Pinnacle=Endeavor Air
#162
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,915
Maybe not him specifically, but I said ALPA protects incompetent pilots and gives them more chances. I've seen guys sit in sims for a 2nd and 3rd chance because the pilot claimed someone was out to get them. Some people who shouldn't be flying at all are protected by ALPA. Remember 9E infamous MC? He should have been fired long ago. He was finally let go, but ALPA saved him a couple times.
#164
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,341
Can I start with an easy one: are you MA from DTW 200? Are you also known as cherokee_cruiser on "that other forum"?
80: flaps fails at 0 are not an emergency item. The FAA came down hard on us for declaring every time, so we have been highly discouraged from doing so. Better still, since no FOs prior to 2012 had performed an evaluated or even "extra time" maneuver in the sim known as flaps 0 landing, what CAs in their right mind would allow the FO to land to "gain experience", especially considering something a lot less nefarious - contaminated runway landings, are specifically CA only "no matter what" at SWOA. Even after these FOs have been in the seat 5+ years.
#165
Of course I can not prove it because the old airlink forum was removed by MEC Chair CS, but, you did write on there at some point that you were allowed to land at flaps 0. Water under the bridge. It's not like you could get in trouble at this point anyway. Just make sure you have your facts straight before you go bashing other pilot groups for an arbitrated decision and then backpedal using fatal accidents as some sort of heinous barometer that says they are worse than someone else.
Can I start with an easy one: are you MA from DTW 200? Are you also known as cherokee_cruiser on "that other forum"?
80: flaps fails at 0 are not an emergency item. The FAA came down hard on us for declaring every time, so we have been highly discouraged from doing so. Better still, since no FOs prior to 2012 had performed an evaluated or even "extra time" maneuver in the sim known as flaps 0 landing, what CAs in their right mind would allow the FO to land to "gain experience", especially considering something a lot less nefarious - contaminated runway landings, are specifically CA only "no matter what" at SWOA. Even after these FOs have been in the seat 5+ years.
Can I start with an easy one: are you MA from DTW 200? Are you also known as cherokee_cruiser on "that other forum"?
80: flaps fails at 0 are not an emergency item. The FAA came down hard on us for declaring every time, so we have been highly discouraged from doing so. Better still, since no FOs prior to 2012 had performed an evaluated or even "extra time" maneuver in the sim known as flaps 0 landing, what CAs in their right mind would allow the FO to land to "gain experience", especially considering something a lot less nefarious - contaminated runway landings, are specifically CA only "no matter what" at SWOA. Even after these FOs have been in the seat 5+ years.
#166
It's really hard to let it go when these guys in the left seat have no idea what they are doing. You're sitting there with 5k plus hours in the seat and the guy next to you had so much trouble that he had 150 hrs of OE... It's not easy guys and those of you that say let it go must be gone or it didn't hurt your chances. Now on top of that we are capped at 4 year pay while a guy 2 years jr to us is still getting raises.
#168
Not to distract from the sli bashing, but the talk of non_normal landings has me wondering: since in the CRM classes I have attended it has been noted that bad things hapoen three times as often when the ca is pf, wouldn't it be wiser to have the fo flying? Just an armchair question.
Feel free to return to sli bashing. Bonus points for calling Colgan a bottom feeder.
Feel free to return to sli bashing. Bonus points for calling Colgan a bottom feeder.