UPS Accident - BHM
08-27-2013, 12:58 PM
#471
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: B737 F/O
Posts: 425
Originally Posted by Dergrossen
Most pilots are embarrassed about "go arounds" people. ATC wants to know the reason, the employer wants to know the reason and basically the pilot does not want to be seen to be a goof. There is far too much hubris with you guys. If an approach is dangerous don't accept it. If the company you fly for is not happy move to Taiwan. Plenty of good employers out there. At least you KNOW that some far flung destination will have a non precision approach. You don't have to accept third world standards in the USA. An airport this size not having a radar fix on approach heights is unbelievable.
I think I see why the Aviation Herald was having a problem with your posting. This drivel is wrecking an otherwise productive safety discussion.
08-27-2013, 01:11 PM
#472
Banned
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 27
The discussion would not exist if BHM 18 approach had better facilities. The "Aviation Herald" report site is busier than ever. Reports from sources that are new. No longer can places like BHM hide faults like this. The public have rights and the USA has a constitution and a legal system...thats why most of us in the EUR took off to the USA. If you cannot stand comment then there is little difference between the USA and the former USSR.
08-27-2013, 01:39 PM
#473
Working weekends
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 2,384
as a member of APC I am calling for thread to be locked.
deterioriated and the discussion is no longer professional nor respectful in light of the deaths of two fellow aviators.
discussion can be re-started down the road
deterioriated and the discussion is no longer professional nor respectful in light of the deaths of two fellow aviators.
discussion can be re-started down the road
08-27-2013, 01:41 PM
#474
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: French American
Posts: 417
Originally Posted by Dergrossen
The discussion would not exist if BHM 18 approach had better facilities. The "Aviation Herald" report site is busier than ever. Reports from sources that are new. No longer can places like BHM hide faults like this. The public have rights and the USA has a constitution and a legal system...thats why most of us in the EUR took off to the USA. If you cannot stand comment then there is little difference between the USA and the former USSR.
Ladies & gentlemen, please congratulate Dergrossen on becoming the newest person to completely watch all Air Crash Investigations series !
08-27-2013, 02:41 PM
#475
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 15
Dgrassen is not an engineer. He is posing as someone who uses mathematics and does a bit of background on a technical subject to become aware of the nuances.
I go back to my first guess of "reporter". He might be an ambulance chasing lawyer, but there's no need for name calling.
Ignore engaged.
I go back to my first guess of "reporter". He might be an ambulance chasing lawyer, but there's no need for name calling.
Ignore engaged.
08-27-2013, 02:45 PM
#476
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2013
Posts: 15
Originally Posted by satpak77
as a member of APC I am calling for thread to be locked.
deterioriated and the discussion is no longer professional nor respectful in light of the deaths of two fellow aviators.
discussion can be re-started down the road
deterioriated and the discussion is no longer professional nor respectful in light of the deaths of two fellow aviators.
discussion can be re-started down the road
08-27-2013, 03:17 PM
#478
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Pilot
Posts: 2,625
Originally Posted by Dergrossen
Most pilots are embarrassed about "go arounds" people. ATC wants to know the reason, the employer wants to know the reason and basically the pilot does not want to be seen to be a goof. There is far too much hubris with you guys. If an approach is dangerous don't accept it. If the company you fly for is not happy move to Taiwan. Plenty of good employers out there. At least you KNOW that some far flung destination will have a non precision approach. You don't have to accept third world standards in the USA. An airport this size not having a radar fix on approach heights is unbelievable.
08-27-2013, 03:33 PM
#479
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Position: French American
Posts: 417
Originally Posted by Dergrossen
Most pilots are embarrassed about "go arounds" people. ATC wants to know the reason, the employer wants to know the reason and basically the pilot does not want to be seen to be a goof. There is far too much hubris with you guys. If an approach is dangerous don't accept it. If the company you fly for is not happy move to Taiwan. Plenty of good employers out there. At least you KNOW that some far flung destination will have a non precision approach. You don't have to accept third world standards in the USA. An airport this size not having a radar fix on approach heights is unbelievable.
HAHA W T F are you talking about ?!
The only time I've ever heard ATC ask the reason for a go around was when there are winds and they would like to know if you got hit with windshear. They train for a G/A as much as pilots and no one wants a $200 million dollar piece of metal bent on their watch.
08-27-2013, 03:35 PM
#480
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,681
Originally Posted by Dergrossen
the employer wants to know the reason and basically the pilot does not want to be seen to be a goof.
Originally Posted by Red Forman
ATC didn't care why I did it
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
