@Tech No, he's genuinely worried about the safety of people. That incident could have harmed or killed people unnecessarily. I find those words of Mr. Nordal really inspiring, I must say, and I think you should do the same. This can apply to other contexts besides civil aviation.
I retired as a Pilot with 27600 hours, and about 7000 hours ATR (the first ones in 1989) and regs, are paramount. My passengers pay money to be safe above all, and I also have to protect my family.... it's responsibility and respect.
I'm a student pilot who had set a target of flying 15000+ hours in the entire career. But after seeing your record, my target increased😅. Congratulations sir 💙
You're also responsible for non involved people living on ground. Don't forget us. I live nearby Delhi Airport with paranoia that one of these jackass gonna drop a plane into my house.
@@Secularism.Ka.Shareholder good luck I wish you well in your career. I'm just beginning my training for fun at the moment and see where it takes me in the end. For the other pilot to a mass 27000hrs he must be a really good pilot cause alot don't last that long. The old saying is there is "bold pilots but no Old and Bold pilots" stay with the numbers and be safe. There's another one on TH-cam that wanted hot the ceiling for fun and now they're all dead.
@@DanielSan-ch7drAgree. A alternative, longer version of the saying is “There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.” Similarly, I like the “aviate, navigate and communicate - in that order.” when it begins with “First, wind your watch, _then_ ” … “aviate, navigate and communicate - in that order.” In other words, take a brief moment to take a deep breath and prepare to _think_ about the challenges of the situation - not react wildly, as one is as likely to do the wrong thing as the right thing in the induced panic. Sadly, we’ve certainly seen startle actions in a number of previous disasters - probably many. (Naturally, while the ‘watch’ part has great utility in and out of the cockpit, it obviously does not apply to moments of immediate danger; if you’re about to hit a mountain, your watch can wait.)
The biggest shame is this guy posting that image publicly... My flight instructor used to say "there are old pilots and daring pilots, but no old daring pilots". I always remembered that sentence when I had to decide whether to be daring or careful in an aircraft...
Admire Capt. Magnar for his honesty and integrity in calling out one of his own- a lesson lost upon many qualified and experienced 'experts' who not only take risks with the public weal, but also cover up for their colleagues- in aviation, military, medical, legal and other professions. Salute!
I stress this fact to pilots that regulations today were unfortunately written in blood. You are absolutely correct, as airmen we do not need to know the reason for certification, but we must abide by their limitations. Our understanding of it is not required but our compliance is. I hope that this particular captain sees this and changes his mindset. Brilliant post and I hope it reaches those who who beleive they are test pilots.
I am a 61 year old airline pilot. I currently fly the Boeing B747-400, and even when empty, we rearly ever go up to the aircraft maximum certificated ceiling of 45,100 or climb above or. All I can say about these crewmembers is wow, how irresponsible. Yes, it reminds me of those two Pinnacle Airlines crew who perished trying to land in an off airport environment. Also, this story reminds me of the West Caribbean Airways, flight 708, whose crew decided to fly so high that it couldn't, stalled, and everyone died as a result of the crash. Lastly, this ATR adventures into the unknown also reminded me of that sad accident Avro RJ85 belonging to LaMia Airlines flight 2933, where her crew decided not only to fly above the certified ceiling, but did not wanted to do a mandatory fuel stop. The result was a crash that ended the lives of almost everyone onboard. This particular accident was a chattered aircraft that was carrying the Chapacoense football club that was traveling from Bolivia to Colombia for the final football championship match.. Shame on these pilots. Good video, as always.
Well said Sir. Knowingly and deliberately breaking operating limitations is an act which directly jeopardises the safety of the pax and the aircraft and should be investigated.
This cowboy pilot is a bad apple who spoils the reputation of all safe aviators out there. It’s such a shame that we are not able to weed these people out during our selection process. Good video to expose these sort of people
There was a case of a ferry crew in Canada taking a CRJ as high as it would go. Both engines flamed out, the aircraft crashed and neither pilot survived
Great you brought up the pinnacle airlines incident. Every pilot should read through it. Shocking. I don’t fly ATR but still find the videos very informative. Thank you.
There is something about social media that drives certain personalities to create “impossible” videos and postings. Witness the two clowns in Arizona who defied the FAA by trying a plane swap in flight. Unfortunately, their corporate sponsor was complicit, so I’m encouraging everyone to avoid that sponsors products. That crap is poisonous anyway.
as mad as it was, that stunt was 'almost' registered & legal... if I remember correctly, it was the folks on the ground rather than the FAA that tried to put a kibosh on the plans... sort of similar to a recent airshow collision, they had the paperwork all but complete, in fact they had already discussed the maneuver and were greenlit by the relevant air-boss... it was only the owners of the land bellow that appealed to revoke that permission and close the airspace for stunt-flying.
Hi Magnar, I just found your video. When I first saw the picture long time ago, I was like, “That’s normal…” Then I learnt it was an ATR 42, then I asked, “What’s the ceiling for this aircraft?” Finally, I stumbled upon your video. I learnt a lot… Thanks!
Very good points made in this video. Remember: In 2004 Pinnacle Airlines flight 3701 crashed killing both pilots after the two pilots repositioning the Bombardier CRJ200 decided to see how high the plane could go. After the plane reached 41,000 feet both engines failed. Although the pilots tried to restart the engines, they were unable and the plane crashed near Jefferson City Memorial Airport (JEF) in Missouri. Federal investigators determined the crash was caused by the pilots' unprofessional behavior and disregard for training and procedures.
Great video! Ya I have to say the most shocking part is it was a captain, possibly trainer or checker. Unfortunately, we've seen cowboys from time to time, from places to places. Safe flying!
Great video, as always. The fairly well-known Northwest repositioning crash is a clear example of the dangers that accompany flying at the _certified_ ceiling (FL420, iirc), much less above it.
I knew a couple cowboys that took a Challenger 605 above it's service ceiling, in an attempt to improve fuel consumption on a long over water flight. They stalled the wing and rolled it with pax on board. They then lied to the owner by telling him the experienced wake turbulence from another aircraft. These guys still operate for this owner and are always doing stupid things. They are a statistic waiting to happen.
Wow! You nailed it! Of course is the ATR safe to fly over 25.000 feet. That's why we have safety margins. But safety margins are there to keep you safe from bad things. Keep safe and below the safety margins - Magnar could not put it better: "We don't need cowboys"
Sometimes people call it out for the good of others. I am not an aviator but I would trust this man and hope that the people involved learn from this well structured and researched lesson.
As usual, you are amazing with all the knowledge and wisdom you share to everyone. Thank you, Captain. This was shared to us by our ATR chief pilot to see.
Being upset and so calm at the same time - and also guessing by your name - you must be from a Scandinavian country. But I wholeheartedly agree. The closest I got to working in the aviation world was ground work at an airport😅, so I didn't know what was wrong with the photo when you initially showed it. I am not familiar with the ATR, I have never been inside one. But - unless it is a properly prepared test flight that has all the necessary authorizations and trained test pilots - I expect the fine folks in the front to fly the aircraft within the certification envelope. If a pilot doesn't respect that, they have no business in being in that position, much less so if they are an instructor. After all, even if there is only the cockpit crew on board and both agree to what they are doing - they still risk the lives of people - the people on whose heads they will crash down when things go wrong. There should be no tolerance for that. Fortunately those people seem to be a tiny minority among pilots.
@@guntherachterhof4876 after watching more of his videos since I posted that comment back in the day, I learned that. But thanks for mentioning it anyway. 😁
Dear Magnar, I like how you approach the obvious moron with facts and numbers. It is the engineering way. Yet you do it in polite and professional manner. I will soon fly as your passenger in Maledives.
Thank you for educating the public on this Matter. For the pilots whom flew the aircraft above maximum height. Please do so only when you are the only soul onboard that aircraft.
Hello Magnar, I have a question: What happened to the pilot? What consequences are there for posting evidence (photo) of breaking rules on social networks? Shouldn't he have his license suspended? Or maybe even public endangerment charge? Or at least fined? I only know about the SmartWings pilot who flew across half of Europe with only one engine, and he ceased to be the Chief Pilot, but he continued flying. I've just discovered your channel and subscribed, thank you for your content!
I'm not sure whether any action has been taken against to this pilot. The picture is from a ferry flight, and such jobs are often done by freelance pilots. When looking at his profile at FB, it appears that he has been working with several companies around the word.
@@FlywithMagnar Thanks for your reply! I'm just confused by the regulations; if pilots are not punished for not sticking to them, what are they for? I thought aviation was way stricter than car transportation.
@@frufruJ my guess: long haul flight Event occurred outside the range of any tracking radar FDR flight data got overwritten in subsequent flights because no one had reason to check it. Now, _had_ the airplane popped a gasket/seal at 300, lots of folks would have checked that FDR and the CVR, and we'd be learning the particulars from BlancoLirio or MentourPilot instead of Magnar.
In my experience it’s not possible to break any rule. Every time I did so intentionally or unintentionally I always found out, someone fixed them, miraculously, and more or less instantly.
Just when I think humanity still has a faint glimmer of hope, I see a bunch of windowlickers correcting this man on his pronunciation of "oxygen". Seriously? Interesting video. The optimist in me, hopes that the picture in question was faked or somehow misrepresented for a shock value that didn't actually occur as presented. The realist in me knows that every profession (including pilots) contains people who truly should not be in that profession because they lack the self-discipline required for the job. One can only hope that when such a pilot pushes too hard, the hole they drill in the ground only contains him and his co-conspirator.
I'm not a pilot and I apologise if this has been touched on before, but don't air traffic control have a role to play in allocating appropriate flight levels?
The role of Air Traffic Control (ATC) is to faciliate a safe and efficient air traffic. As long as there's no risk for collision, they will allocate the alititude you are asking for. ATC don't know the performance capabilities of the aircraft or the limitations. That is the responsibility of the commander.
Hi Magnar, any videos on uncommanded auto feather on take off and the best way to deal with it? I know OEB says to treat as an an engine failure, but just wanted to get experienced thoughts. Thanks.
2 points. One, why protect his identity when he himself is posting in social media? That's public domain. And two, since he openly posted and then defended his actions in social media, I am really, really curious to know if/how his employer responded. Because he should be fired.
Looks like the same reckless and stupid attitude than numerous guys not here to talk about it anymore. Like the 2 guys who crashed their CRJ because they wanted to see just how high altitude they could go up ona ferry flight way above certified until their 2 jet engines quited (core engine collapsed) and they somehow lost control of the plane and crashed. Garbage in garbage out
You mentioned Pinnacle Airlines 3701, if memory serves me correctly those pilots had switched seats on that repositioning flight [no passengers] in addition to numerous other failures. The four stripes reflected in the FO instrument panel, as you identified it, may not necessarily mean that the pilot sitting in the seat was an "instructor" pilot. The same lack of judgement that takes a aircraft above its ceiling limitation can also talk, or intimidate, a first officer into swapping seats. Additionally, at FL300 I am seeing a radar return at 12 O'clock, if that is weather and not ground clutter, then they may be dealing with turbulence as well. Being above maximum ceiling in turbulence is a recipe for disaster. They seem to have a large enough margin between the present IAS and the high speed limit, what I am unable to determine is how much margin they have above low speed buffet/onset of stall. If they are in turbulence then that will erode their margins further, add aileron deflection to counter wing drop and maybe some back elevator to maintain altitude and your are in or close to the stick shaker pretty quickly. In aviation what I don't know, don't understand or cannot do CAN in fact hurt me. "No brains, no headaches", sounds funny, but flying around without engaging your brain (intentional non-compliance of limitations and aviation regulations) can and will lead to headaches. This "Captain", or Instructor Pilot can talk a good game and delude themselves justifying taking that turboprop to FL300 but they do not have a legal leg to stand on (other than declaring an EMERGENCY). Neither do they have the aeronautical engineering test-pilot background either so they lack the aeronautical structural certification knowledge to base their decision to ignore the altitude limitation on. The best thing that could happen is to have this pilots peers to pull them aside and counsel some sense into that individual, followed up with accountability. Perhaps they will view Magnar's video and have a change in attitude. if not, then somebody had better turn them into the authorities (airline & regulatory) and have those entities deal with this flawed behavior up to and including stripping this pilot of their licenses if necessary. It is one thing to do something unwise, we have all done unwise things intentionally or unintentionally. But it is another level of poor judgement to post your bad operational decisions online. Reading through these comments it occurred to me that these pilots may be repositioning this aircraft to some remote place on the planet. Having worked/flown and lived in Africa I acknowledge that there are widely differing views on how to operate aircraft. The rate of accidents in those places speak for themselves.
Just because you *can* do something doesn’t mean you should. An aircraft’s operating envelope isn’t dictated by the absolute limit at which the aircraft can perform prior to failure. It’s the limited range of parameters within which operations will result in safe and acceptable equipment performance. It takes into account variables, such as weight, air density, and the overall performance of individual aircraft systems. By operating outside the certified mins and maxes of your aircraft you are willfully decreasing your margins for error. It’s unsafe, unnecessary, unprofessional, and irresponsible-especially if you’re someone that the aviation community looks to as an authority.
Hi Franklin. It depends on which country you want to work as an airline pilot. In some countries, the airline companies require a degree to hire you. In other countries, it's not a requirement. In the US, for example, a degree is mandatory. But because of pilot shortage, this requirement might be skipped in the future.
@@FlywithMagnar plus I think the FAA lowered the min flight required hours down by 500 hours I think I heard. So it’s actually prime time to get your commercial and get onboard with an airline at least here in the US. Happy flying
Superb video and your anger is felt by us all. Two questions for you Magnar, 1. Why is the ALT selector not limited to 250? and 2. What do you do if cruising at FL250 and you get a RA to climb?
Thank you for your comment. Question 1): The avionics are not made specifically for ATR, but are used in other aircraft as well. Question 2): The TCAS knows the performance capabilities of the aircraft. TCAS in opposing aircraft communicate this with each other. If the other aircraft has better performance, it will be told to climb.
@@FlywithMagnar Many thanks for your reply. The TCAS situation was more of an observation that a pilot may need to operate outside of limitations and regulations but of course TCAS only works when everyone follows the rules and as you point out the cowboy in this case would probably do the opposite! In the short time I have been following your channel, I have found the content to be excellent and I certainly learned a thing or too about the ATR and flying in general. Please keep it up, aviation needs people like you.
FCOM: "Altimeter readout range is from NEG 980 ft to above 25 000 ft." FCOM doesn't specify how much above FL250. However, altitude select is restricted to FL250. That's a nice feature.
@@FlywithMagnar wow. He sure has alot of confidence in his "interpretation" of the regs! Reminds me of the ferry flight in the US where the pilots got their aircraft (forget what model) up to FL400 and then flamed out both engines due to intake stall and subsequently crashed.
The Pinnacle crash was going through my mind the whole time. Everybody is comfortable with their actions, especially when they are _ignorant_ of what they are getting themselves into. Also: Test pilots are _not_ cowboys. In my experience (not a TP,) TPs have at least the same level of technical understanding as the designers. Testing is iterative-test one thing at a time. Don't fly the a/c beyond the bounds of what's been tested, unless you're moving into a new test item.
@@stonebear exactly. That's one line of testing where methodicalness (?) is a definite asset. SW test, on the other hand, benefits from a balance of method _and_ madness. p.s. as for _your_ nickname: $ echo
There is something else to consider. When we fly we are not only trusted with valuable equipment, we are also trusted with the name and reputation of the company we represent. Much can be lost by the irresponsible action of one person.
How much would the barometric pressure need to be adjusted from _actual_ pressure in order to move the _displayed_ altitude from 25000 to 30000 (i.e., roughly how many hPa?) Mind you, I’m not saying that’s what the poster did - especially when they tried to justify their actions, but I’m certainly curious. This is social media, with all the positive and negative aspects that come with the territory, after all. Edit: for context, in my relatively small amount of hours in the cockpit, I dont recall ever taking those unpressurized puddle jumpers above ~5000. So, I don’t have a good feel for the (non-linear) pressure gradient 5 or 6 times higher. Also, whether the pilot/poster took the plane up to 30000 by using the yoke or the gauge work, doing so and posting the results, it was absolutely idiotic, no matter how you slice it!
The altimeter's reference pressure is set to 1013 hPa (29.92 inHg). That means the pressure altitude was 30,000 feet. Therefore, the aircraft did fly at that altitude. If you are flying at 25,000 feet and turn the barometric reference knob until the altimeter shows 30,000 feet, it must be set to 938 hPa. Calculation: Atmospheric pressure at 25,000 feet is 376 hPa. Atmospheric pressure at 30,000 feet is 301 hPa. Difference: 75 hPa. 1013 hPa - 75 hPa = 938 hPa. However, altimeters cannot be set to a reference pressure below 950 hPa.
Every commercial flight I have measured maintains cabin altitude at 8000 feet above sea level pressure. Given that regulations set this pressure as a limit, shouldn’t consideration be given by airlines to maintaining cabin pressure at a somewhat lower level? Of course, that would cause a higher fuel burn and greater differential pressure stress on the aircraft leading to fewer use cycles. Everything is calculated to maximise revenue by cutting costs. If the airlines run operating limits right at the boundaries of the acceptable, who can blame pilots who push the boundaries similarly? Fly a bit higher, travel a bit faster, get to the destination a bit quicker and save the company money!
Not really, you can move the needle by changing the barometer setting but this is already set at the correct value (1013 for FL), then the only other way would be to precisely control the air pressure sensors driving the altimeter which is "technically possible" with unlimited resources but just not practically possible here.
Brilliant video Magnar - a cool, calm and expert observation on what an idiot thinks is safe flying - I would enjoy flying with you anytime - not so much the idiot pilot you have just reviewed......
@@FlywithMagnar shame you can't even see fix on the ND. At least you have UTC, groundspeed and altitude, and the actual type. I'm sure once the country is figured the authorities can be notified. Maybe you can work out country from other pictures of NDs etc. You can see 4 striped in the reflection of the picture Even if he didn't endanger any pax I'm sure the company will still be angry.
One thing you didn’t really cover in the video is RVSM. What this pilot did was take a non-RVSM approved aircraft into RVSM airspace, and that is a serious violation because it increases the mid-air collision risk for everybody nearby. The pilot may have thought he was at FL300, but the reality is the altimetry system error (ASE) could mean the aircraft was significantly above or below that altitude, perhaps to the extent of a level bust. But nobody would know, because the transponder would also read that it was at FL300. The aircraft was also at an IAS/Mach combination outside the normal operating envelope, which could invalidate the static pressure error corrections done by the air data computers. If the error is big enough, it could degrade the ability of TCAS to do its job properly. RVSM ASE limits are very demanding; much more so than for non-RVSM aircraft, precisely because altimeter errors get larger with increasing altitude and hence the limits for RVSM are much more demanding. See CS-ACNS for details if interested. There are very good reasons that RVSM required specific aircraft certification and operational approvals under Ops Part SPA. It seems this pilot has no understanding of that.
That's a good point. However, there are areas where RVSM is not implemented, like the South Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. Since we don't know the route of the aircraft, we don't know whether this rule was broken.
Hi Magnar, 100 % agree with you. Myself with thousands of hours conducting airline ops, its pretty simple - Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men. The next issue that comes to hand is what would the insurance company have to say?. With regard to "albula642" comment. A simulator is for professional use and not fun. The mear fact of going outside the limitations even in a simulator is negative learning
Great analysis Magnar. But could it be possible that this is inside a simulator just having some fun with it and then trolling in the answers? Not saying that it is good but wouldn't ATC interfere or at least have it on record when they fly above FL 250?
Hi. No, there's no sunlight in a simulator. It's not the job of ATC to know the operational limitations of each aircraft type. That's the responsibility of the pilot.
Cap you say ATC isn’t in control of an aircrafts ceiling level but wouldn’t they notice your flying at 300 without their permission? Or could this have been requested by the FO to fly at 300? Just curious is all.
Nice example where social media supplements FDM 😁. Childish, reckless, irresponsible behaviours driven by adrenaline thirst have no place in our industry. Thanks for pointing that out.
Great video - you may have missed an additional point about being in RVSM airspace with an airplane that's... not RVSM certified. So there's an airspace violation on top of all the others.
Pressure altitude and density altitude are not the same: Flight level 250 and 25 000 ft are therefore not the same. The first is based on a hypothetized standardized mean, unrelated to actual density altitude. The second is based on actual meteorological conditions. It is a physical property of air masses. The flight performance comparision should be based on density altitude alone, not on pressure altitude. It is possible that the actual density altitude was thousands of feet lower than the suggested 30 000 ft especially in winter and very cold air temperature (like in polar regions) combined with especially strong meteorologic high-pressure system (anticyclone). Both decrease density altitude. In this setting, an aircraft with a ceiling of 25 000 ft cruising at 25 000 ft might show a difference of several thousand feet if the altitude is shown as flight level (which is based on pressure altitude, not density altitude). Like showing FL 300 when in reality it is cruising in air the density of which corresponds to around 25 000 ft. By the way, mountains do not care about the flight level your instruments are showing you. They only respect the true altitude your aircraft is cruising at.
No. There are two safety features: 1) The pressurization controller sets maximum differential pressure 6.0 PSI. 2) A safety valve will open if the differential pressure exceeds 6.35 PSI.
turned on cc so that i could read subtitles ...turn it on and at 0:31 his name is displayed as Magna noodle and that he's an 'alien captain' thanx for the laughs youtube and tech !
And how about safety margin in the safety limitations? We have seen that it is possible to climb up to 30000ft without problems. Seems that the airplane is capable for that.
Safety margins are everywhere. They often can accomodate for unforseable factors, human one included. However, there is a trick: they only work when nominal limitations are abided, otherwise they are not margins anymore and dont provide that cushion))
Difficult to accept that a captain would exceed the aircraft limitation but it does explain a few things about the ATR and why they are not flying them in the US. It appears they decided to certify the aircraft to a lower set of standards. That should be reason enough to not exceed that lower certification standard.
ATR aircraft are certified to the same standard as any other transport category aircraft. There are several ATR operators in the US: Silver Airways, Mountain Air Cargo (FedEx), Empire Airlines, the US Department of Justice, Gulf & Caribbean Cargo, and Blue Ridge Aero Services. Source: www.atr-aircraft.com/presspost/atr-600-aircraft-certified-by-the-faa/ (earlier models have also been certified by the FAA). Source: simpleflying.com/us-operators-most-atr-turboprops/
None of those are mainline carriers and the dept of justice operates one airframe.If the ATR was certified to a higher standard then operation at FL300 would not have been a problem. You confirmed that in your video by highlighting a few sections the airframe is deficient. The airframes not so stellar safety record speaks for itself. You cannot blame every accident on pilot error. The FAA grounded them for a reason.
Like most turboprops, ATR aircraft are certified to maximum FL250. This has nothing to do with an inferior design. Fully loaded, the ATR will typically cruise below FL200. When you want to certify an aircraft to fly higher than FL250, you have to comply with a set of additional requirements. This makes the aircraft more complex and heavier. But that is not necessary with an aircraft optimzed for short regional routes. The FAA grounded ATR 42 and 72 aircraft shortly after the accident near Roselawn in 1994. The grounding was a precaution and happened before the accident had been fully investigated. This is nothing new. Other aircraft types have also been gounded after accidents (the Boeing 737 Max is just one example). At the time of the acciddent, the ATR 72 was certified in accordance with the current FAA regulations, but it was operated outside the certification parameters. In the accident report, NTSB critizised FAA, the French aviation authroity, and the manufactruer on several points. Those issues have been rectified long time ago. However, the NTSB is still critical to regional turboprops in general because the ailerons are not actuated by hydraulic power, which can prevent aileron roll-over, and because the de-icing boots have limitations.
@@anthonydennis2996 Alaska Airlines or actually the Horizon airlines the subsidiary of alaska Air is flying these to this day. They are slowly phasing them out for the crj’s but they still do fly the airframe. Wish I was able to post a pic of one I took a couple of months ago. I love the aircraft personally but they are aging pretty quick.
Shameful….and then to put it on a public platform for everyone including professional pilots and aviation regulators to see and then to make matters worse put up a shoddy justification….. not acceptable.
I’m trying to figure out how you’d get the airplane light enough to get the airplane to FL300? And the airspeed indicator is showing a Vmo of 202 knots. Does that check with what the charts show at FL300?
This was an ATR 42, which has better performance than ATR 72. This was a ferry flight, and therefore, it was very light towards the end of the flight when most of the fuel had been used. The "barber pole" pointer has two functions: At low and medium altitudes, it shows Vmo, which is 250 kt. At high altitudes, it shows Mmo, which is Mach 0.55.
You are correct. In ISA conditions, the temperature at 30,000 ft is -44.4 degrees Celsius. This means the speed of sound is 589 kt, and Mach 0.55 is 324 kt. This is true airspeed. Calibrated airspeed is 203 kt, which is very close to MMO, which is indicated with the "barber pole" in the image.
@@FlywithMagnar Love your videos. But for this answer, I’d disagree. Latest sim, MSFS2020, will easily have the sunlight and shadows and reflections. But it will not have the reflection of a pilot with four stripes on his shoulders. So, answer is still the same…. Not a simulator image. And one more point: there is no ATR in that sim yet but two vendors are planning to offer them within a year or so. Have been watching your videos to prepare for when these are available.
@@EIGYRO Hahaha for sure Chuck Yeager wii love it your French Atr (auto total reset) drama philosophy It's like comparing quasi modo rules and morals to Aviation of some lost in space TRI Go to the Airshow my friend and have fun please it will help your brain to relax.
"Dear Captain, how can you teach pilots to respect the rules when you break them yourself?". The words of a leader.
@Tech No, he's genuinely worried about the safety of people. That incident could have harmed or killed people unnecessarily. I find those words of Mr. Nordal really inspiring, I must say, and I think you should do the same. This can apply to other contexts besides civil aviation.
@Tech we don’t need cow-boys in this business .
I retired as a Pilot with 27600 hours, and about 7000 hours ATR (the first ones in 1989) and regs, are paramount. My passengers pay money to be safe above all, and I also have to protect my family.... it's responsibility and respect.
I totally agree!
I'm a student pilot who had set a target of flying 15000+ hours in the entire career. But after seeing your record, my target increased😅. Congratulations sir 💙
You're also responsible for non involved people living on ground.
Don't forget us. I live nearby Delhi Airport with paranoia that one of these jackass gonna drop a plane into my house.
@@Secularism.Ka.Shareholder good luck I wish you well in your career. I'm just beginning my training for fun at the moment and see where it takes me in the end. For the other pilot to a mass 27000hrs he must be a really good pilot cause alot don't last that long. The old saying is there is "bold pilots but no Old and Bold pilots" stay with the numbers and be safe.
There's another one on TH-cam that wanted hot the ceiling for fun and now they're all dead.
@@DanielSan-ch7drAgree. A alternative, longer version of the saying is “There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.”
Similarly, I like the “aviate, navigate and communicate - in that order.” when it begins with “First, wind your watch, _then_ ” … “aviate, navigate and communicate - in that order.” In other words, take a brief moment to take a deep breath and prepare to _think_ about the challenges of the situation - not react wildly, as one is as likely to do the wrong thing as the right thing in the induced panic. Sadly, we’ve certainly seen startle actions in a number of previous disasters - probably many.
(Naturally, while the ‘watch’ part has great utility in and out of the cockpit, it obviously does not apply to moments of immediate danger; if you’re about to hit a mountain, your watch can wait.)
The biggest shame is this guy posting that image publicly...
My flight instructor used to say "there are old pilots and daring pilots, but no old daring pilots".
I always remembered that sentence when I had to decide whether to be daring or careful in an aircraft...
Admire Capt. Magnar for his honesty and integrity in calling out one of his own- a lesson lost upon many qualified and experienced 'experts' who not only take risks with the public weal, but also cover up for their colleagues- in aviation, military, medical, legal and other professions. Salute!
I stress this fact to pilots that regulations today were unfortunately written in blood. You are absolutely correct, as airmen we do not need to know the reason for certification, but we must abide by their limitations. Our understanding of it is not required but our compliance is. I hope that this particular captain sees this and changes his mindset. Brilliant post and I hope it reaches those who who beleive they are test pilots.
I am a 61 year old airline pilot. I currently fly the Boeing B747-400, and even when empty, we rearly ever go up to the aircraft maximum certificated ceiling of 45,100 or climb above or.
All I can say about these crewmembers is wow, how irresponsible.
Yes, it reminds me of those two Pinnacle Airlines crew who perished trying to land in an off airport environment. Also, this story reminds me of the West Caribbean Airways, flight 708, whose crew decided to fly so high that it couldn't, stalled, and everyone died as a result of the crash. Lastly, this ATR adventures into the unknown also reminded me of that sad accident Avro RJ85 belonging to LaMia Airlines flight 2933, where her crew decided not only to fly above the certified ceiling, but did not wanted to do a mandatory fuel stop. The result was a crash that ended the lives of almost everyone onboard. This particular accident was a chattered aircraft that was carrying the Chapacoense football club that was traveling from Bolivia to Colombia for the final football championship match..
Shame on these pilots.
Good video, as always.
The flight manager once said to us new captains … remember you are not paid as TEST PILOTS!! Very good advice 😊
Well said Sir. Knowingly and deliberately breaking operating limitations is an act which directly jeopardises the safety of the pax and the aircraft and should be investigated.
This cowboy pilot is a bad apple who spoils the reputation of all safe aviators out there. It’s such a shame that we are not able to weed these people out during our selection process. Good video to expose these sort of people
There was a case of a ferry crew in Canada taking a CRJ as high as it would go. Both engines flamed out, the aircraft crashed and neither pilot survived
Not canada, it was in the great U S of A.
Great you brought up the pinnacle airlines incident. Every pilot should read through it. Shocking. I don’t fly ATR but still find the videos very informative. Thank you.
There is something about social media that drives certain personalities to create “impossible” videos and postings. Witness the two clowns in Arizona who defied the FAA by trying a plane swap in flight. Unfortunately, their corporate sponsor was complicit, so I’m encouraging everyone to avoid that sponsors products. That crap is poisonous anyway.
Indeed. It was dangerous stupidity.
And the product of the sponsor is a combination of water, chemistry and much, much sugar.
as mad as it was, that stunt was 'almost' registered & legal...
if I remember correctly, it was the folks on the ground rather than the FAA that tried to put a kibosh on the plans... sort of similar to a recent airshow collision, they had the paperwork all but complete, in fact they had already discussed the maneuver and were greenlit by the relevant air-boss... it was only the owners of the land bellow that appealed to revoke that permission and close the airspace for stunt-flying.
Hi Magnar, I just found your video. When I first saw the picture long time ago, I was like, “That’s normal…”
Then I learnt it was an ATR 42, then I asked, “What’s the ceiling for this aircraft?”
Finally, I stumbled upon your video. I learnt a lot… Thanks!
Very good points made in this video. Remember: In 2004 Pinnacle Airlines flight 3701 crashed killing both pilots after the two pilots repositioning the Bombardier CRJ200 decided to see how high the plane could go. After the plane reached 41,000 feet both engines failed. Although the pilots tried to restart the engines, they were unable and the plane crashed near Jefferson City Memorial Airport (JEF) in Missouri. Federal investigators determined the crash was caused by the pilots' unprofessional behavior and disregard for training and procedures.
Excellent address to erring pilots, without sounding arrogant or condescending. Well done sir!!
Your comments are spot on, there shouldn’t be a place for cowboys in our industry.
Great video! Ya I have to say the most shocking part is it was a captain, possibly trainer or checker.
Unfortunately, we've seen cowboys from time to time, from places to places. Safe flying!
Great video, as always. The fairly well-known Northwest repositioning crash is a clear example of the dangers that accompany flying at the _certified_ ceiling (FL420, iirc), much less above it.
You nailed it. Well said and supported by documentation. 👍
Pinnacle flight 3701 comes to mind.
I knew a couple cowboys that took a Challenger 605 above it's service ceiling, in an attempt to improve fuel consumption on a long over water flight. They stalled the wing and rolled it with pax on board. They then lied to the owner by telling him the experienced wake turbulence from another aircraft. These guys still operate for this owner and are always doing stupid things. They are a statistic waiting to happen.
Wow! You nailed it! Of course is the ATR safe to fly over 25.000 feet. That's why we have safety margins. But safety margins are there to keep you safe from bad things. Keep safe and below the safety margins - Magnar could not put it better: "We don't need cowboys"
Sometimes people call it out for the good of others. I am not an aviator but I would trust this man and hope that the people involved learn from this well structured and researched lesson.
Thanks to share and for your wise words, Captain, Sir! Congrats from Portugal 👍🇵🇹
As usual, you are amazing with all the knowledge and wisdom you share to everyone. Thank you, Captain.
This was shared to us by our ATR chief pilot to see.
Great talk dear Headmaster.
Greetings Capt, great work.
Me as an engineer "meeh its probably okay"
Little voice in the back of my head "that's why engineers like you will never make commercial pilot"🤣
Being upset and so calm at the same time - and also guessing by your name - you must be from a Scandinavian country.
But I wholeheartedly agree. The closest I got to working in the aviation world was ground work at an airport😅, so I didn't know what was wrong with the photo when you initially showed it. I am not familiar with the ATR, I have never been inside one. But - unless it is a properly prepared test flight that has all the necessary authorizations and trained test pilots - I expect the fine folks in the front to fly the aircraft within the certification envelope. If a pilot doesn't respect that, they have no business in being in that position, much less so if they are an instructor.
After all, even if there is only the cockpit crew on board and both agree to what they are doing - they still risk the lives of people - the people on whose heads they will crash down when things go wrong. There should be no tolerance for that. Fortunately those people seem to be a tiny minority among pilots.
He is Norwegian
@@guntherachterhof4876 after watching more of his videos since I posted that comment back in the day, I learned that. But thanks for mentioning it anyway. 😁
@@Colaholiker My pleasure. Yeah, I wouldn't have been able to be as calm like he is.
Dear Magnar,
I like how you approach the obvious moron with facts and numbers. It is the engineering way. Yet you do it in polite and professional manner. I will soon fly as your passenger in Maledives.
Thanks!
Double thanks! This is highly appreciated!
The old saying; “Aviation regulations are written in blood”...
Thank you for educating the public on this Matter.
For the pilots whom flew the aircraft above maximum height.
Please do so only when you are the only soul onboard that aircraft.
Hello Magnar, I have a question: What happened to the pilot? What consequences are there for posting evidence (photo) of breaking rules on social networks? Shouldn't he have his license suspended? Or maybe even public endangerment charge? Or at least fined?
I only know about the SmartWings pilot who flew across half of Europe with only one engine, and he ceased to be the Chief Pilot, but he continued flying.
I've just discovered your channel and subscribed, thank you for your content!
I'm not sure whether any action has been taken against to this pilot. The picture is from a ferry flight, and such jobs are often done by freelance pilots. When looking at his profile at FB, it appears that he has been working with several companies around the word.
@@FlywithMagnar Thanks for your reply! I'm just confused by the regulations; if pilots are not punished for not sticking to them, what are they for? I thought aviation was way stricter than car transportation.
@@frufruJ my guess:
long haul flight
Event occurred outside the range of any tracking radar
FDR flight data got overwritten in subsequent flights because no one had reason to check it.
Now, _had_ the airplane popped a gasket/seal at 300, lots of folks would have checked that FDR and the CVR, and we'd be learning the particulars from BlancoLirio or MentourPilot instead of Magnar.
@@FlywithMagnar I would definitely say the pilot was "around the 'word' "
These 'alleged' pilots mentioned should be GROUNDED IMMEDIATELY investigated, and if necessary CRIMINAL CHARGES pressed!
Well said Sir.
As long as international system of measurements is not adapted you will see accidents
In my experience it’s not possible to break any rule. Every time I did so intentionally or unintentionally I always found out, someone fixed them, miraculously, and more or less instantly.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Just when I think humanity still has a faint glimmer of hope, I see a bunch of windowlickers correcting this man on his pronunciation of "oxygen". Seriously?
Interesting video. The optimist in me, hopes that the picture in question was faked or somehow misrepresented for a shock value that didn't actually occur as presented. The realist in me knows that every profession (including pilots) contains people who truly should not be in that profession because they lack the self-discipline required for the job.
One can only hope that when such a pilot pushes too hard, the hole they drill in the ground only contains him and his co-conspirator.
I'm not a pilot and I apologise if this has been touched on before, but don't air traffic control have a role to play in allocating appropriate flight levels?
The role of Air Traffic Control (ATC) is to faciliate a safe and efficient air traffic. As long as there's no risk for collision, they will allocate the alititude you are asking for. ATC don't know the performance capabilities of the aircraft or the limitations. That is the responsibility of the commander.
Hello Capt! Do you fly to Cambodia also ??
Yes, I did. Siem Reap from Bangkok
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should"
Sorry if it was addressed already, but that footage couldn't be taken in a simulator?
There's no sun in the simulator
Hi Magnar, any videos on uncommanded auto feather on take off and the best way to deal with it? I know OEB says to treat as an an engine failure, but just wanted to get experienced thoughts. Thanks.
I haven't planned any video about it because OEB says it all: You treat it as an engine failure.
Could not have been put better! Let's hope this pilot absorbs some of this
2 points. One, why protect his identity when he himself is posting in social media? That's public domain.
And two, since he openly posted and then defended his actions in social media, I am really, really curious to know if/how his employer responded. Because he should be fired.
Thank you very much Magnar! Ha en god 17e Mai! This is an exceptional safety video!
Takk!
Was that pilot identified and reported? I hope so.
Did they caught that chap?
I'm sure it is not photographed in a simulator?
There's no sunlight in a simulator.
That was my initial reaction as well, thinking that no professional pilot could be that foolhardy to push an aircraft beyond its operational limits.
Looks like the same reckless and stupid attitude than numerous guys not here to talk about it anymore. Like the 2 guys who crashed their CRJ because they wanted to see just how high altitude they could go up ona ferry flight way above certified until their 2 jet engines quited (core engine collapsed) and they somehow lost control of the plane and crashed. Garbage in garbage out
You mentioned Pinnacle Airlines 3701, if memory serves me correctly those pilots had switched seats on that repositioning flight [no passengers] in addition to numerous other failures. The four stripes reflected in the FO instrument panel, as you identified it, may not necessarily mean that the pilot sitting in the seat was an "instructor" pilot. The same lack of judgement that takes a aircraft above its ceiling limitation can also talk, or intimidate, a first officer into swapping seats.
Additionally, at FL300 I am seeing a radar return at 12 O'clock, if that is weather and not ground clutter, then they may be dealing with turbulence as well. Being above maximum ceiling in turbulence is a recipe for disaster. They seem to have a large enough margin between the present IAS and the high speed limit, what I am unable to determine is how much margin they have above low speed buffet/onset of stall. If they are in turbulence then that will erode their margins further, add aileron deflection to counter wing drop and maybe some back elevator to maintain altitude and your are in or close to the stick shaker pretty quickly.
In aviation what I don't know, don't understand or cannot do CAN in fact hurt me. "No brains, no headaches", sounds funny, but flying around without engaging your brain (intentional non-compliance of limitations and aviation regulations) can and will lead to headaches. This "Captain", or Instructor Pilot can talk a good game and delude themselves justifying taking that turboprop to FL300 but they do not have a legal leg to stand on (other than declaring an EMERGENCY). Neither do they have the aeronautical engineering test-pilot background either so they lack the aeronautical structural certification knowledge to base their decision to ignore the altitude limitation on.
The best thing that could happen is to have this pilots peers to pull them aside and counsel some sense into that individual, followed up with accountability. Perhaps they will view Magnar's video and have a change in attitude. if not, then somebody had better turn them into the authorities (airline & regulatory) and have those entities deal with this flawed behavior up to and including stripping this pilot of their licenses if necessary. It is one thing to do something unwise, we have all done unwise things intentionally or unintentionally. But it is another level of poor judgement to post your bad operational decisions online.
Reading through these comments it occurred to me that these pilots may be repositioning this aircraft to some remote place on the planet. Having worked/flown and lived in Africa I acknowledge that there are widely differing views on how to operate aircraft. The rate of accidents in those places speak for themselves.
Just because you *can* do something doesn’t mean you should. An aircraft’s operating envelope isn’t dictated by the absolute limit at which the aircraft can perform prior to failure. It’s the limited range of parameters within which operations will result in safe and acceptable equipment performance. It takes into account variables, such as weight, air density, and the overall performance of individual aircraft systems. By operating outside the certified mins and maxes of your aircraft you are willfully decreasing your margins for error. It’s unsafe, unnecessary, unprofessional, and irresponsible-especially if you’re someone that the aviation community looks to as an authority.
I'm Franklin.
I want to become an airline pilot.
How important is it to get a degree in college before starting my flight training
Hi Franklin. It depends on which country you want to work as an airline pilot. In some countries, the airline companies require a degree to hire you. In other countries, it's not a requirement.
In the US, for example, a degree is mandatory. But because of pilot shortage, this requirement might be skipped in the future.
@@FlywithMagnar roger. Exactly what I wanted to hear thanks for the info sir
@@FlywithMagnar plus I think the FAA lowered the min flight required hours down by 500 hours I think I heard. So it’s actually prime time to get your commercial and get onboard with an airline at least here in the US. Happy flying
The people who take it out of its design limits may make it not airworthy, in them, that is so something bad may happen to the next people to use it.
I noticed immediately the 30.000ft I operated as cabin crew on ATR... thats not normal at all
Superb video and your anger is felt by us all. Two questions for you Magnar, 1. Why is the ALT selector not limited to 250? and 2. What do you do if cruising at FL250 and you get a RA to climb?
Thank you for your comment. Question 1): The avionics are not made specifically for ATR, but are used in other aircraft as well. Question 2): The TCAS knows the performance capabilities of the aircraft. TCAS in opposing aircraft communicate this with each other. If the other aircraft has better performance, it will be told to climb.
@@FlywithMagnar Many thanks for your reply. The TCAS situation was more of an observation that a pilot may need to operate outside of limitations and regulations but of course TCAS only works when everyone follows the rules and as you point out the cowboy in this case would probably do the opposite! In the short time I have been following your channel, I have found the content to be excellent and I certainly learned a thing or too about the ATR and flying in general. Please keep it up, aviation needs people like you.
On ATR72-600 the altitude tape is limited to 25.000 ft
FCOM: "Altimeter readout range is from NEG 980 ft to above 25 000 ft." FCOM doesn't specify how much above FL250. However, altitude select is restricted to FL250. That's a nice feature.
Just curious Magnar, did the poster ultimately delete his post after all the comments?
No, he didn't.
@@FlywithMagnar wow. He sure has alot of confidence in his "interpretation" of the regs! Reminds me of the ferry flight in the US where the pilots got their aircraft (forget what model) up to FL400 and then flamed out both engines due to intake stall and subsequently crashed.
@@paulloveless9180 Pinnacle Airlines flight 3701, there are several videos on YT about it.
@@lukfi89 oh, that's the one Magnar mentions in his video! Whoops. Non-pilot here.
@@paulloveless9180 Yes, indeed.
The Pinnacle crash was going through my mind the whole time.
Everybody is comfortable with their actions, especially when they are _ignorant_ of what they are getting themselves into.
Also: Test pilots are _not_ cowboys. In my experience (not a TP,) TPs have at least the same level of technical understanding as the designers. Testing is iterative-test one thing at a time. Don't fly the a/c beyond the bounds of what's been tested, unless you're moving into a new test item.
If you want to see a good test pilot, check out Elliot Seguin hereabouts. Probably one of the more _methodical_ humans on the planet.
oh, and I see what you did there with your nickname. Ya gotta know the territory...
@@stonebear exactly. That's one line of testing where methodicalness (?) is a definite asset. SW test, on the other hand, benefits from a balance of method _and_ madness.
p.s. as for _your_ nickname:
$ echo
There is something else to consider. When we fly we are not only trusted with valuable equipment, we are also trusted with the name and reputation of the company we represent. Much can be lost by the irresponsible action of one person.
Verry well said, nothing to add.
How much would the barometric pressure need to be adjusted from _actual_ pressure in order to move the _displayed_ altitude from 25000 to 30000 (i.e., roughly how many hPa?)
Mind you, I’m not saying that’s what the poster did - especially when they tried to justify their actions, but I’m certainly curious. This is social media, with all the positive and negative aspects that come with the territory, after all.
Edit: for context, in my relatively small amount of hours in the cockpit, I dont recall ever taking those unpressurized puddle jumpers above ~5000. So, I don’t have a good feel for the (non-linear) pressure gradient 5 or 6 times higher.
Also, whether the pilot/poster took the plane up to 30000 by using the yoke or the gauge work, doing so and posting the results, it was absolutely idiotic, no matter how you slice it!
The altimeter's reference pressure is set to 1013 hPa (29.92 inHg). That means the pressure altitude was 30,000 feet. Therefore, the aircraft did fly at that altitude.
If you are flying at 25,000 feet and turn the barometric reference knob until the altimeter shows 30,000 feet, it must be set to 938 hPa. Calculation: Atmospheric pressure at 25,000 feet is 376 hPa. Atmospheric pressure at 30,000 feet is 301 hPa. Difference: 75 hPa. 1013 hPa - 75 hPa = 938 hPa. However, altimeters cannot be set to a reference pressure below 950 hPa.
Excellent presentation. No room for cowboy flying!
Every commercial flight I have measured maintains cabin altitude at 8000 feet above sea level pressure. Given that regulations set this pressure as a limit, shouldn’t consideration be given by airlines to maintaining cabin pressure at a somewhat lower level? Of course, that would cause a higher fuel burn and greater differential pressure stress on the aircraft leading to fewer use cycles. Everything is calculated to maximise revenue by cutting costs. If the airlines run operating limits right at the boundaries of the acceptable, who can blame pilots who push the boundaries similarly? Fly a bit higher, travel a bit faster, get to the destination a bit quicker and save the company money!
These rules are for public transport. I used to fly the ERJ-145. FL370 was our max, but sometimes it was ferried at FL410- legally.
Is it possible to manually adjust the altimeter so that it displays a value that doesn't match reality? Let's say just for a photo op.
Not really, you can move the needle by changing the barometer setting but this is already set at the correct value (1013 for FL), then the only other way would be to precisely control the air pressure sensors driving the altimeter which is "technically possible" with unlimited resources but just not practically possible here.
Brilliant video Magnar - a cool, calm and expert observation on what an idiot thinks is safe flying - I would enjoy flying with you anytime - not so much the idiot pilot you have just reviewed......
2:12 you're a gent for not exposing him here but at the same time he shouldn't be flying imo so he needs to be exposed or reported
He was using a pseudonym, so I don't know his name. Neither do I know his nationality. So it will require some detective work to find him.
@@FlywithMagnar shame you can't even see fix on the ND. At least you have UTC, groundspeed and altitude, and the actual type. I'm sure once the country is figured the authorities can be notified. Maybe you can work out country from other pictures of NDs etc. You can see 4 striped in the reflection of the picture Even if he didn't endanger any pax I'm sure the company will still be angry.
This picture was first published seven years ago. That makes it harder.
@@FlywithMagnar he's probably in an accident report nowadays then
The FL300 high club
Thank you very much for pointing that out!
One thing you didn’t really cover in the video is RVSM. What this pilot did was take a non-RVSM approved aircraft into RVSM airspace, and that is a serious violation because it increases the mid-air collision risk for everybody nearby.
The pilot may have thought he was at FL300, but the reality is the altimetry system error (ASE) could mean the aircraft was significantly above or below that altitude, perhaps to the extent of a level bust. But nobody would know, because the transponder would also read that it was at FL300.
The aircraft was also at an IAS/Mach combination outside the normal operating envelope, which could invalidate the static pressure error corrections done by the air data computers. If the error is big enough, it could degrade the ability of TCAS to do its job properly.
RVSM ASE limits are very demanding; much more so than for non-RVSM aircraft, precisely because altimeter errors get larger with increasing altitude and hence the limits for RVSM are much more demanding. See CS-ACNS for details if interested.
There are very good reasons that RVSM required specific aircraft certification and operational approvals under Ops Part SPA. It seems this pilot has no understanding of that.
That's a good point. However, there are areas where RVSM is not implemented, like the South Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. Since we don't know the route of the aircraft, we don't know whether this rule was broken.
Go too high, and you'll drop and suddenly fly even higher.
Hi Magnar, 100 % agree with you. Myself with thousands of hours conducting airline ops, its pretty simple - Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men. The next issue that comes to hand is what would the insurance company have to say?. With regard to "albula642" comment. A simulator is for professional use and not fun. The mear fact of going outside the limitations even in a simulator is negative learning
Was the pic taken on a ferry flight or were there pax in the back?
Great analysis Magnar. But could it be possible that this is inside a simulator just having some fun with it and then trolling in the answers? Not saying that it is good but wouldn't ATC interfere or at least have it on record when they fly above FL 250?
Hi. No, there's no sunlight in a simulator. It's not the job of ATC to know the operational limitations of each aircraft type. That's the responsibility of the pilot.
@@FlywithMagnar Thanks for the answer. Also, Gratulerer med dagen!
Cap you say ATC isn’t in control of an aircrafts ceiling level but wouldn’t they notice your flying at 300 without their permission? Or could this have been requested by the FO to fly at 300? Just curious is all.
Hi Captain, I'm getting into vnav could you please make a video about it.
It's on my to-do list
Nice example where social media supplements FDM 😁. Childish, reckless, irresponsible behaviours driven by adrenaline thirst have no place in our industry. Thanks for pointing that out.
Well done this video. There is no place for this kind of behaviour.
Great video - you may have missed an additional point about being in RVSM airspace with an airplane that's... not RVSM certified. So there's an airspace violation on top of all the others.
Pressure altitude and density altitude are not the same: Flight level 250 and 25 000 ft are therefore not the same. The first is based on a hypothetized standardized mean, unrelated to actual density altitude. The second is based on actual meteorological conditions. It is a physical property of air masses. The flight performance comparision should be based on density altitude alone, not on pressure altitude. It is possible that the actual density altitude was thousands of feet lower than the suggested 30 000 ft especially in winter and very cold air temperature (like in polar regions) combined with especially strong meteorologic high-pressure system (anticyclone). Both decrease density altitude. In this setting, an aircraft with a ceiling of 25 000 ft cruising at 25 000 ft might show a difference of several thousand feet if the altitude is shown as flight level (which is based on pressure altitude, not density altitude). Like showing FL 300 when in reality it is cruising in air the density of which corresponds to around 25 000 ft. By the way, mountains do not care about the flight level your instruments are showing you. They only respect the true altitude your aircraft is cruising at.
11:30 nooo, not literally, figuratively!
Very dangerous
Could the differential pressure above the ceiling altitude cause structural issues for the ATR 42 operating at FL300?
No. There are two safety features: 1) The pressurization controller sets maximum differential pressure 6.0 PSI. 2) A safety valve will open if the differential pressure exceeds 6.35 PSI.
@@FlywithMagnar Ah yes, a safety relief valve. Thankyou
It would be interesting to know what will be the cabin altitude when you're at FL300 and the diff pressure is limited at 6psi.
Excellent review and critique.
I have difficulty understanding of why any pilot would intentionally fly his/her outside its certified limit.
Ref: Flight 3701
Could I salute you sir ❤
Absolutely great video and it is a shame some pilots do things that are not safe knowingly....
turned on cc so that i could read subtitles ...turn it on and at 0:31 his name is displayed as Magna noodle and that he's an 'alien captain'
thanx for the laughs youtube and tech !
I'm often called "Noodle" in Thailand! Another variant is "Mak Noi."
And how about safety margin in the safety limitations? We have seen that it is possible to climb up to 30000ft without problems. Seems that the airplane is capable for that.
Safety margins are everywhere. They often can accomodate for unforseable factors, human one included.
However, there is a trick: they only work when nominal limitations are abided, otherwise they are not margins anymore and dont provide that cushion))
FL 300 sticks out at me, especially for a turboprop. And apparently that's over the service ceiling for the ATR. So I'm going to go with that!
I made the comment about 30 seconds into the video and I guess I was proven right, so yay!
Difficult to accept that a captain would exceed the aircraft limitation but it does explain a few things about the ATR and why they are not flying them in the US. It appears they decided to certify the aircraft to a lower set of standards. That should be reason enough to not exceed that lower certification standard.
ATR aircraft are certified to the same standard as any other transport category aircraft. There are several ATR operators in the US: Silver Airways, Mountain Air Cargo (FedEx), Empire Airlines, the US Department of Justice, Gulf & Caribbean Cargo, and Blue Ridge Aero Services.
Source: www.atr-aircraft.com/presspost/atr-600-aircraft-certified-by-the-faa/ (earlier models have also been certified by the FAA).
Source: simpleflying.com/us-operators-most-atr-turboprops/
None of those are mainline carriers and the dept of justice operates one airframe.If the ATR was certified to a higher standard then operation at FL300 would not have been a problem. You confirmed that in your video by highlighting a few sections the airframe is deficient. The airframes not so stellar safety record speaks for itself. You cannot blame every accident on pilot error. The FAA grounded them for a reason.
Like most turboprops, ATR aircraft are certified to maximum FL250. This has nothing to do with an inferior design. Fully loaded, the ATR will typically cruise below FL200. When you want to certify an aircraft to fly higher than FL250, you have to comply with a set of additional requirements. This makes the aircraft more complex and heavier. But that is not necessary with an aircraft optimzed for short regional routes.
The FAA grounded ATR 42 and 72 aircraft shortly after the accident near Roselawn in 1994. The grounding was a precaution and happened before the accident had been fully investigated. This is nothing new. Other aircraft types have also been gounded after accidents (the Boeing 737 Max is just one example).
At the time of the acciddent, the ATR 72 was certified in accordance with the current FAA regulations, but it was operated outside the certification parameters. In the accident report, NTSB critizised FAA, the French aviation authroity, and the manufactruer on several points. Those issues have been rectified long time ago.
However, the NTSB is still critical to regional turboprops in general because the ailerons are not actuated by hydraulic power, which can prevent aileron roll-over, and because the de-icing boots have limitations.
@@anthonydennis2996 Alaska Airlines or actually the Horizon airlines the subsidiary of alaska Air is flying these to this day. They are slowly phasing them out for the crj’s but they still do fly the airframe. Wish I was able to post a pic of one I took a couple of months ago. I love the aircraft personally but they are aging pretty quick.
Shameful….and then to put it on a public platform for everyone including professional pilots and aviation regulators to see and then to make matters worse put up a shoddy justification….. not acceptable.
He's flying way too high....
Thank you
I’m trying to figure out how you’d get the airplane light enough to get the airplane to FL300? And the airspeed indicator is showing a Vmo of 202 knots. Does that check with what the charts show at FL300?
This was an ATR 42, which has better performance than ATR 72. This was a ferry flight, and therefore, it was very light towards the end of the flight when most of the fuel had been used.
The "barber pole" pointer has two functions: At low and medium altitudes, it shows Vmo, which is 250 kt. At high altitudes, it shows Mmo, which is Mach 0.55.
Isn't 0.55 x speed of sound at 30,000 feet about 324 knots?
You are correct. In ISA conditions, the temperature at 30,000 ft is -44.4 degrees Celsius. This means the speed of sound is 589 kt, and Mach 0.55 is 324 kt. This is true airspeed. Calibrated airspeed is 203 kt, which is very close to MMO, which is indicated with the "barber pole" in the image.
@@FlywithMagnar thank you for that, I forgot that TAS isn't same as CAS or IAS
Fly the Envelope well said captain 🛫🛫😘
It could be a simulator
There's no sunlight in a simulator.
@@FlywithMagnar Love your videos. But for this answer, I’d disagree. Latest sim, MSFS2020, will easily have the sunlight and shadows and reflections. But it will not have the reflection of a pilot with four stripes on his shoulders. So, answer is still the same…. Not a simulator image. And one more point: there is no ATR in that sim yet but two vendors are planning to offer them within a year or so. Have been watching your videos to prepare for when these are available.
13:05 If there were no cowboys, there would be no aviation, They wanted to fly higher, they flew applause for courage
The Wright brothers were not cowboys. Test pilots are not cowboys. Aviation never needed cowboys.
@@EIGYRO Hahaha for sure Chuck Yeager wii love it your French Atr (auto total reset) drama philosophy It's like comparing quasi modo rules and morals to Aviation of some lost in space TRI Go to the Airshow my friend and have fun please it will help your brain to relax.
No, cowboys have no place in aviation, th-cam.com/video/DCMmCekKO_c/w-d-xo.html
@@FlywithMagnar Props are good for boats :)