I'm with the Captain on this one. Give me a stop in the grass any day over a "should've" been able to fly. I don't want to be on a plane that "should" be able to fly or "should" be able to land.
Spot on. I must have seen 20 videos on here where a plane left the ground for a very short time and then crashed, killing most/all on board. He felt a problem and abandoned at V1. Should have been able to stop, hardly his fault that he couldn't. The investigation attempted to apply hindsight which is pointless and counter-productive. The decision maker didn't have the benefit of hindsight, or time. It's like being told you didn't need to take cover because the bullet was going to miss you anyway. You're always going to take cover.
@@Noodle999 Excellent comment and great analogy! I also think the captain made the right decision. I would in fact initiate an investigation on the investigators to find out why were they so biased and incompetent in their decisions. In the end I would fire them, we really don't need this kind of "investigators".
I'm with the Captain on this one. That momentary loss of acceleration was indeed a large water puddle but what if an engine had ingested enough water to hiccup or flame out? He had NO time to fathom this out and did the right thing no matter the result. Accident video channels are full of airliners rotating with something wrong and less than full power or maybe iced up surfaces causing them to crash after takeoff. He was at Wet V-1, he had to act. He did. Bravo!
@@herobo123456 - By that reasoning you should proceed with the takeoff if an engine fails to start at the gate. The investigators confirmed that he aborted "at or before wet V1" (which is precisely what the V1 call is for) and that all subsequent actions by the crew were correct. Without all the time in the world time to scan the instruments and pull out checklists, he correctly assumed the worst - that AT LEAST ONE engine had lost power - and followed the procedure to the letter. That there was insufficient runway remaining, with a servicable aircraft correctly managed, and contrary to the manufacturers tables for calculating V1, can only mean that the problem was with a sub-par runway surface - which the (presumably Spanish) investigators apparently believe was the Captain's responsibility, not that of the (Spanish) airport's management. Rather than it being the responsibility of all flights to check whether runway conditions have caused damage to any aircraft in the last few hours, some might consider that to be the kind of information that should be shared with them without needing to ask for it ("Wind 260 at 12kts, probability of catastrophic damage 67%, cleared for takeoff runway 24R"). How recently had the runway been inspected - particularly after a major incident as described - to assess whether it should be closed until the issue had been rectified? This was clearly a blatant attempt to shift blame away from the Spanish airport authorities, and I'm surprised they had the neck to do it with the Captain still alive to defend himself. As others have said, there should be an investigation into the investigation - with a view to potentially bringing criminal charges against the investigators.
After the fact,they are so eager to "crucify" the pilot. If he had taken off and crashed it would have been his fault again. The pilot only had one chance. I believe he reacted correctly, not that I have a clue, but I have seen plenty investigations. Besides he was an experienced pilot and knew what he was doing.
Right. So many of these accidents have arisen because airline workers are pushed by airlines for deadlines or budget cuts. The pilots are stuck in a situation where if they worry about their passengers they can get blamed for decisions that put them first. This captain was in charge and made a decision. We trust them to do that, and when airline companies act like hulls are more important than lives and attack captains for insurance losses, it sends a message to the captains that they should put the company first.
@@herobo123456 _"It would have had no problem climbing out on two engines."_ I wouldn't be so sure about that. That's the way it's _supposed_ to be, but the Siddley Hawker Trident 1E had an unusually low thrust-to-weight ratio of only .26 to 1. And as many others have said, the pilot aborted the takeoff right at V1 or even a little bit before, so the plane should've been able to come to a stop before the end of the runway. That's what V1 _means._ If the airplane wasn't able to do that, that's not the pilot's fault.
Right. When looking at titles of Aviation events, seeing that word makes me think that things are not going to turn out too good for folks. I kept waiting for, as the saying goes, the other shoe to drop. Sure, the plane was a write-off, but, I'm with you too. He made the best call with the info he had available.
@@davidtx8777 _"Maybe you should learn the definition of 'catastrophe'."_ Maybe YOU should. Not a single life was lost. If this was a "catastrophe" in your view, what would you call it if the pilot had continued with the attempted takeoff and the plane had crashed, killing everyone?
Coulda, woulda, bullshit. The captain, in the moment, decided on safety and prudence, and as a result no one sustained any injuries. All the armchair quarterbacking is utter horseshit.
They have applied hindsight and lengthy analysis, neither of which he had the benefit of. Typical of many poor investigations. The quality of decision making has to be judged on the information the person had available to them at the time. From that perspective he was exemplary.
I'm also with the captain on this. As a retired ATPL I can sympathise. He didn't know what caused the hesitation at Wet V-1, ...Could just be the water, we've all experienced this driving when you suddenly hit standing water and it feels like sudden deceleration... BUT, it could have been loss of thrust.... He acted instinctively because attempting to continue with the T/O only to discover one or more engines spooling down would be very irresponsible ... ( Trident wasn't nicknamed 'The Ground gripper' for nothing) .... and he aborted at a point (Wet V-1) where he should have been able to stop....Most (I hope) would have done the same....
Should the captain and crew have exercised better due diligence in assessing the runway whilst taxiing and checking in with the tower prior to takeoff roll? Sure. A case could be made that this was a ‘pilot error’ and contributed to the accident. However, placing the blame on him for aborting takeoff when the conditions and plane performance didn’t feel right (as also corroborated by the other flight crew members) is total bs. Just a total cop out. Are the investigators really communicating here that the crew should have just trusted that plane ‘should’ lift off based on the performance data?? The accident could have been exponentially worse if they tried to rotate while the plane continued to buffer and decelerate. Good on the captain and screw those who just wanted to point the finger.
IF the engine performance instruments did not indicate a loss of thrust( loss of rpm) then you continue the takeoff. What the heck good is a flight engineer with a multitude of engine performance guages if he can't call out that engines are performing properly?
The spray behind the aircraft landing was standing water being temporarily cleared from the runway surface before they entered the runway and back-tracked, to be replaced before commencing the takeoff roll. The onus is on the airport authorities to check the runway surface as frequently as necessary to ensure its safety, not on departing crews to judge a fluid (pardon the pun) situation from the single timestamp available to them.
Bravo for a Captain who judged his passengers lives above his company. I'm not seeing anything they did, including going into the grass, that should have totalled the airplane. I'm wondering what else was wrong with it?
This is one of those situations when you can chuck everything you know “in theory” out the window. I’m siding with the Captain here. He did what he thought was right to protect his passengers and crew. And I bet that jet could’ve been fixed “good to go” had much of today’s repair technology been available then. Great video, Allec!
I agree.its all well and good experts saying had he done this n that but a split decision had to be made.if he truly believed the loss of engine power was there then why risk taking off and it goes tits up.the crew did well in my eyes
I agree the pilot did the right thing. How can they place blame if he was most likely under wet V1? I always wonder what happened to the pilots in these videos. Did he get fired? Did they continue to fly for BA? I love these videos that Alec makes but I just wish he would include the outcome of the crew.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't... Easy to armchair-quarterback this one, but with only a second or two to decide imo it's hard to fault the PIC here. Also... why was a runway designed that retained so much standing water...?
The ground settles after awhile and causes slight depressions for standing water to pool. Newer runway surfaces allow the water to soak through the tarmac so no standing water collects.
Good drainage is a critical part of airport design, at least in theory. Standing water on a runway can cause real problems, especially in a climate where puddles freeze into glistening smooth skating rinks. 😱
The captain made a split-second decision based upon the feel of the aircraft, at a point when he didn't have time for further consultation of the instruments, and in favor of the safety of all the souls onboard. If there's any blame to be placed, it's upon the airport for not providing better drainage to prevent standing water on the runways.
I fully support the captain's decision. Better a plane full of passengers on the ground than a hundred or so feet in the air to suddenly drop due to something going awry. All credit to the captain.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. The captain had to decide quickly. Yes, maybe asking for a runway condition might have helped or avoided this excursion. Glad everyone survived. Thanks, Mr I
My last flight on a Trident was in August '81 from Zagreb to LHR. My father and I sat on the right side just ahead of the leading edge of the starboard wing. Our seats were up against a bulkhead and faced aft. I can still remember seeing Big Ben from my window seat as we approached Heathrow.
Better to be sure than sorry. By reacting fast he made sure he saved everyone. The critics had weeks to analyse, he had split seconds. There was no catastrophe.
I agree with Cato. In the split second the Captain had to make a decision, it’s hard to analyze all of the instrument readings. Sure, the plane may well have taken off if he had kept it going, BUT what if it didn’t take off and the result may have been catastrophic….
The Captain had to make a spilt-second decision and did what he felt was best for the safety of all aboard. Too many factors at play here to second-guess him. And everyone survived. Not as catastrophic as I was thinking it might be. Nice video, Allec...
Easy to blame the captain on this one. I can see why the investigators were like, "well yeah, its his fault" but as others have said, he played it safe and rather than risk killing them all, he drove it off into the grass. The only thing he could have done differently was alert people about the wet runway situation. Ultimately, lives were saved and this disaster wasn't nearly as bad as it could have been. I'd rather be on a plane with a captain with this attitude any day. I'd much rather walk myself back to the terminal on foot than be dead in a field.
I reckon if you'd asked all the passengers onboard whether the captain did the right thing when he felt something off at decision point they would answer 100% yes
It's better to be down here wishing you were up there rather than to be up there wishing you were down here. Kudos to the Captain. On a different theme, I thought that a runway of that status would incorporate a slight drainage camber?
I think I'm with the pilot on this one also. You're at V1, conditions are poor and suddenly you lose acceleration. You have a split second to make a go/no-go decision - no time to poke around and analyse gauges to figure out if it's a bust engine or not.. The runway should probably have been closed by the airport authorities after the amount of standing water was significant enough to damage an earlier aircraft, and their drainage systems were clearly insufficient. Cheaper to blame the pilot I guess..
Thanks alec. The way you keep regularly producing content despite being extremely busy becoming a pilot is very admirable and we the subscribers really appreciate it mate 👍
It is very pleasing to see that names are omitted. Most if not all pilots will have had a twitchy moment; mine was in the Congo on refugee work when our tired DC6B had a less than bright take off on the outward leg and on the return they asked if another pair of MsF nurses could fly as conditions were getting iffy. My First Officer and Engineer were happy so we agreed. That was when our poor engines really did not want to fly .....we chopped the jungle tree tops down a bit and staggered on. The hideous rattles and the fact the undercart would not wholly retract made for an interesting trundle.
These are the most terrible moments! Continue or abort? There is not a single second, you have to act immediately. If the captain had started with too little speed, it could have had a very nasty end. Then rather a stop in the grass. All have survived!! Super video.
I've watched dozens of these videos and normally I find myself being a bit tough on the captain and flight deck crew. But in this case, I'm on their side, especially in having to assess in an instant, what was perceived as a sudden loss of engine thrust.
I don't like the words "possible" and "probable" when it comes to airliner performance.. what if the captain said "we'll Probably be Ok to take off" and then killed everyone
That was the first off- runway take-off abort where no one was injured or killed that I have seen in these videos. The captain, with his many hours of flying experience, reacted perfectly; if he thought he would not make a proper lift off. To me, he did a great job with the circumstances he was faced with, in only seconds, to keep all of his crew and passengers safe. I say BRAVO. I don't care what the investigation determined.
Thanks for the video. But I am 100% sure that the captain made the right decision. He was at Wet V-1 and at that point its kill 117 people with a shaky takeoff or impress 117 people with a shaky takeoff. Which would you pick? He had no way of knowing that the engines had or had not absorbed water that had been made airborne during the runway drive.
I would rather have a Captain that face the music because he is right Rather than the Captain that refuse to acknowledge danger and dragging everyone down with him Kudos for this one
You're supposed to continue after V1, even in the event of engine failure, unless there are good reasons to think the aircraft won't fly, or won't be controllable. Some loss of engine power is not in itself a reason to abort after V1. He was lucky that the aircraft could be stopped without hitting anything significant, but that is not always the outcome.
I don't comment much but your posts that I have seen have always been factual, direct, and show a great talent for entertaining us morbid minded peeps. Thank you for the work that I am sure that CGI rolled you over the coals.👍
The Captain misread the situation on takeoff heard a noise and noticed the plane wasn't feeling right or maybe not performing properly and decided to abort takeoff. He chose to err on the side of caution and think of the safety of his passengers, good for him. They can say "he should have been able to whatever" all they want but they were not on that plane in that situation. I realize the plane was damaged beyond repair but there was absolutely no loss of life and that should have been the only thing that mattered. I'm not blaming the Captain at all. You can replace an airplane but you cannot replace the loss of someone's life. A great Captain and Crew.
The pilots are always the easiest and first to lay blame on. I think they did a great job aborting the takeoff. If they had continued, and ran out of runway and crashed, they would have been blamed for not aborting the takeoff. A no-win situation for the pilot.
The captain did exactly the right thing. At those speeds you have to make lightning quick decisions. You can't call for diagnostics during a take off roll before deciding whether or not to continue! No casualties, no injuries = best result. BA pilots are THE BEST in the world and their skills should be applauded. FDR data is all well and good but doesn't offer a full evaluation of the situation, it cannot record what feedback the pilot feels in the cockpit. If I were head of BA, I would much rather my pilots opt for caution and abort than carry on and risk hundreds of lives.
I honestly respect Captains and even First Officers who abort a flight when something is just not right... or if something fails to operate.. so definitely a lot of respect for this Captain and First Officer
I would much rather catch a ride with this pilot than with one who would gamble on “everything being fine” despite the possibility of power loss. Salute to sound judgement.
The Trident side by side main wheel arrangement will hydroplane more than the normal fore and aft setup, where the front wheel would displace water giving the rear wheel better traction.
Great video, a Trident and a Caravelle - those were the days. Always thought the British rear engined aircraft had a really good look about them (e.g. Tristar and, of course, the VC10). On topic, the Captain was totally correct. He had a split second to react and his actions resulted in no loss of passengers or crew. It may well have been that the aircraft would have recovered momentum and, whilst long on the runway, would have made a safe take-off. However, how many times have we seen pilots try and get the aircraft up only to crash catastrophically close to the field?
I really enjoy your videos. You have some of the best on the Tube. Maybe the captain didn't do the best thing possible but I believe that he thought he made the best decision for all souls on board. No one dies. That's most important.
I really felt sorry for the Captain watching this and am glad many commenters agree. In the heat of the moment you have split seconds to make a decision that could save or kill all aboard. Everyone was fine in this case and who's to say what might have happened had they tried to lift off. I hope the Captain did not suffer unduly from his decision and that his career was not negatively affected. Thanks Allec for doing this one, I hadn't heard of it before. BA has a pretty excellent safety record over the years all-told so it was interesting to learn about this one.
Great job by the pilot. This is what you call a "gut check" The pilot was very wise to follow his gut. Had he not aborted the flight and caused a runway excursion, we would all be hearing a different story, like "Why didn't the pilot abort?"
Echo the sentiments of others. I’m not an aviator, but that close to V1 you may have only a fraction of a second to react, and he reacted immediately. Had he continued on the assumption all was fine and found it wasn’t, it would’ve been too late. Monday morning quarterbacks have all the data, the captain only had enough time to notice something was off and react. Good job crew.
As someone said in a comment recently, "Better to be on the ground and wish you were in the air, rather than being in the air and wishing you were on the ground!"
If there's any unexpected change in acceleration at or near V1, you put it back down. Period. Look at Air Florida 90 for a refresher on what happens when you try to continue.
The "experts" can pound sand. The Captain played it safe with the lives of everyone on board and safe, they were. The Captain did the right thing in this case.
Captain kept everyone alive by stopping the aircraft. We have seen how many of Alexs videos where this could have been the better outcome. Errors were made but everyone walked away
This is a classic case of what became a judgment of 'Pilot Error' by a large team of experts in Airframe, Engine, Electrical and Hydraulic systems following an investigation lasting two years, when the Captain had just two seconds to make a potentially life-saving decision. Well done skipper.. my 11,000 hrs as a professional pilot would back you all the way.
As a humble passenger with my life in the hands of the Captain I would trust his judgement implicitly here based on the information provided and the comments of people who know. I hope he wasn't penalised in any way by his employer for his as actions.
Captain 1; Review board 0. What’s that saying? It’s better to be on the ground, wishing you were in the air, than to be in the air, wishing you were on the ground. Another great video, Allen.
🤬 They always have something to blame on the flight crew. Things are occurring/changing from one second to the next. How many crashes have we seen due to wrong decisions by the flight crew. Here's a captain who wasn't going to take the risk & I applaud him for it. 👏🏼 👏🏼
@ 6,44 could that be Dan Air B727 G-BDAN in the background ? Yeah the HS 121 was a superb aircraft and this crew were exceptional professionals..........
One comment after another saying "he played it safe"; "better safe than sorry". Neither choice was safe -- both had considerable risk: Reject near V1 on a flooded runway, or takeoff if it happened to be the case that more than one engine was losing power (instrument scan, anyone?). The fact the airframe was written off suggests that at the very least one or both of the main gear stripped. If a wing fuel tank ruptures from busting its MLG trunnion, fire can engulf the aircraft. So there were no "safe" choices.
The problem is that airlines companies always have to blame the pilots, because they are not in their shoes, what the captain did was the best way to save many lives and money to the company, the company would end up paying compensation to the family of the victims, I applause to the captain for his decision
Tridents were notoriously underpowered in fact they were nick named the groundhog due to their reluctance to take-off.. I wonder what its performance would be like with only 2 engines..? maybe the same thoughts were going through the pilots mind
I do know they were very noisy at take off and to throttle back early once airborne in some countries to comply with noise abatement.That always seemed a dangerous thing to have to do whilst still on the climbout? Lovely looking aircraft though.
Captain Made the right call. Investigators can sit the next day an blame him easily as they usually do. He felt deceleration, aborted take off. The plane was not damaged and the people were safe. Had he continue with the TO when he doubted wether he had the power or not, that would have been a bad call that put people lives in danger.
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm with the Captain on this one. Give me a stop in the grass any day over a "should've" been able to fly.
I don't want to be on a plane that "should" be able to fly or "should" be able to land.
Better safe than sorry, especially when dealing with so many lives onboard.
Spot on. I must have seen 20 videos on here where a plane left the ground for a very short time and then crashed, killing most/all on board. He felt a problem and abandoned at V1. Should have been able to stop, hardly his fault that he couldn't.
The investigation attempted to apply hindsight which is pointless and counter-productive. The decision maker didn't have the benefit of hindsight, or time. It's like being told you didn't need to take cover because the bullet was going to miss you anyway. You're always going to take cover.
@@Noodle999 Excellent comment and great analogy! I also think the captain made the right decision. I would in fact initiate an investigation on the investigators to find out why were they so biased and incompetent in their decisions. In the end I would fire them, we really don't need this kind of "investigators".
@@cornells.1727 (and Noodle999) Totally agree. 👍
I'm with the Captain on this one. That momentary loss of acceleration was indeed a large water puddle but what if an engine had ingested enough water to hiccup or flame out? He had NO time to fathom this out and did the right thing no matter the result. Accident video channels are full of airliners rotating with something wrong and less than full power or maybe iced up surfaces causing them to crash after takeoff. He was at Wet V-1, he had to act. He did. Bravo!
it would have had no problem climbing away on two engines
@@herobo123456 - By that reasoning you should proceed with the takeoff if an engine fails to start at the gate. The investigators confirmed that he aborted "at or before wet V1" (which is precisely what the V1 call is for) and that all subsequent actions by the crew were correct. Without all the time in the world time to scan the instruments and pull out checklists, he correctly assumed the worst - that AT LEAST ONE engine had lost power - and followed the procedure to the letter. That there was insufficient runway remaining, with a servicable aircraft correctly managed, and contrary to the manufacturers tables for calculating V1, can only mean that the problem was with a sub-par runway surface - which the (presumably Spanish) investigators apparently believe was the Captain's responsibility, not that of the (Spanish) airport's management.
Rather than it being the responsibility of all flights to check whether runway conditions have caused damage to any aircraft in the last few hours, some might consider that to be the kind of information that should be shared with them without needing to ask for it ("Wind 260 at 12kts, probability of catastrophic damage 67%, cleared for takeoff runway 24R"). How recently had the runway been inspected - particularly after a major incident as described - to assess whether it should be closed until the issue had been rectified?
This was clearly a blatant attempt to shift blame away from the Spanish airport authorities, and I'm surprised they had the neck to do it with the Captain still alive to defend himself. As others have said, there should be an investigation into the investigation - with a view to potentially bringing criminal charges against the investigators.
After the fact,they are so eager to "crucify" the pilot. If he had taken off and crashed it would have been his fault again. The pilot only had one chance. I believe he reacted correctly, not that I have a clue, but I have seen plenty investigations. Besides he was an experienced pilot and knew what he was doing.
Right. So many of these accidents have arisen because airline workers are pushed by airlines for deadlines or budget cuts. The pilots are stuck in a situation where if they worry about their passengers they can get blamed for decisions that put them first. This captain was in charge and made a decision. We trust them to do that, and when airline companies act like hulls are more important than lives and attack captains for insurance losses, it sends a message to the captains that they should put the company first.
@@herobo123456 _"It would have had no problem climbing out on two engines."_
I wouldn't be so sure about that. That's the way it's _supposed_ to be, but the Siddley Hawker Trident 1E had an unusually low thrust-to-weight ratio of only .26 to 1.
And as many others have said, the pilot aborted the takeoff right at V1 or even a little bit before, so the plane should've been able to come to a stop before the end of the runway. That's what V1 _means._ If the airplane wasn't able to do that, that's not the pilot's fault.
Considering the criticality of the situation at V1, it is in my view that the pilot did good, no one died.
yeah nobody would have died if he rotated either and the plane would not have been written off
@@herobo123456 mate he acted before V1 was called, what do you think its for?
It seems that the only "catastrophe" was the hull loss, not any loss of life. The Captain played it safe, and it's better to be safe, than sorry.
Maybe you should learn the definition of catastrophe.
@@davidtx8777 Which definition of the word do you think is applicable to this event?
Indeed, exactly!
Right. When looking at titles of Aviation events, seeing that word makes me think that things are not going to turn out too good for folks. I kept waiting for, as the saying goes, the other shoe to drop. Sure, the plane was a write-off, but, I'm with you too. He made the best call with the info he had available.
@@davidtx8777 _"Maybe you should learn the definition of 'catastrophe'."_
Maybe YOU should. Not a single life was lost. If this was a "catastrophe" in your view, what would you call it if the pilot had continued with the attempted takeoff and the plane had crashed, killing everyone?
Coulda, woulda, bullshit.
The captain, in the moment, decided on safety and prudence, and as a result no one sustained any injuries. All the armchair quarterbacking is utter horseshit.
I feel the captain saved all on board by his quick reaction. The weather was the reason takeoff was aborted. He did a great job.
it would have got airborne, save who?
@@herobo123456 Should or would? Completely different things.
I agree,he called it right with the limited info he had and less runway with every second that passed.
@@herobo123456 would it have?
I would rather fly with this Captain than one who would take a chance on getting airborne.
Almost 11,000 hours of time from the captain. Blame hung around his neck by people who probably had 0.
They have applied hindsight and lengthy analysis, neither of which he had the benefit of. Typical of many poor investigations.
The quality of decision making has to be judged on the information the person had available to them at the time. From that perspective he was exemplary.
@@Noodle999 Exactly!
So 11,000 hours didn´t mean anything since he did not choose any of his options. So flight hours basically meant nothing here.
I have a little over 23,000 hours and I blame him.
I'm also with the captain on this. As a retired ATPL I can sympathise.
He didn't know what caused the hesitation at Wet V-1, ...Could just be the water, we've all experienced this driving when you suddenly hit standing water and it feels like sudden deceleration... BUT, it could have been loss of thrust....
He acted instinctively because attempting to continue with the T/O only to discover one or more engines spooling down would be very irresponsible ...
( Trident wasn't nicknamed 'The Ground gripper' for nothing) ....
and he aborted at a point (Wet V-1) where he should have been able to stop....Most (I hope) would have done the same....
Should the captain and crew have exercised better due diligence in assessing the runway whilst taxiing and checking in with the tower prior to takeoff roll? Sure. A case could be made that this was a ‘pilot error’ and contributed to the accident. However, placing the blame on him for aborting takeoff when the conditions and plane performance didn’t feel right (as also corroborated by the other flight crew members) is total bs. Just a total cop out. Are the investigators really communicating here that the crew should have just trusted that plane ‘should’ lift off based on the performance data?? The accident could have been exponentially worse if they tried to rotate while the plane continued to buffer and decelerate. Good on the captain and screw those who just wanted to point the finger.
IF the engine performance instruments did not indicate a loss of thrust( loss of rpm) then you continue the takeoff. What the heck good is a flight engineer with a multitude of engine performance guages if he can't call out that engines are performing properly?
Doesn't the controller play a part in this? You'd think controllers would be ahead of the curve regarding runway conditions.
@@davidhoffman1278 How long does it take for the instruments to indicate a malfunction? There was precious little time to make a decision.
The spray behind the aircraft landing was standing water being temporarily cleared from the runway surface before they entered the runway and back-tracked, to be replaced before commencing the takeoff roll. The onus is on the airport authorities to check the runway surface as frequently as necessary to ensure its safety, not on departing crews to judge a fluid (pardon the pun) situation from the single timestamp available to them.
@@davidhoffman1278 - Presumably the Captain should've hit 'pause' while the engineer made his call...
Bravo for a Captain who judged his passengers lives above his company. I'm not seeing anything they did, including going into the grass, that should have totalled the airplane. I'm wondering what else was wrong with it?
I expect that the landing gear sank into soft ground and stressed the airframe beyond the economic limits of repair.
@@davidhoekje7842, well said. Thank you. 🙂
This is one of those situations when you can chuck everything you know “in theory” out the window.
I’m siding with the Captain here. He did what he thought was right to protect his passengers and crew.
And I bet that jet could’ve been fixed “good to go” had much of today’s repair technology been available then.
Great video, Allec!
I totally agree. Better safe than sorry
I agree.its all well and good experts saying had he done this n that but a split decision had to be made.if he truly believed the loss of engine power was there then why risk taking off and it goes tits up.the crew did well in my eyes
👍
I agree with what the captain did also.
I agree the pilot did the right thing. How can they place blame if he was most likely under wet V1? I always wonder what happened to the pilots in these videos. Did he get fired? Did they continue to fly for BA? I love these videos that Alec makes but I just wish he would include the outcome of the crew.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't... Easy to armchair-quarterback this one, but with only a second or two to decide imo it's hard to fault the PIC here.
Also... why was a runway designed that retained so much standing water...?
The ground settles after awhile and causes slight depressions for standing water to pool. Newer runway surfaces allow the water to soak through the tarmac so no standing water collects.
Good drainage is a critical part of airport design, at least in theory.
Standing water on a runway can cause real problems, especially in a climate where puddles freeze into glistening smooth skating rinks. 😱
The rain in Spain stays mainly on the plain and under the plane too
The captain made a split-second decision based upon the feel of the aircraft, at a point when he didn't have time for further consultation of the instruments, and in favor of the safety of all the souls onboard. If there's any blame to be placed, it's upon the airport for not providing better drainage to prevent standing water on the runways.
I fully support the captain's decision. Better a plane full of passengers on the ground than a hundred or so feet in the air to suddenly drop due to something going awry. All credit to the captain.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
The captain had to decide quickly.
Yes, maybe asking for a runway condition might have helped or avoided this excursion.
Glad everyone survived.
Thanks, Mr I
Sorry about the loss of such a magnificent aircraft but his prudent actions might have saved the lives of the passengers.
My last flight on a Trident was in August '81 from Zagreb to LHR. My father and I sat on the right side just ahead of the leading edge of the starboard wing. Our seats were up against a bulkhead and faced aft. I can still remember seeing Big Ben from my window seat as we approached Heathrow.
Better to be sure than sorry. By reacting fast he made sure he saved everyone. The critics had weeks to analyse, he had split seconds. There was no catastrophe.
I agree with Cato. In the split second the Captain had to make a decision, it’s hard to analyze all of the instrument readings. Sure, the plane may well have taken off if he had kept it going, BUT what if it didn’t take off and the result may have been catastrophic….
Always blaming the pilot. He had a split second to react and made the call. Everyone lived. He's got my respect.
👍
I agree ,more of a case of Damned if you do , damned if you don’t .
Oh great, spoiler alert. Please everyone, let others watch to find out what happens. One can comment without spoiling the end for others.
Right? Better safe than sorry…and in this case sorry would have meant death so he’s got my respect too for being safe
@@donnabaardsen5372 Why would you be in the comment section BEFORE you watch the video?
The Captain had to make a spilt-second decision and did what he felt was best for the safety of all aboard. Too many factors at play here to second-guess him. And everyone survived. Not as catastrophic as I was thinking it might be. Nice video, Allec...
Easy to blame the captain on this one. I can see why the investigators were like, "well yeah, its his fault" but as others have said, he played it safe and rather than risk killing them all, he drove it off into the grass. The only thing he could have done differently was alert people about the wet runway situation. Ultimately, lives were saved and this disaster wasn't nearly as bad as it could have been. I'd rather be on a plane with a captain with this attitude any day. I'd much rather walk myself back to the terminal on foot than be dead in a field.
I reckon if you'd asked all the passengers onboard whether the captain did the right thing when he felt something off at decision point they would answer 100% yes
It's better to be down here wishing you were up there rather than to be up there wishing you were down here. Kudos to the Captain. On a different theme, I thought that a runway of that status would incorporate a slight drainage camber?
He saved every soul on board based on his experienced decision. I hope he didn't get demoted or lost his job due to this incident.
I think I'm with the pilot on this one also. You're at V1, conditions are poor and suddenly you lose acceleration. You have a split second to make a go/no-go decision - no time to poke around and analyse gauges to figure out if it's a bust engine or not.. The runway should probably have been closed by the airport authorities after the amount of standing water was significant enough to damage an earlier aircraft, and their drainage systems were clearly insufficient. Cheaper to blame the pilot I guess..
I think the Captain made the best possible choice given the situation and the technology of the time. Great vid, Allec!! 💕🛬💕🛬
I love that old British airways livery.
Thanks alec. The way you keep regularly producing content despite being extremely busy becoming a pilot is very admirable and we the subscribers really appreciate it mate 👍
Seems to me that the Captain did exactly the right thing.
I wonder how things ended up for him?
It is very pleasing to see that names are omitted. Most if not all pilots will have had a twitchy moment; mine was in the Congo on refugee work when our tired DC6B had a less than bright take off on the outward leg and on the return they asked if another pair of MsF nurses could fly as conditions were getting iffy. My First Officer and Engineer were happy so we agreed. That was when our poor engines really did not want to fly .....we chopped the jungle tree tops down a bit and staggered on. The hideous rattles and the fact the undercart would not wholly retract made for an interesting trundle.
I would fly with this captain any day. Another airplane can be built but the lives the captain was considering could not be replaced.
Board conclusions were harsh. Fast decision-making and a good crew.
Damn if you do damn if you don't----just blame the captain.
I side with the captain, he saved 117 lives
Happy Veterans Day
These are the most terrible moments! Continue or abort? There is not a single second, you have to act immediately. If the captain had started with too little speed, it could have had a very nasty end. Then rather a stop in the grass. All have survived!! Super video.
I've watched dozens of these videos and normally I find myself being a bit tough on the captain and flight deck crew. But in this case, I'm on their side, especially in having to assess in an instant, what was perceived as a sudden loss of engine thrust.
It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback but I’m good with the 10,000 hour pilot’s decision on this one.
Wouldn't matter if he only had 100 hours, the right thing is the right thing.
The pilot did what he realised was right according to the circumstances.
In the end he saved everybody's lives.
Captain and crew did right. Better a damaged aircraft than 100 + dead.
I don't like the words "possible" and "probable" when it comes to airliner performance.. what if the captain said "we'll Probably be Ok to take off" and then killed everyone
I get stuck in some of these wormholes but these videos (when everyone makes it) gets me out of that hole with a smile. 🪂
That was the first off- runway take-off abort where no one was injured or killed that I have seen in these videos. The captain, with his many hours of flying experience, reacted perfectly; if he thought he would not make a proper lift off. To me, he did a great job with the circumstances he was faced with, in only seconds, to keep all of his crew and passengers safe. I say BRAVO. I don't care what the investigation determined.
As usual, it's always easier to blame the Pilots than any other factor...
Thanks for the video.
But I am 100% sure that the captain made the right decision. He was at Wet V-1 and at that point its kill 117 people with a shaky takeoff or impress 117 people with a shaky takeoff. Which would you pick?
He had no way of knowing that the engines had or had not absorbed water that had been made airborne during the runway drive.
I would rather have a Captain that face the music because he is right
Rather than the Captain that refuse to acknowledge danger and dragging everyone down with him
Kudos for this one
It's better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than in the air wishing you were on the ground.
Not always.
You're supposed to continue after V1, even in the event of engine failure, unless there are good reasons to think the aircraft won't fly, or won't be controllable. Some loss of engine power is not in itself a reason to abort after V1. He was lucky that the aircraft could be stopped without hitting anything significant, but that is not always the outcome.
Actually no this is not true, V1 is the decision speed. I.e. the point where the pilots must commit to an abort or a takeoff.
Well done the Captain - I'm glad none of these " experts" were making the decisions
Perfectly said, Buckfast!!!
It never ceases to amaze me how well done these videos are.
Really appreciate the attention to components detailing and the overall the historical accuracy within this superb simulation.
I don't comment much but your posts that I have seen have always been factual, direct, and show a great talent for entertaining us morbid minded peeps.
Thank you for the work that I am sure that CGI rolled you over the coals.👍
The Captain misread the situation on takeoff heard a noise and noticed the plane wasn't feeling right or maybe not performing properly and decided to abort takeoff. He chose to err on the side of caution and think of the safety of his passengers, good for him. They can say "he should have been able to whatever" all they want but they were not on that plane in that situation. I realize the plane was damaged beyond repair but there was absolutely no loss of life and that should have been the only thing that mattered. I'm not blaming the Captain at all. You can replace an airplane but you cannot replace the loss of someone's life. A great Captain and Crew.
The pilots are always the easiest and first to lay blame on. I think they did a great job aborting the takeoff. If they had continued, and ran out of runway and crashed, they would have been blamed for not aborting the takeoff. A no-win situation for the pilot.
The captain did exactly the right thing. At those speeds you have to make lightning quick decisions. You can't call for diagnostics during a take off roll before deciding whether or not to continue! No casualties, no injuries = best result. BA pilots are THE BEST in the world and their skills should be applauded. FDR data is all well and good but doesn't offer a full evaluation of the situation, it cannot record what feedback the pilot feels in the cockpit. If I were head of BA, I would much rather my pilots opt for caution and abort than carry on and risk hundreds of lives.
I miss the old BA liveries. It looks magnificent. Grew up next to GLA and used to see them from my classroom every day as a kid.
When you the guy in the seat, you got milliseconds to make a decision. I’m with the Captain
I honestly respect Captains and even First Officers who abort a flight when something is just not right... or if something fails to operate.. so definitely a lot of respect for this Captain and First Officer
If the Captain had carried on and crashed he would still have got the blame. I think he did what was instinctive. It's easy to blame the Captain.
Doesn't say if the pilot got fired. Let's hope BA backed him.
I would much rather catch a ride with this pilot than with one who would gamble on “everything being fine” despite the possibility of power loss. Salute to sound judgement.
The Trident side by side main wheel arrangement will hydroplane more than the normal fore and aft setup, where the front wheel would displace water giving the rear wheel better traction.
Great video, a Trident and a Caravelle - those were the days. Always thought the British rear engined aircraft had a really good look about them (e.g. Tristar and, of course, the VC10).
On topic, the Captain was totally correct. He had a split second to react and his actions resulted in no loss of passengers or crew. It may well have been that the aircraft would have recovered momentum and, whilst long on the runway, would have made a safe take-off. However, how many times have we seen pilots try and get the aircraft up only to crash catastrophically close to the field?
Another fantastic video Allec! How amazing you're doing this alongside your pilot training! Best wishes.
Salute to the crew for their awareness and utilizing their skills 😊💯🙏
I really enjoy your videos. You have some of the best on the Tube. Maybe the captain didn't do the best thing possible but I believe that he thought he made the best decision for all souls on board. No one dies. That's most important.
I really felt sorry for the Captain watching this and am glad many commenters agree. In the heat of the moment you have split seconds to make a decision that could save or kill all aboard. Everyone was fine in this case and who's to say what might have happened had they tried to lift off. I hope the Captain did not suffer unduly from his decision and that his career was not negatively affected. Thanks Allec for doing this one, I hadn't heard of it before. BA has a pretty excellent safety record over the years all-told so it was interesting to learn about this one.
So critical of the pilot in this video. I side with the pilot's decision based on the facts presented. Stayed safe on the ground with no fatalities 😀
Great job by the pilot. This is what you call a "gut check" The pilot was very wise to follow his gut. Had he not aborted the flight and caused a runway excursion, we would all be hearing a different story, like "Why didn't the pilot abort?"
Echo the sentiments of others. I’m not an aviator, but that close to V1 you may have only a fraction of a second to react, and he reacted immediately. Had he continued on the assumption all was fine and found it wasn’t, it would’ve been too late. Monday morning quarterbacks have all the data, the captain only had enough time to notice something was off and react. Good job crew.
Catastrophic? "Where's the Kaboom? There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering kaboom!"
Coral Gables Florida 🌴🇺🇸 USA ALWAYS a tuff call. GOOD job Captain 👍 🏄
Better alive than crispy critters littering the landscape.well done pilot,this should be mandatory viewing for pilots.
Catastrophic only to the aircraft & not to the passengers. If your actions save lives that is what matters most.
As someone said in a comment recently, "Better to be on the ground and wish you were in the air, rather than being in the air and wishing you were on the ground!"
Mathematics without the other communication..love ya alec 😁
this is pretty refreshing after Fight To The Death | British European Airways Flight 548
If there's any unexpected change in acceleration at or near V1, you put it back down. Period. Look at Air Florida 90 for a refresher on what happens when you try to continue.
The "experts" can pound sand. The Captain played it safe with the lives of everyone on board and safe, they were. The Captain did the right thing in this case.
Captain kept everyone alive by stopping the aircraft. We have seen how many of Alexs videos where this could have been the better outcome. Errors were made but everyone walked away
A simple "thank you, captain" would have sufficed.
This is a classic case of what became a judgment of 'Pilot Error' by a large team of experts in Airframe, Engine, Electrical and Hydraulic systems following an investigation lasting two years, when the Captain had just two seconds to make a potentially life-saving decision. Well done skipper.. my 11,000 hrs as a professional pilot would back you all the way.
As a humble passenger with my life in the hands of the Captain I would trust his judgement implicitly here based on the information provided and the comments of people who know. I hope he wasn't penalised in any way by his employer for his as actions.
Its all very well to be clever after the event, the captain acted instinctively so kudos to him.
Captain 1; Review board 0. What’s that saying? It’s better to be on the ground, wishing you were in the air, than to be in the air, wishing you were on the ground. Another great video, Allen.
That NO loss Of Life happened IS the best outcome.
. . . and the Captain got an extra Sim Ride. 🛫🛬🛫🛬🛫🛬
Good video buddy 👍
🤬 They always have something to blame on the flight crew. Things are occurring/changing from one second to the next. How many crashes have we seen due to wrong decisions by the flight crew. Here's a captain who wasn't going to take the risk & I applaud him for it. 👏🏼 👏🏼
Hey allec great content keep it up
@ 6,44 could that be Dan Air B727 G-BDAN in the background ? Yeah the HS 121 was a superb aircraft and this crew were exceptional professionals..........
One comment after another saying "he played it safe"; "better safe than sorry". Neither choice was safe -- both had considerable risk: Reject near V1 on a flooded runway, or takeoff if it happened to be the case that more than one engine was losing power (instrument scan, anyone?). The fact the airframe was written off suggests that at the very least one or both of the main gear stripped. If a wing fuel tank ruptures from busting its MLG trunnion, fire can engulf the aircraft. So there were no "safe" choices.
The problem is that airlines companies always have to blame the pilots, because they are not in their shoes, what the captain did was the best way to save many lives and money to the company, the company would end up paying compensation to the family of the victims, I applause to the captain for his decision
Tridents were notoriously underpowered in fact they were nick named the groundhog due to their reluctance to take-off.. I wonder what its performance would be like with only 2 engines..? maybe the same thoughts were going through the pilots mind
I do know they were very noisy at take off and to throttle back early once airborne in some countries to comply with noise abatement.That always seemed a dangerous thing to have to do whilst still on the climbout? Lovely looking aircraft though.
Never heard groundhog as a nickname. I’m more familiar with “The gripper”
This Trident was first saw service with Channel Airways and then with NorthEast Airlines
The text is easier to read, good job.
Best to have a Flight Engineer really. They're that pivotal extra hand in ensuring aviation safety. Bring back flight engineers.
BEA didn’t have Flight Engineers on the Trident. They had three pilots, and P2, P3 positions were swapped leg to leg.
Captain Made the right call. Investigators can sit the next day an blame him easily as they usually do. He felt deceleration, aborted take off. The plane was not damaged and the people were safe. Had he continue with the TO when he doubted wether he had the power or not, that would have been a bad call that put people lives in danger.
The captain eventually became an Uber driver.