Exactly. Please quote the CFR section that states that instrument approach charts must be "in alphabetical order" prior to climbing into the aircraft?

If you were to get an LOI from the FSDO, what violation would it reference?

 

It would reference section 9.2.1of the FOM

9.2.1Navigation Charts

A

The Captain shall not begin a flight unless the appropriate Jeppesen aeronautical charts are on board. The Company will provide Jeppesen Enroute and Approach Charts to each Pilot. In addition, flight planning and airport analysis documents are maintained in OCC. Responsibility for Jeppesen Revision.: · If a revision is distributed while a Pilot is flying a sequence, the Pilot is not responsible for that revision until returning at the end of that sequence. · If a revision is distributed at the Pilot’s base before departing on a sequence, the Pilot is responsible to have revised pages inserted and/or removed as instructed on the Manual Transmittal Sheet. The revision number must also be logged on the Record of Revisions in the manual for that sequence. Jeppesens must be revised before referencing your charts on the Flight Deck in preparation for pre-flight activities. · If the revision is not in the Pilot’s V-File, the Pilot should check with the base manager to obtain the current revision.

We need to comply with the FOM, right?

 

Nothing gets past you, does it?

:-)

 

You have learned much Grasshopper!

 

Way to go junior. You took the one sentence out of the post that had little to do with the post itself. But since you did.

We shouldn't? LOL. Those are phrases for a place that has corporate culture, where managers think it is important to take care of their employees because in return they will take care of their customers. This is not that place. Arguments that start with "we should, or they should" just don't apply here bro.

And why should they btw? No, it does not benefit the company. Like Nedskids said, as long we show up at the gate and push on time they have no incentive to get it. If the MEC wants 100% compliance and enforcement, shouldn't the company expect the same? That is all they are doing. We will give them no slack, they will give us no slack. They give no slack to the passengers either. No slack is the corporate culture here.

But F KCM. I really don't care anymore. It seems I am the only one who thinks that perhaps a few dollars a month from my $2-3k yearly ALPA dues could go for KCM. That way they could not hold it hostage. But the union does not want to hear that. I just wish I could pay for my own. Buying airport friendly shoes cost me more per year than KCM would.

But didn't Joe write in his "Dear John" letter to us that it was coming? I thought I have read that on the ra email. I could be wrong, my eyes were full of tears.

 

That's hardcore. If that's the case how it's specifically addressed in your FOM, I would say show at scheduled show time and take the delay. Easier said than done; I know there's serious pressure and nobody wants to be the guy sticking their neck out.

What a silly little game.

 

Yep, have to comply for company reasons, not FAA reasons.
No CFR says you have to have them in order, or in the book.
And the FOM is an accepted manual, not approved. There's a difference.
Approved manuals are just as regulatory as the CFRs.
Like reading in the cockpit. Nowhere in the CFRs does it state you can't read at cruise. Company policy may state so, but no CFR.
Like at UAL/ CAL now does not prohibit reading...

 

If the approved manuals are just as regulatory as the CFRs then we need to do it right?
Seems strange. I wonder if a FA violated the make-up policy in their manual are they in violation of the regs. subject to discipline from the FAA?

 

Is it an APPROVED or ACCEPTED manual?
There aren't many APPROVED manuals. Although some POIs think there are.
Weight and balance manual is approved, training manual is approved. GOMs or FOMs, are ACCEPTED.

 

A/C 620 is on its way... Little bit of good news I guess, keep em coming!

Spirit (NK) #9620 Flight Tracker ? FlightAware