Captain Charm School Impressions
02-20-2018 | 06:27 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,559
Likes: 0
From: A Nobody
Ok you safety experts can fight this out now and decide why one Captain should have turned an airplane down while another didn’t. Personally I support the regulations which give him or her such an authority.
02-20-2018 | 06:29 AM
#42
Number Last
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
From: Boeing voice activated systems and ACARS commander
Basically what I am trying to say is that the FAA doesn't sit around trying to figure out how to make things safer ... They enforce the rules until something happens to require a new rule or modification of the old rule. Reactive.
02-20-2018 | 06:32 AM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,559
Likes: 0
From: A Nobody
The reason for an MEL and things like ETOPS, in the FARs is because without them safety would only be in the eyes of the beholder. It provides a minimum level of protection/safety for the general population.
MELs came about after accidents ... Basically bargained for by operators.
ETOPs came about after a close call where an L1011 (I believe) touched down after losing 2 of the 3 engines ... And the 3rd engine was on the way ... All three had an oil seal installed incorrectly.
No safety forethought involved in either MELs or ETOPs ... Both were reactive.
MELs came about after accidents ... Basically bargained for by operators.
ETOPs came about after a close call where an L1011 (I believe) touched down after losing 2 of the 3 engines ... And the 3rd engine was on the way ... All three had an oil seal installed incorrectly.
No safety forethought involved in either MELs or ETOPs ... Both were reactive.
ETOPs came about because two engine airplanes need to be certified for over water ops. More than two engine airplanes operate under different standards. If you fly over terrain look up Method I and II standards, the requirements for alternates and such.
Please check out your “facts” before pushing the send key.
And as I wrote, regs have a history of graves behind them. Why? Probably because the designers can’t think of everything when they design something, the law of unintended consequences is always active, hind sight is 20/20...
02-20-2018 | 06:39 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,559
Likes: 0
From: A Nobody
I once owned an airplane with a WWII B26 crew member. He showed me a picture of him sitting in a ditch with his airplane on fire and exploding in the background, a terrified 19 year old. I asked what happened?
His reply was, “We had an engine failure on takeoff.”
My next question was, “Won’t it fly on one?”
He said this, “Two engines wasn’t for reliability it was to put more weight into the air, i.e. bombs. The airplane would barely fly at max load.”
There was no two engine safe T/O profile.
He made it back alive and died an old man with a wonderful family.
02-20-2018 | 06:41 AM
#45
Line Holder
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
While you (and I) may disagree and feel somethings amiss, the rules did not happen in vacume and in some simple arbitrary sort of way. So before you start to pick on the individual regs, like rest, please investigate the whys. Rest, body cycles, time zones, and such are huge areas of study these days.
There’s also differences between freight and pax operations, did you ask yourself why and whose safety is being protected?
There’s also differences between freight and pax operations, did you ask yourself why and whose safety is being protected?
02-20-2018 | 06:56 AM
#46
Number Last
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
From: Boeing voice activated systems and ACARS commander
Powder, not only do I have friends at the FAA at one time I had the opportunity to represent them, as in deciding if an airman applicant was “safe,” according to the regs, to get a license.
Ok you safety experts can fight this out now and decide why one Captain should have turned an airplane down while another didn’t. Personally I support the regulations which give him or her such an authority.
Ok you safety experts can fight this out now and decide why one Captain should have turned an airplane down while another didn’t. Personally I support the regulations which give him or her such an authority.
I also support CAPTAINS athority and don't abuse it.
02-20-2018 | 08:06 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
There’s no easy fix I’m sure, but I recently had a dispatcher on the jumpseat and the reasons he told us guys were refusing planes were amazing, like no acars for example. I had an fo from Denver to pdx who thought we should refuse the plane because our APU was on MEL, another with apubleed MEL thought we should refuse the plane because of light snow at the airport. I spent 5 years flying a plane with no APU in some pretty sh&t weather. Nobody is asking anyone to risk safety and our company always stresses safety above all else. But Jesus there a reason we carry an MEL
If an FO has an issue with a deferral and willing to speak up, I'm all ears. Everyone should be comfortable with the flight.
02-20-2018 | 08:32 AM
#48
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,457
Likes: 6
From: Airbus 320 Right Seat
All these are great stories and responses about the past , to the original poster , did you ask about Kirbys plans for more Large RJ's etc !?!??!!!?!!????!! What's their take on this growth .
02-20-2018 | 09:25 AM
#49
Thread Starter
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,725
Likes: 0
From: UAL retired
There were several questions and all the managers smiled and said: "you're not gonna draw me into a negotiation on Scope here" .
On growth they were all clear that the plan as of now is 4% + at MAINLINE over the next 7 years. I asked if we had a plan for a downturn and the answer was, yes, but the hope was this time would be "different" because UAL and the entire industry are in a very different position financially and competitively.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
