I had a chance to hear the transmissions between the pilot and the tower. Wow.....she was textbook...cool....calm under very tough conditions. She even spoke briefly with most of the passengers after they landed in Philly. Very proud of her and this also speaks to the excellent Navy flight training she received. I also noticed that she was a flight instructor as well during her tour in the Navy....they sure knew who to pick as an instructor back in the day ! Also...a big shout out to the passengers who attempted to save the fellow passenger who was partially sucked out her window. Despite all of the drama and negative discourse in our country ....it sure is great to see that heroes still exist . Perhaps....a hero may live in everyone
FC: Southwest Pilot....defines cool under pressure
- Thread starter whart
- Start date
All due respect to the situation, but really, once any concerns over the decompression were quelled, there was no threat to the plane. I wouldn't expect a heavily trained pilot to be anything but calm in that situation. The plane wasn't out of control and wasn't going to crash and had plenty of fuel.
Just about every situation that could possibly occur in a plane is accounted for. An uncontained engine failure even isn't that big of a deal. Just in this particular case, it punctured the cabin.
Just about every situation that could possibly occur in a plane is accounted for. An uncontained engine failure even isn't that big of a deal. Just in this particular case, it punctured the cabin.
She --- like Sully 9 years ago in NYC --- "did her job." They're trained to (1) be cool under pressure and (2) follow the principle of "aviate first, then navigate, then communicate."
I know there are some folk who view commercial pilots as nothing more than "cockpit caretakers." But I definitely respect them - they're professionals up there.
I know there are some folk who view commercial pilots as nothing more than "cockpit caretakers." But I definitely respect them - they're professionals up there.
That being said, it appears the plane was closer to Harrisburg International than to Philly International based on where debris from the plane was found. Why did she choose Philly instead of Harrisburg? Would it have made any difference in outcome for the injured passenger who died?
(1) The plane may have been closer to MDT then PHL when the incident occurred - but the plane does need to descend of course.
(2) PHL has the longer runways. She was bringing the plane in with only 1 engine - she was also bringing the plane in at a higher-than-average speed and at a non-standard flaps setting. Longer runway preferred there.
(3) Southwest serves PHL. It doesn't serve MDT or ABE. She was probably familiar with PHL, and less familiar with the other 2. When she needs to get the plane down quick, go somewhere you already know.
Perhaps Harrisburg doesn't have the (possibly) needed ground personnel and/or they wanted to go to a Philly hospital instead of Hershey?
Suspect the decision where to divert to wasn’t totally made by the pilot?
Most likely there's a more suitable maintenance facility at PHL than Harrisburg.
And the pilot did pick the airport. If you listen to the ATC recording, she was asked where she wanted to go.
And the pilot did pick the airport. If you listen to the ATC recording, she was asked where she wanted to go.
LOL. One engine exploded and out of commission, a window blown out and the cabin depressurized at 30,000+ feet, one passenger mortally wounded and many of the remaining passengers screaming in understandable fear, and a need to descend quickly before the low pressure and lack of oxygen starts killing passengers. Yeah, no big deal.
The fact that this pilot was trained to handle things like this does not mean she didn't do a very praiseworthy job.
Says the person that wasn't on the plane.
And maybe its just me but unless you are a pilot I don't think you have any insight to what was a threat and not a threat. I mean everyone else that has experience in this area said it was a pretty big deal.
Sorry but if I'm a passenger on the plane you can damn well bet it becomes a pretty big freaking deal to me.
Nice internet bravado though. Props.
Yes, it was no big deal in her approach to get the plane on the ground. The plane was in no danger of crashing. Planes are designed to fly on one engine. She had plenty of fuel.
She did do a praiseworthy job, but she was doing the job she's trained to do for years.
I'd argue the flight attendants had a hell of a lot harder job to do since you can script any technical approach to a malfunction, but you can only do so much to train for a panicked group of passengers.
She did do a praiseworthy job, but she was doing the job she's trained to do for years.
I'd argue the flight attendants had a hell of a lot harder job to do since you can script any technical approach to a malfunction, but you can only do so much to train for a panicked group of passengers.
If I read the story right, the passengers weren't flying the plane.
Well you also don't think shrapnel flying through the cabin is a big deal so yea maybe you should go back and read it again.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
I would with hold judgment of saying the plane wasnt in any danger until the entire investigation is complete. Yes she is very calm on radio with the tower but until everything comes out we dont know what she was battling. Heck a big safe guard had already failed in keeping parts contained inside the engine. After sitting in between the pilot and copilot during landing on a commercial flight from Athens to London what they do is amazing. Incredible experience watching them and listening them talk to the tower back and forth.
Well you also don't think shrapnel flying through the cabin is a big deal so yea maybe you should go back and read it again.
How would that have changed the pilot's decision on how to react? Yes, it was hell for the passengers. But the pilot was doing her job.
I heard about the the emergency returning home on the TurnPike yesterday. I've been very busy with work today and had yet to look into the details of the mishap. When I did start reading a few articles and saw her picture, I realized that I was one of hundreds that shook her hand after giving a great insight into her flight history in the Navy. She was the guest motivational speaker for the assembly of the Associated PA Constructors Fall Seminar in either 2015 or 2016.
LOL, maybe interrobang is having that time of the month experiences and is just being contrary to everyone.
The NTSB spokesman giving a press conference right now basically said the same thing. These pilots are trained on exactly what to do in all the scenarios that this plane experienced. And that he wasn't surprised at how calm the pilots were in getting the plane down.
Just because its "expected" or he isn't "surprised" doesn't mean it was anything less than excellent work.
Last edited:
Last edited:
Exactly.
Per the NTSB briefing just now, the plane was --- for a moment immediately following the blowout --- in a 41-degree left roll. That's pretty damn significant. That roll was caused by the loss of the one engine. The pilots (let's give credit to the co-pilot on this too, there were 2 people up front) had to deal with that immediately and they did so.
Then on the landing they came in at 190 MPH (normal landing speed ~ 155 MPH) and with the flaps in a very non-standard position. They had to fly the plane that way because of the blowout.
So even when there were "procedures" for this, they still had to adapt and adapt correctly, often doing that adapting quickly (e.g., when the plane was at a 41-degree left roll).
Similar threads
