6 ms·

Honestly that captain is too calm. Sounds like she's drunk or drugged. I understand calm under fire, but she's talking slower than everyone else on that radio.

by eric_b 8y ago

Honestly that captain is too calm. Sounds like she's drunk or drugged. I understand calm under fire, but she's talking slower than everyone else on that radio. Seems like quick replies to the point would be better than her lackadaisical speech. Also, she doesn't seem to have a firm grasp on what happened to her airplane, or the damage done to it.

evan_ 8y ago
so what's your premise here, that she's drunk and that's what caused the engine to explode?
- BookmarkSaver 8y ago
  Or that the captain could use some more urgency and sharpness in responding to the situation, rather than sounding somewhat checked out and slow. Still a pretty petty point.
  - tclancy 8y ago
    What would urgency sound like, speaking really loudly and quickly? If so, how would that be better than her measured cadence making sure she and the tower are on the same page?
    - spear 8y ago
      I suppose then she'd be criticized for being too "hysterical".
  - lutorm 8y ago
    Talking to ATC is far down on your priority list in emergencies. First priorities are to fly the airplane, figure out what's wrong, decide on a course of action and head in the right direction. Only after all those things are done, should you take time to talk to the controllers. In these situations, you do what's necessary and then, when convenient, you advise the controllers of the actions you are taking.
  - JshWright 8y ago
    The captain acted decisively and communicated clearly. I teach firefighters and paramedics how to communicate on the radio. You always want an inverse relationship between the stress level of the situation and the intensity level of your radio transmission. Speaking 20% slower and being understood is much better than speaking 20% faster and constantly repeating yourself.
    - mindcrime 8y ago
      Former firefighter and 911 dispatcher here -can confirm. There's little worse than somebody screaming excitedly over the air in a way that no one can understand them.
anoncoward111 8y ago
Dude, the woman just landed a damaged plane and saved everyone's life. Are you this much of a nitpicker in real life? "Uhhh, I don't know, the landing was good but she could have been a little quicker on her speech. 8/10 would consider further training."
wahern 8y ago
Maybe she went to the Denzel Washington School of Aviation: https://www.hulu.com/watch/417659 https://www.hulu.com/watch/417659
eropple 8y ago
She's inside the airplane. She's relying on her instrumentation. What do you expect her to do, get out and look? As for her speech patterns, she's trying to be extremely clear and specific with her speech while dealing with stuff like emergency checklists and keeping the plane aloft. As anyone in a life-or-death crisis should be doing. Speaking precisely and clearly is worth overwhelmingly more than speaking quickly and getting something wrong. This is perhaps the grossest backseat-driving I've seen on Hacker News and I have seen some gross ones.
- swsieber 8y ago
  Furthermore, they are supposed to be calm. It's not just a good idea & more effective; it's what they're supposed to do.
- ubernostrum 8y ago
  Also, keeping away from unnecessary (and potentially distracting) communication, trusting colleagues, and maintaining clear separation of responsibilities. That's the sort of thing that needs to be drilled into people, and that aviation does a good job with. I always like referencing this incident from a few years ago as an example of that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14742725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14742725
hodgesrm 8y ago
Good Lord. She's working through how to get a damaged plane onto the ground without further incident, which means that in addition to talking to ATC she's assessing equipment status and going through an emergency landing checklist. Pretty full plate all things considered. Her calm is impressive. That's what pilots are paid for.
tedunangst 8y ago
Definitely should have gone back and stuck her head out the window to assess the damage. Just lazy to sit there in the cockpit.
tclancy 8y ago
Have you ever been in a crisis anything like that? If you don't panic, you may find an eerie sense of calm as the part of your brain built for the situation starts stripping away all input that doesn't matter and focuses you on the task at hand. Hardly compares, but as someone who once set his yard on fire (and once pulled over to help someone whose car had just rolled multiple times) I can attest it feels a bit like a superpower after the fact. On the one hand, I'd definitely be happy to see her on my next flight, but on the other, she's a woman so all her responses have to be seen through some mechanism where her emotions have betrayed her.
bspn 8y ago
So which would you prefer: a calm pilot speaking clearly to ensure no misunderstanding or a harried pilot speaking incoherently (but urgently!) and potentially risking hundreds of lives due to an error? She handled this perfectly and if you go back and listen to the Hudson landing Captain Sully had a very similar demeanor but, you know, I guess it was ok when he did it.
- briandear 8y ago
  The famous “Houston Center” radio voice.
danaliv 8y ago
I think this stems from a common misconception that ATC is “in charge.” Yes, compliance with ATC is mandatory, but in an emergency, priority number one is to fly the airplane. ATC can’t help you there. Communication with ATC is priority number three. ATC cleared the airspace for her and has her on radar; there’s nothing else they can do.
- weaksauce 8y ago
  Aviate, navigate, communicate... in that order.
  - dingaling 8y ago
    That's an axiom, not a law. For example it would be inadvisable to navigate a stricken aircraft through an airport's terminal manoeuvring area without prioritising communication with ATC. Quick way to make things much worse. Or trying to navigate to a diversion airfield without first communicating to ensure that it is usable. Aviate, then navigate and communicate.
    - lutorm 8y ago
      Not at all; once you declare an emergency, it's ATC's job to get everyone else out of your way. It's obviously better if you tell them what you're going to do, but that takes a backseat to actually handling the emergency.
- barty1 8y ago
  Last thing a controller wants to do is to get in the way of the pilot flying the airplane in the event of an emergency. I worked a light aircraft that had iced up a couple of months ago, and the only thing I really did was to relay whatever information I had to help the pilot find his way out of the ice.
- tialaramex 8y ago
  I don't think it's correct to say that compliance is "mandatory". The set of circumstances in which a pilot ordinarily must disobey direct instructions from ATC is small, but it's not empty. And ATC rarely gives direct instructions anyway, a lot of what is said by ATC is phrased in terms of permission for the pilot to do things they should probably choose to do. If they respond "Unable" the ATC isn't going to write them up for violating some rule, they're going to look at how to work around this. A very obvious example where the Rules explicitly tell pilots to disobey ATC is instructions from local technology that isn't co-ordinated with the ground, such as Ground Proximity Warning System and Traffic Collision Avoidance System. If these systems decide that overall "Climb, Crossing Climb, Climb Now!" is the correct instruction, but your controller suggests descending, the Rules are clear that you should all obey the machine and it will probably be fine because the machine is doing its own real time conflict resolution and re-assessing the local situation. The Rules say you should tell the controller why you didn't obey their instructions but again, not as a greater priority than flying the plane.
JshWright 8y ago
Notice how many times she was misunderstood? Exactly none... Calm, clear communication is precisely what's needed in situations like that.
ben509 8y ago
Maybe this is too much of a meta question, but why was this downvoted so heavily? As someone with a relevant background, I think it's entirely wrong, but it's presented in an entirely respectful manner. Saying something that is very clearly wrong is good because then we can explain why it's wrong. Or am I missing something?
- eropple 8y ago
  I didn't downvote it (though my incredulous reply has been upvoted pretty heavily), but I'll be frank: I don't think this kind of warm-take review of the pilot's radio manner would be made if it was a man. Being respectful-and-gross is not materially better than being gross, and so I'm not surprised that other people came to the same conclusion and tubed the post.
  - hueving 8y ago
    >I don't think this kind of warm-take review of the pilot's radio manner would be made if it was a man. Every aviation incident discussed in /r/aviation is full of armchair analysts and critics. People on the internet like to put out controversial opinions about what people have done to feel relevant. Much like you ended up doing ascribing this to a sexism issue despite it being based on pace of speech.
    - Johnny555 8y ago
      Analysis and speculation (even if uninformed) about how they handled the incident is one thing "Why didn't they reduce speed and take a 25 mile approach instead of 20 mile?".... But criticizing the pilot for being too calm and speaking in slow deliberate sentences? That seems over the edge and sounds more like personal criticism.
- hueving 8y ago
  Because if you have no relevant experience, you shouldn't be making assertions about 'being too calm' since you have no clue what you're talking about. The commenter then digs in further with irrelevant opinions about why he/she thinks the pilot was too calm. It's like a non-programmer opening up some source code, then leaving a comment that the letter X is used too much because it's not used that much in articles on the NY Times.
mvkel 8y ago
The pilot has thousands of hours in an F18 fighter jet. She retired from the NAVY and became a commercial pilot. What you're hearing is incredibly effective communication by a very experienced pilot. Curious if you'd give this kind of scrutiny if the pilot were a man.
- hodgesrm 8y ago
  Thank you so much! I was wondering about the pilot's background while listening to the ATC tape. A lot of the ex-military folks are completely unflappable. She sounds like she can hang with the best of them. I would fly on her plane any day. (Disclaimer: ex-USAF here though not air crew.)
  - danso 8y ago
    Apparently she was one of the Navy's first ever female fighter pilots: https://heavy.com/news/2018/04/tammie-jo-shults-pilot-southwest-flight-1380-engine-hero/ https://heavy.com/news/2018/04/tammie-jo-shults-pilot-southw... https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-pilot-who-saved-that-southwest-flight-is-a-badass-1825341463 https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-pilot-who-saved-that-s...

by eric_b 8y ago

evan_ 8y ago

so what's your premise here, that she's drunk and that's what caused the engine to explode?

BookmarkSaver 8y ago
Or that the captain could use some more urgency and sharpness in responding to the situation, rather than sounding somewhat checked out and slow. Still a pretty petty point.
- tclancy 8y ago
  What would urgency sound like, speaking really loudly and quickly? If so, how would that be better than her measured cadence making sure she and the tower are on the same page?
  - spear 8y ago
    I suppose then she'd be criticized for being too "hysterical".
- lutorm 8y ago
  Talking to ATC is far down on your priority list in emergencies. First priorities are to fly the airplane, figure out what's wrong, decide on a course of action and head in the right direction. Only after all those things are done, should you take time to talk to the controllers. In these situations, you do what's necessary and then, when convenient, you advise the controllers of the actions you are taking.
- JshWright 8y ago
  The captain acted decisively and communicated clearly. I teach firefighters and paramedics how to communicate on the radio. You always want an inverse relationship between the stress level of the situation and the intensity level of your radio transmission. Speaking 20% slower and being understood is much better than speaking 20% faster and constantly repeating yourself.
  - mindcrime 8y ago
    Former firefighter and 911 dispatcher here -can confirm. There's little worse than somebody screaming excitedly over the air in a way that no one can understand them.

anoncoward111 8y ago

Dude, the woman just landed a damaged plane and saved everyone's life. Are you this much of a nitpicker in real life? "Uhhh, I don't know, the landing was good but she could have been a little quicker on her speech. 8/10 would consider further training."

wahern 8y ago

Maybe she went to the Denzel Washington School of Aviation: https://www.hulu.com/watch/417659 https://www.hulu.com/watch/417659

eropple 8y ago

She's inside the airplane. She's relying on her instrumentation. What do you expect her to do, get out and look? As for her speech patterns, she's trying to be extremely clear and specific with her speech while dealing with stuff like emergency checklists and keeping the plane aloft. As anyone in a life-or-death crisis should be doing. Speaking precisely and clearly is worth overwhelmingly more than speaking quickly and getting something wrong. This is perhaps the grossest backseat-driving I've seen on Hacker News and I have seen some gross ones.

swsieber 8y ago
Furthermore, they are supposed to be calm. It's not just a good idea & more effective; it's what they're supposed to do.
ubernostrum 8y ago
Also, keeping away from unnecessary (and potentially distracting) communication, trusting colleagues, and maintaining clear separation of responsibilities. That's the sort of thing that needs to be drilled into people, and that aviation does a good job with. I always like referencing this incident from a few years ago as an example of that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14742725 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14742725

hodgesrm 8y ago

Good Lord. She's working through how to get a damaged plane onto the ground without further incident, which means that in addition to talking to ATC she's assessing equipment status and going through an emergency landing checklist. Pretty full plate all things considered. Her calm is impressive. That's what pilots are paid for.

tedunangst 8y ago

Definitely should have gone back and stuck her head out the window to assess the damage. Just lazy to sit there in the cockpit.

tclancy 8y ago

Have you ever been in a crisis anything like that? If you don't panic, you may find an eerie sense of calm as the part of your brain built for the situation starts stripping away all input that doesn't matter and focuses you on the task at hand. Hardly compares, but as someone who once set his yard on fire (and once pulled over to help someone whose car had just rolled multiple times) I can attest it feels a bit like a superpower after the fact. On the one hand, I'd definitely be happy to see her on my next flight, but on the other, she's a woman so all her responses have to be seen through some mechanism where her emotions have betrayed her.

bspn 8y ago

So which would you prefer: a calm pilot speaking clearly to ensure no misunderstanding or a harried pilot speaking incoherently (but urgently!) and potentially risking hundreds of lives due to an error? She handled this perfectly and if you go back and listen to the Hudson landing Captain Sully had a very similar demeanor but, you know, I guess it was ok when he did it.

briandear 8y ago
The famous “Houston Center” radio voice.

danaliv 8y ago

I think this stems from a common misconception that ATC is “in charge.” Yes, compliance with ATC is mandatory, but in an emergency, priority number one is to fly the airplane. ATC can’t help you there. Communication with ATC is priority number three. ATC cleared the airspace for her and has her on radar; there’s nothing else they can do.

weaksauce 8y ago
Aviate, navigate, communicate... in that order.
- dingaling 8y ago
  That's an axiom, not a law. For example it would be inadvisable to navigate a stricken aircraft through an airport's terminal manoeuvring area without prioritising communication with ATC. Quick way to make things much worse. Or trying to navigate to a diversion airfield without first communicating to ensure that it is usable. Aviate, then navigate and communicate.
  - lutorm 8y ago
    Not at all; once you declare an emergency, it's ATC's job to get everyone else out of your way. It's obviously better if you tell them what you're going to do, but that takes a backseat to actually handling the emergency.
barty1 8y ago
Last thing a controller wants to do is to get in the way of the pilot flying the airplane in the event of an emergency. I worked a light aircraft that had iced up a couple of months ago, and the only thing I really did was to relay whatever information I had to help the pilot find his way out of the ice.
tialaramex 8y ago
I don't think it's correct to say that compliance is "mandatory". The set of circumstances in which a pilot ordinarily must disobey direct instructions from ATC is small, but it's not empty. And ATC rarely gives direct instructions anyway, a lot of what is said by ATC is phrased in terms of permission for the pilot to do things they should probably choose to do. If they respond "Unable" the ATC isn't going to write them up for violating some rule, they're going to look at how to work around this. A very obvious example where the Rules explicitly tell pilots to disobey ATC is instructions from local technology that isn't co-ordinated with the ground, such as Ground Proximity Warning System and Traffic Collision Avoidance System. If these systems decide that overall "Climb, Crossing Climb, Climb Now!" is the correct instruction, but your controller suggests descending, the Rules are clear that you should all obey the machine and it will probably be fine because the machine is doing its own real time conflict resolution and re-assessing the local situation. The Rules say you should tell the controller why you didn't obey their instructions but again, not as a greater priority than flying the plane.

JshWright 8y ago

Notice how many times she was misunderstood? Exactly none... Calm, clear communication is precisely what's needed in situations like that.

ben509 8y ago

Maybe this is too much of a meta question, but why was this downvoted so heavily? As someone with a relevant background, I think it's entirely wrong, but it's presented in an entirely respectful manner. Saying something that is very clearly wrong is good because then we can explain why it's wrong. Or am I missing something?

eropple 8y ago
I didn't downvote it (though my incredulous reply has been upvoted pretty heavily), but I'll be frank: I don't think this kind of warm-take review of the pilot's radio manner would be made if it was a man. Being respectful-and-gross is not materially better than being gross, and so I'm not surprised that other people came to the same conclusion and tubed the post.
- hueving 8y ago
  >I don't think this kind of warm-take review of the pilot's radio manner would be made if it was a man. Every aviation incident discussed in /r/aviation is full of armchair analysts and critics. People on the internet like to put out controversial opinions about what people have done to feel relevant. Much like you ended up doing ascribing this to a sexism issue despite it being based on pace of speech.
  - Johnny555 8y ago
    Analysis and speculation (even if uninformed) about how they handled the incident is one thing "Why didn't they reduce speed and take a 25 mile approach instead of 20 mile?".... But criticizing the pilot for being too calm and speaking in slow deliberate sentences? That seems over the edge and sounds more like personal criticism.
hueving 8y ago
Because if you have no relevant experience, you shouldn't be making assertions about 'being too calm' since you have no clue what you're talking about. The commenter then digs in further with irrelevant opinions about why he/she thinks the pilot was too calm. It's like a non-programmer opening up some source code, then leaving a comment that the letter X is used too much because it's not used that much in articles on the NY Times.

mvkel 8y ago

The pilot has thousands of hours in an F18 fighter jet. She retired from the NAVY and became a commercial pilot. What you're hearing is incredibly effective communication by a very experienced pilot. Curious if you'd give this kind of scrutiny if the pilot were a man.

hodgesrm 8y ago
Thank you so much! I was wondering about the pilot's background while listening to the ATC tape. A lot of the ex-military folks are completely unflappable. She sounds like she can hang with the best of them. I would fly on her plane any day. (Disclaimer: ex-USAF here though not air crew.)
- danso 8y ago
  Apparently she was one of the Navy's first ever female fighter pilots: https://heavy.com/news/2018/04/tammie-jo-shults-pilot-southwest-flight-1380-engine-hero/ https://heavy.com/news/2018/04/tammie-jo-shults-pilot-southw... https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-pilot-who-saved-that-southwest-flight-is-a-badass-1825341463 https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-pilot-who-saved-that-s...