Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
UPS Accident - BHM >

UPS Accident - BHM

Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

UPS Accident - BHM

Old 08-15-2013, 02:48 PM
  #191  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Vito's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757/767 Capt
Posts: 641
Default

USMCFlyer
As an FAA inspector it would be refreshing to see the FAA take a close look at the untenable schedules we are flying at night...the only time I see the FAA is when they are jumping our flights or sims to inspect us, the pilots, yet the biggest threat we face is the company streching and squeezing our schedules to the max. I only wish that the recipient of FAA scrutiny is UPS's scheduling practices and not UPS pilots.
Vito is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 02:54 PM
  #192  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Bilsch's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Position: FAA ATSI VSRP ERC
Posts: 218
Default

Originally Posted by Jetjok View Post
OK, before it gets too far off kilter, let me rephrase so as to try and not offend...
Thank you Jetjok?

As a community, me and all my team (who are all Air Force and/or airline veterans) mourn together after these events.
Bilsch is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 02:56 PM
  #193  
Gets Weekends Off
 
USMCFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,835
Default

Originally Posted by FrontSeat View Post
If this were true there would not allow the many scumbag 135 unsafe operators go under the radar in Florida and the LA area. FSDO chiefs take payoffs to look the other way....LMAO at safety.......money trades hands, eyes look the other way and LEARS and GIV's fly way over flight and duty times....

Don't get me started on maintenance logs being altered......

POI's are getting RICH RICH RICH.....all under the table cash for their "responsibility and global leadership"

I used to think working in a FSDO/being a POI would be way less income then a 121 captain.....I should have become a POI in either VNY or Lake Havasu, SDL, south florida ETC ETC.

So when I hear of an FAA inspector giving a 121 crew a hard time because they forgot to dot an I or cross a T on some minor Bull Crap issue I laugh my "a s s" off at what they let slide in the FSDO with 135 operators...

At least give the 121 pilots the same chance for a cash payoff before busting them...
So every part if the FAA is connected to Flight Standards?
So all airlines are connected to each other too.
So I can take your most hated airline (and especially airline management teams) and lump you right in there with them?

Vito. I have all the same trials and tribulations with AFS as all if you do. You understand that Flight Standards (the *enfircement arm of the FAA) is just one part of an organization. I KNOW you know this but many seem to forget this fact.

And FrontSeat - if you have personal knowledge of POIs or any member of a FSDO taking bribes then you should present your evidence and be part of the solution.
USMCFLYR is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 03:00 PM
  #194  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: Fire Lieutenant
Posts: 50
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Well in this case it's not the job, it's what's in the back that determines the level of safety acceptable to the government.

The FAA is not providing passenger pilots a higher level of safety than cargo pilots...they are providing passengers with a higher level of safety than boxes.

The pilots in either case are just along for the ride. There are more dangerous aviation (and non-aviation) jobs than 121. I guess they take the view if loggers, electrical linemen, etc can be in daily danger, why not pilots?

But keep lobbying, the squeaky wheel might get some grease. One can argue, correctly, that a loaded widebody poses a danger to people on the ground as well as the pilots.
It's been a long time since I traded DC-8's for BRTs (big red trucks), but it still makes me crazy when I hear the media/general public refer to airline pilots vs "cargo pilots" as if they are two different classes of people doing 2 different jobs, as NBC did last night on nightly news, deserving of two different levels of safety.

And while I do not in any way paint all FAA employees with one brush(I believe the rank and file are dedicated to their job) I do believe that the upper levels of the FAA, in bowing to pressure from industry lobbyists and our beloved Congress and accepting 2 sets of rest rules, made a politically based decision to wantonly and willfully compromise safety in lieu of commerce.

They are the same aircraft, with the same crew sizes, flying in the same NAS, using the same airports. There is just no damned difference between the two jobs. Doesn't matter if it is babies or boxes in the back. It should be the same set of rules.

For what it is worth, it is the same in my industry, only the third rail is staffing and not rest rules. Municipalities routinely ignore safe staffing levels because they just don't want to pay for more firefighters. So I'm left to make command decisions on whether to commit my company to a situation based on handcuffed staffing. Even the FAA gets into the act, mandating the number of ARFF units, but not the number of firefighters on them, when they index airports.

I'm not naive enough to believe that this will ever change, regardless of how morally wrong it truly is.

The two lives lost yesterday were just as important, just as special, just as irreplaceable as any pilot in the industry. Regardless of what, or who, was riding behind them.

Last edited by gdube94; 08-15-2013 at 03:13 PM.
gdube94 is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 03:05 PM
  #195  
Gets Weekends Off
 
USMCFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,835
Default

The rules should be made for the pilots - pax or cargo.
If the PILOTS are kept safe - the pax (or cargo) will be kept safe.
USMCFLYR is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 03:15 PM
  #196  
Gets Weekends Off
 
FoxHunter's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 980
Default

Originally Posted by Hrkdrivr View Post
I can't find a reference right now, but I'm pretty sure this isn't part of the FAA's charter/mission/vision any more. A long time ago they realized the conflict between promoting air commerce and regulating aviation and safety.
October 1996
A change in the FAA's mandate?
President Clinton signs the Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 1996. Following public outcry over the ValuJet Flight 592 crash, lawmakers approve changes to the FAA's mission that appear to remove the agency's dual mandate of regulating safety and promoting industry development.

Timeline - The Faa And Airlines | Flying Cheap | FRONTLINE | PBS

But a closer look at the bill tells a different story. "There's a footnote in that legislation before Congress," Schiavo explains. "The footnote says: 'Although we're changing the terminology from "promote" to "encourage," we do not intend to change the way we do business. This is a change for the public consumption, and we're not changing how we work at the FAA.' It was simply a sleight of hand."
FoxHunter is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 03:16 PM
  #197  
captains food tester
 
pullup's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 94
Default

Kit Darby is an aviation expert with more than 30 years of experience.

"When they got down closer to the airport they found themselves too high and too fast and they really made a very steep descent," said Darby.

quoted from CBS Atlanta website....
[email protected]
There is his e-mail...told him to ****
pullup is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 03:59 PM
  #198  
Gets Weekends Off
 
BeenThere's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 152
Default

Originally Posted by Moose View Post
FWIW, witnesses are saying the plane was on fire before it crashed and the engines sounded odd.
Witnesses always say that. Then the facts correct their observations.
RIP fellow pilots. Your are not forgotten.
BeenThere is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 04:18 PM
  #199  
Gets Weekends Off
 
savall's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: French American
Posts: 417
Default

Originally Posted by pullup View Post
Kit Darby is an aviation expert with more than 30 years of experience.

"When they got down closer to the airport they found themselves too high and too fast and they really made a very steep descent," said Darby.

quoted from CBS Atlanta website....
[email protected]
There is his e-mail...told him to ****
I hope this buffoon is referring to another incident. The black boxes haven't even been analyzed yet. Was this aviation "expert" an eyewitness ? Does his thirty years of experience involve anything large than a C172 ?!?! At least what happens here is merely speculation and not blatant assumptions / accusations.
savall is offline  
Old 08-15-2013, 04:21 PM
  #200  
Gets Weekends Off
 
savall's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: French American
Posts: 417
Default

By the looks of it, this guy is a lawyer / law firm involved in suing over aviation accidents. How fitting that he'd jump on TV spewing BS.

KITDARBY.COM - About Us
savall is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MD90PIC
Cargo
196
05-24-2021 06:56 AM
Ernst
Cargo
148
07-08-2010 06:04 PM
⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
Cargo
16
02-18-2009 03:34 PM
jungle
Cargo
0
12-10-2008 06:55 AM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
23
07-10-2006 06:19 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices