Eagle/TSA Jets Failing Inspections
05-11-2009, 05:11 AM
#62
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
I'll also assume that you know how to read and if you take the chance to re-read my post, I didn't say that at all. I'll sum it up for you to save you the time.
1) Our captains have just as much, if not more, systems knowledge as yours.
2) We deal with many more systems related issues on a daily basis due to our MX than you do.
You can put 1 and 2 together in a blender and come out with your above quote, but that's not what I said. Also, I did not belittle anyone. I just said our captains are on par with yours from a knowledge standpoint because we NEED to be.
1) Our captains have just as much, if not more, systems knowledge as yours.
2) We deal with many more systems related issues on a daily basis due to our MX than you do.
You can put 1 and 2 together in a blender and come out with your above quote, but that's not what I said. Also, I did not belittle anyone. I just said our captains are on par with yours from a knowledge standpoint because we NEED to be.
Crapola.
OK Mr. Wizard, please show us the quantifiable data that supports your assertion in point #1.
The fact is son, that there is no way to say any one particular pilot group has more "knowledge" then another for that is not quantifiable and the above is simply ASSUMPTION on your part based on erronous belief.
To elaborate further regarding claim #2, it is also an erronous ASSUMPTION because it is based on the hypothisis that more maintenance write-ups or malfunctions implies more system knowledege. There is no correlation between that. By that same twisted logic, I could say Eagle captains have more "system knowledge" then AA or UAL pilots because WE have more systems related issues on a daily basis then they do, implying our maintenance is sub to theirs.......which is the argument you appear to hinging your erronous assumption on (that your captains are superior in system knowledge because of TSA's slipshod maintenance).
That isn't true either (although it does appear TSA has slipshod maintenance).
The only thing in a blender is the logic you're using to substantiate your misguided claims.
05-11-2009, 05:29 AM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 307
1) This is a stupid thread that is getting worse!
2) Calling someone "son" doesn't make you cool.
2) Calling someone "son" doesn't make you cool.
05-11-2009, 05:41 AM
#64
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
It appears you're offended by the phrase "son", although since it wasn't directed at you, I don't know why.
Are you one ?
I could sure use a lesson in how to be "cool". Should I start saying "dude", "bro", "knarley" or "righteous" alot ?
It would be most excellent.
05-11-2009, 06:16 AM
#66
18 Day Gear Monkey
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Phenom Gear Jockey
Posts: 171
The thread was about TSA's slipshod maintenance and the situation it's placing Eagle pilots in. All this "systems" malarkey shouldn't have been here in the first place.
It appears you're offended by the phrase "son", although since it wasn't directed at you, I don't know why.
Are you one ?
I could sure use a lesson in how to be "cool". Should I start saying "dude", "bro", "knarley" or "righteous" alot ?
It would be most excellent.
It appears you're offended by the phrase "son", although since it wasn't directed at you, I don't know why.
Are you one ?
I could sure use a lesson in how to be "cool". Should I start saying "dude", "bro", "knarley" or "righteous" alot ?
It would be most excellent.
It's not like they won't be taken care of before they are out on the line, so what's the worry?
05-11-2009, 06:23 AM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 999
Is that a fact ?
Crapola.
OK Mr. Wizard, please show us the quantifiable data that supports your assertion in point #1.
The fact is son, that there is no way to say any one particular pilot group has more "knowledge" then another for that is not quantifiable and the above is simply ASSUMPTION on your part based on erronous belief.
To elaborate further regarding claim #2, it is also an erronous ASSUMPTION because it is based on the hypothisis that more maintenance write-ups or malfunctions implies more system knowledege. There is no correlation between that. By that same twisted logic, I could say Eagle captains have more "system knowledge" then AA or UAL pilots because WE have more systems related issues on a daily basis then they do, implying our maintenance is sub to theirs.......which is the argument you appear to hinging your erronous assumption on (that your captains are superior in system knowledge because of TSA's slipshod maintenance).
That isn't true either (although it does appear TSA has slipshod maintenance).
The only thing in a blender is the logic you're using to substantiate your misguided claims.
Crapola.
OK Mr. Wizard, please show us the quantifiable data that supports your assertion in point #1.
The fact is son, that there is no way to say any one particular pilot group has more "knowledge" then another for that is not quantifiable and the above is simply ASSUMPTION on your part based on erronous belief.
To elaborate further regarding claim #2, it is also an erronous ASSUMPTION because it is based on the hypothisis that more maintenance write-ups or malfunctions implies more system knowledege. There is no correlation between that. By that same twisted logic, I could say Eagle captains have more "system knowledge" then AA or UAL pilots because WE have more systems related issues on a daily basis then they do, implying our maintenance is sub to theirs.......which is the argument you appear to hinging your erronous assumption on (that your captains are superior in system knowledge because of TSA's slipshod maintenance).
That isn't true either (although it does appear TSA has slipshod maintenance).
The only thing in a blender is the logic you're using to substantiate your misguided claims.
Mason32 was the person who made a claim about an entire pilot group having less systems knowledge than another. (AE>TSA)
What I did was try to give a (very good) reason why this may not be the case. Try to follow, Grampa!
1) Our planes are not kept like yours...a claim that you've already substantiated.
2) Our planes carry more DMI's than yours...ok, there is no possible way for me to give you exact numbers but this is a very reasonable assumption.
3) In order for a captain to determine if an aircraft is safe to fly or not, they have to know the systems that are affected by each DMI, how they will be affected, and what changes will have to be made to how the flight will be conducted....sorry, I'm furloughed, so I don't have a GOM to show where it says a Captain must review all DMI's.
You're really caught up on me making assumptions, but these are reasonable assumptions based in reality.
4) Nearly every aircraft in the fleet carries at least one DMI, sometimes up to 12 <-reasonable assumption. Before signing for the aircraft, a Captain must review these DMI's for safety. Therefore, our captains MUST have solid systems knowledge because they need to use that knowledge on a flight by flight basis.
I never said that TSA was better than AE or that our pilots were better. I just said that the claim that Mason32 made that our pilots were weak at systems was basisless.
05-11-2009, 10:03 AM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,948
Tit for tat flamebait, bashing, and name calling. Please keep the dialogue respectable in the future. Thread closed.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
