Video from inside the Icelandair 757 that preformed an unauthorised low pass over Vestmannaeyjar 2 days ago
Posted by Hot_Net_4845@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 436 comments
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNR4KpK9m/ (It's Tiktok, music/audio removed by me)
Howie92@reddit
Been there. Really lovely place. Went up to the tip of the old vulcano and if we removed the top layer of rocks the ground was so hot we could melt marshmellows there.
JoungAvgeek2012@reddit
Hallo,
darf ich diese Aufnahme für meinen youtube Kanal (ich mache aviation news) (FlugzeugCheck) nutzen?
64bittechie@reddit
Reckless and unprofessional if the pilot did it without prior authorization.
G25777K@reddit
Cashing out after 40 years on the job
4374J@reddit
Fired with cause loss all benefits? Maybe not in Europe…
Ordinary_Duder@reddit
The concept of "losing benefits" is not a thing in most european countries.
mitchsusername@reddit
Wait really? I thought the benefits were better in Europe than the US. You guys don't get retirement accounts, pensions, stock options, stuff like that?
Many-Gas-9376@reddit
Of course we have that stuff or equivalents, depending on country. But little of that is such that it's in the employer's power to take any of it back.
Pension would be either a personal retirement account or an accumulated pension in a centralized government scheme. Your employer has no control over any of this. And even somebody who was fired from a job is entitled to whatever government benefits might apply to their situation.
Compare to the US, even if you were fired from a job, the employer couldn't take back your 401k investments, you'd still be eligible for social security and Medicare, etc.
Ordinary_Duder@reddit
My point was that benefits like health care and other social benefits are provided no matter what. Pensions are paid in during your time at work so that money is already yours and cannot be lost.
Stock options etc. is whatever deal you have with the company so I guess technically that could be lost.
Otres911@reddit
Lol no maybe we get better holidays among other things like that but money? No.
m0viestar@reddit
He wouldn't even lose his pension in the US for this.
oojiflip@reddit
No if he has a paid-in pension as is the norm for most of Europe now. He'd have paid a part of his salary, matched by the company, into a pot that he is the owner of, meaning that if he's reprimanded and fired he would still have access to the pension
Facu474@reddit
One would hope there will be some other type of repercussion at least, otherwise it just encourages more people to do such a thing.
oojiflip@reddit
Yeah I'm absolutely not saying it's OK, even less so with passengers on board, but in terms of airline repercussions, I doubt there'll be any. Criminal ones, however, I don't know
Ok_Recording81@reddit
It was his last flight before retirment. He flew low over his home town.
Techhead7890@reddit
Regarding the edit - out of context that this was purely informational context, this would seem like something that the pilot could use as special circumstances to justify his actions. Tone's hard to read over text and that.
LaconicSuffering@reddit
It doesn't help that people nowadays assume the worst instead of the best when it comes to reading comments.
Techhead7890@reddit
Yeah for sure and I see those kinds of edits all the time now, we live in a very "shoot first, ask questions later" or "downvote and return never" type of online lifestyle these days.
Corporal_Tax@reddit
Which is reckless and unprofessional if the pilot did it without prior authorization.
rocket_randall@reddit
Bad enough doing it alone over a populated area, unconscionable to do it with a crew and passengers aboard
Rainebowraine123@reddit
Planes fly low over populated areas all the time with crew and passengers on board during approach and landing. There was 0 risk involved with this maneuver. Visual conditions and this guy knows the plane like the back of his hand.
soulmechh@reddit
The authorization is what makes it safe and professional? LOL
SK_SLO@reddit
Yes... becaues you would not get one for a stunt like this.
Latespoon@reddit
Well that all depends.
Processing img mmtal0cwsxug1...
zdy132@reddit
To be fair, Australia is a different country.
av8geek@reddit
You don't say...
DynamiteWitLaserBeam@reddit
Big if true
SK_SLO@reddit
Is it full of passangers? It's a military plane. Totally different scenario.
Latespoon@reddit
There are thousands of people immediately below it. It is a military plane, that doesn't really change much.
SK_SLO@reddit
You do know that they are thousands or people around almost every airport around the world… On approach and takeoff paths. Still not the same as why the pilot did on Icelandair.
Latespoon@reddit
Aircraft typically don't make low passes over the terminal where those people are!
av8geek@reddit
Boooooo
Ok_Recording81@reddit
Yeah, Iceland air reported him to law enforcement.
DoctorPepster@reddit
Because responding to that comment with this reply just sounds like you're making an excuse for the pilot.
Ok_Recording81@reddit
Saying something factual is an excuse?
DoctorPepster@reddit
Like I said, giving that information in that specific context sounded like making excuses.
Ok_Recording81@reddit
It was statement of the facts. Nothing more or less.
Cheesekurs@reddit
Goodbye retirement pay
NeighborhoodLoud4884@reddit
Not how it works in europe. Retirement savings aren't tied to the company so they have no access.
Okey, if the Captain gets a huge fine he might loose some money, but this is super unlikely to happen.
av8geek@reddit
Booooo
Dagur@reddit
They would never allow this publicly but maybe with a wink
Kjartanski@reddit
Icelandair referred to captain to the police for Prosecution
Dagur@reddit
yep, they kind of have to. This is not good for their reputation.
deep_rover@reddit
I once did it without prior authorization.
Outrageous-Score7936@reddit
How will the copilot be punished? If he allowed the low pass to happen.
CoffeeBeanATC@reddit
After the numerous incidents & accidents that have occurred, the first officer is expected to speak up when the captain does something without permission or is outright illegal. Otherwise, you get the Tenerife disaster, as an example.
rnavstar@reddit
As an airline pilot I can tell you that this is still a problem. Maybe not as much, but some captains can still be huge A-holes. I know some at my company that have very high FO book offs because of this.
NewUser769283@reddit
And this captain was on his last flight, so there could very well have been a lot of age between them.
fmota00100@reddit
The amount of times there are incidents or accidents because the "captain was on his last few days in the company" or "the captain was about to retire" is mind boggling
Haunting_Heat3296@reddit
Right? They need to surprise retire them. Come off the plane, boom, someone’s there with champagne and streamers, well done that was your last go.
badpuffthaikitty@reddit
Why are the fire trucks moving towards my airplane? Oh shit! That was my last flight.
dvcxfg@reddit
CONGRATS CAPTAIN
pipboy1989@reddit
“Well there goes my low pass under the Golden Gate Bridge”
niftygull@reddit
I think this would be actually pretty cool, but idk if airlines care enough to do it. Ultimately it’s a problem with the pilot doing something that was dangerous and unnecessary but ah, what can you do
disillusioned@reddit
"Now find your own way home!"
JamsHammockFyoom@reddit
They do say you crash within 5 miles of home after a long drive, as it's when you drop your guard the most... honestly, this isn't the worst idea.
AltruisticCoelacanth@reddit
This is base rate neglect.
That's not why you crash when you're within a few miles of your house. You crash more often there because you are driving within a few miles of your house more often than you are driving anywhere else. You simply have more opportunities to crash over time.
JamsHammockFyoom@reddit
That's not what I mean, I mean that after driving home after a long drive (say you've been on holiday, for example) and because you're familiar with the the roads, you subconsciously let your guard slip a little because you feel comfortable on familiar roads - and that's when you end up having a crash.
Obviously what the captain did here is unacceptable - perhaps he felt a bit more empowered to do something like this because he was the equivalent from 5 miles from home on his career, who knows. I suspect he'll be in quite a bit of bother though.
chakid21@reddit
Any sources? Or did you make all that up?
JamsHammockFyoom@reddit
Sources?
It's a hypothetical, my dude.
JBR1961@reddit
I read they tended to do this in Vietnam when guys approached their 100th mission. There was a high incidence of guys shot down on their last couple missions, one theory being they were so nervous being “almost finished” that they screwed up. So they might call it for you at, say, 98 instead. I don’t recall if the practice ever had statistically positive results.
NewUser769283@reddit
At least he didn't make one last barrel roll during the low pass....
aquoad@reddit
And tear down grandma's clothesline??
Nara-Quill@reddit
The fact that "some captains are still huge a-holes" is apparently just an accepted variable in commercial aviation is a bit concerning when you think about what these captains are actually operating. It's not a difficult personality to work with at an office, it's a 757 over a town.
tarrasque@reddit
You can be really good at your job and still be an asshole. Really good.
Pilots are no exception.
UpsetAstronomer@reddit
Decisions are part of being a good pilot, if you’re a bad decision maker you’re a bad pilot, period.
tarrasque@reddit
What’s being an asshole got to do with decision making?
theglassishalf@reddit
I get what you're saying, but for some jobs, being an asshole is incompatible with doing a good job. I'd argue that if you are bad at crew resource management (i.e. an asshole) you are in fact not good at your job as aircraft captain.
tarrasque@reddit
And I get what you’re saying, but I’d say they are not mutually exclusive. You can be a dick and still be effective with CRM. Being an asshole may be a limiting factor on how good you can be, but I don’t think it automatically makes one ineffective.
MikeOfAllPeople@reddit
It's really hard to fire someone for being an asshole. Toxic leaders tend to also be high performing and so all the measurables are in their favor.
indorock@reddit
I mean the entire second season of The Rehearsal on HBO dealt with this exact problem.
PerforatedPie@reddit
That's not all season 2 dealt with.
indorock@reddit
For some reason, I had suppressed that part of the season from my memory...
Gb_packers973@reddit
Miracle on the mojave
101Alexander@reddit
I'll support this but want to add context.
My experience has been that there simply isn't a knowledge base given to FOs on what to do. The 'training', which is really just slides in a PowerPoint, is all about "softly" suggesting that a different course of action might be ideal before gradually saying s bit more. It's all suggestion of course.
Without the actual practice, you have no idea how much harder it is to put it into a social context. And that's assuming the FO is even on the right path of what to do to begin with.
The underlining assumption is that the Captain generally has good intentions about the outcome of the flight and will work towards that. Nevermind that there are still plenty of idiots who's "good intentions" still lead to unnecessary risk elevation.
So you end up with a scenario of "good luck, deal with it".
steakbbq@reddit
Nathan Fielder did a whole show about this, its actually a pretty amazing show! Season 2 of The Rehearsal
LionsDetestPotatoes@reddit
What does «FO book off» mean?
rnavstar@reddit
At my company we don’t have “sick” days. We have book offs. We have around 8 a year, but in reality it’s unlimited. They are not 8 days either. They can be as long as you need. One book off can go 1 day to 5 days to as many as you need. It’s a really good program. Yes some take advantage of it. I’m guilty to it too. But the idea is, if you’re not fit to fly, YOU DON’T FLY.
If it’s someone you want to never fly with again, it’s called a “no fly list”
TK3K216@reddit
When first officers bid for their schedule they can bid to specifically avoid flying with certain captains
LionsDetestPotatoes@reddit
Thank you! Guess I have people like that at my job as well. Our biggest customer have an employee that is not allowed to work on the same projects as us because of trust issues, ha ha
Stahi@reddit
"Really don't think you should be doing this."
"What are they gonna do, fire me?"
Dinosaur_Wrangler@reddit
“No dickhead, they’re gonna fire me.”
Stahi@reddit
"Sounds like a you problem."
ozymandieus@reddit
Anyone interested in knowing why copilots often don't speak up should watch season 2 of the rehearsal, it's one of the strangest deepest funniest things I've ever seen
Drunkenaviator@reddit
Absolutely not. Do not mistake a comedy show for actual information. That wanker was so incredibly far from reality as to be laughable. I'm so sick of regular people asking me about that shithead's show. Like CRM somehow hasn't existed for fucking decades.
ADinner0fOnions@reddit
Captain Allears and First Officer Blunt ❤️
RugerRedhawk@reddit
That's why the commenter brought it up most likely
gothaggis@reddit
apparently, they had permission to do it (from what i read anyway) - its after the fact that icelandair lawyers reported it to the police...for legal protection reasons i guess.
Squrton_Cummings@reddit
Don't even get me started on the hints & allegations.
wolfganggartner5@reddit
Haven’t you guys seen that Nathan for you or he spends an entire season going into this?
flightwatcher45@reddit
Is the CVR available or was it over written?
Beautiful-Musk-Ox@reddit
Tenerife disaster
the captain being considered infallible was not a good policy in my humble opinion
r0thar@reddit
Hence the official start of CRM
CessnaBandit@reddit
There isn’t much they can do beyond voicing disapproval. If you start wrestling for the controls it will just make things worse.
CatInAPickleSuit@reddit
Bullshit. You can absolutely say no and stop it from happening.
CessnaBandit@reddit
My 32 years airline experience know better
CatInAPickleSuit@reddit
So you're just gonna sit there while he other guy pulls some shit like this?
That's what you learned in your 32 years?
sanjosanjo@reddit
Wouldn't it be good for them to radio ATC, to tell them what is about to happen?
CessnaBandit@reddit
Makes no difference. Would all be on the cockpit recorder. For all we know both pilots were in favour of doing it
sanjosanjo@reddit
How would they know if the recording would be saved or heard?
CessnaBandit@reddit
It’s a given when something like this happens.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Only if it has been preserved.
Have a look at this data from NTSB showing how in many incidents, unfortunately, pilots don't ensure the CVR circuit breaker is pulled after the event, in order to preserve the recording.
hvusslax@reddit
They were on the ground 30 minutes after the incident and the plane did not fly again until next morning so it should have been possible to recover. The airline made it clear immediately that this was a serious infraction.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Assuming the CVR has not been intentionally erased or hasn't been intentionally powered for a few hours just to ensure it's been overwritten.
CessnaBandit@reddit
You’re arguing for the sake of it
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Not really, and I bet there’s no CVR preserved in this case.
melquiades_is_alive@reddit
I don't understand why it's even an option, to NOT record a flight. Also I cannot understand the whole need of erasing old flights, or rewriting data. like we have 5 tera usb stick now. isn't the technology advanced enough to record ALL flights without rewriting?
sanjosanjo@reddit
Do they preserve 2 hours before re-recording for the 757-200?
sanjosanjo@reddit
Does the flight recorder last more than 30 minutes? I think that was the soonest they could have pulled the recorder after the incident.
https://avherald.com/h?article=537cac23&opt=0
SkyHighExpress@reddit
You don’t think atc knows exactly what is happening?
roy-dam-mercer@reddit
At least say it on the CVR.
A coworker does that regularly to be funny. You’ll tell him what your plan is and he’ll strain closer to the CVR mic and calmly say, “I don’t agree with this, roy-dam-mercer.” Dude’s hilarious.
NARRATOR: He’s not joking.
LunchboxSuperhero@reddit
Wouldn't anything they said be on the cockpit voice recorder?
Dr_Law@reddit
Best you can do as a copilot is strongly urge against it. End of the day if the captain wants to crash the aircraft he can crash the aircraft. I dunno what the best thing you should do here as a copilot because if you continuously argue against it and create a contentious atmosphere the already insane captain could end up doing something chaotic. So yeah I don’t think the copilot should be punished unless there’s evidence that he also jubilantly agreed to it.
durandal@reddit
No, as a copilot you will not let the captain crash if you have any opportunity to prevent it. You call it an emergency and take over controls. Better to wrestle the controls than to crash. Also such an escalation may fix whatever mindset the captain was in - it is extremely unusual to take controls away as a copilot.
In this specific scenario, it is probably slightly tricky to find the right point to put a stop to this, especially if it is a nice captain on a special occasion who doesn't make clear he wants to violate minimum flight altitudes. Best would be to set safe gates, and to have permission by ATC. Any violation you call out, announce that you will intervene, and in worst case take over and initiate a climb to safe altitude. What's he gonna do, fight you? On his last flight?
m0viestar@reddit
Wrestle the controls? My dude this isn't Hollywood. You start pulling controls you're putting the plane at a bigger risk than just letting it ride out. Pilot is not incapacitated and still has control over the aircraft you shouldn't be tugging at shit even if it's in a stupid maneuver
durandal@reddit
This was in response to "End of the day if the captain wants to crash the aircraft he can crash the aircraft." In this case I will wrestle anyone for my life, the looks of it be damned.
Dr_Law@reddit
Ok well my point on that was mostly conceptual; if someone wanted to do something nefarious there are a billion ways to succeed and very few ways to to stop against it. It's such a hard situation exactly because the safer option is probably just want to trust the other guy instead of assume the worst and fight him for it.
clarinetJWD@reddit
The person you are replying to wasn't taking about this incident, but the hypothetical "if the captain wants to crash the aircraft" above.
KnoxvilleJimmy@reddit
In 2002 Icelandair 757 would've crashed at Oslo Gardemoen if the copilot hadn't taken control over from the captain. Captain was wrong, copilot saved the plane. Icelandair later gave the copilot a warning for disobeying the captain.
If this is the culture within the company, I understand the copilot staying silent in this situation.
PanchoVilla6@reddit
He’s got at least a phone call afterwards to deal with
danit0ba94@reddit
He better deny disapprove & dennounce that captain the world over, if he enjoys this whole flying business.
RandomNameOver90000@reddit
Everything is recorded in the cockpit. If he did deny anything then we'll know.
AdMuch7162@reddit
that's only assuming the cockpit voice recorder was intentionally preserved and not overwritten. It runs on a loop and maintains a fairly short period of recording (historically only 2 hours).
Not only that, but there is a simple push button to erase the CVR available to the pilots when the plane is on the ground. It is not a given that a recording will be available, and it most certainly won't be made available to the public (selected transcript portions at the very most).
Pilots unions/associations are remarkably powerful things.
danit0ba94@reddit
Yikes. Very true.
YSU777@reddit
Did they confirm he was not up for this? He could’ve agreed to this and thus he is also part of the problem.
DarkNo7318@reddit
He was taking a dump
Gervill@reddit
What if the Lundi just gets scared and leaves ?
MeDonGustavo@reddit
That.Is.Low.
laterral@reddit
What would he be charged with?
C4-621-Raven@reddit
Negligent or reckless operation of an aircraft under the Icelandic equivalent regulation to SERA 3101 (EU) FAR 91.13 (US) or CAR 602.01.1 (CAN)
OkAstronaut76@reddit
soulmechh@reddit
Is that Icelandic law?
Kjartanski@reddit
Iceland is a member of EASA, its regulations are adopted into icelandic legislation yes
laterral@reddit
Thanks for this! Do you know what would be some realistic consequences in this case?
BeachHut9@reddit
Loss of licence for a star.
JanEric1@reddit
Probably irrelevant if that was his retirement flight
juusohd@reddit
But the FO still has career left.
F737NG@reddit
Maybe. Though if that captain wanted to continue flying privately/recreationally in retirement, that's gone as an option.
C4-621-Raven@reddit
In Canada at least, straight to jail, maximum sentence of 25 years and bye bye pilot wings.
TheYell0wDart@reddit
Eating a meal? A succulent Chinese meal?
tottle24@reddit
Is this near Vik?
hchn27@reddit
Oh…..this was done during a flight with passengers………🫣
lukei1@reddit
Holy crap was this during a regular passenger flight?
birkir@reddit
Yeah you can hear audio from the passengers and cabin in this 1 min 26 sec version just released by the estonian clarinet player Selvadore Rähni who bragged that he'd now flown with the "Icelandic Maverick".
eggplantpot@reddit
Wait wtf he wasn't descending to land the plane?
birkir@reddit
he's flying over a town on a separate island off the coast
eggplantpot@reddit
That's really messed up. I guess he did let the people in the cabin know, but I would have shat bricks if I was in the island without knowing what's going on.
doxxingyourself@reddit
Yeah. Apparently it’s his hometown and he’s retiring, this was the last flight. I’m thinking they knew he was gonna do that honestly.
NoTap8889@reddit
this didn't trigger 9/11 alarmbells for the ATC??
ItselfSurprised05@reddit
That's not nearly as bad as it seemed from the first videos we saw.
If he's lost all thrust, he still would have cleared the city before crashing into the sea. /s
Mesphelia@reddit
yes
slowkums@reddit
IANAP but that looks like a typical approach into Midway.
AshamedTown9281@reddit
Tower, requesting a fly by. Negative ghostrider, the pattern is full.
Traquer@reddit
Ehh, I bet the pilot has flown over this area plenty of times in his lift while training in a Cessna and knew the conditions. He didn't fly into a box canyon or anything.
The only questionable thing in my mind is did he announce his intentions to local traffic on the island?
True-Economist3382@reddit
He's retiring. Thank God. World does not need a brainless pilot endangering all of our lives. I'm going to be nice. Maybe he has early dementia.
MrAlanShore@reddit
This is just plain stupid
flylowslow@reddit
Have the Captain pay for the gas and call it good. No harm no foul.
derekcz@reddit
Realistically is this actually dangerous? Was that with a heavy fuel load? There's some airports where the landing path is just as close to houses and it happens like a hundred times a day. It makes me wonder how all the crazy South African airlines low passes were possible
Drunkenaviator@reddit
As a pilot who hand flies a ton, and frequently does stuff the magenta line kids would be terrified by (short approaches in a jet, etc). This is WILDLY irresponsible. 300ft is insanely low over a populated area with passengers on board. If he did it at 2000ft, nobody would bat an eye. There's no safety margin at that altitude, and the one at the controls is retirement age and well into cognitive decline.
derekcz@reddit
Would a minimum safe altitude be calculated by assuming dual engine failure and then looking at glide range? I don't want to excuse this behaviour, I'm just interested in how aviation risks are evaluated. For example I think on every takeoff there's technically a point where a multiple engine failure basically guarantees a crash, so someone somewhere had to draw the line at a certain likelihood percentage.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
It wouldn't be for a dual engine failure, more for something like a control issue, or windshear off one of those mountains creating some turbulence you wouldn't be able to react to in time. There's near zero chance of a double engine failure in a 757.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
There's one thing doing this as part or an pre-arranged, approved airshow, for which you train, with an empty aircraft.
To do this without any approval, training and finally, with fare paying passengers in the back... it's extremely reckless. Those people didn't pay money to be part of an egotistic self-loathing air display, but rather to be safely flown from A to B.
hammerhead987@reddit
Thanks for the insight. You forgot to answer the question though. Realistically is this dangerous?
Appropriate-Count-64@reddit
It really depends.
These low passes on their own aren’t strictly more dangerous than (say) approach. BUT it requires a lot more finesse and attention. Any sudden gust (or worse, a downdraft) could cause the plane to lose too much altitude to recover from. 100 meters is basically the limits of low-passes even when doing demonstrator flight demonstrations with a near empty, interior-less plane like at the Dubai Airshow.
There are a decent few instances of these going wrong. The one that leaps to mind is an Air France A320-100 in the 80s crashed into trees while doing a sanctioned low pass of a regional airport with passengers aboard. The pilots slowed down too much and came in too low, and then when they realized their mistake and tried to climb the plane went “Whoa, hey now that’s gonna stall us out.” And inhibited the climb which led them to crashing into the forest.
When compared to most airshow moves, flying low is pretty easy to pull off. The main issue is that it’s an airshow move that the plane isn’t designed to do regularly, so it’s reduces the margins for error to basically nothing. As you can tell by the video, it’s usually fine. But doing this is basically removing all the safety nets that would normally be there and placing the plane in a very risky position.
LowPomegranate225@reddit
Woah .. there were passengers in the plane? Thought was just pilot.
Yea that's a definite no no.
Antares_@reddit
Who did you think record the video?
Clutch-Bandicoot@reddit
If pilot was flying the plane then who was phone?
ViciousNakedMoleRat@reddit
The pilot.
Puedo_Apagar@reddit
How is the pilot flying the plane all the way back in seat 19F?
Tupcek@reddit
long hands
IdaCraddock69@reddit
Manute Bol move
Hfyvr1@reddit
Well his hands are busy filming. Must be something else long
Olaxan@reddit
I thought the pilot was Icelandish but turns out he was Danish
TiredWiredAndHired@reddit
This cracked me up so much
SillyDeersFloppyEars@reddit
I thought Luffy only sailed the sea.
flyingthroughspace@reddit
Inspector Gadget over there
danit0ba94@reddit
757s are just that good :-)
Chilipepah@reddit
Go go Gadget arms!
Dagur@reddit
autopilot
LifeguardNo2020@reddit
Ever heard of an airfryer buddy?
EINFACH_NUR_DAEMLICH@reddit
Duct tape?
MoreElloe@reddit
Ever heard of a no hander?
Square-Patience8357@reddit
From behind the wings!?
ViciousNakedMoleRat@reddit
That's the joke.
ic33@reddit
With a handheld camera back next to the wing? That would be even worse ;)
Golden_Hour1@reddit
Its not like Iceland air were going to let the pilot just take one of their fully loaded commercial planes for a spin lmao. Of course there were People on it
Photosynthetic@reddit
Could’ve been a repositioning flight or something. 🤷♀️
Chairboy@reddit
"Hey I'm just gonna take her up for some pattern work, maybe go get a $10,000 hamburger."
"Cool."
shewy92@reddit
So you didn't even read the title OR watch the video?
LowPomegranate225@reddit
I'm dyslexic
erlendursmari@reddit
This was FI 521 from Frankfurt.
ManonMacru@reddit
I actually have nightmares of me travelling with family and having the pilot do reckless things like that.
We have our lives in their hands, there should not be anything more than flying safely from A to B. That's the job. Nothing more, nothing less.
ImNotSkankHunt42@reddit
I think there was a Russian pilot that allowed his kid to fly the plane and ended up killing everyone after a stall, in 1994 I think.
I_love_pancakes_88@reddit
Yep. He let TWO of his kids fly the plane. They hadn’t crashed if someone had managed to stop him after the first one.
TinyCopy5841@reddit
Or if they had absolutely any idea of how to operate their aircraft. You need to look at the bigger picture, that boy didn't do anything that couldn't have happened normally on a completely mundane flight. If the captain or the FO had bumped the yoke themselves, the outcome would have been the same.
wehappy3@reddit
There are two excellent reviews of this incident: - Admiral Cloudberg (writeup)
maltosekincaid@reddit
r/KidsAreFuckingStupid (so are their parents in this case)
Shawnj2@reddit
I think it would be really fun for companies to operate tourist flights which do perform wilder maneuvers
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Exactly.
That's why these days, everything we do is monitored, and the flight data is regularly reviewed for any exceedances from the normal operation (look up Flight Data Monitoring, or FDM).
As they weren't approaching an airport, there will be so many high risk events noted by the system, that even without the video evidence or other reports, the pilots would have ended up in trouble anyway.
jakeotheshadows@reddit
That doesn’t explain if this is actually dangerous.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Sure they do, but that's not the point. I also know how to fly the airplane without one engine, or without hydraulic systems, or land without flaps. Am I going to deliberatly shutdown an engine, switch off hydraulics or land without flaps with 200 people in the back just for fun?
On the next flight, would you like your pilots to do any of the above?
jakeotheshadows@reddit
No but those things actually sound dangerous.
The view out this window looks like the view I had tonight flying over LA on approach to LAX.
soulmechh@reddit
You are 100% right. People here will flip their positions in a second if he had "authorization". Pathetic. Either the action is dangerous or it's not.
CptSandbag73@reddit
It does matter.
If it was authorized (which it shouldn’t be with passengers IMO), it means that the crew has considered and has agreed to certain restrictions like altitude and horizontal distance from obstructions.
Plus, ATC would know the crew’s intentions and would be operating within a shared mental model of the situation.
That would be categorically be safer.
This is all moot, because I doubt the airline would authorize any of this either, and they would have just as much of a veto authority as ATC.
BIKF@reddit
I am not sure what 700ft hills there are a third of a mile away on both sides of the approach to LAX when you are on a half mile final. I'm not local to LA though, so all I have to go on is how flat Inglewood looks in google street view. Maybe you can help me out and show me what hills you saw.
TheCygnusWall@reddit
Here's the thing though if you are on a stable glide path into LAX and lose 1 or even 2 engines you are already essentially gliding towards an airport. In this case there is no airport to land at if you do lose an engine that low and also there also probably aren't planned "missed approach" paths around the terrain like there would be at an airport.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Yes, but the view up the front in that situation would have had a runway in front, not a a random part of the world.
You can't fly that low, except for the purpose of takeoff and landing. The rules in aviation are written in dark, red blood.
Something that this captain, despite his apparently vast amount of experience, still didn't quite comprehend.
BIKF@reddit
We need to remember that we are talking about a full career consisting of flying that is entirely different from this. Decades of being an airline pilot does not necessarily make you a qualified airshow pilot. Every time this pilot has descended this close to the ground before, he has done it with the help of an approach plate, PAPI lights and other visual cues from the runway environment. Does that make him an expert on doing it without all those things to help him?
soulmechh@reddit
He was flying level, no stunts. Did you know planes fly that height and lower and then actually touch the ground on runways? WTF!
I don't think he should have done it at all, but nothing about this is dangerous. None of you can articulate how it was dangerous.
plhought@reddit
You sure about every time this pilot has flown close to the ground?
Do you know the full back story of this pilot?
What about his times flying bush in Iceland? Medevac, etc...
He didn't fly 757s for Iceland his entire life you know...
Or his training - where the airport may not even if had PAPIs?
Or the multitudes of times PAPIs are unserviceable, and nor are they required for any visual approach (pilots are taught to land without them you know...)
If you're going to cite his lack of these specific experiences as a reason they aren't capable at it - you better be sure you have your facts straight.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
You're just looking for excuses.
It was purely reckless, end of story.
plhought@reddit
Not an excuse.
This commenter was highlighting specific inexperiences that first of all - weren't true - and therefore not relevant.
If the pilot had an ego and made a poor decision - that's ancillary to the false facts noted above.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Previous experience of flying a C150 from 40 years ago means nothing.
This is a jet, operated in accordance with Commercial Air Transport rules, and you have no way of flying it like that on a scheduled flight, with fare paying passengers in the back, even if you are Bob Hoover, Chuck Yeager and Neil Armstrong in one person.
plhought@reddit
Once again, where was I making an excuse.
The comment was factually incorrect. Nothing more.
BIKF@reddit
Fair enough, I should have qualified my statement by specifying "every time he has descended this close to the ground in an airliner".
And the claim was "PAPI lights and other visual cues from the runway environment" as an aggregate statement. When you fly, do you typically decend this low before you have the runway in sight? The runway itself is a meaningful clue to whether you are where you think you are.
plhought@reddit
The "runway environment" is just one of many tools to determine position. Not the only. Pilots are smart.
I'm not justifying this individual's actions - but don't claim absolutes about this pilot or incident if you don't know.
jakeotheshadows@reddit
This actually answers my question. Because I’ve been in a passenger many times and this view seemed very familiar. Thank you.
Hellstrike@reddit
If you look at flight radar, this was a low pass over a local airport. So the flight path itself was safe.
Still not a great thing to do, but at least he wasn't doing some wannabe Top Gun flying.
Austerlitz2310@reddit
This is how the B-52 crashed back in the 90's
NewTransportation911@reddit
Well no. That 52 crashed because the pilot pushed it to way beyond it and his capabilities.
Austerlitz2310@reddit
Because he was being wreckless.
sithelephant@reddit
Because he was not being wreckless.
Ok_Recording81@reddit
He was being reckless. There were other pilots who refused to fly wirh him from previous incidents. Command was aware of his lack of professionalism and they did nothing about it.
sithelephant@reddit
He was being reckless. He was not (as the poster I replied to) said being wreckless.
Ok_Recording81@reddit
Ohhhh. Did not catch the spelling mistake.
Ashamed_Musician_674@reddit
a WOOSH so big i bet you thought a plane was overhead
Ok_Recording81@reddit
What? You are not making sense. But hey, thanks for your rudeness.
Austerlitz2310@reddit
Go read the report.
sithelephant@reddit
You misspelled reckless.
Austerlitz2310@reddit
Gotchya, missed that.
flightist@reddit
Was thoroughly wrecked (thus, not wreckless), because he was being reckless.
Longjumping_Rule_560@reddit
He had at least one wreck.
Antelope-Subject@reddit
He sure showed us he was the best B52 pilot ever and his Co Pilot sure kept him in check. What a waste.
-smartcasual-@reddit
The co-pilot on that flight, LTC McGeehan, was the squadron commander, and actually the only person who had fought to get the pilot removed from flying duty because of a history of unsafe decisions.
When that was denied by his superiors, he decided to co-pilot every flight where "that guy" was PIC in order to protect his aircrew.
Unfortunately there was nothing he could do in time.
Texas_Kimchi@reddit
That pilot was a murderer too. Dude had an observer flying with him because he had almost killed other crew members and people complained over and over again and nothing was done about it. So the guy worried about it decided he would personally watch him, and it cost him his life.
TogaPower@reddit
I don’t think you know what the word murder means. Let’s be accurate with our words.
He was reckless and dangerous and got people killed because of it. That’s not the same thing as murder, which requires intent to kill someone.
Professional_Net7339@reddit
That accident is objectively, third degree murder. Why are you trying to grandstand? And more importantly, why are you trying to grandstand while being wrong?!
ic33@reddit
Murder doesn't always require intent to kill; it can e.g. include depraved indifference to human life or when deliberately engaging in a reckless felony. What is definitionally "murder" depends upon jurisdiction and findings of fact.
s0ul_invictus@reddit
This so much, its getting to a point where its becoming difficult to convey precise information and have meaningful discourse because "use the worst words I know to describe things I don't like" has become the standard for so many.
neroflyer@reddit
And how did a plane get into that’s situation without input from the pilot or mechanical failure. That B52 pilot had an ego and was reckless. His superiors knew he was reckless and did nothing about it u til it was too late. Three other aircrew paid the price with their lives.
genuine_sandwich@reddit
I had to look this story up.
Austerlitz2310@reddit
It wasn't his first stunt either. The whole point is that this behavior is dangerous. Yet people downvote 😂
BrewCityChaserV2@reddit
No, it's not.
Pr6srn@reddit
Self-loathing?
Self-centred surely.
FatsDominoPizza@reddit
Someone losing their wings for sure.
Practical-Ball1437@reddit
It was the pilot's final flight.
stormdraggy@reddit
Can't lose something you don't have.
s0ul_invictus@reddit
those people loved every minute of it
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
You have to remember that not everybody that boards an airplane is a 100% avgeek. There are also people who don't care about airplanes at all, other than a means of transport, and then there are some people, that are afraid of flying.
Do you think those people loved it as well?
s0ul_invictus@reddit
they were well informed prior to the flight, nobody was scared and crying, good lord
AdoringCHIN@reddit
I love planes and I'd still be pissed off at this. The pilot's job is to get us from point A to point B, not go off course to do some stupid vanity flyover.
Santa_Ricotta69@reddit
"self-loathing" is so funny, the histrionics of it all
Rainebowraine123@reddit
No, this is not actually dangerous at all. Perfect visual conditions and the pilot knows the aircraft like the back of his hand if he's retiring.
CoffeeBeanATC@reddit
ATC here. It will depend on the layout, like are there water towers, etc. The pilot absolutely did his research of course & approach plates will have the Minimum Safe Altitude (MSA) on there. The problem here is, if it wasn’t pre-arranged with ATC, this counts as a deviation. I know people will say “screw it” to the first reason, but there are noise abatement & MSA rules to follow. The maneuver itself could have been perfectly safe, but if you don’t let anyone know about it, that’s the problem. Safety of aircraft is the pilot’s responsibility; safety of airspace is ATCs.
Commercial aircraft tend to do instrument approaches, though, on good weather days, they could ask or ATC could offer a visual approach or an ILS. More often than not, in the summer, Approach will clear an aircraft for either an ILS or visual approach for runway 17 & ask the pilot to tell me in the Tower what they choose to do. I have received requests of slight deviations for whatever reasons & more often than not, I approve them for it, as long as it doesn’t break any minimums. So did this pilot not even say anything?! Pilots also know when the busier times are & won’t bother us with these shenanigans during those times.
As for South Africa, I can’t speak to that, I’m in Canada. Every country, every city has their own rules when it comes to noise abatement. Helicopters are able to fly low to do their jobs, civilian or military, but they all ask for approval prior to even leaving the ground.
NewUser769283@reddit
It wasn't prearranged with ATC?
My guess the pilot requested descend early into Keflavík and requested to go below controlled airspace......
Why in the whole world would ATC not approve that??
What he does in uncontrolled airspace.... you cannot blame ATC for....
ATC is not police officers, they provide a service. Pilot asks, pilot gets.... (if able).
Hellstrike@reddit
He was flying over some local airfield (both runways around 4k feet), so doing a low pass should be fine in theory. The ATC probably found the request odd, but not particularly dangerous. There's 1-2 flights a day there, BE20s, so it's not like the airspace is congested.
NewUser769283@reddit
No, ATC don't find requests like that odd.
It's not a daily thing.... but it's not uncommon either.
Hellstrike@reddit
Requesting a low pass at a field not on your flight plan while flying revenue airline service is rather odd. Especially one that can't regularly take a 757.
I mean, at the end of the day, the only "damage" is a ton or two of fuel.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
The only time I've ever heard of something like this actually happening was one of Connie's 747s dropping into YIP for a low pass on the way to China during the airshow.
aceyt12@reddit
Looks like he’s below MSA. Look at all the terrain around him in close vicinity.
Hour_Tour@reddit
There's an airport there, close on the opposite side to the camera view. They can use the associated instrument approaches to cloudbreak. Once below cloud, arguably a visual approach and a visual climb out can be used for the terrain safety aspect (these are IFR procedures), as long as the weather isn't too bad. The highest point on the island is 935ft AMSL, so it's not that they're surrounded by high terrain, they're flying very low. The MSA is 2000ft as soon as they're west of the airport, and there's only ocean ahead a few seconds after this video ends.
Not defending the actions, just sprinkling in some context.
Hellstrike@reddit
Yeah, this wasn't great, but the strange aspect was that there were Pax aboard and that the airline was not in the know. Low passes are sometimes done when Airlines get new planes or retire old ones, so the practice itself is done often enough. Just not in revenue service.
aceyt12@reddit
Thanks, appreciate the context!
derekcz@reddit
Thanks for an actual detailed answer on this, it's good to have the perspective of someone who actually realistically could be dealing with something like this. It's a shame if the pilot really did this entirely on their own without planning, I feel like if they really wanted then it might have been possible to arrange for a flyby maybe slightly offset away from the town at a higher altitude, still would be cool. I hope we will get clear answers.
Boeing367-80@reddit
The key thing you said there is that in those landing paths, it happens like a hundred times a day.
Yeah, on a path that is surveyed, ensured its free of obstacles, no weird local climactic/wind issues and otherwise is extremely well understood.
That aircraft was close to high ground - you can see the hill/mountain/cliff in the background. Who knows what effect winds have in the local area. When you're that close to the ground, any weird local wind effect could have a really deleterious effect on the aircraft.
Basic rule in aviation - don't take unnecessary risks. Especially don't take them on behalf of passengers who never signed up for whatever self-indulgent bullshit the pilot was engaged in.
SkyHighExpress@reddit
Your basic rules would stop most types of operations. Risks are always taken in aviation. What do you think is more risky? Straight and level at 1500’ when you are 40 miles from the airport in a jet twin or landing in winding more windshear conditions. (Ps one has killed significantly more people)
takeachillpill666@reddit
That person said *unnecessary* risks. Landing is necessary. Stop being a tool lol. You know this was unsafe, even though the footage is cool.
SkyHighExpress@reddit
Yes it is less safe than a CDA from 35000’ but how much? It really is insignificant compared to other risks in aviation like perhaps going into discretion, or doing a non precision approach (again lots of deaths during that) or ejecting to fly a visual instead of taking the ils and stabilising at 3000’ or choosing to flying with enough fuel for one alternate instead of six. It is just not a big deal, doesn’t look great and that’s it. Plus not unsafe. Rules of the air, vfr is 500’ from people. So you could just take a plane, fill it with friends and do the same thing perfectly legally. A final thing is this flight has atc? What do your think they were doing during the stunt?
Hellstrike@reddit
The plane is flying a low pass over some local airfield, you can see that on Flight Radar 24. So the flight path should be free of obstacles.
ravens-shadows@reddit
*** Steve Fossett has joined the channel ***
CMDR_Expendible@reddit
How on earth did you get so many upvotes? Are there really that many of you on this forum who think that anything aviation/military/space is just a playground for your own fantasies, so much that you've become totally disconnected from reality... glances at news ... oh.
There's one very simple answer that should be apparent; if you don't authorise it, no one else knows you're there either. Sure, ground control might be desperately trying to keep up with radar returns (harder for commercial the lower you go outside expected coverage) and then ping everyone else in the nearby area that there's a huge commercial jet flying unexpectedly over people's homes... But just over a year ago we saw where, even on expected routes right next to the airport there's absolutely no room for compromise on situation awareness. Now you're asking why it's so bad a commercial pilot can just go sightseeing when he feels like it, no doubt because many of you wish you could do the same?
Do you know who else apparently did a flyby of his home island? The pilot of MH370. Pilots going joyriding, even if just a little off course, isn't a sign of healthy behaviour, especially when the consequences will be paid by your passengers. Don't let your children into the cockpit either. Your flight isn't a perk, a toy to play with, it's your duty to protect it and perform it to the best of your ability and following all safety regulations that have been written in blood, blood and blood.
speedfox_uk@reddit
Upvotes =/= endorsements. They just mean "I think more people should see this post"
Glum-Height-2049@reddit
Insane that so much has happened this year that somehow the plane crash that killed 67 people had already faded from my memory.
derekcz@reddit
Because it's a question that many people have. And one that was answered and explained pretty well by people a lot more respectful than yourself
jebybi@reddit
Knowing its Iceland, they will ask him not to do it again. They were doing low passes over Reykjavik in 2019 when I lived there, not sure for their own pleasure or not. Not that low ofc.
Vondi@reddit
Weren't those just the planes landing at the Reykjavík airport?
The airline reported him to the police btw.
jebybi@reddit
Fun fact Reykjavik airport is in Keflavik which is 50km away;D
Vondi@reddit
...Reykjavík Airport is in Reykjavík.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk_Airport
jebybi@reddit
Not for Icelandair planes
Vondi@reddit
Typically not but their Greenland flights have sometimes used Reykjavík instead of Keflavík.
Practical-Ball1437@reddit
It was his final flight anyway.
ZZ9ZA@reddit
Well, it was going to his final flight in any of at least three different ways.
jebybi@reddit
Thats the joke
cerui@reddit
You sure they weren't landing them? Icelandair has on multiple occasions used their 737 MAXs to fill in for the Dash 400s when those were unavailable.
CollegeStation17155@reddit
A few years back, there was a cruise ship captain who took his ship too close to shore to show off for some reason. When it grounded, several passengers died and the ship was eventually cut up for scrap.
sjmahoney@reddit
Yes, but on the other hand it gave us this incredible video so it's a wash https://youtu.be/Qh9KBwqGxTI?si=iAG55pkocQOcwzGA
Kaffe-Mumriken@reddit
If something goes wrong. You have 100 meters to mitigate it.
Austerlitz2310@reddit
Just pause and hit slew /s
the_silent_redditor@reddit
Presses ‘Y’ and F4
This shit is easy, man.
72616262697473757775@reddit
22 years after my dad got Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 for Christmas and I basically stole it from him, and I still remember Y to slew.
phaederus@reddit
'ctrl+z, ctrl+z, ctrl+z'
Golden_Hour1@reddit
Just exit out of the flight sim bro /s
Yoojine@reddit
Agreed, like I understand why this is dangerous, but as a San Diego resident this is just what I see every time I fly home
-NewYork-@reddit
Recreational drones happen.
TommiHPunkt@reddit
Iceland is famous for not having any large seagull colonies that regularly cause birds strikes. Nope. Not at all.
smithstreet11@reddit
Those Islands are a Puffin breeding ground too
herblee@reddit
ground effect would help keep the plane up, as long as the wings are level
daygloviking@reddit
Ground effect comes in to play when you are within half the wingspan above the ground. And it will not stop you hitting the ground.
BIKF@reddit
At an airport with challenging terrain around it you will follow a properly charted approach path and use PAPIs or an ILS or other navigational aids to know that you are where you are supposed to be. Another thing that makes a landing different from this flyby is that landings are necessary. While a landing is one of the riskiest segments of a flight, that increased risk is accepted and dealt with because it must be done if we want to fly.
Whether or not this was dangerous depends on what you mean by dangerous. The airline industry is famously risk-averse, and works constantly to reduce already small risks. A low approach at BIVM about half a nautical mile south of this flight path would have been a safer alternative.
elthepenguin@reddit
Imagine someone was flying a bigger drone that went into one of the engines. Dangerous enough now?
No-Salt7142@reddit
As a passenger, I would find this totally reckless and unprofessional, but if I could sign up for the ride I would.
Pocket_Aces1@reddit
Feels like this could have been a similar crash as the air France disaster when the captain did a low flyby over the airport for a press media release of their new plane. Lost thrust due to a delay, and ended up in the trees at the end. Flying low means more risk, less time to react. Low flybys are cool, but not over crowds.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
Yeah, that was an airbus issue. One of the reasons so many pilots hate the idea of the computer interpreting their intentions after they move the controls. (Even after that specific issue was solved).
FJ60GatewayDrug@reddit
No, it was not an Airbus issue. The final report exonerated the aircraft. The engines functioned exactly as expected and commanded. A big turbofan does not spool up quickly, and they only start when a thrust increase is commanded.
Nine seconds from idle to full thrust is a very, very, long time when you’re low and slow.
Assuming a minimum speed of about 115kt, that’s roughly 100m every second. The runway they did the flyby over was only 610m and ended with trees. TOGA had to be called for basically while still trying to descend for the botched and unbriefed flyby… it was never going to work.
Arguably, the A320 stall protection systems prevented the pilots from stalling, dipping a wing, and cartwheeling into the trees which would have likely killed everyone. Same thing benefitted Sully during the landing on the Hudson— full back on the stick and ride the stall line until contact at the lowest-possible speed with wings level is going to be the lowest-energy and safest way to crash land.
SkyHighExpress@reddit
The only similarity with that was that it was in a plane. Are you banning everything in aviation which reduces safety, simultaneously approaches, closing airports like Funchal, stopping anything crossing runways, banning flying when the wind is more than 10knots… if the dude was flying a helicopter with 19 people in it at that altitude then you wouldn’t bat an eyelid
jbabytrainn@reddit
If I was a passenger I would be fine with this. Y'all are freaking out over nothing. Did they die? No.
DaneAlaskaCruz@reddit
Nice to see a video from inside the plane. Saw a video from down below of the plane a few days ago.
Reckless and quite idiotic of the pilot.
These planes are super loud; I hear them all the time when I'm visiting family in Florida and they're over the flight path towards the airport
the_silent_redditor@reddit
If I were on this plane and the pilot announced we were doing a ‘low flyover of his home’, I’d be extremely uncomfortable as it’s low flight ops reliant on the dab hand of a retiring-age ATPL who probably hasn’t done anything close to this flying for decades.
If I were a passenger and this were not announced, I’d be terrified.
If I were on the ground and saw this, I’d be terrified.
What a fucking egotistical moron.
Boundish91@reddit
If i were a passenger I'd think "oh this'll be neat"
If i were the first officer i would strongly reject this move.
NeighborhoodLoud4884@reddit
*If i were the first officer i would loudly reject this move so it's clearly recorded on the CVR but then support the captain as best as I can in order to maximize the safety of the flight (and enjoy the action 😎)
dmo1187@reddit
Exactly
SophieElectress@reddit
As a passenger I'd think it was neat when they announced it, but not once we got to <500ft and then kept going down. At that point I'd be at least a little bit worried it was a Germanwings scenario with extra steps.
dmo1187@reddit
Settle down there little buddy. You’ll be okay, go touch some grass and enjoy the day. Nothing to be terrified about.
the_silent_redditor@reddit
Man I wish I could be as cool as you flying in the hypothetical Icelandair 757 😎
You’re a fuckin’ rockstar, dude!
Carvair-98@reddit
Yeah, it's quite illuminating. There was lots of back and forth in the previous threads about this, what the tracking apps said, what the terrain was around here, etc, etc...
...this is fucking low. If I didn't know otherwise, this would be an approach to one of those airports like Congonhas where the city surrounds it basically to the fences...or one with 4 reds 🔴🔴🔴🔴
Kitchen-Letterhead28@reddit
Can you give a link to that video please?
Old_Crow_5646@reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/s/KDPqnPSmGX
ImNotSkankHunt42@reddit
Can confirm
panzerboye@reddit
This is so reckless and dangerous.
SkyHighExpress@reddit
How is it reckless? How is it dangerous? Are you aware that you can fly commercially at 1500’ from A-B with passengers and people do like from Victoria to Vancouver.
It isn’t reckless, it isn’t dangerous… just unusual and an unnecessary.
Are you also going to call landing with a tailwind to save time reckless and dangerous too? How about the close spaced simultaneous approaches that used to be the norm of San Francisco? Throwing words like reckless and dangerous without having any evidence is a poor show
BoiledFrogs@reddit
Such an aggressive sounding comment for someone so far in the wrong. It's impressive.
SkyHighExpress@reddit
Sorry, didn’t mean it to sound aggressive, I just don’t think it is the deal people are making. I mean, if this was a helicopter then would anyone care? I don’t mind people pushing the unprofessional line but what is the risk compared to other things that occur in aviation
agha0013@reddit
since he was WAY LOWER than 1500' not sure what point you're trying to make.
this guy broke laws pulling this stunt.
it actually is reckless and dangerous AND illegal.
"landing with a tailwind to save time" yeah that's absolutely reckless too.
timewarp@reddit
Yeah, 1500', not 150'.
NeighborhoodLoud4884@reddit
Poor FO, hope theres something saved on the CVR along the lines of he doesn't approve this but now supports the captain instead of fighting, as it's safer for the flight. So the FO's career isn't at risk 🙂
Marklar0@reddit
I am a center controller and not gonna lie, if he did this on my watch I wouldnt turn him in XD
Serenaded@reddit
Had a place do an aborted landing over our house last week first time I've ever heard it, was so loud it sounded like a plane was about to crash into our house. For the people on the ground here their houses would've been shaking and I imagine it probably did feel like a plane was about to crash into their houses lol.
ImNotSkankHunt42@reddit
I live really near an airport and oftentimes found myself looking up just in case
IdaCraddock69@reddit
Not near an airport but on a flight path, same! Although our worst threat is from negligently flown hot air balloons but that’s another story
Photosynthetic@reddit
…okay, I gotta ask
IdaCraddock69@reddit
Napa Valley in California, they often take off very near the north city limit of our town. I've lived in teh same place over 10 years, balloons consistently bottom out right over our area (often v close to the power lines)
one was brushing the tops of low growing trees over my neighbor's house and I caught it on camera, I called 911 but they pulled up at last minute
everyone I know who is a pilot or has flown professionally/in military says 'that is DANGEROUS' but I've spoken to the FAA and as these balloons are within X distance from taking off they are allowed to fly at lower altitudes (no matter I have literally dozens of photo/video evidence of them losing altitude aft4er takeoff) and also they need a reg number in order to open a case to investigate an incident
I have literally hundreds of various hot air balloons flying over our area over the last decade, some really great close up shots too but no reg numbers are ever to be seen
idk it seems to me that these envelopes all over w no identifiable reg numbers EVER should be a problem in itself?
it's so bad, no one will care until there's an accident. once I was literally on the throne, heard one flaring loud overhead and came out and my neighbors were on their porch saying it almost hit us. if I die by hot air balloon attack while on the can I've told my family and friends to tell my story so we can get reforms!!!
thanks for listening, it's a big tourist draw so no one will do anything. very frustrating
Photosynthetic@reddit
Yikes. I had no idea. Note to self: spread the word!
IdaCraddock69@reddit
it never occurred to me either until I moved here! thank you - and I am thinking it may be worth a post in this subreddit since it is aviation. I have eight million other things I should be doing but I get het up about these balloons since we're really at the mercy of the pilots and company. it's mostly retired people living here too
Photosynthetic@reddit
Do it! Post the thing!
CoffeeBeanATC@reddit
Yeah, when they press that TOGA button, those engines will revv up quickly! I wonder if it was a louder aircraft to begin with, like my favourite, the Lear 45 is quite loud & I’m not even sorry when I sent it for a takeoff on a runway where it would rotate right in front of me…pilot obliged! But in a Citation X, you can barely hear their engines!
JConRed@reddit
There's an additional factor to the ground noise level in a go around. Directivity. The pitch shift of even slightly raising the nose, directs the main acoustic lobe of the engines toward a more prominent intersection with the ground.
The aircraft effectively 'aiming' its jet noise at the ground during a go-around.
BrewCityChaserV2@reddit
757s are loud but the descriptions I keep reading about this incident make me believe that these folks never heard a 727 without hush kits takeoff. I guess everything is relative.
TommiHPunkt@reddit
I've heard eurofighters do a low pass, that doesn't mean I think other planes aren't loud
those comparisons aren't super useful
BrewCityChaserV2@reddit
I'm not sure what you mean, but I live next to an airport which regularly features narrow and widebody jets taking off 1000-2000 feet over my house and I've never once felt like they were going to crash into it. But I'm also not known for exaggerating things.
TommiHPunkt@reddit
How about well under 300 feet and maneuvering?
MmmSteaky@reddit
Did you actually laugh at the end of composing this?
A_Concerned_Viking@reddit
That seems normal for this approach
agha0013@reddit
it's not an approach. there was no runway anywhere nearby.
Random-Cpl@reddit
It’s not
AccomplishedTap915@reddit
This is the kind of shit that makes me never fly that airline
agha0013@reddit
I mean, the airline took a very strong stance against this by basically handing the captain over to police... they aren't happy with this either.
0-G@reddit
Another longer video from inside
therealharajuku@reddit
good thing is he’ll be busy with court dates now and doesn’t have to find a hobby for the time after work. keeps u on your toes 😂
farva_06@reddit
Hope he wasn't wanting to get in to civil aviation in retirement, cause they probably won't even let his ass fly R/C planes after that.
Senior_Method3206@reddit
Its iceland, town probably had less people than the plane did. Yall jus gotta let it go, it was pretty cool
Competitive_Dig625@reddit
Looks like a typical landing at LaGuardia
GotWheaten@reddit
Or Midway Chicago
hsp-adhd-c@reddit
Cabin crew prepare for landing ..
cerui@reddit
In addition to it being unauthorized and what other people say is below minimum height I think the captain (and the co-pilot) may get harsher end of whatever law or regulation he/they broke since afaik the last time a captain of an Icelandic plane decided to do that in ended with crashing a medical flight onto a quarter mile course while returning to base at Akureyri.
What I don't get is not asking permissions, the last flight of iirc Air Atlanta 747, the new Icelandair Airbus 321 NEOs arriving in Iceland and some other low flybys have all been granted in just the last few years.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
They'd authorize it at 3000-5000ft no problem. They're not going to clear you to buzz the town at 300agl.
moon__lander@reddit
From the outside recording it didn't look that low to me, but from this I'd tuck my legs up just in case
tgsweat@reddit
Wait, passengers were on the plane? double yikes
ywgflyer@reddit
That's the real reason they're going after this guy. If it was an empty plane they'd give him a knuckle slapping but apparently it was a revenue flight so it is now Defcon 1 for the regulator.
Ancient-Accountant83@reddit
kinda sick honestly
DojatokeSC@reddit
That would have been epic
tylerscott5@reddit
Frightening. Fuck that
emsesq@reddit
"Requesting a fly by."
"Negative ghost rider. The pattern is full."
enataca@reddit
We Too Low
hughk@reddit
This is Heimaey which is an island in the Vestmannaeyjar, a group of islands to the south of Iceland. It has a single town named for the Island, a golf course and an airport
N0DuckingWay@reddit
Iceland: the only country where saying the town's name takes longer than flying over it.
N0DuckingWay@reddit
Iceland: the only country where saying the town's name takes almost as long as flying over it.
Old_Jelly_2085@reddit
I’m curious what, if anything, they told the passengers.
“Captain here…I’m retiring after this flight, so gonna do a quick buzz by by hometown. Enjoy the view! Have you on the ground in 10 minutes.”
dawtips@reddit
You legend!
Suuuumimasen@reddit
I would beat the f out of the flight crew if they did this on my flight.
BrittaKenulla@reddit
Pilots needs to be jailed
SkyHighExpress@reddit
Nuts why?
av8geek@reddit
That's awesome!
djjsteenhoek@reddit
Why doesn't anyone low pass my house 😭
xCanadaDry@reddit
There were PEOPLE ON THE PLANE?? My god! I assumed it was an empty plane and he just made a dangerous pass! Holy shit
rwally2018@reddit
Man I wish I had been on this plane! What a great experience
Sprintzer@reddit
Wish there was interior audio, I was wondering if the pax were at all concerned
Recent_Tap_7378@reddit
The Westman Islands are home to a rich avian population, particularly the Atlantic Puffin, which is the most abundant seabird species in the area.
He got really lucky with a non birdstrike on this pass.
johnnyribcage@reddit
Well it’s not “unseen” anymore…
Funkytadualexhaust@reddit
Whats the riskiest part of this... Birds, drones, wind, or general no altitude to recover from random?
GrimDog999@reddit
This is just pure horseshit... Airport in my city Vilnius) is surrounded by houses, right up to it's fence. On approach planes are flying 30-50meters above them. Last year DHL crashed on landing (pilot error), plane parts like engine hit the houses (no casualties on the ground). If you look up video of the crash you can see how close to houses that plan is on landing: https://youtube.com/shorts/41wJmcHn1Lw?is=vd6YvRTDxFE44jkm
skisvega@reddit
Agreed. Seems everyone here is foaming at the mouth over it but frankly seems like harmless fun to me, it's his last trip, it lasted a few seconds, no one was hurt or nearly hurt, so it seems a lot of drama over nothing.
Random-Cpl@reddit
I hope you are not a pilot
skisvega@reddit
I'm better than a pilot, I'm a sailor.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Back in the old days, nobody dying meant the flight was safe, and we are the safest airline in the world.
Fortunately aviation has largely moved away from that mindset, into being proactive and preventative with safety. We're not just interested in the outcome, but rather the entire process.
This was utterly reckless, and there was nothing funny about it.
GrimDog999@reddit
This only reckless from administrative perspective, looking from technical, this is what planes are ment to do (fly low and high) + this guy as understand had thousands of flying hours and he knew what he was doing
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Sure, I also know from a technical perspective that the airplane I fly, will fly without hydraulics or electrics, and even with an engine out.
Which one of those systems should I switch off on my next flight full of passengers, since I know what I'm doing, and that's the only important factor?
Parking_Line_3704@reddit
"my city is dumb so everyone should be dumb" is a pretty dumb statement.
Pulp__Reality@reddit
Except this wasnt an approach
Micromagos@reddit
There's a big difference between flying a preapproved route vs deciding to low alt a neighborhood for fun.
steelmen09@reddit
This is exactly what it looks/feels like landing at Midway haha
wrquwop@reddit
“Negative Ghostrider. The pattern is full.”
King-Meister@reddit
Is that Topgun?
hold-my-gimbal@reddit
no, this is patrick
Rich-fluffernutter@reddit
Permission to buzz the tower - The pattern is full, Maverick , REPEAT, the pattern is full !!
Swimming_Way_7372@reddit
I wish delta had scimitar winglets on their 757s like Iceland Air does. Damn they looks so good.
optiontraderGER@reddit
I wonder if that will ruin his pension money?
sauchlapf@reddit
Im not condoning this, but don't planes go this close over houses regularly near some airports. I felt like I'm as close to houses on regular flights approaching the runway. What exactly is the difference here? I'm not a pilot or anything, so genuinely asking.
DisturbedForever92@reddit
If you're this low on a landing path, and you have a major malfunction, you can likely keep gliding on your landing path and land safely.
If you're this low and there's no runway ahead of you and something happens, you're forcefully renovating a lot of these homes.
Katana_DV20@reddit
Those planes you mentioned were flying low out of necessity: they were landing or taking off from an airport.
This plane was not.
Unless there is an emergency there is no valid legit reason to descend so low during a flight. Its affected the career of the co-pilot, likely scared some passengers and no doubt terrified people on the ground.
F737NG@reddit
Here's a good description of why it's unsafe:
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1sk1s7b/comment/ofw0wvs/
sauchlapf@reddit
Thank you! Makes a lot of sense.
bill-of-rights@reddit
To be fair, there is an airport there - not the one he was going to land on, but there is a runway under him for part of this flight.
TheSnailpower@reddit
Not in the orientation they are going. This footage shows them going westward over the island above the town. If they would be going southward the runway would have been under them at least. But like other people are saying, that runway is not at all suitable for a passenger jet
Random-Cpl@reddit
That airport is for like tiny 2 seaters. This island is so small, super mountainous, and very quiet. I can’t imagine how insane this was for the residents.
Kjartanski@reddit
Yeah no, BIVM will not take a 757, like at all
hughk@reddit
Its kind of tiny. I was at that airport many years ago, and we landed in a small twin prop. The runway is next to a volcano, so the wind can be unfriendly there. On the other side of the harbour, there are steep hills with cliffs (and normally covered in Puffins).
Twitter_2006@reddit
Woah.
Hfyvr1@reddit
That’s a lot higher than say the hundred of departures every single day at KSAN. Reckless maybe? A little overblown kinda.
Random-Cpl@reddit
This is a tiny island with a population of like 1500 that never has jetliners land on it. It’s also pretty mountainous and hilly. I cannot imagine how terrifying it was for the people who live there when they saw a fucking jet flying this low over the town
gordonlordbyron@reddit
The pilot is a complete scumbag doing this, I hope they throw the book at him.
Katana_DV20@reddit
This was his retirement flight so the only way to get him would be to deny his pension and potentially he faces charges. The airline has told the cops.
TapatioCardzzz@reddit
Who the fuck is ruby rose?
nomamesgueyz@reddit
Cool
xChoke1x@reddit
That dude is in some shit. Lll
Random-Cpl@reddit
Just unbelievably dangerous. These guys should never fly again
Beautiful-Musk-Ox@reddit
a drone or bird in an unlucky spot would blow out one of those engines
GroundProximity@reddit
LET THE MAN FLY! Whats the big fucking deal
Rude-Dentist-2493@reddit
It must have been terrifying for the people on the ground, and doing it without authorization is just wildly unprofessional.
Muted_Fuel7549@reddit
There's an old adage in aviation that when you're a copilot you think all the A holes are in the LHS. When you become a captain you realise they are most definitely in the right. Never been more the case with the latest generation addicted to phones, immature and unable to accept when they make a mistake and need to fess up and take responsibility. When pushed all you'll get is their standard defence that nobody showed me that before etc etc.
NewUser769283@reddit
You're allowed to go below minimum altitudes on your way to landing.
And he was landing..... in Keflavík..... 60 miles away.
F737NG@reddit
Narcissistic and foolhardy.
Fare paying passengers in the back, less than 500 feet AGL, no prior authorisation, in an area known for significant bird activity and topography that causes unpredictable airflow - how many more red flags did this captain want before he would have decided this flyby wasn't safe?
Hope the Icelandic legal system has laws to arrest and prosecute for reckless endangerment. Throw the book at him.
Therealthefab@reddit
Damn how cool
flash69696969@reddit
Person in the house below - "Two of your snot-nose jockeys did a fly-by on my house at over 400 KNOTS! I want somebody's butt, I want it now, I've HAD IT!"
J0hnnyBlazer@reddit
What does the pilot even get out of this? What's even the point here, who the fukk cares about his town and his last flight etc, just get a private plane and fly as much as you want
bonzothebonanza@reddit
Who else is getting flashbacks from the Air Berlin A330 incident lol
phaederus@reddit
The AB pilots had clearance for that though and ended up with no consequences.
ASSTORIA92@reddit
Awesome.
frogingly_similar@reddit
I could imagine the noise in those households with those roaring 757 RR engines.
Maximum-Shallot-2447@reddit
They should throw his retired wrinkley arse in prison for a few years for endangering passengers and people on the ground.
notmyrealname8823@reddit
Why's it called Iceland if the land isn't covered in ice??
/s
sp4cenet@reddit
It's not worth to lose his Pension for this lol
Boundish91@reddit
He won't lose his pension. Besides if Iceland operates like most European countries it's the state that pays out pensions. The company will let police handle the case, but other than that i don't think they will or can do much, he's quitting anyway.
MeatResident2697@reddit
Lose pension? How about jail time?
Boundish91@reddit
I know it's reckless, but as a passenger I'd think it was a cool experience.
Even if the risk of anything going wrong is a little higher than normal, it's still pretty low.
That said, such low altitude gives almost no time if someone does go wrong.
tiorzol@reddit
It's cool until it's not.
Unlikely_Number5600@reddit
This is how it feels landing at SEATAC.