ExperimentalAB

Kilgore, that makes absolutely no sense?? Anyway, Steveo et al...they've got a point.

steveo1kinevo

And I do understand there point, I am just expressing what I would of done in his situation.

Kilgore Trout

Experimental AB,
Short version,
If I ever ran my own outfit I'd really, really try to only hire pilots who could be counted on to do what is right, safe, and legal to the best of their abilities, regardless of external pressures or desires to prove anything.

cornbeef007

Your are a 135 guy, I understand that. 135 and 121 are worlds apart, I have done both, in Alaska for over 5000 hours. In a 135 enviroment the ball is in your court much more often then 121. Decisions are in the "gray" area daily, when operating 135. In fact I love 121, I really don't need to think. Now 121 is black and white, it's that way so we don't need to think(we don't even have the option of decision making in most situations) The problem is that the rules said he could go.....end of story. If ALPA(in this case) and the FAA did not agree that this situation was safe, more operational stipulations could have been placed on the said MEL. In a 121 enviroment this is simply the case.

My point.........Always be able to defend your actions, but in my opinion the captian is in a corner.

hi208

used to do 8 to 9 legs a day in crappy weather and it's bad, but we are pilots and that is what we signed up to do!!!!

Kilgore Trout

cornbeef007,
Thanks for the reply. I was wondering when someone would notice me and say "Hey what's he doing in this thread!".

I appreciate your post on the differences between doing the PIC thing in 121 vs 135. I've often wondered about 121, how I would fit in, or if it would be the right thing for me. Don't know the answers to those questions, but I suspect from reading what many in the Regional 121 world deal with it's not for me. Probably too set in my ways by now.

I understand the MEL allowances for flight with some inoperative equipment.

I also appreciate the fact that a company has to make money, get the flights done, track a much larger pilot group than what I've ever flown with, and do all these things safely, legally, and as on time as they can.

What I have a problem with is this specific incident involving the Pinnacle Captain. I do not understand how a company could even fathom disciplining a pilot in this manner for doing what they thought was right, and safe.

You remember all the human factors stuff that was specific to Alaska flying I'm sure. Don't fly because you are pressured by company or passengers. Don't fly when you are unsure of the outcome. Don't push the weather. Don't push other pilots to do anything they are unsure of. Wait. Get it done but get it done safe.

I guess I have a hard time wrapping my head around the way this company has treated this pilot. For following what seems to me very similar guidance I've had from old timer 135 pilots who have lost lots of friends and bent lots of aluminum.

xjcaptain

I wouldn't call actually flying an aircraft rather than watching the autopilot "Taking a Chance". It's just exercising a minimal skill level that anybody in the cockpit of an airliner ought to be able to handle. Perhaps it might be better called "Being a pilot". Now if he didn't feel safe doing it he did the right thing by walking away from it. Now that doesn't mean that there won't be any repercussions. If you are telling your employer that you are incapable of doing the job you were hired to do that will probably raise flags. If he can come up with a good story; fatigue, multiple legs etc that might be another story as well. But just a bit of weather and no A/P, with no other factors, maybe it's time to re-asses weather you are truly a professional and capable of doing the job you were hired to do. Now I know everybody wants to have a group hug, and convince each other that it takes superhuman skills to fly the might RJ, and it's crazy to be expected to actually fly it manually, but that's just B.S. Having flown multiple types under both 135 and 121, turbo-prop and jets, maybe it's time for a reality check. IT'S JUST AN AIRPLANE. Fly it, and fly it regularly and when the AP does go T/U it's no big deal. Any AVERAGE pilot should be able to do it, and do it smoothly. If it truly concerns so many out there, I think it's pretty telling of the sad state of our industry. Too many empty uniforms, and not enough true pilots.

CAPTAINPCL

Wow fifteen pages of Monday morning quarter backers, I love it.

Also, I think its wonderful how everyone is stating how great they are and how many hours they have flown part 135 cargo in bad weather without autopilots. Such superheros!!! No one really cares how many hours you have or how many different types of airplanes you have mastered...

The Captain in question made a decision to not fly the aircraft that night, no autopilot was probably just the tip of the iceberg. It was his decision and that's all that matters.

End of discussion.

kalyx522

WRONG. This is NOT simply the case. Do you really think that something being legally allowed to be MELed must mean it's safe? I've seen plenty of MELs that are just plain dumb or dumb in wx situations and MELs don't always state stipulations either - necessitating the crew to judge potential threats for themselves. The rules did not say he could go, the rules say captain ultimately has authority to decide to go or not. Why cant you people accept this so simple fact???????????

JDFlyer

Nicely said.