Pinnacle CA suspended
02-03-2010, 08:53 AM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: Livin' the dream
Posts: 626
I laugh at you guys talking all this freight dog crap. I was a single pilot night ifr guy and I can tell you that doing that type of flying has given me the guts, or whatever you want to call it, to say no. Being a freight dog doesn't make you a better pilot per se, but it helps you make better decisions. You learn really quickly when you have bit off more than you can chew when you are the only one in the plane flying. There are more than a couple flights I can look back on and think to myself, man I should have stayed on the ground. Now that I am a captain with OTHER peoples lives in the back I need to evaluate everything that much more closely. Anyone bringing the freight dog attitude to the airlines is just looking for trouble and when they find it all the people they were entrusted with will pay the price.
I haven't done the single pilot night freight stuff, only VFR 135 SE in Southeast AK on floats and wheels. About 3500 hours of it. Often prowling around in very crummy weather, low light in the winter, and sometimes innacurate weather reporting for whats out there ahead of you. I too have in the past had flights where I regretted parts of the decision making process that got me airborne on days when the holes in the cheese started lining up towards a not good outcome. It's very easy to go from hero to zero, and it can happen fast.
I have to say kudos to this Captain for taking a stand for what they thought was right, and most importantly safe. Noone should be hung out to dry for following their gut instinct on conducting or not conducting a flight in an instance like what is described.
All pilots are different, comfort levels, experience, currency- and not currency on paper I mean, I'm talking about your honest self evaluation of how capable one is to perform a certain operation. Not currency on a piece of paper.
Another thing I have not seen mentioned is how many times has this situation happened to this Captain? Maybe they already have dealt with a similar situation with deferred autopilot, flew it, and experienced a flight that few here have in a CRJ because, well, supposedly you are not flying around very often with an inop autopilot, right? Has the company been slack on maintaining the system properly in other words.
Kudos to this Captain for taking a stand for safety.
This is NOT an ego thing.
02-03-2010, 09:02 AM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: Computer desk
Posts: 118
I suggest you tune into PBS on Feb 9th at 21:00.
02-03-2010, 09:11 AM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: Livin' the dream
Posts: 626
No he/she is not full of it. I hand flew lear 20's for over 5 years. Living on a pager. Flying time critical cargo. If you were lucky, the autopilot would hold altitude for awhile. Most of the time it didn't. Every airline pilot should be able to do the same in the equiptment they are flying. I am not suggesting this captain made a bad decision. On the contrary. If he/she is not comfortable. Then the Captain made the right choice in refusing the flight. The problem here is that Airlines are allowed to hire LOW time LOW EXPERIENCE pilots to fly under a Flag carrier name. I suggest you tune into PBS on Feb 9th at 21:00.
I suggest you tune into PBS on Feb 9th at 21:00.Maybe, just maybe, they are more experienced than you. Maybe a Lear is not a CRJ. Maybe the Captain flies differently than you because they've got humans in back rather than boxes. Maybe this Captain understands that their company is probably under a microscope.
Where does this idea that "Every airline pilot should be able to do the same in the equpment they are flying." come from?
Have you somehow determined this, objectively? For how many hours, to what minimums, flight after flight, with possibly a not very helpful person in the right seat?
02-03-2010, 09:18 AM
#44
Tuk er jerbs!
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: B747 Left
Posts: 1,342
If the captain wasn't comfortable with it, it sounds like he made the right decision. Kudos to him for making a tough call and putting his personal ego aside. Flying jets on autopilot 95% of the time does make you rusty; it seems as if he knew it and made the decision accordingly.
And yes, I've been flying single pilot IFR in the northeast in old pistons for about 1000 hours now. I still agree with the decision.
02-03-2010, 09:35 AM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Slinger
Posts: 316
[quote=1900luxuryliner;757056]
...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.
While I can't speak for all airlines out there, as I mentioned earlier, we are prohibited from hand flying while the autopilot is operative, with the exception of visuals. This came as a response to an incident in providence involving an unstabalized approach. While I don't agree with it, and I think we should hand fly approaches in IMC occasionally, our FOM prohibits it. To prohibit hand flying with an operative autopilot, then as soon as the autopilot decides to stop working, say it's now okay to hand fly doesn't make any sense to me.
I can easily see why this captain refused the airplane. I've seen A/C refused for less than that.
...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.
I can easily see why this captain refused the airplane. I've seen A/C refused for less than that.
02-03-2010, 09:35 AM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: Missionary
Posts: 309
No he/she is not full of it. I hand flew lear 20's for over 5 years. Living on a pager. Flying time critical cargo. If you were lucky, the autopilot would hold altitude for awhile. Most of the time it didn't. Every airline pilot should be able to do the same in the equiptment they are flying. I am not suggesting this captain made a bad decision. On the contrary. If he/she is not comfortable. Then the Captain made the right choice in refusing the flight. The problem here is that Airlines are allowed to hire LOW time LOW EXPERIENCE pilots to fly under a Flag carrier name. I suggest you tune into PBS on Feb 9th at 21:00.
I suggest you tune into PBS on Feb 9th at 21:00.I've seen aircraft grounded for a lot less, and the relief Capt. should have backed up the 1st one. That's the only way things will change.
So for arguments sake, you get to your next aircraft and find placards in all those hard to reach places, the Mx log has more entries than Paris Hilton's shag-book, you've got a full boat for a relatively long leg in solid IMC, and you've probably got the fleet hangar queen. You might not legally fly RVSM, so flying lower and burning more gas will mean taking on more fuel and possibly leaving paying passengers at the gate, while you get to play test pilot for the Mx. dept. Leaving out fatigue and any other Mx issues, it's about time Captains started using their authority and saying, "Fix it, or this plane goes nowhere!"
Id like to buy this guy a beer just for being old-school and understanding the concept of Captain's Authority.
02-03-2010, 09:53 AM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Beech 1900D
Posts: 280
While I can't speak for all airlines out there, as I mentioned earlier, we are prohibited from hand flying while the autopilot is operative, with the exception of visuals. This came as a response to an incident in providence involving an unstabalized approach. While I don't agree with it, and I think we should hand fly approaches in IMC occasionally, our FOM prohibits it. To prohibit hand flying with an operative autopilot, then as soon as the autopilot decides to stop working, say it's now okay to hand fly doesn't make any sense to me.
I can easily see why this captain refused the airplane. I've seen A/C refused for less than that.
02-03-2010, 09:58 AM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Gear Slinger
Posts: 316
I agree completely that that provision in our FOM makes no sense, but it's basically just a knee jerk reaction to a previous incident. I should also clarify I do not work for Pinnacle, I was just throwing that out there since their manuals may include something similar.
02-03-2010, 10:03 AM
#49
Property of Scheduling
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: Bus driver
Posts: 2,573
We have no limitations that are company imposed on hand flying. Obviously RVSM/RNAV/CAT2 have restrictions requiring its use. For future reference- if you get in hot water, call a rep.
The pilot is grieving the 14-day suspension. There are many more details but the company is trying to use other language instead of challenging PIC authority.
The pilot is grieving the 14-day suspension. There are many more details but the company is trying to use other language instead of challenging PIC authority.
02-03-2010, 10:06 AM
#50
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Posts: 32
The reason why I posted this in the first place was out of sheer disbelief that Pinnacle would give disciplinary action to the CA for using "Captain's Authority" in making a decision in what the CA thought was the best/safest course of action in those circumstances.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Past V1
Regional
61
01-22-2009 07:17 AM
