Originally Posted by
aviatorhi
So we need to keep creating more and more rules (and their respective "cultures") because someone screwed up one time? I'd love to see how that would work in an office environment, every screw up needs a new rule, before you know it there's a system of bureaucracy so heavy weighing down on yo... oh wait, never mind, already happened.
So I guess newarkblows is right... on at least 2 items.
I guess the only "legitimate" reason I could think of to decline is runway performance or Feds on-board.
They, as in Part 121 pilots as a group, didn't screw up just one time to create a 1000' rule and right along with it, the be down within the TDZ. They screwed up a lot, not only bending metal and killing people but with the advent of FOQA data airlines learned a lot about what was going on with their line flying that was not accident related.
I think Coex found from FOQA data that 90% or some extremely high number of approaches to PSP were unstabilized. Attention was given to PSP, i.e. new rules. Rules are created and
dropped as necessary at every airline I've been at. In reality, there are not that many rules to flying. Its rather very simple and practical.
I've not found anyone, until this thread, that was upset about the 1000' rule at either Delta or Coex before it. It was never even brought up. Do enough approaches and deal with enough pilots and you appreciate the rule.
Now if you're flying a Cessna 185, be as unstabilized as you'd like. Flying a commercial airliner with passengers on board be stabilized where the company tells you to be stabilized.