I know out of HPN one morning my crew road on the van with a Colgan crew. In talking to the new upgraded CA, brand new hire FO and also FA we got to talking about the Saab and how they were going from HPN-IAD. Come to find out the CA then heard from the FA that she had been DHD into HPN to cover the flight. Ended up she was a Q FA and had never flown on the Saab...... We thought ok, odd but maybe they are common and its ok?

Long story short, we thought if it were an issue the CA would have taken care of it..... At the end of the Runway we hear, "Colgan XXX if you are not ready let me know." The response, "The FA is brand new to this plane and we will let you know." From that day on we had wondered about it and still had us wondering if they were trained on ALL AC or just a type..... So to learn about this at Colgan does not shock me..... Compared to this time where the FA flew a plane from HPN-IAD she had never been properly trained on.....

 

All FA's at 9L are dual qualified (except about 50, which they will be) on the Saab and Q. More than likely the FA hadn't flown on the Saab ever or in a long time but was qualified. Only know this because I found out today in FO new hire class.

 

They must have forgotten the pizza last month at the FSDO....

 

Well needless to say that was the "old" Colgan mentality and many of those Colganites that steered our ship back then are gone. Things have improved since their departure. Unfortunately, we're still being labeled as Chuck Colgan's airline and its nothing like it once was.

 

Sad it took what it did to have make that happen. In a perfect world Chuck would be in jail, not enjoying a golden parachute.

 

I agree with you. At least he could come back and hire flight attendants again. Since his departure our "layover" quality has gone down hill

 

They actually were signing FAs off on Saab without any IOE, typical Colgan Worthlessness in this World of trying to save a $1

 

Its pretty common to get FA's from the Q but they were all trained to fly the Saab. The problem is that the Q FA's are in general spoiled and seldom fly on the Saab. They aren't used to doing the announcements (cd recording in the Q) and only having about 5 minutes from the second engine startup to takeoff (if that). So we end up holding short of the runway waiting for them to finish their announcements and let us know that the cabin is secure for takeoff. About 90% of the time, getting a Q FA means they will break the cabin door stairs by not hitting the release to bring them up.

Not that I'm defending the company's practices but this does seem like a really stupid proposed fine when all it comes down to is a rubber hose. It seems that someone at the FSDO is trying to coming up with their own way to balance the FAA's budget.

 

...or maybe the FAA got out the microscope to have a look at an airline with a fatal crash and wrong airport landing under its belt in the last 2.5 years.

 

Yeah, that's it. Please, spare us your superiority complex. Neither of those events are remotely related to this outlandish proposal.

Seriously, almost 2 MILLION dollars because the training extinguishers don't have a 12" hose but the ones in the plane do?!? Get real! It's a fire extinguisher, they all operate the same. Pull (pin), Point (base of fire/ source), Squeeze (handle/ trigger), Sweep (spray entire area).

This is ridiculous, plain and simple.