Pinnacle CA suspended
02-03-2010, 07:00 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: back in the right
Posts: 406
What is the training like at Pinnacle? Was there a lot of hand flying low approches in the sim? It sound to me like it was a good call on the Captains part. If he did not feel the flight was safe, of he was up to hand flying a low approch after what ever day he had, then good job! Is sounds like he payed attention in the Private pilot days with not getting an unsafe mindset of Macho.
To all of you ready to hang this guy for not flying the plane, How many times have you accepted an unsafe condition? This is the Airline Biz, not Top Gun. Saftey should be your highest priority, Not who has the Biggest... Ego.
To all of you ready to hang this guy for not flying the plane, How many times have you accepted an unsafe condition? This is the Airline Biz, not Top Gun. Saftey should be your highest priority, Not who has the Biggest... Ego.
02-03-2010, 07:09 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: HS125
Posts: 194
A Pinnacle CA friend was recently suspended for 2 weeks without pay for refusing an airplane without an autopilot. Contributing factors to the decision were:
-No autopilot, scheduled block just over 2 hours
-Scheduled departure 10:16pm
-Destination wx 600 OVC, RA, winds gusting 25kts, 60 degrees of crosswind
-Line of thunderstorms between origination and destination
The CA refused the flight in the interest of safety with regard to enroute and destination weather, and was immediately removed from the flight and replaced with a reserve CA. Pinnacle didn’t have any spare planes to swap to, so scheduling simply replaced the crew. The reserve CA also initially refused the flight, but ultimately ended up going after a lengthy delay during which time most of the enroute and destination wx had cleared.
I simply cannot fathom how Pinnacle can completely ignore FAR 91.3, "Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command" and penalize the CA for the decision that was made.
-No autopilot, scheduled block just over 2 hours
-Scheduled departure 10:16pm
-Destination wx 600 OVC, RA, winds gusting 25kts, 60 degrees of crosswind
-Line of thunderstorms between origination and destination
The CA refused the flight in the interest of safety with regard to enroute and destination weather, and was immediately removed from the flight and replaced with a reserve CA. Pinnacle didn’t have any spare planes to swap to, so scheduling simply replaced the crew. The reserve CA also initially refused the flight, but ultimately ended up going after a lengthy delay during which time most of the enroute and destination wx had cleared.
I simply cannot fathom how Pinnacle can completely ignore FAR 91.3, "Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command" and penalize the CA for the decision that was made.
02-03-2010, 07:18 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Slinger
Posts: 316
If everything originally posted is true, I wouldn't worry too much about the unpaid portion, since I'm sure he will receive back pay. The problem is management using strong arm tactics to try and force people flying into a situation they are not comfortable with. Kudos to this guy for standing up and doing the right thing, even if it does mean going through this hassle.
I don't think I'll ever understand management's side of things. At our airline we are required to use the autopilot on approaches in IMC, yet it can still be MEL'd. So anytime you want to practice handflying an approach in IMC we are technically violating our company policy...that is until the autopilot is MEL'd.
I don't think I'll ever understand management's side of things. At our airline we are required to use the autopilot on approaches in IMC, yet it can still be MEL'd. So anytime you want to practice handflying an approach in IMC we are technically violating our company policy...that is until the autopilot is MEL'd.
02-03-2010, 07:31 AM
#35
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,108
02-03-2010, 07:39 AM
#36
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 85
If the captain actually thought he could not make the flight safely, great job for walking away from it. Now if the captain, can't pull off a two hour leg without autopilot, maybe it's time for a little self assessment. The CRJ is about as easy as it gets when it comes to hand flying. Was the problem a lack of background, proficiency, recency, fatigue? Who knows, but it's a pretty sad day when an AIRLINE PILOT can't FLY an aircraft for more than a few seconds after take-off and the last couple on landing.
02-03-2010, 07:48 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 888
In my experience hand flying a CRJ isn't THAT easy. Can it be done? Sure. For all the freight dogs I'm curious what it was you were flying at that point? I can fly a 210 almost in my sleep, it will trim that well and lets be honest it just isn't THAT sensitive. The CRJ is a different monster, it requires constant attention even in cruise, half of a degree of pitch will quickly result in climb or descent that will put you outside the 100 ft altitude tolerance. If you're OCD like me that means constant attention to avoid a possible violation. Maybe I'm just an idiot but I never could quite get the electric trim just exactly perfect to be able to take my hands off. Could you ask for a block altitude? Yea and that would probably greatly reduce the workload, even then it's more mental gymnastics than autopilot by a long shot. At night after a long day, looking at hand flying for 2 hours into weather followed by a handflown approach, I don't have anything to prove about how big my balls are. I agree with one of the previous posters; if you take this flight and anything goes wrong they pin it on you for pilot error, it sounds to me you've got the first half of an accident report that's waiting to be written and get crucified by the guys here for poor decision making. Bottom line most of those conditions are outside of SOP, generally guys just don't hand fly daily in bad weather, if they did then obviously an autopilot isn't a big deal.
If pinnacles union is worth their salt he'll get back pay for his whole trip and this nice vacation, you really want a guy taking 50 people on a flight he isn't comfortable with?
If pinnacles union is worth their salt he'll get back pay for his whole trip and this nice vacation, you really want a guy taking 50 people on a flight he isn't comfortable with?
02-03-2010, 08:11 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: B737 F/O
Posts: 425
I don't think you can crucify someone for not being a freight dog in their past. Everyone has different levels of experience, and we all have different levels of comfort. This CA made a decision. None of us were there, and we should ALL back the guy up. Those of you who are saying "Oh he's just a low time 200 hour wonder who never hand flies" are no better than the chief pilot who suspended him.
I was fairly low time when I went to Mesa, and hand flew ALL the time. Most of my approaches were hand flown, and I had no problem flying without an autopilot, FMS or flight director. Longest flight for me was AUS-IAD with no A/P and a deferred FMS. It was supposed to be the captains leg, but I volunteered to fly it for him.
The point is, we weren't there, and we've all made decisions that could have been monday morning quarterbacked the next day. Just the thought that some people are jumping on this guys back really frustrates me. He's the captain of a 121 airliner, and his decision should be respected and listened to. None of us have any business to say anything except to say good job to him for standing up to the company and holding his own for something he wasn't comfortable with. That's all that matters.
I was fairly low time when I went to Mesa, and hand flew ALL the time. Most of my approaches were hand flown, and I had no problem flying without an autopilot, FMS or flight director. Longest flight for me was AUS-IAD with no A/P and a deferred FMS. It was supposed to be the captains leg, but I volunteered to fly it for him.
The point is, we weren't there, and we've all made decisions that could have been monday morning quarterbacked the next day. Just the thought that some people are jumping on this guys back really frustrates me. He's the captain of a 121 airliner, and his decision should be respected and listened to. None of us have any business to say anything except to say good job to him for standing up to the company and holding his own for something he wasn't comfortable with. That's all that matters.
02-03-2010, 08:16 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Beech 1900D
Posts: 280
[quote=rickair7777;756965]
...But lets say we had a non-precision, non-radar, full approach with a PT and/or a complicated missed in mountainous terrain. I'd take a pass on that...we are just not current on that kind of hand flying...
quote]
Why are you guys not current on this? If your company has the ability to defer the autopilot system, it must occur to you that an autopilot deferal is a very realistic possibility that may pop up in daily line flying. That being the case, part of being a professional, to me, would include having the professional ability to deal with this situation. That would mean staying current on hand flying the aircraft, and even hand flying more complicated approaches. I'm not saying I'm better than RJ pilots, or cooler than RJ pilots, or have more skills than RJ pilots...I'm not, and I don't believe that at all. I'm just not understanding the justification for non-acceptance of this aircraft. I understand that it's the PIC's discretion; but, at the same time, part of our job, as professionals, is to be an effective part of the chain of providing efficient and reliable transportation to our customers. We can't be scared of flying things to mins, unless there is a reasonable justification for believing safety is affected. I'm not seeing the reasonable justification here...unless, like I say, he wasn't comfortable with hand flying the aircraft...which goes back to the whole professionalism thing...In the end, I'm just saying I'm not understanding this situation, perhaps, maybe, because I don't have the full story. No judgements; just questions. On the surface, it doesn't make sense to me. There may be much, much more to the story than what I'm seeing here, which may cause me to actually agree with this CA's decision.
...But lets say we had a non-precision, non-radar, full approach with a PT and/or a complicated missed in mountainous terrain. I'd take a pass on that...we are just not current on that kind of hand flying...
quote]
Why are you guys not current on this? If your company has the ability to defer the autopilot system, it must occur to you that an autopilot deferal is a very realistic possibility that may pop up in daily line flying. That being the case, part of being a professional, to me, would include having the professional ability to deal with this situation. That would mean staying current on hand flying the aircraft, and even hand flying more complicated approaches. I'm not saying I'm better than RJ pilots, or cooler than RJ pilots, or have more skills than RJ pilots...I'm not, and I don't believe that at all. I'm just not understanding the justification for non-acceptance of this aircraft. I understand that it's the PIC's discretion; but, at the same time, part of our job, as professionals, is to be an effective part of the chain of providing efficient and reliable transportation to our customers. We can't be scared of flying things to mins, unless there is a reasonable justification for believing safety is affected. I'm not seeing the reasonable justification here...unless, like I say, he wasn't comfortable with hand flying the aircraft...which goes back to the whole professionalism thing...In the end, I'm just saying I'm not understanding this situation, perhaps, maybe, because I don't have the full story. No judgements; just questions. On the surface, it doesn't make sense to me. There may be much, much more to the story than what I'm seeing here, which may cause me to actually agree with this CA's decision.
Last edited by 1900luxuryliner; 02-03-2010 at 09:17 AM. Reason: Clarification on previous points
02-03-2010, 08:28 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 888
I wonder how this decision would have gone if it's a 737 or 757 no autopilot into bad weather. I don't know the answer, maybe a mainline guy can chime in. Most beech 1900's don't have autopilots so no autopilot flying clearly isn't out of the ordinary.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Past V1
Regional
61
01-22-2009 07:17 AM
