A Delta Airlines B752 was climbing out of SFO when they lost guidance, autothrottle, autopilot, and an EICAS message regarding TAT Probe. The crew worked the issues with dispatch and maintenance without success. After further discussion with dispatch and the duty pilot they decided to return to SFO as it would be too fatiguing to fly with limited capabilities and at time of circadian low.
oh common...Every regional pilot has flow 10 yrs plus with no auto throttles...u barely have to touch them in cruise...they created the delay by holding instead of continuing and calling mx enroute. This is a POOR CPT.
@@mtnairpilot using ARINC frequencies. You can Google the map. Airlines subscribe to the service and use operators to connect. You can hear the operator ask if the crew wants to be connected at the beginning of the tape.
I agree with the duty pilot. The aircraft pilots were not yet fatigued, were not flying in a fatigued condition and would not be landing at SFO fatigued. They were discontinuing the flight to avoid becoming fatigued due to a mechanical issue. Great call by the aircraft pilots and the duty pilot.
One improvement I would suggest for the duty pilot, and the PIC- make it clear that fatigue was not an issue at the moment, but it would be a concern after 5 hours flight with a mechanical deficit. IMHO, PIC made the correct aviation call, DP made a legal call.
@@TexasVernon if some simple and safe failures would cause fatigue making the flight unsafe they were never fit to fly the mission and should haven't been flying that plane. It means they were on the edge before they started the engine because everything had to go right and smooth. The right call to make was not accepting that flight.
@@zach6639no. He didn't do anything to his career. It's a weird administrative/procedural/regulatory gray area. Bottom line, he was fit for duty when he took off. After the mechanical which is technically legal and safe to continue to JFK with, the added factor of having been on duty for quite a while and the fact that they're at their circadian low, the Captain and crew deemed it the safest course of action to return due to an impending fatigue issue if he were to continue with the added procedural steps caused by the Autothrottle failure. It's dumb they even had to have that conversation. All he should have heard from Dispatch/Duty Pilot was "Roger, Captain."
I’m with the captain here too. I think what the duty pilot was saying is it’s better for them to call out fatigued after returning to SFO due to the mechanical issue, and not call out fatigued in the air.
Totaly agree. Return due to mechanical issues and explain/defend your decision on ground. If there is any doubt, for any reason, that the flight can be completed safely it is the PIC‘s duty and responsibility to decide on a course of action. No „duty pilot“ or dispatch is gone make that choice for you. I do find the whole conversation with the „duty pilot“ unnecessary. He knew very well what it was all about and kinda played stupid to put subtile pressure on the PIC to continue.
Old pilot or new pilot he made a good decision, inop autopilot/autothrottles and tat could evolve into something else 3 hours into the flight.Airplanes give us warnings. Old Pilot here.
@@MrWoodyxpI don't think he was pressuring the PIC to continue at all, he was subtly advising him that it's not a good look to report fatigue while still in the air, even if it's impending and not current. He tells them to just call it a mechanical issue and that they should discuss any possible fatigue related issues off the net once they're on the ground. No need to report a fatigue out if it never actually happened, but once they use those words it opens a whole can of worms.
@@MrWoodyxp Subtle pressure? Are you kidding? The duty pilot was trying to get the PIC to make the correct realization on their own. At no point did they “subtly pressure” the PIC. I highly suggest that you listen to the audio again. And again.
@RetreadPhoto All of it should have been discussed over a telephone line not radio patch.If TAT probe was broken a/p and a/t would be a on -off thing during the whole flight,thus inop. add to that a circadian low ? no, I am with the Captain.
I want to add I agree with those saying how interesting it was to hear the company comms. It’s a great new insight to the rest of what happens in the cockpit and just emphasises the number of people it actually takes to operate an aircraft, as well as showing us other tasks the pilots undertake.
When the PIC is concerned about fatigue, it should not be questioned, period. Also, this is the first ever vídeo I've seen anywhere that has audio beyond ATC. More please! Rewatched the video, why is the captain asking others to see if landing overweight is OK? My assumption is this is a fairly new captain. This is his call and it was not an emergency, so he should've been able to burn fuel. For those wondering, this happened on Sept 6, 2024.
I'm just guessing, but I think the DP is hinting at "if you return citing fatigue, you shouldn't have gone flying in the first place" and it will seem a personal misjudgment. Wheras returning due to mechanical issue is ok and then because of delays etc. you are too fatigued to continue. He's just looking out for the PIC not getting a note on his record.
@@maartendeen8404 The thing is autothrottle failure is not a reason to return in itself. Look at Southwest, they didn't allow pilots to use autothrottles until 2010.
Sure but the duty pilot is trying to save him from a nightmare situation. If he says he took off fatigued then he is liable. If he is returning for mechanical then he isn't.
@@maartendeen8404 What the DP is doing is saving his ass. If he took off "fatigued" then he made a critical mistake and it is ALL on the crew. Mechanical is mechanical.
My dad was a career Air Force pilot and when I started flight training he told me once you start having a cascade of “little things” that you need to get it on the ground asap.
Yes. Across the US, late night, AP warning lights that won't reset, auto throttles inop, pilots will be getting tired . . . accident chain was definitely forming. Return and land, get it fixed, try tomorrow. Good call.
The airline I retired from had a big poster near the time clock that read, "There is no task so urgent, that we must compromise safety". That should be the mandate, regardless of the occupation! ✈️
Shoutout to the PIC for not caving into the operational pressure of completing the flight and standing on the decision he made. Could they have made it to jfk? Yes, but why add a hole to the swiss cheese model if theres no need.
@RetreadPhoto its not an issue of competency, its an issue of decision making. The PIC will always have the final say regardless of what ops or the chief pilot says. It sounds like they were close to dutying out and if anything else were to happen enroute, then you would be in a much different situation. I would rather explain to the chief pilot why some passengers had to get rebooked on the next flight than explain to the FAA why I made a poor decision in the case of an incident or accident.
It would have been interesting to hear the conversation between the captain and the duty pilot after they landed. Good on him and his copilot for putting safety first.
If you are not familiar with the working environment the situation while not at that moment, can become very stress inducing with a high workload. After a lengthy delay they will be making a 5 hour flight having to constantly actively monitoring throttle settings and speed in an environment with little room for mistake. Then descend through a real of potential icing without clear indication or advance warning. Then shoot an approach with little holding time and if necessary a diversion to an airport inside the area of known ice. All this being done at the end of a long fatiguing night when their circadian rhythm is at its lowest. That is the definition of risky. They did the right thing. Oddly enough this video may help them as Delta would not want the public to think they are forcing pilots to continue flying fatigued
To be clear. He wasn’t saying he was fatigued. He said it would be “fatiguing” to continue 5 hours to New York after all the delays and added technical issues, not to mention somewhat stressful given how little holding fuel he had on arrival at New York. There may be no right or wrong answer to this Captain’s decision making, but I agree with the Duty Pilot, that no mention of the word fatigue should be used while airborne. Ex 777 Captain, 25 years commercial experience.
I agree with you. I think when it got to the point where Dispatch said they would connect the Duty Pilot I would have (hopefully) said that it was unnecessary and we would be landing and could talk to him then. At that point the Captain had already made the decision to return, the advice or anything the Duty Pilot would say is irrelevant and not within the allowable discussion in a sterile cockpit environment.
Not a pilot, so haven't had all the training, but seems to me that the captain made the "RIGHT" decision. Saftey is 1st. As someone who has a job with hours all over the place and very long hours, the window of circadian low is absolutely a thing(as I'm sure you know), and Ive seen how even when rested, its hard to not make little mistakes at that time. Add to that the delay in takeoff, the several warnings, the extra/abnormal work not having the auto throttle, the low alternate fuel, I think any other decision would have clearly been the wrong one. Sure, maybe they would have been fine, but there are thousands of lives at risk(air/ground), so why go? Sure, it screws the passangers there and in new york who were waiting for that aircraft, but better this than becoming a MentourPilot episode.
@@griffisjm Yes the CA made the right decision for him and in the interest of safety however he did not execute it well. At this level in a career we are multitudes of levels ahead in terms of "all the training". At this point making the right decision concerning safety is assumed, but now you are also expected to make these calls in a smart and legal manner. He made the right call to end the flight, however he should not have accepted any input from the duty manager and unfortunately that is what can get him talked to by the company and the FAA. @TheFutureThoughtExchange and I are specifically talking about this aspect when we criticize whether what he "did" was right or wrong.
@TheFutureThoughtExchange So first of all I hope you both know how lucky you guys are to have/and be able, to fly are. Id sell you my left kidney, left nut, and left pinky to he able to. My idea of a fun day, crammed in a tiny coach window seat of an embraer flying 4hrs. If you guys can help in any way, with knowing how, please let me know, but I really want to fly on a 747 before they are retired. Still need that and a 380, but the 747 seems harder. I don't know if there is a way to find what routes other than flight radar app, but then it may change day to day, and the last thing I want is to book a detroit to Tokyo or Seoul and end up on a 777 or 787. Not that it wouldn't be cool and fun, but money and time are what I don't have to waste. If you have any ideas, I'm all ears. As for the video, I get what both of you are saying, and the optics of saying "fatigued" while flying. But like you gus said, he didn't say he was fatigued, he said "would be fatiguing", and it was ops that said he would have to call fatigued, not him. It seems to me, again as a lay person, that knowing he made the right choice with the flight, the airline or FAA should not look at him, but the Dispatch procedures. What you seem to be saying is he should have lied about the seriousness of the maintenance, used that as an excuse to get on the ground, then he could call out fatigued. In 2 weeks when I strap myself into a 500mph tin bullet, I don't want to be worried about my pilots playing symantics. Seems like great strides have been made with CRM, and being able to call out sick or unrested, not punishing crew for speaking up, or taking the decisions, but we're saying, "Oh no, that the reason but don't say that", and that seems like it will only lead to problems. If my pilot has to lie or play games, in any way hide the truth, there is a problem, and we need you guys to step up and help fix that. My wife and kids sit down behind you guys all the time, and archaic ways of thinking, "get there itis", even from ops, is unacceptable. Edit: I guess the crux of my argument, and its not your fault, I know exactly where you are coming from and what you mean, but the "didn't execute it well" is the garbage I'm talking about. You're right, that should not even be in the vocabulary in this instance.
@@griffisjm Korean Air still has 747’s I believe, you can try booking on them, or Air India. I’m sure there are other passenger airlines running them. You can look at the flight schedules and they should say what equipment the flight is scheduled to be on, or just call them directly! Unfortunately pilots have gotten in trouble for saying the wrong things in the past when it comes to MX issues. Honestly, nothing gets in the way of safety when it comes to our conduct of a flight however you do have to be tactful in certain areas of communication to not jeopardize your job. For instance: if you went through some turbulence and said anything like “severe” anywhere on the radio etc. then you better have a write up on that aircraft later. Just throwing the word out “severe” can bring a violation on you if you don’t then write the aircraft up. This has actually happened to people because they just meant it was rough, later saying it was actually moderate. This is what I mean: words have meaning. Most flight manuals require an inspection after encountering severe turbulence and each category of turbulence is in fact defined. To be clear in this event I don’t even think the duty pilot was correct in what he was saying, he blew it out of proportion, however I think the discussion itself should never have happened. CA has made the choice to return, it’s a good choice for him and his crew that night after long delays. Done. That should have been the end of it. When they wanted to put the duty pilot on he should’ve just said: I’ll talk to them on the ground. Don’t worry we know what we do and are glad to have all of you on board, my life depends on it and y’all are depending on us. We never forget it.
But the plane was fine. This would be like driving a car with an inop cruise control. The car still works but it would be more work to use your foot instead of CC.
This was an unusually interesting conversation; almost like a peek into the OT while a major surgery is in progress. The things these folks have to do behind the scenes for us to fly from place to place safely is mindblowing.
Thanks for putting all this together. I've watched countless ATC videos, and I think this is *the* most interesting video I can recall, especially the discussion between the captain and the duty pilot. There is clearly so much being said without being said.
100% great call not to continue. Better to have this discussion on the radio than on your behalf at the NTSB hearing. The crew saw holes in the swiss cheese slices starting to line up, and took responsibility for keeping everyone in the air and on the ground safe. Increased workload, non-normal operation, decreased protections, circadian low, delays. This was a flight the NTSB would be very pleased didn't continue.
One problem is there is a condition of "fatigued" and a condition of "not fatigued" but there is no condition of "going to be fatigued." The air return goes down as mechanical, everybody's happy. That means additional delay and then leads to fatigued crew. Just like with "timing out" there's not really a protocol for "about to time out." Either it happens or it doesn't and the nature of the crew is to look ahead and plan and get the ball rolling so everything flows without delay, but the protocol begins with a certain condition that hasn't occurred yet but likely will. It's complex.
Nailed it! Not knowing what actually happend in SFO prior to the flight (in terms of delay, maintenance issue etc) dealing with these issues can be quite exhausting in itself. As i understand , they already operated the flight JFK-SFO… sounds like quite a rotation duty time wise… Was a bit irritated with the „Duty Pilots“ response and statements. We do have those too, but they dont generally interfere with ops wants airborne. We give them a call after shutdown if at all required.. Technical degradation of airplane systems can leed to fatigue earlier than usual. As you say, unfortunatly there seems to be no understanding of calling a quits BEFORE the onset of fatigue. Seems like everyone on ground just wanted to make sure they can’t be blamed.. cover your a.. mentality. Difficult but sound decision by the PIC. Well done
You can't forecast fatigue and trying to blame a minor automation failure on their future state of supposed fatigue is pretty rich. Don't forget there is thousands of jets flying everyday with no auto throttles installed at all. Sounds to me like it's more related to an unfamiliarity of manual throttle controls and unwillingness to try.
it is just a mechanical issue. It's a fault that stops the plane from safely flying to its destination when it otherwise would. There is no need to put in some special "this is why the mechanical issue would be an issue" issue.
@zachansen8293 it's not even mechanical it is a single layer of automation. ATP pilots needs to be able to have mastery of the aircraft at all levels of automation including none. It is ridiculous that this crew returned for such a small thing and it shows that many crews have become entirely dependant on the automation. We need to get back to actually flying airplanes again.
Excellent crew who stood their ground even when pressured by a few colleagues. The pilots are the ones in that cockpit and only they know how their day has been so far, how much more is predicted and how much they can trust their aircraft. Multiple issues on take off leaves room reasonable concern that more technical issues could show up through the flight, regardless of the fact most had ceased for now. We’ve seen it so many times, how there’s one issue, then 30 mins later a new one, then 10 minutes later 2 new ones…. Suddenly workload increases dramatically and during their window of Circadian Low, this can become a real safety issue. Plenty of those scenarios ended in fatal crashes. The fact they had the insight and awareness to think ahead and know that this could cause them big - far more dangerous problems - going forward a few hours, it’s commendable that they considered it, discussed it and then had the balls to follow through despite the people who tried to persuade them to continue. Dispatch wasn’t on that aircraft, nor was the DP. That Captain and his FO were the ones in the cockpit, meaning it’s their aircraft and their decision. Delta should take it as a compliment that the pilots felt comfortable enough to make this decision, as they’ve obviously experienced good CRM and command training, and must feel like it’s a supportive company, even if their colleagues on the night weren’t so in agreement. If I was on that flight and I knew this had happened and been discussed like this, I would be thanking the pilots on our return for putting the safety of me and everyone else above cooperate demand. I’d fly with this crew any day, anywhere. At the end of the day, it’s the Captains job to ensure his plane takes off, flies then lands with the same number of cabin and crew alive that they set off with. Any flight that lands safely, is a successful flight, regardless of where it landed.
From a former airline pilot during the early 2000s - By day 3 of a 3 day trip, I had involuntary micro-naps. The worst -BOS to Jackson, Mississippi. 6am departure, after landing at 8:30pm the night prior - Technically meeting the 8.5 hours of crew rest. Got to the hotel at 9:30pm, with a 4:15am wake up. Not good. Total pay - $60 = $20 per hour x 3 hour block
@@DavidWade66 Yes sir. Fatigue, and the Captain had. sorry RIP, failed a few checkrides if I recall correctly. His control inputs were exactly wrong for the situation. RIP.
The duty pilot was spot on. Don't call fatigue is you already operate the aircraft, altough I understand the point made by the captain was "we are going to be fatigued in the future" but as a precautionnary measure it's best not the mix the two together as it is each pilot responsability to not accept a flight if he feel fatigued.
Agreed - was surprised the Duty Pilot was giving pushback - figured it was always the pilot's decision to call the flight on safety grounds and Company wouldn't question it
Its rare you get hear what Airline Dispatchers deal with. This is one problem on one flight. Domestic Dispatchers often touch 40-60 flights through an 8 hour shift and plan atleast half of those.
For other low level Pilots like me . TAT total air temp sensor Total air temperature is important when monitoring fuel temperatures on long flights (fuel tank temps tend to approach TAT). Pilots use both TAT and SAT to help determine when to use airframe and engine anti-ice systems. My airline’s 767 procedures require the use of engine anti-ice in visible moisture (rain, snow, clouds) between +10°C TAT and -40°C SAT. TAT probe data is used for calculating Mach number and true airspeed which are critical for cruise flight and navigation. Engine thrust setting values and auto throttles require data from the TAT probe.
An autothrottle (automatic throttle, also known as autothrust, A/T or A/THR) is a system that allows a pilot to control the power setting of an aircraft's engines by specifying a desired flight characteristic, rather than manually controlling the fuel flow. The autothrottle can greatly reduce the pilots' work load and help conserve fuel and extend engine life by metering the precise amount of fuel required to attain a specific target indicated air speed, or the assigned power for different phases of flight. A/T and AFDS (Auto Flight Director Systems) can work together to fulfill the whole flight plan.[1]
This situation is like you hopping in the car and turning around 45 mins into the drive because it would be too tiring because your cruise control wasn’t working. The 170 people who paid you to drive will then applaud you for making a safety related decision.
This is an excellent video. Pilots have to estimate if they will be fit enough to perform a landing in 5 hours from now, possibly resulting in a go-around and a diversion to an alternate. If anything happens during the flight the commander will be responsible. I am pretty sure that if anything would have happened all company parties involved would make sure that the commander will be blamed solely. Therefore it's a very good and professional decision to return to SFO, taking into account all factors, including a very PROBABLE fatigued situation 5 hours from now. Thank God the commander has the authority to do that.
Interestingly, without the mechanical issue - if he had felt they’d be fatigued due say, delays on the ground and had taken off - he’d be up for disciplinary and his judgement questioned. Hence being coached, ‘don’t say fatigued on here’. So if the error warning hadn’t shown, he’d have had to have flown it or be written up.
Good job to the pilots. As a passenger, I’d rather have pilots with this attitude towards safety, than to think they could do it. Safety first. Always. 2X👍
What you’re watching is absolutely embarrassing. I get you think this is about safety. This is about a pilot that can’t manage throttles without the computer doing it. This is the problem, most pilots now are incapable of operating an airplane and this scenario is absolutely embarrassing.
@@RS-uo2ndas if you're them and know they can't do that. Speak for yourself, armchair pilot. Maybe they're really fatigued because they were screwed with the delays and now they have another problem on top of that.
@@Lusc1nt just curious, do you think that this is a rare scenario? The only people in support of this embarrassing crew are hardcore union pilots or non pilots who have no idea what they’re listening to and how egregiously lazy they’re being.
@ Lol I started in the military as a flying crew chief, became a pilot in the air guard, and was an air traffic controller in a level 12 facility for 10 years and went back to the airlines a few years ago when talk of the new contracts began. You couldn’t have thought any more wrong if you tried. Guess what didn’t function on the C5 galaxy? Auto throttles.
Many accidents are the result of a chain of related events. I see the Capt. being aware of the prior “issues” that day and took that into consideration. This decision might just have avoided a larger incident down the road. I mean just listen to the challenges they had navigating back into SFO! My concern would be the questioning where they ask “dispatch said you’d be safe to fly to JFK. Why didn’t you?” Let’s hope they really do prioritize safety over operational impacts. As a pilot myself, If I were aware of this as a passenger, I would have applaud this decision.
Yea the duty pilot I understand why he said what he said. It raises concerns that honesty was just suggested would not be the best policy. In safety honesty always has to be the best policy . That is a cultural thing. Suggesting to not be honest is also a cultural thing .
Speaking with 40 years in emergency services, making judgment calls on the side of caution and safety is more than crucial. A significant number of fire fighter deaths on duty has stemmed from fatigue and consequent loss of good judgment. Had I been present and the opportunity arose I would have thanked the pilots for the discomfiture and delays. Very small change compared to flying an aircraft with functional issues for five hours when both pilots know they would be close to the edge of their personal safety margins.
Some live feeders do include 'company' channels as a separate feed. Luckily the feed provider has one at SFO so I always make sure to check, but can be hit or miss. I was actually surprised to hear the phone patch to Atlanta.
@@avocadoflight Awesome job! The RUclips algo pushed me one of your videos a while ago and I was skeptical due to your sub count - but immediately subbed after the first video, as I'm super impressed with the quality and attention to detail you put in the videos! Keep up the awesome work!! :)
Good call from crew, safety most important. Pilot fatigue is dangerous condition especially when dealing with a mechanical situation with the aircraft. The swiss cheese progression halted by good calls !!!! A good standard for all pilots to observe.
Good judgment. Broke the chain of events with good forward projection into later hours of the flight. Fatigue, weather, mechanical issue ..why press on?
7:10 Pilot knows his limits, pride or peer pressure is not included in this decision. Consulted with the co-pilot and made the call. This is the kind of hard choices that have to be made, against the will of pencil pushers and penny pinchers that have no skin in the game. The bean counters took away the flight engineer... but the QRH says you can continue flight without the automation that removed the flight engineer in the first place. 🎩
The pride was getting on the plane knowing he was fatigued. The pride was taking off knowing he was fatigued. The pride was calling to try to convince people he was making the right decision instead of making the decision and going with it.
@@qwerty112311 the pilot was not fatigued when he came on board. He is foreseeing that he WILL be fatigued after flying manually without automation The danger is not now, it's in the future
Had this happen to me on the 767 two years ago it was a popped circuit breaker. Kinda shocking it controls all those. We were crossing the Atlantic tho so we went back to EWR
Captain needs to figure out the diplomatic part of being a captain. He really wasn't leading the show, more like poking and seeing what was and wasn't going to get him in the stew with the chief pilot office. Dispatch and chief pilot are always going to lean towards the flight proceeding as normal unless they hear some magic words. For all non-airline commenters, fatigue is not prospective. It must be in the moment. A mainline captain should know this. Ultimately, he went with his gut and landed, which was probably the best decision. Plus, autothrottles and circadian low? Must have never flown an RJ or night freight.
This situation took the captain way too long to make a decision. They weren't flying to the moon. I understand following protocol by calling maintenance and dispatch, but after that, use PIC authority and make a solid decision. He wanted to return, but was searching for assurance from the folks in Atlanta that he was making the right decision. Bottom line, he and the first officer ALREADY DECIDED early on that they were returning so no need for the endless, incriminating babble while actually flying the airplane. All they had to do was thank maintenance and the dispatcher for their time, then tell them they're returning. Talk about the rest on the phone after shutdown at the gate.
@@buzzhazzard No he doesn't........... I've flown with captains like this. They look for any reason to not fly. That conversation with the duty pilot was painful to listen to. He was trying to get someone else to tell him to return to departure point. Also, I would never debate with MX over whether to return or not. 25+ years as a captain has left me with a certain skill set. I decide if I'M going to fly, then airborne WE talk about the current issue, then I DECIDE if we continue. I love my SFO overnights but the Doubletree Hotel is not worth my job. If it's safe, I fly. No auto throttles isn't the end of the world but the discussion of icing conditions and a TAT probe out leads me to believe the MEL had a few limitations. I still think he didn't want to do the trip, pretty FO not withstanding.
@@kalamageoI have been a captain for almost 25 years myself and have been flying for over 40. The assertion that a captain would make a decision based on how pretty his first officer was or that he might like a layover in San Francisco is simply stupid. I agree with your decision making process. It would be very similar to mine. So why would you agree with a guy who denigrates the profession by suggesting the decisions being made had to do with the attractiveness of a female pilot or his layover location. It's a stupid comment.
In the old 3 crew Boeing days before autothrottles and before the FAA disallowed it we would take naps at the controls with some restrictions so all three didn't fall asleep. We also read magazines when things were quiet and smoked.
I would think waking up at the controls could be startling. I used to have a job driving a tow truck night shift. I fell asleep in the drivers seat of the running truck, parked in the corner of an L shaped fast food restaurant. A car with loud exhaust exited the drive through and woke me up. For a split second when I woke up the parking lot looked like an intersection, and I thought I had fellen asleep at a red light. I nearly bent the brake pedal 😂
What is everyone else talking about? Seeing a lot of back-patting and safety platitudes. This is a routine conversation with mission control but with comms hampered a bit by loss of some automation. I'm a captain on the Airbus side of things and I certainly didn't hear any pressure for the crew to continue. The captain was concerned about *future* fatigue but probably could've done without bringing that up with Maintenance - its not really their concern. When they don't understand, they want to talk to the duty pilot and then he gets confused because the only current issue is a mechanical one. Maintenance will only advise if the manuals would allow an operation to continue, which in this case it would. It's up the PIC to decide if thats the best course of action taking into account all the other factors, which is this case it wasn't. No railroading or cajoling here, sorry folks.
Should have just said have technical issue with auto throttles out and only 10 min reserve at destination because of delay and troubleshooting, not safe to continue. Will discuss on the ground factors involved for the report... That would have had the duty pilot less on edge for the reason as there would be a whole lot of splaining to do in my humble opinion.
Maybe the phrasing of the captain was wrong but I understood him to be saying they can't continue with the flight in the state it is and the time of the flight as they risk been fatigued. I never interpreted or understood him to be saying they're fatigued and he clearly said it's a long flight with a "broken" plane and in circadian low
🤦♂️ Painful to hear the back and forth regarding fatigue vs. broken airplane. I developed fatigue just listening to it. Awesome though, rare you get to hear grounds talking.
The whole conversation was unnecessary with duty pilot, he just needed to tell dispatch I need to return due to maintenance run my number and tell me how much I need to be on hold in order not to land over weight then you can tell the story over the phone, I’m surprised that dispatch at delta was pushing too much, it was a yes or no question, book saying you can continue are you going or not end of story, but good video thanks
Agreed. First time hearingops which adds an interesting dynamic to the conversation. I’m a bit surprised by the duty pilot communication as he should be more supportive of the flying pilots concern and less of the particular language at the time. Particularly from Delta.
Yeah, you have to be careful talking to maintenance and following their troubleshooting advice. There are Flightcrew procedures and there are Maintenance procedures. Once airborne we generally don’t go beyond QRH.
Fatigue is a valid reason to discontinue. But the TAT probe is also essential for the ideal gas law math underlying all the AP/FD flight control algo's, if INOP it was the right call here, not to proceed 5 hours in a non-redundant config.
@foobarf8766 exactly. 5 hours, through the night, after flying a turn from a near 6 hour flight, delayed 2.5 hours. They were butting up against max duty there anyway - maybe even flying an exception.
I'm no pilot but I'm assuming operating the throttle manually could lead to higher fuel burn as well and leave less of a safety margin if they have to hold when they get to New York
Mechanical was the reason for returning. If you admit fatigue was the cause of return than that opens up questions about if you took off in a fatigued state and the safety implications of that.
100% with the captain. Not sure what else this crew was doing prior to flying this leg but if they are flying ANF after a long delay and you add a mechanical into the mix I wouldn’t continue either. And all this getting the duty pilot on the line is irrelevant. Return to the field then call. Was a bit irritating to me how confusing this became. The mechanical was technically not an issue cause you can fly with no AT. Which was the captains point, he can fly but due to that he’s going to be fatigued with the rolling delay and now having to deal with that for the next 6 hours.
Points of interest: The Captain sounded knackered already! Was he looking for an excuse to end the flight early? The First officer sounded a lot “fresher” Why is having no auto-throttle more fatiguing? I submit having this extra task would increase their stress/arousal performance relationship. (Yerkes-Dodson law). We need stress for peak performance. Especially during night flights..! Safe flying all
Everyone forgetting the pilots wouldn’t be fatigued if they didn’t have mechanical issues and would’ve been able to fly it perfectly. However, having to deal with multiple mechanical issues, and no auto throttle, at the end of duty limit and circadian low would risk fatiguing them as it’s much more work than if they were AP most of cruise. That doesn’t fatigue you as much as having to handle and troubleshoot all your issues and manage the throttles constantly. So to be clear, they are not fatigued and wouldn’t have been fatigued had there been no mechanical issues to deal with. They are saying they may end up fatigued during the flight because they’re at the end of their limit, it’s a circadian low period which is proven to increase mistakes in any pilot, and the managing of those faults requires a lot more effort, physically and physiologically and the safer bet is to return than risk a mistake. Remember airlines care about money. Not you.
I think the crew over reacted wanting to stop the climb at 2 or 3k, much of the discussion was unnecessary and a distraction. I don't think it contributed to safety being vectored around the terminal area at low level with a broken plane while on the phone. It sounds like the Captain isn't really in command of his aircraft and wants to defer decision making to dispatch and maintenance in order to cover himself. Maybe this hints at some corporate culture problems. The QRH is incomplete for a TAT Probe failure, it says flight in icing might result in erroneous instruments and omits that the TMC is affected with several minor engine control & indication implications, which is why A/T disconnects. I would be inclined continue the climb on route to keep the workload down, get the A/P back in if possible, do the QRH, avoid icing as a priority, then at a safer altitude and out of the terminal area, contact maintenance for help. This would put me 30 mins closer to the destination, burn weight off in the climb, helping with max landing weight, and preserve my reserves at JFK. Deciding to RTB because manual thrust is too fatiguing sounds like they were already too fatigued from previous issues to operate in the first place. I also think a broken temperature probe and manual thrust are not valid reasons for an overweight landing which is going to generate mandatory reporting and inspection. They would have needed to cruise for about 2:45 to burn off 18 tons of fuel, or 1:40 if they dropped the gear. I think this crew were put in a difficult situation being delayed already in the middle of the night, rightly concerned about fatigue levels and stuck between continuing with a mild technical defect or landing overweight. Personally I would have continued provided the JFK weather was benign and no other threats, controlled rest in the cockpit, then assessed crew fatigue later in the flight, they could have diverted into Detroit if they felt too tired to continue.
I completely agree. I’m a retired 747 Classic Capt. It was not a safety of flight problem like an engine failure. They should have continued on course while they did their trouble shooting. If they decided it was okay to continue, they wouldn’t have wasted all of that fuel and time while they were flying around SFO. If they decided to not continue, they still could have returned with no problem to SFO. If they were concerned about flying without A/T at optimum altitude, they could have (and I probably would have) requested a lower altitude that would give me a larger speed envelope to work in. A couple of thousand feet lower would not have resulted in much of an extra fuel burn, if any. There have been many times I didn’t get the cruise altitude that was flight planned and just by flying at a slightly reduced speed at the lower altitude, I always saved fuel. Optimum altitude and speed are not just for fuel savings. It is a combination of fuel costs, crew costs and airframe tme. I was enroute one time from Miami to Toronto ferrying a B-747 200. Shortly after takeoff out of Miami, I realized that dispatch had made a mistake and we were going to arrive at Toronto about an hour before the noise curfew was lifted. I descended from 29,000’ to 22000’ and slowed to holding speed. Checked the INS and it looked like we could lose enough time to arrive after the curfew ended. Checked the fuel flow and calculated that fuel would also be no problem. I contacted our dispatch in JFK and pointed out the problem and what I had done and that if they wanted, we could land at JFK or continue at the reduced altitude and speed. They did their calculations and agreed that we should continue. When we arrived at Toronto, we had actually used 3.000 pounds of fuel less than what was flight planned, but the flight took almost 1 hour longer. I was paid by the hour, so not a problem for me. By not landing at JFK we not only saved fuel but also landing and handling fees. The Delta capt seemed to be inexperienced and made a mountain out of a molehill. It sounds like something that a pilot would do during a contract negotiation period in order to show the company that pilots can cost them a lot of money.
I don't blame this Captian....no way would I fly 5 hours manually at night and then the last brillant comment from Ops, you gonna have 10 mins of hold fuel by Albany......no way!
As a corporate pilot I totally understand fatigue factors but saying you can’t continue due to no ATs is kinda rare. We fly everyteio without ATs and back and forth across the country all the time. Not saying they made the wrong call at all just not something that I would be concerned.
I have been an airline captain for almost 37 years, I’m still working. I do understand they didn’t want to fly, however, 30 years ago, I flew freight, sometimes from Kennedy to Los Angeles at night with no auto pilot, and no auto trust, at 41,000 feet. Currently pilots are probably unsafe, because they are no longer used to fly airplanes, we have all become button pushers,
Good call from the pilots. I think generally decent support from maintenance and dispatch. The requirement to explain the rationale to not proceed with the duty pilot seems odd, but reading between the lines the dp might just be covering their backs.
Duty Pilot sounded arsey, but he was doing them a favour. Return 'due fatigued' will likely be written up alongside embarrassing stories such as, "I woke up and saw my FO was asleep." Return 'due mechanical failure' will be quickly forgotten once they have explained that, although flight with those failures was technically permissible, the circumstances of that particular flight made it unsafe in the opinion of the Pilot in Command. If I had a criticism, it would be that asking to be vectored around busy airspace like that was only adding to the workload. A normal climb-out would be an easier environment for sorting out a non-critical issue. Extended holding near the departure airport is eating into personal energy reserves and duty time, and potentially creating a marginal fuel situation to add to your problems if you do eventually want to continue. Perhaps the crew were having a crappy day and just wanted to pack it in. That's not necessarily a bad decision - there are plenty of examples of negative emotional state being the final hole in the cheese.
He didn't want to fly without autothrottle and TAT inop because he could he could/should have called in fatigued or fatigue concerned on the ground possibly giving the airline time to call in reserve crew to do the trip. The discussion points to it.
Solid, could've ended in an ntsb report... I think calling that you will end up fatigued before you get to your destination because of things you learned once airborne such as autothrottles inop is a very reasonable reason to not continue a flight. Arguing the semantics while flying seems like a really good way to get fatigued
There shouldn't even be a conversation about this. The captain's decision is final. If he feels the safe operation of the flight will be effected, there should be zero push from "dispatch" . The fact the captain is even entertaining this tells me there must be significant pressure and repercussions on a daily basis from the company for delays in the schedule.
I think the sad, underlying issue is that they are trying to figure out how to best say they can’t continue so they don’t get reprimanded or fired. I was a flight attendant for several years and it’s the same thing there. Trying to balance your personal health and safety with your career and income. I had to work a trip with the stomach flu once because I couldn’t call out “sick” without getting in trouble since I had already called out once the month before. The only way I could have avoided it was to admit myself to a hospital. It’s dangerous.
It’s not fatiguing to fly without the auto throttle. I believe he’s concerned with making an approach in the early morning hours after a long flight and a long ground delay in SFO. It sounds like this was not supposed to be an all night flight but turned into one because of the delays.
Ugh, this is a bit of a mess. I agree that if they’re anticipating being fatigued, they should do what they planned. Circadian low is a real thing, and although not having auto throttles isn’t that big of a deal, this is definitely the safest course of action even though it’s an unusual circumstance.
Children of the magenta line when one thing breaks. They’ve probably never flown a jet flight without auto throttle. Ya gotta turn that stuff off occasionally and keep proficient because one night it’s all gonna stop working and it won’t be on a nice clear smooth moonlit night when it happens. You’d better be able to fly the plane without the magic or it may cost lives (AF447 - yeah I wrote a book about that one)
@@oavdov the autopilot wasn't out, just the autothrust. not that hard - unless you don't know how to, and that was my point: not "man up" but to have the proficiency to be able to fly without the magic.
As if you're them and know what they can't or can do. They were fatigued and decided to be as safe as possible. You're part of the problem, pushing for unsafe operations if you're not lying about your expertise. You just sound like a typical armchair pilot.
@I’m not lying about my expertise (I hold type ratings in 757/767 777 DC10 A320 A330 A350 and was an instructor and line check airman). Read my comment more carefully. First they were not fatigued, they thought they WOULD BE fatigued by the extra workload of no auto throttle. My premise was that they probably were not proficient at flying without the auto-everything and that they need to be - for just situations like this- or worse.
The decision as to whether or not to fly the Transcon for five hours without the auto throttle is the captains. A good captain will discuss this with their first officer. But ultimately if he feels that it is the best interest of safety to not do that it is the captains decision. Now he may expect to discuss that with his fleet captain, and were the chief pilot after he returns. The issue of fatigue is more appropriate once they’ve landed. The company may have opted to switch equipment and asked them to replay a different 757 and continue with the flight. At that point, the crew assesses their fitness for duty and makes the decision whether or not to say they are fatigued or fit. One other option would have been to have the flight to an intermediate stop, maybe Salt Lake City, where Delta has facilities and aircraft. I do not know if they have 75 sevens based there, but that might’ve been an option. I am not familiar with exactly how the TAT data integrates with the auto flight system and the flight management computers. I do know that on other Boeings like the 737 800 NG, loss of TAT probe will cause the auto pilot to default to right auto pilot control wheel steering only , you will lose RAV capability from your flight management computer, and you are no longer eligible to participate in RVSM airspace unless ATC gives you permission to be there. There is also the issue of cycling circuit breakers in flight in an attempt to restore the system, and whether or not this is approved per Delta‘s maintenance procedures. Now I say this, having flown my last leg in a falcon 50 from San Jose to Teterboro between midnight Eastern and 5:30 AM Eastern, in an airplane that is not equipped with auto throttles. In my former life, I had a leg as a first officer and the 737 800 NG with the FAA sitting in the Jumpseat, where we dispatched without auto throttle per the MEL and flew the leg. After landing at Dallas, the FAA inspector before he deplaned, complemented me and said I flew it better than the auto flight system.
Good for this pilot standing his ground on returning to SF and not attempting a 5 hour over night flight to JFK!!! That duty pilot sure didn't want any verbiage or comms regarding fatigue entered into the log! Glad everything turned out alright!!!
Two options... Either the captain isn't very good at stuff or.... He is absolutely fatigued and likely should have called it after the delay. That's the problem with being fatigued and being a professional pilot. You have to make self assessment decisions when your already impaired. Fatigue is the worst.
Jesus the duty pilot convo was driving me nuts. Yes there is a mechanical issue but there is a mechanical issue that WOULD allow them to fly but it WOULD be fatiguing to deal with given their situation. Both can be true.
Absolutly. The Duty Pilot new full well what the issue was. He tried to apply subtile pressure to the PIC to continue with his fake „i am confused“. Typical manager pilot behaviour. If something would have gone wrong, he would have been the first to blame the PIC for not calling a quits. Cover your a.. mentality.
@@MrWoodyxp yes it was like a political conversation which is terrifying given the responsibility these pilots have. Pilots on the plane handled it beautifully, but unfortunate they let the duty pilot win with the “mechanical issue” jargon.
Too much info over the airwaves. "ops we're returning to SFO because we had a mechanical issue and don't feel comfortable flying across the country without it being checked by maintenance."
A 757 captain surely knows how to do this....the fact that he was talking like this to ops instead of just turning back maybe shows he was already operating too tired! I am a center controller and I *never* hear any proper details from an experienced captain until they have decided whether they are going back, decided what's going on the paperwork, etc.
I tried this in X-Plane, not saying it's realistic, but I had to move the throttle every minute throughout the flight. At 38,000 feet there is only 10kts between overspeed and airspeed low. Every time you think you have it dialed in the speed starts creeping up or down. Was able to keep it at about 250kts +/- 3 but it was at least every 3 or 4 minutes I had to adjust. Climb out was okay using LVL CHG on the auto pilot. It started getting a little more difficult to manage above FL280. Decent was fine. got a little more busy during initial approach. ILS approach was a little bit more involved without auto throttle. Seems doable. I guess we will probably never know what all led up to this and the fate of the pilot. One thing that made me nervous is that they were Close to Mt. Diablo several times at only 5000 feet.
I’m also wondering if the pilot had some niggling sense that there was something else that didn’t feel right about the plane, that also informed this decision.
Amazing that you got Delta Ops comms! I’m so glad the captain specifically called out his circadian low. Another reason I’m glad to fly Delta. Duty pilot was not just a dickhead, but providing an unacceptable distraction instead of helping solve the issue.
The way I saw it, the Duty Pilot was trying to save the actual pilots from a huge pile of BS.. "We just took off and now all of a sudden we are fatigued and need to return".. That would come with a lot of questions and paperwork, and possibly an investigation.. He was trying to save their bacon.. Mechanical.. You aren't fatigued. You are returning because of a MECHANICAL failure. The fact that the MECHANICAL failure would contribute to fatigue in 5 hours, we will talk about that later while we make out the report. Right now, you are returning because of MECHANICAL failure.
@@bobw53jrmaexactly. The duty pilot wasn’t suggesting they continue the flight. He was merely suggesting that they document the decision in the best way. Not only would there be fewer questions to answer, it was the more accurate description of what was causing the return. As the pilot noted, he wasn’t fatigued now, but he would have been fatigued at the end of a long redeye with higher than normal workload.
Aircraft used to fly cross-country and trans-oceanic without autothrottle ALL THE TIME (727's and 707's didn't have autothrottle for example). If this crew shows up to fly, they need to be fresh enough to fly the aircraft no matter what happens. They shouldn't have taken off if they were delayed so long prior and were at "circadian low."
This is taking safety serious. There were no serious risks of fatigued mistakes at the time but knew there was a risk of it happening and decided to put safety first. They could’ve asked them to continue flying but it’s not worth the risk. They always say, you haven’t an idea how expensive a plane crash, and not just in the cost of the aircraft and victim funds, but in reputation and fines. Sometimes paying $$$$$’s is worth it and could save tens to hundreds of millions of $. Also pilots, remember you get the final say. If you don’t feel safe to continue flying, speak up. No job or company is worth dying over or risking jail time for. If you state you returned for safety reasons and anticipated troubleshooting whilst fatigued in circadian low and question that, find a new company. A company should trust the pilots in control of the aircraft, not the suits in the cosy safe offices getting paid 10x more.
A Delta Airlines B752 was climbing out of SFO when they lost guidance, autothrottle, autopilot, and an EICAS message regarding TAT Probe. The crew worked the issues with dispatch and maintenance without success. After further discussion with dispatch and the duty pilot they decided to return to SFO as it would be too fatiguing to fly with limited capabilities and at time of circadian low.
This is why I fly Delta. Safety above all else. Smart crew.
@@martincryer7913grow a pair, you pearl-clutching ninny.
That's the pilot I want to ride with! 👍
oh common...Every regional pilot has flow 10 yrs plus with no auto throttles...u barely have to touch them in cruise...they created the delay by holding instead of continuing and calling mx enroute. This is a POOR CPT.
calling fatigued inflight...what a noob
I think this is the first time I've heard Ops comms too. It's a really interesting addition with new insights into what the air crew have to do.
Yea I don't know how they got the audio between dispatch and the crew. That's not really public info.
@@dashriprock2916 it's a radio frequency, same as ATC.
@@chrisgomes9572 Yes but it's not the same frequency as for example approach or tower. Thus someone knew the frequency and listened .
@@chrisgomes9572how was an airplane in San Francisco talking to a maintenance base in Atlanta?
@@mtnairpilot using ARINC frequencies. You can Google the map. Airlines subscribe to the service and use operators to connect. You can hear the operator ask if the crew wants to be connected at the beginning of the tape.
The back and forth is fatiguing me.
Outstanding job getting the internal comms. Subscribed!
DITTO!!! Great Job!!
I agree with the duty pilot. The aircraft pilots were not yet fatigued, were not flying in a fatigued condition and would not be landing at SFO fatigued. They were discontinuing the flight to avoid becoming fatigued due to a mechanical issue. Great call by the aircraft pilots and the duty pilot.
One improvement I would suggest for the duty pilot, and the PIC- make it clear that fatigue was not an issue at the moment, but it would be a concern after 5 hours flight with a mechanical deficit.
IMHO, PIC made the correct aviation call, DP made a legal call.
117 allows predictive fatigue so the pilots made the right call and shouldn’t have to dance around it with the POD.
@@skygraffNever heard of that before.
@@skygraffagree
@@TexasVernon if some simple and safe failures would cause fatigue making the flight unsafe they were never fit to fly the mission and should haven't been flying that plane. It means they were on the edge before they started the engine because everything had to go right and smooth. The right call to make was not accepting that flight.
Duty pilot was helping them cover their ass by railroading them to say "mechanical" vs "fatigue". All the pilots in this video are awesome
He's not covering their ass, he's truly confused. This is a bizarre move by the captain, and he probably fucked his career
@@zach6639no. He didn't do anything to his career. It's a weird administrative/procedural/regulatory gray area. Bottom line, he was fit for duty when he took off. After the mechanical which is technically legal and safe to continue to JFK with, the added factor of having been on duty for quite a while and the fact that they're at their circadian low, the Captain and crew deemed it the safest course of action to return due to an impending fatigue issue if he were to continue with the added procedural steps caused by the Autothrottle failure. It's dumb they even had to have that conversation. All he should have heard from Dispatch/Duty Pilot was "Roger, Captain."
@@zach6639Okay Captain!
@@zach6639confused until he understood what he was trying to say 😂😂 he then changed his tone to cover his butt
That was great
When I thought nobody could beat VASaviation, this avocado guy comes and adds airline dispatch comms 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
VASaviation isn't that good, his subtitles are pretty awful
I’m with the captain here too. I think what the duty pilot was saying is it’s better for them to call out fatigued after returning to SFO due to the mechanical issue, and not call out fatigued in the air.
Totaly agree. Return due to mechanical issues and explain/defend your decision on ground. If there is any doubt, for any reason, that the flight can be completed safely it is the PIC‘s duty and responsibility to decide on a course of action. No „duty pilot“ or dispatch is gone make that choice for you. I do find the whole conversation with the „duty pilot“ unnecessary. He knew very well what it was all about and kinda played stupid to put subtile pressure on the PIC to continue.
Old pilot or new pilot he made a good decision, inop autopilot/autothrottles and tat could evolve into something else 3 hours into the flight.Airplanes give us warnings.
Old Pilot here.
@@MrWoodyxpI don't think he was pressuring the PIC to continue at all, he was subtly advising him that it's not a good look to report fatigue while still in the air, even if it's impending and not current. He tells them to just call it a mechanical issue and that they should discuss any possible fatigue related issues off the net once they're on the ground. No need to report a fatigue out if it never actually happened, but once they use those words it opens a whole can of worms.
@@MrWoodyxp Subtle pressure? Are you kidding? The duty pilot was trying to get the PIC to make the correct realization on their own. At no point did they “subtly pressure” the PIC. I highly suggest that you listen to the audio again. And again.
@RetreadPhoto All of it should have been discussed over a telephone line not radio patch.If TAT probe was broken a/p and a/t would be a on -off thing during the whole flight,thus inop. add to that a circadian low ? no, I am with the Captain.
I want to add I agree with those saying how interesting it was to hear the company comms. It’s a great new insight to the rest of what happens in the cockpit and just emphasises the number of people it actually takes to operate an aircraft, as well as showing us other tasks the pilots undertake.
When the PIC is concerned about fatigue, it should not be questioned, period. Also, this is the first ever vídeo I've seen anywhere that has audio beyond ATC. More please!
Rewatched the video, why is the captain asking others to see if landing overweight is OK? My assumption is this is a fairly new captain. This is his call and it was not an emergency, so he should've been able to burn fuel.
For those wondering, this happened on Sept 6, 2024.
I'm just guessing, but I think the DP is hinting at "if you return citing fatigue, you shouldn't have gone flying in the first place" and it will seem a personal misjudgment. Wheras returning due to mechanical issue is ok and then because of delays etc. you are too fatigued to continue. He's just looking out for the PIC not getting a note on his record.
@@maartendeen8404 The thing is autothrottle failure is not a reason to return in itself. Look at Southwest, they didn't allow pilots to use autothrottles until 2010.
Sure but the duty pilot is trying to save him from a nightmare situation. If he says he took off fatigued then he is liable. If he is returning for mechanical then he isn't.
@@maartendeen8404 What the DP is doing is saving his ass. If he took off "fatigued" then he made a critical mistake and it is ALL on the crew. Mechanical is mechanical.
@@drn13355 BINGO...he wasn't fatigued at take off time but *anticipated* becoming fatigued because of over-work from mechanical failure.
My dad was a career Air Force pilot and when I started flight training he told me once you start having a cascade of “little things” that you need to get it on the ground asap.
The holes in the Swiss cheese are lining up
Haha, come fly at my airline. They would fire you for refusing a plane with little things.
@@HardeepSingh-g7g your union sucks
This is no cascade of problems unless you include the pilots.
Yes. Across the US, late night, AP warning lights that won't reset, auto throttles inop, pilots will be getting tired . . . accident chain was definitely forming. Return and land, get it fixed, try tomorrow. Good call.
The airline I retired from had a big poster near the time clock that read, "There is no task so urgent, that we must compromise safety".
That should be the mandate, regardless of the occupation! ✈️
Bell System safety creed: no job is so important and no service is so urgent that we cannot take time to perform our work safely.
Shoutout to the PIC for not caving into the operational pressure of completing the flight and standing on the decision he made. Could they have made it to jfk? Yes, but why add a hole to the swiss cheese model if theres no need.
@RetreadPhoto its not an issue of competency, its an issue of decision making. The PIC will always have the final say regardless of what ops or the chief pilot says. It sounds like they were close to dutying out and if anything else were to happen enroute, then you would be in a much different situation. I would rather explain to the chief pilot why some passengers had to get rebooked on the next flight than explain to the FAA why I made a poor decision in the case of an incident or accident.
It would have been interesting to hear the conversation between the captain and the duty pilot after they landed. Good on him and his copilot for putting safety first.
Flying without auto throttle is no big deal. They could have continued.
If you are not familiar with the working environment the situation while not at that moment, can become very stress inducing with a high workload. After a lengthy delay they will be making a 5 hour flight having to constantly actively monitoring throttle settings and speed in an environment with little room for mistake. Then descend through a real of potential icing without clear indication or advance warning. Then shoot an approach with little holding time and if necessary a diversion to an airport inside the area of known ice. All this being done at the end of a long fatiguing night when their circadian rhythm is at its lowest. That is the definition of risky. They did the right thing.
Oddly enough this video may help them as Delta would not want the public to think they are forcing pilots to continue flying fatigued
The pilot correctly put the safety of all first. However, in hindsight I'm sure he'll learn better how to handle something like this in the future.
Duty pilot was actually looking out for PIC in a major way if it's not obvious
i see. initially though annoying DP but yeah i see
To be clear. He wasn’t saying he was fatigued. He said it would be “fatiguing” to continue 5 hours to New York after all the delays and added technical issues, not to mention somewhat stressful given how little holding fuel he had on arrival at New York. There may be no right or wrong answer to this Captain’s decision making, but I agree with the Duty Pilot, that no mention of the word fatigue should be used while airborne.
Ex 777 Captain, 25 years commercial experience.
I agree with you. I think when it got to the point where Dispatch said they would connect the Duty Pilot I would have (hopefully) said that it was unnecessary and we would be landing and could talk to him then. At that point the Captain had already made the decision to return, the advice or anything the Duty Pilot would say is irrelevant and not within the allowable discussion in a sterile cockpit environment.
Not a pilot, so haven't had all the training, but seems to me that the captain made the "RIGHT" decision. Saftey is 1st. As someone who has a job with hours all over the place and very long hours, the window of circadian low is absolutely a thing(as I'm sure you know), and Ive seen how even when rested, its hard to not make little mistakes at that time. Add to that the delay in takeoff, the several warnings, the extra/abnormal work not having the auto throttle, the low alternate fuel, I think any other decision would have clearly been the wrong one. Sure, maybe they would have been fine, but there are thousands of lives at risk(air/ground), so why go? Sure, it screws the passangers there and in new york who were waiting for that aircraft, but better this than becoming a MentourPilot episode.
@@griffisjm Yes the CA made the right decision for him and in the interest of safety however he did not execute it well. At this level in a career we are multitudes of levels ahead in terms of "all the training". At this point making the right decision concerning safety is assumed, but now you are also expected to make these calls in a smart and legal manner. He made the right call to end the flight, however he should not have accepted any input from the duty manager and unfortunately that is what can get him talked to by the company and the FAA. @TheFutureThoughtExchange and I are specifically talking about this aspect when we criticize whether what he "did" was right or wrong.
@TheFutureThoughtExchange So first of all I hope you both know how lucky you guys are to have/and be able, to fly are. Id sell you my left kidney, left nut, and left pinky to he able to. My idea of a fun day, crammed in a tiny coach window seat of an embraer flying 4hrs. If you guys can help in any way, with knowing how, please let me know, but I really want to fly on a 747 before they are retired. Still need that and a 380, but the 747 seems harder. I don't know if there is a way to find what routes other than flight radar app, but then it may change day to day, and the last thing I want is to book a detroit to Tokyo or Seoul and end up on a 777 or 787. Not that it wouldn't be cool and fun, but money and time are what I don't have to waste. If you have any ideas, I'm all ears.
As for the video, I get what both of you are saying, and the optics of saying "fatigued" while flying. But like you gus said, he didn't say he was fatigued, he said "would be fatiguing", and it was ops that said he would have to call fatigued, not him. It seems to me, again as a lay person, that knowing he made the right choice with the flight, the airline or FAA should not look at him, but the Dispatch procedures. What you seem to be saying is he should have lied about the seriousness of the maintenance, used that as an excuse to get on the ground, then he could call out fatigued. In 2 weeks when I strap myself into a 500mph tin bullet, I don't want to be worried about my pilots playing symantics. Seems like great strides have been made with CRM, and being able to call out sick or unrested, not punishing crew for speaking up, or taking the decisions, but we're saying, "Oh no, that the reason but don't say that", and that seems like it will only lead to problems. If my pilot has to lie or play games, in any way hide the truth, there is a problem, and we need you guys to step up and help fix that. My wife and kids sit down behind you guys all the time, and archaic ways of thinking, "get there itis", even from ops, is unacceptable.
Edit: I guess the crux of my argument, and its not your fault, I know exactly where you are coming from and what you mean, but the "didn't execute it well" is the garbage I'm talking about. You're right, that should not even be in the vocabulary in this instance.
@@griffisjm Korean Air still has 747’s I believe, you can try booking on them, or Air India. I’m sure there are other passenger airlines running them. You can look at the flight schedules and they should say what equipment the flight is scheduled to be on, or just call them directly!
Unfortunately pilots have gotten in trouble for saying the wrong things in the past when it comes to MX issues. Honestly, nothing gets in the way of safety when it comes to our conduct of a flight however you do have to be tactful in certain areas of communication to not jeopardize your job. For instance: if you went through some turbulence and said anything like “severe” anywhere on the radio etc. then you better have a write up on that aircraft later. Just throwing the word out “severe” can bring a violation on you if you don’t then write the aircraft up. This has actually happened to people because they just meant it was rough, later saying it was actually moderate. This is what I mean: words have meaning. Most flight manuals require an inspection after encountering severe turbulence and each category of turbulence is in fact defined.
To be clear in this event I don’t even think the duty pilot was correct in what he was saying, he blew it out of proportion, however I think the discussion itself should never have happened. CA has made the choice to return, it’s a good choice for him and his crew that night after long delays. Done. That should have been the end of it. When they wanted to put the duty pilot on he should’ve just said: I’ll talk to them on the ground.
Don’t worry we know what we do and are glad to have all of you on board, my life depends on it and y’all are depending on us. We never forget it.
Fascinating back-end discussions. You can see how a captain could be persuaded to carry on with a faulty aircraft. Good call Crew!
It was a perfectly functioning aircraft. It is disappointing he attempted a risky overweight landing because the auto-throttle did not work.
But the plane was fine. This would be like driving a car with an inop cruise control. The car still works but it would be more work to use your foot instead of CC.
This was an unusually interesting conversation; almost like a peek into the OT while a major surgery is in progress.
The things these folks have to do behind the scenes for us to fly from place to place safely is mindblowing.
Wow this was fantastic behind the scenes look! Thank you for posting!
Thanks for putting all this together. I've watched countless ATC videos, and I think this is *the* most interesting video I can recall, especially the discussion between the captain and the duty pilot. There is clearly so much being said without being said.
100% great call not to continue. Better to have this discussion on the radio than on your behalf at the NTSB hearing. The crew saw holes in the swiss cheese slices starting to line up, and took responsibility for keeping everyone in the air and on the ground safe. Increased workload, non-normal operation, decreased protections, circadian low, delays. This was a flight the NTSB would be very pleased didn't continue.
One problem is there is a condition of "fatigued" and a condition of "not fatigued" but there is no condition of "going to be fatigued."
The air return goes down as mechanical, everybody's happy.
That means additional delay and then leads to fatigued crew.
Just like with "timing out" there's not really a protocol for "about to time out." Either it happens or it doesn't and the nature of the crew is to look ahead and plan and get the ball rolling so everything flows without delay, but the protocol begins with a certain condition that hasn't occurred yet but likely will. It's complex.
Nailed it! Not knowing what actually happend in SFO prior to the flight (in terms of delay, maintenance issue etc) dealing with these issues can be quite exhausting in itself. As i understand , they already operated the flight JFK-SFO… sounds like quite a rotation duty time wise… Was a bit irritated with the „Duty Pilots“ response and statements. We do have those too, but they dont generally interfere with ops wants airborne. We give them a call after shutdown if at all required.. Technical degradation of airplane systems can leed to fatigue earlier than usual. As you say, unfortunatly there seems to be no understanding of calling a quits BEFORE the onset of fatigue. Seems like everyone on ground just wanted to make sure they can’t be blamed.. cover your a.. mentality. Difficult but sound decision by the PIC. Well done
On the other hand, near misses are logged and investigated, right?
You can't forecast fatigue and trying to blame a minor automation failure on their future state of supposed fatigue is pretty rich. Don't forget there is thousands of jets flying everyday with no auto throttles installed at all.
Sounds to me like it's more related to an unfamiliarity of manual throttle controls and unwillingness to try.
it is just a mechanical issue. It's a fault that stops the plane from safely flying to its destination when it otherwise would. There is no need to put in some special "this is why the mechanical issue would be an issue" issue.
@zachansen8293 it's not even mechanical it is a single layer of automation. ATP pilots needs to be able to have mastery of the aircraft at all levels of automation including none. It is ridiculous that this crew returned for such a small thing and it shows that many crews have become entirely dependant on the automation. We need to get back to actually flying airplanes again.
Good call by the Captain. How many times have we seen flights end in badly because warnings were ignored.
Excellent crew who stood their ground even when pressured by a few colleagues. The pilots are the ones in that cockpit and only they know how their day has been so far, how much more is predicted and how much they can trust their aircraft. Multiple issues on take off leaves room reasonable concern that more technical issues could show up through the flight, regardless of the fact most had ceased for now. We’ve seen it so many times, how there’s one issue, then 30 mins later a new one, then 10 minutes later 2 new ones…. Suddenly workload increases dramatically and during their window of Circadian Low, this can become a real safety issue. Plenty of those scenarios ended in fatal crashes.
The fact they had the insight and awareness to think ahead and know that this could cause them big - far more dangerous problems - going forward a few hours, it’s commendable that they considered it, discussed it and then had the balls to follow through despite the people who tried to persuade them to continue. Dispatch wasn’t on that aircraft, nor was the DP. That Captain and his FO were the ones in the cockpit, meaning it’s their aircraft and their decision.
Delta should take it as a compliment that the pilots felt comfortable enough to make this decision, as they’ve obviously experienced good CRM and command training, and must feel like it’s a supportive company, even if their colleagues on the night weren’t so in agreement.
If I was on that flight and I knew this had happened and been discussed like this, I would be thanking the pilots on our return for putting the safety of me and everyone else above cooperate demand. I’d fly with this crew any day, anywhere.
At the end of the day, it’s the Captains job to ensure his plane takes off, flies then lands with the same number of cabin and crew alive that they set off with. Any flight that lands safely, is a successful flight, regardless of where it landed.
100% agree. When a couple holes in the cheese start lining up there's no reason to keep going to see if all of them will line up.
They weren't pressured, corporate saved them from a LOT of paperwork by misreporting the reason for returning.
From a former airline pilot during the early 2000s -
By day 3 of a 3 day trip, I had involuntary micro-naps.
The worst -BOS to Jackson, Mississippi.
6am departure, after landing at 8:30pm the night prior -
Technically meeting the 8.5 hours of crew rest.
Got to the hotel at 9:30pm, with a 4:15am wake up.
Not good.
Total pay -
$60 = $20 per hour x 3 hour block
Colgan Air 3407 was the result.
@@DavidWade66
Yes sir.
Fatigue, and the Captain had. sorry RIP, failed a few checkrides if I recall correctly.
His control inputs were exactly wrong for the situation.
RIP.
The duty pilot was spot on. Don't call fatigue is you already operate the aircraft, altough I understand the point made by the captain was "we are going to be fatigued in the future" but as a precautionnary measure it's best not the mix the two together as it is each pilot responsability to not accept a flight if he feel fatigued.
Great catch! Really cool to hear the internal comms with maintenance. So much going on up there. Great decision to return.
Agreed - was surprised the Duty Pilot was giving pushback - figured it was always the pilot's decision to call the flight on safety grounds and Company wouldn't question it
Its rare you get hear what Airline Dispatchers deal with. This is one problem on one flight. Domestic Dispatchers often touch 40-60 flights through an 8 hour shift and plan atleast half of those.
Yes!! More of these, PLEASE :) GREAT JOB!!!
For other low level
Pilots like me . TAT total air temp sensor
Total air temperature is important when monitoring fuel temperatures on long flights (fuel tank temps tend to approach TAT).
Pilots use both TAT and SAT to help determine when to use airframe and engine anti-ice systems. My airline’s 767 procedures require the use of engine anti-ice in visible moisture (rain, snow, clouds) between +10°C TAT and -40°C SAT.
TAT probe data is used for calculating Mach number and true airspeed which are critical for cruise flight and navigation.
Engine thrust setting values and auto throttles require data from the TAT probe.
An autothrottle (automatic throttle, also known as autothrust, A/T or A/THR) is a system that allows a pilot to control the power setting of an aircraft's engines by specifying a desired flight characteristic, rather than manually controlling the fuel flow. The autothrottle can greatly reduce the pilots' work load and help conserve fuel and extend engine life by metering the precise amount of fuel required to attain a specific target indicated air speed, or the assigned power for different phases of flight. A/T and AFDS (Auto Flight Director Systems) can work together to fulfill the whole flight plan.[1]
Well done by 564 flight crew . Safety first - I like it . Sucks for passengers but all safe - try
Again tomorrow .
This situation is like you hopping in the car and turning around 45 mins into the drive because it would be too tiring because your cruise control wasn’t working. The 170 people who paid you to drive will then applaud you for making a safety related decision.
I applaud the pilots for their mature decisions.
This is an excellent video. Pilots have to estimate if they will be fit enough to perform a landing in 5 hours from now, possibly resulting in a go-around and a diversion to an alternate. If anything happens during the flight the commander will be responsible. I am pretty sure that if anything would have happened all company parties involved would make sure that the commander will be blamed solely. Therefore it's a very good and professional decision to return to SFO, taking into account all factors, including a very PROBABLE fatigued situation 5 hours from now. Thank God the commander has the authority to do that.
Interestingly, without the mechanical issue - if he had felt they’d be fatigued due say, delays on the ground and had taken off - he’d be up for disciplinary and his judgement questioned. Hence being coached, ‘don’t say fatigued on here’. So if the error warning hadn’t shown, he’d have had to have flown it or be written up.
Good job to the pilots. As a passenger, I’d rather have pilots with this attitude towards safety, than to think they could do it.
Safety first.
Always.
2X👍
What you’re watching is absolutely embarrassing. I get you think this is about safety. This is about a pilot that can’t manage throttles without the computer doing it. This is the problem, most pilots now are incapable of operating an airplane and this scenario is absolutely embarrassing.
@@RS-uo2ndas if you're them and know they can't do that. Speak for yourself, armchair pilot. Maybe they're really fatigued because they were screwed with the delays and now they have another problem on top of that.
@@Lusc1nt just curious, do you think that this is a rare scenario? The only people in support of this embarrassing crew are hardcore union pilots or non pilots who have no idea what they’re listening to and how egregiously lazy they’re being.
@@RS-uo2ndare you a pilot, air traffic controller or an airline maintainence worker? Yeah I didn’t think so.
@ Lol I started in the military as a flying crew chief, became a pilot in the air guard, and was an air traffic controller in a level 12 facility for 10 years and went back to the airlines a few years ago when talk of the new contracts began. You couldn’t have thought any more wrong if you tried. Guess what didn’t function on the C5 galaxy? Auto throttles.
I remember when we didn't have auto-throttle. Had a few red-eye 5 hour flights with autopilot inop. It wasn't on the MEL.
Many accidents are the result of a chain of related events. I see the Capt. being aware of the prior “issues” that day and took that into consideration. This decision might just have avoided a larger incident down the road. I mean just listen to the challenges they had navigating back into SFO!
My concern would be the questioning where they ask “dispatch said you’d be safe to fly to JFK. Why didn’t you?” Let’s hope they really do prioritize safety over operational impacts. As a pilot myself, If I were aware of this as a passenger, I would have applaud this decision.
I hope this opens up more conversation about this issue.
Yea the duty pilot I understand why he said what he said. It raises concerns that honesty was just suggested would not be the best policy. In safety honesty always has to be the best policy . That is a cultural thing. Suggesting to not be honest is also a cultural thing .
Speaking with 40 years in emergency services, making judgment calls on the side of caution and safety is more than crucial. A significant number of fire fighter deaths on duty has stemmed from fatigue and consequent loss of good judgment.
Had I been present and the opportunity arose I would have thanked the pilots for the discomfiture and delays. Very small change compared to flying an aircraft with functional issues for five hours when both pilots know they would be close to the edge of their personal safety margins.
This is the first ATC video I've seen that includes the maintenance discussion - how did you manage that, is that on LiveATC somewhere?
Some live feeders do include 'company' channels as a separate feed. Luckily the feed provider has one at SFO so I always make sure to check, but can be hit or miss. I was actually surprised to hear the phone patch to Atlanta.
@@avocadoflight Awesome job! The RUclips algo pushed me one of your videos a while ago and I was skeptical due to your sub count - but immediately subbed after the first video, as I'm super impressed with the quality and attention to detail you put in the videos! Keep up the awesome work!! :)
I appreciate that! Now if I could only be a bit quicker. There's quite the back log of audio, so plenty more to come.
@@avocadoflight Keep up the great work mate. Quality over Quantity always 👌 Subbed 🎉
Good call from crew, safety most important. Pilot fatigue is dangerous condition especially when dealing with a mechanical situation with the aircraft. The swiss cheese progression halted by good calls !!!! A good standard for all pilots to observe.
Good judgment. Broke the chain of events with good forward projection into later hours of the flight. Fatigue, weather, mechanical issue
..why press on?
7:10 Pilot knows his limits, pride or peer pressure is not included in this decision. Consulted with the co-pilot and made the call.
This is the kind of hard choices that have to be made, against the will of pencil pushers and penny pinchers that have no skin in the game.
The bean counters took away the flight engineer... but the QRH says you can continue flight without the automation that removed the flight engineer in the first place.
🎩
The pride was getting on the plane knowing he was fatigued. The pride was taking off knowing he was fatigued. The pride was calling to try to convince people he was making the right decision instead of making the decision and going with it.
@@qwerty112311 fatigue doesn't cause a TAT failure, unless it was metal fatigue, it was the right call to not proceed in non-redundant configuration.
Overweight Landing should have declared emergency!
@@qwerty112311 the pilot was not fatigued when he came on board.
He is foreseeing that he WILL be fatigued after flying manually without automation
The danger is not now, it's in the future
Had this happen to me on the 767 two years ago it was a popped circuit breaker. Kinda shocking it controls all those. We were crossing the Atlantic tho so we went back to EWR
Captain needs to figure out the diplomatic part of being a captain. He really wasn't leading the show, more like poking and seeing what was and wasn't going to get him in the stew with the chief pilot office. Dispatch and chief pilot are always going to lean towards the flight proceeding as normal unless they hear some magic words. For all non-airline commenters, fatigue is not prospective. It must be in the moment. A mainline captain should know this. Ultimately, he went with his gut and landed, which was probably the best decision.
Plus, autothrottles and circadian low? Must have never flown an RJ or night freight.
This situation took the captain way too long to make a decision. They weren't flying to the moon. I understand following protocol by calling maintenance and dispatch, but after that, use PIC authority and make a solid decision. He wanted to return, but was searching for assurance from the folks in Atlanta that he was making the right decision. Bottom line, he and the first officer ALREADY DECIDED early on that they were returning so no need for the endless, incriminating babble while actually flying the airplane.
All they had to do was thank maintenance and the dispatcher for their time, then tell them they're returning. Talk about the rest on the phone after shutdown at the gate.
You win the prize for dumbest comment on the thread.
@@buzzhazzard No he doesn't........... I've flown with captains like this. They look for any reason to not fly. That conversation with the duty pilot was painful to listen to. He was trying to get someone else to tell him to return to departure point. Also, I would never debate with MX over whether to return or not. 25+ years as a captain has left me with a certain skill set. I decide if I'M going to fly, then airborne WE talk about the current issue, then I DECIDE if we continue. I love my SFO overnights but the Doubletree Hotel is not worth my job. If it's safe, I fly. No auto throttles isn't the end of the world but the discussion of icing conditions and a TAT probe out leads me to believe the MEL had a few limitations. I still think he didn't want to do the trip, pretty FO not withstanding.
@@kalamageoI have been a captain for almost 25 years myself and have been flying for over 40. The assertion that a captain would make a decision based on how pretty his first officer was or that he might like a layover in San Francisco is simply stupid. I agree with your decision making process. It would be very similar to mine. So why would you agree with a guy who denigrates the profession by suggesting the decisions being made had to do with the attractiveness of a female pilot or his layover location. It's a stupid comment.
@@kalamageo "I have a very specific set of skills"
@@buzzhazzard but also likely, boys will be boys
In the old 3 crew Boeing days before autothrottles and before the FAA disallowed it we would take naps at the controls with some restrictions so all three didn't fall asleep. We also read magazines when things were quiet and smoked.
was that over Macho Grande?
I would think waking up at the controls could be startling. I used to have a job driving a tow truck night shift. I fell asleep in the drivers seat of the running truck, parked in the corner of an L shaped fast food restaurant. A car with loud exhaust exited the drive through and woke me up. For a split second when I woke up the parking lot looked like an intersection, and I thought I had fellen asleep at a red light. I nearly bent the brake pedal 😂
What is everyone else talking about? Seeing a lot of back-patting and safety platitudes. This is a routine conversation with mission control but with comms hampered a bit by loss of some automation. I'm a captain on the Airbus side of things and I certainly didn't hear any pressure for the crew to continue. The captain was concerned about *future* fatigue but probably could've done without bringing that up with Maintenance - its not really their concern. When they don't understand, they want to talk to the duty pilot and then he gets confused because the only current issue is a mechanical one. Maintenance will only advise if the manuals would allow an operation to continue, which in this case it would. It's up the PIC to decide if thats the best course of action taking into account all the other factors, which is this case it wasn't. No railroading or cajoling here, sorry folks.
Should have just said have technical issue with auto throttles out and only 10 min reserve at destination because of delay and troubleshooting, not safe to continue. Will discuss on the ground factors involved for the report... That would have had the duty pilot less on edge for the reason as there would be a whole lot of splaining to do in my humble opinion.
Maybe the phrasing of the captain was wrong but I understood him to be saying they can't continue with the flight in the state it is and the time of the flight as they risk been fatigued. I never interpreted or understood him to be saying they're fatigued and he clearly said it's a long flight with a "broken" plane and in circadian low
🤦♂️ Painful to hear the back and forth regarding fatigue vs. broken airplane. I developed fatigue just listening to it. Awesome though, rare you get to hear grounds talking.
The whole conversation was unnecessary with duty pilot, he just needed to tell dispatch I need to return due to maintenance run my number and tell me how much I need to be on hold in order not to land over weight then you can tell the story over the phone, I’m surprised that dispatch at delta was pushing too much, it was a yes or no question, book saying you can continue are you going or not end of story, but good video thanks
Agreed. First time hearingops which adds an interesting dynamic to the conversation. I’m a bit surprised by the duty pilot communication as he should be more supportive of the flying pilots concern and less of the particular language at the time. Particularly from Delta.
Yeah, you have to be careful talking to maintenance and following their troubleshooting advice. There are Flightcrew procedures and there are Maintenance procedures. Once airborne we generally don’t go beyond QRH.
Fatigue is a valid reason to discontinue. But the TAT probe is also essential for the ideal gas law math underlying all the AP/FD flight control algo's, if INOP it was the right call here, not to proceed 5 hours in a non-redundant config.
@foobarf8766 exactly. 5 hours, through the night, after flying a turn from a near 6 hour flight, delayed 2.5 hours. They were butting up against max duty there anyway - maybe even flying an exception.
I'm no pilot but I'm assuming operating the throttle manually could lead to higher fuel burn as well and leave less of a safety margin if they have to hold when they get to New York
Mechanical was the reason for returning. If you admit fatigue was the cause of return than that opens up questions about if you took off in a fatigued state and the safety implications of that.
And now the conversation about being fatigued operating an airplane is all over RUclips....
100% with the captain. Not sure what else this crew was doing prior to flying this leg but if they are flying ANF after a long delay and you add a mechanical into the mix I wouldn’t continue either.
And all this getting the duty pilot on the line is irrelevant. Return to the field then call.
Was a bit irritating to me how confusing this became. The mechanical was technically not an issue cause you can fly with no AT. Which was the captains point, he can fly but due to that he’s going to be fatigued with the rolling delay and now having to deal with that for the next 6 hours.
Great job making this video @avocadoflight!
Points of interest:
The Captain sounded knackered already! Was he looking for an excuse to end the flight early?
The First officer sounded a lot “fresher”
Why is having no auto-throttle more fatiguing? I submit having this extra task would increase their stress/arousal performance relationship. (Yerkes-Dodson law). We need stress for peak performance. Especially during night flights..!
Safe flying all
Everyone forgetting the pilots wouldn’t be fatigued if they didn’t have mechanical issues and would’ve been able to fly it perfectly.
However, having to deal with multiple mechanical issues, and no auto throttle, at the end of duty limit and circadian low would risk fatiguing them as it’s much more work than if they were AP most of cruise. That doesn’t fatigue you as much as having to handle and troubleshoot all your issues and manage the throttles constantly.
So to be clear, they are not fatigued and wouldn’t have been fatigued had there been no mechanical issues to deal with. They are saying they may end up fatigued during the flight because they’re at the end of their limit, it’s a circadian low period which is proven to increase mistakes in any pilot, and the managing of those faults requires a lot more effort, physically and physiologically and the safer bet is to return than risk a mistake.
Remember airlines care about money. Not you.
I think the crew over reacted wanting to stop the climb at 2 or 3k, much of the discussion was unnecessary and a distraction. I don't think it contributed to safety being vectored around the terminal area at low level with a broken plane while on the phone. It sounds like the Captain isn't really in command of his aircraft and wants to defer decision making to dispatch and maintenance in order to cover himself. Maybe this hints at some corporate culture problems. The QRH is incomplete for a TAT Probe failure, it says flight in icing might result in erroneous instruments and omits that the TMC is affected with several minor engine control & indication implications, which is why A/T disconnects. I would be inclined continue the climb on route to keep the workload down, get the A/P back in if possible, do the QRH, avoid icing as a priority, then at a safer altitude and out of the terminal area, contact maintenance for help. This would put me 30 mins closer to the destination, burn weight off in the climb, helping with max landing weight, and preserve my reserves at JFK. Deciding to RTB because manual thrust is too fatiguing sounds like they were already too fatigued from previous issues to operate in the first place. I also think a broken temperature probe and manual thrust are not valid reasons for an overweight landing which is going to generate mandatory reporting and inspection. They would have needed to cruise for about 2:45 to burn off 18 tons of fuel, or 1:40 if they dropped the gear. I think this crew were put in a difficult situation being delayed already in the middle of the night, rightly concerned about fatigue levels and stuck between continuing with a mild technical defect or landing overweight. Personally I would have continued provided the JFK weather was benign and no other threats, controlled rest in the cockpit, then assessed crew fatigue later in the flight, they could have diverted into Detroit if they felt too tired to continue.
I completely agree. I’m a retired 747 Classic Capt. It was not a safety of flight problem like an engine failure. They should have continued on course while they did their trouble shooting. If they decided it was okay to continue, they wouldn’t have wasted all of that fuel and time while they were flying around SFO. If they decided to not continue, they still could have returned with no problem to SFO. If they were concerned about flying without A/T at optimum altitude, they could have (and I probably would have) requested a lower altitude that would give me a larger speed envelope to work in. A couple of thousand feet lower would not have resulted in much of an extra fuel burn, if any. There have been many times I didn’t get the cruise altitude that was flight planned and just by flying at a slightly reduced speed at the lower altitude, I always saved fuel. Optimum altitude and speed are not just for fuel savings. It is a combination of fuel costs, crew costs and airframe tme. I was enroute one time from Miami to Toronto ferrying a B-747 200. Shortly after takeoff out of Miami, I realized that dispatch had made a mistake and we were going to arrive at Toronto about an hour before the noise curfew was lifted. I descended from 29,000’ to 22000’ and slowed to holding speed. Checked the INS and it looked like we could lose enough time to arrive after the curfew ended. Checked the fuel flow and calculated that fuel would also be no problem. I contacted our dispatch in JFK and pointed out the problem and what I had done and that if they wanted, we could land at JFK or continue at the reduced altitude and speed. They did their calculations and agreed that we should continue. When we arrived at Toronto, we had actually used 3.000 pounds of fuel less than what was flight planned, but the flight took almost 1 hour longer. I was paid by the hour, so not a problem for me. By not landing at JFK we not only saved fuel but also landing and handling fees. The Delta capt seemed to be inexperienced and made a mountain out of a molehill. It sounds like something that a pilot would do during a contract negotiation period in order to show the company that pilots can cost them a lot of money.
Where there is doubt there is no doubt. There is a chance that this was the first hole in the Swiss cheese
It sounds like this was at least the second or third hole. It was absolutely the correct call to go back.
I don't blame this Captian....no way would I fly 5 hours manually at night and then the last brillant comment from Ops, you gonna have 10 mins of hold fuel by Albany......no way!
Great call.
As a corporate pilot I totally understand fatigue factors but saying you can’t continue due to no ATs is kinda rare. We fly everyteio without ATs and back and forth across the country all the time. Not saying they made the wrong call at all just not something that I would be concerned.
TAT probe INOP is not ideal. I'm assuming the captain concerned there may be a bigger problem at play.
I have been an airline captain for almost 37 years, I’m still working. I do understand they didn’t want to fly, however, 30 years ago, I flew freight, sometimes from Kennedy to Los Angeles at night with no auto pilot, and no auto trust, at 41,000 feet. Currently pilots are probably unsafe, because they are no longer used to fly airplanes, we have all become button pushers,
Yeah, wasn’t that long ago that ALL the flights were without autithrottle 😬
Flew without AT or AP for 4 hrs before and survived it and got my PAX to their destination. Sounds like they were totally not on board to do that.
So many factors... No working AP... Now that can't operate in RVSM airspace... So many little big deals in this scenario
Good call from the pilots. I think generally decent support from maintenance and dispatch. The requirement to explain the rationale to not proceed with the duty pilot seems odd, but reading between the lines the dp might just be covering their backs.
Good Job Captain.
Duty Pilot sounded arsey, but he was doing them a favour. Return 'due fatigued' will likely be written up alongside embarrassing stories such as, "I woke up and saw my FO was asleep."
Return 'due mechanical failure' will be quickly forgotten once they have explained that, although flight with those failures was technically permissible, the circumstances of that particular flight made it unsafe in the opinion of the Pilot in Command.
If I had a criticism, it would be that asking to be vectored around busy airspace like that was only adding to the workload. A normal climb-out would be an easier environment for sorting out a non-critical issue. Extended holding near the departure airport is eating into personal energy reserves and duty time, and potentially creating a marginal fuel situation to add to your problems if you do eventually want to continue.
Perhaps the crew were having a crappy day and just wanted to pack it in. That's not necessarily a bad decision - there are plenty of examples of negative emotional state being the final hole in the cheese.
He didn't want to fly without autothrottle and TAT inop because he could he could/should have called in fatigued or fatigue concerned on the ground possibly giving the airline time to call in reserve crew to do the trip. The discussion points to it.
Things failed in flight
Great call for the CPT
Solid, could've ended in an ntsb report... I think calling that you will end up fatigued before you get to your destination because of things you learned once airborne such as autothrottles inop is a very reasonable reason to not continue a flight. Arguing the semantics while flying seems like a really good way to get fatigued
There shouldn't even be a conversation about this. The captain's decision is final. If he feels the safe operation of the flight will be effected, there should be zero push from "dispatch" . The fact the captain is even entertaining this tells me there must be significant pressure and repercussions on a daily basis from the company for delays in the schedule.
unlocked a new page for your career highlights, hopefully for a good reason
I’m surprised they are pulling breakers in flight.
I fly the ERJ-145, I wish we had autothrottles for our 3.5 hour flights😂
I think the sad, underlying issue is that they are trying to figure out how to best say they can’t continue so they don’t get reprimanded or fired. I was a flight attendant for several years and it’s the same thing there. Trying to balance your personal health and safety with your career and income. I had to work a trip with the stomach flu once because I couldn’t call out “sick” without getting in trouble since I had already called out once the month before. The only way I could have avoided it was to admit myself to a hospital. It’s dangerous.
This is just the kind of bull that after 38 years as a major airline pilot I am glad I am retired. Life couldn’t be better.👍😃
This is very interesting and very helpful thank you
Meanwhile…they’ve been flying with no auto throttles for the entirety of their time loitering around the SFO terminal area.
Outstanding call by the captain.
It’s not fatiguing to fly without the auto throttle. I believe he’s concerned with making an approach in the early morning hours after a long flight and a long ground delay in SFO. It sounds like this was not supposed to be an all night flight but turned into one because of the delays.
Ugh, this is a bit of a mess. I agree that if they’re anticipating being fatigued, they should do what they planned. Circadian low is a real thing, and although not having auto throttles isn’t that big of a deal, this is definitely the safest course of action even though it’s an unusual circumstance.
Not sure about cycling CBs in flight. Just decide if flight is to be continued without auto throttle and with that EICAs message as per QRH or not.
Children of the magenta line when one thing breaks.
They’ve probably never flown a jet flight without auto throttle.
Ya gotta turn that stuff off occasionally and keep proficient because one night it’s all gonna stop working and it won’t be on a nice clear smooth moonlit night when it happens. You’d better be able to fly the plane without the magic or it may cost lives (AF447 - yeah I wrote a book about that one)
Was thinking the same thing.
So basically, man up and fly, that's nice. And then something goes wrong on approach to JFK. And another AA1420 happens.
@@oavdov the autopilot wasn't out, just the autothrust. not that hard - unless you don't know how to, and that was my point: not "man up" but to have the proficiency to be able to fly without the magic.
As if you're them and know what they can't or can do. They were fatigued and decided to be as safe as possible. You're part of the problem, pushing for unsafe operations if you're not lying about your expertise. You just sound like a typical armchair pilot.
@I’m not lying about my expertise (I hold type ratings in 757/767 777 DC10 A320 A330 A350 and was an instructor and line check airman). Read my comment more carefully. First they were not fatigued, they thought they WOULD BE fatigued by the extra workload of no auto throttle. My premise was that they probably were not proficient at flying without the auto-everything and that they need to be - for just situations like this- or worse.
The decision as to whether or not to fly the Transcon for five hours without the auto throttle is the captains. A good captain will discuss this with their first officer. But ultimately if he feels that it is the best interest of safety to not do that it is the captains decision. Now he may expect to discuss that with his fleet captain, and were the chief pilot after he returns. The issue of fatigue is more appropriate once they’ve landed. The company may have opted to switch equipment and asked them to replay a different 757 and continue with the flight. At that point, the crew assesses their fitness for duty and makes the decision whether or not to say they are fatigued or fit. One other option would have been to have the flight to an intermediate stop, maybe Salt Lake City, where Delta has facilities and aircraft. I do not know if they have 75 sevens based there, but that might’ve been an option.
I am not familiar with exactly how the TAT data integrates with the auto flight system and the flight management computers. I do know that on other Boeings like the 737 800 NG, loss of TAT probe will cause the auto pilot to default to right auto pilot control wheel steering only , you will lose RAV capability from your flight management computer, and you are no longer eligible to participate in RVSM airspace unless ATC gives you permission to be there.
There is also the issue of cycling circuit breakers in flight in an attempt to restore the system, and whether or not this is approved per Delta‘s maintenance procedures.
Now I say this, having flown my last leg in a falcon 50 from San Jose to Teterboro between midnight Eastern and 5:30 AM Eastern, in an airplane that is not equipped with auto throttles. In my former life, I had a leg as a first officer and the 737 800 NG with the FAA sitting in the Jumpseat, where we dispatched without auto throttle per the MEL and flew the leg. After landing at Dallas, the FAA inspector before he deplaned, complemented me and said I flew it better than the auto flight system.
Good for this pilot standing his ground on returning to SF and not attempting a 5 hour over night flight to JFK!!! That duty pilot sure didn't want any verbiage or comms regarding fatigue entered into the log! Glad everything turned out alright!!!
that's because those comms would have been inappropriate and led to a bunch of unnecessary paperwork. This IS a mechanical issue.
Two options...
Either the captain isn't very good at stuff or....
He is absolutely fatigued and likely should have called it after the delay.
That's the problem with being fatigued and being a professional pilot. You have to make self assessment decisions when your already impaired.
Fatigue is the worst.
Jesus the duty pilot convo was driving me nuts. Yes there is a mechanical issue but there is a mechanical issue that WOULD allow them to fly but it WOULD be fatiguing to deal with given their situation. Both can be true.
Absolutly. The Duty Pilot new full well what the issue was. He tried to apply subtile pressure to the PIC to continue with his fake „i am confused“. Typical manager pilot behaviour. If something would have gone wrong, he would have been the first to blame the PIC for not calling a quits. Cover your a.. mentality.
@@MrWoodyxp yes it was like a political conversation which is terrifying given the responsibility these pilots have. Pilots on the plane handled it beautifully, but unfortunate they let the duty pilot win with the “mechanical issue” jargon.
Too much info over the airwaves. "ops we're returning to SFO because we had a mechanical issue and don't feel comfortable flying across the country without it being checked by maintenance."
A 757 captain surely knows how to do this....the fact that he was talking like this to ops instead of just turning back maybe shows he was already operating too tired!
I am a center controller and I *never* hear any proper details from an experienced captain until they have decided whether they are going back, decided what's going on the paperwork, etc.
I tried this in X-Plane, not saying it's realistic, but I had to move the throttle every minute throughout the flight. At 38,000 feet there is only 10kts between overspeed and airspeed low. Every time you think you have it dialed in the speed starts creeping up or down. Was able to keep it at about 250kts +/- 3 but it was at least every 3 or 4 minutes I had to adjust. Climb out was okay using LVL CHG on the auto pilot. It started getting a little more difficult to manage above FL280. Decent was fine. got a little more busy during initial approach. ILS approach was a little bit more involved without auto throttle. Seems doable. I guess we will probably never know what all led up to this and the fate of the pilot. One thing that made me nervous is that they were Close to Mt. Diablo several times at only 5000 feet.
What is with the debate over what to say as the reason? I feel this is incredibly responsible of these pilots, given all of the factors.
I’m also wondering if the pilot had some niggling sense that there was something else that didn’t feel right about the plane, that also informed this decision.
Captn defiantly didn't want to make this flight after the delay. Can almost promise you he timed out...
Always better safe than sorry. Good decision by the pilots. Peoples lives are worth much much more than anything else
The TAT probe has been known to fail and hopefully that is it and one at the airport so the trip can continue with a reserve crew if on call.
Amazing that you got Delta Ops comms! I’m so glad the captain specifically called out his circadian low. Another reason I’m glad to fly Delta. Duty pilot was not just a dickhead, but providing an unacceptable distraction instead of helping solve the issue.
Yeah the duty pilot was not helpful at all sounded more like a corporate manager than a pilot
The way I saw it, the Duty Pilot was trying to save the actual pilots from a huge pile of BS..
"We just took off and now all of a sudden we are fatigued and need to return".. That would come with a lot
of questions and paperwork, and possibly an investigation..
He was trying to save their bacon.. Mechanical.. You aren't fatigued. You are returning because of a MECHANICAL failure.
The fact that the MECHANICAL failure would contribute to fatigue in 5 hours, we will talk about that later while we make out
the report.
Right now, you are returning because of MECHANICAL failure.
@@bobw53jrma Bingo. This is going over the heads of many.
@@bobw53jrmaexactly. The duty pilot wasn’t suggesting they continue the flight. He was merely suggesting that they document the decision in the best way. Not only would there be fewer questions to answer, it was the more accurate description of what was causing the return. As the pilot noted, he wasn’t fatigued now, but he would have been fatigued at the end of a long redeye with higher than normal workload.
Looks like you’re the dhead
Aircraft used to fly cross-country and trans-oceanic without autothrottle ALL THE TIME (727's and 707's didn't have autothrottle for example). If this crew shows up to fly, they need to be fresh enough to fly the aircraft no matter what happens. They shouldn't have taken off if they were delayed so long prior and were at "circadian low."
This is cool, how did you get your hands on the OPS conversation?
This is taking safety serious. There were no serious risks of fatigued mistakes at the time but knew there was a risk of it happening and decided to put safety first. They could’ve asked them to continue flying but it’s not worth the risk.
They always say, you haven’t an idea how expensive a plane crash, and not just in the cost of the aircraft and victim funds, but in reputation and fines. Sometimes paying $$$$$’s is worth it and could save tens to hundreds of millions of $.
Also pilots, remember you get the final say. If you don’t feel safe to continue flying, speak up. No job or company is worth dying over or risking jail time for. If you state you returned for safety reasons and anticipated troubleshooting whilst fatigued in circadian low and question that, find a new company. A company should trust the pilots in control of the aircraft, not the suits in the cosy safe offices getting paid 10x more.
Interesting that we could here the conversation with Delta dispatch.