We've had two significant air crashes in 2025, which seems like a lot. It could be that flying is not a zero risk endeavour and the the odds finally caught up (1:11,000,000) and we had a couple close together.
What is interesting about both of these crashes is the lack of information about the flight crews being released. This lack of transparency about the flight crews has certainly led to lots of speculation about the makeup and competency of the pilots. Obviously the speculation could have been minimized by releasing the information, but it wasn't. So when people look at the social media presence of Endeavor Air (the operators of the Delta regional flight) it seems reasonable to question the make up of the flight crew and whether or not the pilots might have been promoted due to factors other than strictly competence. That the cause of the crash seems to be pilot error leading to a landing so hard as to destroy one side of the landing gear, it seems like the pilots qualifications might be important. It is possible that this was a maintenance issue and the the landing gear just collapsed due to negligence or some other reason. If this is the case, then likewise it would be valuable to have information about those who did the maintenance.
Given the fact that this most recent crash was in Canada, it's possible that the Canadian version of the FAA/NTSB might do things differently and more slowly. Unfortunately, the longer they wait, the more speculation there will be.
10 comments:
Frankly, I don't recall crew members involved in crashes in the past being publicized.
I'm sure they were made public, but probably wasn't as big of a story. Given the airlines and the military publicizing their commitment to things other than putting the highest possible quality of pilots in the cockpit, it's now potentially newsworthy. After the recent preliminary findings about the helicopter pilot situation, it seems safe to suggest that the pilot was not the cream of the crop.
If, in this case, the pilots are less qualified than they could be then it's a legitimate story.
The flight crew of the Canadian airliner were all women:
https://notthebee.com/article/plane-that-crashed-at-toronto-airport-was-operated-by-endeavor-air-an-airline-obsessed-with-all-female-flight-crews
Watching the landing, it wasn't faulty gear. The crew did not flare but drove the plane onto the ground so hard the right main collapsed and, watching the video, it looked like the nose gear also collapsed The collapsing gear led to the roll that broke the wing and left it upside down.
I haven't seen anything confirming the all women crew, but given the company it wouldn't surprise me. They certainly advertise their all women crews, at some point they'll have to release the actual names.
I think that your assessment is likely what happened, although I've heard some concern about wind gusts as well. It seems possible that they were trying to get down quickly to avoid wind gusts and landed hard as you noted. I guess it's possible that the wind help to flip the plane as well.
If it comes out that the flight crew was anywhere close to under qualified, all hell is going to break loose.
I have a friend who is an airline pilot (we served in the Civil Air Patrol together) and he said that it appeared the crew were so concerned about the wind that they just plain forgot to flare!
Which makes total sense on the surface. But there are two pilots and at least one of them should have been aware enough to flare or to go around again. It seems like that's kind of why pilots are trained.
It looks especially bad when you see bigger planes land successfully in significant crosswinds and other extreme conditions.
If they were that concerned, it seems like they should have aborted the landing and tried again or diverted to another airport.
It'll be interesting, but my money is on pilot error just like DC.
I agree, especially given the weight put on DEI by the previous administration and all like it. By listing how many DEI placements are involved in negative outcomes as oppose to placements on merit, we can better determine the value of DEI initiatives rather than merely speculate on what is clearly the most obvious likely consequences.
It's possible, maybe even likely, but I'm not sure it's obvious yet. Let's wait for the actual information and then go from there. Dan and his ilk like to jump to conclusions, let's be better than Dan.
If it turns out that this was a DEI situation that put unqualified pilots in the cockpit, then it'' absolutely be fair game. But let's not get ahead of the facts.
I agree that with two pilots, one should have noticed they needed to flare!!!
When you have strong crosswinds you do keep your speed up longer so you can hold into the wind, and then when you flare you do in leaning into the wind (depending on the strength of the wind and size of the plane) so you touchdown with the windward gear a fraction of time ahead of the downwind side.
Just looking at the video, I doubt if they even thought about a go-around.
Yeah, it kind of makes sense that they'd work together.
I'm sure that there's a specific technique that pilots train on, both on simulators and in real life. I'm guessing that multiple other planes landed safely under the same conditions and that there is no reason why this plane could not have done so as well.
I agree that it looked like they were intent on getting down on the first attempt and probably didn't consider anything else.
Post a Comment