I heard an aircraft accident investigator saying, "there is never only one reason for an accident." "There are always a number of factors that lead up to the accident." I have seen this happen every time. Scary...
It’s a chain of events , often called the Swiss cheese effect. When the holes line up , if at any point something didn’t line up then the accident wouldn’t happen
Or, to put it another way, as a sister show famously leads with? "Disasters don't just happen. They're a chain of critical events." (Yes, that's the opening to Seconds from Disaster.)
That's nice to know in my opinion - I'm not as scared to fly anymore after watching mayday episodes - oddly enough 🤣🤣 You'd think it'd be the opposite but I've learned how safe flying actually is.
A couple thoughts about the fuel slip issue. First, if the audio from the tower shows that the ATC said they would get the slip to the pilot later, then that implied that a slip existed and that refueling occured. Second, while the pilot still broke the rules by not leaving with slip in hand, there are enormous pressures (financial and organizational) to make pilots fly their planes on time. That can lead to incautious decisions. Holding back for what seems like a minor bit of beauracracy means that your crew isn't getting paid (they are only paid once push back from the gate happens), the passengers are upset over missed connections & delayed plans, the airport coult be upset because contracts and flight plans aren't being fulfilled etc., and the airline itself is upset. It doesn't encourage a safety culture.
At the post office, they place a lot of emphasis on being safe. However, the second it costs them any money or time, they cease to care. The condition of many of their vehicles is atrocious. I've had some with no horn (despite us being required to honk before backing up), non-functional speedometers and fuel gauges, broken washer nozzles, wipers held on by makeshift pins, bad front end alignments, bald tires, mismatched tires, and worst of all, transmissions which will pop right out of parking gear. And if something goes wrong, it's ALWAYS the employee's fault, despite the fact that they refuse to properly maintain their vehicle fleet. I've never in my life seen such a dissonance between what a company practices vs. what they preach. I mean, they've actually had to release memos regarding proper procedure when a vehicle catches fire because it was happening so often. My point is, the issue isn't just within the airline industry. It's everywhere and, like an untreated disease, it's only spreading and getting worse as time goes on. Time is money, and life is cheap.
@@RedneckSith: Very true point (oh, how I'm tempted to say more!), though of course, you'd think that airlines (and anything involving transporting passengers, for that matter!) would entirely commend decisions that are a bit painful, but otherwise guarantee safety. After all, wasn't it EasyJet's Stelios who said "if you think safety is expensive, try an accident"...
Our policeman friend probably increased Paula's chance of being killed by his stupidity in ignoring safety instructions. Releasing your safety belt before a crash is sheer idiocy, not to mention His and Paula's weight being thrown forward into the seats/heads of the couple in front of them likely played a part in their deaths as well.
Not to mention inflating the vest around your THROAT in a violent crash, then not being able to control your buoyancy as you try to escape a sinking fuselage. I kept thinking "this guy is the ideal poster child for what NOT to do in a crash"
Yup, the only reason he got out was bc his vest came off. I couldn't believe she allowed him to inflate her vest right after the cabin crew told them not to. What idiot allows another to make that decision for them
@Charles Faure I agree with you, plus he insisted on inflating the vests before leaving the plane - another thing that increases someone's ability to fit through tight spaces and escape a sinking aircraft. He's an ass to have done all that you mentioned, plus the vest inflating, too. Shame on him - and as a first-responder, he should know safety measures are in place for a reason!
If he hadn't taken off his seat belt he would have died, he was unconscious at first. But I get the rule since I have seen videos of how you are thrown at the ceiling with no seatbelt.
I’ve never really agreed with criminal charges for these kinds of accidents. Unless something more substantial can be presented such as falsifying maintenance or doing other types of fraud, charging people over legitimate mistakes provides incentives to go on the defensive and finger point or obstruct the investigation as opposed to recognizing failures in the way things are done and improving the system.
Agreed. To place blame and possible charges against a pilot when he had nothing to do with the engine failure or loss of fuel, had to function under extreme anxiety and panic and stress knowing he has so many people's lives depending on him, etc. all so unfair. Flight simulators cant possibly prepare you for every emergency and crash landing scenario and no matter what mindset you try to put yourself in you wont panic during training, you don't have the fear of death. Most pilots cant turn into Captain Sully and be as calm as him. And it isnt the movies like Denzell Washington in Flight who stayed calm. Most pilots would be scared shitless, panicking, and unable to think clearly.
@@SusieQ1971 the only person that should be charged is the tech. if I was him and saw what was reported wrogn with the old guage and then installed the new one and see if it matched the numbers of the old then i would consider it fixed. the fact the tech doesn't notice this lead to everythign else
Still, you should try to put the right parts in the right plane. If you are a mechanic putting the wrong parts in a plane, you should try to do better.
This is a hard one on the mechanics end.. I do believe he messed up big…. As for the pilot I disagree with him being charged… yes it may be procedure to make sure you have the refueling slip but real life happens and who in their right mind would truly think the gauge could be off? I could almost guarantee you that if the pilot didn’t retire after that he absolutely looked at the fuel gauge in a much different light than before! Edit: just found out they sentenced the pilot to 6 years and 8 months in prison and the copilot and many others to around 5-6 years! That’s crazy!!!!!
@@Revkor I think the tech should only be charged if he was truly found to be negligent, e.g. drinking/drugs on the job or something like that. Humans make mistakes. If we put people in prison for making honest mistakes, then either A) no one would do the job, or B) everyone would work in a defensive manner that always tried to put the onus for such perfection on someone else.
I think the pilot did an amazing job given the set of circumstances and the info his instruments were giving him. If anything, the mechanic is more at fault for putting in the wrong fuel indicator.
Ms Blackhawk69: You forgot about the one critical thing the pilot let go that would have saved everyone's lives, the fuel slip. Had he insisted on obtaining one, as he was required to do (the rule is: no fuel slip, no flight), the lives would have not been lost due to low fuel.
The mechanic was clearly at fault, but the captain was almost equally at fault. In aviation, the cost of skirting rules is paid in human lives. Had the captain not skirted the rule requiring a fuel slip - which is the proof one needs to know a plane was actually refueled - then the mechanic's error may well have been discovered on the ground. Instead this captain departed, trusting the fuel quantity reading on his fuel gauge which he knew had been malfunctioning the previous day! That's shocking incompetence.
One thing every new pilot learns is the best glide speed for the aircraft he is flying. This is a fundamental mistake. Also feathering the prop on a dead engine should have been the first thing he did. These are basic things that all pilots should learn early in training.
@@jimfarmer7811 Love all the back seat pilots chiming in and saying how things should have be done, since they have the luxury of hindsight and also not being in that situation at the moment. Maybe stick to farming there buddy.
The simulator pilots KNEW there was no fuel available and their only task was to immediately set up for longest glide possible from flight level 230. 1153’s crew didn’t feather immediately because they were fighting for engine restart until they were below flight level 170 and made the decision to ditch based on their sink rate and distance from Palermo. All this after losing time failing to get the engines restarted, because they continued to mistakenly believe they HAD fuel.not really fair to the crew in that regard. However, the cardinal sin of leaving without a fuel slip was the real issue. But after maintenance TO the fuel system, and assurance from the carrier’s office that the captain would get his fuel slip later led him to believe there was one, whatever his reservations would have been otherwise. I don’t believe he would have left without the slip if there was no maintenance. Probably wouldn’t have even started the engines in that case.
Good points made there. Usually these episodes are pretty good, this one has me shaking my head though. Many errors made along the chain... BUT fuel quanity has direct effect on weight and balance paperwork , the aircraft should have felt different upon takeoff using settings with more weight. Even a smaller turbo prop like that. Each gallon of fuel has weight that must be factored in.
This is what I was thinking as well. The pilots thought they still had 1800 kilos of fuel. With what knowledge they had weight of the aircraft was also a thing they had to measure. They though they were possibly heavier then they were.
I read about the crash on Wikipedia and it *infuriates* me that the pilots and crew were slapped with *criminal charges.* They went through all the proper checklists and did their best to keep their passengers safe. They aren't *psychic.* How were they supposed to know there wasn't any fuel available? There were also *large* sections of the flight voice recording that were left out of the official report that showed the controller spoke very poor English and gave the incomplete or useless information to the pilots.
Difficult to do when a dumb cop and his girlfriend slams into the back of your seat a 140-something km/h bc the dumb cop behind ya couldnt take instructions so he brilliantly manages to survive while also leading 3 others to their death 🥴
Couple of thoughts: Is it common to accept not having this fuel slip? There are a lot of things that are "against the rules" that are commonly accepted for the sake of efficiency and profits. How often does this fuel slip go missing and planes take off without it? It is possible that the captain was doing things 'the way they are done' and that insisting on having the slip and delaying the flight without it might have gotten him in trouble, at least initially. How can they fault him for not switching to the ditch procedure earlier? He thought he had fuel. How soon do we want pilots to switch to crash landing mode? I imagine if a pilot gives up on restarting the engines after a time or two and decided to switch to ideal gliding and crash land, if they think the engines would have eventually restarted, he would get in quite a bit of trouble. They should spell out how many attempts at restarting engines should take place before switching to glide procedures.
IDK.. No fuel slip, faulty fuel gauge on the same plane 2 days earlier?.. And the engines won’t start?.. Yeah, a lot is going on, but the info was there to finally snap to the fact there’s no fuel, or at least the possibility there’s no fuel..
The both engine out emergency checklist the pilot followed should have indicated couple of things if the engines cannot be restarted: 1-the best glide speed to get the best glide ratio 2- feather both props to reduce tremendous drag, if the aircraft does not auto-feather like some other turboprops when the engine fails! These two steps would have extended the glide by reducing the drag! Then they would have made it to the closest airport per the test pilot. However, having said that, they should know these two steps being airline pilots. On the other hand, it is really easy to sit on a chair with no stress making comments!
Yeah, we weren't there, but feathering if you can't restart is part of basic pre-airline flight training. On the other hand, the manufacturer should be held somewhat responsible for labeling the indicators 2250 and 2500 instead of 72 and 42 or something akin to the aircraft model number. As well as having connectors/fittings that allowed the wrong instrument to be installed in the wrong plane.
They explained thoroughly why the pilot didn't do the feathering. He was sure they had the fuel to get the engines restarted so that was his thoughts, not that he would have to glide plane. By the time they figured out engines would not restart, he didn't have time to adjust for the glide to make it to the airport. So he had to find the best place to ditch. We weren't there, under the circumstances he was dealing with. I think he did the best he could do in that situation.
I can’t be the only one that was shocked the pilot was charged. That just doesn’t make any sense at all. He did everything he could with the situation he was in with the intent to save the passengers.
@@MysticBakura ATC told him he will get the slip at the next stop.. where he topped up the fuel based on the fuel gauge.. the fault is with plane manufacture and maintenance for installing the wrong fuel gauge.. also ATC at fault for giving the captain false self security that the plane was refueled..
Maybe the other couple that died were in the row in front of the idiot and Paola. Their unrestrained bodies slammed into the seat backs in front of them killing the two good swimmers.
Monday morning quarterbacking. The simulator was easy because if you failed then you will still live, They may not have made it to the runway and crashed into the ground. The pilots did what they thought was best in this case
You can do your best and still make mistakes. But agree, many possible outcomes with different decisions - some a lot worse. Procedurally, I think he should have feathered the prop when he couldn't get the first engine started - certainly after the second engine failure. However, I also understand the hope of getting them restarted. If the speeds are correct on ditching, then that certainly wasn't ideal. However, he really should have confirmed the fueling issue before departing. A great pilot once told me, "do not tolerate uncertainty". It has a tendency to come back and bite you in the ass - verify everything as much as possible. The stakes are high (pun intended) in aviation. Undoubtedly to me, the biggest contributing factor, and most irresponsible part of this tragic accident, was the manufacturer making the FQI's interchangeable between the 2 a/c. And that's about profit over safety. Blue skies.
True, but setting up for best glide while troubleshooting is pounded into basic flight training, at least in NA. On the simulator, you may have a point: "One pilot was able to make it...". OK, how many others didn't? How many tries did it take that one pilot to succeed?
I can't get over the guy inflating his life vest and undoing his seatbelt in the face of a crash, that didn't help him at all he was just crazy lucky to survive -_-
@@rolanda666 Did it help his girlfriend? If he hadn't regained consciousness (due to his idiot idea to undue his seatbelt) he would've drowned. He killed his girlfriend.
@@charliemarqfj According to what research? If that were the case, then, in the event of a landing emergency on land, they have people put on their flotation vests.
It absolutely sickens me the owners are always so ready to blame the pilot when it clearly was *NOT* his fault! No matter how courageous the pilot is, the owners of the airlines won't hesitate to offer up the pilot to be sacrificed rather than accept any blame for the way they run their airlines!
Many of these pilots and ground crews are not properly trained to recognize and react quickly and correctly to a dire situation, that is a problem worldwide
Had they simply feathered the props, they may have landed on terra firma! If it's conclusively proven that they didn't take that crucial and simple step, then they are indeed the only ones at fault here. Especially when the lack of a fuel slip compounds their errors!
there is plenty of fault to go around.. but the pilot in command has blame as well. fuel slip is required. amount of fuel added with logs will give a discrenpency. This must be compared with running time... HOBBS (time engine running) etc etc.. alot fell through the cracks. There are scales to weigh the aircraft by landing gear wheel , just like transport trucks. The weight of the unloaded aircraft with current fuel load could have been determined after the repair. Why this was not mentioned in the episode is beyond me and poor production.
Why interview the passenger that refused correct advice by inflating jacket inside the plane, unbuckling seat belts etc. What a clown. Just lucky he survived.
@@barbarasjelin9925 I think it's worth adding you should not inflate till you're in the water OUTSIDE the aircraft. Someone might interpret "in the water" as the criterion being met if there's water inside the fuselage with them while they're still inside. 😔
The mom who was talking about her daughter being a good swimmer. Sometimes its not about the swimming. You can die on impact. She could have hit her head and no amount of swimming experience can stop a hard enough hit to the head, they are not related. She may not have been able to save herself. Sad as it is. That would appear to be the reality. She may have blacked out before they hit the water for all anyone knows.
It's maddening the pilots were charged with manslaughter for this accident. Just because somebody can land the plane in a simulator where the threat of death is looming over them, doesn't mean anything!
@godloves1821 Maintenance worker is at fault for installing the wrong instrument, but the pilot is ultimately the decider of fly or no-fly. Lots of poor decision making from the pilot who decided to just trust the instrument he KNEW had issues without the refuel slip, or checking fuel manually himself.
Wow, it never occurred to me until watching this that you're basically dead if a high wing plane ditches, if the fuselage breaks open in the water the entire fuselage immediately sits below the surface, if not then then it's likely so low in the water the that when the doors are opened you'd surely flood immediately? The whole aircraft displaces the same number of litres of water as it weighs in kilos (bless you metrics!) so every litre volume of wing and engine you put under the water pushes a litre of fuselage OUT of the water. I wish they'd stop showing the 767 ditching as an example of the dangers of ditching in the ocean - there was a reef under that port engine, the pilot had been smashed in the head close to touch down (from memory) by hijackers who refused to believe they were out of fuel, they weren't able to set up for ditching etc.
Just because they were able to glide the aircraft to land in the simulator doesn't mean real life they could have. He did what he thought was best for an error that was made by someone else.
It's crazy how random it is that of the 3 men in the cockpit, 2 survived, and 1 didn't. I mean they are all in the same tiny space, but yet he didn't make it.
This idiot passenger undoing his belt and inflating his vest, is a prime example of how Karma is fickle. He should have been charged with endangering the other passengers, his girlfriend, and abject cowardice. What a scumbag.
In Italy when car seatbelts became mandatory,back in the early 80' , people in Naples started making t-shirts with a single stripe across the front as to make it look like you've got a seat belt on. Got the message ?
It is probably my worst nightmare. Being in the middle of the oceon after a ship sinking or an airplane ditching and busting up. Just you and other injured and bleeding people and the sharks, water temp. etc. No thank you !!
This is still common actually on different types of aircraft, just because the plug fits on it doesnt mean it will work. The tech must verify , if in ANY doubt, verify. If it doesnt match exactly as per repair instructions.. it must be verified by higher up in the chain. This was not done.. and simply passed over in the this episode. And in my opinion this part of the episode is done very poorly. They mask this with refueling slips etc etc... usually these are produced quite well... this is very poor for proper presentation.
I find it hard to understand why the captain was charged here! Did they say he went to jail? If so, that's absurd. He had two options - either restart the engines or prepare the plane to glide as far as possible. He could not do both, but he chose the one that made the most sense based on the information he had - i.e. that he had sufficient fuel. Why didn't they place the blame where it belonged - on the guy who installed the wrong fuel guage - and leave it at that? Very sad story for all concerned, and especially those who died R.I.P.
The captain operated the flight illegally. He was required to cross check the accuracy of the indicated fuel using a separate method before departure. There are strict procedures in place to catch fuel quantity errors that were not followed.
@@conradanderson3928 You are correct. From the point of view of a chain of responsibility, the buck stops with him. There's nothing more to say, except it seems a pity given the facts here.
except he called the AIRLINES dispatch and they made it sound like they had the fuel slip and gave him authorization to take off and said they would give it to him when he got back. Airline mechanics and dispatch should have full responsibility for this.@@conradanderson3928
@@conradanderson3928 I disagree, if you’re not present during refueling, there isn’t anything to tell you it was done right beside the slip, which the dispatch told him he had it, just that he couldn’t find it. He didn’t have anything to cross check it . A real shitty situation to be in.
He did not go to Jail. He is Tunisian not Italian and the court verdict was given in Italy. His career was damaged no doubt, but he was the scapegoat. Whether he could have done more to prevent it or even stop it is quite absurd seeing the situation.
The rescue crews did a wonderful job. There were survivors, more than those who died. Very sad that there were engaged couples who died, and denied happiness
A few errors were made , the one mistake I will comment on is the mechanic definitely should be convinced of manslaughter. As a automotive mechanic myself , there are airbags that do technically fit different vehicles but won't operate properly. If I install the wrong bag and then someone is killed due to that I most definitely would be prosecuted for being negligent in my work.
The mechanics were able to prove to investigators that they installed the correct part based on the reference materials provided to them by the airline. Yes, the parts database contained errors, but they no way of knowing that. Investigators did not find them at fault for this accident.
You know you’re in trouble when both engines have stopped and the Captain says, “Ladies and Gentlemen, have you ever seen Mayday? Well, we’ll more-than-likely be one of the episodes in Season 21.”
The Capitan is not at fault. He requested the fuel paperwork. They denied his request and told him that he would get it later, meaning that there was one, but in reality the people on the ground was talking out of their ... There was nothing. The cap is led to believe that he would get one later and that his plane was good on fuel. He was lied to by the tower and by the mechanics. The Mechanic should have noticed the sudden change in fuel reading because the cap did and he requested his paperwork and he was denied. What would you do at that point? You have a plain filled with fuel, and the tower is telling you they can't give you the paperwork until later. What do you do? We all can say, oh I would waited for the paperwork and I wouldn't have left the runway until it was in my hand. Remember pilots have schedules to keep. They have the added pressure of the passengers as well. He sees there is enough fuel and he can comeback and get the paperwork later because they can't give it to him at the moment.
Exactly what I was thinking. That was some bullshit trying to blame the Captain. The investigators were just trying to save their company's ass. They didn't train their mechanic enough to read. This plane At takes 2250 and plane B takes 2550. Then not notice the immediate 4x change of fuel. It's like this expect the pilots to know everything when they are supposed to know how to fly the plane.
@@cristinanaugler5579 Right! the claim is that Pilots are not supposed to leave the airport without the Fuel Paperwork. That's the Captain's responsibility. However, The cap didn't just take the decision based on one thing. Ground control led the cap to believe that the fuel paperwork was there. That plus the fact that his plain is indicating that he has plenty fuel to make the trip; and the added pressure coming from passengers.. Why aren't we taking off? AND the fact that airlines demand pilots to keep their schedules played a huge role in the Cap's decision. ALL THE STARS ALIGNED for this Accident. Almost as if it was meant to happen.
Unfortunately that was exactly what he was supposed to do. In the end the pilot has final say in whether they fly or not. Doesn't make this right though.
@@animehuntress9018 Exactly. The buck stops with the pilot. Regardless of whether you are a pilot governed by the FAA or a commercial driver governed by the FMCSA if you knowingly operate outside of established regulations it’s your baby should something go wrong. Both pilots and commercial drivers have the pressures of scheduling but it’s still going to be their fault if they bow to those pressures and skip the required procedures. It may cost you your job but jobs are a dime a dozen and you will be alive.
The captain most certainly *is* at fault. He needs the fuel slip to cross check that the indicated fuel on the FQI is correct. If the fuel slip is missing, he needs to open his operations manual and follow the procedures for missing vital paperwork. He did not do either of these things. Two major mistakes before the plane ever left the ground. He made at least two other major mistakes once the plane was in the air.
I love how the test pilots who glide for the maximum distance always throws out the engine out check lists and goes for maximum distance knowing that the engines will not start.
I've noticed that a lot of people are blaming the pilots. Now I'm not saying that the pilots don't make mistakes. I'm saying such sentiments are dangerous in the flight industry. Or any industry for that matter. Because if you blame and point at people for their mistakes, people are less likely to be honest about what they did wrong. You might say that people who do wrong needs to be punished, however, what is more important is trying to figure out why accidents happen and how to stop it from ever happening again. If we just blame the pilots and carry on, something like this can happen again. Something like this WILL happen again, because humans make mistakes. No one is perfect, and someone, somewhere will slip up. That is why we have multiple regulations and checks, to try to catch our errors. Maybe put more importance on fuel slips and repeatedly remind pilots that they can't fly without one. Because people forget, we do not have perfect memory. Or maybe make different models of fuel gages have more clear indicates. Maybe paint one in a different color. We can't bring back the lives that have already been lost, but we can prevent losses in the future.
Yep, the first step to doing anything safely is to first take into account that people make mistakes. It's safety training 101. If you write procedures that require people to be perfect you have a flawed procedure. We call it setting up for failure.
The manufacturer of the Plane clearly is a Monday Morning Couch Quarterback. The Fact the Two Fuel meters had the same Pin & hole Setup is insane. I can't interchange The door speakers From my Mercedes benz a year apart.
I get they need answers but throwing the pilots under the bus when the major infraction was putting the wrong fuel indicator in. Saying that the pilots could've glided to Palermo when they knew if they didn't make it crashing on land meant certain death but ditching meant a chance. Yes the captain shouldn't have left without the receipt but saying a pilot in the simulator made it means nothing. Knowing all they know in hindsight means a huge difference to how far the pilot could glide it.
I don’t think the pilot should face criminal charges, just a reprimand for the missing fuel slip. As they say at the end, his flying most likely saved lives. The bearded investigator was just looking out for his company’s interests, so his input should have been discounted as biased. The companies who build commercial aircraft should be required to participate, and provide all knowledge possible, but they should not be investigators themselves. Since the cop didn’t obey the rules himself, unbuckling belts and inflating vests, he should not judge the captain for dismissing the fuel slip…the captain’s life was as much jeopardy than the passengers. The crew made the correct choices based on their instruments, to spend the time trying to get engines restarted, rather than configuring for feathering. But I agree this should be included more in simulators, so that any future incidents might have a better outcome. May God give these grieving families comfort.
The end of it, saying that the pilot *should have* been able to ... hindsight is always 20/20. Things are a lot different in the moment. Was "feathering the props" part of any checklist? It would seem they were trying everything they could. And, by calculating how far they could glide the plane, they were counting that as part of their "plan".
feather is in the check list....for the out of fuel checklist.. The flight crew was using the engine restart list because all information they had indicated they had gas. Hindsight is exactly 20/20 and the fact the pilot was blamed for this was crazy.
Don't inflate your flotation devise until you are out of the a/c. Remain seated and belted and braced until plane is stopped or sinking (generally speaking). But HEAR specific instructions given if they are given.!
I love how the passengers ignore the cabin crews instructions. I know it's often thought that airlines have malicious intent and try to make airline crashes as fatal as possible, but you have to remember that these people are trained for this situation. You aren't
You sound crazy; the airlines DON'T WANT fatalities! that means liability, and that means lawsuits , and that means settlements , and that could mean bankrupt.
I think airlines should schedule rotating time in the simulator for their pilots. They could learn and practice the complete emergency protocols for various emergencies. Then it would be second nature to know exactly what to do and not miss anything. Any human being would have some panic in this situation. More training for emergencies would help keep the pilots and crew much more focused. I think this crew did a fantastic job. Unfortunately, even one small error can add to the chain leading to catastrophe. May all those lost rest in peace.
Airline pilots DO go to the sim continuously throughout their career. These guys did not do a good job, which is why they were convicted and sent to prison. The CVR reveals they were more focused on praying than they were actually trying to save the plane.
At 27:23 the fuel tank explodes during the investigation. First rule of aviation maintenance: No electric power tools allowed. The spark inside the electric nut driver will ignite the vapors in the fuel tank like an atom bomb. Watching that is like seeing someone scratching their fingernails on a chalk board to me. Or like watching a dog running loose on the freeway.
Perhaps they’ve decided the threat was no longer existent? Fuel possibly diluted due to water? Anti-spark coatings perhaps? I am not an aviation mechanic but special tools exist. I wouldn’t doubt they maybe have some.
@lawgeta Great point! Non-spark producing. It's like flashlights. You can not use a flashlight inside the fuel cell. So how do you see inside the fuelcells? By using a flashlight that doesn't generate a spark.
That’s the key. How many attempts did it take the simulator pilots to *maybe* make it to shore? Anyone can do anything without life-or-death on your shoulders. I think these pilots did the best they could under the circumstances…
I have a problem : fuel gauge indicator is not working .. Solution : replacing it + making sure replacing it solved the problem .. .. The question here is simple : how did the maintenance staff know if the problem was solved ?? Just replacing it doesn't necessarily mean that your mission as maintenance supervisor is accomplished .. .. I don't think it's the pilot job to check if the problem was solved or not ..
The problem was the display being incomplete with segments missing (30:45), for which replacing it and all segments being present on the replacement would be an apparent fix...
No pilot wants to die unless suicidal. Personally, I think they should lighten up on the charges against pilots as their jobs are stressful enough and if you keep looking to blame or charge them there will be shortages of experienced pilots. These two, the pilot and the co-pilot followed every other check list that they were required. The wrong fuel gauge was installed and he had no idea. He was told that the re-fueling slip would be given to him later. (showing that pilots get told things like this often and are expected to accept that) Everything that a pilot is required to have like re-fueling slips should be on board with the pilot before he is expected to take off anyhow. This should not be an acceptable response to be given a pilot anyhow. This is more a problem in my opinion with operations higher up that should be over seeing those that are allowed to give such answers. i.e. supervisors and airport authorities.
The history off aviation investigations is full of stories of manufacturers paying millions to avoid being responsible for fatal accidents .. it's always cheaper to find a scapegoat : pilots , mechanics , traffic control , ramp agents .. etc
You want they should use the same aircraft in the air? Then cut out the engines to see what the other pilots do? I mean we don't want to fustrate you.😁
@@rhuttrho88 The problem is that the simulator pilots *knew* there wasn't fuel available and so could act on that information. The actual pilots *didn't.*
Yes I agree. With a simulator you might think everything is easy to control not until the real life situation hits. I feel Captain Gab was unfairly charged with the criminal case 😢.
FQI should be made incompatible if installed in wrong airplane. that will solved the problem. i dont know how is it possible to be installed into incompatable airplane, right after installation, it should indicate that the FQI will not be working with the wrong plane. dont blame the pilot!!! in the first place, the airlplane manufacturer and maintainance should be the one charged with manslaughter!!! shame on them on palying safe in this matter!!! how sad it was not anticipated and the accident takes the lives of innocent people including the child😢😢😢
It's not a 172. You don't do that with airliners. Pilots aren't permitted to do so for liability. They can't even touch the PCA or GPU connections ffs.
Just imagine how many lives could’ve been saved if one st@pid police officer had just followed the crew’s instructions to NOT inflate their life vests while inside the airplane!
The only reason I can watch them is because I haven't been on a plane in 30 years and plan never to do so for my remaining 20 or so. The chances are low but feeling that terror of knowing you are about to die is not the way I want to go.
Because the plane crashed roughly 20-30 miles from land. The the curvature of the Earth would've prevented anyone on land from seeing a plane crash into the sea. The horizon for people on land simply would've blocked them seeing it. At sea level, the horizon for the average human is too see is about 3 miles off shore. As for the cargo boats, it depends on which direction they were facing, I imagine, and how far away the plane went down from them
@@bIametheniIe Dude. No. There is a plane, low in the air, and only going lower. Anyone seeing it go down has a vector to a probable crash site. Go outside and touch some grass.
Were the simulations done with no fuel? The real life glide calculations were made with the assumption that there was 1800Kg of fuel in the tanks - surely that would have drastically cut their estimated glide distance.
bingo. all the information the pilots had indicated engine failure not lack of fuel. leave it to the corrupt Italian government to blame the flight crew rather than the airline.
The investigators should have the 2 best pilots they know fly and have the engineer secretly cut the fuel one engine at a time and wait until the last minute to restart the engines.
No, they should go to several airports and randomly pick 2 qualified pilots each and put them in the situation with no preparation and see what happens.
The actual cause of this crash is with the designers of the fuel guage. It is terrible engineering to make the two different models identical and physically interchangeable. That is just setting up the airlines for failure.
Whoever put the wrong gauge in is to blame. We often forget people are human. The pilot asked for the refueling slip, so who waved him off? There are several individuals to blame including the owner of the company. Anytime someone is willing to blame someone else, they usually hold some blame themselves. Get better technicians.
You're confusing one link in the chain of events with the cause. Investigators concluded the installation if the wrong FQI was not the cause of this accident.
@@conradanderson3928 wrogn it was. as someone who has done repairs you make sure the repair was done right. this guy didn't or he would notice the issue. the pilot did notice and took nearly all the proper steps. so his error is a understandable one. He had a slip sayign his guage is fixed. he notices the fuel increase and asks tower for slip. they say they will have it when he gets back. and considering his guage says he has enough he lets it slide. were these mistakes, yes but minor the major is the tech for if the tech did his job these errors don't happen
The investigation found the parts database the airline was using contained several errors. The database showed the installed part was an acceptable alternative. Investigators determined the mechanics did everything correctly, procedure-wise.
@@conradanderson3928 So the mechanic was correctly using the mistaken documentation that he was given. Whoever signed off on the replacement part as an acceptable alternative should be the one punished.
Because this is the worst episode produced by this series. Simple rules and such are passed over... wasting time on a idiot police officer etc etc. The tech didnt verify before install. Yes... BUT fuel added needs 2 verifications not only for the amount of fuel.. but the weight of that carried on the aircraft. This is weight and balance checks. Most basic to every pilot before every flight on ANY aircraft. This isnt even mentioned.. the aircraft was lighter than it should have been ... take off at trim for the expected weight etc etc should have felt wrong for the settings. 1000's of hours on type and the flight crew missed this... laughable.
Release / open your seat belts the moment the plane crash lands in water. This way you are not trapped inside the fuselage. Look up to the sky point up[ and you go up to the surface. The wrong fuel indicators were installed in the aircraft recently.
I thought one of the pilots was supposed to look at the fuel sample and do a walk around. My last flight at Thanksgiving someone really dropped the ball. I was first to board and discovered electrical wires sticking up out of the floor over the left wing.
These poor people were doomed because a series of safety failures: 1) the manufacturer should not have used the same electrical connector for two different fuel gauges that are not compatible. 2) These are aircraft parts, they are serial numbered, tagged and traceable. The model number of plane should be on that tag and in the inventory control system. A mechanic should not be able to sign-out a part for plane model "A" when he is working on model "B". 3) The mechanic should have verified the part numbers before installing the wrong gauge. 4) the mechanic should have seen and noted the vast difference of fuel quantity when he installed the new gauge. 5) The pilot knew the fuel gage had just been replaced and should have been suspicious enough to demand the fuel paperwork before take-off. I have no opinion on what could or could not have been done for a better outcome once the engines suffered from fuel starvation. Saying that they "might have" or "probably" could have made the airport isn't good enough to justify possibly killing people on the ground.
I immediately noticed that the props were windmilling instead of feathered once the engines flamed out but was unsure if that was just an inaccuracy in the video. Apparently it was not. Windmilling props can induce quite a bit of drag. I have a very hard time believing the EP's did not instruct the crew to feather the props if the engines could not be restarted.
*This sounds like a training issue.* Why weren't these gliding numbers in the two engine out chart. The last people that should be anywhere near this investigation are the people that have the most to lose. But I know they always are.
Absurd; what difference would having a chart out for gliding numbers. The pilot knew he was going to Ditch. I don't believe you know a thing about investigators. Quit making stuff up.
@@robertgiles9124 Ok OP's post is a bit confusing, true, but on private aircraft best glide for time and for distance are usually on the engine out checklists, so why not in airliners?
@@yellowrose0910 There are too many factors , gross weight of the aircraft ... temp.. air wind speed.. etc etc Glide ratio is general at best and can vary by many factors. It is there to be a guide in the worst case circumstance, and to be used only as such. In short it can vary greatly... from fantastic, to drop like a rock.
'Nine people were charged for criminal negligence, including captain garbino.' Ridiculous! That man had a solid record as a pilot, & did all he knew to cope with failed engines. There was no way he couldve known his last departure was with insufficient fuel. In the absence of a receipt for fuel received, he naturally relied on his fuel readout Even the script of this documentary acknowleges that when the engines quit, garbino spent precious time trying to restart the engines, because he was convinced he had enough fuel to reach the airport 20 km away. This means the italian authorities charged him with criminal negligence for several attempts at engine restart, instead of using that time to "feather" the propellers & glide the plane at its optimum glide speed. The fact he maintained a speed 80 kmh above glide speed & failed to change the propellers appropriately suggests his training on this model of aircraft was insufficient The fault that caused this accident wasnt him afterall, but was the malfunctioning fuel readout. ("FQI") IMO, the airline & this italian aviation authority used capt garbino as a pariah, instead of backing him for doing all he knew to save the plane & its passengers. He should have never been treated so mercilessly. Horrible 😪
Yes, it was maintenance fault, but the pilot contributed to this accident too. Any pilot worth his salt would check the forms before flight, and the fact that there was a missing fuel slip should have raised a red flag. Ultimately, the pilot is the one who decides whether an aircraft is safe to take off. It's his ship now, his command. He's in charge, the boss, the head man, top dog, big cheese, a head honcho, number...
At least visually check the fuel tanks right? Especially an airplane! I'd have to check if I were a pilot. A plane running out of fuel 20 thousand high and over the ocean? Uh, no, that's inexcusable!
I don't think the captain should have been charged he did everything he could possibly do just because he didn't have one fuel slip I still don't think he should have been charged but as far as the maintenance they should have known better and paid closer attention to what they were doing either way that Airline itself should have been held accountable because it was their aircraft I feel so sorry for the families who lost their loved ones
The airport authorities should be charged too if the pilot is charged as they allow pilots to be told we will give it to you later. If the pilot is told this to begin with it is obvious to me that they are told this quite often. Obviously they are not trained not to give this response to pilots.
Ignoring that one fuel slip though went against the regulations. No fuel slip, no flight. Period. Problem is, pilots are under pressure to maintain a schedule, and at times that pressure has pilots making poor decisions.
Seen this sad accident over and over again. Condolences to families and friends. Pilots did the could under the circumstances. Rip for manyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.Amen.
Who thought it was a good idea to make two incompatible FQI’s identical but for the part number? The FQI’s should have been engineered to prevent this kind of mixup so that one model could NOT be interchanged with the other. If this only downed one plane the manufacturers got very lucky. This could have been far deadlier.
You are more likely to get in a car crash, than a plane crash. However i feel the same, my luck i would end up in a final destination situation as well. Prayers to everyone who passed and was affected by any crashes.
Perhaps the correct fuel indicator was out of stock and the mechanic assumed that the one for the other aircraft would work? If the available parts inventory was not kept up to date then he would get punished?
I really hate it when investigators change the rules. Or possibly just use the time and less pressure to come up with the ideal circumstances. I want to put 50 pilots through that simulations, pilots with a similar experience level to the crew involved. How many would make it? There is always that might have been possible the might does a lot of heavy lifting but it is nice to see a test pilot acknowledge it.
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
Want to watch more episodes from season 7? Watch them here: bit.ly/3GGzV4J
Thank you for posting these AWESOME Videos. I LOVE THEM !!!
0:18
I love them
please meke in hindi language
I heard an aircraft accident investigator saying, "there is never only one reason for an accident." "There are always a number of factors that lead up to the accident." I have seen this happen every time. Scary...
It’s a chain of events , often called the Swiss cheese effect.
When the holes line up , if at any point something didn’t line up then the accident wouldn’t happen
@@heartland96a The same is true in IT... it's never one mistake, it's always at least two.
Or, to put it another way, as a sister show famously leads with?
"Disasters don't just happen. They're a chain of critical events."
(Yes, that's the opening to Seconds from Disaster.)
Definitely less scary than these happening for one single reason tho lol
That's nice to know in my opinion - I'm not as scared to fly anymore after watching mayday episodes - oddly enough 🤣🤣 You'd think it'd be the opposite but I've learned how safe flying actually is.
A couple thoughts about the fuel slip issue. First, if the audio from the tower shows that the ATC said they would get the slip to the pilot later, then that implied that a slip existed and that refueling occured. Second, while the pilot still broke the rules by not leaving with slip in hand, there are enormous pressures (financial and organizational) to make pilots fly their planes on time. That can lead to incautious decisions. Holding back for what seems like a minor bit of beauracracy means that your crew isn't getting paid (they are only paid once push back from the gate happens), the passengers are upset over missed connections & delayed plans, the airport coult be upset because contracts and flight plans aren't being fulfilled etc., and the airline itself is upset. It doesn't encourage a safety culture.
Yessss, thank you for saying these . I understsnf it does not exvusr sll lives gone
This comment should be posted on every airlines website
At the post office, they place a lot of emphasis on being safe. However, the second it costs them any money or time, they cease to care. The condition of many of their vehicles is atrocious. I've had some with no horn (despite us being required to honk before backing up), non-functional speedometers and fuel gauges, broken washer nozzles, wipers held on by makeshift pins, bad front end alignments, bald tires, mismatched tires, and worst of all, transmissions which will pop right out of parking gear. And if something goes wrong, it's ALWAYS the employee's fault, despite the fact that they refuse to properly maintain their vehicle fleet. I've never in my life seen such a dissonance between what a company practices vs. what they preach. I mean, they've actually had to release memos regarding proper procedure when a vehicle catches fire because it was happening so often.
My point is, the issue isn't just within the airline industry. It's everywhere and, like an untreated disease, it's only spreading and getting worse as time goes on. Time is money, and life is cheap.
@@RedneckSith: Very true point (oh, how I'm tempted to say more!), though of course, you'd think that airlines (and anything involving transporting passengers, for that matter!) would entirely commend decisions that are a bit painful, but otherwise guarantee safety. After all, wasn't it EasyJet's Stelios who said "if you think safety is expensive, try an accident"...
Money is king, as usual.
Our policeman friend probably increased Paula's chance of being killed by his stupidity in ignoring safety instructions. Releasing your safety belt before a crash is sheer idiocy, not to mention His and Paula's weight being thrown forward into the seats/heads of the couple in front of them likely played a part in their deaths as well.
Not to mention inflating the vest around your THROAT in a violent crash, then not being able to control your buoyancy as you try to escape a sinking fuselage. I kept thinking "this guy is the ideal poster child for what NOT to do in a crash"
Yup, the only reason he got out was bc his vest came off. I couldn't believe she allowed him to inflate her vest right after the cabin crew told them not to. What idiot allows another to make that decision for them
@Charles Faure I agree with you, plus he insisted on inflating the vests before leaving the plane - another thing that increases someone's ability to fit through tight spaces and escape a sinking aircraft. He's an ass to have done all that you mentioned, plus the vest inflating, too. Shame on him - and as a first-responder, he should know safety measures are in place for a reason!
If he hadn't taken off his seat belt he would have died, he was unconscious at first. But I get the rule since I have seen videos of how you are thrown at the ceiling with no seatbelt.
@@kathleenwilkins4294 Oh really? He would have died? And you know this…how, exactly? Smh
I’ve never really agreed with criminal charges for these kinds of accidents. Unless something more substantial can be presented such as falsifying maintenance or doing other types of fraud, charging people over legitimate mistakes provides incentives to go on the defensive and finger point or obstruct the investigation as opposed to recognizing failures in the way things are done and improving the system.
Agreed. To place blame and possible charges against a pilot when he had nothing to do with the engine failure or loss of fuel, had to function under extreme anxiety and panic and stress knowing he has so many people's lives depending on him, etc. all so unfair. Flight simulators cant possibly prepare you for every emergency and crash landing scenario and no matter what mindset you try to put yourself in you wont panic during training, you don't have the fear of death. Most pilots cant turn into Captain Sully and be as calm as him. And it isnt the movies like Denzell Washington in Flight who stayed calm. Most pilots would be scared shitless, panicking, and unable to think clearly.
@@SusieQ1971 the only person that should be charged is the tech. if I was him and saw what was reported wrogn with the old guage and then installed the new one and see if it matched the numbers of the old then i would consider it fixed. the fact the tech doesn't notice this lead to everythign else
Still, you should try to put the right parts in the right plane. If you are a mechanic putting the wrong parts in a plane, you should try to do better.
This is a hard one on the mechanics end.. I do believe he messed up big…. As for the pilot I disagree with him being charged… yes it may be procedure to make sure you have the refueling slip but real life happens and who in their right mind would truly think the gauge could be off? I could almost guarantee you that if the pilot didn’t retire after that he absolutely looked at the fuel gauge in a much different light than before!
Edit: just found out they sentenced the pilot to 6 years and 8 months in prison and the copilot and many others to around 5-6 years! That’s crazy!!!!!
@@Revkor I think the tech should only be charged if he was truly found to be negligent, e.g. drinking/drugs on the job or something like that. Humans make mistakes. If we put people in prison for making honest mistakes, then either A) no one would do the job, or B) everyone would work in a defensive manner that always tried to put the onus for such perfection on someone else.
I think the pilot did an amazing job given the set of circumstances and the info his instruments were giving him. If anything, the mechanic is more at fault for putting in the wrong fuel indicator.
Ms Blackhawk69: You forgot about the one critical thing the pilot let go that would have saved everyone's lives, the fuel slip. Had he insisted on obtaining one, as he was required to do (the rule is: no fuel slip, no flight), the lives would have not been lost due to low fuel.
The mechanic was clearly at fault, but the captain was almost equally at fault. In aviation, the cost of skirting rules is paid in human lives. Had the captain not skirted the rule requiring a fuel slip - which is the proof one needs to know a plane was actually refueled - then the mechanic's error may well have been discovered on the ground. Instead this captain departed, trusting the fuel quantity reading on his fuel gauge which he knew had been malfunctioning the previous day! That's shocking incompetence.
@@humanbeing2420 Never have I seen people do mental gymnastics to defend an airplane manufacturer, more than you and the other numbskull.
One thing every new pilot learns is the best glide speed for the aircraft he is flying. This is a fundamental mistake. Also feathering the prop on a dead engine should have been the first thing he did. These are basic things that all pilots should learn early in training.
@@jimfarmer7811 Love all the back seat pilots chiming in and saying how things should have be done, since they have the luxury of hindsight and also not being in that situation at the moment. Maybe stick to farming there buddy.
The simulator pilots KNEW there was no fuel available and their only task was to immediately set up for longest glide possible from flight level 230. 1153’s crew didn’t feather immediately because they were fighting for engine restart until they were below flight level 170 and made the decision to ditch based on their sink rate and distance from Palermo. All this after losing time failing to get the engines restarted, because they continued to mistakenly believe they HAD fuel.not really fair to the crew in that regard. However, the cardinal sin of leaving without a fuel slip was the real issue. But after maintenance TO the fuel system, and assurance from the carrier’s office that the captain would get his fuel slip later led him to believe there was one, whatever his reservations would have been otherwise. I don’t believe he would have left without the slip if there was no maintenance. Probably wouldn’t have even started the engines in that case.
Exactly...
Good points made there. Usually these episodes are pretty good, this one has me shaking my head though. Many errors made along the chain... BUT fuel quanity has direct effect on weight and balance paperwork , the aircraft should have felt different upon takeoff using settings with more weight. Even a smaller turbo prop like that. Each gallon of fuel has weight that must be factored in.
Yes, and he ditched by the boat to insure rescue.
This is what I was thinking as well. The pilots thought they still had 1800 kilos of fuel. With what knowledge they had weight of the aircraft was also a thing they had to measure. They though they were possibly heavier then they were.
I read about the crash on Wikipedia and it *infuriates* me that the pilots and crew were slapped with *criminal charges.* They went through all the proper checklists and did their best to keep their passengers safe. They aren't *psychic.* How were they supposed to know there wasn't any fuel available? There were also *large* sections of the flight voice recording that were left out of the official report that showed the controller spoke very poor English and gave the incomplete or useless information to the pilots.
“It’s impossible that this could’ve happened because they were such great swimmers.” Sure, but you gotta survive the crash first.
Difficult to do when a dumb cop and his girlfriend slams into the back of your seat a 140-something km/h bc the dumb cop behind ya couldnt take instructions so he brilliantly manages to survive while also leading 3 others to their death 🥴
@@marksadplier9451exactly
Yup, or at least stay conscious long enough to not drown.
@@marksadplier9451 is there any proof this was what happened or are we just making stuff up?
@@dg4804 good point!!!
Couple of thoughts:
Is it common to accept not having this fuel slip? There are a lot of things that are "against the rules" that are commonly accepted for the sake of efficiency and profits. How often does this fuel slip go missing and planes take off without it? It is possible that the captain was doing things 'the way they are done' and that insisting on having the slip and delaying the flight without it might have gotten him in trouble, at least initially.
How can they fault him for not switching to the ditch procedure earlier? He thought he had fuel. How soon do we want pilots to switch to crash landing mode? I imagine if a pilot gives up on restarting the engines after a time or two and decided to switch to ideal gliding and crash land, if they think the engines would have eventually restarted, he would get in quite a bit of trouble. They should spell out how many attempts at restarting engines should take place before switching to glide procedures.
IDK.. No fuel slip, faulty fuel gauge on the same plane 2 days earlier?.. And the engines won’t start?.. Yeah, a lot is going on, but the info was there to finally snap to the fact there’s no fuel, or at least the possibility there’s no fuel..
Not all flights require a slip. It depends on company policy.
25:15 p 26:19
I was wondering this too - Im a nurse and we wpuld prob have a range of acceptible tries or a time period or altitude before ditching…
The fuel slip is mandatory unless the fuel quantity is verified using another method. Trusting the fuel quantity indicator alone is illegal.
Discovering why accidents occur is so important.
Because of this work, there are people alive today who never had to experience a similar accident.
Not really, this wasn't an accented, this was incompetence!
Like u know that for a fact. Give me a break....
@@tomasinacovell4293 Accented?
Yes better flight attendants are needed@@tomasinacovell4293
Absolutely
The both engine out emergency checklist the pilot followed should have indicated couple of things if the engines cannot be restarted: 1-the best glide speed to get the best glide ratio 2- feather both props to reduce tremendous drag, if the aircraft does not auto-feather like some other turboprops when the engine fails! These two steps would have extended the glide by reducing the drag! Then they would have made it to the closest airport per the test pilot. However, having said that, they should know these two steps being airline pilots. On the other hand, it is really easy to sit on a chair with no stress making comments!
Yeah, we weren't there, but feathering if you can't restart is part of basic pre-airline flight training.
On the other hand, the manufacturer should be held somewhat responsible for labeling the indicators 2250 and 2500 instead of 72 and 42 or something akin to the aircraft model number. As well as having connectors/fittings that allowed the wrong instrument to be installed in the wrong plane.
Good point, alot of blame to go around with this one... but the pilot has alot of blame for many points including the ones you mentioned.
I think restarting the engines is a nobrainer....
They explained thoroughly why the pilot didn't do the feathering. He was sure they had the fuel to get the engines restarted so that was his thoughts, not that he would have to glide plane. By the time they figured out engines would not restart, he didn't have time to adjust for the glide to make it to the airport. So he had to find the best place to ditch.
We weren't there, under the circumstances he was dealing with. I think he did the best he could do in that situation.
@@michael-4k4000true but realistically if the engines stopped there is a reason and restarting doesn’t change that
I can’t be the only one that was shocked the pilot was charged. That just doesn’t make any sense at all. He did everything he could with the situation he was in with the intent to save the passengers.
Absolutely
The pilot was charged because he did NOT have the refueling slip. The plane was NOT refueled...THAT'S WHY IT CRASHED
The captain didn't refuel which caused the entire thing. So ya I can see why he was charged. He broke regulation
@@voodoo1449 the fule gauge was showing a wrong level, that's why he assumed the plane has enough fuel. it's easy to sit on the sofa and judge
@@MysticBakura ATC told him he will get the slip at the next stop.. where he topped up the fuel based on the fuel gauge.. the fault is with plane manufacture and maintenance for installing the wrong fuel gauge.. also ATC at fault for giving the captain false self security that the plane was refueled..
“I decided to take off my seatbelt and inflate my life vest” 🥴🙄😬 “I wondered if I should stand up” Jeez…
Maybe do a few jumping Jack's to warm up the ole tendons, haha!
I’m gonna be the one like, hey, fill my vodka before we go down. Some people panic
Yeah, I hear you, but he survived. Go figure!
@@krinkle909 No doubt! I feel horrible for his girlfriend. Must have been terrible to lose her. 🙏
Maybe the other couple that died were in the row in front of the idiot and Paola. Their unrestrained bodies slammed into the seat backs in front of them killing the two good swimmers.
Monday morning quarterbacking. The simulator was easy because if you failed then you will still live, They may not have made it to the runway and crashed into the ground. The pilots did what they thought was best in this case
You can do your best and still make mistakes. But agree, many possible outcomes with different decisions - some a lot worse. Procedurally, I think he should have feathered the prop when he couldn't get the first engine started - certainly after the second engine failure. However, I also understand the hope of getting them restarted. If the speeds are correct on ditching, then that certainly wasn't ideal. However, he really should have confirmed the fueling issue before departing. A great pilot once told me, "do not tolerate uncertainty". It has a tendency to come back and bite you in the ass - verify everything as much as possible. The stakes are high (pun intended) in aviation. Undoubtedly to me, the biggest contributing factor, and most irresponsible part of this tragic accident, was the manufacturer making the FQI's interchangeable between the 2 a/c. And that's about profit over safety. Blue skies.
Look up this accident in a search engine. The pilots we’re praying instead of flying.
@@Roadglide911 Lol. They were flying the plane obviously or should I say gliding?
But it worked in Pro-E....
True, but setting up for best glide while troubleshooting is pounded into basic flight training, at least in NA.
On the simulator, you may have a point: "One pilot was able to make it...". OK, how many others didn't? How many tries did it take that one pilot to succeed?
I can't get over the guy inflating his life vest and undoing his seatbelt in the face of a crash, that didn't help him at all he was just crazy lucky to survive -_-
It may have helped him... to a small degree
It would help on impact like an airbag but could have easily got stuck and drowned.
@@rolanda666 Did it help his girlfriend? If he hadn't regained consciousness (due to his idiot idea to undue his seatbelt) he would've drowned. He killed his girlfriend.
@@charliemarqfj According to what research? If that were the case, then, in the event of a landing emergency on land, they have people put on their flotation vests.
Keep shut.the people who did not inflate and un belt ? Why did they die ?
It absolutely sickens me the owners are always so ready to blame the pilot when it clearly was *NOT* his fault! No matter how courageous the pilot is, the owners of the airlines won't hesitate to offer up the pilot to be sacrificed rather than accept any blame for the way they run their airlines!
Leaving to fly without a fuel slip was the pilots fault though it’s against the rules.
@@mystoc3995 yes there's a reason this is the rules... Not sure what Harry watched.
Many of these pilots and ground crews are not properly trained to recognize and react quickly and correctly to a dire situation, that is a problem worldwide
Had they simply feathered the props, they may have landed on terra firma! If it's conclusively proven that they didn't take that crucial and simple step, then they are indeed the only ones at fault here. Especially when the lack of a fuel slip compounds their errors!
there is plenty of fault to go around.. but the pilot in command has blame as well. fuel slip is required. amount of fuel added with logs will give a discrenpency. This must be compared with running time... HOBBS (time engine running) etc etc.. alot fell through the cracks. There are scales to weigh the aircraft by landing gear wheel , just like transport trucks. The weight of the unloaded aircraft with current fuel load could have been determined after the repair. Why this was not mentioned in the episode is beyond me and poor production.
Why interview the passenger that refused correct advice by inflating jacket inside the plane, unbuckling seat belts etc. What a clown. Just lucky he survived.
He's a cop. It's Italy.
Never inflate a life jacket until in the water and keep your seatbelt on. I was a flight attendant for two airlines and many years
@@barbarasjelin9925 I think it's worth adding you should not inflate till you're in the water OUTSIDE the aircraft. Someone might interpret "in the water" as the criterion being met if there's water inside the fuselage with them while they're still inside. 😔
He got his girlfriend killed potentially too
He pulled a Homer.
The mom who was talking about her daughter being a good swimmer. Sometimes its not about the swimming. You can die on impact. She could have hit her head and no amount of swimming experience can stop a hard enough hit to the head, they are not related. She may not have been able to save herself. Sad as it is. That would appear to be the reality. She may have blacked out before they hit the water for all anyone knows.
It's maddening the pilots were charged with manslaughter for this accident. Just because somebody can land the plane in a simulator where the threat of death is looming over them, doesn't mean anything!
Totally agree
Think Sully.
Pilots are at fault as they didn't follow procedure to check fuel manually when they couldn't get the slip.
@@ryansmock2717 but the engineer who put a wrong instrument isn't at fault? Lol
@godloves1821 Maintenance worker is at fault for installing the wrong instrument, but the pilot is ultimately the decider of fly or no-fly. Lots of poor decision making from the pilot who decided to just trust the instrument he KNEW had issues without the refuel slip, or checking fuel manually himself.
Wow, it never occurred to me until watching this that you're basically dead if a high wing plane ditches, if the fuselage breaks open in the water the entire fuselage immediately sits below the surface, if not then then it's likely so low in the water the that when the doors are opened you'd surely flood immediately? The whole aircraft displaces the same number of litres of water as it weighs in kilos (bless you metrics!) so every litre volume of wing and engine you put under the water pushes a litre of fuselage OUT of the water. I wish they'd stop showing the 767 ditching as an example of the dangers of ditching in the ocean - there was a reef under that port engine, the pilot had been smashed in the head close to touch down (from memory) by hijackers who refused to believe they were out of fuel, they weren't able to set up for ditching etc.
Just because they were able to glide the aircraft to land in the simulator doesn't mean real life they could have. He did what he thought was best for an error that was made by someone else.
It's crazy how random it is that of the 3 men in the cockpit, 2 survived, and 1 didn't. I mean they are all in the same tiny space, but yet he didn't make it.
The pilots seats are designed to absorb a lot of shock.
This idiot passenger undoing his belt and inflating his vest, is a prime example of how Karma is fickle. He should have been charged with endangering the other passengers, his girlfriend, and abject cowardice. What a scumbag.
Exactly..he's gotta be one of the stupidest people on earth
In Italy when car seatbelts became mandatory,back in the early 80' , people in Naples started making t-shirts with a single stripe across the front as to make it look like you've got a seat belt on.
Got the message ?
Looks like the kind of person to crawl over children to be the first out. Coward.
23 pulled from the sea alive I’m surprised that many made it out alive.
It is probably my worst nightmare. Being in the middle of the oceon after a ship sinking or an airplane ditching and busting up. Just you and other injured and bleeding people and the sharks, water temp. etc. No thank you !!
@@gib59er56 that’s alot of people worst nightmare.
The two types of fuel gauges should be physically impossible to interchange.
Now it is designed that fuel gauge cannot be interchanged. Its 2023 feb.
This is still common actually on different types of aircraft, just because the plug fits on it doesnt mean it will work. The tech must verify , if in ANY doubt, verify.
If it doesnt match exactly as per repair instructions.. it must be verified by higher up in the chain. This was not done.. and simply passed over in the this episode. And in my opinion this part of the episode is done very poorly. They mask this with refueling slips etc etc... usually these are produced quite well... this is very poor for proper presentation.
@@sharoncassell9358 thank you for that, it's almost a full time job keeping up with the latest service updates.
There should have been an error proof built into the wiring harness to prevent the wrong gage from being installed.
This suggestion is basic in many fields, including medical devices. So simple.
And you know some chucklehead mechanic will try to 'make it fit'...
@@chezsnailez You know nothing about aircraft repair, stay off You Tube troll.
Part numbers of fuel gauges should be totally different and not similar.
Use different ID color stickers! I was a satellite engineer for 30+ years...
I find it hard to understand why the captain was charged here! Did they say he went to jail? If so, that's absurd. He had two options - either restart the engines or prepare the plane to glide as far as possible. He could not do both, but he chose the one that made the most sense based on the information he had - i.e. that he had sufficient fuel. Why didn't they place the blame where it belonged - on the guy who installed the wrong fuel guage - and leave it at that? Very sad story for all concerned, and especially those who died R.I.P.
The captain operated the flight illegally. He was required to cross check the accuracy of the indicated fuel using a separate method before departure. There are strict procedures in place to catch fuel quantity errors that were not followed.
@@conradanderson3928 You are correct. From the point of view of a chain of responsibility, the buck stops with him. There's nothing more to say, except it seems a pity given the facts here.
except he called the AIRLINES dispatch and they made it sound like they had the fuel slip and gave him authorization to take off and said they would give it to him when he got back. Airline mechanics and dispatch should have full responsibility for this.@@conradanderson3928
@@conradanderson3928 I disagree, if you’re not present during refueling, there isn’t anything to tell you it was done right beside the slip, which the dispatch told him he had it, just that he couldn’t find it. He didn’t have anything to cross check it . A real shitty situation to be in.
He did not go to Jail. He is Tunisian not Italian and the court verdict was given in Italy. His career was damaged no doubt, but he was the scapegoat. Whether he could have done more to prevent it or even stop it is quite absurd seeing the situation.
The rescue crews did a wonderful job. There were survivors, more than those who died. Very sad that there were engaged couples who died, and denied happiness
A few errors were made , the one mistake I will comment on is the mechanic definitely should be convinced of manslaughter. As a automotive mechanic myself , there are airbags that do technically fit different vehicles but won't operate properly. If I install the wrong bag and then someone is killed due to that I most definitely would be prosecuted for being negligent in my work.
The mechanics were able to prove to investigators that they installed the correct part based on the reference materials provided to them by the airline. Yes, the parts database contained errors, but they no way of knowing that. Investigators did not find them at fault for this accident.
Jjj
Cop unbuckles seat and inflates life jacket early, guess following commands are harder than giving them.
You know you’re in trouble when both engines have stopped and the Captain says, “Ladies and Gentlemen, have you ever seen Mayday? Well, we’ll more-than-likely be one of the episodes in Season 21.”
id actually cry
Oh my gosh!!!
I’d be like “You mean one of the episodes with a good ending right? 😀 …R i g h t?”
@@KingOfGaymes
😂😂😂😂
The “Sully” episode, right?
RIGHT!!!!!
Try harder
The Capitan is not at fault. He requested the fuel paperwork. They denied his request and told him that he would get it later, meaning that there was one, but in reality the people on the ground was talking out of their ... There was nothing. The cap is led to believe that he would get one later and that his plane was good on fuel. He was lied to by the tower and by the mechanics. The Mechanic should have noticed the sudden change in fuel reading because the cap did and he requested his paperwork and he was denied. What would you do at that point? You have a plain filled with fuel, and the tower is telling you they can't give you the paperwork until later. What do you do? We all can say, oh I would waited for the paperwork and I wouldn't have left the runway until it was in my hand. Remember pilots have schedules to keep. They have the added pressure of the passengers as well. He sees there is enough fuel and he can comeback and get the paperwork later because they can't give it to him at the moment.
Exactly what I was thinking. That was some bullshit trying to blame the Captain. The investigators were just trying to save their company's ass. They didn't train their mechanic enough to read. This plane At takes 2250 and plane B takes 2550. Then not notice the immediate 4x change of fuel. It's like this expect the pilots to know everything when they are supposed to know how to fly the plane.
@@cristinanaugler5579 Right! the claim is that Pilots are not supposed to leave the airport without the Fuel Paperwork. That's the Captain's responsibility. However, The cap didn't just take the decision based on one thing. Ground control led the cap to believe that the fuel paperwork was there. That plus the fact that his plain is indicating that he has plenty fuel to make the trip; and the added pressure coming from passengers.. Why aren't we taking off? AND the fact that airlines demand pilots to keep their schedules played a huge role in the Cap's decision. ALL THE STARS ALIGNED for this Accident. Almost as if it was meant to happen.
Unfortunately that was exactly what he was supposed to do. In the end the pilot has final say in whether they fly or not. Doesn't make this right though.
@@animehuntress9018 Exactly. The buck stops with the pilot. Regardless of whether you are a pilot governed by the FAA or a commercial driver governed by the FMCSA if you knowingly operate outside of established regulations it’s your baby should something go wrong. Both pilots and commercial drivers have the pressures of scheduling but it’s still going to be their fault if they bow to those pressures and skip the required procedures. It may cost you your job but jobs are a dime a dozen and you will be alive.
The captain most certainly *is* at fault. He needs the fuel slip to cross check that the indicated fuel on the FQI is correct. If the fuel slip is missing, he needs to open his operations manual and follow the procedures for missing vital paperwork. He did not do either of these things. Two major mistakes before the plane ever left the ground. He made at least two other major mistakes once the plane was in the air.
I love how the test pilots who glide for the maximum distance always throws out the engine out check lists and goes for maximum distance knowing that the engines will not start.
I've noticed that a lot of people are blaming the pilots. Now I'm not saying that the pilots don't make mistakes. I'm saying such sentiments are dangerous in the flight industry. Or any industry for that matter. Because if you blame and point at people for their mistakes, people are less likely to be honest about what they did wrong. You might say that people who do wrong needs to be punished, however, what is more important is trying to figure out why accidents happen and how to stop it from ever happening again. If we just blame the pilots and carry on, something like this can happen again. Something like this WILL happen again, because humans make mistakes. No one is perfect, and someone, somewhere will slip up. That is why we have multiple regulations and checks, to try to catch our errors. Maybe put more importance on fuel slips and repeatedly remind pilots that they can't fly without one. Because people forget, we do not have perfect memory. Or maybe make different models of fuel gages have more clear indicates. Maybe paint one in a different color. We can't bring back the lives that have already been lost, but we can prevent losses in the future.
Yep, the first step to doing anything safely is to first take into account that people make mistakes. It's safety training 101. If you write procedures that require people to be perfect you have a flawed procedure. We call it setting up for failure.
The manufacturer of the Plane clearly is a Monday Morning Couch Quarterback. The Fact the Two Fuel meters had the same Pin & hole Setup is insane. I can't interchange The door speakers From my Mercedes benz a year apart.
That's for reasons of profit, not safety. The manufacturers are clearly at fault and should have been charged.
Like Capt Sully once said ... add human factors to the simulator pilot, and you'll get a different result every time
You're right real life incident is different
I get they need answers but throwing the pilots under the bus when the major infraction was putting the wrong fuel indicator in. Saying that the pilots could've glided to Palermo when they knew if they didn't make it crashing on land meant certain death but ditching meant a chance. Yes the captain shouldn't have left without the receipt but saying a pilot in the simulator made it means nothing. Knowing all they know in hindsight means a huge difference to how far the pilot could glide it.
The pilot and copilot were both sentenced to prison for this. I can’t find any record of anyone from maintenance being charged with anything.
I don’t think the pilot should face criminal charges, just a reprimand for the missing fuel slip. As they say at the end, his flying most likely saved lives. The bearded investigator was just looking out for his company’s interests, so his input should have been discounted as biased. The companies who build commercial aircraft should be required to participate, and provide all knowledge possible, but they should not be investigators themselves. Since the cop didn’t obey the rules himself, unbuckling belts and inflating vests, he should not judge the captain for dismissing the fuel slip…the captain’s life was as much jeopardy than the passengers. The crew made the correct choices based on their instruments, to spend the time trying to get engines restarted, rather than configuring for feathering. But I agree this should be included more in simulators, so that any future incidents might have a better outcome. May God give these grieving families comfort.
The pilot did nothing wrong. He tried. It's not like that was a known issue with the fuel indicator.
@@berzerkbankie1342 ok
It's always not the pilots fault, and I don't think he deserves to face criminal charges against him. At least he tried to do he thought was right.
That was completely beyond the pilots control
He definitely shouldn’t have been charged
I agree.
The end of it, saying that the pilot *should have* been able to ... hindsight is always 20/20. Things are a lot different in the moment. Was "feathering the props" part of any checklist? It would seem they were trying everything they could. And, by calculating how far they could glide the plane, they were counting that as part of their "plan".
feather is in the check list....for the out of fuel checklist.. The flight crew was using the engine restart list because all information they had indicated they had gas. Hindsight is exactly 20/20 and the fact the pilot was blamed for this was crazy.
Don't inflate your flotation devise until you are out of the a/c. Remain seated and belted and braced until plane is stopped or sinking (generally speaking). But HEAR specific instructions given if they are given.!
The fault is in the man who repaired and put the piece of equipment not the pilote. It seems that the companies always want to blame the pilote.
May all the victims rest in peace.
I love how the passengers ignore the cabin crews instructions. I know it's often thought that airlines have malicious intent and try to make airline crashes as fatal as possible, but you have to remember that these people are trained for this situation. You aren't
You sound crazy; the airlines DON'T WANT fatalities! that means liability, and that means lawsuits , and that means settlements , and that could mean bankrupt.
The flight simulator pilots, were they supposed to ask for the fuel slip before proceeding, or were they simply flying the plane?
I think airlines should schedule rotating time in the simulator for their pilots. They could learn and practice the complete emergency protocols for various emergencies.
Then it would be second nature to know exactly what to do and not miss anything.
Any human being would have some panic in this situation. More training for emergencies would help keep the pilots and crew much more focused.
I think this crew did a fantastic job.
Unfortunately, even one small error can add to the chain leading to catastrophe.
May all those lost rest in peace.
Airline pilots DO go to the sim continuously throughout their career. These guys did not do a good job, which is why they were convicted and sent to prison. The CVR reveals they were more focused on praying than they were actually trying to save the plane.
At 27:23 the fuel tank explodes during the investigation. First rule of aviation maintenance: No electric power tools allowed. The spark inside the electric nut driver will ignite the vapors in the fuel tank like an atom bomb. Watching that is like seeing someone scratching their fingernails on a chalk board to me. Or like watching a dog running loose on the freeway.
Perhaps they’ve decided the threat was no longer existent? Fuel possibly diluted due to water? Anti-spark coatings perhaps? I am not an aviation mechanic but special tools exist. I wouldn’t doubt they maybe have some.
@lawgeta Great point! Non-spark producing. It's like flashlights. You can not use a flashlight inside the fuel cell. So how do you see inside the fuelcells? By using a flashlight that doesn't generate a spark.
That’s the key. How many attempts did it take the simulator pilots to *maybe* make it to shore? Anyone can do anything without life-or-death on your shoulders. I think these pilots did the best they could under the circumstances…
I have a problem : fuel gauge indicator is not working ..
Solution : replacing it + making sure replacing it solved the problem ..
..
The question here is simple : how did the maintenance staff know if the problem was solved ??
Just replacing it doesn't necessarily mean that your mission as maintenance supervisor is accomplished ..
..
I don't think it's the pilot job to check if the problem was solved or not ..
The problem was the display being incomplete with segments missing (30:45), for which replacing it and all segments being present on the replacement would be an apparent fix...
No pilot wants to die unless suicidal. Personally, I think they should lighten up on the charges against pilots as their jobs are stressful enough and if you keep looking to blame or charge them there will be shortages of experienced pilots. These two, the pilot and the co-pilot followed every other check list that they were required. The wrong fuel gauge was installed and he had no idea. He was told that the re-fueling slip would be given to him later. (showing that pilots get told things like this often and are expected to accept that) Everything that a pilot is required to have like re-fueling slips should be on board with the pilot before he is expected to take off anyhow. This should not be an acceptable response to be given a pilot anyhow. This is more a problem in my opinion with operations higher up that should be over seeing those that are allowed to give such answers. i.e. supervisors and airport authorities.
do u know how meany pill heads and drunks r out thire we need rules
The problem with the simulator is that is optimal condition. Not as much stress. Look at Captain Sully Sullinburger
The history off aviation investigations is full of stories of manufacturers paying millions to avoid being responsible for fatal accidents .. it's always cheaper to find a scapegoat : pilots , mechanics , traffic control , ramp agents .. etc
This right here.
It's a little frustrating them comparing the pilots in an actual situation to simulator pilots.
You want they should use the same aircraft in the air? Then cut out the engines to see what the other pilots do? I mean we don't want to fustrate you.😁
@@rhuttrho88 The problem is that the simulator pilots *knew* there wasn't fuel available and so could act on that information. The actual pilots *didn't.*
Yes I agree. With a simulator you might think everything is easy to control not until the real life situation hits.
I feel Captain Gab was unfairly charged with the criminal case 😢.
@@rhuttrho88go watch sully cuz clearly you are missing the point.
That lab technician was stunning.
Sorry to scatter your dreams, she is an actress.
@@dutchsailor6620 Of course
FQI should be made incompatible if installed in wrong airplane. that will solved the problem. i dont know how is it possible to be installed into incompatable airplane, right after installation, it should indicate that the FQI will not be working with the wrong plane. dont blame the pilot!!! in the first place, the airlplane manufacturer and maintainance should be the one charged with manslaughter!!! shame on them on palying safe in this matter!!! how sad it was not anticipated and the accident takes the lives of innocent people including the child😢😢😢
They should investigate why that initial fuel module went bad
If you have any doubts about fuel, roll up some stairs, open up the covers, and look inside the tanks.
Sadly man's reliance on technology has led to complacency and laziness
It's not a 172. You don't do that with airliners. Pilots aren't permitted to do so for liability. They can't even touch the PCA or GPU connections ffs.
The simulator can also have calibration issues.
Errors and level of simulation can give different results
Just imagine how many lives could’ve been saved if one st@pid police officer had just followed the crew’s instructions to NOT inflate their life vests while inside the airplane!
To quote from another time, he pulled a Homer.
one more, I guess?
Man I’m to addicted to theese
This show is like potato chips. Can't just have one.
me too my goodness its better than netflix
The only reason I can watch them is because I haven't been on a plane in 30 years and plan never to do so for my remaining 20 or so. The chances are low but feeling that terror of knowing you are about to die is not the way I want to go.
Boy, I didn't know there were so many beautiful investigators! They look like they hire only the good-looking ones!
Lol, the actors/actresses in the show are almost always prettier than the real victims.
17:20 - Nobody saw the commercial passenger plane crash into the sea??? 🤔
ikr!
Lol right
Because the plane crashed roughly 20-30 miles from land. The the curvature of the Earth would've prevented anyone on land from seeing a plane crash into the sea. The horizon for people on land simply would've blocked them seeing it. At sea level, the horizon for the average human is too see is about 3 miles off shore. As for the cargo boats, it depends on which direction they were facing, I imagine, and how far away the plane went down from them
@@bIametheniIe Dude. No. There is a plane, low in the air, and only going lower. Anyone seeing it go down has a vector to a probable crash site. Go outside and touch some grass.
@@bIametheniIe How do you explain the literal recording of the plane going down then if nobody saw it?
Were the simulations done with no fuel? The real life glide calculations were made with the assumption that there was 1800Kg of fuel in the tanks - surely that would have drastically cut their estimated glide distance.
bingo. all the information the pilots had indicated engine failure not lack of fuel. leave it to the corrupt Italian government to blame the flight crew rather than the airline.
It's funny...i was just thinking about "that mayday episode with the bozo cop that thought he knew more than the flight crew" and then it pops up 🤣🤣
The investigators should have the 2 best pilots they know fly and have the engineer secretly cut the fuel one engine at a time and wait until the last minute to restart the engines.
Like Johnny in Airplane! when he unplugs there runway lights..
No, they should go to several airports and randomly pick 2 qualified pilots each and put them in the situation with no preparation and see what happens.
I know this is a re-enactment... but how in the world did those boats miss that plan crashing?
I kept waiting for that to be explained and I'm at the end of the video and shocked it never was. I don't get how that even possible!
The actual cause of this crash is with the designers of the fuel guage. It is terrible engineering to make the two different models identical and physically interchangeable. That is just setting up the airlines for failure.
blame the bean coutners saves money by havign the same deisgn
Whoever put the wrong gauge in is to blame. We often forget people are human. The pilot asked for the refueling slip, so who waved him off? There are several individuals to blame including the owner of the company. Anytime someone is willing to blame someone else, they usually hold some blame themselves. Get better technicians.
You're confusing one link in the chain of events with the cause. Investigators concluded the installation if the wrong FQI was not the cause of this accident.
@@conradanderson3928 wrogn it was. as someone who has done repairs you make sure the repair was done right. this guy didn't or he would notice the issue. the pilot did notice and took nearly all the proper steps. so his error is a understandable one. He had a slip sayign his guage is fixed. he notices the fuel increase and asks tower for slip. they say they will have it when he gets back. and considering his guage says he has enough he lets it slide. were these mistakes, yes but minor the major is the tech for if the tech did his job these errors don't happen
The idiot who allowed different instruments to have an interchangeable enclosure and electrical connector should be prosecuted.
why is there no mention about interviewing the mechanic who installed it ?
The investigation found the parts database the airline was using contained several errors. The database showed the installed part was an acceptable alternative. Investigators determined the mechanics did everything correctly, procedure-wise.
@@conradanderson3928 So the mechanic was correctly using the mistaken documentation that he was given. Whoever signed off on the replacement part as an acceptable alternative should be the one punished.
Because this is the worst episode produced by this series. Simple rules and such are passed over... wasting time on a idiot police officer etc etc.
The tech didnt verify before install. Yes... BUT fuel added needs 2 verifications not only for the amount of fuel.. but the weight of that carried on the aircraft. This is weight and balance checks. Most basic to every pilot before every flight on ANY aircraft. This isnt even mentioned.. the aircraft was lighter than it should have been ... take off at trim for the expected weight etc etc should have felt wrong for the settings. 1000's of hours on type and the flight crew missed this... laughable.
Release / open your seat belts the moment the plane crash lands in water. This way you are not trapped inside the fuselage. Look up to the sky point up[ and you go up to the surface. The wrong fuel indicators were installed in the aircraft recently.
We've lost both engines and are about to crash. Please stay calm. 😮
😳😳😳😭😭😭
Comment of the year .!! Period .
I thought one of the pilots was supposed to look at the fuel sample and do a walk around. My last flight at Thanksgiving someone really dropped the ball. I was first to board and discovered electrical wires sticking up out of the floor over the left wing.
Poor Captain. They put the blame on him too!
I’m amazed Mr. Policeman didn’t say, “When the helicopter flew over and threw me a life jacket, I wondered if I should put it on.”
I love this series
You will never stop tragedy from happening. Had those who died stayed home that could have hit by a bus . Who knows when your time is up😢
Wrong place/wrong time is also real
If a guy inflates ur vest before exiting the aircraft, leave him!!
Idiotic comment!!
I'm all for bringing back flying boats. If you have to ditch one of THOSE in the sea, your chances of survival would be MASSIVELY improved.
These poor people were doomed because a series of safety failures: 1) the manufacturer should not have used the same electrical connector for two different fuel gauges that are not compatible. 2) These are aircraft parts, they are serial numbered, tagged and traceable. The model number of plane should be on that tag and in the inventory control system. A mechanic should not be able to sign-out a part for plane model "A" when he is working on model "B". 3) The mechanic should have verified the part numbers before installing the wrong gauge. 4) the mechanic should have seen and noted the vast difference of fuel quantity when he installed the new gauge. 5) The pilot knew the fuel gage had just been replaced and should have been suspicious enough to demand the fuel paperwork before take-off. I have no opinion on what could or could not have been done for a better outcome once the engines suffered from fuel starvation. Saying that they "might have" or "probably" could have made the airport isn't good enough to justify possibly killing people on the ground.
I immediately noticed that the props were windmilling instead of feathered once the engines flamed out but was unsure if that was just an inaccuracy in the video. Apparently it was not. Windmilling props can induce quite a bit of drag. I have a very hard time believing the EP's did not instruct the crew to feather the props if the engines could not be restarted.
*This sounds like a training issue.* Why weren't these gliding numbers in the two engine out chart.
The last people that should be anywhere near this investigation are the people that have the most to lose. But I know they always are.
Absurd; what difference would having a chart out for gliding numbers. The pilot knew he was going to Ditch. I don't believe you know a thing about investigators. Quit making stuff up.
@@robertgiles9124 Ok OP's post is a bit confusing, true, but on private aircraft best glide for time and for distance are usually on the engine out checklists, so why not in airliners?
@@yellowrose0910 There are too many factors , gross weight of the aircraft ... temp.. air wind speed.. etc etc Glide ratio is general at best and can vary by many factors. It is there to be a guide in the worst case circumstance, and to be used only as such. In short it can vary greatly... from fantastic, to drop like a rock.
'Nine people were charged for criminal negligence, including captain garbino.'
Ridiculous! That man had a solid record as a pilot, & did all he knew to cope with failed engines. There was no way he couldve known his last departure was with insufficient fuel. In the absence of a receipt for fuel received, he naturally relied on his fuel readout
Even the script of this documentary acknowleges that when the engines quit, garbino spent precious time trying to restart the engines, because he was convinced he had enough fuel to reach the airport 20 km away. This means the italian authorities charged him with criminal negligence for several attempts at engine restart, instead of using that time to "feather" the propellers & glide the plane at its optimum glide speed. The fact he maintained a speed 80 kmh above glide speed & failed to change the propellers appropriately suggests his training on this model of aircraft was insufficient
The fault that caused this accident wasnt him afterall, but was the malfunctioning fuel readout. ("FQI") IMO, the airline & this italian aviation authority used capt garbino as a pariah, instead of backing him for doing all he knew to save the plane & its passengers. He should have never been treated so mercilessly. Horrible 😪
What did the manufacturer say about the different fuel indicator models?
Thanks for this perfect Information Film material/investigation....well done....
Yes, it was maintenance fault, but the pilot contributed to this accident too. Any pilot worth his salt would check the forms before flight, and the fact that there was a missing fuel slip should have raised a red flag. Ultimately, the pilot is the one who decides whether an aircraft is safe to take off. It's his ship now, his command. He's in charge, the boss, the head man, top dog, big cheese, a head honcho, number...
At least visually check the fuel tanks right? Especially an airplane! I'd have to check if I were a pilot. A plane running out of fuel 20 thousand high and over the ocean? Uh, no, that's inexcusable!
"Airplane" anyone......
the problem is dispatch said they would give it to him when he got back. That made the pilot believe a fuel slip had already been collected
Captain has no fault. Starting the engine is priority nr 1 when indicators show fuel is enough. Flying is better than gliding
I don't think the captain should have been charged he did everything he could possibly do just because he didn't have one fuel slip I still don't think he should have been charged but as far as the maintenance they should have known better and paid closer attention to what they were doing either way that Airline itself should have been held accountable because it was their aircraft I feel so sorry for the families who lost their loved ones
The airport authorities should be charged too if the pilot is charged as they allow pilots to be told we will give it to you later. If the pilot is told this to begin with it is obvious to me that they are told this quite often. Obviously they are not trained not to give this response to pilots.
Ignoring that one fuel slip though went against the regulations. No fuel slip, no flight. Period. Problem is, pilots are under pressure to maintain a schedule, and at times that pressure has pilots making poor decisions.
@@jszlauko or the tech could have checked his work
Gliding closer to land is a better option than ditching right away.
Seen this sad accident over and over again. Condolences to families and friends. Pilots did the could under the circumstances. Rip for manyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.Amen.
Even before the plane had landed... help was on the way 👏👏
Who thought it was a good idea to make two incompatible FQI’s identical but for the part number?
The FQI’s should have been engineered to prevent this kind of mixup so that one model could NOT be interchanged with the other. If this only downed one plane the manufacturers got very lucky. This could have been far deadlier.
Save money. the key issue the tech didn't check the gauge after repalcement
It's just like trucking you almost have to be a mechanic to compensate for poor maintenance.
If those pilots had been trained by simulator usage maybe the outcome would have been better. Need more training in areas not expecting to happen.
Why were the pilots and crew not interviewed? The captain being charged seems wrong!
This is why I never what to get on a plane I feel like I would have a final destination Situation
I'm a pilot I trust myself and always check my plane the best I can before I fly.
You are more likely to get in a car crash, than a plane crash. However i feel the same, my luck i would end up in a final destination situation as well. Prayers to everyone who passed and was affected by any crashes.
Man .. that is why I always go for the window seat in any flight and at the rear of the plane .
I forgot the machanic should have been trained better, like it was stated how many planes had the wrong fuel indicator? Did they try to pass the buck?
Perhaps the correct fuel indicator was out of stock and the mechanic assumed that the one for the other aircraft would work? If the available parts inventory was not kept up to date then he would get punished?
I really hate it when investigators change the rules. Or possibly just use the time and less pressure to come up with the ideal circumstances. I want to put 50 pilots through that simulations, pilots with a similar experience level to the crew involved. How many would make it? There is always that might have been possible the might does a lot of heavy lifting but it is nice to see a test pilot acknowledge it.
Do not blame the pilots
ikr.
it is the manufaturer and maintainance should be blamed!
The final report came to a different conclusion.
Well they did miss a few vital parts some of the blame is on them but not all of it just some
I mean I know that the pilot messed up, but to ditch that perfectly on water is very impressive.