4 ms·
I think it’s unreasonable to pin the mistake on the pilots for not running all the checklists. This is where a flight engineer would come into play in my lay op
by avidphantasm 4y ago
I think it’s unreasonable to pin the mistake on the pilots for not running all the checklists. This is where a flight engineer would come into play in my lay opinion. The pilots were tactically focused; they were trying to keep the plane in the air. You need someone on the flight deck who is looking at the bigger picture, doing the fuel calculations (even if the automated systems aren’t warning about certain fuel-related variables), running the checklists, etc. Perhaps a flight engineer role (perhaps filled by a spare pilot) should be required for all ETOPS flights?
- Gasp0de 4y agoThey did contact the engineering department. Maybe it would have sufficed to have a telemetry uplink back to the engineering department. Should be doable with Starlink etc. soon enough.
- t0mas88 4y agoNo need for Starlink, sat com voice and data links have been a standard things for oceanic flights for years before Starlink.
- kayodelycaon 4y agoAircraft already have telemetry uplinks via satellite. See ACARS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS
- kayodelycaon 4y agoThere isn’t a need for a flight engineer. The non-flying pilot (pilot monitoring)’s entire job is to be looking at the big picture. If something goes wrong, they are the ones managing the checklist. In any case, the automation handles the vast majority of flight engineer duties. And fuel leak warnings have been added now.
- mannykannot 4y agoIt is an objective fact that if they had run the checklists they would have arrived with fuel remaining, and also that they had plenty of time to do so. If we can't say this, how can we learn anything from the investigation?