How about that president of Poland?

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Yup. Which makes it even more surprising (to me, at least ) that he was continuing to attempt to land after the controllers had recommended diverting. You'd think that they would have the latest and greatest weather but who knows.

Hind sight is always easy. But, as you know, it's worth trying to learn lessons from every accident.

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Yup. Which makes it even more surprising (to me, at least ) that he was continuing to attempt to land after the controllers had recommended diverting. You'd think that they would have the latest and greatest weather but who knows.

Hind sight is always easy. But, as you know, it's worth trying to learn lessons from every accident.

Pilots don't trust controllers.

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Well, I don't trust controllers to always get it right. It's like the old saying "when the pilot makes a mistake, the pilot dies. When a controller makes a mistake, the pilot dies." So I'm cautious.

If a controller effectively tells me that something is safe, it's "trust but verify" where possible. But if a controller tells me that I'm about to do something unsafe, I'm listening hard.

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Well, I don't trust controllers to always get it right. It's like the old saying "when the pilot makes a mistake, the pilot dies. When a controller makes a mistake, the pilot dies." So I'm cautious.

If a controller effectively tells me that something is safe, it's "trust but verify" where possible. But if a controller tells me that I'm about to do something unsafe, I'm listening hard.

just listen up, it never ceases to amaze me...

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Well, I don't trust controllers to always get it right. It's like the old saying "when the pilot makes a mistake, the pilot dies. When a controller makes a mistake, the pilot dies." So I'm cautious.

If a controller effectively tells me that something is safe, it's "trust but verify" where possible. But if a controller tells me that I'm about to do something unsafe, I'm listening hard.

Exactly.

The saying that we used to use, "back in the day," was - "a controller will give you a clearance to kill yourself."

In all fairness, though, they will also work very hard to keep you from killing yourself.



???

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Exactly.

The saying that we used to use, "back in the day," was - "a controller will give you a clearance to kill yourself."

In all fairness, though, they will also work very hard to keep you from killing yourself.



???

unfortunately for you then they're the controller and you're the controlee

 

[angus63]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Well, I don't trust controllers to always get it right. It's like the old saying "when the pilot makes a mistake, the pilot dies. When a controller makes a mistake, the pilot dies." So I'm cautious.

If a controller effectively tells me that something is safe, it's "trust but verify" where possible. But if a controller tells me that I'm about to do something unsafe, I'm listening hard.

"Trust, but verify" was a signature quote from President Reagan concerning his dealings with the Soviets. Ironic it appears here about a Soviet plane in Russian airspace.

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I just did some surfing, but there isn't much info available on Smolensk Military Airport. What little I did find suggests that there is no ILS at all. There is also only one VOR and a bunch of NDBs in the area.

I also looked at a satellite photo of the airport and blew it up as much as I could - I didn't see an ILS antenna array on either end of the runway (08-26). There also is no evidence of a glideslope antenna or any approach lights. Worse yet, there isn't any sign of the VOR being on the field. For those of you who don't fly, what this means, is that the electronic "beam" that you follow, doesn't lead you on a path to the runway, that is close to being straight out from the centerline, in most cases. Instead, you will follow a path that gets you to a point off of the end of the runway, but your heading will be offset from the extended centerline.

Basically, what all of this means, is that the pilots were flying a non-precision approach with fairly high "minimums." Trying to make it to a runway in dense fog under such a scenario, isn't particulalry bright - especially if you couldn't do it the first three times.

Flying a couple of approaches in a condition that includes fairly well defined ceilings and variable ceiling heights, is one thing. To keep trying in a fog situation, which tends not to change rapidly, isn't usually a very productive exercise. As can be seen here, if you get "gotta land-i-tis," and go below MDA, things can get worse in a hurry.


???

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

unfortunately for you then they're the controller and you're the controlee

I'm glad that you made this statement and I understand what you mean, but there's a huge difference in in the "or" ("er," in this case) and "ee" relationship, when it comes to flying airplanes. As a pilot, you are the final authority. If the controller tells you to do something that you know to be unsafe or beyond the capabilities of your aircraft, you have no obligation to do it. In fact, you have an obligation not to do it.

I don't fly airplanes any more and haven't in a long time, but when I was doing it, I can assure you that I wouldn't hesitate to override a controller, if I thought doing so was necessary.



???

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I'm glad that you made this statement and I understand what you mean, but there's a huge difference in in the "or" ("er," in this case) and "ee" relationship, when it comes to flying airplanes. As a pilot, you are the final authority. If the controller tells you to do something that you know to be unsafe or beyond the capabilities of your aircraft, you have no obligation to do it. In fact, you have an obligation not to do it.

I don't fly airplanes any more and haven't in a long time, but when I was doing it, I can assure you that I wouldn't hesitate to override a controller, if I thought doing so was necessary.



???

Absolutely. "Unable" is one of the most valuable words in a pilot's vocabulary.

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Absolutely. "Unable" is one of the most valuable words in a pilot's vocabulary.

As long as you have an operational reason, sure

 

[skysurfer2010]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

unfortunately for you then they're the controller and you're the controlee

With all due respect, and trust me I do have a lot of respect for controllers, but I hate that mentality. I know you're defending yourself and your career a little bit right now in this discussion, but a controller does not have final authority. PIC, "pilot in command", has and will always have the final authority over a flight. He or she just might have some explaining to do to the FAA if he or she decides to not accept a controllers authority.

That mentality is no different from the mentality of those large headed, egotistical pilots who think they're gods. I know controllers have to deal with them often, but we also have to deal with controllers who think they're god on occasion as well.

It's a good day when both do their jobs and work together instead of against.

 

[jonesg]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I flew from Poland into the soviet union, scary even in good weather if you're used to US technology and western facilities.
I recall the open cattle cars picking us up with our luggage to tow us to the terminal, no easy on off terminal connectors.
Warsaw is nice.

 

[skysurfer2010]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

I flew from Poland into the soviet union, scary even in good weather if you're used to US technology and western facilities.
I recall the open cattle cars picking us up with our luggage to tow us to the terminal, no easy on off terminal connectors.
Warsaw is nice.

Canada, the Caribbean, and South America are bad enough with all those darn pesky NDB approaches! I can only imagine the technology being worse over in Russia.

I've got to admit, the Russians have come up with some really crazy flying contraptions though!

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Canada, the Caribbean, and South America are bad enough with all those darn pesky NDB approaches! I can only imagine the technology being worse over in Russia.

My plane doesn't have an ADF.

I do have a 430W, so I can do overlay approaches. And I have a very, very, very valuable LORAN unit in the plane... want to buy it?

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

With all due respect, and trust me I do have a lot of respect for controllers, but I hate that mentality. I know you're defending yourself and your career a little bit right now in this discussion, but a controller does not have final authority. PIC, "pilot in command", has and will always have the final authority over a flight. He or she just might have some explaining to do to the FAA if he or she decides to not accept a controllers authority.

That mentality is no different from the mentality of those large headed, egotistical pilots who think they're gods. I know controllers have to deal with them often, but we also have to deal with controllers who think they're god on occasion as well.

It's a good day when both do their jobs and work together instead of against.

just because you "don't feel like it" doesn't mean you get to refuse routing or metering and go direct JFK. If the LOA says you're doing it, unless you're a lifeguard, the president, or someone else higher on the list you're doing it, or you're deviating and you get to call the facility. That's how it goes, safe, orderly, expeditious in that order.

Believe me, I'm a lot more willing to work with you than the old guys, but I have to do my job, and if that means it rolls down hill...

 

[qbynewbie]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Sure, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about issues of safety. If a controller issues an order that the PIC believes will compromise the safety of the flight, the PIC gets to say "unable". Further, in an emergency, a pilot is legally able to ignore all of the regulations as needed to bring the flight to a safe conclusion.

Of course, in that event, there better be a demonstrable emergency. Pilots who declare an emergency should have a demonstrably true reason for doing so.

 

[DECK SWABBER 58]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

GREAT THREAD GUYS.

I've been "toying" with the idea of getting a pilot's license.

Listening to you "pro's" is great fun.

Doesn't matter if your a pilot or a passenger, flying in a airplane
is just plane fascinating.

IMHO, this poor pilot was pressured into doing something against
his good judgement due his "dignataries" on board.

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

Sure, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about issues of safety. If a controller issues an order that the PIC believes will compromise the safety of the flight, the PIC gets to say "unable". Further, in an emergency, a pilot is legally able to ignore all of the regulations as needed to bring the flight to a safe conclusion.

Of course, in that event, there better be a demonstrable emergency. Pilots who declare an emergency should have a demonstrably true reason for doing so.

I never see it happen that way, it's always a clown that says he's unable to go down 1000-2000' for traffic, so he gets vectored to death and wastes just as much fuel.
I'm pretty young, I haven't seen many emergencies.

 

[Philip_G]

Re: How about that president of Poland?

GREAT THREAD GUYS.

I've been "toying" with the idea of getting a pilot's license.

Listening to you "pro's" is great fun.

Doesn't matter if your a pilot or a passenger, flying in a airplane
is just plane fascinating.

IMHO, this poor pilot was pressured into doing something against
his good judgement due his "dignataries" on board.

do it. no reason not to if you have the interest and the means.