airmanship

It's good airmanship to turn into your "good" engine.

Though I do agree that good airmanship would have been to tell ATC no and land the plane. A pilot may do that if lives are at risk.

Point the nose too high or too low – or bank to steeply and the computer will correct your bad airmanship. Who’s in charge here?

The airmanship and the experience is so much pure and intense in a glider. Also the costs are much lower for the weekend airman.

It's amusing that they were found at fault and separately awarded for their airmanship skills.

I'm a US CPL holder and there are numerous basic airmanship systems in place to prevent this. For one, you note your acceleration rate and how far down the runway you are.

> Colgan 3407 crashed because of a profound and astounding lack of basic airmanship I agree. I think the New Yorker just picked wrong incident to try to advance their theory.

If it were just one or two examples of poor airmanship at Air France then sure, it'd be easy to chalk it up to "flying is hard". And yeah, the pandemic has robbed a lot of pilots of their necessary practice.

They had elements of excellent airmanship; they also had flaws in their execution of that flight which, if avoided, would have likely been enough to save the flight.

It would be poor airmanship to bail from the aircraft without at least running through the engine failure checklist. I'll let the FAA do their job before drawing any final conclusions but my impression as a student pilot is that this was planned and staged.

The only backup in that case is good airmanship to know that you are in an anomalous condition, diagnose whether you have a set of gauges that you can rely on, and finally, what to do about it. ATC could have been utilized to cross-check instruments.

That's both surprising and an incredible feat of airmanship by the pilots! Since I love reading about these kinds of incidents and the best way to solve a problem is to claim it's impossible, I amend my claim to "I rather doubt there are two examples of an off airport landing of a 737 without significant damage to the aircraft."

The pilots failed to correctly react to the failure and failed to do basic airmanship like monitor their speed until it was too late. Whereas the MAX failures may well have required well-above-average piloting skills and instincts to successfully recover from, this one simply required basic competence and attention.

There's the NY Times Magazine article that reminded everyone of the word 'airmanship' [1] although it wasn't terribly well-received [2], [3] by some other pilots. If you don't want to read all those, basically pilots in richer countries might be more likely to also be private pilots and more familiar with how an aircraft 'feels' that translates to a better sense of what's happening in larger aircraft.

I emphasize I only offer it as a source of examples of bad airmanship recognized abroad. I still patently reject his conclusions of ultimate fault for the 737 MAX crashes. Given the choice between having the internal Boeing trainers mentioned in the article, or potentially delegating it to a contracted pilot with said deficient airmanship, without the context I personally have into the industry from extensive hobbyist research, I couldn't fault someone for being wary.