Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Perhaps at mesa or a few other bottom-feeder 121 operations. The larger jet regionals almost never argue if a captain says no go. With Mx it's easy...once you are on record making the phone call (it's all recorded) they can't try to talk you into flying a with non-mel issue.
The only grey area might be weather that is technically barely OPSPEC legal but out of the CA's comfort zone. Ex. Poor braking action with precip and a 25 kt xwind on the only available runway. A CA can make the argument that two near-limitations factors are a no go when combined together. Or you can take a lot of gas, go have a look, and divert or RTB if it looks sketchy.
Most 121 is MUCH safer than 91/135, except the fractionals are pretty safe too.
I am going to go ahead and have to disagree..... Yeah..... (in my best Bill Lumburgh voice). AirNet is not your mom and pop 135 company. As a former pilot there, i can attest that the training there is just as good as the training I am getting at my LCC 121 major airline driving a 737. I would rather commute on an AirNet learjet with pilots who have been there, done that and have the t-shirt rather than your ERJ/CRJ with a 500 hour wonder kid as the FO at your regional of choice.
As far as the loading and fuel quality. From an AirNet source close to the investigation, we know that the Jet A-1 (they use phillips pre-mix jet a) was tested that day and that the caravan was sprayed with 150 gallons of Type 1 4 mins prior to recieving his TAKEOFF clearance. BTW the Type 1 was also analyized post accident and found to be in spec. As for the loading, AirNet weighs every bin as it comes out of the sort so I don't think it was a weight issue and with 1270 hours in a Caravan, if it is underweight, it really doesn't matter where it goes, it will fly.
Why don't we quit monday morning QB'ing this in respect to Mike and James and those of us who knew them and let the NTSB do their job.