Jul 21, 2017 Research papers

Countermeasures to mitigate flying risks

This paper concentrates on the primary theme of Countermeasures to mitigate flying risks in which you have to explain and evaluate its intricate aspects in detail. In addition to this, this paper has been reviewed and purchased by most of the students hence; it has been rated 4.8 points on the scale of 5 points. Besides, the price of this paper starts from £ 40. For more details and full access to the paper, please refer to the site.

Countermeasures to mitigate flying risks

INSTRUCTIONS:

Since flying involves a fair number of risks, one of the reasons for becoming a commercial “level” pilot is develop skill obviously, but to learn best practices associated with episodes of risk. Each student will be presented with 5 real-life episodes, each seeking a response. Describe the best countermeasures that you as a pilot can use to mitigate these risks. Each response must encompass a minimum of three pages (font: 11) and clearly present the problem and explain the best-practice countermeasure, documenting your answer. This is not an opinion paper. 2. Scenario: It was a warm sunny morning in late September when it happened. Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182, a Boeing 727 with 128 passengers and 7 crew aboard was on an extended downwind for Runway 27 at Lindbergh Field. A Cessna 172 with an instructor and student aboard was climbing away from the airport on a vector of 070 degrees for an eventually return to Lindbergh for a third practice ILS approach. San Diego Approach provided several advisories to PSA Flight 128 on the location of the C-172 ahead. Just before the approach controller handed them off to Lindbergh tower, the first officer told the captain, “Got ‘em,” and the captain informed the controller that they had the “traffic in sight.” San Diego Approach then informed the C-172: “Traffic at six o’clock, two miles, eastbound; a PSA jet inbound to Lindbergh, out of three thousand two hundred, has you in sight.” Less than a minute later a conflict alert warning went off in the San Diego Approach Control facility indicating that the predicted flight paths of Flight 182 and the Cessna 172 would conflict. The approach controller responded by issuing a second advisory to the Cessna: “Traffic in your vicinity, a PSA jet has you in sight, he’s descending for Lindbergh.” Unfortunately the advisory was too late – the two aircraft had already collided. All told, 144 people – all 137 people aboard both planes and 7 people on the ground – perished in what was at the time the worst collision in U.S. history (Report No. NTSB – AAR-79-5). Aircraft involved: Boeing 737; Cessna 172 Discuss this NTSB report and any similar incidents identifying the associated risks, latent errors, and hazards associated with midair collisions. What mitigation would you recommend and identifying ‘best practices’ to prevent incident/accidents of this type, as well as noting what the FAA, NTSB and LUSOA (Liberty University school of aeronautics) has to say about this.

CONTENT:
Countermeasures to mitigate flying risksName:Course:Tutor:Date: As a pilot, one needs to develop a wide range of skills in both the main course of flying and the best practices associated with particular life threatening episodes of risks that are involved in flying. As a requirement, one therefore needs to learn countermeasures that they (pilots), can use to mitigate the risks involved. Due to the big difference in the nature of the risks involved, one needs to learn what is considered the best practice to counter a specific scenario. Below are two cases where two airlines, on different courses, happened to be using the same path, resulting in to a conflict and subsequently fatalities. The first scenario happened in San Diego. Two airlines, Pacific Southwest Airlines, Inc., Boeing 727-214 and Gibbs Flight Center, Inc., Cessna 172 were involved in a fatal mid-air collision on the 9th Sep 1978. Apparently, the two collided when the control tower lost the radar on one of the smaller plane (Cessna 172). The 128 passengers and 7 crew aboard in the Boeing and the instructor and a student in the Cessna perished in the accident.[1],[2] The second scenario happened in Hoboken, over the Hudson River. Unlike in the first scenario, this was largely attributed to the visual meteorological conditions which prevailed at that the time.The report(NTSB – AAR-10-05) released in the following year by the NTSB indicate thatpilot of the Piper PA-32R-300, N71MC visibility was severely limited and only managed to see the Eurocopter AS350BA, N401LH in the final moments before the collision. Report also claimed of the pilot having been engaged in non-pertinent call moments before the collision, which also contributed in the accident. The accident was not less fatal as all members on board were killed as the airlines received substantial damages.[3] There are different countermeasures that one would undertake to prevent the mid-air collision accidents. FAA, NTSB and LUSOA cite the different measures that would be carried out to mitigate such risks.The most common factors in the mid-air collisions accidents are; poor visibility especially in bad weather and latency in the communication between the radar towers and the pilots. According to FAA, several of the mid-air collisions occu...


0% Plagiarism Guaranteed & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions


International House, 12 Constance Street, London, United Kingdom,
E16 2DQ

UK Registered Company # 11483120


100% Pass Guarantee

Order Now

STILL NOT CONVINCED?

We've produced some samples of what you can expect from our Academic Writing Service - these are created by our writers to show you the kind of high-quality work you'll receive. Take a look for yourself!

View Our Samples

corona virus stop
FLAT 25% OFF ON EVERY ORDER.Use "FLAT25" as your promo code during checkout