Hornet pilot loses wings over...a videogame?!

[phrogdriver]

What a DB.

If the game was enough to throw him into a seizure, then he was a ticking time bomb, and it's a good thing he lost his flight status.

 

[feddoc]

The shadows coming thru the rotor blades make me angry~

Hmmm, noted.

 

[flaps]

we had a rio in vmfa 232

at iwakuni in '69.. an o-4 who had been a ch-53 driver. said flicker vertigo did him in.

 

[AirPirate]

In that case, let's celebrate this opportunity to throw this dude under the bus.

Ok, ok, I'm not irate or anything. All I'm saying is that we have a choice. Do we put the guy on trial here -- a guy for whom we might at least have a partial understanding, more so than a faceless group of software developers? Or do we acknowledge the possibility that there could be something to this that is beyond us?

All we have is a news article. Newsflash here guys...there are corporate types at this very minute trying to pin their failing systems on pilots' errors ("...the more things change..."), so there is still plenty of stuff out there left to be discovered that can hurt you. Playing big and tuff, and throwing the D-word around won't help us. We don't do it for mishaps, so I see no reason to do it here.

 

[squorch2]

Much more often than not, it IS pilot error...

 

[MasterBates]

They also define pilot error as not coming to the same decision as 29 dudes in room with all the info made in 3 weeks, when he had only what his gauges and ass told him, and 3 seconds to make his decision.

Sent via my HTC EVO 4G

 

[BACONATOR]

They also define pilot error as not coming to the same decision as 29 dudes in room with all the info made in 3 weeks, when he had only what his gauges and ass told him, and 3 seconds to make his decision.

Sent via my HTC EVO 4G

True, but devil's advocate: CFIT, Gear-up landing and shutting down the wrong engine are all pretty cut and dry Pilot errors that don't need 29 dudes or 3 weeks to figure out, but they do so for the sake of thoroughness and professionalism. There may be mitigating/extenuating circumstances that play into WHY those decisions or actions were made, but ultimately it is all pilot error and many cases that I've read are pretty cut and dry.... certainly not all and certainly not most.

 

[lowflier03]

True, but devil's advocate: CFIT, Gear-up landing and shutting down the wrong engine are all pretty cut and dry Pilot errors that don't need 29 dudes or 3 weeks to figure out, but they do so for the sake of thoroughness and professionalism. There may be mitigating/extenuating circumstances that play into WHY those decisions or actions were made, but ultimately it is all pilot error and many cases that I've read are pretty cut and dry.... certainly not all and certainly not most.

Not to undermine all your years of experience with this, but there are lots of situations that get chalked up to "pilot error" that really boil down to something else. What is the easier thing for big Navy to say. Well we had this part in the aircraft that broke because we chose the lowest bidder and he gave us crap equipment... or that said equipment "malfunctioned" but it's really all the pilots fault because he had 2 seconds to analyze the situation and in the end damaged or crashed the aircraft. Remember it's always easier to blame the pilot. And yes there are times where pulling off the wrong engine may not be so cut and dry.

 

[MIDNJAC]

Not to undermine all your years of experience with this, but there are lots of situations that get chalked up to "pilot error" that really boil down to something else. What is the easier thing for big Navy to say. Well we had this part in the aircraft that broke because we chose the lowest bidder and he gave us crap equipment... or that said equipment "malfunctioned" but it's really all the pilots fault because he had 2 seconds to analyze the situation and in the end damaged or crashed the aircraft. Remember it's always easier to blame the pilot. And yes there are times where pulling off the wrong engine may not be so cut and dry.

Agreed. When you are talking Hornets, which I assume makes up the majority of the "chopped the wrong motor" crowd, you are also talking about 2 motors that share generally the same piece of the aircraft. There have been several instances that I have heard/read about, where a sympathetic fire light indicated the wrong motor.....it's around a foot or two seperating the motors, and the fire loop of one motor can certainly be affected by burn through from another. Just food for thought. And this is also a significant thread jack WRT the original topic

 

[Brett327]

Agreed. When you are talking Hornets, which I assume makes up the majority of the "chopped the wrong motor" crowd, you are also talking about 2 motors that share generally the same piece of the aircraft. There have been several instances that I have heard/read about, where a sympathetic fire light indicated the wrong motor.....it's around a foot or two seperating the motors, and the fire loop of one motor can certainly be affected by burn through from another. Just food for thought. And this is also a significant thread jack WRT the original topic

Happens in Prowler land as well.

Brett

 

[MIDNJAC]

Happens in Prowler land as well.

Brett

Yeah I could see that as well, good point!

 

[MasterBates]

Well, 60s (and I guess some other multi engine helos as well) can have "crosstalk" issues which lead to the wrong engine being shut down with out of limit TQ/EGT/RPM fluctuations.

Then there are the "malfunction happened, pilot followed EP, safety system failed" on a normal flight profile, and then they blame the pilot for not flying a profile that would have allowed greater success (when his profile should have been OK, if a "FAILSAFE" system worked). I've seen that type of "pilot error" blame more than once.

There are mishaps which I have seen chalked up to "skill based errors" when a test pilot was able to handle the recreated mishap, but he knew it was coming, and SHOULD be an above average Naval Aviator (and don't give me the we all should be above average.. I'm talking average Naval Aviator.. if there is more than one, THERE IS AN AVERAGE, AND NOT EVERYONE CAN BE ABOVE IT)

 

[phrogdriver]

Shutting down the wrong engine is usually the result of "fast hands." In my experience (which is a lot more than, uh, Otto's), that's due to poor CRM and impatience/getting freaked out. Rarely is losing an engine going to kill anyone quickly--take your time and fight the EP.

That said, a lot of the "pilot error" blame is complete BS. Comparing a pilot's response to a potentially deadly emergency against the supposedly optimal response is unfair.

 

[BACONATOR]

Well, 60s (and I guess some other multi engine helos as well) can have "crosstalk" issues which lead to the wrong engine being shut down with out of limit TQ/EGT/RPM fluctuations.

Then there are the "malfunction happened, pilot followed EP, safety system failed" on a normal flight profile, and then they blame the pilot for not flying a profile that would have allowed greater success (when his profile should have been OK, if a "FAILSAFE" system worked). I've seen that type of "pilot error" blame more than once.

There are mishaps which I have seen chalked up to "skill based errors" when a test pilot was able to handle the recreated mishap, but he knew it was coming, and SHOULD be an above average Naval Aviator (and don't give me the we all should be above average.. I'm talking average Naval Aviator.. if there is more than one, THERE IS AN AVERAGE, AND NOT EVERYONE CAN BE ABOVE IT)

Shutting down the wrong engine is usually the result of "fast hands." In my experience (which is a lot more than, uh, Otto's), that's due to poor CRM and impatience/getting freaked out. Rarely is losing an engine going to kill anyone quickly--take your time and fight the EP.

That said, a lot of the "pilot error" blame is complete BS. Comparing a pilot's response to a potentially deadly emergency against the supposedly optimal response is unfair.

I knew crosstalk and engine load-sharing would be brought up as a counter to my wrong-engine pilot error 1-to-1 argument. And NATOPS does give guidance on how to determine WHICH engine is malfunctioning (say, if you are getting fluctuations, and the good engine is following), AND I know I learned to pull the engine to idle to remove the load-sharing function, and see if it's the right engine before pulling off.

I don't know a whole lot of pilots who have experienced an engine failure, so I'm all ears to those who have.

 

[phrogpilot73]

I don't know a whole lot of pilots who have experienced an engine failure, so I'm all ears to those who have.

I pulled back the wrong one once, because I misdiagnosed the EP. Of course, I didn't pull it all the way back to stop - so it was easily remedied.