What These Pilots Did Was Amazing! British Airways Flight 9
The flight was crewed by 43-year-old Captain Kevin Hunt and 39-year-old First Officer David McClelland. Captain Hunt was a veteran British Midland pilot who had been with the airline since 1966 and had about 13,200 hours of flying experience. First Officer McClelland joined British Midland in 1988 and had accrued roughly 3,300 total flight hours. Between them, the pilots had close to 1,000 hours in the Boeing 737 cockpit (Hunt had 763 hours, and McClelland had 192 hours). However only 76 of these were logged in Boeing 737-400 series aircraft (Hunt 23 hours and McClelland 53 hours).
What These Pilots did was Amazing! | British Airways flight 9
I get a lot of emails from people who have read the book. Some want to become pilots, either they're young people or older people in other professions. There are quite a few architects, for some reason. I don't know what that connection would be. But I also get emails from retired pilots, and the emails go on and on. They tell me these stories about this night they flew into Dubai, the night they took their wife to Singapore for their 30th anniversary. You know, they're just wild stories about a job they love. I don't know what I'll feel like when I retire, but I think when you look back on your day-to-day job satisfaction, the evidence is to me is that most people are pretty happy.
Representatives from Guinness World Records were at the stadium, but official word of whether this was actually the largest ever formation flight has not come down. Until then, enjoy these amazing videos from on the ground and in the air!
After the war, some of the Polish airmen settled in Britain and continued their service in the RAF, mostly as flight instructors. However, in the first VE Day parade, held in 1946, none of the Polish forces who had fought for Britain were invited to attend. The Free Polish government in exile had been opposed to the Soviet Union since the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939 that agreed to partition Poland between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. The British government had decided to recognise the new Soviet controlled Polish government at the end of the war and, seeking not to cause a diplomatic incident with the Soviet Union, chose not to extend an invite to the Free Polish forces. Instead, it invited representatives from the Soviet controlled Polish government. The decision caused much outrage in Britain and, after protests from Winston Churchill, members of the RAF and others, invites were extended to 25 Free Polish pilots. However, these were refused by the recipients in protest that all Free Polish forces were not invited.
Much can surely be learned from two identical flights less than a day apart where one is safe, and one is deadly. Both had MCAS events, but with totally different outcomes. What then, was the difference? Why do we not know the names of the pilots on that first flight which landed safely, who were confronted with what has been oft described as an
While we now train 737 pilots on every aspect of the MCAS system, do we fail to teach them on all types of aircraft about things like auto-throttle during Go Arounds, or the use of the Flight Directors during critical phases of flight? As recent major crashes and incidents have revealed, these fundamental skills also need to be taught. But are they considered by the Chief Financial Officer to be too time-consuming items on expensive type rating courses?
Please Please would you say a very big thank you to everyone connected with the course yesterday. I am 55 years old and flew for the very first time yesterday, amazing ,I am so proud to say I have flown !!! Even the thoughts of booking the course made my stomach churn so yesterday was going to be an enormous challenge . Everyone was fantastic and I can honestly say I enjoyed the whole course. The info from the pilots was excellent and answered a lot of my fears and with Patricia's session on the afternoon I was so relaxed on the flight I could not believe it.. Everyone on the flight was so caring and constantly making sure we were all ok..
Meeting the pilots was lovely, what great people, would and did trust them with my life. And the girls, were so upbeat and informed. Watching them on the plane with other passengers who were finding it more difficult than myself, was amazing, they were so in tune with what people needed, having them there made me feel so safe, thank you girls.
Calvert: I can remember it very clearly. It was off the east coast ofMalaysia in the late 1960s, and we had just begun doing some trials to see whythe airplane got very agitated when you operated it on a particular kind ofrunway. If you tried to take off on the runway at the Singapore airport as itwas at the time, the tarmac had a kind of wavy shape to it, and as the airplaneaccelerated it actually flapped about in the air. By the time it got totake-off speed this flapping motion was getting to be rather bad news. So theyfilled the airplane up with fuel and had the test pilots check it out. I satand watched them. During one of these flights when we were out over the seasomeone said, "Well, I suppose you'd better go in and have a go." Just likethat. Just off the cuff, casual. So I did. In the cockpit I immediately begandiscovering some of the plane's odder qualities.
The passengers' actions on Concorde in general were quite amusing in a waybecause everybody wanted it to be thought that he or she was a regular Concordetraveler. In other words it didn't do to wander about the plane with your mouthopen saying "Ooooh" and "Ahhhh." That would prove that you weren't a regularpassenger, and it would show a certain amount of weakness to be impressed ifyour regular lifestyle was equally polished. Sometimes people exaggerated thisdetached approach. They opened their very expensive briefcase to get the paperout and start reading as soon as they sat down and would ostensibly be tooabsorbed to even notice this amazing aircraft they were occupying. But I wouldalways notice their heads popping up and looking around, because you couldn'thelp yourself. And every passenger wanted to take in what was going on up onthe flight deck. That was fascinating to them. We all blissfully left theflight deck doors open because that's the way the passengers liked it.
Press Briefing by Scott McClellanThe James S. Brady Briefing Room Press Briefing view listen Statement by the President on steel
President's trip to Baghdad
12:34 P.M. EST MR. McCLELLAN: Good afternoon. I'm pleased to be joined today byAmbassador Zoellick, our United States Trade Representative. I want tobegin with an opening statement by the President of the United States.And then I will turn it over to Ambassador Zoellick, who will providesome additional comments on the decision the President has reachedtoday. And he will be glad to take your questions on that issue. Andthen at the end of the briefing, I'll come back for whatever otherquestions you all may have on other topics. This is a statement by the President. "Today I signed a proclamation ending the temporary steel safeguardmeasures I put in place in March 2002. Prior to that time, steelprices were at 20-year lows, and the U.S. International TradeCommission found that a surge in imports to the U.S. market was causingserious injury to our domestic steel industry. I took action to givethe industry a chance to adjust to the surge in foreign imports, and togive relief to the workers and communities that depend on steel fortheir jobs and livelihoods. "These safeguard measures have now achieved their purpose. And asa result of changed economic circumstances, it is time to lift them.The U.S. steel industry wisely used the 21 months of breathing space weprovided to consolidate and restructure. The industry made progress,increasing productivity, lowering production costs, and making Americamore competitive with foreign steel producers. "Steel producers and workers have negotiated new groundbreakinglabor agreements that allow greater flexibility and increased jobstability. The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation has guaranteedthe pensions of eligible steel workers and retirees, and relieved thehigh pension cost that burdened some companies. My jobs and growthplan has also created more favorable economic conditions for theindustry, and the improving economy will help further stimulatedemand. "To keep the positive momentum going, we will continue our steelimport licensing and monitoring program so that my administration canquickly respond to future import surges that could unfairly damage theindustry. We will continue negotiations with our trading partnersthrough the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development toestablish new and strong disciplines on subsidies that governmentsgrant to their steel producers. We will continue to pursue economicpolicies that create the conditions for steel producers, steelconsumers who rely on steel to produce goods ranging from refrigeratorsto auto parts, and other U.S. manufacturers to succeed. "I strongly believe that America's workers can compete with anyonein the world, as long as we have a fair and level playing field. Freetrade opens foreign markets to American products and creates jobs forAmerican works. And an integral part of our commitment to free tradeis our commitment to enforcing our trade laws. "I am pleased the steel industry seized the opportunity we providedto regain its competitiveness and assist steel workers and theircommunities. As a result, U.S. steel companies are now once againwell-positioned to compete both at home and globally." And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Ambassador Zoellick forsome comments. Thank you. AMBASSADOR ZOELLICK: Thank you. Good afternoon. One and one-halfyears ago, the President acted to provide America's steel industry andworkers an opportunity to respond to increased competition from surgingimports due, in part, to global overproduction. And the industry hasused that breathing space well, to the benefit of many families andcommunities around the country. Trade is an important engine of economic growth and job creation.To help very open economies like ours to adjust to rapid and sharpchanges, we sometimes provide temporary safeguards from imports. Suchrelief is an accepted principle of global trade rules. In March 2002, after a nine-month investigation, the independentU.S. International Trade Commission found that 10 steel industryproducts had been injured by a surge in imports that warranted relief.Based on that finding, the President decided that America's steelindustry needed this breathing space. The industry was facingtremendous pressures. Thousands of jobs were at stake, and many steelfirms were at or facing bankruptcies. The industry had been seekinghelp following a rush of low-priced imports in the aftermath of theAsian financial crisis. This President acted. The President imposed temporary safeguards, "To help give America'ssteel industry and its workers the chance to adapt to the large influxof foreign steel." To do so, he exercised his authority under Section203 of the 1974 Trade Act. Now, these safeguards consisted principallyof tariffs, ranging from 8 to 30 percent on the 10 categories of steelproducts identified by the ITC. And in order to minimize the impact ofthese tariffs on U.S. consumers, some steel products were excluded. Inaddition, exports from our free trade partners and most exports fromdeveloping countries were excluded, as well. In September of this year, the ITC provided a follow-up report, amidterm assessment of the impact of the safeguard. That assessmentprovided an important basis for the President's deliberations ofwhether to maintain, modify, or end the safeguard. Now, there are three key elements that inform the President'sreview. First, the ITC's analysis clearly demonstrated that thesafeguard worked. It provided the steel industry with a breathingspace they needed to regain its competitiveness. Jobs have been saved;steel businesses have been given another chance to compete. Since the safeguard has been in place, the industry has undergonemajor restructuring and consolidation. More than half of the steelproduction capacity is owned by firms that merged or restructured. Andthey cut about 4 million tons of inefficient capacity. Overallproductivity has increased sharply. The ITC found that in thesafeguard's first year, productivity increased 12.5 percent for thecritical flat-rolled products, and by between 5.5 to 26 percent for therange of products. Prices have stabilized, and prices today are about 15 to 30 percenthigher than in February 2002, the month before the safeguard. Workers'pensions have been saved and taken off steel industry books. The U.S.Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation has assumed guaranteed pensionunderfunding of 14 steel producers, totaling $8.2 billion. Profitability has been returned. After losing nearly $5 billion inthe 24 months before the safeguard was initiated, the flat-rolledindustry posted profits of $400 million during the first 12 months ofrelief. And financial markets are reflecting the growing optimism forthe steel market. U.S. Steel Corporation stock is currently at a52-week high. Through November 21, the S&P index of steel stocks rose24.4 percent, as compared with a 13.9 percent increase for the S&P500. And U.S. Steel exports are at historic levels, too. ThroughAugust exports are 49 percent above the prior year, and that accountsfor about 8.4 percent of total U.S. shipments. Now, this safeguard definitely provided the industry and workerswith needed breathing space. And to its credit, much of the industryhas used this time well. The bulk of the reconstructing that wasnecessary to make the industry more competitive has now taken place. Second, not only is the industry much stronger today than it was 21months ago, but the economic circumstances that justified the safeguardhave changed. Imports are no longer depressing U.S. prices. On anannualized basis, imports to date are at their lowest levels in adecade, even including the exclusions from the safeguard. Demand inAsia and Russia has rebounded. China's steel consumption has increased22 percent a year since 2001, and it's forecast to increase even morenext year. Changes in relative prices have lowered import pressuresand increased export opportunities. But last, but importantly, safeguards unavoidably impose someadditional costs on consumers. The aim, of course, is to make surethat the benefits of the safeguard outweigh the costs. Fortunately, asthe ITC report demonstrated, the cost to the United States economyimposed by the safeguards were limited. Now, the purpose of the midterm review has been to determinewhether economic circumstances have changed, such that the cost ofmaintaining the safeguard outweigh the benefits. In the first 21months of the safeguard, the benefits to the industry outweighed themarginal cost to consumers. Going forward, however, this is not thecase. For these reasons, the President has concluded that thesafeguard has done its job and can now be lifted. We will continue to use our steel import licensing and monitoringsystem so that we can identify potential import surges quickly in orderto respond. This President has worked hard with the Congress and with othercountries around the world to open markets for product and services forAmerican businesses, farmers, workers, and to help consumers stretchtheir hard-earned dollar to go further. At the same time, he hasrecognized that we need to help Americans adjust to change, throughsafeguards like this one, worker retraining, better education. Andsafeguards are not supposed to be permanent. They provide a helpinghand in extraordinary circumstances. So we're pleased with the steps that the industry has taken to makethe most of this breathing space provided by the safeguard. And welook forward to working with them and with other U.S. businesses tocontinue to grow the economy, to create jobs, and to expandopportunity. Pleased to take your questions. Q Ambassador Zoellick, the steel industry says, certainly theyhave gone through a lot of the reconstructing and consolidation thatwas needed, but that they still have more to do and now is not the timeto be lifting these tariffs. Furthermore, they say that while foreignimports are not the same type of damaging competition that they were 20months ago, a rise in the dollar could turn all of that around veryquickly. Are those concerns not founded? AMBASSADOR ZOELLICK: At this point, no. The whole point of thesafeguard, as I mentioned, was not to be permanent, but was to take thetime necessary to get the industry back on its feet. And from the very start of the safeguard, this midterm review wasbuilt into the process, the ITC report was built into the process. Andas I've outlined, what have you seen -- you've seen profitability goup; you've seen prices go up somewhat and stabilize. They went up andcame down, but have stabilized above earlier levels. The restructuringthat's taken place in these companies, as I mentioned, is enormous,including labor contracts that have changed the overall picture, goingforward. And one of the best indicators is look at what financialmarkets are telling you in terms of the future earning stream. So the key about this safeguard, and it's an important part aboutour overall trade policy, is sometimes industries really go through atough spot. And in this case, this industry really started to get hitvery hard after the '97 financial crisis. And if you look at theiroverall statistics, they were really crying for help in the late '90s.This President came in, asked the ITC to do the investigation, and heacted. But he also believes that after that period is done, theindustry is stabilized, has an opportunity to move forward, that's whatwe should do, because a safeguard is always a balance. Yes, sir. Q Ambassador, the retaliatory tariffs that the European craftedwere meant to inflict maximum political pain on the President'sreelection. How did that factor into your decision? AMBASSADOR ZOELLICK: This decision was independent of that, inthat what we did and what we did from the start of this process was toask for this ITC review, and we were always going to measure thebenefits and costs, to try to get a sense of whether the industry wascoming back, what the circumstances were, in terms of it, and as Isaid, profitability, the restructuring in terms of capacity, dealingwith some of their contractual arrangements -- removing $8.2 billionfrom their pension guarantees and making sure that's protected throughthe Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, another important thing. Sowhether you look at any of the statistics, imports, imports -- all thatis on the positive side. Now, of course, it's good that we now don't have retaliation. Soin my view, this has been a win-win proposition. You give an industrya chance to get on its feet; the ITC showed it didn't have much effectin terms of the past couple of years with some of the consumers -- someeffect, but not overwhelming effect; and there's also no retaliation. Q If it was independent of the WTO decision or the EUretaliation, why did it take you so long to make a decision after theITC report? It's been several months since the ITC report. AMBASSADOR ZOELLICK: I've been in government for so many years, acouple of months after an ITC doesn't strike me as too long. Look,this is an important -- it was clearly an important issue. It is aclearly important industry. And the President wanted to take the time,do the analysis. We relied on the ITC report. A lot of differentoffices looked at this. We also got imports -- or sort of inputslooking at financial sectors. And so that was the basis of thedecisio