Mentour, this isn't the first questionable incident of this captain. He was involved in an in-flight intercept in 2007 over Switzerland after loss of coms - apparently with the FO outside of cockpit for 20 minutes or so and the captain not responding to the radio calls. The press was saying he fell asleep, while alone in the cockpit ... He is a fairly legendary figure in aerobatics - former world champion, he was pretty much a household name in Czechoslovakia in the 1980s.

Hi Mentour! Can you please link to that translated report?

this crew reminds me of Hapag-Lloyd flight 3378 ...Petter, you should do a video about this Hapag-Lloyd flight = an absolute mess!

Honestly, I think you're being WAY too nice about all of this as most of us would like to have a few choice words with said Captain... Seriously, I don't think Peter has a single mean bone is his body! So by all means dude, let your fan-base handle the deleted expletives on your behalf in the comments section below! *deep breath* FFFFFFFFFFFF- *feed cuts to static*

What is a « discord » server? And why the name « Mentour » It’s like « the tour of the men » inverted. 🙃

@Vegan Zombie I beg to differ. His actions and answers did show severe misjudgements, questioning his sanity was a very reasonable thing to do. The report didn't *actually* call him crazy, it was my interpretation of reading between the lines.

I recall hearing of a US-citizen in Germany that was caught driving so drunk that the German authorities could not believe he was fully mentally capable. The idea that someone-even while that drunk-could make such a dangerous decision was so egregious to them, that they were like, surely, there must be something wrong here. I think after evaluation it was informed to them that… frustratingly, this was not such a grossly atypical situation in the US.

I once flew for a company where the Chief Pilot was much like this guy..... wrote the manuals but they didn't apply to him. Go figure....

Or just the way aviation community roasts their members in official manner.

@@LeifNelandDk Safety recommendations 1. ÚZPLN recommends to Smartwings, as on the basis of the flight a PIC's (pilot in command) continuing belief that its final decision-making process has been carried out "correctly", perform a psychological examination at the ÚLZ at the PIC. It's basically saying "If this pilot think he was doing correct during the incident, then the pilot should be examined psychologically" Tone is pretty set here.

It reminds me of Northwest Airlink Flight 5719.

lets be fair they probably a meanace everywhere in their life

I think that some passengers for whom captain saved a lot of time (which they would waste due to landing in random airport) can have different opinion.:-) Nothing really happened. It just matter of risk acceptance. One tolerate 1% other is scary of 0.1%. Procedures are created to have it at extreme minimum level.

@@mborows2 Ha ha, that is why they don't let passengers make decisions any more complicated than choosing tea or coffee. Just think it would be a lot cheaper to remove all those "unnecessary" engines along with backup hydraulics and electrics....!?

@@jtidsskids So what? if somebody prefers cheaper flight which has 50% chance of crash it's his life and his decision. He only should be fully aware of the risk. That's all. "Safety experts" do not even measure risk in numbers they just want it minimal. However risk should be reasonable not minimal. Everyone has its own acceptable level.

Which is a good thing, I believe. And this wasn't even an accident, only a potential one, but this is how our culture works efficiently. Whereas even this very same playlist is full of disasters caused by the hubris of establishment dinosaurs, being cleared of blame by their Turkish, Moroccan, Korean and Indonesian companies..

Because the cap was a moron and got What he deserved

@@rawexplorer8373 I don’t agree. He should’ve been stripped of his wings. Definitively. That sort of dogged attitude can not be cured or trained out. His final response to the report betrays some degree of narcissism and that is a serious mental illness that ought to be kept far away from leadership roles. IMHO.

@@AnthonyLeighDunstan you dont agree with What? I agree with you that he is psycho, I even know ppl who knew him and confirmed so and as far as I know he was in the end stripped of his license and in the nut house which is good.

@@rawexplorer8373 it was in response to your statement “he got what he deserved” when at the time I was of the understanding that he was still allowed to fly. Sorry, I didn’t realise that that had all be carried out. Good. Haha, so then yeah, we agree. Glad the right degree of justice was implemented. 😬👍🏻

British Airways 009, early 1980s, got into a vulcanic ash cloud over Indonesia. After the plane was cleaned, the cleaning crew nicknamed it "the flying ashtray", because of the mass of ash they needed to get out.

"Everything is fine apart from the small issue being that we've lost all 4 issues"

Personally, I'd appreciate such heads up to morally prep

I know BAW009 pretty well.

Was that the guy that appears in an interview on this very channel? Fairly sure he says it during that video. Sounds even funnier with the British accent 😂

I first heard that joke back in the early 1980s, and I'm not even a pilot!

Said in humor, "Thanks, Victor Borge"

That makes me wonder how many engines a 747 could fly with and what would be the outcomes. I would imagine flying on only 1 or 4 would be pretty hard. IIRC, they used the 747 to test one of the newer bigger engines, one of the big Trents or GEs, and they were able to fly the plane with only that engine operating, but it was inboard.

@@wiredforstereo In Take-Off, there's a speed at which they can NO LONGER "reject" taking off... SO for safety reasons Jets have to be at least capable of not only flight on 1 of 4, but Full-on Take-Off as well. It's certainly not recommended, so pilot's have extra training to handle the technical adjustments, BUT it IS imminently do-able. According to Kelsey over on "74 Gear" (channel on YT) Flying even on an outboard 1 of 4 is mostly inefficient as hell, and makes landing less than optimal... BUT Commercial Pilots already "Land in the Crab" regularly, so probably only a marginal addition to risk. ;o)

@@gnarthdarkanen7464 I don't think you have proven your case. And I don't think that's accurate. They may be able to fly on one engine, but they most certainly cannot take off on one. If planes have a long roll out on all engines loaded, as we have seen, it beggars belief that one quarter of the power could pull it off when they already use three quarters of the runway. That math just doesn't work. I've also seen it tried on a simulator.

I thought using your own headset is allowed? I think Mentor once mentioned using his own.

@@Mike-oz4cv Maybe it's a selectively faulty unit 😉😉

@@Mike-oz4cv yes, and then it's his fault the headset was faulty

Or even worse: zmrdwings zmrd= brat

I am so smart! I am so smart! S-M-R-T ... no, wait...

Chief pilot and training officer, I think Mentour said.

But unlike this guy that KLM Captain was under a pretty tight time constraint, I do not think this crew was.

Hadn't he also been appointed "Pilot of the year".

Exactly

Yep he was a big blow bag

Smartwings - the second biggest shame of our aviation.

​@@jakubjandourek2822I sense a joke. Which is the first biggest shame of the Czech aviation?

@@EeeEee-bm5gx Liquidation of ČSA. (Czech - formerly Czechoslovak - Airlines)

"He needs to be taken to a hospital...A HOSPITAL! What is it? It's a big building with sick people."

@@publicmail2 Classic :D

@@publicmail2 so a krankhaus then ? :)

A completely over the top response. I hope the pilot, his license,and his career all stay intact. I support the captain's decision. One person's expert judgment is worth a thousand rules created by mediocrity.

@@Menstral are you sane?

It should be noted that it would have been wise, in the Teneriffa case, to inform the captain that there is traffic on the runway in progress. This would have highly eased the situation.

@Rob Bannstrom I think it is a tad simplistic to pin the blame on just 1 person, in this case Capt. Jacob Veldhuyzen van Zanten of KLM. Complex accidents such as these are often the result of a chain of events which culminates in a disaster. In the Tenerife case, KLM's crew overtime policies and crew fatigue considerations, the foggy conditions at the Los Rodeos airport, non-standard aviation phraseology used by ATC, one critical radio transmission being lost, Capt. van Zanten's towering figure in the cockpit smothering dissent from KLM Fligh Engineer Willem Schreuder etc. etc. are some of the elements that need to be factored in. Nationalism further colours the post-mortem of the accident with the Dutch version of the analysis exonerating KLM. But you are right about the fact that Captains of yore behaved like demigods and refused to have their authority questioned by other crew in the cockpit. And that was surely a factor in the Los Rodeos tragedy. And sadly, in many others as well. Hopefully, modern CRM training can address these issues.

@@suresh1957 There will always be bad weather and poorly equipped airports and all kinds of unfavourable conditions but none of them can serve as an excuse for a reckless or arrogant captain. He or she is the person in charge and bears all responsibility. If they cannot bear it, they should change their profession.

@@Kajpajepolavailable Thanks for the reply to my comment. But the point I am trying to make is that usually, it is no single element that alone causes an accident but a plethora of related factors. Captain Veldhuyzen was but one element in this chain although a lot of the blame can be pinned on him.

@@suresh1957 I'd be curious to read the dutch version exonerating KLM. It would seem that the single most compelling cause for the crash was the take-off roll without clearance by the KLM Captain. Everything else was just contributory factors.

At-Risk Survivor, if he passes the psych exam. The Darwins have rules.

Nope. Darwin award list won't accept a breathing candidates 😅

@@ronysanjaya9807 no they grant the award to people living all the time. They just can't be able to breed

Too late, I believe. I believe he had already breeded. There's more to come ...

Darwin award is a cynical metaphor to say that a person ought to die, not fit for survival. It's not clever nor civil to say it about a person.

Or even lack of fuel (see the Gimli Glider).

Simpler even than this is to apply the principle of redundancy. 2 engines gives you a redundant engine if there are issues, one engine gives you no redundancy, and that in itself is a reason to abort the flight and land as soon as possible.

@@tasmedic Plus the possibly contaminated fuel would stop the next engine fast.

the risk versus money discussion in poor countries runs diferent

​@@FraLin planes fuel and even pilots cost about the same everywhere

Me neither, but he's talking about making decisions about critical situations, and I'm hooked.

I was not even that interested in the aviation, but this channel thought me so much and made me be so interested. Thanks!

@@julicum My son-in-law is starting a career in the aviation, that's how I start watching this channel, and now I'm hooked.

Seriously what is it with this amazing channel?? I’m not a pilot, I’m not interested in being one, but the way he tells these stories and the way he explains the details and mechanics behind what’s happening is just spot on. He’s a teacher with a gift! He’s got that “thing” that amazing teachers have .. it makes you want to listen and learn even if you never knew you did! So inspiring, I love it.

I’m not a pilot and have no affiliation with the aviation industry but I love this channel. I have watched it grow and believe Peter’s accident explanation episodes are the best. I have learnt so much about aviation and think these episodes are absolutely fantastic.

I can relate to the need to work. If I don’t have plans, but I’m off for more than 2 days, I go stir crazy. I’m an engineer and idle hands drive us nuts.

is it customary for pilots to get the loss of license insurance, and is it provided by the airline or you have to pay for it? And how much does it compensate for? Thanks.

Well, this certainly explains the number of CRM related accidents if employees have to choose between the certainty of disciplinary action and the possibility of a fatal crash. It should be international law that raising concerns about the safety of the flight cannot result in disciplinary action.

Yep I had this. My SCCM disagreed about a passenger having a seizure and attempted CPR on the pax, I had to physically pull her off the pax as I saw her lanyard and her friends saying it’s a seizure. I was stood down from duty for 3 weeks and had a disciplinary after that. SCCM carried on flying with no actions against her for violating first aid procedures. I no longer work for that airline

@@alexorjerry Was the airline United by any chance?

@@thorlancaster5641 Nah I’m not US based

@@toastercatx yeah like a whistleblower type thing. It should be anonymous.

Dante Araujo then go to blancorilo channel

Bravo

I thought it was good too. Well done Peter,

No one does it better!

You being sarcastic

Worst plane disaster in history... Specifically because of the captains arrogance 😢

They were discounting their bills if it was a delay to arrive their destination

That was the first thing I thought of, too.

Jorge Mak I think you mean they were penalizing their checks, a discount on a bill is a good thing...

Yea, that's correct Mike

Well said.

Even more power to ‘his elbow’ is the fact that he is not using his first language…….. I am Ret’d RAF Aircrew (multi-engine transport 29 years) and I am totally absorbed in what he says as it is so lucid. I believe this puts me up there in the top echelon of his fan base. Is there a badge for this? (Just kidding).

The Bijlmerramp in the Netherlands had confusion over the term 'lost' an engine. In that infamous case they physically lost it, as it was no longer attached to the plane.

Agreed, I think if I was in that situation, pretty much knowing that the captain would continue the flight no matter what, I would prefer just to shut up and try not to anger the captain even more, to avoid any possible fuckups

There is no CRM in smart wings. Trust me, I did 4 years as a contractor. The f.o. Covered his ass as best he could

Maybe we need some kind of "recycling recertificate exams" every X(lot of them) flight hours,to avoid excess of "self-confidence". just like when a pilot didnt flight enough hours,but to avoid this kind of behaviours,that i suspect its waaay more common than we think ,just happens that not enough airplanes brake down/ATCs fail or Airports have failures to expose how much arrogance has grown on some pilots,just like in with the rest of the world.The issue is a commercial jet is flown by a manual,not by pilot experience,if i can explain what i want to say.

Negligence !!!! No, sheer Arrogance!

That’s the kind if Arrogant attitude that gets people killed. That man should never be allowed near any aircraft let alone a passenger airliner! Shame there appears to be no pilot passenger to threaten to broadcast his failures and force him to follow the procedures correctly!

Oh .. Dear Mentour's too much the gentleman to do it, but I DO think its ok and appropriate to name and shame in a case like this? Though he doenst like 'lifetime bans' I sure what to see this guy's learned SOME kind of lesson, and aint just wriggling...

woooopsie! I just accidentally just forgot to preserve evidence that shows that I am a dumbass and incompetant pilot, My bad sorry

Interesting video this. I didn’t know this was a requirement till now

He also forgot he could get priority in Vienna.. he forgot to recalculate the fuel.... He forgot a lot of things that would not make the flight possible.

He didn't want them to know what was on it

Yeah, this tells it all. The captain should never be allowed inside a cockpit of a commercial aircraft again.

If you are talking about PIA. I agree with you 100%. Sad to see such a loss of life to a totally incompetent/arrogant pilot.

Yeah, that's fucking crazy! I mean, just add 1 other problem to the mix and let him not have enough thrust to rectify the situation and it could become a "concatenation of unfortunate events" type of catastrophe.

What were you doing ( sitting on the toilet reading the O's in the dictionary ) ?

​@@NeilRees-jr2mf Those words are not that unusual, English is not my first language and I know them well. Watching atheist/religious debates might have helped me ;)

Not tripping the CVR sounds like he knew how much trouble he would be in.

Destroying evidence

Steve Evans - In this case maybe but generally so many things are going on you often forget to pull the c/b.

@@Hans-gb4mv He was in it up to his eyebrows anyway when they got through investigating his actions.

Captain is old school. He is like F... the rules. I know my shit.

Very true. I've been in a paid fire department for 20+ years and a majority of the fire ground procedures are there because someone did something wrong or someone died. I call these blood rules. Unfortunately, because of aviation incidents and deaths, improvements have been made...

@@fyrman9092 Safety rules are written in blood

@@fyrman9092 I would say "fortunately," not "unfortunately." The aviation industry is one of the best at learning from mistakes and failures, and then fixing them. It means those incidents, injuries, and deaths are taken seriously, not as a cost of doing business.

Could you link those safety rules?

@@fyrman9092 I was a volunteer and then I went on into the medical field. I worked for Riverside County Fire for a while as a volunteer though and I loved it.

Yes, and he probably shouldn't be driving a car either. I wonder if they followed up on that.

It was and he got it back. No doubt the F/O will be harassed out of the company too.

@@jdrissel If the red brake light comes on while he’s driving (indicating a fault in part of the brake system) he will continue to destination even if it’s thousands of miles away.

@Chelsea Chelsea I think he either had a TIA or a mini stroke or hypoglycemia or some other medical problem that was not detected. The sustained, persistent failure of judgement shown here could easily lead to things like driving without headlights at night, driving too fast for the weather, failure to turn on wipers or defogger as needed, or any number of dangerous behaviors. Remember that cars kill a lot more often than planes.

😂😂😂

Oh no not the coffee!

Jokes on you, I'm a heathen who can drink both tea or coffee, mwhahaha.

Pretty sure that's a joke from the movie airplane with Leslie Nielsen

​@@Potoum Airplane! 2 actually

I hope that the authorities take deleting evidence as worse then anything that could be proven with the evidence. Note that overwriting the CVR it self in such a case is a criminal offense. Yeah, it does not prove any misbehavior in the air - but a pilot unable to follow the most basic of instructions while on the ground after landing proves the inabilty to follow basic instructions, SOPs, legal requirments etc. in a *low workload, non critical situation*, proving inability to operate under higher workload or with higher stakes.

The same reason the space shuttle's main computers were using ancient magnet core memory. By the time it is decided by the authorities, then the new device is designed, tested, flight certified, and produced, the plane will probably be nearly retired from service. So in all probability it will be all but too late, so just don't even think about doing it. And if you do, you will be laughed at as by the time it's ready, it will be antiquated junk.

That stuff gets replaced when it breaks. Since it's designed not to do that no matter what, it doesn't. You have cargo planes flying that are nearly 30 years old, they have 30 years old flight recorders. When planes are built, they contain tech certified for that model. If you have a model that has been in production for a while, even that might need outdated by the time it's built, since that certification is expensive and is only re-done when it's absolutely necessary. So, if you have an incident today, you might be dealing with a 10 year old plane, flying with 20 years old tech...

@@realulli Okay? So keep the legally mandated tape CVR, but add a $100 Android phone as a company-level policy, then.

@@neolexiousneolexian6079 I'm not an aviation industry professional. I'm just an interested geek. I've read that quite a few modern planes already today record *MUCH* longer loops, just not in the armored *DR cases. It's already built into the control systems that they use (the one I read about keeps 30 hours worth of comprehensive flight data (not sure if that includes Cockpit voice data). (Also, the FDRs and CVRs that are currently installed have been digital solid state for quite a few years by now. They're really just reluctant to replace one of these devices, since it's not cheap.)

@@neolexiousneolexian6079 Sadly, despite all of the advances over the past decade with smartphones, I doubt there is one in existance that could survive and/or retain it's data, when subject to an airplane crashing. To put it bluntly, how many smartphones survive even being dropped from your hand accidentally, you invariably have to replace most, if not all of it, and especially you lose all or most of the data. The sad truth is, as has been stated earlier, the CVR and FDR systems they use are usually able to withstand pretty much anything, and it would probably be prohibitively expensive to design something newer that has the same survivability. In some cases though, and especially in this case, no matter how much time the CVR records, certain people will be aware of how to "overwrite" any incriminating evidence. It seems clear to me that, for what ever reason, the Captain was determined that the plane was only ever going to land in Prague.

I think it goes more along the lines "I wrote those rules, and I know how much redundancy for the sake of safety I had to put in there, just to be on a safe side (and to cover my arse should anything happen), and I know how wide safety margins I had to put there too". It might be subconscious, but I think for those guys know what is safety envelope and where the "real danger" zone lies, so they might be tempted to "push the envelope a bit". In this case, as other have pointed out, there were a conflicting interests, or rather priorities, as this guy was a Director of operations, or someone like that. Combine this with with "slave driver" mentality of the company, and the whole situation, and the question "but why the hell did he do that?!" becomes somewhat less enigmatic. Also, others mentioned here that KLM pilot on Tenerife, who was (AFAIR) a Chief of Safety Board of KLM (or whatever they call it - the "funny" thing was, after that crash journalist tried to call him to get his comments on that crash...), and yet he did "that stupid thing" - why? Again, my guess is that in Tenerife case again this "hey, I know how much redundant safety procedures are there, and I'm feeling like trying my luck a little... erm, I mean, 'I feel everything will work out all right'" attitude kicked in. He (that KLM pilot) also was under some type of "time pressure" (a risk of weather turning worse, the risk of exceeding his flight hours limit, which would force him to stay for a day at the destination), and that was (AFAIK) also probably the reason he decided to take extra fuel at Tenerife, so he could save an hour or so of refuelling time at the destination. Which turned out to be, LITERALLY, a fatal decision, as with less fuel he could probably miss (i.e. clear) that other plane - maybe just by inches, but still "close shave" is better that fatal encounter... Well, we'll never know what was on his mind, but clearly he pushed the envelope a bit, and in given (unforeseen by him) circumstances it turned out to be "a bridge too far"

Not pulling the breaker seems sus to me. I think he was counting on it the CVR to "accidentally" be overwritten, he had to know that flying as far as he did on a dead engine was going to get looked into. He knew better, he knew he was in the wrong, and he was IMO trying to destroy evidence. I'm glad the airline threw the book at him.

@@xheralt Looking at the WHOLE situation it looks more to me like this guy's situation was "a Greek tragedy" sort - i.e. "whatever you'll do, you're screwed". In other words, he was (IMO) made kinda scapegoat by the company ("to err is human, to forgive is... not a company policy"). Let's put the entire blame on him (easy-peasy in this case) and no one talks about how the company is run, and how employees are driven like slaves. Side note - it just occurred to me, there are many, or some, "underlying similarities" (i.e. hidden "initial" causes) between this case and the case of Canadian National Railway Hinton train collision - basically, a company chasing dollar and putting safety aside - but I digress here. Yes, the pilot should have landed at first suitable airport, and no one could blame him - OFFICIALLY, that is - for doing that. But "if you want to beat a dog you'll always find a stick", as the say... And to me it seems that one has to ask himself "but WHY the pilot did what he did, even if he knew perfectly well it was wrong, against the rules, and just plain stupid"? Such blatant disregard for rules and safety (and common sense) has to have some "reasons" behind it, methinks - one does not act "like that" on a whim... Mind you, this guy did not even report properly to ATC what really happened, which means (or looks like) he tried to conceal the problem from the very beginning - again, WHY? - even though it would be perfectly OK to land the plane in such circumstances. Well, "perfectly OK" from SAFETY perspective, but not necessarily so from "company profit's perspective" - after all, it was a "budget carrier", where profit margin is "as thin as mosquito piss". But anyway, that was a flight through Europe, densely populated area with all kind of airports and landing strips a stone's throw away from each other, so when the real sh!t happens (like, the only engine still working goes kaput) "I'm still OK, sorta kinda" - and I'll still be able to glide to safety (fingers crossed...), and no problemo, amigo. Hakuna matata, as they say... Anyway, to me "the official story" is just that - "an official version of the truth". This guy got kicked, hard for what he did - and probably rightly so, but this is pretty much like MAK's (Межгосударственный авиационный комитет, or "Interstate Aviation Committee") "investigations" into air crashes - whenever pilot dies in the crash, the blame is squarely put on the pilot. A rather simple procedure to follow, Soviet style: 1. The accident is always pilot's fault; 2. In case it seem like it was mechanical failure, refer to point one. OK, 'nuff of this rant. Cheers!

He's the perfect modern liberal.

He also potentially endangered other traffic by descending without permission or deviaiton from the airway.

Even worse - That captain helped wrote the procedures that he himself ignored.

I do not want to be in an aircraft where this captain flies. If he really thinks he did not do anything wrong... There is something seriously wrong with the captain.

As a chartered engineer for more than 45 years, (not in aviation), I can assure you that everything that you said was correct, particularly your final sentence which is key to the whole incident. The second engine and the rudder were put under stresses that were untested during normal flight and the controls were in an abnormal configuration that they had never been tested for over prolonged periods. I can see that the captains years of experience could allow him to make mental assessments on items such as fuel burn, but they should have been verified by calculations. Above all, descending without correct communication with ATC was a totally unacceptable risk. I feel sorry for the captain, but being in a senior position, he should have immediately spotted everything that I have mentioned (and a lot more as well). Landing at the first available safe airport with a runway long enough to stop without reverse thrust should have been his first thought.

@@wilsjane I know it's and old thread, BUT a few points can't be let go... There's also NO actual known CAUSE for the engine failure,which similarly CAN creep into other systems... Electrical issues CAN "move" knocking stuff out along the way... A fuel issue can flame out one engine AND explode in the other... Debris ingested could be from anywhere at 30,000 BUT isn't SUPPOSED to even BE at 30,000... AND THEN we get to whatever this engine's flaming out could actually cause that we ALSO simply do not know. AS to the Pilot. Kelsey over on 74 Gear ( channel on YT) mentions the "Chief Pilots" regularly when ATC "tattles" on problem pilots in "stupidity" incidents. Their job is to be on the phone number the ATC gives you to call in (You NEVER want the ATC to tell you to call those numbers)... It's for your own "private bitch session" which may even get you additional training mandates or grounded on the spot... I DO NOT feel the least sorry for the guy if he's actually even like one of those "Chief Pilots". This was clearly arrogance, regardless of any risks, perceived or otherwise. Arrogance is fine in a bar or club, to think it attractive... whatever. It's got no business in Commercial Transportation, and I think it a public menace even in ordinary street traffic. ;o)

@@gnarthdarkanen7464 Your final final paragraph reminded me of the time when a fairly newly appointed first officer had to fly with a relief captain, after his scheduled captain called in sick. After the flight, he was amusing the cabin crew by telling them about the dear old lady who told him to do the check lists by memory, then allowed him to fly, but told him not to bother with that contraption (the autopilot) on a 50 minute flight. He said that she seemed to be on another planet. You can imagine the look on his face, when one of the cabin crew mentioned that she was the airlines chief pilot. a few days later, he received a letter from HR, telling him that he had passed his first assessment, mentioning that he had a professional attitude and a pleasant friendly personality. He nearly fell through the floor, but mentioned that if he had known her position, his nerves may have got the better of him, causing him to mess things up. Perhaps it is no surprise that the airline (a major international) has flown for more than 50 years without a crash or incident involving injury. The chief pilot was a legend, having previously served in the military, where her role was teaching pilots to take off and land on aircraft carriers without ending up in the water. She may have looked relaxed, but she never missed a single point. Can you guess the airline.? Clue, you never see them on any accident videos. 😊

@@wilsjane I'd have to "cheat" and look up stat's to tell you the airline fairly. These vid's and Comment Sections are an evening pass-time and I haven't seen enough air-disasters to say. (haha) The story sounds vaguely familiar, maybe something when I was kid touring the Airport on a school trip or something. There were a few "notorious" tricks employed for things like surprise inspections and spot checks... AND I'm ex-Navy, so that she was formerly a Navy instructor doesn't surprise me. Showing up with acts and routines to "test character" as well as using plain clothes to lower everyone's guard is kind of "regular business" until we screwed up (of course). I had the Base C.O. administrate my first "Basic Defensive Driving" exam (in a bus no less), AND SHE commanded me to parallel park between another bus and HER Cadillac. "It's fine to know the answers in the book. Traffic gives you stress. I want to see you with a little heat." were her words. "Can you function when the REAL world isn't like the picture? When you're under actual PRESSURE???" ;o)

@@gnarthdarkanen7464 To save you the research, the airline is Aer Lingus. While everyone else panics, they just carry on. All of their crews live in the same area as their home airport, so they are more like a family. When one of the girls spotted a late arrival diverted into Shannon after it was closed for the night, she jumped into her car and reopened the airport. No one bothered that her night dress was about 4 inches below her skirt, or that she and the crew of the arriving flight did the immigration and customs checks. They would have known all bar a few passengers anyway.

not only low-cost - almost all airlines

Surely you could ferry the plane back to Prague on one engine.

This is false economy thinking. Keep on doing that. Sure you might get away with it a few times or more, BUT sooner or later something serious WILL happen. Then the airline would stand to loose way more money than what was saved or made. More than a few airlines have folded because of this.

@@TheGhostGuitars you dont understand how it works - it`s REAL economy thinking - noone cares in long term - leasing & insurance cover this - they need money right now - thats it

@@az................. ferry flight is another set of rules in the US. There is limited crew on board and NO passengers.

I've watched that gig at least ten times. His delivery is so good on that segment I still bust a gut every time even though I've seen it enough to repeat it verbatim.

Now imaging running a version of this over over a plane's PA - by the captain - it 'may' bring up the passenger angst somewhat.

Lelz

Ouch...but Ron nailed it

If I was on that investigation board, I'd recommend him being cut loose from all avaition PERIOD. And have him turned over to custody w/o bail for criminal proceeding AND have him committed to the most "uncomfortable" mental institution I can find.

No just declare him mentally unfit. Remember his actions did not result in physical injury or death. Though they could of. Learned lesson don't trust him again.

@@iannarita9816 I agree, however it's a fact that if one still has contact within the aviation industry (even if it's a "desk" job) that dude could eventually be placed back in the cockpit. Or do / not do something indirectly that will affect the safe operation of the planes. Mentally unfit is a good starting place, but aviation has no place for anyone with such attitude and behavior as shown by this "pilot" in any way or manner. Imagine the damage if someone like that is placed in ANY positions of responsibility and inevitably makes decisions inconducive to safety. A person with a history of skimping corners in maintenance? Nope. Supply? Hell no. Finance? Nuhuh. Administration? Are ye kidding? No. He needs spend a long time reflecting on the errors of his ways, whether it be behind bars or in a padded room, away from the planes.

@@TheGhostGuitars He sounds like a classic narcissist. My father has had quite a severe form of this that caused him some really deep personal problems, luckily was not a pilot, and nothing he did in his professional career seemed to have been affected by it. People who thinkg they cannot make a mistake, should never be placed in control of an aircraft, the potential issues they could get themselves into could be fatal to many people.

@@tedferkin One lesson I learned in flightsim: I never ever EVER make a mistake. Only sometimes the earth doesn't move out of the way fast enough. I mean it's not that it couldn't see me coming is it? Stupid thing there!

Ah, so that's what cockpit CRM is.

One of my early lead mechanics did this as well, especially for young mechanics who didn't seem to get the gravity of our job. This guy gets it--for a pilot! 😁 By the way, I like your channel name PianoGal. I find it quite amusing to play Chopin for colleagues and/or customer mechanics after a long day of breaking pin extractors!

Given the current economic situation, good time to let him go. Lots of other pilots looking to fly.

EASA will be mandating a 25 hour flight recorder starting in 2022.

Couldn’t Google tell them?

There is still planes flying that only have a 30 minute cvr.

"My 4 year old phone can record a conversation longer than that..." And then surviving an impact at a thousand km/h? I don't believe you, only a Nokia 3310 would survive that

@@benghazi4216 That is not that big of deal. If they can keep moving electromechanical parts safe in the current system then shock proofing some non volatile solid state storage would be really easy. Probably significantly more reliable than the current system. It is genuinely pathetic we still use this antique shit in airplanes when we obviously have more than enough technology to do better - at almost no cost. They constantly replace avionics and all their other equipment like GPS and even engines, but we still use 1970s data recorders. That is just stupid! We can install WIFI in old planes and not a damn modern voice recorder??

Fired? I would say a criminal investigation should be in order for promoting a potential incident.

Angel Reyes , Syed Ahmed if you watched to the end he did lose his job, and a criminal investigation case was opened. Along with being forced to undergo psychological questioning of decisions.

Eren Azizoglu umm, he said nothing about that in this video, I just double checked after reading your comment. He only said psychological evaluation, said as far as he he knew he was still with them but not as head of operations.

I think he knew very well what he was doing, but chose to do so for financial reasons. IMO he should be punished, but the airline should be investigated too.

@@bizzzzzzle He does say it, at 26:05 "There is now a criminal investigation against the Captain"

Correct

There is a saying “if you walk away from it,it’s a good landing!🛬

@@AmtrakFan6905 i dont think the landing was the issue here

So, just what are "the odds" ???

On the way

You are more than welcome!

Wikipedia claims he was demoted from being head of flight operations to just being a pilot, which is insanity.

​@@davidsinclair7439 He should have been demoted to "Unlicensed"

26:40 What Mentor says next, applies directly to the GOP white supremacists that are in our US police forces and military

@@JR-playlists Maybe just GOP white supremacists in general would cover it better? Don't just limit your scope of a good idea to the GOP white supremacists in the military and in law enforcement.

@@PfizerRN_USNavyReserveRN Now that Donald Trump has been demoted as president, he should take up a career as a pilot. I could imagine him slumped on the captains seat with the stick in one hand and a checklist in the other calling it fake news. Meanwhile, he would be bullying the first officer and telling him to tune the radio channels to allow him to tweet on Twitter. Reality, perhaps not.......But it would make a great comedy sketch, 🤣

Yes!!

Yes all older doctors are sexist bastards! You go girl! Thanks for the input...

@@vandijk1698 You got that wrong, first, I'm a guy and second I didn't even say doctors or old doctors are sexist. Sexism is a word that has lost its meaning nowadays anyway. You could say I'm sexist against young female doctors, but I'm not because I'm a young male doctor and what I'm saying is basically empirical evidence. Young female doctors NEVER criticize, they only complain to male doctors hoping those will criticize the doctors.

Excellent! Kelsey is truly a great guy

Same here

I'd use the term: hubris. Macho is but a small subset of hubris. Thinking that one is above the laws rules and common sense. Feeling that one is a total master of all situation and everyone else is wrong. Even if one is wrong one then blunder/bluster ahead, expecting your position and seniority will shield ye from all consequences. NOPE.

The Mangalore crash had nothing to do with being macho- the pilot was fatigued & the weather conditions also played a big part....!

@@TheGhostGuitars agreed

@@OGchaibhai48 The captain didn't go around, even when the first officer insisted many times as they were very high in their approach. That's being sort of MACHO/HUBRIS.

This is so sad.

Scott, there are a few videos online on that incident, incl NatGeo I believe

Can't declare PAN or PAN PAN whilst in the air unless you're a pilot with PAN-AM. Otherwise you could be fined for impersonating another airline! 😅

You can have a million hours in the cockpit but you will never ever have a crystal ball. If an engine fails you dont have X ray eyes to see What exactly happened there. It can be a malfunction of the engine itself yet it can also mean a fuel contamination and a possibility of the remaining engine failing as Well. Then he can show off his seniority by landing a large jet plane without engines in the middle of the Alps🙃 *heavy sarcasm

I also fought the first officer could put him off the command. But on the other hand.. it is a 2-person job for a reason.

The incident described here would have never been known about, but for a remark by a Budapest traffic controller which made it to an aviation website which investigated. Without that Smartwings would have "get away with it' and we would be none the wiser. Interestingly, Hapag Lloyd 3378 (2000) ended with a court conviction for the pilot who pressed on with a non-retracted gear and crash-landed, out of fuel.

It could still be. While the plane did not crash per se, this repport could still attract producers attention, because this is somewhat similar to "Titanic in the Sky"... only with completly feasable runways to land on, which were "overshot", serious CRM issues and blatant arrogance on captains part.

It makes a good case study for what not to do in a single engine failure situation. Doubt the plane was ETOPS rated. While the PIC thought he had the situation under control, another unplanned event( hydraulic, weather, etc) could've doomed this flight...

"I don't need to follow safety regulations because I have enough experience" is how you challenge the record for worst aviation disaster of all time.

It would be, but none of the passengers would have been aware enough of the danger to remember the flight number.

I prefer the tone of voice of mentour over about any tv show, especially when concerning aviation.