Mixed cockpit
06-30-2014 | 04:37 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,887
Likes: 0
From: Guppy Capt.
Sincere question here and would appreciate some honest replies. What is it with the UAL side of the house refusing aircraft on non-ETOPS flights with a legitimate APU placarded? I've seen several flights cancelled because of this with a very recent 767-400 leaving the F/O behind because he refused to take the aircraft.
Looking for explanations as I never saw one refused on the CAL side ever.
Thanks
Looking for explanations as I never saw one refused on the CAL side ever.
Thanks
Did the F/O state why he refused?
06-30-2014 | 04:38 AM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
I made the mistake of taking an inop APU on the 300 Guppy in ORD one HOT summer day. Ramp pulled the conditioned air about 10 minutes before dept (contrary to my wishes). The start cart arrived about 5 min after dept (the one that worked anyway). By the time we got the engines and packs going, the cabin temps were triple digit. Waited in an hour long conga line to take off, did I mention it was HOT. Got multiple calls from the FAs about the heat. Never Again. Maybe in the Fall or Winter.
06-30-2014 | 04:42 AM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,887
Likes: 0
From: Guppy Capt.
We have what's called a Minimum Equipment List or MEL which explains what equipment can be inoperative, it also explains how this affects you operationally, and any restrictions you may face. I think if you search your IPad, you'll find one too. Not sure what you go by Air Hoss, but if your afraid to fly with an inoperative APU, your in the wrong business, or you need to grow a pair.... I even (gasp) used to fly a turbine plane without an APU installed, and I survived.
06-30-2014 | 04:48 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Likes: 0
True, just as something on placard doesn't mean it's unsafe or a bad option. We thump our chests about Captain's Authority, then slam crews for making decisions one way or another. How 'bout we recognize each situation is unique and let the crews decide?
06-30-2014 | 05:08 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
We have what's called a Minimum Equipment List or MEL which explains what equipment can be inoperative, it also explains how this affects you operationally, and any restrictions you may face. I think if you search your IPad, you'll find one too. Not sure what you go by Air Hoss, but if your afraid to fly with an inoperative APU, your in the wrong business, or you need to grow a pair.... I even (gasp) used to fly a turbine plane without an APU installed, and I survived.
It doesn't matter what the MEL says. If any crew member feels the operation is unsafe with the piece of equipment inop they are obligated to say NO. The Capt and F/O share this responsibility individually and collectively. This is one of the reasons for CRM/CLR. The fear of retribution should not come into play today and no safety decision should be based on discipline threats from management.
06-30-2014 | 05:59 AM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
Shrek, on the LUAL side, is it ever acceptable to leave a MX base with an MEL? Or is the aircraft always refused if logbook isn't clean. Also, I heard there's a union publication (maybe old) that recommends some no-go items for various situations, like APU for international, TCAS at night. If anyone can provide a link to this it would be good to have. Thanks.
Last edited by APC225; 06-30-2014 at 06:11 AM.
06-30-2014 | 06:19 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Shrek, on the LUAL side, is it ever acceptable to leave a MX base with an MEL? Or is the aircraft always refused if logbook isn't clean. Also, I heard there's a union publication (maybe old) that recommends some no-go items for various situations, like APU for international, TCAS at night. If anyone can provide a link to this it would be good to have. Thanks.
I'm not Shrek but let me say I don't want you bringing me an airplane to B..F..E.. (I don't mean Brownfield, TX) that has a questionable MEL item that may ground the airplane based on my judgement. I will not take a 2 engine airplane with the APU inop across the North Atlantic, Pacific or over the Amazon. And would question the judgment of anybody that would. No UNION publication needed just a little common sense.
06-30-2014 | 07:19 AM
#48
Need More Callouts
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,143
Likes: 0
From: Unbridled Enthusiasm
Again, looking for some solid reasons not to take an aircraft based solely on the APU being inop on a non-ETOPS flight. I've witnessed this at last five times now since the merger and would like to hear why.
Personally I would take the aircraft if its a legitimately MEL'd and don't see why not having one is a reason not to accept it. Not slamming the L-UAL folks at all but perhaps some of you can cite examples that might enlighten me.
I've refused plenty of aircraft for other reasons, (mostly inop LAV's on full fights), but am very curious why this is such a hot-button item for others.
I can see why the FO disagreed with the Capt and IRO on the Amazon 767 flight, (and I do not question his right to do so), but I'd be very interested in finding out why its deemed a no-go item on other domestic flights?
Personally I would take the aircraft if its a legitimately MEL'd and don't see why not having one is a reason not to accept it. Not slamming the L-UAL folks at all but perhaps some of you can cite examples that might enlighten me.
I've refused plenty of aircraft for other reasons, (mostly inop LAV's on full fights), but am very curious why this is such a hot-button item for others.
I can see why the FO disagreed with the Capt and IRO on the Amazon 767 flight, (and I do not question his right to do so), but I'd be very interested in finding out why its deemed a no-go item on other domestic flights?
06-30-2014 | 07:43 AM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,887
Likes: 0
From: Guppy Capt.
Again, looking for some solid reasons not to take an aircraft based solely on the APU being inop on a non-ETOPS flight. I've witnessed this at last five times now since the merger and would like to hear why.
Personally I would take the aircraft if its a legitimately MEL'd and don't see why not having one is a reason not to accept it. Not slamming the L-UAL folks at all but perhaps some of you can cite examples that might enlighten me.
I've refused plenty of aircraft for other reasons, (mostly inop LAV's on full fights), but am very curious why this is such a hot-button item for others.
I can see why the FO disagreed with the Capt and IRO on the Amazon 767 flight, (and I do not question his right to do so), but I'd be very interested in finding out why its deemed a no-go item on other domestic flights?
Personally I would take the aircraft if its a legitimately MEL'd and don't see why not having one is a reason not to accept it. Not slamming the L-UAL folks at all but perhaps some of you can cite examples that might enlighten me.
I've refused plenty of aircraft for other reasons, (mostly inop LAV's on full fights), but am very curious why this is such a hot-button item for others.
I can see why the FO disagreed with the Capt and IRO on the Amazon 767 flight, (and I do not question his right to do so), but I'd be very interested in finding out why its deemed a no-go item on other domestic flights?
Was the weather at destination bad?
Did you ask why they refused it?
I don't see a problem if it was non-ETOPs, during the day, and wx on both ends was good... but, I do not know the whole story.
06-30-2014 | 09:19 AM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,025
Likes: 100
Again, looking for some solid reasons not to take an aircraft based solely on the APU being inop on a non-ETOPS flight. I've witnessed this at last five times now since the merger and would like to hear why.
Personally I would take the aircraft if its a legitimately MEL'd and don't see why not having one is a reason not to accept it. Not slamming the L-UAL folks at all but perhaps some of you can cite examples that might enlighten me.
I've refused plenty of aircraft for other reasons, (mostly inop LAV's on full fights), but am very curious why this is such a hot-button item for others.
I can see why the FO disagreed with the Capt and IRO on the Amazon 767 flight, (and I do not question his right to do so), but I'd be very interested in finding out why its deemed a no-go item on other domestic flights?
Personally I would take the aircraft if its a legitimately MEL'd and don't see why not having one is a reason not to accept it. Not slamming the L-UAL folks at all but perhaps some of you can cite examples that might enlighten me.
I've refused plenty of aircraft for other reasons, (mostly inop LAV's on full fights), but am very curious why this is such a hot-button item for others.
I can see why the FO disagreed with the Capt and IRO on the Amazon 767 flight, (and I do not question his right to do so), but I'd be very interested in finding out why its deemed a no-go item on other domestic flights?
In Unity.....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
turk
Flight Schools and Training
29
01-13-2012 05:58 AM
