Cockpit visits on a private plane

[Jay_solo]

Are cockpit visits allowed on private flights? Say someone owns something like a BBJ, is the Captain (with permission from the a/c owner) allowed to let passengers visit the cockpit?

[cldrvr]

This is not really the place to discuss this.

[Jay_solo]

So where on PPRune is the right place to discuss this??

[ksjc]

Yes. Cockpit visits can be permitted. There is no FAA regulation prohibiting it...likely the same elsewhere.

[FrankR]

Flight deck visits are fine in flight.

In the past,we have occasionally allowed passengers to sit on the jumpseat for landing provided we felt they would adhere to our sterile flight deck below 10,000 rule.

FR

[Tinstaafl]

USA doesn't rule the world, anyway. Different countries have different rules. Some will allow it, some may not.

[Pace]

Remember too that on SP aircraft it is common for a Pax to sit up front.

[Gulfstreamaviator]

In general we have a passenger, or more often the owner in the jump seat, for take off and landing.

His toy, his choice of seat.

One owner is so frightened of flying that he bought his jet, so he could sit in the jump seat....and see just what is actually happening. he was not impressed on his first cat2.... seat was not good for viewing the lights and we touched down and he never saw nuffin...... good tip that trip.

glf

[cambioso]

Come on cldrvr.............Why, in your opinion, (and you seem to have an opinion on everything!) is this not the place to discuss this topic?
As Jay says, where, in your opinion, IS the best place on this Network to discuss this perfectly reasonable question?
Jez.

[dc9-32]

Rules or no rules. If Joe Bloggs has spent $15m on a jet, and he says it's ok for one of his punters to sit up front, who on earth is going to lay down the rules at FL410 !

I'd say the only person who would be against it would be the PIC but if he wanted to keep his job, he's most likely to agree to a vist to the front office.
Of course, PIC can refuse on safety grounds, that's why he is PIC.

Let's face it, Mr Tali Ban isn't likely to be on the manifest of a biz jet is he :ugh:

[iwrbf]

I second cldriver's opinion.

Security stuff should NOT be discussed openly. 11 years later, everyone who laughs about security related paranoia is becoming a cool guy in people's perception.

Think about it: Mr Tali Ban is funded by very rich people with huuuuuge business interests. There would be absolutely no problem to give him a few thousand bucks for a sightseeing trip...

I guess bad things have to happen before the average "Peace" fan realizes that there are far more ways to do harm to innocent people than he thinks.

Sad thing :-(

Peter

[First.officer]

Plenty of cockpit visits used to take place on the CJ, open cockpit and attendant seat right behind the co-pilot seat meant it was perfectly feasible, and allowed the client the opportunity to see what was going on, and ask a few questions along the way.......

As an aside, I did my first flight on the CJ2 with Cambioso pretty much as a "spectator" lol.....

F/o

[His dudeness]

11 years later, everyone who laughs about security related paranoia is becoming a cool guy in people's perception.

And rightly so (the cool guy perception...) since some people in some countries are totally tonto and morons. Some say we (crew/people working there) are the last line of defense, but then they go one and mistrust us up to laughable level.

I´m almost at a point where I would not report someone with a gun or grenade should I ever see him on an airport. (note: I wrote almost)

I guess bad things have to happen before the average "Peace" fan realizes that there are far more ways to do harm to innocent people than he thinks.

That might be, but then I rather live a little bit more dangerous life than being constantly harassed by idiots with no clue whatsoever and no real impact on security. All they (the politicians) want is what their wet dreams always were: power. And now they have more power than they had ever since the end of Hitler, talking about Germany here)

And if our Governments would get their act together and stood their ground were they should (here where Islamists try to take over the public opinion and demand all the tolerance there is while not being tolerant at all) and pull out of military adventures with no result for 10 years now and actually do what they preach, then there would be little ground for the Taliban/Al-Quaida etc to plant and grow recruits of the hateful variety.

The whole thing turns totally upside down when I pass a control with a bearded muslim guy working the xray machine.

[INNflight]

The chance of being directly affected by a terrorist attack is right up there with the chance of winning the jackpot at the casino or being struck by lightning.

If you seriously think flight deck visits in a bizjet are the biggest danger you face out there, well... :suspect:

[jr of dallas]

Hey Jay ! Not driving a BBJ but if your GF has nice bumpers you can visit my plane anytime :ok:

[SFI145]

This is not really the place to discuss this.
Whatever do you mean?

[sooty3694]

cldrvr, your response seems a bit OTT to me also.

kind of crass remark one would expect from a jobsworth security operative.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Our A/C (CAA reg and UK AOC operated) the rules are when the owner is on board its' his toy and he can do pretty much what he likes.

On charter, then it is commercial air transport, same rules as an airline flight (just a shedload more expensive) then CAA rules apply and no-one is allowed on the FD apart from crew.

I do miss FD visits, we tend to know our charter pax and a lot of fun has gone out of the job.

SND

[iwrbf]

@His dudeness:

I am - by far - no blind follower of our ruling political class but I guess if we continue to ridicule our system and if we continue to deprive our politicians of their sanity we will one day have a rude awakening when our self evident rights will be gone.

Have you ever thought about what had happened from 2001 until 2012 if we had all gone tree hugging instead of bearing this security nuisances? Think about it, please!

Btw, I don't think this is OT - it's generally about statements like the one above with the "almost". This shouldn't ever come to your mind, not even in a sarcastic way.

Kind regards,
Peter (Not a right wing person, just thinking of the many people that had to die until we had something like elections and human rights... our governments are not the problem - even if it's a popular psychological kind of reaction to a widely invisible threat to think like that...)

PS: Statistics about losing once's life in a terrorist attack would have to be rewritten in a real WMD event. I desperately hope that this will never ever have to be done. Let's all do what we can to prevent this, there are enough mad men running around and there are more than enough "weapons" out there.

[His dudeness]

You won't find me arguing with SENSIBLE security.

Whats done currently is mostly not sensible, just harassment and power trips of security agencies.

This shouldn't ever come to your mind, not even in a sarcastic way.

Thanks, so we are already at a point where 'you' want to order me what to think or what to say ?
**** that I say, and 'my government' - and the others - can only annoy and insult me for so long before I cancel whatever will I ever had to participate in charades. If they don´t trust me and my fellow airmen to fly these noise and dangerous pointy things with wings on than they should make a clean cut and forbid aviation.

IMO the system these days ridicules itself.

if we continue to deprive our politicians of their sanity we will one day have a rude awakening when our self evident rights will be gone.

So the same politicians and bureaucrats that take away bit by bit what is left of our rights (e.g. ZÜP) and try to screw us time and again are the preservers of freedom?

Whoa, that is a new perspective for me and one I won´t buy it, I fear...

our governments are not the problem

I think they are.

[Flyingstig]

Sir Naill,
My money is with you.
Love the moniker!

[Pace]

IWRBF

I totally support His Dudeness.
I am sorry but I am a sceptic of such good intentions. It is usually someones bank balance? Government looking for acceptable reasons to create artificial jobs or mostly acceptable taxes which never find their way to whatever cause they are raised for.

You talk of freedoms but that is a very loosely used term. We have never been less free now than ever!

We have never lived in such a big brother society than now.

This protection against terrorism is a red herring.
Any terrorist would find it far far easier to drag a case onto the London Tubes in the rush hour where he would find no security, no one to check whether he held more than 100ml of liquid in his case or even have the case checked through an X ray machine.
He could simply walk on with the crowds and kill as many people as there are on any aircraft.

The Burocracy, red tape , regulators, streams of meaningless paperwork and millions of created government jobs is the reason Europe is living above its means and quickly going down the plug hole.

Madness!!! as an example we dropped a jet at Southend today parked up where we were told to and with yellow jackets walked to the terminal some 100 m away.
An irate person charged up to tell us in an aggressive manner that we were supposed to walk between two vague white broken lines 20 yds to our left.
No traffic lights! Just two vague broken white lines.
We are pilots! It is hard to miss a huge 737 on the taxiway. Far more dangerous crossing the road in town and what difference would two vague white lines make to being run over by a 737? But no! Its regulations :ugh: This world is going mad!

Pace

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Pace;

So you receieved the wonderful Stobart welcome! sounds like the same bloke I met there. One day someone will lose it and that guy will get a towbar inserted firmly in his fundament!

And as for your other comments couldn't agree more. Now tell me old boy ever fancied being prime minister........................?

SND

[iwrbf]

@His dudeness


You won't find me arguing with SENSIBLE security.

Whats done currently is mostly not sensible, just harassment and power trips of security agencies.


I agree about the procedures in the foreground being (very) far from perfect.


Thanks, so we are already at a point where 'you' want to order me what to think or what to say ?


I just said
--> This shouldn't ever come to your mind, not even in a sarcastic way. <--
in regard to your statement:

I´m almost at a point where I would not report someone with a gun or grenade should I ever see him on an airport. (note: I wrote almost)


I don't wish to change you, your personality, your political views or the brand of your breakfast cereals. The statement you gave does bother me, though. Almost is "almost", not "never ever". Your frustration about the daily problems with all the daily hassles seems to make you insensible to what you declare as your personal statements. In other words: Are you aware what you're saying? This is a rhetoric question, though.

@Pace
My definition of freedom is quite complex, you're right. Us being less free now than ever is... a bold statement at least. Surveillance alone does not compromise freedom.
About the Southend thing: a person compensating his own powerless on the basis of 'safety' (not: security, that's why this example doesn't really fit in here...) is nothing new. Laugh about it.

To clarify what I wrote above:

- I don't believe in bureaucracy
- I'm aware of the state of idiocracy in regulations and governmental issues
- I'm neither right wing nor do I like what has been done to all of us in the last 11 years (and before)

On the other hand:

- There is a real threat. The minimal knowledge I have about mass psychology and leadership tells me, that there is a vast chance that the 'Puppeteers' do have quite a bit more information than the 'Cattle' (us...) has. This would at least explain the governmental paranoia since 2001.
- One should not mistake the nuisance of the ludicrous amateur like show that underpaid actors perform at thousands of security gates worldwide with all the stuff going on in the background.
- One should differentiate between safety and security

Open your eyes. As long as there is poverty in this world you only need religious fanatics, extreme ideologists or just people who wish to profit of the tension between rich and poor... and voila, you have a recipe for disaster. Ending all political and military influence (and intervention) in the world will not stabilize the world's situation. This is wishful thinking. Mankind is centuries away from the individual thinking for itself, and as long as you don't invent some kind of intellectuality and consciousness booster, the richer will have to continue in defending their position. Do you really believe "the fire" will extinguish itself?

I do understand the daily frustration regarding these often totally pointless and sometimes insane procedures. But honestly: do you really think all this is nonsense? Do you really think that aviation with its vital purpose of business interconnection, with its billions and billions of turnover and its symbolic value in terrorist attacks is on the same place on Mr. T. Errorist's wish list?

Please, I understand your position. I even respect it. But there's more than one truth on some things...

Kind regards,
Peter
(who will NEVER hesitate to stop some idiot who intends to do harm to innocent people just to get rid of his frustration. Harsh words, I know. But true.)

[Pace]

Now tell me old boy ever fancied being prime minister........................?

Sir Niall

Not in the slightest ;) does not matter who is there its all window dressing nowadays.
If we look at prior 9/11 I used to sit up front for hours going to the USA in a 777, 747. Mention of a commercial licence and you were welcome.
9/11 and all that talk of fighting for the freedoms that had been hard fought for?
The world changed dramatically for the worse and as for the freedoms??? I am afraid the terrorists won big time.

Pace

[Armchairflyer]

Open your eyes. As long as there is poverty in this world you only need religious fanatics, extreme ideologists or just people who wish to profit of the tension between rich and poor... and voila, you have a recipe for disaster.Agreed. Unfortunately, the "people who wish to profit of the tension between rich and poor" is the rich 'puppeteers', certainly happy that the poor 'cattle' can be so successfully silenced by the buzzword "security". IMHO there's no real governmental paranoia at all, it's just a show to convince the 'cattle' that giving more and more power and control to the 'puppeteers' is in their own best interest :yuk:. BTW, a German cabaret artist once put the "real threat" into context quite well, comparing the number of victims of religious terrorism in Europe to the death toll of road traffic, smoking, alcohol, and treatment errors in medical care. Al-Qaeda must be green with envy.

Sorry for OT.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Pace;

Your'e very right, we lost, and I doubt our political masters will ever let us have our freedom back.

SND

[etrang]

Naill, you shouldn't talk about that here. Saying "we lost" is giving aid and comfort to the enemy - very dangerous and will encourage more attacks.