Delta Airlines jet crash lands/flips upside down in Toronto

Maybe she did primary training in a Bonanza. Not sure many Bo drivers understand the concept of flare. They just drive it onto the runway.

 

From link

Pic in Post #42 says she got her ATP in Jan2025. So in what capacity has she been flying since April?

 

Those were leased aircraft acquired when they took over some of Pan Am's routes. They were gone from the fleet by 1995, replaced by 767-300s.

 

You are just talking about the "Date of Issue." If she changed her address, for instance, they would reissue it and the date would change. Means nothing.

 

Challenging cross winds??

 

Been busy. I did not even here about this one. Also, AA had a jet catch fire in DEN yesterday. If this had been a 787 they would have grounded the entire fleet. Just saying


Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Because the Airbuses are less expensive than the Boeings.

 

""The left-wing of Endeavor Air Flight 4814 struck the runway at LaGuardia Airport in New York while the pilot was executing a go-around due to an unstable approach," a spokesperson for the agency shared in a statement."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/delta-plane-wing-clips-runway-during-botched-landing-laguardia-airport
*****
I wonder if this was an Endeavor "unmanned" flight.

 

The relevant portions of the report is below. Essentially, a low-time first officer smacked the plane into the ground and broke it.

=====

The airplane’s enhanced ground proximity warning system, which is designed to alert pilots to potential hazards upon approach, detected a high rate of decent less than three seconds before touchdown.

Less than 1 second before touchdown, the aircraft’s indicated airspeed was 134 knots. Its bank angle was 7.1 degrees to the right, and the pitch was 1 degree nose up. The descent at that time was recorded at rate of 1,110 feet per minute.

As the landing gear contacted the runway, the plane banked 7.5 degrees to the right. A component called a “side-stay” attached to the right landing gear fractured, and then it folded into the retracted position.
At maximum weight, the shock struts for the CRJ-900 are rated to absorb 720 feet per minute when the airplane lands, according to the report.

The first officer completed her flight training in April after being hired in January 2024, and has flown for Endeavor since then, exceeding the mandatory minimum standards set by the federal government.

Before the crash, the first officer piloting the aircraft had more than 1,422 hours of total flight time experience, nearly 419 hours of which were spent on the CRJ-900, the most common plane in Endeavor Air’s fleet. She was on the fifth of a five-day work cycle, according to the report, and started her day flying from Cleveland, Ohio, to Minneapois-St. Paul.

 

The real issue is not the FO... it is that the Captain only had 3700 hours after 18 years at Endeavor! He had flown, I think, once in the last 30 days, and this was his first leg with this FO. In all probability, he let her do the landing because he thought she would do a better job than he would!

 

The quote below says it all. This is both Endeavor's fault and also has to do with government interference.

What's really scary are companies that are now allowed to fly for the government under contract on small commercial routes that don't even meet the same standards as the major commercial carriers. It's only a matter of time before we hear more about them on the news

""At the time of the occurrence, she had accumulated 1,422.3 hours total flight time, including 418.7 hours on the aircraft type. The first officer was on day five of a five-day work cycle. She had flown 56.3 hours in the previous 30 days," the TSB report said."

 

"she had accumulated 1,422.3 hours total flight time,"
*****
Does that total include time in simulator? If so, do they report actual time flying an aircraft?

 

Another video, though it really doesn't add much:

 

That would not include any simulator time.

Again, why is everyone worked up about her time, which is nothing unusual? It's the Captain's time, which is both unusual and more important.

 

She was PF, so that is most important.

 

1100 fpm at touchdown is about 18 fps, like a really rough carrier landing, except she was not built for carrier landings. Normal carrier landing for a fighter is 600-700 fpm.

 

And touch down on one wheel with a substantial side load... and this is the result.

The important thing is that the Captain decided that under those conditions, she should be the pilot flying. And then, he did not promptly intervene when things were not going well, before they got to the accident. That's why his time is the most important, not hers. A monkey can fly an airplane-- that's the easy part. It's the decision making that is hard.

 

I like Juan Brown's explanation. The crew was inexperienced (the FO was building time fast but didn't have much and the captain had even less in recent years). They didn't put in enough excess energy to overcome the instability of gusts and may have been visually tricked by the not fully plowed 'narrowed' runway and blowing snow, which may have given the visual illusion of being higher than they were (late flare).

Regards,

Art S.

 

Most airline pilots are required to have 1500 hours to be hired by a major airline. Obviously not all

 

Which conditions are you referring to? Weather? If so you have already stated that the conditions were "not the bad, really". Since "a monkey can fly an airplane", and the conditions were not that bad then the PF should not have had any issues. and no decisions were to be made by the Captain. Not sure how you can shift the majority of blame to the Captain, e.g. "his time is most important". Maybe the CVR transcripts will shed a little light on the cockpit dynamics in the latter stages of the approach.

 

They were not that bad, in the sense that a competent crew should have had no problems landing in them-- as many did before these guys crashed.

"Not that bad" doesn't mean that care wasn't required, however. Sometimes the conditions are such that, while safe, the landing should be made by the Captain, particularly when the First Officer is fairly inexperienced. Or, if the Captain does allow the First Officer to land, the Captain needs to have the ability to understand when things are not going right and intervene before they become critical.

In this case, it appears that the Captain didn't have the skill set to intervene when necessary, and possibly didn't have the skill set to make the landing himself. That is why his time is most important.

At the end of the day, it's always the Captain's responsibility to make sure things happen safely, no matter who is flying the airplane. That's the job. This Captain didn't do that, or wasn't able to do that.

 

No argument there, although the practicalities of real life are that there is little difference between a Captain and First Officer on a regional jet other than seniority. No difference in training or proficiency standards. As you stated

So would the result have been any different, in all probability?