Miami plane crash latest

T. A. Gardner said:
The wheels weren't on the ground at that point, and they had flight speed,
Click to expand...
They did not have flight speed. Once the wheels touch the ground, you will need most of a runway to get in the air again.
T. A. Gardner said:
because the wheels weren't on the ground among other things.
Click to expand...
The wheels were on the ground.
T. A. Gardner said:
Applying full power and going to flaps 20 would have put them back in the air almost immediately.
Click to expand...
No. That much flaps add drag and make you sink. Full power is not available immediately with jet engines.
 
Earl said:
After seeing tens of thousands of arrivals (and departures) on the arrival and departure radar and from the tower cab, it appears that the plane landed long and at rollout, there was insufficient runway left for a safe landing.
Click to expand...
Or to attempt a go around.
Earl said:
If the runway had ILS,
Click to expand...
That runway is equipped with ILS, at least until the aircraft mashed the antenna structure and the radio shack as it left the runway.
Earl said:
the Glideslope could be involved but from the news reports, it appears it was a VFR approach and not an IFR approach.
Click to expand...
It was a VFR approach.
Earl said:
It appears to be pilot/s error but the NTSB will determine this.
Click to expand...
It could be nothing else, even if there was equipment failure. The initial causing factor was bullheading to a landing despite high speed, poor configuration for landing, and landing too far down the runway either stop or get back in the air again.

The time to conduct the go around is BEFORE the wheels touch the ground.

Further, the glide slope indicator does not do anything to configure a plane properly for landing or slow the plane down to proper speed for a stable landing.

Planes using ILS go around all the time. Debris, another aircraft or animals on the runway when you break out, unstable approach speed or poor configuration for landing,

There are numerous reasons planes on an ILS approach will conduct a go around.
Indeed, on an ILS approach you should PLAN to go around, landing is only for when the shoot was good enough.
The same could be said for a visual (VFR) approach.

If you consider the go around the "normal" end of an approach, and the landing the "conditional" end, you will fly a lot safer.

In a jet aircraft it's even more important. Jet engines are at or near idle during approach. Spooling them up for the go around takes significant time. They aren't like reciprocating engines, where power is available almost immediately.

The NTSB full report will take about a year to conduct. They DID release the voice recorder and instrument recorder (which also records flight controls positions, brakes, spoiler position, reverser position, etc).

The plane was flying too fast on approach, even to the point of a sink warning being issued multiple times, followed by 'terrain' warnings. These only happen when the aircraft is NOT configured properly for landing, and/or descending too fast for a stable landing.

At the first 'sink' warning, a go around should have been initiated right then and there.

On the voice recorder, one pilot (probably the co-pilot) DID remark they were going too fast.

It is pilot error. Whether it is compounded with equipment failure (the wheel brakes were shown to be working already), it makes no difference. The pilot and only the pilot could have initiated this chain of events, and ONLY by not following correct landing procedure for that aircraft.

I hate to blame the guy, but it really couldn't have been anything else.
 
Last edited:
Into the Night said:
They did not have flight speed. Once the wheels touch the ground, you will need most of a runway to get in the air again.

The wheels were on the ground.

No. That much flaps add drag and make you sink. Full power is not available immediately with jet engines.
Click to expand...
Halfway down the runway they were still airborne and did have flight speed. That's why the wheels weren't on the runway at that point. They waited too long to make the decision to go around.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Halfway down the runway they were still airborne and did have flight speed. That's why the wheels weren't on the runway at that point. They waited too long to make the decision to go around.
Click to expand...
I already explained this. They did NOT have flight speed, and could not regain flight speed in time.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Jaime Felipe Silva Molina, 37 and Joseph Carol, 55.
Click to expand...
I am not going to pre-judge them like you have, but I will point out a few facts about the pilots of the plane.

Carol was first certified for the Boeing 767 in May of this year, so he had only been certified for four months. Usually they like to pair newer certified pilots with more experienced pilots. Molina had been certified in April of 2025, 17 months ago. The average amount of experience on that plane was under a year. Pilots I know are shocked by that.

Molina has 2,655 hours of flying time. He needed 1,500 hours to be a commercial pilot, so more than half of that was before he was a commercial pilot. A commercial pilot can only fly 1000 hours a year, but gets paid by the hour flown, so tries to fly as close to 1000 hours as possible. That makes for a full time pilot flying between 700 and 900 hours a year.

That all means that Molina was a 37 year old that had been employed as a commercial pilot for the equivalent of 1.65 years.

Carol was a little better, but not much. He had 7,145 hours of flight time. If we subtract out the 1,500 he needed to become a commercial pilot, and divide by 700 hours a year, and Carol was a 55 year old man with commercial pilots license for the equivalent of a little over 8 years.

They were working for a bottom basement cargo airline, so had no guaranteed hours pay, and got less than $100 per hour. That is not less than $100 per hour worked, but by the flight hour. The absolute ceiling they could be earning was $100k, but more realistically they were getting $50k. I do not expect they were driving Uber on the side, but I would not be surprised if they were.

Why did they do it? The more flight hours they got, the more likely they were to get a real airline job, and maybe even start getting seniority there. Especially Carol was getting late in his career, he would be required to retire at age 65, so that was a dream that was slipping away.
 
Walt said:
I am not going to pre-judge them like you have, but I will point out a few facts about the pilots of the plane.

Carol was first certified for the Boeing 767 in May of this year, so he had only been certified for four months. Usually they like to pair newer certified pilots with more experienced pilots. Molina had been certified in April of 2025, 17 months ago. The average amount of experience on that plane was under a year. Pilots I know are shocked by that.

Molina has 2,655 hours of flying time. He needed 1,500 hours to be a commercial pilot, so more than half of that was before he was a commercial pilot. A commercial pilot can only fly 1000 hours a year, but gets paid by the hour flown, so tries to fly as close to 1000 hours as possible. That makes for a full time pilot flying between 700 and 900 hours a year.

That all means that Molina was a 37 year old that had been employed as a commercial pilot for the equivalent of 1.65 years.

Carol was a little better, but not much. He had 7,145 hours of flight time. If we subtract out the 1,500 he needed to become a commercial pilot, and divide by 700 hours a year, and Carol was a 55 year old man with commercial pilots license for the equivalent of a little over 8 years.

They were working for a bottom basement cargo airline, so had no guaranteed hours pay, and got less than $100 per hour. That is not less than $100 per hour worked, but by the flight hour. The absolute ceiling they could be earning was $100k, but more realistically they were getting $50k. I do not expect they were driving Uber on the side, but I would not be surprised if they were.

Why did they do it? The more flight hours they got, the more likely they were to get a real airline job, and maybe even start getting seniority there. Especially Carol was getting late in his career, he would be required to retire at age 65, so that was a dream that was slipping away.
Click to expand...
Come on moron....this is obvious.

This is a complete failure to perform.
 
Online retailer Amazon said Sunday it was suspending its use of cargo carrier 21 Air after one of its Amazon-branded aircraft crashed upon landing in Miami this month, killing five people.

Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel did not divulge specific factors but said the decision came after the company reviewed some of the circumstances around the crash as it supported the National Transportation Safety Board's investigation into its cause.

"After the tragic incident last weekend, we've spent time supporting the investigation and reviewing some of the surrounding circumstances, and we've decided to pause our operations with 21 Air, the operator of Flight 7598," Nantel said.

www.yahoo.com

Amazon suspends use of 21 Air, cargo carrier involved in fatal Miami crash

Online retailer Amazon said Sunday it was suspending its use of cargo carrier 21 Air after one of its Amazon-branded aircraft crashed upon landing in Miami this month, killing five people.
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com

Supporting my theory that this pilot never should have been in the air....perhaps the FO as well.
 
I saw a alleged pilot say that he has been talking to other pilots, and the general view is that this performance was so bad that criminal charges should be considered....which if true is rather shocking.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I saw a alleged pilot say that he has been talking to other pilots, and the general view is that this performance was so bad that criminal charges should be considered....which if true is rather shocking.
Click to expand...
The pilots of the plane are dead, so it is impossible to charge them with anything. There is a question why such inexperienced pilots were allowed to fly a massive wide body jet. It appears they got in under the new trump deregulations.

Can trump or his appointees be criminally charged for letting dangerous pilots fly? I doubt it, but anything is possible.
 
The evidence still shows that at 11 different points a mandatory go around was mandated by SOP....and did not happen. The CAPT was flying, but the FO should have taken over the plane and did not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top