Failure to Crosscheck (Austrian Airlines Flight 901) - DISASTER BREAKDOWN

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Get 25% off Blinkist premium and enjoy 2 memberships for the price of 1! Start your 7-day free trial by clicking here: www.blinkist.com/disasterbreakdown Thank you to Blinkist for Sponsoring this video.

[@DrAuthorite1]

Can you make a video about Turkish airlines flight 981? it would be super interesting!!!

[@zacclacherryYT]

⁰⁰

[@zacclacherryYT]

you have nice videos

[@Crossark1]

“One can imagine that with such a discrepancy, conflict could occur between the plane and the ground.” Such a polite way to phrase that

[@beccyvc5743]

This made me laugh, I know it shouldn't have.

[@steewith2ees14]

Same here hehehe. I cannot decide which was funnier - that or the reference to the US use of mg of mercury "because, of course".

[@paulazemeckis7835]

Just like a Brit - always polite!

[@robm3074]

Chloe… when you were marketing Blinkest on your video you mentioned "that you were not that smart" . That is a bunch of nonsense. You are very intelligent, you make very good videos, you have a lot to offer. So please please please do not sell yourself short.

[@DisasterBreakdown]

am the person that once put my phone in the post box instead of my letter and had to wait for the postman to come round to get it back... Thank you for your comment, I appreciate it :)

[@someonee3186]

Well said

[@rubies200]

@@DisasterBreakdown That's a sign of a very intelligent person, though. You're thinking so much, that you get distracted!

[@ragenetwork4112]

Who's Chloe?

[@wajidiqbal84]

So your name is CHLOE?

[@localmenace3043]

I don’t know a lot about piloting or aircraft, but you always find a way to make it understandable.

[@thejudgmentalcat]

I'd only flown a Piper Tomahawk a few hours 45 years ago and never thought how altimeters are calibrated. Very informative, if a bit disconcerting, video 👏

[@SKitty1732]

It's lovely to see how far you come with your channel, seeing you get your first sponsor makes me overjoyed because it means you're doing great! Keep it up Chloe!

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Thanks, this actually wasn't my first sponsored segment. I did a couple way back in 2021. It's been a while since I had one, I'm very picky about what I promote.

[@SKitty1732]

@@DisasterBreakdown ah my bad xD still proud of you!

[@pennywaltz4601]

Oh could you do Bea 548 that accident highlights the need for cockpit voice recorder for passenger flights, the accident led to a greater emphasis on crew resource management, and a greater caution before allowing off-duty crew members to occupy flight deck seats?

[@sailaab]

Thank you for continually making such detailed and painstakingly researched (minj) documentaries. . Being a paraplegic since birth.. .. i can only experience most of aviation as an outsider only. . And I am from finance background. . Still.. of my limited undeserving.. I would say that your technical explanation of the barometric terms in aviation.. was simpler to follow.. than perhaps even Petter (Mentour Pilot), Joe (Captain Joe). . Our wishes are always with you.. in all of your sincere endeavour endeavours. . Greetings🤍💙 from the middle of nowhere ..in India.

[@DrAuthorite1]

@@DisasterBreakdown Can you make a video about Turkish airlines flight 981? it would be super interesting!!!

[@akschmidt2085]

"Conflict between the plane and the ground" is my new favourite expression. Funny how the ground always wins those arguments...😄 well done video, thumbs up

[@missfleming5465]

I'm gonna tell you what I tell my niece(also a Chloe) "I don't want to hear you say you're not that smart come out your mouth". You are smart Chloe the amount of work you put in writing a script, researching topics etc is something a smart person can do. Keep up the good work I've got zero clue how long I've been subscribed to DB because I'm so engrossed in your video.

[@mycroftsanchez901]

Interesting to hear about an incedent from over 60 years ago and compare how things have changed, black boxes, ILS systems etc. Thanks for posting.

[@scottmoseley5122]

good work.. Thanks for the in depth Altimeter explanation.

[@OBB-qs4dh]

WOW! I am impressed. Indeed a rarely mentioned accident with a lot of mystery and Mandy stories around it! And for sure very unknown - even in my home country of Austria. Thank you!

[@johnbowles5399]

Big admirer of your channel and the work you put into researching these tragic accidents. I always think of the poor souls who perish in these disasters.

[@Thedribblerr]

I’ve watched your channel for a while now and I’m so happy you got a sponsor! You deserve it so much and your channel is incredible!

[@AzovAzza]

I’m so glad I found your channel. I absolutely love your content and coverage. The way you break things down for better understanding. The time, effort and energy that you put in… It’s fantastic. Thank you so much!!!✈️

[@PauperJ]

Terrific video. I appreciate the in-depth descriptions that you always do. Looking forward to your second YT channel, "Disaster Conspiracies."

[@VoidStarchan]

Congratulations on getting a Sponsor! Really love your videos, hope to see a lot more in the future! Cheers!

[@sydyidanton5873]

Hi Chloe, I’m not sure if you’ll even read this, I just wanted to tell you that your explanation of how altimeters work was excellent. Extremely well broken down and explained. I love the quality of your work, I can appreciate the tremendous effort you put into making these. Considering you are not from an aviation background your information is brilliantly explained and on point. Magnificent! Regarding your comment with the Blinkist sponsorship and your personal intelligence, please do NOT underestimate yourself, you are clearly a very intelligent person, the exceptional standards in the work you are doing testify to that. You are indeed most talented, and I am grateful for your effort. Best regards. Cheers, Anton

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

12:00 - "Conflict would occur between the plane and the ground." _I salute your use of understatements. More powerful than saying "so they're gonna crash."_

[@darkfox2076]

Great commentary and super interesting as always thanks Chloe

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@buildingsheriff]

What a BRILLIANT episode! Thanks.

[@TheMightyZwom]

I've known that altimeters in airplanes work by measuring pressure. However, I've never given the fact much thought that air pressure changes based on the weather which should have a drastic influence on the accuracy of the reading. Thank you for the explanation on how the calibration works.

[@thatguyalex2835]

Hopefully in the future, planes could use GPS altimeters, or maybe even LIDAR altimeters for altitude above ground, but if the GPS or LIDAR (laser distance measuring) system were to fail, it would still be beneficial to learn to use the barometric altimeter.

[@Xaddre]

Wednesday upload?!?!?! Let’s go!!!

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Yep and I'll be hitting you with another one this weekend! :)

[@alchemite]

Thanks Chloe ! :)) You've made my week, and happy new year by the way!

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Happy New Year to you too!

[@irenetorkel2186]

As always an entertaining and educational video. The fact you put so much information into a relatively short video is amazing. I never fail to learn something. This is the first video I’ve been able to watch immediately instead of having to wait for work to end. I’m so happy 😊

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@nyxqueenofshadows]

congrats on getting another sponsor! really interesting info on the altimeter, i'd never considered how they were calibrated before and for some reason thought it would be simpler! great video, as always :)

[@Rochi47]

You've finally got another sponsor! Your channel is becoming bigger everyday. Congratulations 🎉.

[@henrikpicton5486]

Great video as always.

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Thanks!

[@kevinheard8364]

Great job, as always . looking forward to the next one :)

[@dianaespiritosanto5813]

Such excellent explanations for the instruments, the systems behind them and how they are operated. This really is the best channel to understand how air accidents occur to the detail. Congratulations!

[@MothaLuva]

There was a contributing factor afaik. At that time a Russian navigator who also worked as a translator was required and carried on board every non Russian flight allowed to enter Russian airspace. Many, if not most, Russian ATC controllers did not speak English (or any other western language), thus the translator requirement. In a high workload environment (f. e. bad weather approaches) this is just a recipe for desaster. I shared some experience with the son of the first officer on this flight (Wolf Dietrich Freisleben).

[@pawelgrott1278]

11:50 'Assuming that Cpt was flying and his instrument was showing the LOWER reading...' - wouldn't it mean that FO must had flown the aircraft since they collided? Great video!

[@claudiacook619]

'Conflict would occur between the plane and the ground' Well... that's one way of putting it

[@ohioguy215]

Crashing would be more appropriate. The ground doesn't care what you do.

[@planck39]

I'm confused. The captains Altimeter was set right to QFE, elevation above ground. When it is assumed that the captain was flying, was it the first officer that made false elevation call outs from his wrongly set altimeter to QNH?

[@PauperJ]

That's what I was thinking.

[@fabianyt123]

Ye that must be it. If captain was flying and taking his height instead, he would have flown 700ft too high instead

[@Ian-lx1iz]

¿Que? Surely if the Captain's altimeter has a _lower_ reference pressure, then it will read zero when the plane is zero feet above the ground. The co-pilot's altimeter, with _higher_ (sea level) reference pressure, will give an altitude of 700 feet when the plane is actually on the ground (zero feet). Therefore, trying to land this plane in reference to the _Co-Pilot's_ altimeter will crash the plane, and NOT in reference to the _Captain's_ altimeter. Have I got that right? (Trying to understand)

[@ww2planes_810]

Seems like it

[@protodvd]

Just want to add that this is definitely the preferable way to do in-video ad placement - no stupid wordplay or segues, just "I'm pausing briefly to tell you about the product" and a "that said, let's get on with the video." Would be happy to keep seeing it done that way.

[@gnarthdarkanen7464]

Great episode as usual, Chloe!!! AND hell yeah! I'm definitely looking forward to a second channel where you might bring a level-headed exposition to aviation-related conspiracy theories... I've seen a few channels try to bring up theories, but they have a tendency to either push the "entertainment" button a little far... OR (at least occasionally) things get out into left field a bit further than "bat-shit territory" if we're perfectly honest... Would love to see and hear your take on some of them... ;o)

[@justanotherjezebeI]

Oooo... a series on Aviation conspiracy theories would be absolutely fascinating.

[@PeterHarveySPP]

Chloe, I love your videos, enjoy the perspective, and your voice is perfect! Hugs.

[@洪梓恩-p7z]

Just finished another college semester's class here, and I would say that every number and calculations in literally EVERYTHING in this industry are important and should be cross-checked and double-checked every single time. This case reminds me of an accident that'll soon be made as one of the episode of Mayday season 23- Independent Air flight 1851. I think the crew of Independent air flight 1851 misheard the pressure reading due to accent of the controller and radio statics, but the biggest mistake made by the crew was not inputting the wrong readings into altimeter. The crew ignored ground proximity warning and crashed onto the side of the mountain. In the end, a little reminder with no relation to this episode here. I watched several old episodes of disaster breakdown while doing homework few days ago, and I learned that an episode about Madrid airport collision was suppose to come out before 2023 (which didn't happen). I don't really know if you're a busy person or the topics for disaster breakdown are piling up, but if you're busy, there's no need for uploading this episode to be top priority. I'm just looking forward for this episode to come out at anytime, and once again, there's no need to rush to make and upload this episode. Thank you very much and wish you have a good day!

[@nigelbond4056]

Another fascinating video with clear and simple explanations on the technical details. And then you go and tell us you’re not bright Chloe? 😂

[@hihey229]

Get that bag! Thank you for all the work you do and consistently having subtitles on your bids Chloe!

[@AdrianColley]

Use the word "altitude" only for distance above mean sea level. Use "height" only for distance above ground level. Or you can use the abbreviations AMSL and AGL

[@WhiteWolf-lm7gj]

Dude...

[@tatyana5692]

A sponsor Chloe!!! That is so incredible!! Well deserved, I look forward to your videos every week. Glad we get an extra one today!

[@bwc1976]

Wow, I've been pronouncing Viscount wrong all these years! Great video as always. Also, where was the photo at 8:46 taken?

[@jfangm]

"I'm not very smart myself" Says the person making detailed aviation disaster videos on par with professional documentaries AND is a certified private pilot. Don't sell yourself short.

[@melissers5282]

My hypothesis is that the copilot simply left their altimeter set to standard pressure from cruise instead of inputting the QNH given by the approach controller. Then, when they were on their short final, the captain was probably looking outside to establish visual contact with the runway while the first officer was calling out altitude and distance checks for the captain's approach (which were unfortunately wrong being provided by the FOs incorrectly set altimeter). This would mean they began hitting the trees even though the first officer's altimeter would be reading a couple hundred meters and, according to this faulty reading, they thought they were on profile. Hope that gives some closure to everyone who thought the investigation didn't really answer the question of why they actually crashed. Like, yes, it was the altimeters, but they didn't elaborate on how the captain had the correct altitude right in front of him but ignored it.

[@pascalcoole2725]

Sometimes, preparing for approach the PnF sets the Alt to QNH (QFE is hardly used these day's) while the PF Alt still is set on STD until passing below Transition Altitude (or transition Level, not sure anymore, long ago but Alt makes more sense) They just might have forgotten to check when below Transition Alt. It's a bussy process on (by now) antiquated equipment and meanwhile one has to retink between Meters and Feet.

[@greghardy9476]

I retired from the aviation maintenance profession after 40+ years. We used to say that aircraft were thousands of parts flying in loose formation. When I started my civilian career, my supervisor stated that “nothing we work on here will cause a crash”. With more than a little incredulity I replied that a 3 cent machine screw can cause a crash! The stress caused by the news of an aircraft accident was always there.

[@simpilotadamt1012]

8:44 I just want to mention that the actual standard pressure in hPa is 1013.25hPa. On any plane with digital altimeters (like the B737NG or A320 series), setting the QNH to 1013hPa will actually display a slightly lower altitude than if the altimeter is set to standard. The difference is minute but there. 29.92 inHg is fully accurate, though.

[@peteconrad2077]

Standard is actually 29.9212 so an imperial altimeter isn’t precisely accurate either.

[@6yjjk]

If the captain was flying, and his altimeter was reading *lower* than the co-pilot's, then surely they would have levelled off 700' too *high* and not hit the ground?

[@Biggles2498]

Chloe, I absolutely love your reassuring voice.

[@tarotbrarian]

Chloe, you are a gem. Keep up the good work. 😊

[@Miralee01]

Chloe, please tell me during this video you did NOT say you were not intelligent! That shocked me where I went back to make sure I'd heard correctly. Madam you are VERY intelligent. You are organized, research vast amounts of data, and help all of us grasp difficult scientific concepts to understand why some of these disasters occur. Please please never say such a thing about yourself again. You are magnificent! ❤

[@eatonbeaver6083]

I believe that standard practice is for the altimeters to be set to the “standard” setting of 1013/29.92 at FL180 and above. Below that they are usually set to the local barometric pressure.

[@peggyh8937]

Great video, thanks!

[@springbok4015]

Congrats on the sponsor!

[@arinerm1331]

I'm addicted to analyses of air incidents, and this one was **VERY** insightful. I would also love to see an analysis of the infamous Hainan Island Incident of 2001, but my bet is that public reports are hard to come by.

[@MothaLuva]

8:30 That „some point“ is called transition altitude in climb and transition level in descend.

[@PFMediaServices]

Chloe, I sent you an email recently and I hope it didn't go to spam! Very happy to have this extra video! ✌️🍍

[@momentomori-rw6jp]

YEEEEAAHHH MID WEEK UPLOAD!! 🎉

[@itsgib8191]

Me double checking the date cause I was surprised to see a video on a Wednesday 😂 I thought I was losing my mind

[@LNDND]

hello are you going to do us airways 1549 yet.

[@LNDND]

Also great video😁

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Maybe... it is a very well documented incident. If people want it enough I'll put it on my list

[@palemale2501]

So to spell it out was the captain's altimeter wrong and First Officer's may have been correct ? I understand that on approach, a plane is advised by Ground Control of the local air pressure as part of the local weather update, and they re-set their altimeters accordingly.

[@shola1213]

A sponsor??!! Get it girl!!!

[@joequinal]

Wonderful job! My favorite part of your video is when you say “Hello Everyone” before Patreon members 😂. I say it in stereo with you as I watch. I’m joking but really do love your vids. 🤣🔥

[@NorwayT]

@DisasterBreakdown - you mentioned Barometric Altimeters. I'm no expert on these old crates, but I believe it was around the time of this accident that Radio Altimeters became more and more common on Commercial Flights. Do you know if the accident plane was equipped with a Radio Altimeter?

[@harlequinn2526]

i think it’d be cool if you had a video only talking about all of the conspiracy theories surrounding various crashes obviously a disclaimer would be involved but i think a big reason why some plane crashes are more famous than others is because of the conspiracy theories that surround them a while ago you had a video that i think was eastern airlines flight 401 that crashed in florida and you mentioned the phenomenon where flight attendants and residents supposedly saw the ghosts of the former passengers, and i think it added a really cool layer to the video

[@wp8022]

There's also a conspiracy theory about Austrian Airlines 901.

[@jerryweirdspeed8943]

It's true pilots do not know their actual altitude above the ground for the most part of higher altitude flying. And there is only one chance to know exactly. That is before the plane takes off. Especially, when there is no radio altimeter or satellite based 3D navigation available. Stunning good and extensive explanation.

[@rodrigonogueiramota4433]

even today you can do entire IFR procedures in Russia using altimeters in meters and QFE all you have to do is ask the Russian ATC, if you think Europe, Asia and Latin America embraced the metric system you have to the Russia, there the simple mention of anything other than the metric system to measure things is considered offensive. so before entering on the Russian Airspace you have to check, crosscheck and check again to avoid possible mistakes because if you don´t you will make a mistake there.

[@moiraatkinson]

Yay! Newcastle airport! That’s where I live 😊. I notice you give the 4-letter code, but it’s always known as NCL on baggage tags etc. Interesting video - yours always are. I tend not to go in for conspiracy theories, especially if investigators find nothing suspicious. Whenever the exact cause of an accident can’t be determined they always seem to arise.

[@oldstrawhat4193]

I really LOVE your videos! But I really HATE the music. Will you please go back to just narration only? Please?

[@ImperialDiecast]

i love the music

[@northbytrain]

i was a bit shocked when i saw my local airport in this video- i didnt expect it i wont say which for privacy reasons

[@angelwhitener6968]

I tell ppl that my memory is as long as my d*^k and I def don’t have one, so that’s usually a good analogy that everybody seems to understand..!! Absolutely love, love, love your channel, Chloe..!! Has always been excellent, professional, super informative, while being amazingly presented .. however, I am so proud at how your presentation of your channel and videos have progressed thru the years, and seem to grow with each one being better (if possible ) than the one before ..!! It’s been and continues to be so exciting to watch you grow along with your channel and its subscribers, contributions, and sponsors..!! So proud of you as you should be so proud for yourself..!! The sky is the limit and don’t ever let anyone steal your shine..!! Keep on keepin on, love..!! Apologies for the long ass comment but I had a lot to say..!! Thank you for all your hard work you put into your videos, and it shows..!! Much love from NC, USA .. ps: (I know sorry) do we get a little sneak peek after your recovery ..?) speedy recovery to you..!!

[@Caracaraorangeberry]

it appears that even if the altimeters were synchronized, they still would have do to be synchronized correctly- to the QNH.

[@Dovietail]

Too much work. I'm taking the train!

[@patolt1628]

The very probable cause is indeed an altimeter wrong setting. Anyway, there is something strange here: perhaps I'm too old now but as a former pilot, in my view the reasoning works only if the copilot was flying, not the captain. Indeed if the captain's altimeter was set on the QFE, the information he could read was under-estimated which means that somehow he would have been "on the safe side". The dangerous side is always over-estimation. Let's take an example: - let's assume the aircraft was supposed to fly over a beacon, in final, at 1000ft: the captain flying would have read in this case 1000ft above "ground level", the area being quite flat, provided that he was referring to the airport chart QFE instructions (usually indicated in brackets). Here you can have another possible mistake: reading an instruction in QFE and using it as if it was a QNH (or the other way around). But the smaller figure can only be the QFE one: in this case we would have 1700 (1000) indicated on the chart so that, have the captain mistaken the "QNH" for the QFE instruction, he would have flown over the beacon at 1700ft AGL at worst, not 300ft, so again on the safe side. They would have been too high, that's it. - unlike the captain, if instead the copilot was flying and if HE made the mistake: complying with the 1000ft QFE instruction with an altimeter set in QNH, would have led the airplane to fly at 300ft while thinking they were at 1000ft. Here we get the recipe for a disaster. Just my opinion. Regards

[@TamaleLoco95]

"In the United States, because of course, they use a completely different measurement..." I'm American and went to school for engineering, and had this thought at least twice a week.

[@SinaLaJuanaLewis]

Another good one! btw Saudi flight 163 is interesting if you haven't done it already 😀

[@robboltwood]

China and Russia are still operating in meters for altitude, US is still pounds for fuel and inches of mercury for qnh. Makes intl flying fun

[@knrdvmmlbkkn]

12:52 Someone's good at math!

[@kevanhubbard9673]

Very dangerous mixing up metric and Imperial.Shame yards aren't used for height as mixing them up with metres wouldn't be too far out but feet and metres a huge difference.Although unrelated to air travel I came across a very dangerous tide table which used the 12 hour clock, what's 12pm!?, combined with a 6 hour walk along a beach with cliffs on the left and it'd be very hard to climb out if the tide came in!

[@jrpsims]

I would expect 12pm to be 12 midday.

[@mukhtar__]

our girl got a sponsorship y'all !!!

[@dfuher968]

That is something, I have never understood the reasons for. Why aviation chose to use feet rather than meters. Not only is the metric system used in most of the world, its far easier and more accurate, which is, why the metric system is always used in science, even in the famously metric hostile US.

[@tookitogo]

It’s one of those things where the risks involved in switching units far outweigh any benefits. I’d argue that given that aircraft altitude is in essence a very abstract scale - neither pilots nor non-pilots really ever need to relate their altitude to the small units of measure they deal with on a daily basis - the units simply don’t matter. A pilot doesn’t need to have any feel whatsoever for how long a foot is (nor a meter, for that matter) because knowing it doesn’t help you judge altitude by eye nor help interpret the instrument. With that in mind, a transitional period would almost certainly entail crashes due to altitude unit mismatches. (Kinda like how the Gimli Glider incident was the result of a transitional from lbs to kg for aircraft fuel in Boeing aircraft. The 767 fuel system is all-metric, but the refueling infrastructure - specifically, the documentation and the staff’s experience - back then was still based around lbs.) If there were some significant real-world advantage to using meters for altitude, then I’d say “go for it!”, but I don’t think there’s any argument for meters other than philosophical ones. But metrication for the sake of “everything else is metric so this should be, too” just isn’t worth the cost and risk of switching.

[@ww2planes_810]

Could also be for low altitude flying and minute change of altitude (like when taking off/landing)

[@tookitogo]

As for metric being “far easier”: eh, yes and no. Sure, moving decimals around is easy, but so are other calculations if you use them regularly. As for metric being “more accurate”: that’s just nonsense. Accuracy isn’t a trait of a unit of measure, nor is precision. Any amount can be expressed equally precisely in either system: the precision is up to the user. For example, 2 inches and 50.8mm are exactly the same thing, no matter which system you select. As for the US being “metric-hostile”, I don’t think that’s an accurate representation. I think a more apt description would be “metric-indifferent”. Most people simply don’t give a crap about what units they use, but unlike non-Americans, most Americans don’t get particularly aggressive about defending their system. As it is, the US is fully mixed-system anyway, with metric being THE standard not only in science, but also in many consumer products, like medicine (mg), soft drinks (2 liter bottles), etc. This isn’t new; US soda bottles have been 2 liter and drugs in mg since before I was born, and that was over 40 years ago. Every office ruler in USA since at least the 70s has inches on one side, cm on the other. And finally, it’s not as though the US is unique in using non-metric units: EVERY COUNTRY does to some extent. TVs are sold in inches everywhere. Common pipe fittings (like garden hose threads) are inches all over the world. Tire sizes are a wacko mix of inches, mm, and percent _within the same size code._ In the UK, people still tell their body weights in “stone”. In Canada, whether milk is in a metric or imperial carton _depends on what kind of milk it is._ Japanese homes are measured not in square feet or square meters, but in tatami (the area of a standard Japanese floor mat.) So ultimately, I think it’s often very unbecoming and hypocritical when people get all condescending about the US not being all-metric, since nowhere in the world is actually entirely metric, even if they claim to be.

[@peteconrad2077]

There’s a bid advantage in using different units for different things. It helps prevent mixing of quantities. In Europe, if they’re talking about feet, it can only be altitude. If there talking about metres it can only be a a runway length or visual range.

[@martcon6757]

So which alti was wrong? If the Capt was in command and his alti was displaying 700ft lower than actual, then surely his decent to zero and touch down, would have resulted in the aircraft being still 700 ft above the runway. But if the Co pilot was in command and his alti displayed 700 above actual, then his decent would certainly have resulted in the aircraft striking the ground short of the threshold. So which alti was wrong and can it definitely be said which of the flight crew was in command of the aircraft during the approach? From what I can make out if the Capt was commanding the aircraft it should not have struck the ground even if his alti was showing an incorrect lower reading.

[@MrWaheedulHaque]

you need to put your voice levels up on these videos, i run them at full volume and struggle to hear them unless the room is entirely quiet, even today i got headphones on instead of playing on speaker and struggling to hear them, the background sound is louder than the video :(

[@DisasterBreakdown]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll boost a bit more in the next video

[@MrWaheedulHaque]

@@DisasterBreakdown thanks boss apprieciate it cos i do love your videos i just struggle to hear them sometimes :), keep up the good work

[@dogevid]

I knew you read my comment

[@747-8F]

there have been many accidents due to QFE settings.. I never used them ,but I think it makes one lose the awareness of the real obstacle elevations around. This must be especially true for companies/pilots mixing these settings,which can easily be done when flying into an airport with the remark "QFE operations not allowed" disaster will eventually happen

[@peteconrad2077]

Indeed. QNH is widely recognised as safer.

[@Tony-pm5xo]

I think mentour pilot made a video about a modern plane flying 2 meters above the ground for pretty much the same mistake. Automation can only help so much, I suppose.

[@dxkaiyuan4177]

was the pilot monitorint not checking the radio altimeter? It should have gave sufficient warning lower than expected. Just lack of situational awareness. Also I'm assuming aircraft of that time did not have GPWS?

[@eriesara6424]

1:18 excuse you Chloe, Ms. Aviation Researcher And Educational Content Producer, you are VERY smart. Please be kind to yourself, mmk? :)

[@noneofyourbizness]

there's a seemingly tragic similarity between the captain's perception of his plane's height above ground and the airport's height ASL...both ~700 Metres

[@martinwarner1178]

My hobby of sailing is very much the same as flying, such is my obsession with depth of water (altitude) my name, amongst other sailors is "shallow water Warner." Bless the people with the same concerns. Peace be unto you.

[@Karen-rb4en]

This guys sounds like he would be an effortlessly hilarious comedian.

[@bwc1976]

I love the "conflict between the plane and the ground" part!

[@alexjackson9527]

Funny that you used Newcastle Airport as an example, I worked there as a security officer for 6 months.

[@flyingphobiahelp]

Geordie, eh? 😂😂

[@alexjackson9527]

​@@flyingphobiahelp I can't survive without Greggs so absolutely 🤣

[@xtremepowersports4329]

I’m glad U.S. Americans use a different system

[@marksmith8079]

That Viscount had only have two crew- its has space for three. Much later aircraft always had a flight engineer. Then with flight engineer he should have noted down settings.

[@marksmith8079]

According to Wikipedia it has only two crew seats- that is totally unbelievable.

[@chrisheffernan3998]

Flight 901 is a jinxed number. 1960 Austrian airlines 1979 Air New Zealand

[@mizzyroro]

I don't know why the Viscount reminds me of a plover.

[@Chic01taliano]

When will content creators learn to chapterize sponsors? Thanks for the video though.

[@Nicole-je6bz]

Newcastle airport gang!!