Airline Pilot Central Forums - UAL letter to the ed. on RJ's......BRAVO!

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)

- - UAL letter to the ed. on RJ's......BRAVO! (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/48780-ual-letter-ed-rjs-bravo.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuppyPuppy (Post 774811)

I found it quite ironic that the UAL MEC (Wendy) mentions that these regional carriers hire "minimally experienced pilots" when her company lowered the minimum qualifications to a commercial pilot certificate and 350 hours total time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 774831)

I know of one individual at UAUA that was hired at about 400 hrs back in 1998.

They had not even completed initial IOE at the regional they were at. Yes, he/she was an intern their while in college.

I believe the ACTUAL minimum was 350 PIC, not total. Going from the scantron after it removed various breakdowns of flight time, like dual received, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fishfreighter (Post 774842)

And none of those "minimally qualified" F/Os at UAL was flying with a 3000 hour Captain with 5 checkride busts.

I wonder how many CA's had check ride busts from some of the already mentioned;

AA in Columbia and LIT
DAL (S) in ATL
DAL (N) overflight
AA in Jamaica
CAL taxiway Z
FedEx
UAL in SFO

As examples.

Quote:

Originally Posted by STILL GROUNDED (Post 775201)

Recently while deadheading on a work assignment I had a professional pilot "miss the hump" on 23 in CLT and touch us down (slammed us to the ground after someone pushed it over) midfield instead of fessing up and going around. I figured we were about to be speared by a 757 taking off 18c but somehow at about 40 knots the captain managed to make the last exit before running off the end. Every piece of carry on luggage and anyone with slip on shoes had to pick them up 3 rows forward from what most certainly max breaking. All the passengers looked at me and my colleague asking if they had just survived wind shear. Of course we calmly smiled with a business as usual "everything is fine". Fact was ACE just about broke his A321 with me on board.

If you for one minute think a mainline pilot is not capable of screwing something up as bad as the Buffalo accident you are living under a rock.

The Colgan flight got more media play then any fatal accident in recent history. It was sensational that the ATC tapes were online within an hour of the accident. More information about this accident hit the media before anyone really knew what had happened but the cat was already out of the bag and the media had already decided for the public who was guilty. It wasn't two pilots but entire fleet of pilots.

Where is the cvr tape from the American flight that over shot the runway and nearly went swimming in Jamaica. There were cry's of fatigue there. The Union came to rescue with the work rule excuse. Why didn't those MORE professional pilots call out because of fatigue. Where is the out cry, no one died that's the only difference. And they did not die not because the pilots did such a great job. A great job would have had the plane at the gate not on the beach.

So I honestly don't take your question with much merit. It has shock value and that is what the media is here for.

The Buffalo accident was not a cross section of the regional airline pilot group. It was one accident which should not have happened. To lump all regional pilots in with this crew is wrong. Just as wrong as it is too lump all mainline pilots in with those who have had bad things happen. I wouldn't do it to them, I'd appreciate the courtesy of not doing it too me.

It is almost as though you people think the public won't fly on a regional aircraft if you make enough noise. You ought to know better. They will fly on the cheapest ticket they can get, look at the success of Southwest. Look how they brought the rest of the industry to its knees. It wasn't outstanding service, better pilots, better meals or A, B, or C boarding priorities. It was the cheapest ticket. Once the sensationalism is gone they will go right back to doing what they do. Besides it's not like your companies are going to stop farming work out.

So, you're saying we're all worth 25 dollars an hour, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bull (Post 774779)

You are joking, right? You are going to argue that experience is not a big difference between the regional and mainline? I am not slamming either side, or trying to start a fight, but experience is a major difference, IMO....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gomerglideslope (Post 775053)

Personally, I do...and as a result I will not let my family ride on an RJ

Again, guys, my argument is for "as far as the contents of this letter regarding scope issues is concerned", the difference between Regional and Mainline companies in relation to safety is a mute point. This letter attempts to piggyback scope issues on the rising sentiment from the public that regional airlines are less safe than their mainline contractors.

Looking at a statistical standpoint, the MORE flying regional carriers have captured over the past 10-15 years makes it more likely that accident trends would INCREASE in the regional sector. Preceding this time period regional companies companies had a much smaller capacity, and therefore less incidents and accidents, so would it have been safe to say at that time that Mainline carriers were LESS safe?
I'll reiterate it, one more time, less experience is an ISSUE, but not a REASON for accidents that have happened at the Regional level.

As far as this letter is concerned, I personally don't feel it's appropriate for ALPA to try and divide airline groups in order of safety. ALPA should be doing everything it can to improve QOL and Compensation for all of their representative pilot groups, as opposed to pitting one side of it's organization against the other.

The whole premise of ALPA, and a Union in general, is based on the concept of unity in numbers. If ALPA is allowing the pilots to be pitted against one another, whether industry-wide or within a single carrier, than they are missing the bigger picture.

You could have a Real Estate Agent represent both the buyer or the seller, but more then likely either the Buyer or the Seller is going to get screwed.

I think Wendy is stuck.

She'd like to tell the person that just bought his ticket from ORD to OMA on United through Orbitz to "take a stand". I am sure there are one or two Tribune readers who will do just that. They'll look at the ticket they just bought on-line and call the airline and "demand" that they ride on a mainline jet flown by mainline pilots?

Lets say 500 people a day inquire about who will be doing the flying from now on. It wont make a difference. There may be a small marketing advantage here if you ran the marketing department of an airline that didn't outsource (WN comes to mind).

Having applied to UAL during the late 80's and seeing the hiring criteria they opted to go with, her attempt is laughable... "Yet, we are witnessing the outsourcing of too many of our brothers and sisters in lieu of cheaper, less-experienced pilots."

Un huh. Some of us know better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bligh (Post 775230)

Captain Bligh, yes there were some less qualified folks hire at ual in the 80's. That is not the majority of the pilots there it is the exception. just like and I will only use a small example. Lets say some of the pilots hired at cal in the 80's yes the ones hired out of the newspaper ads that met in hotel rooms for a quick interview, no sim no evaluation, is this typical there no did it happen yes. How bout some amr floks hired I know some low time, flunked the sim check during interview, knew someone got back for second try, typical no but all airlines have them not just ual.

Quote:

Originally Posted by STILL GROUNDED (Post 775201)

If you for one minute think a mainline pilot is not capable of screwing something up as bad as the Buffalo accident you are living under a rock.

You mean like the mainline pilots who stalled an A300 a few years ago after descending and forgot to push the power back up?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beagle Pilot (Post 775235)

You mean like the mainline pilots who stalled an A300 a few years ago after descending and forgot to push the power back up?

I'm unfamiliar with this accident. The pilot stalled the aircraft and then didn't increase thrust? or stalled the aircraft by forgetting to increase thrust and during the stall recover increased thrust.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 775209)

So, you're saying we're all worth 25 dollars an hour, right?

Come on man, you know that's NOT what he's saying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airbum (Post 775240)

I'm sure you can google it, and I'm also sure that somebody here has the EXACT specifics. I'm just going by memory, but I believe they were going into holding, somehow the AT's got turned off, kicked off, disconnected, whatever. Slowed to their holding speed, and then some. That is, if it's the one I'm thinking of.

May also be classified as an incident, as opposed to an accident.

Yeah. Because the pilots subsequently executed a proper stall recovery instead of fighting the stick pusher with 80-120 pounds of force all the way to the ground.

Not exactly the equivalent of BUF.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JungleBus (Post 775319)

Yeah. Because the pilots subsequently executed a proper stall recovery instead of fighting the stick pusher with 80-120 pounds of force all the way to the ground.

Not exactly the equivalent of BUF.

True, but all that was was a classic example of pilots who exercised poor judgment/SA, and subsequently had to rely on their skill/training/experience as well as luck to get them out of a situation that shouldn't have happened in the first place. Been happening to us since day 1, we'll continue to succumb to it as we've proven to be the weakest link in the safety chain.

That rationale is similar others, "well, nobody got killed so it's OK".

As opposed to pilots relying on skill/judgment/experience to keep themselves out of trouble.

And the standard opposite side of the coin ensues. The guys in (take your pick, Columbia/LIT) got themselves into trouble, a lengthy error chain followed, and were unable to salvage a bad situation, were UNLUCKY, and it cost them.

We can go round and round all day on this stuff.