Search

Notices

Allegiant Air

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-30-2015 | 02:30 PM
  #3451  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
From: on the bench
Default

Looks like ValuJet past is catching up with Allegiant senior management as media is connecting the dots, finally.

......................................
JULY 30, 2015
"Allegiant under “several regulatory investigations,” says FAA
Fargo emergency among a string of troubling incidents; maintenance issues have unfortunate parallels to ValuJet

FAA won’t release documents due to “ongoing” investigations

FAA says Fargo closure notice published well in advance; Allegiant disagrees

Allegiant 426 pilots declared fuel emergency – was it justified?

Union says Allegiant has continual maintenance problems, lack of resources

Alleged lack of maintenance processes, infrastructure similar to ValuJet"
......................................

Allegiant under ?several regulatory investigations,? says FAA | SkyWriter Aviation
.
Old 07-30-2015 | 05:12 PM
  #3452  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Default

Bearly Legal: A round-up of today?s dumbest business news-V.PHM-V.CXV-ACCO-ALGT-T.TOY-MATX-Stockhouse news

THE SUITS ARE IN THE COCKPIT, WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE
Apparently it’s a thing at airlines that executives, to keep their pilots licenses, occasionally take a big ass plane out for a spin. Such was the case when an Allegiant Air (NASDAQ:ALGT, Forum) jet made an emergency landing in Fargo, North Dakota, complaining that they were running out of fuel.

The airport, which was temporarily closed for a US Navy Blue Angels practice, told the pilots in question, VP of Flight Operations Greg Baden and Director of Flight Michael Wuerger, to tell their story walking and move to the next airport.

The suits responded negatively to that request, apparently advising that they didn’t have enough fuel to get to the next airport along – something that isn’t supposed to happen according to federal rules, which require a flight to have enough fuel to get to the next strip, and 45 minutes more fuel on top of that.

Allegiant says the execs did nothing wrong, even though they now say the pilot meant “he had less than 20 minutes before dipping into his reserve’… which is akin to my kids telling me they’re really dizzy and can’t breathe because it’s so hot and maybe if we just got Slurpees… and then telling me we shouldn’t be at the ER because they just meant they were a bit hot and a sandwich would be fine.

Allegiant, unsurprisingly, is standing behind its executives. Because executives are never wrong, even when they cause an airport emergency and break federal aviation laws.
Old 07-30-2015 | 06:07 PM
  #3453  
CousinEddie's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 1
Default

Sounds to me like we need to wait for the investigation to conclude before hanging them:

Allegiant investigation: Captain exercised sound judgment | Las Vegas Review-Journal
Old 07-30-2015 | 06:17 PM
  #3454  
CousinEddie's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 1
Default

And you can guarantee that because you are privy to all the relevant facts because.....you read them on the internet so it must be correct.
Old 07-30-2015 | 06:25 PM
  #3455  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Sounds to me like we need to wait for the investigation to conclude before hanging them:

Allegiant investigation: Captain exercised sound judgment | Las Vegas Review-Journal
We can attest from our experience with g4 management, that when a line pilot makes this kind of mistake you are guilty untill proven innocent. How swift and convenient g4 management has made a complete and thorough investigation to exonerate themselves of all wrongdoing. Only from our experience with these weasels, we understand the standard practice is to fry the crew at any hint of impropriety.

Last edited by EngFail; 07-30-2015 at 06:49 PM.
Old 07-30-2015 | 06:38 PM
  #3456  
CousinEddie's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 1
Default

I'm sure your disdain is warranted. Not denying that.
Old 07-30-2015 | 06:40 PM
  #3457  
Hovernut's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
From: MD-80
Default

I wish the company had copied the actual NOTAM in the exoneration email, in keeping with our core value of TRANSPARENCY! Does anyone have THE NOTAM that was in effect that day, allowing exclusions for Air Carrier Ops?
Old 07-30-2015 | 06:57 PM
  #3458  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Default Openness and Transparency?

Originally Posted by Hovernut
I wish the company had copied the actual NOTAM in the exoneration email, in keeping with our core value of TRANSPARENCY! Does anyone have THE NOTAM that was in effect that day, allowing exclusions for Air Carrier Ops?
Ya during our next ‘Coffee Corner’ right? How long has it been now? Oh I know the actual notam g4 management used to exonerate itself will be cut and pasted in the next ‘Fish Wrap’?
Old 07-30-2015 | 07:06 PM
  #3459  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
From: on the bench
Default

Originally Posted by Hovernut
I wish the company had copied the actual NOTAM in the exoneration email, in keeping with our core value of TRANSPARENCY! Does anyone have THE NOTAM that was in effect that day, allowing exclusions for Air Carrier Ops?
I think the NOTAM in question was FAR 07/020. They are supposed to be archived on this FAA website below but it appears that particular one has been removed, maybe due to the incident or to its unclarity??

https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/PilotWeb/

(enter FAR in location field on left side of screen under "NOTAM Retrieval", then click VIEW NOTAMS to display all recent NOTAMS in the database for FAR airport)


Google has the below listed as a cached webpage, and it shows FAR 07/020 was available for viewing at one time on the website. You can see that the cached webpage shows FAR 07/020 and info that mentions scheduled carriers. Don't know why they would take it down from the website. Maybe I am just missing it when I do the search. Anyone know if the TFRs and NOTAMS both get archived here? Maybe dispatch read it as the closed airport was open for regular scheduled carriers and all they had to do was contact ATC upon arrival, circle a few minutes until they got the rehearsals moved out of the way and the airliner could land? Could ATC have interpreted the NOTAM as a hard closure, not aware of the exception for scheduled carriers?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

"!FAR 07/020 FAR AD AIRPORT CLSD EXC SCHEDULED AIR CARRIERS DLY 1700-2200 1507231700-1507242200"

Last edited by rokgpsman; 07-30-2015 at 07:22 PM.
Old 07-30-2015 | 07:20 PM
  #3460  
Banned
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,378
Likes: 0
From: 7th green
Default

Originally Posted by CousinEddie
Sounds to me like we need to wait for the investigation to conclude before hanging them:

Allegiant investigation: Captain exercised sound judgment | Las Vegas Review-Journal
Do you really think the Las Vegas media would publish ANYTHING negative about the "hometown" airline? This place isn't Seattle.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
winglet
Regional
47
05-15-2016 09:45 PM
pipercub
Allegiant
32
11-18-2015 09:12 PM
Flameout
Military
32
03-05-2010 12:21 PM
vagabond
Major
19
06-15-2007 06:29 PM
AirWillie
Hiring News
4
11-16-2005 03:35 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



Your Privacy Choices