground. Go UA!!

In that case, I guess you can point to the specific aspects of the manuals, procedures and training protocols that were changed from their pre-merger United state and how those changes contributed to the safety concerns for which the bulletin was intended to address?

Absent some facts in support, another anecdotal generalization is just flamebait. We are talking about a group of professional pilots, and while some post-merger changes came down that were disruptive to procedures many had become accustomed to and familiar with, the assertion that they made the operation less safe is difficult, if not impossible to substantiate. For example, what is the pre-merger point of comparison? Just that legacy United pilots felt more comfortable doing things the way they had since new-hire training?

I'm not disputing that post-merger changes were made to a number of aspects of flight operations, I know there were, but I think it's a bit irresponsible for a lay person to conclude that they made an operation (which carries tens of millions of passengers per year) measurably less safe on the basis of informal discussions and an internal company communication directed to pilots.

Lest we forget the fairly sensationalist news piece that spurred the discussion...

Not a surprise that some sUA pilots would complain about having to adopt sCO procedures. The fact is that before the merger each carrier had its own set of manuals and procedures. For the FAA to approve the merger the manuals had to be adjusted so all pilots followed the same procedures. Accordingly, some of the procedures of each airline was adopted for the new, common sets of manuals. The sCO pilots had to make some changes, and so did the sUA pilots. Nothing sinister in this.

The same happened with NW and DL and other mergers.

Save your angst for real calamities in the world.

The legacy CO procedures are quite safe. CO used, with very minor exceptions, Boeing's operating manuals and procedures manuals verbatim, flying its aircraft according to manufacturer specifications.