Dash8widget

In the past year, I have been through initial training on two different aircraft types at a (very) large legacy carrier. One of these types has a stick "nudger" and the other has a full blown stick pusher. In neither case did I get to experience these systems in action; training was always to recover at the first indication of a stall (shaker). Of course, I understand the philosophy behind this; as pilots, we should always react correctly at the first indication of a stall. However, since I have never experienced a stick pusher, how do I know that I would react properly?

You guys seems surprised (shocked?) that the Colgan pilots had not recieved training in stick pusher recoveries. Sadly, this training oversight extends far beyond Colgan. This is something that needs to be part of all 121 training programs, and probably needs to be adressed at the FAA level.

Sorry for the thread drift

AFW_MD11

EXACTLY! Thank you!

How 'bout this?

Block out early if you can.

Taxi out at a SAFE taxi speed.

Fly the FUEL SENSE (fuel saving) planned mach - slow down if it gets bumpy (for safety.)

Fly the FILED flight planned route (dip clearances, optimized for fuel) - deviating only as necessary for weather avoidance (safety) - don't accept direct routing ('cause you don't have to believe it or not)

Taxi in at a SAFE taxi speed.

Results (win-win-win):

1. SAFETY is never compromised for sake of expedience

2. FUEL is saved (= $$$ saved for Fred)

3. Freight gets to the sort on time/early anyway (if you block out a little early)

4. Historical flight times reflect a more accurate (albeit increased) block time.

5. HOURLY EMPLOYEES (pilots) earn a couple of extra bucks for a few more minutes block over 8 hours.

Helloooooo.......Bubba........???

The company is BEGGING us to do the Fuel Sense......why not accommodate their request?

What's the hurry to get into Guangzhou anyway? at 10:30pm. They keep the free hotel bar open for us late anyway? The mall at the food court closes at 9 or 10pm anyway!!

I've wondered why FedEx pilots "do what they do" ever since I've been here (run out the door of the AOC with their hair on fire the entire trip) - seems they just don't understand the fact that they get paid by the hour.....??

dojetdriver

Nothing against you, but I'm not too sure your statement is valid. Crosswind landings are taught in primary training, but I wouldn't say that they are quite as basic as stall recovery.

Wasn't there a pilot at a certain cargo company that wrecked a plane in a crosswind due to lack or proper technique? Good thing everybody made it out and there weren't more people on board with the fire and all.

To reiterate what another poster said, that, along with other issues goes beyond specific airlines and their training programs.

Daniel Larusso

I agree with Dash8Widget, it's not surprising that the Colgan guys didn't get training on the pusher. I've been at a number of 'Brand X's' and only one of them actually trained us all the way to the pusher. If you haven't seen it before, it's a definite eye-opener even in the sim at a safe altitude, let alone around the marker on an ILS. Also, most places I've been at including FDX train stall recovery the plain vanilla FAA way of basically powering out of it and above all not losing altitude. Only way back during my primary flight training and at one Brand X were we ever taught that breaking the stall was the most important thing in the real world and that all of that altitude stuff is really just so the FAA has something to grade us on. Colgan will wear the scarlet letter for this, but stuff like this could have happened at a lot of places including here.

meatloaf

At least they don't have to tell any jokes to start the lecture. That's comedy enough as it is.

Gunter

What do think is more effective, and proper, in communicating fatigue? A safety report saying you were almost fatigued or an actual (this is not a test) fatigue call. I'd rather not put airplanes at risk because crewmembers decide to hack it. Filing an FSR afterwards is helpful but is almost like telling on yourself. It puts you at risk! Make the call early and avoid the FSR.

The union communicates with the company every month on fatigue issues. How far has that gotten us as we've been optimized? I doubt FSRs will be any more successful than our disputed pairing system. Making the difficult to make fatigue call might be the only way to stay safe.

ptarmigan

When (what year/month) did you fly EWR-ANC with an RFO? I am really curious on this one.

MD11Fr8Dog

Before my time, and I've been on the jet for 12 yrs. Back in the day when I was the junior guy in the company on the MD-11 (1 full yr in ANC follwed by 6 months in MEM) I was a regular on the EWR-ANC flight since it seemed to always be in open time for reserve assignment. It is the toughest flight in the system, IMO, followed by IND-ANC , MEM-ANC and AFW/DFW-ANC! No RFOs on any.

The latest tough no RFO long flight I've done was IND-STN, again, no RFO, which followed an afternoon MEM-ANC flight, 19 hrs off, ANC-IND, and 28hrs there. By the time my afternoon alert call came in STN after 26 hrs there, I had 3 sleep cycles over the 4 days of th trip. I actually got an extra hour layover in STN, because my trip was changed. Instead of STN-CDG and 55 hrs off, I was now being scheduled to j/s to CDG from STN, hang out a couple hours and then operate a 9+58 block flight to MEM for 14+58 duty. Taking into account that I had a full 8 hr sleep in STN (in 2 blocks of sleep between 1030pm and 9am), I would have been awake and/or on duty for 24hrs at ETA in MEM! I refused to move the jet, they eventually, after a few friendly chats with the DO, put me in crew rest and operated out of CDG 18 hrs later. We missed the Sunday sort, I wonder what the bean counters thought that weekend about eliminating the CDG stand bys a few months earlier!

Anyway, until folks stand up and not only say, "yes, I'm fatigured", but "I will be fatigued if I continue" (15 hrs in my case), nothing will change!

meatloaf

Sounds like a good judgment call...

md11retiree

Your asking a retiree of four years (age 59 thank you) to remember that far back? I'll try: suspect it was in the latter years of the 1990's. I remember having an RFO on that flight, though I probably only flew it a half dozen times. Believe C.N. was the ACP at the time. In fact, I had a #2 engine fire warning over NY on one of these flights and the RFO ran the checklist for us. I also recall flights out of IND and AFW to Anchorage with no RFO's. Must have been a 'trial' period for the EWR-ANC RFO's, as the company was definately concerned with fatique and safety on that flight. Still have that daily flight? RFOs? When we had leaders that listened and tried to make the airline safer, we got reasonable requests approved.