Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
JO... regional airlines are safer than showers >

JO... regional airlines are safer than showers

Search

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

JO... regional airlines are safer than showers

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-08-2008 | 08:54 AM
  #11  
The Chow's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
From: 1st year pay for the 3rd time
Default

Originally Posted by saab2000
I'll try an experiment today. I am going to take a shower and fly on a regional airline.

If I survive both I'll assume that JO is wrong - they are equally safe. If I have a shower accident but survive the flight I will have to assume he is right.
In order for this to work you need a control group. This group will have fly on regionals all over the country but not shower.
Reply
Old 02-08-2008 | 08:59 AM
  #12  
SharkAir's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Default

I've nearly slipped in the shower several times in recent memory. It's scary. I'm starting to lose sleep over it.
Reply
Old 02-08-2008 | 09:30 AM
  #13  
ERJ Driver's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
From: ERJ CA
Default

"It's safer to fly an airplane than it is to take a shower," said Jonathan Ornstein, chairman and CEO of Mesa Air Group, which operates regional airlines. "No fatalities last year. That speaks for itself."

It's flippant statements like this that contribute to the problem rather than fixing it. When our leaders are crooks how can we rely on any information they give? This is a whitewash load of crud that speaks for itself. At MAG we are secretly counting the days. Good luck.
Reply
Old 02-08-2008 | 12:02 PM
  #14  
exp96's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
Default

Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB
And how the heck was FL410 an "unauthorized high altitude??"
I think the media just has its facts wrong (go figure). At the time of the 3701 accident, there was no reason we couldnt go up to FL410 if we were light enough. Right after 3701, the company restriced operations above FL370.
Reply
Old 02-08-2008 | 01:40 PM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,847
Likes: 10
Default

Originally Posted by exp96
I think the media just has its facts wrong (go figure). At the time of the 3701 accident, there was no reason we couldnt go up to FL410 if we were light enough. Right after 3701, the company restriced operations above FL370.
Yep - that was my conclusion. I'd like to know what the climb-capability chart said...?
Reply
Old 02-08-2008 | 01:40 PM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,847
Likes: 10
Default

Originally Posted by The Chow
In order for this to work you need a control group. This group will have fly on regionals all over the country but not shower.
Where do we opt-out of that experiment?!
Reply
Old 02-08-2008 | 03:55 PM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,732
Likes: 0
From: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Default

Originally Posted by Jakob
Showers are generally WAYYYY overrated anyway...








Unless you get to shower with JO's daughter.
Reply
Old 02-09-2008 | 08:41 AM
  #18  
exp96's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
Default

Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB
Yep - that was my conclusion. I'd like to know what the climb-capability chart said...?
I dont know what 3701's TOGW was, but I know it took them 29 minutes to get to FL410. I have only been up there 2 times on ferry flights, and it took longer than 29 minutes to burn off enough fuel to make it.
Reply
Old 02-10-2008 | 04:12 PM
  #19  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB
Yep - that was my conclusion. I'd like to know what the climb-capability chart said...?
They were empty - so I'm betting the charts would say they could do it. Hell heavy our charts routinely say FL370 no problem - but it would be a brave person who would actually go there.

To re-hash an old incident, a significant part of the problem was they weren't following any reasonable climb profile, if they held 500fpm, or probably even less, they could probably have got to FL410 with a stable airspeed and lived to tell about it.

Note that the article had a picture of a go! jet (Mesa owned and operated) and did not mention the AMW accident except in the side-bar (and only the insider would know AMW was Mesa owned) and no other mention of Mesa incidents and JO was the only airline executive quoted. So I'm thinking there was a little quid pro quo going on and let's face it, the USA Today (the cartoon of newspapers) isn't exactly known for it's investigative journalism.
Reply
Old 02-10-2008 | 06:31 PM
  #20  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Default

Funny, after an interview with Mesa I felt so dirty I had to shower......
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sr. Barco
Regional
89
09-15-2013 07:22 PM
AFPirate
Regional
6
11-26-2007 11:39 AM
Sr. Barco
Major
34
07-31-2007 01:01 PM
RockBottom
Major
1
12-08-2005 06:50 AM
WatchThis!
Major
0
07-10-2005 03:55 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