Dangerous Flights- Discovery Channel

Veloce · 04-02-2013 11:16PM #1

Anybody been watching this? Single engined North Atlantic crossings via Canada / Greenland / Iceland / Northern Scotland :eek:

EchoIndia · 04-02-2013 11:48PM

Hyped up no end and the MD of the company comes across as a jerk - which may of course be unfair to him, as he sems to have sound and experienced ferry crew working for him. There is probably ten minutes of good material per episode.

LeftBase · 05-02-2013 01:37AM

EchoIndia wrote: »

Hyped up no end and the MD of the company comes across as a jerk - which may of course be unfair to him, as he sems to have sound and experienced ferry crew working for him. There is probably ten minutes of good material per episode.

"Cory and Brad arrive at this isolated airport. They're low on fuel and still shaken from the fright they got when we milked the Transponder interrogation light flashing and the alt alert sounding. But things are about to get much worse as they discover this airport has no chocolate biscuits. They're going to have to make do with rich tea and hope they can make it to their next stop"

It's total sensationalist BS! And a lot of the pilots come across as arrogant dickheads. The pure ignorance they show sometimes is shocking. An example being the 2 muppets in that UN Dornier over Africa. They were denied a direct route through military airspace and complained about it endlessly. The ridiculous thing was they were attempting a leg their aircraft barely had the endurance to complete!

They also have some great shots of "isolated and alone aircraft" from their chase planes....

The owner is not a pilot. He's a class example of the clueless fools the FAA hand ratings out to like sweets!

Storm 10 · 05-02-2013 11:31AM

One thing I noticed about the UN flight was the lightning looked very fake, its a total rubbish programme tbh.

EI-DOR · 05-02-2013 02:06PM

Why would the lighting be fake? Unless they recorded the whole thing in a Simulator.

Last nights episode showed two numpties ferrying a Phenom from Australia to Vegas. Why in gods name would they put a Pilot in the other seat who has no experience of using Glass Cockpits. They got themselves into a right pickle at one stage. Stalled the aircraft and thankfully got out of it.

The chap who owns the Company is a right pillock. No regard for safety what so ever. Ridiculous show!

Irish Steve · 05-02-2013 08:14PM

Have just caught up on the episodes that were recorded while I was away.

Way too much sensationalism, and some pretty poor continuity, wrong engine sounds, wrong runways, all sorts of things that are annoying to people who have any reasonable aviation experience.

I suspect the Phenom can be flown single crewed, but there have been so many changes to these regulations now, its hard to know what's going on.

The owner pushes too hard, and is in danger of becoming an accident statistic if he's not careful.

Smaller types like King Air and Bonanza's don't require a type rating in the way that an Airbus or Boeing etc do, but if you don't have detailed knowledge of the type, you're an accident waiting to happen, as we saw with the Phenom when the pressurisation issue happened. The other aspect is that I was amazed how long it took for someone to get on to Oxygen, unless they were still at lower level, and also amazed that they didn't declare a PAN call so that ATC had a better idea of why they were no longer flying according to their plan, getting "in the way" of a 330 is not a good idea, so telling ATC what's going on is not a bad idea.

The Bonanza having to overfly because they didn't have the night landing clearance! Thst's the sort of mistale that a student makes, and learns from, and a professional pilot that doesn't read the AIC for the destination and find out about those sorts of restrictions and limitations is missing the plot somewhere. OK, the commercial world of airlines has a flight operations department that does all that sort of work on behalf of the crews, so they are in many respects spoon fed from the time they enter the flight deck to the time they leave, and I suppose that highlights the lack of GA experience of so many people, way too many pilots haven't had to deal with in depth long distance flight planning, which is more than just working out the fuel and going, it's also about all the other peripheral things that are essential to making sure that the flight does get where it's supposed to, and safely, and that there's a Plan B for the time when Plan A goes pear shaped.

I just hope this series isn't giving some of the low hours CPL holders who desperately need hours to get to their frozen ATPL's ideas that they shouldn't get, this program is so shallow in so many areas, it is in danger of glamourising what is probably one of the most dangerous flying jobs that's out there.

There are some reasonable bits, but way too much has been tweaked to make it palatable for short attention span TV viewing.

EI-DOR · 05-02-2013 08:28PM

Couldn't agree more Steve. Their first stop of the trip in Indonesia near landed them in prison over lack of papers. Anybody flying into that part of the world with no papers deserves to be locked up. It's not hard to have the correct documents on board the ac. Then again it's probably a nightmare sorting the paper work out for some countries.

The other aspect is that I was amazed how long it took for someone to get on to Oxygen

What was the craic with just one of them putting the Oxygen Mask on?

EchoIndia · 05-02-2013 09:03PM

LeftBase wrote: »

the pure ignorance they show sometimes is shocking. An example being the 2 muppets in that UN Dornier over Africa. They were denied a direct route through military airspace and complained about it endlessly. The ridiculous thing was they were attempting a leg their aircraft barely had the endurance to complete!

Of course, while the programme suggested that they barely had enough fuel to make their destination, this was never really explained. Wouldn't they have had to have holding plus diversion fuel as per legal requirements? It was never actually said that they were at risk of the tanks running dry before they got there, and the crew's "fuel critical" references might have been partly to add "spice" for TV.

el tel · 06-02-2013 07:30PM

It's all a big load of hammed up horse****. Or to be less critical, it's purely for entertainment. Most of the 'situations' are contrived. For each trip you could probably cobble together an entire programe's worth of narrative in a 20 minute flight.

Pilotdude5 · 06-02-2013 08:01PM

I may not be an experienced pilot but I too think it's a load of bollix. The programming on Discovery and Nat Geo has become atrocious in the last 5 years if you ask me.

What ever happened to proper documentaries?

notreal · 07-02-2013 01:51AM

Finding some of the comments here interesting. Watched some of the programmes and thought how it managed to convey just how hairy flying a light single IFR into a strange airfield with very iffy weather can be.

The Phenom near stall incident did remind me of one or two moments.

Can't help feeling there are some really confident really low time pilots on this forum.

Good luck boys, hope the real world doesn't bite your arse! Ha ha.

Oh sure it's all a bit hyped. TV always is. But look carefully. It's clear that the Captains in this series know their job. You can only wish you ever get to that level of experience.

basill · 08-02-2013 04:53PM

It's clear that the Captains in this series know their job. You can only wish you ever get to that level of experience.

You think so? I think it highlights a big weakness in the FAA system whereby someone without a type rating nor IR can operate in the RHS effectively piggy backing off the guy in the LHS. The "alleged" near stall of the phenom showed that a guy with high hours on pistons but NONE on a glass cockpit could have potentially had a CFIT if it wasn't for the captain taking control. He had never flown a jet, not read the manuals, had no type rating and I am not sure if he even has an instrument rating. Had the captain been incapacitated at all during the flight then it is unclear if there would have been a successful outcome.

During the "alleged" pressurisation problem the time of useful consciousness would have been well exceeded. Thankfully we can only assume since they landed afterwards that they weren't above 14,000ft at all so presumably it was all madey uppey. I am sure that even a shoddy operator would have a memory drill requiring oxygen masks to be worn at the first inkling of the aircraft depressurising soon followed by an emergency descent if deemed necessary.

Anyway if it was all true then I am sure the FAA would have been all over them and closed down the ferry business.

Irish Steve · 08-02-2013 10:16PM

Those weaknesses are not just in the FAA system, but we'll stick with that for the momemt, as that's the focus of the discussion.

A number of years ago, I went over to California to do a SE & ME CPL and IR, to add to the existing licences I already had from the UK. Arrived in, having sent all the information of time, types etc to the FTO, and was put with an instructor, and off we went. We flew together once, I came back from the first flight to a discussion with the owner of the FTO, and made it very clear that I was not prepared to fly with that instructor again, he'd been sh1tting himself for most of the flight, the reason being very simple, while he was indeed an instructor, his total ME time was somewhere in the very low double digits, and at that time, I had close on 600 Hrs in my log book, with most of it on ME aircraft similar to the one I was flying for the CPL, so I was naturally and comfortably doing things in the Seneca that the instructor hadn't a clue about, and as a result, he was way out of his comfort zone, and way out of his experience zone as well. Result was a rapid change of instructor, and that solved the problem, as the new guy had lots of experience flying as part of their other operations, so when we got together, he was able to see that I too had been doing a lot of solo flying in a twin, so we got on very well, and it all worked out, but it was very clear to me that the original instructor would have been in trouble with some of the scenarios that were completely comfortable for me.

We have similar issues here in Europe, the Manx crash at Cork is a case in point, the First Officer didn't have a lot of experience of that type of aircraft, and the Captain was a new command, so while he had time on type, his command experience was limited. That's the way that the beancounters have the industry screwed up now, another example is the AF 330 crash in the Atlantic, where a flyable aircraft was stalled into the sea killing all on board, because the crew didn't have enough experience in dealing with unreliable airspeed. That's basic IFR training, and for a crew on a large heavy aircraft to not have the skills to deal with that level of problem is fundamentally worrying.

OK, we've drifted some from the original thread, but what I'm mentioning here is just another manifestation of the way that the industry has changed in ways that are ( in my view) detrimental to the good of the industry. The race to the bottom that has spawned things like self funded type ratings, and many other similar "cost cuttings" are having a detrimental effect on the long term safety of the industry, and it's not just the low cost carriers that are suffering the bad effects.

LeftBase · 09-02-2013 12:52AM

basill wrote: »

You think so? I think it highlights a big weakness in the FAA system whereby someone without a type rating nor IR can operate in the RHS effectively piggy backing off the guy in the LHS. The "alleged" near stall of the phenom showed that a guy with high hours on pistons but NONE on a glass cockpit could have potentially had a CFIT if it wasn't for the captain taking control. He had never flown a jet, not read the manuals, had no type rating and I am not sure if he even has an instrument rating. Had the captain been incapacitated at all during the flight then it is unclear if there would have been a successful outcome.

During the "alleged" pressurisation problem the time of useful consciousness would have been well exceeded. Thankfully we can only assume since they landed afterwards that they weren't above 14,000ft at all so presumably it was all madey uppey. I am sure that even a shoddy operator would have a memory drill requiring oxygen masks to be worn at the first inkling of the aircraft depressurising soon followed by an emergency descent if deemed necessary.

Anyway if it was all true then I am sure the FAA would have been all over them and closed down the ferry business.

The point basill highlights also occurred very much to me.

On an awful lot of these ferry flights you have an experienced PIC and then a bag of bones on the RHS. If the PIC on any of the flights was to have any issues with health I would not be confident in the co-pilots to take command of the situation and land the aircraft safely.
Also an awful lot of the flying is done when the pilots are very fatigued it seems and so the normal safety net of a co-pilot is removed. It seems like these co-pilots are not trained to the standard a commercial co-pilot would be and in truth that renders the PICs experience useless in a MC aircraft.

The 1st episode with that boobie prize Cessna with the metal fragments floating in the engine highlighted this very much so. The PIC was very experienced and knew what he was about, however your one beside him seemed totally useless despite her hours. If they were crossing the Atlantic and he was incapacitated I would have zero faith in her to get the aircraft to safety.
Many of the co-pilots have a very "yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir" attitude toward the commander. When they had a fuel leak and he said "I think we should divert to the nearest airport" she just replied "Ok". That is not the response a first officer should give. It should be more along the lines of "I agree" and thus validating the commander's decision. That is what multi-crew ops is about. A co-pilot is there to validate a commander's decisions or to offer a different perspective if he/she believes it is needed. When I did my MCC and my TR we were told that if we did not agree with the commander or did not understand the reasoning behind a decision that we should question it or offer an opinion or make sure we understood the full reasoning. The 2 reasons for this were 1) The commander may be wrong or the FO may have a better plan of action/suggestion than the commander and 2) It promotes command thinking in FOs which can only be good for their future career development(discounting pissing off a Senior Captain;)). It's an almost unwritten company SOP that you never just go along with the Captain, you actively back and give your approval to his/her decision.

In these flights as far as I can see it is a pilot carrying a passenger who on occasion flies a bit if the leg.

aob9 · 12-02-2013 12:40AM

I am a major fan of aviation TV shows but this load of cr@p is a serious letdown. Blatant sensationalism at it's worst. The limits of my real world experience extend to 20 hrs training in a C172 to date. I have learned in this short period that you DO NOT fly fuel critical, you DO carry correct documentation at all times and you DON'T test fly a plane without checking out systems on the ground first. Seriously, the issue with the trim tab should have been identified in the ground, not in the air. I switched it off half way through tonight, utter rubbish.

tankbarry · 12-02-2013 10:28AM

Im not a pilot and I find it unbelievable. I even know you don'f fly with fuel critical or even if you think its going to be critical. And for your man to be such an experienced pilot and not check everything on the ground is unbelievable.

Johnny901 · 12-02-2013 12:35PM

I think some of the bits we are seeing are made up for the camera, turning up to file a flight plan and discovering the destination is closed (thats happened before), critical on fuel and looking for priority from ATC, almost stalling that exe jet etc etc. The boss ringing and asking them to land in a airfileld in South America with no customs. He couldn't be that stupid, could he ?

LeftBase · 12-02-2013 01:32PM

Johnny901 wrote: »

. He couldn't be that stupid, could he ?

I think he may just be....

STEVE35 · 12-02-2013 03:04PM

The Boss is an accident waiting to happen, every week just seems to be a serious lack of planning. Looks like they never heard of Notams, Metars or Taf's!

donvito99 · 12-02-2013 04:40PM

If the boss was so worried about deadlines and cash etc., why were two of his pilots pissing about in some sort civilian ex-jet fighter?

basill · 12-02-2013 07:42PM

Because their clapped out old twin was broken. Well that was what the producers and editors would lead us to believe. They were probably on days off when the jet stuff was filmed.

boboldpilot · 13-02-2013 12:23AM

I have to say this thread has given me a few laughs. Let's see:

The limits of my real world experience extend to 20 hrs training in a C172 to date.

Good man

Im not a pilot and I find it unbelievable.

The boss ringing and asking them to land in a airfileld in South America with no customs. He couldn't be that stupid, could he ?

The Boss is an accident waiting to happen, every week just seems to be a serious lack of planning. Looks like they never heard of Notams, Metars or Taf's!

It's interesting that most of the real pilots who occasionally contribute to this forum have refrained from posting. Laughing too much I assume. Clearly few of you have no clue about how things operate in the real world. Flight school aces and flight sim experts.

Basill, I have to say came closest to reality but even he missed the point.

It's easy to see that we have a new generation of pilots and fantasists who think they know it all. Many of them came straight of the womb of flight school into a flight department where everything is done for them, yes you Leftbase. God help you if you every had to face the reality of a ferry flight somewhere without some an over staffed operations department to work out the Hotac and all the other boring stuff.

Seriously you are making fools of yourselves, kids.

Yeah the programme is over egged. But those pilots you see are better than you'll ever be.

Keep it up though. I enjoy the laugh!

LeftBase · 13-02-2013 12:37AM

boboldpilot wrote: »

I have to say this thread has given me a few laughs. Let's see: Good man

It's interesting that most of the real pilots who occasionally contribute to this forum have refrained from posting. Laughing too much I assume. Clearly few of you have no clue about how things operate in the real world. Flight school aces and flight sim experts.

Basill, I have to say came closest to reality but even he missed the point.

It's easy to see that we have a new generation of pilots and fantasists who think they know it all. Many of them came straight of the womb of flight school into a flight department where everything is done for them, yes you Leftbase. God help you if you every had to face the reality of a ferry flight somewhere without some an over staffed operations department to work out the Hotac and all the other boring stuff.

Seriously you are making fools of yourselves, kids.

Yeah the programme is over egged. But those pilots you see are better than you'll ever be.

Keep it up though. I enjoy the laugh!

Your name wouldn't be Randy by any chance would it?:rolleyes:

It doesnt matter if you have a flight ops department or not. Simple pilot sense says "do not fly into bad weather...check notams...know your destination airfield regulations....know your alternate...do basic check on aircraft before take off....know your aircraft a little bit even...the list goes on"

...and basic common sense says : Trip fuel + reserves/contingency etc = < fuel required = duhhhh

What sort of hours/ratings do you bring to the table? And those conducted through distance learning with Rod Marcharo or whatever his name is dont count!

aob9 · 13-02-2013 12:48AM

boboldpilot wrote: »

I have to say this thread has given me a few laughs. Let's see: Good man

It's interesting that most of the real pilots who occasionally contribute to this forum have refrained from posting. Laughing too much I assume. Clearly few of you have no clue about how things operate in the real world. Flight school aces and flight sim experts.

Basill, I have to say came closest to reality but even he missed the point.

It's easy to see that we have a new generation of pilots and fantasists who think they know it all. Many of them came straight of the womb of flight school into a flight department where everything is done for them, yes you Leftbase. God help you if you every had to face the reality of a ferry flight somewhere without some an over staffed operations department to work out the Hotac and all the other boring stuff.

Seriously you are making fools of yourselves, kids.

Yeah the programme is over egged. But those pilots you see are better than you'll ever be.

Keep it up though. I enjoy the laugh!

As far as I can tell nobody has criticised the pilots on this thread, at least I didn't. What I believe is the producers of this programme are leading us to believe that professional pilots take crazy risks. I stand by my statement that this show is completely sensationalistic in order to grab the attention of viewers with a low boredom threshold. A sad day for documentary channels that once offered high quality viewing. You don't need to be a real world pilot to notice that.

sellerbarry · 13-02-2013 12:50AM

FWIW, I love the show and have no piloting experience...............

LeftBase · 13-02-2013 12:54AM

sellerbarry wrote: »

FWIW, I love the show and have no piloting experience...............

Thats fair enough. If people enjoy it that's great. I enjoyed the LOTR and the matrix.

Good entertainment....but if you are a pilot it is a little head in hands.

boboldpilot · 13-02-2013 12:37PM

As far as I can tell nobody has criticised the pilots on this thread,

Let's see

The Boss is an accident waiting to happen, every week just seems to be a serious lack of planning. Looks like they never heard of Notams, Metars or Taf's!

The boss ringing and asking them to land in a airfileld in South America with no customs. He couldn't be that stupid, could he ?

I have learned in this short period that you DO NOT fly fuel critical, you DO carry correct documentation at all times and you DON'T test fly a plane without checking out systems on the ground first. Seriously, the issue with the trim tab should have been identified in the ground, not in the air.

Need I go on?

Your judgement of the actions of these pilots is coloured by your lack of experience. That's very clear. If you care to look past the drama you should be able to see that very real pressures involved in commerical aviation away from the cosseted world of flight schools and the highly regulated airline business.

You guys are making a hell of a lot of assumptions about the pilots in the programme. Why don't you have a look at the website and check out their bios. Pete Zaccagnino, 15,000 hours, aerobatic pilot, race pilot, test pilot, Instructor etc etc. Dave Matheson, 15,000 hours.

http://www.dangerousflights.ca/pilots.aspx

Maybe when you reach those kind of hours and have that kind of experience you will be fit to criticise their actions. Particularly you non pilots.

You have a lot to learn. People with little experience don't realise how little they know.

And Leftbase I've no idea what you're on about. But I suspect I have a few more hours than you. It's really that obvious.

aob9 · 13-02-2013 12:58PM

@boboldpilot . I bow to your superior knowledge. Once gain, I NEVER intended to criticize the pilots but I do criticize the way in which they are portrayed. Much of what is portrayed on this is staged for the camera.

All the shots of them struggling with the trim were obvious recreations, as the props were in Feather and the fuel levers were in shutoff... If that were in flight, I think the trim would have been the least of their concerns!

I stand by my opinion ( of which I am perfectly entitled to make) , the show is crap.

LeftBase · 13-02-2013 03:46PM

Right where to start with you.....

boboldpilot wrote: »

Your judgement of the actions of these pilots is coloured by your lack of experience. That's very clear. If you care to look past the drama you should be able to see that very real pressures involved in commerical aviation away from the cosseted world of flight schools and the highly regulated airline business.

This is commercial aviation. They are ferry pilots flying as part of a business which delivers aircraft to new owners in exchange for money...
The actions of these pilots such as taking off into known thunderstorm conditions, flying with less fuel than their plan says they need, failure to check notams, failure to know the regulations and procedures at their destination airfield, failure to know the regulations and procedures at their alternate airfield, failure to comply and understand ATC procedures, failure to observe the immigration/customs laws of other countries, seeming failure to do a basic walk around check/ground run up check to ensure systems are working, failure to understand the aircraft they are flying, failure to operate a multi-pilot aircraft with 2 pilots who know what they are doing, are all basic considerations for anybody who is flying any aircraft anywhere!

[1]You guys are making a hell of a lot of assumptions about the pilots in the programme. [2]Why don't you have a look at the website and check out their bios. Pete Zaccagnino, 15,000 hours, aerobatic pilot, race pilot, test pilot, Instructor etc etc. Dave Matheson, 15,000 hours.

http://www.dangerousflights.ca/pilots.aspx

In this you really blow your own argument and credibility out of the water. I split it into 2 parts to deal with it easier:

[1] - No assumptions made. Just stating the glaring basic errors they make or are portrayed to make in the show

[2](this where you damage yourself most) - "aerobatic and test pilot" Most airlines do not regard that as countable time towards what they require because it is a world away from what the actual flying you do there and the flying they do in this show. If an F1 driver rocked up to Dublin Bus tomorrow and said he wanted a job and used his F1 experience as currency you could excuse Dublin Bus for wondering what exactly speeding around a track at 200mph had to do with negotiating the tight streets and stop start traffic of Dublin. The same principle applies here. Test pilots and aerobatic pilots may be good handlers but for cross country flying you need much much more experience than that. You may have 1000 hours as a military test pilot, but the guy with 100h and a PPL may be more experienced when it comes to cross country flying.
It's not the amount of flying it's the type!
This is a point FSX Captains usually miss.

Maybe when you reach those kind of hours and have that kind of experience you will be fit to criticise their actions. Particularly you non pilots.

You have a lot to learn. People with little experience don't realise how little they know.

And Leftbase I've no idea what you're on about. But I suspect I have a few more hours than you. It's really that obvious.

I'll bet you dont!:rolleyes:

And like I said 1000 hours on FSX does not count!

boboldpilot · 13-02-2013 03:52PM

Nevertheless there is plenty of criticism of the pilots in this thread. Unwarranted criticism.

As for the show itself, of course events are re-enacted for the camera. That's normal in any TV programme. No pilots would appreciate a cameraman shoving his camera into their faces during a crisis. Even live sports on TV has sound effects added at times.

You may not like the production values but as a 20 hour student, I suggest you watch it for the real pilot stuff. You might learn something.

boboldpilot · 13-02-2013 05:01PM

Oh now I see Mr left base, it was a PC flight simmer reference. I get it. I'm outed.:D

Well you made laugh out loud now! This is the line that set me off.

Test pilots and aerobatic pilots may be good handlers but for cross country flying you need much much more experience than that. You may have 1000 hours as a military test pilot, but the guy with 100h and a PPL may be more experienced when it comes to cross country flying.

You cannot be serious, just exactly how do you think anyone becomes a military test pilot? I'm pretty sure the military has cross country flying well covered, sometimes at night a hundred feet off the ground. I'm amazed any 'pilot' would make a statement like that.

Then there's this

The actions of these pilots such as rant, rant, rant etc.

Again you make assumptions about the pilot's actions based on the narrow view of a TV show. I directed you to their bios on the website. Do you honestly think they managed to log multiple thousands of hours while ignoring the basic rules of airmanship? Again I'm surprised a 'pilot' would assume that.

[2](this where you damage yourself most) - "aerobatic and test pilot" Most airlines do not regard that as countable time towards what they require because it is a world away from what the actual flying you do there and the flying they do in this show.

This is funny too. Comedy gold in fact. Just imagine the scene at an airline interview, Captain Flasheart is being disappointed by the airline interviewer. 'I'm sorry Captain, your 10,000 hours is no good to us at Mega airlines. So what if you were leader of the Red Arrows, won the world aerobatic championship three times and chief test pilot on the Eurofighter. We don't need your sort here. No our preferred candidate is a 350 hour hotshot just back from Florida where he was hour building in a clapped out Cessna.':p

Airlines may or may not have any preferences for aerobatic or test pilots. But I'm sure they all would prefer a pilot who knows enough about basic flying not to pull back on the sidestick with the stall warning blaring away and wonder why it isn't climbing.

Well I'm back to my flight sim, I'm about to aerobat an Airbus A380.

Dangerous Flights- Discovery Channel

Comments