My son just called me from the Sacramento airport very upset. He said when they were landing in Hawaiian Airlines that they hit the runway very hard and started fishtailing; the engines reved up and they took off again, circled twice and then make a normal landing. During all this, absolutely nothing was said to the passengers and some were crying and distraught thinking a tire had burst and the plane was going to crash on landing. The stewardesses did not say anything; the captain did not come on the intercom. When they disembarked nothing was said and no one offered any explanation. He finally asked and found out (what I always hope is not happening on every landing) that the co-pilot was landing for practice and screwed up. The captain took over and took off, afraid that the plane would go out of control and run off the runway. Personally, if this is all the consideration they have for what must have been a terrible nightmare for the passengers, I would NEVER fly with them again. I think it is inexcusable. My son was still shaking 20 minutes after they disembarked and his girlfriend was a wreck. What the hell was the captain thinking, once the plane was under control?
Well, The poilt should have lied a bit and said there was a dog on the runway or something maybe.
Standard procedure for co-pilots to make some landings.
All landuings that you walk away from are good.
If the airplane in not bent, it was a great one.
If the passengers are happy, you get to keep your job.
The co-pilot might justhave had a bad day, there could have been a wind shift.
Teh Captain probably was so pissed that he could not make a calm announcement.
I liked flying cargo, it never got scared. Didn’t complain either… 
Pilot 141 may fly by with a more correct post.
IMO, someone needed to say something if it was that bad…
It is always better to be down here wishing you were up there than to be up there wishing you were down here.
IANAP - but I’d sue.
To botch a landing is bad enough - but to then say nothing and drive the passengers hysterical with fright is inexcusable.
And - if the pilot was too angry to make an announcement - he/she should not be a pilot - I want somebody who remains calm and collected when things go wrong.
I hope the FAA sees to it that neither of the “pilots” is in charge of a passenger-carrying plane for a long time.
Maybe the pilot was not pissed, but busy taking care of the situation…?
Yep, that’ll take care of it. That will also help airlines get out of debt, then they’ll stop borrowing from the government… AND, they’ll lower rates for consumers.
This is Hawaiian Airlines so I don’t know their financial status; I’ve never heard they are in trouble like the big airlines. Also, I understand that when the emergency occured that the captain didn’t have time to inform the passengers, but they circled around the airport twice before they could land, so it seems by then he could have said something. I was on a plane where a dog ran across the runway and the captain aborted the takeoff; he told us right away before anyone could panic. It just seems so strange.
Hey Extraneous, bet you’re not a lawyer either. What are your damages, tough guy?
something along the line of intentional infliction of emotional distress - I’ll let a lawyer phrase the “willfully negligent” stuff.
Actual damages - lost wages (inability to sleep, shock, whatever (also IANAshrink). Punitive damages - bunches. Or they fire the morons.
And anybody who is so completely occupied by a go-around that he/she cannot key the mike and tell the passengers what is going on is another person who should not be on the flight deck.
I am a not a commercial pilot, but a private one:
Rule 1: Fly the airplane
Rule 2: see rule #1
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. I imagine that there are all sorts of tasks in the go-around checklist. Something probably should have been said after the safe landing, but I don’t fault them beforehand.
Brian
I am a civilian flight instructor, and I think there’s something else to consider here:
Most passengers have no idea what a hard landing really is. What they think is hard might be nothing at all to worry about.
I realize I wasn’t there for this situation, but it’s something to think about before you hire a lawyer. There are lots of reasons for a go-around, and the situation might not have been as dire as you imagine.
The problem was not in the botched landing/go-around - it was in the failure to inform passengers of what the situation was - a 5-second xmit would have been all that was required - if they circled twice, there was more than enough time to allay passenger fears - failure to do so should be actionable.
One more time - the fault was not in the actions taken, but in the actions NOT taken - keeping the customers happy is always nice - at a minimum, you should at least assure them that the situation was routine, and they weren’t all going to die in a huge fireball.
I’ve been on several commercial flights that touched down and then wound up going around and landing again, and I don’t recall ever hearing any commentary over the intercom. Sometimes that happens in flight operations.
I think a lawsuit would be silly.
Extraneous: Gotta disagree with you. There is absolutely no reason for a lawsuit. The pilot’s job is to fly the aircraft; not to chat on the PA system. It would have been nice of them to inform the passengers, and they probably did have time to do so.
On the other hand, have you ever been in a cockpit at a busy airport? There’s a lot going on. In this case, the pilots had to abort the landing and go around. Unlike a Cessna with it’s very short checklist, there are a lot of things that need to be done in a large commercial aircraft; especially if they want to be sure to comply with all of the rules that exist for commercial operations. Not to mention that aircraft are sequenced, and having one out of sequence disrupts the traffic.
Have you ever tried to talk to the tower at a busy airport? I have. Sometimes it’s hard to get a word in edgewise. And radios are not like telephones. You can’t just shout out while someone else is talking. You need to wait for everyone to stop talking. I’ve found radio communications so busy that I’ve barely been able to get out “L.A.Helicopters,fourtriplezeroninerover.” When you’re waiting for just the right moment to transmit, you can’t afford to be talking on the PA when that moment comes.
Christ eating sardines! The way you talk, pilots should inform passengers that the wings are not going to fall off whenever they hit a little turbulence!
From the OP - there were people freaking over the fishtailing and subsequent go-around. SOMEBODY should have damn well acted to calm frightened passengers - people are NOT cargo, and do not deserve to be treated like baggage (although they commonly ARE treated like baggage, but that’s another thread).
and, since this airline did not even see fit to inform the passengers AFTER THEY WERE ON THE GROUND (can’t really argue that the entire flight crew, gate crew, the janitor were too consumed with the “emergency”, can you?) despite the fact that they had people crying, really, really calls for some kind of sanction - and since we don’t allow premeditated violence, I think ligtigation would be the best approach.
I’d drop the suit in exchange for an apology, a few grand, the the head of the pilot, but that’s just me…
a few grand, AND the head…
and yes, if you have people frightend to the point of crying during turbulence, then YES, SOMEBODY (preferably the pilot) should do something to allay passenger fears.
(am tempted to inquire what kind of moron flies a plane load of people into storms, (lightening holes, hail damage - don’t those mean some idiot flew into a Tstorm?), but let’s stick to the matter of the pilot allowing the (obviously incompetant) co-pilot to scare the hell out of the passengers, then ignore their distress)
Well, I’ll jump in here. Extraneous you seem like you have a lot of bones to pick with airlines, so I’ll start with what is actually required to be done under these situations.
As Johnny L.A. pointed out, the requirements in a situation like this all center around flying the airplane. A go-around at a busy airport creates a huge increase in workload for both the pilots and the controllers. There is no FAR that requires you to make a PA to the passengers informing them of what is going on.
However, making a PA can do wonders for the passengers. IF you can do it, you should. Most companies (including mine) include making a PA on at least one checklist, but it’s at the bottom of the checklist. It gets emphasized over and over again in simulator sessions: fly the airplane. The old standard priorites: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, in that order. Now, I don’t know what was going in that cockpit, but if they were too busy to get around to making a PA, well then they were too busy. Maybe they thought that they had blown a tire or two on the hard landing, and were coordinating for a fly-by so the tower could inspect their gear. They could also have been discussing whether to divert to San Francisco or LAX - places with much longer runways than Sacramento. Maybe the winds at Sacramento were at or near crosswind limits. In short, there are innumerable items that they could have been contending with up front.
So making a PA is a good idea, but if you can’t get around to it at least get the airplane safely on the ground. After landing, though, I agree that something could have been said.
But come on - wanting the head of the pilot? And several comments about “obviously incompetent” copilots and copilots landing “for practice”? How exactly do people end up as captains of airliners? The do not just magically appear wearing four stripes and with years of experience. They get that expereince in the right seat. If you always want the captain to land, what happens when that captain retires and the copilot moves into the left seat?
The norm at every US airline is for the pilots to trade legs - you fly one leg, I fly one leg. That way everyone builds experience.
As to the actual landing that started this whole thing, it sounds like they were landing in some pretty strong crosswinds. You WANT a firm touchdown in strong crosswinds. Now, obviously something went wrong, but flying is a dynamic environment and things can change rapidly. If things go wrong, take it around and try it again.
Did these guys do something wrong? Well, the FAR’s do NOT say that you have to make a special PA, even after landing. Once again, they probably should have if they had the time. But they did NOT violate any rule by not doing so.
They made a public relations error. An admittedly bad one, but they did bring the airplane to the gate intact.
I don’t believe that “communicate” necessarily means “communicate with the passengers”. I think that in an emergency situation, “communucate” means “communicate with controllers”.
You’re right, Johnny but I was using it to illustrate my point for non-fliers.
Serves me right!
Said point being that communication (outside of the flight deck) is at the bottom of the priority list.
And of the communication options available, the priorities are:
- ATC (the controllers)
- The flight attendants
- PA’s to the passengers.