Comments by "bruzote" (@bruzote) on "Mentour Pilot" channel.

  1.  @spodule6000  - Nobody wants to die hungry. That's just an awful epitaph.
    3
  2. Does the real-life industry inadvertently facilitate this behavior by expecting pilots to continue schedule flights with non-functioning parts that ARE part of normal flying operations, but the parts are not mission critical? I wonder if that bleeds over, regardless of training. Human nature needs to be recognized for what it is. If it leads to this behavior, maybe flying with malfunctioning parts, especially parts whose failures have unknown cause, leads to dismissive attitudes.
    2
  3.  @XPlaneAviation  - One man did continue flying IIRC.
    2
  4.  @markmoreiras7649  - That system is quad redundant (although sensor reliability is a different issue I don't know about).
    1
  5. @I am not a bot I’m a real boy - That incident results in a posthumous award for both pilots. They kept their cool. It's so unfair they did everything they could do and still perished.
    1
  6.  @aaron6806  - Would most pilots be very alarmed by that reported attitude?
    1
  7.  @memememine1  - It's going downhill where you really need to handle things well! Losing control uphill is remedied by allowing the car's kinetic energy to convert into potential energy of altitude (going uphill, you slow down unless you apply gas). Of course, going up Pike's Peak at 60 MPH around a curve, one might not lose THAT much speed to get in control, but the uphill always helps.
    1
  8. As a non-pilot (but one who had some pilot training), I am puzzled as to why confused pilots in situations like these don't shut off all automation systems and fly manually. They are trained to fly that way as students in the their first aircraft. It works. It is not confusing. Stick, ruddder, and throttles should do it. Add in trim tabs, flaps, and spoilers if you like. Landing gear if you are going to land. Why do I never hear of this being a recommended course of reaction in response to a confused state that should obviously be alarming? Is the industry filled with pig-headed people who refuse to give up on the idea that a confused pilot will ALWAYS correctly think a way out of the problem before disaster strikes? What is so terrifying about flying manually? Seriously, please explain why this course of action is not acceptable. Once flying manually, things would be fine and the pilots could figure out how to restore use of automated systems. I really need to know why flight procedures are so adamant about putting actual flying-the-plane skills at the end of all options, if even considering them at all? Instead it seems to be all about flying-the-computer, or more realistically, flying-the-corporate-line. [Edit: I had not watched the post-crash part that discusses regulatory changes to procedures. Exactly what I was thinking. Shut off automatic control, go to standard throttle, etc. Thank goodness! However, I still think this should be done during any times of obvious confusion. Why not do it?]
    1
  9. Without some kind of rebuttal from an expert, it seems your point #4 is so obvious (after-the-fact).
    1