Here's why AA aircraft taxi so slow....
12-13-2006, 07:19 PM
#71
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 F/O
Posts: 54
Fuel on the fire.
I just learned what all the wind check calls are about. Second hand info but what I was told is AA specs call for the most currnent winds on landing.
I thought it was FOs working the Take off perfomance numbers, not a pilot that couldn't remember what tower told em a few second ago. I was taught, doesn't matter what the winds are, point the nose at the runway, maintain centerline and land the damn thing. Don't want to take away from asking for the winds if its gusty or a front is moving thru, especially at night, but give me a break, when its severe clear and you're on the visual.
I just learned what all the wind check calls are about. Second hand info but what I was told is AA specs call for the most currnent winds on landing.
I thought it was FOs working the Take off perfomance numbers, not a pilot that couldn't remember what tower told em a few second ago. I was taught, doesn't matter what the winds are, point the nose at the runway, maintain centerline and land the damn thing. Don't want to take away from asking for the winds if its gusty or a front is moving thru, especially at night, but give me a break, when its severe clear and you're on the visual.
Your second hand info is wrong.
12-13-2006, 07:35 PM
#72
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 394
his comments about the AAMP program simply show his ignorance (at no time was any pilot EVER instructed to use rudder in uncoordinated fashion, nor was he to use it at all for recover unless the aircraft was essentially upside down...conditions which were not present on AA 587--the point being that even if the FO used improper rudder inputs {which was never proved} he was not trained to do that by AA.)
Can you do that for me?
Get yourself a copy of that AA recurrent training video...if you can find one, that is. See for yourself.
Then get yourself a copy of the NTSB findings.
Beyond that, his bitterness bleeds through the page and, as I stated, he is the typical ex-TWA ingrate crybaby. Lucky to have a job, but *****ing all the way...and probably not even a union member, as most of the ex-TWA boys decided to take their ball and go home as non-union independent operators.Jetblaster
As for the rest of that...maybe you can answer the question that has yet to be answered?
Why does the rest of the industry refer to AA pilots as Sky Nazis?
12-13-2006, 08:47 PM
#73
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,918
Because of the association AA had with the Luftwaffe in the 1930s-1940s (AMC and Berlin airlift.)
That said - Jetblaster, you are completely out of line, IMO. If you ever would've had a chance to have ridden in a TWA cockpit, you wouldn't have said half the things you did. They had an exemplary safety record AND an outstanding CRM cockpit philosophy that we would be very lucky to adopt. In fact, when I sent the Flight Dept numerous suggestions over our overworked cockpits - especially on taxi out and taxi in- I took a lot of what TWA did. Also, at my old airline we ran the cockpit just like TWA, NWA, UAL, CAL, DAL and every other airline OTHER than AA. AA is consistently the only one who does it differently, and a lot of it is unnecessary high workload. Go fly out of STL with those guys for a few months and you'll see what I mean.
73
That said - Jetblaster, you are completely out of line, IMO. If you ever would've had a chance to have ridden in a TWA cockpit, you wouldn't have said half the things you did. They had an exemplary safety record AND an outstanding CRM cockpit philosophy that we would be very lucky to adopt. In fact, when I sent the Flight Dept numerous suggestions over our overworked cockpits - especially on taxi out and taxi in- I took a lot of what TWA did. Also, at my old airline we ran the cockpit just like TWA, NWA, UAL, CAL, DAL and every other airline OTHER than AA. AA is consistently the only one who does it differently, and a lot of it is unnecessary high workload. Go fly out of STL with those guys for a few months and you'll see what I mean.
73
12-14-2006, 11:44 AM
#74
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
Well, so much for professionalism--but, what are we to expect from you guys? Mock the unfortunate deaths of your fellow aviators...make yourself feel superior...but all you do is diminish yourself. I'm glad you had such a perfect career...
As I figured...you have no idea what you are talking about; you weren't AT the NTSB hearing in Washington (as I was); you never took AAMP (as I did); you seem to be attempting to bluster your way out of it using terms such as "clown" but...the fact is that AAMP was improperly implicated by the NTSB and Airbus, as it never taught pilots to do anything with the rudder in the attitude that AA 587 was in.
See what I mean? AAMP was not *recurrent training*--it was a special seminar. There were unusual attitudes taught in the sim in recurrent training...but rudder use was not taught in recovery except when the aircraft attitude was extreme. Again, even if the pilot did what they say he did (and they never proved it) it was not taught that way at AA.
I'm very familiar with the NTSB findings; they are shot through with errors, featuring outright lies in testimony, especially by the Captain who claimed he flew with the FO from AA 587 and saw him use improper rudder. Several of us have made the NTSB aware that their data is incorrect and proven it--many folks know it is wrong, but...guess what? They don't care because it is all about blaming the pilot to avoid liability.
Have a nice retirement.
Upside down? What does that have to do with it? You aren't some clueless 'anything over 30 degrees of bank is an unusual attitude' clown', are you? Maybe you can explain the aerodynamics of how rudder effect varies with bank angle?
Get yourself a copy of that AA recurrent training video...if you can find one, that is. See for yourself.
Then get yourself a copy of the NTSB findings.
Have a nice retirement.
12-14-2006, 11:55 AM
#75
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
As for the other comments, I have had the chance to ride in a TWA cockpit and I have ridden ex-TWA jumpseat since they became AA; I never stated that ex-TWA pilots were bad airmen--in fact, I have to say that they were excellent.
My comments spoke to their overall philosophy of concession when it comes to how they (don't) defend their career value. We just need to keep them in the cockpit and out of the union hall or management, because their track record there is perhaps the worst of any pilot group even as far as protecting career value. I have done work for the union and have witnessed these men first-hand at APA; not one--not one--was a unionist. And they lead the discussion when it comes to "what can we give away for nothing today?"
They had an exemplary safety record AND an outstanding CRM cockpit philosophy that we would be very lucky to adopt.
Jetblaster
12-14-2006, 04:06 PM
#76
AAmerican Way for AA Pay
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: B-737 Pilot
Posts: 1,617
In fact, when I sent the Flight Dept numerous suggestions over our overworked cockpits - especially on taxi out and taxi in- I took a lot of what TWA did. Also, at my old airline we ran the cockpit just like TWA, NWA, UAL, CAL, DAL and every other airline OTHER than AA. AA is consistently the only one who does it differently, and a lot of it is unnecessary high workload. Go fly out of STL with those guys for a few months and you'll see what I mean.
Blaster---I'm out of the loop on Section 6, your current APA Nego reps and other stuff that is in-house. I'm only speculating on fleet updates, leases and marketing opportunities that is public knowledge.
And, I'm not slinging any mud about safety or calling anyone names; I'm entitled to my opinions about what I considered a rotten 'un'integration.
Don't you have the ability to elect non-TWA Nego reps, if they're so bad? I can't believe there are 2 out of 5 ex-TWA.
12-14-2006, 04:49 PM
#77
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
Good on ya for trying, seriously. An airline can always make improvements. And, I can tell you've flown out of SLT, while Blaster hasn't.
Blaster---I'm out of the loop on Section 6, your current APA Nego reps and other stuff that is in-house. I'm only speculating on fleet updates, leases and marketing opportunities that is public knowledge.
And, I'm not slinging any mud about safety or calling anyone names; I'm entitled to my opinions about what I considered a rotten 'un'integration.
Don't you have the ability to elect non-TWA Nego reps, if they're so bad? I can't believe there are 2 out of 5 ex-TWA.
Blaster---I'm out of the loop on Section 6, your current APA Nego reps and other stuff that is in-house. I'm only speculating on fleet updates, leases and marketing opportunities that is public knowledge.
And, I'm not slinging any mud about safety or calling anyone names; I'm entitled to my opinions about what I considered a rotten 'un'integration.
Don't you have the ability to elect non-TWA Nego reps, if they're so bad? I can't believe there are 2 out of 5 ex-TWA.
The BOD conducts negotiating committee elections using a very contrived, secret ballot. This particular APA "leadership" placed either proven concessionarries--like Jacobsen and Stowe from tWA--or other completely inexperienced negotiators in the chairs, apparently so the board and the National Officers could essentially negotiate themselves. The negotiating committee chairman never did any union work at all until he ran for a term or two as a base officer. Now, he is the seat-warmer.
So...no, we can't vote in non-TWA...yet.
Jetblaster
12-14-2006, 06:58 PM
#78
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 394
My comments spoke to their overall philosophy of concession when it comes to how they (don't) defend their career value. We just need to keep them in the cockpit and out of the union hall or management, because their track record there is perhaps the worst of any pilot group even as far as protecting career value.
How could that be? Did you have anything to do with that concessionary contract?
LMAO at your expense.
Now...back to those unusual attitudes. In an earlier post, you said:
I don't know what AAMP is or was...but I do remember well that video we had to watch about how you AA guys fly unusual attitude recoveries. I remember what I thought was an excessive amount of attention given to rudder use. The briefer introduced himself, IIRC, as a former USN fighter pilot. Having done a little of that myself, I wondered why he thought lacing his discussion with fighter-type wording was going to make much of an impression on a civilian audience.
That was shortly before the NY accident. I bet AA doesn't use that video much any more...am I correct!?
To get back to the basics of this forum...and how it is a medium for new guys to get an idea of what is like in the airlines...I's like to invite them to pay attention to the other AA pilots here. These folks demonstrate the camaraderie that we all would like to see in ourselves.
You, on the other hand, are exemplifying exactly the stereotype that AA pilots are unfortunately universally tagged with.
12-15-2006, 12:44 PM
#79
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
OK Shackone...I'm not sure why you think you can deny your derisive comments about dead crewmembers...since it is logged for posterity about six pages back...but here it is:
Your comments about single-engine taxi (bragging) forget that we have had SE taxi on and off at AA...and we used to "blow-back" all the time. Due to operational decisions made by AA management, we stopped; now we have started again. SE taxing on widebodies is a bad idea, as we all knew, diminishing returns due to FOD, etc. But, I'm sure the ex-TWA guys do it just right...
The instruction in unusual attitude recoveries was the basic stuff we all learned back in pilot training--the rudder is the most effective tool to use in a recovery at slow airspeeds, and it was always stressed that coordinated use of the controls was required. Note--slow airspeeds...meaning...low stress loads. Note: coordinated--meaning not only rudder, but all flight controls in coordinated fashion, just like basic aero tells us. That's what was taught, the rest of the NTSB finding was pure Airbus mischaracterization...but since the effort was to find a "plausible" route to blame the structural failure of a tail on the pilot, it served its purpose.
As for the concessions of 2003, why not ask former TWA Vice President and then-influential APA Board Member Keith Bounds about why our weakies caved in such dishonorable fashion, without even snapbacks. Keith was the sage voice the entire board turned to because he had--get this--"Bankruptcy Experience" and he certainly was one of the leading voices for APA to do exactly what they did. (News Flash: I voted No.) The ex-TWA has not been the reason for AA concession...our group runs scared...but they certainly have not brought any additional backbone to the group.
You refusal to correct your disrespect for dead crews...(pilots love to point out the flaws of "some other guy who screwed up") and your unwillingness to face facts and political realities when it comes to the flawed and corrupt accident investigation process, where a deceased pilot really has no defense whatsoever, that will ALWAYS look to blame the pilot for the crash (even if the freakin' tail falls off and three other tails of the same type aircraft are found to be cracked and almost fall off) ...is sad but a common tendency I see all too often, and not just among AA pilots. I ask you to notch down your ego a bit, realize that our profession is set up to get blamed and, while many accidents are caused by pilot error, certainly all are not.
And...that those unlucky pilots who have died in air crashes deserve better from their peers than comments like: "Tell it to the folks at Cali, Little Rock, New York, etc." We're to believe TWA procedures would've saved these crews? Given that most accidents are a chain of flaws actions, poor weather, bad communication, etc...it is highly unlikely the vaunted TWA Process would've made any difference.
Jetblaster
You blithering idiot...get on the right runway!
It was 540/790!!
Smooch!!
Joking aside...my favorite was the five altitudes we briefed per the AA checklist before takeoff. The standing joke was to write them down if a FAA or check airman was on the jumpseat...then recite them as if we had them memorized. The takeoffs went so much better that way!!
Pardon the sarcasm...but I was a TWA Check Airman at the merger and had to listen to the native B/S about how much better their ways were. Tell it to the folks at Cali, Little Rock, New York, etc.
Better still...ask a native about single engine taxi and push backs vs blow backs....
It was 540/790!!
Smooch!!
Joking aside...my favorite was the five altitudes we briefed per the AA checklist before takeoff. The standing joke was to write them down if a FAA or check airman was on the jumpseat...then recite them as if we had them memorized. The takeoffs went so much better that way!!
Pardon the sarcasm...but I was a TWA Check Airman at the merger and had to listen to the native B/S about how much better their ways were. Tell it to the folks at Cali, Little Rock, New York, etc.
Better still...ask a native about single engine taxi and push backs vs blow backs....
Your comments about single-engine taxi (bragging) forget that we have had SE taxi on and off at AA...and we used to "blow-back" all the time. Due to operational decisions made by AA management, we stopped; now we have started again. SE taxing on widebodies is a bad idea, as we all knew, diminishing returns due to FOD, etc. But, I'm sure the ex-TWA guys do it just right...
The instruction in unusual attitude recoveries was the basic stuff we all learned back in pilot training--the rudder is the most effective tool to use in a recovery at slow airspeeds, and it was always stressed that coordinated use of the controls was required. Note--slow airspeeds...meaning...low stress loads. Note: coordinated--meaning not only rudder, but all flight controls in coordinated fashion, just like basic aero tells us. That's what was taught, the rest of the NTSB finding was pure Airbus mischaracterization...but since the effort was to find a "plausible" route to blame the structural failure of a tail on the pilot, it served its purpose.
As for the concessions of 2003, why not ask former TWA Vice President and then-influential APA Board Member Keith Bounds about why our weakies caved in such dishonorable fashion, without even snapbacks. Keith was the sage voice the entire board turned to because he had--get this--"Bankruptcy Experience" and he certainly was one of the leading voices for APA to do exactly what they did. (News Flash: I voted No.) The ex-TWA has not been the reason for AA concession...our group runs scared...but they certainly have not brought any additional backbone to the group.
You refusal to correct your disrespect for dead crews...(pilots love to point out the flaws of "some other guy who screwed up") and your unwillingness to face facts and political realities when it comes to the flawed and corrupt accident investigation process, where a deceased pilot really has no defense whatsoever, that will ALWAYS look to blame the pilot for the crash (even if the freakin' tail falls off and three other tails of the same type aircraft are found to be cracked and almost fall off) ...is sad but a common tendency I see all too often, and not just among AA pilots. I ask you to notch down your ego a bit, realize that our profession is set up to get blamed and, while many accidents are caused by pilot error, certainly all are not.
And...that those unlucky pilots who have died in air crashes deserve better from their peers than comments like: "Tell it to the folks at Cali, Little Rock, New York, etc." We're to believe TWA procedures would've saved these crews? Given that most accidents are a chain of flaws actions, poor weather, bad communication, etc...it is highly unlikely the vaunted TWA Process would've made any difference.
Jetblaster
12-15-2006, 07:20 PM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 135
>>>These folks demonstrate the camaraderie that we all would like to see in ourselves.
You, on the other hand, are exemplifying exactly the stereotype that AA pilots are unfortunately universally tagged with.>>>
Oh...forgot about the irrelevant sniping portion of your response.
If you capitulate the hard-won gains of decades of contractual fights that made your career what it is in order to save your own ass for another year, another day, another hour...no one really blames you guys at TWA.
Shackone...just remember that you TWA guys surrendered--burned-- your self-respect, dignity and peer respect in the process. It was a choice you made...and I'm not saying the majority of AA pilots wouldn't make the same sorry choice.
BUT...the consequence of that choice is that any affection for "camraderie" toward TWA by professional pilots was sacrificed at the altar of "undermining your profession for personal reasons."
Don't be so surprised that, when you come walking in the door of AA, after narrowly avoiding liquidation and lucky-as-hell that APA did not do what they should have done and stalled the deal and sloughed off the TWA acquisition after 9/11...
...and you guys swagger in, with the middle fingers of both hands held high like you deserve some respect...
...that you are informed that you gave all that up when you collapsed the profession in "domino" fashion as TWA did.
Just because you guys at TWA were in a chrysalis of self-supporting bull****--to the point where you justified pilots entering management-- about your embarrassing capitulation that submarined the value of the rest of the profession...doesn't mean we will all be nice to you now that the end-game is here.
You guys irreparably damaged the profession, just as the 1980s APA pilots damaged the profession with the first "B" Scale (but they repaired their mistake later by ending the "B" Scale...you guys perpetuate the damage by trying to deal failed TWA crap, like Preferential Bidding, at AA...)
You can praise the "nice" AA guys who coddle your ego in retirement on this forum, but you--and those "new pilots" you are referring to--ought to know the truth about what the TWA actions did to the entire profession and how many of us recognize that truth.
Now...please apologize about your denigrating and misinformed comments about your deceased fellow-aviators.
Jetblaster
You, on the other hand, are exemplifying exactly the stereotype that AA pilots are unfortunately universally tagged with.>>>
Oh...forgot about the irrelevant sniping portion of your response.
If you capitulate the hard-won gains of decades of contractual fights that made your career what it is in order to save your own ass for another year, another day, another hour...no one really blames you guys at TWA.
Shackone...just remember that you TWA guys surrendered--burned-- your self-respect, dignity and peer respect in the process. It was a choice you made...and I'm not saying the majority of AA pilots wouldn't make the same sorry choice.
BUT...the consequence of that choice is that any affection for "camraderie" toward TWA by professional pilots was sacrificed at the altar of "undermining your profession for personal reasons."
Don't be so surprised that, when you come walking in the door of AA, after narrowly avoiding liquidation and lucky-as-hell that APA did not do what they should have done and stalled the deal and sloughed off the TWA acquisition after 9/11...
...and you guys swagger in, with the middle fingers of both hands held high like you deserve some respect...
...that you are informed that you gave all that up when you collapsed the profession in "domino" fashion as TWA did.
Just because you guys at TWA were in a chrysalis of self-supporting bull****--to the point where you justified pilots entering management-- about your embarrassing capitulation that submarined the value of the rest of the profession...doesn't mean we will all be nice to you now that the end-game is here.
You guys irreparably damaged the profession, just as the 1980s APA pilots damaged the profession with the first "B" Scale (but they repaired their mistake later by ending the "B" Scale...you guys perpetuate the damage by trying to deal failed TWA crap, like Preferential Bidding, at AA...)
You can praise the "nice" AA guys who coddle your ego in retirement on this forum, but you--and those "new pilots" you are referring to--ought to know the truth about what the TWA actions did to the entire profession and how many of us recognize that truth.
Now...please apologize about your denigrating and misinformed comments about your deceased fellow-aviators.
Jetblaster
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Imeneo
Engineers & Technicians
33
01-13-2007 08:44 AM
