Colgan 3407 crash...Chief Pilot Emails
#112
Second, having been found to doubts about the captain, what are they going to say in rebuttal--we didn't mean it.
Dicovery is a powerful tool, gigabytes of emails were no doubt downloaded. The plaintiff attorneys found the key to proving the company liable for wrongful death.
GF.
#114
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
First, withholding material evidence from the Board is obstruction, a legally actionable issue. The Board could have them civilly or criminally liable. You cannot lie or withhold evidence when the government comes calling in an investigation and that doesn't only apply in criminal cases.
Second, having been found to doubts about the captain, what are they going to say in rebuttal--we didn't mean it.
Dicovery is a powerful tool, gigabytes of emails were no doubt downloaded. The plaintiff attorneys found the key to proving the company liable for wrongful death.
GF.
Second, having been found to doubts about the captain, what are they going to say in rebuttal--we didn't mean it.
Dicovery is a powerful tool, gigabytes of emails were no doubt downloaded. The plaintiff attorneys found the key to proving the company liable for wrongful death.
GF.
#115
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: B737 CA
Posts: 1,518
Last I heard they were trying to go after Continental too, the judge recently ruled they could have access to Continental pilot records (to prove that Colgan pilots were less qualified than mainline). There was a thread about it recently.
#116
New Hire
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: EX SF340 CA
Posts: 5
It is possible that the regional are avoiding you for other reasons. They don't like it when someone quits unless it is to move on to a bigger or better 121 outfit. It suggests that you did not like 121 and that if hired you would quit again after a year or two as soon as you find another part 91 gig.
Secondly now that hiring is slow the regionals do not need street captains. Why hire someone to sit in the right seat for years who is going to be unhappy? It is better to hire low time guys who will be grateful, do not have families to support and who will most likely be there for ten years.
Your record proves that you are a risk taker. The regionals want drones who know their place.
Skyhigh
Secondly now that hiring is slow the regionals do not need street captains. Why hire someone to sit in the right seat for years who is going to be unhappy? It is better to hire low time guys who will be grateful, do not have families to support and who will most likely be there for ten years.
Your record proves that you are a risk taker. The regionals want drones who know their place.
Skyhigh
Those are good points, but I'm hardly a risk taker. Moving from place to place is common in most professions, also in aviation. Flying 135, 91 and 121 has given me a lot more experience than I would have gained had I gone from flight instructing directly to flying an RJ or something. But I think you may be right about everything else. FWIW, I prefer flying 121, but at that time of my life just couldn't deal with the pay/schedule. Ironically, the first two years at Colgan were pretty good. At any rate, this is probably the only industry that pays you crap, treats you like crap and then gets indignant when you leave.
#117
New Hire
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: EX SF340 CA
Posts: 5
I understand the media are generally stupid concerning aviation, the problem is the lawyers. They're the ones who force the airlines (and other employers) to live in some kind of fantasy world where simple answers are proposed in lieu of examining real issues.
One example of that is how you hear a lot about MR's checkride history and his lack of experience in the Q. But you don't hear anything about his copilot's clean checkride history and that she had something like 700 hours in type.
The whole reason this thread began was because of the discovery of Bill Honan's e-mails voicing his doubts about Renslow's capability to be PIC. I think that is far more damning in a legal sense than MR's failures, although I can't figure out how somebody with so many 121 stumbles made it into the left seat.
If you were to study the backgrounds of the pilots involved in every crash in the last 20 or 30 years, how many of them would have had perfect check ride histories? I would guess that many of them were perfect or almost perfect. So it can't really be a factor can it? What about attitude, nonchalance and get-there-itis? Look at American 1420: it's happened because the pilots insisted on flying through a TS to land at Little Rock instead of holding for a few minutes to let the storm pass. That was a judgement issue, pure and simple, and completely unrelated to training records. I could bore you with more examples.
There's just more to flying than what you did in primary training. But despite that, I understand it's easier to sift out people through a simple metric than think too much about their entire experience. Another thing is quite simply that as long as there are enough guys with no busts on their records, the airlines don't have too much reason to interview someone like me, despite the absurdity of the fact that I've already done the job.
If anything, I'm more paranoid and anal about those kinds of things BECAUSE of my failures. The whole thing mystifies me. I can name dozens of historical examples of people who stumbled and fell early in their career and then went on to be competent professionals.
If the regionals were the Constitutional Congress, they wouldn't have picked some guy named George Washington to lead their army because he lost a garrison and was captured with his troops during the French and Indian War in the 1750s.
If they were Abraham Lincoln, they wouldn't have picked some dude named Ulysses Grant to lead the Union armies because he had quit the army in the 1850s after a mediocre career and then went on to fail in repeated business ventures.
Maybe in today's media/legal climate, the president couldn't promote a guy like Grant because CNN would dig up all the rumors about his drinking, etc.
It raises interesting questions about the state of our culture when people (lawyers) who know nothing about a profession (military, aviation, medicine etc.) nevertheless have a huge impact on it.
#118
New Hire
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: EX SF340 CA
Posts: 5
It is sad that a wet behind the ears guy with no failures can beat out a well seasoned pilot with some failures. Unfortunately, the average pax would prefer a FNG with no failures who has only flown three months to a seasoned pilot who has seen the real world of flying and has a few issues ten years ago.
Funny thing is, I was a 5000 hour 135 IP (slated to be a check airman until the company shut down), and Colgan wouldn't take me as a street CA because I had a prior 121 failure (with a company that failed 50 percent of its new hires).
I feel for you buddy. If you want to stay in the 135 world (especially in Texas or California), feel free to IM me: I have some contacts that would take you in a heartbeat.
If I were to lose my Colgan job, I would go back to 135 work. There are some really good gigs out there.
Good luck to you.
Funny thing is, I was a 5000 hour 135 IP (slated to be a check airman until the company shut down), and Colgan wouldn't take me as a street CA because I had a prior 121 failure (with a company that failed 50 percent of its new hires).
I feel for you buddy. If you want to stay in the 135 world (especially in Texas or California), feel free to IM me: I have some contacts that would take you in a heartbeat.
If I were to lose my Colgan job, I would go back to 135 work. There are some really good gigs out there.
Good luck to you.
#119
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Airbus 319/320 Captain
Posts: 880
No B.S. on this one I'm afraid. The same thing USE to happen at the local airport that I instructed at. The Examiner would schedule up to 4 checkrides during the day and while he was administrating the practical to one fella, the other was planning out his long cross country!! They FAA finally shut him down.
Last edited by brianb; 10-29-2011 at 07:19 AM. Reason: Forgot to insert quote!
#120
I think Renslow's history of repeated checkride failures should have raised flags. But I don't understand how he could be considered qualified to fly the Saab and not the Q. The Q is maybe more "difficult" to fly, but the Saab's systems are arguably more complex. It doesn't make any sense to me how how he could be OK to fly one and not the other. They both need airspeed to fly ... maybe he would have done the same thing if he'd stayed on the Saab?
Also, why all the furor over Renslow's training background? This implies that only pilots with poor training records crash planes. But that isn't true.
Did the pilots responsible for Comair 5191 or Pinnacle 3701 (granted, they only killed themselves) have a string of check ride failures? Did anybody care to ask? What about the Air France 447 guys? Had they ever failed a check ride? Why is this only a factor in the Colgan 3407 crash?
The plane crashed because Renslow and his copilot, who had never failed a check ride, failed to monitor the most basic thing: their airspeed, then freaked out instead of recovering from the stall.
For the record, I was a Saab captain at Colgan at the time of the crash and the guy jump seating on 3407 was a buddy of mine.
Also, why all the furor over Renslow's training background? This implies that only pilots with poor training records crash planes. But that isn't true.
Did the pilots responsible for Comair 5191 or Pinnacle 3701 (granted, they only killed themselves) have a string of check ride failures? Did anybody care to ask? What about the Air France 447 guys? Had they ever failed a check ride? Why is this only a factor in the Colgan 3407 crash?
The plane crashed because Renslow and his copilot, who had never failed a check ride, failed to monitor the most basic thing: their airspeed, then freaked out instead of recovering from the stall.
For the record, I was a Saab captain at Colgan at the time of the crash and the guy jump seating on 3407 was a buddy of mine.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post