Quote:
This thing blew up in a way I could not have envisioned! Each of you that criticized me for how I related with my F/O does not know what you are talking about! You weren't there, so you don't know. Our relationship was good going in and reamains so. We have many trips together and will again, as we are of similar relative seniority and enjoy each other's company, both on duty and on layovers. The paraphrased conversation that I might have included in any above posts was not word-for-word what would have been on the CVR; I was just trying to relate the circumstance, not infer a "tone" or demeanor. Let's just say everyone was happy in the end, and we went about our day.
My contrition tank is empty. I'm not apologizing to the APC world for sharing a thought that I probably should not have. I do appreciate the honest exchange of info and ideas. It's clear I did not think about the details of FAR 139 field maintenance requirements. There's probably more going on behind the scenes than I ever realized. The fact that FOD comes on my "radar" was based on a real world, in-your-face experience with a large object on the runway that threatened my flight. Maybe that was a unicorn, but it is etched in my brain. Would you expect my ongoing attitude about such things to be a shrug of the shoulders and "meeeeh?" Now I am armed with new insight that I will apply to future operations. That's all I can ask for, right?
I’m glad you brought it up. At least now you know that this technique is un-necessary and way outside the norms so in the future you won’t subject another FO to it.Originally Posted by zippinbye
This guy gets it.This thing blew up in a way I could not have envisioned! Each of you that criticized me for how I related with my F/O does not know what you are talking about! You weren't there, so you don't know. Our relationship was good going in and reamains so. We have many trips together and will again, as we are of similar relative seniority and enjoy each other's company, both on duty and on layovers. The paraphrased conversation that I might have included in any above posts was not word-for-word what would have been on the CVR; I was just trying to relate the circumstance, not infer a "tone" or demeanor. Let's just say everyone was happy in the end, and we went about our day.
My contrition tank is empty. I'm not apologizing to the APC world for sharing a thought that I probably should not have. I do appreciate the honest exchange of info and ideas. It's clear I did not think about the details of FAR 139 field maintenance requirements. There's probably more going on behind the scenes than I ever realized. The fact that FOD comes on my "radar" was based on a real world, in-your-face experience with a large object on the runway that threatened my flight. Maybe that was a unicorn, but it is etched in my brain. Would you expect my ongoing attitude about such things to be a shrug of the shoulders and "meeeeh?" Now I am armed with new insight that I will apply to future operations. That's all I can ask for, right?