Missing light aircraft in the NT
Moderator
Not even JT will show an example
I refer to you #173 - I made no claims about this or that aircraft for specifics. ANY aircraft will break if you overload it enough.
Megan (#184) makes a telling observation losing a wing in a beat up is not that unusual, there is video of a Mosquito losing its wing doing the same. Keep in mind that he is a very experienced and knowledgeable pilot, apart from being an all-round pleasant sort of chap. I think back, occasionally, to the first time I had a ride in a light aircraft, shortly before starting my PPL training. Up at Cessnock, where I lived at the time, young chap with his wife in the front seat of the C172 and me in the back. Now, I was a high school student with not much knowledge of aircraft and thought it all was a great bit of fun. These days, I think back and wonder if that fellow had any idea of just how stupid he was ?
The problem for pilots is a general lack of detailed knowledge sufficient to have a basic understanding of what is a reasonable load to ask the aircraft to sustain.
there must be a quick 'rule of thumb' calculation of IAS Vo for the range of weights of the aircraft.
There is - I gave it in my post(s). I can train any Joe Blogs to run those calculations competently in, probably, 10-15 minutes, complete with practice exercises in a tutorial situation. If I get into an unfamiliar Type, it will take me only a couple of minutes to have the numbers in the back of the head.
Starting point is to check the value for n in the POH limitations section. If you want to omit the PEC bit that probably isn't going to make all that much difference as the error will be reasonably low. The lower speed is appropriate for rough and tumble conditions so you could be a bit rubbery with that one.
Why do you opine that there is a problem ?
A problem (I see) for pilots is that many didn't bother acquiring anything more than the absolute lowest level of knowledge to pass the exams and get the licence. Some have the greatest trouble running the simplest of fuel required calculations.
I really shake my head when I see the plethora of places where one can get a whole lot of practice exam questions sufficient, eventually, to scrape through the exam without opening a text book. Then there is the oft-seen comment that one just does a data dump after the exam, anyway. One should be able to rely on the flight test examiner's quizzing the candidate sufficient to establish that there is a reasonable basis for knowledge ... but, sometimes, I wonder ?
What hope do these kids have ?
I refer to you #173 - I made no claims about this or that aircraft for specifics. ANY aircraft will break if you overload it enough.
Megan (#184) makes a telling observation losing a wing in a beat up is not that unusual, there is video of a Mosquito losing its wing doing the same. Keep in mind that he is a very experienced and knowledgeable pilot, apart from being an all-round pleasant sort of chap. I think back, occasionally, to the first time I had a ride in a light aircraft, shortly before starting my PPL training. Up at Cessnock, where I lived at the time, young chap with his wife in the front seat of the C172 and me in the back. Now, I was a high school student with not much knowledge of aircraft and thought it all was a great bit of fun. These days, I think back and wonder if that fellow had any idea of just how stupid he was ?
The problem for pilots is a general lack of detailed knowledge sufficient to have a basic understanding of what is a reasonable load to ask the aircraft to sustain.
there must be a quick 'rule of thumb' calculation of IAS Vo for the range of weights of the aircraft.
There is - I gave it in my post(s). I can train any Joe Blogs to run those calculations competently in, probably, 10-15 minutes, complete with practice exercises in a tutorial situation. If I get into an unfamiliar Type, it will take me only a couple of minutes to have the numbers in the back of the head.
Starting point is to check the value for n in the POH limitations section. If you want to omit the PEC bit that probably isn't going to make all that much difference as the error will be reasonably low. The lower speed is appropriate for rough and tumble conditions so you could be a bit rubbery with that one.
Why do you opine that there is a problem ?
A problem (I see) for pilots is that many didn't bother acquiring anything more than the absolute lowest level of knowledge to pass the exams and get the licence. Some have the greatest trouble running the simplest of fuel required calculations.
I really shake my head when I see the plethora of places where one can get a whole lot of practice exam questions sufficient, eventually, to scrape through the exam without opening a text book. Then there is the oft-seen comment that one just does a data dump after the exam, anyway. One should be able to rely on the flight test examiner's quizzing the candidate sufficient to establish that there is a reasonable basis for knowledge ... but, sometimes, I wonder ?
What hope do these kids have ?
VH-TFT
https://www.ntnews.com.au/news/north...734c550bff4The aviation safety watchdog has released its initial observations from a horror light plane crash in dense Territory bushland.
A Katherine Aviation charter flight was declared missing on December 24 after it failed to arrive at Tindal Airport after leaving Gove Airport at 8.30am.
It took two days for NT Police to reach the isolated wreckage, near Bulman 240km north east of Katherine.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said the light plane was “destroyed” on impact.
Rhys Annis-Brown, the 23-year-old Katherine Aviation pilot, and his 43-year-old female passenger did not survive.
A Katherine Aviation spokeswoman said the company could not comment at this time.
The ATSB released the identification code of the single-engine light plane, confirming the Cessna 210N’s call sign was VH-TFT.
The ATSB said the investigation into the crash was ongoing.
“A final report will be released at the conclusion of the investigation,” it said.
“Should a critical safety issue be identified during the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify relevant parties, so that appropriate safety action can be taken.”
A Katherine Aviation charter flight on a CESSNA 210 was declared missing on December 24 after it failed to arrive at Tindal Airport after leaving Gove Airport at 8.30am.The Civil Aviation Safety Authority aircraft register said the Cessna 210N VH-TFT was manufactured in 1979, making it 43 years old at the time of the crash.
NT Police have also called for witnesses to help track the plane’s final movements across Arnhem Land.
On Tuesday, Senior Sergeant Paul Lawson said police were now looking for witnesses between Nhulunbuy and 50km north of Bulman who spotted the Cessna 210N from takeoff at 8.15am until the crash at 10.30am on December 24.
“The public has already provided us with some valuable information and I want to thank those people who have contacted us,” Sergeant Lawson said.
A Katherine Aviation charter flight was declared missing on December 24 after it failed to arrive at Tindal Airport after leaving Gove Airport at 8.30am.
It took two days for NT Police to reach the isolated wreckage, near Bulman 240km north east of Katherine.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau said the light plane was “destroyed” on impact.
Rhys Annis-Brown, the 23-year-old Katherine Aviation pilot, and his 43-year-old female passenger did not survive.
A Katherine Aviation spokeswoman said the company could not comment at this time.
The ATSB released the identification code of the single-engine light plane, confirming the Cessna 210N’s call sign was VH-TFT.
The ATSB said the investigation into the crash was ongoing.
“A final report will be released at the conclusion of the investigation,” it said.
“Should a critical safety issue be identified during the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify relevant parties, so that appropriate safety action can be taken.”
A Katherine Aviation charter flight on a CESSNA 210 was declared missing on December 24 after it failed to arrive at Tindal Airport after leaving Gove Airport at 8.30am.The Civil Aviation Safety Authority aircraft register said the Cessna 210N VH-TFT was manufactured in 1979, making it 43 years old at the time of the crash.NT Police have also called for witnesses to help track the plane’s final movements across Arnhem Land.
On Tuesday, Senior Sergeant Paul Lawson said police were now looking for witnesses between Nhulunbuy and 50km north of Bulman who spotted the Cessna 210N from takeoff at 8.15am until the crash at 10.30am on December 24.
“The public has already provided us with some valuable information and I want to thank those people who have contacted us,” Sergeant Lawson said.
More Coverage
Sergeant Lawson said anyone with information should call 131 444, and quote the reference number 10212740.
Why do you opine that there is a problem ?
For the same reason someone said:
“Va probably is the most misunderstood parameter in the line pilot world.”
“As the use of Vo gains more penetration into the Industry, this problem [of misunderstandings about Va] will reduce .... but that is going to take some considerable time.”
“Vo is … of much more relevance to pilots than Va.”
There should be no misunderstanding among pilots about what Va is – or, more importantly, what it isn’t – now. It should not take considerable time to educate pilots on the more important parameter – Vo over the aircraft's weight envelope – especially if the education is ‘doable’ in 10-15 minutes.
Too much chaff and not enough wheat in the training system.
The Exam system is the problem. To have a proper education system the theory should be through an approved provider that can guarantee all items are covered. Unfortunately I believe the only way to achieve this is face to face courses in small tutorial groups where the tutor is signing them off per syllabus item covered for correct understanding. This would involve lecture and interactive discussion of topics, which would show if students had understood the theory, maybe a final overall exam that carried less weight. Multiple choice tests are absolutely useless in assessing understanding of content, they only assess if you know the answer to the posed question. If it means CASA cracks down on theory providers so that only a few exist that are worthwhile, so be it, but it would benefit the industry greatly.
Moderator
Too much chaff and not enough wheat in the training system.
Hear, hear
The Exam system is the problem.
I guess yes and no. The examiner has his hands tied to some extent in respect of what he can do off his own bat.
I don't see a problem with a student's studying independently, provided that, after one or, perhaps, two failures in a subject, he/she should be required to obtain a signoff from an appropriate person to indicate that the syllabus has been addressed and the standard achieved should be compatible with a pass next time around.
For sure, the best means of instruction is classroom based with a competent instructor. Unfortunately, we have a lot of folk out there who qualify for "blind leading the blind" status. Again, for many students, the logistics argue against the classroom approach. Covid introduced us all to remote learning and, I have to say, while it might not be as good as face to face, you can make it work pretty well.
Hear, hear
The Exam system is the problem.
I guess yes and no. The examiner has his hands tied to some extent in respect of what he can do off his own bat.
I don't see a problem with a student's studying independently, provided that, after one or, perhaps, two failures in a subject, he/she should be required to obtain a signoff from an appropriate person to indicate that the syllabus has been addressed and the standard achieved should be compatible with a pass next time around.
For sure, the best means of instruction is classroom based with a competent instructor. Unfortunately, we have a lot of folk out there who qualify for "blind leading the blind" status. Again, for many students, the logistics argue against the classroom approach. Covid introduced us all to remote learning and, I have to say, while it might not be as good as face to face, you can make it work pretty well.
Exam system is not helped by asking questions at times that you have to give an answer to get a tick that is actually wrong. Unable to give a specific example at this time, but the subject raises its head from time to time. Useless content gets included at times also, helo drivers had to learn pressurisation systems, any one ever heard of a pressurised helicopter?
The following 2 users liked this post by megan:
Interesting points re first solo etc. Maybe a little bit of system overload? Jumping in the C150 with the basic 6 pack didn’t really take that much to get used to. Throw in a TV screen and it is a little more complex, or am I just getting old?
Moderator
Exam system is not helped by asking questions at times that you have to give an answer to get a tick that is actually wrong.
Indeed. A corollary consideration/problem is that much is simplified for the pilot as the nitty gritty detail is not necessarily necessary. However, it is frustrating when it ends up just plain misleading or wrong.
- seeing we have been talking Va, that's a perfect example. How many times do you see pilot textbooks and questions which infer that Va is the speed where it is appropriate to hack, flick, and zoom to one's heart's content.
- P-chart detail is another which causes me angst.
- weight and balance - especially the use of loading systems - gets to be dreadful at times - who, in their right mind, would consider figuring equations for envelope limit lines to get an increase in numerical precision in the answer when the input data is more than a bit rough and ready to start with ?
- the differences between certification approaches to stall and the training environment way of doing things.
and so on it goes.
On a side note ..... I sometimes wonder whether you felt cheated by not having a nice, airconditioned, pressurised helo complete with a full complement of attractive flight attendants to address your culinary needs ? I guess it is like motorbikes - everytime I pull up next to a highly desirable grid, I offer the rider a swap. Not one has shown any sign of interest so far. Maybe helos are just more fun ?
Throw in a TV screen and it is a little more complex, or am I just getting old?
We all have the final cited problem.
Before I started my PPL flying, I had to have all the theory exams done and dusted. We had to know the AFM inside out and all the checklists (OK, not many) committed to memory and so on. I don't see that the student should be wasting time in the air learning the basics of the current crop of kit. Into the books and CBT stuff long before the first trip in the aircraft. That sort of stuff can all be known before day one. If no other benefit accrues, the learning progress ramps up to the student's individual maximum - money and time saved on time wasting and the end result should be a higher standard product out the other end.
Indeed. A corollary consideration/problem is that much is simplified for the pilot as the nitty gritty detail is not necessarily necessary. However, it is frustrating when it ends up just plain misleading or wrong.
- seeing we have been talking Va, that's a perfect example. How many times do you see pilot textbooks and questions which infer that Va is the speed where it is appropriate to hack, flick, and zoom to one's heart's content.
- P-chart detail is another which causes me angst.
- weight and balance - especially the use of loading systems - gets to be dreadful at times - who, in their right mind, would consider figuring equations for envelope limit lines to get an increase in numerical precision in the answer when the input data is more than a bit rough and ready to start with ?
- the differences between certification approaches to stall and the training environment way of doing things.
and so on it goes.
On a side note ..... I sometimes wonder whether you felt cheated by not having a nice, airconditioned, pressurised helo complete with a full complement of attractive flight attendants to address your culinary needs ? I guess it is like motorbikes - everytime I pull up next to a highly desirable grid, I offer the rider a swap. Not one has shown any sign of interest so far. Maybe helos are just more fun ?
Throw in a TV screen and it is a little more complex, or am I just getting old?
We all have the final cited problem.
Before I started my PPL flying, I had to have all the theory exams done and dusted. We had to know the AFM inside out and all the checklists (OK, not many) committed to memory and so on. I don't see that the student should be wasting time in the air learning the basics of the current crop of kit. Into the books and CBT stuff long before the first trip in the aircraft. That sort of stuff can all be known before day one. If no other benefit accrues, the learning progress ramps up to the student's individual maximum - money and time saved on time wasting and the end result should be a higher standard product out the other end.
The following users liked this post:
Yes Correct, All KA 210s participated in LOP operations unless their digital engine monitors were U/S
When I was there the operator used a 'Company SAR' instead of submitting flight plans etc (unless into Tindal or Darwin when CTA Active'). The 'Company SAR' was just the Google Calendar 'booking' and then a follow up ETA to ops when you're airborne.
Yeah that sounds correct. 15-20 hours is your weekly minimum guarantee (@ $25.xx or whatever the award is these days). If you work more than that you get paid accordingly. You're expected to be on standby 6am-6pm on days you're not rostered to fly without getting paid for any of it. If its a quiet period and your just doing your minimum guarantee you aren't earning much... ($400 a week pre tax, minus ~$200 a week for rent. You're then left with $200 a week for Food, Phone, Fuel, Car insurance, ASIC renewals, Medical Renewal, Flight Review / IPC etc etc). Management pushed back quite a bit when pilots looked for 2nd jobs stocking shelves in woolies etc to get some more coin coming through to be able to live.
It gets even harder for the remote boys and girls who when a medical, flight review or ASIC comes due have to take leave and fork out $1800 return flights and a hotel in Darwin for a couple days just to get it done.
Although I must admit the company were generally OK when you cancelled flights due weather there was always something in the back of your mind of its either:
Not do this duty = Short on cash and eat rice this week.
Do this duty = Might be able to afford some meat and veggies.
I don't believe this young bloke was under commercial pressures as he had turned back the previous 2 days when attempting the same flight....
Cheers,
TB2D
From what I hear, they instead only guarantee pay for 15 hours a week, no casual loading, but expect pilots to be on standby unpaid the rest of the time. The only way to get paid more than that is to fly, regardless of the weather, regardless of any other factors. Pay by the NM would encourage pilots to divert around weather, but instead they make pilots explain themselves for any discrepancy if a flight takes more than 0.1 longer than their spreadsheet says.
Is LG back from his holidays yet?
Is LG back from his holidays yet?
It gets even harder for the remote boys and girls who when a medical, flight review or ASIC comes due have to take leave and fork out $1800 return flights and a hotel in Darwin for a couple days just to get it done.
Although I must admit the company were generally OK when you cancelled flights due weather there was always something in the back of your mind of its either:
Not do this duty = Short on cash and eat rice this week.
Do this duty = Might be able to afford some meat and veggies.
I don't believe this young bloke was under commercial pressures as he had turned back the previous 2 days when attempting the same flight....
Cheers,
TB2D
Thread Starter
Exam system is not helped by asking questions at times that you have to give an answer to get a tick that is actually wrong. Unable to give a specific example at this time, but the subject raises its head from time to time. Useless content gets included at times also, helo drivers had to learn pressurisation systems, any one ever heard of a pressurised helicopter?
Yes Correct, All KA 210s participated in LOP operations unless their digital engine monitors were U/S
When I was there the operator used a 'Company SAR' instead of submitting flight plans etc (unless into Tindal or Darwin when CTA Active'). The 'Company SAR' was just the Google Calendar 'booking' and then a follow up ETA to ops when you're airborne.
Yeah that sounds correct. 15-20 hours is your weekly minimum guarantee (@ $25.xx or whatever the award is these days). If you work more than that you get paid accordingly. You're expected to be on standby 6am-6pm on days you're not rostered to fly without getting paid for any of it. If its a quiet period and your just doing your minimum guarantee you aren't earning much... ($400 a week pre tax, minus ~$200 a week for rent. You're then left with $200 a week for Food, Phone, Fuel, Car insurance, ASIC renewals, Medical Renewal, Flight Review / IPC etc etc). Management pushed back quite a bit when pilots looked for 2nd jobs stocking shelves in woolies etc to get some more coin coming through to be able to live.
It gets even harder for the remote boys and girls who when a medical, flight review or ASIC comes due have to take leave and fork out $1800 return flights and a hotel in Darwin for a couple days just to get it done.
Although I must admit the company were generally OK when you cancelled flights due weather there was always something in the back of your mind of its either:
Not do this duty = Short on cash and eat rice this week.
Do this duty = Might be able to afford some meat and veggies.
I don't believe this young bloke was under commercial pressures as he had turned back the previous 2 days when attempting the same flight....
Cheers,
TB2D
When I was there the operator used a 'Company SAR' instead of submitting flight plans etc (unless into Tindal or Darwin when CTA Active'). The 'Company SAR' was just the Google Calendar 'booking' and then a follow up ETA to ops when you're airborne.
Yeah that sounds correct. 15-20 hours is your weekly minimum guarantee (@ $25.xx or whatever the award is these days). If you work more than that you get paid accordingly. You're expected to be on standby 6am-6pm on days you're not rostered to fly without getting paid for any of it. If its a quiet period and your just doing your minimum guarantee you aren't earning much... ($400 a week pre tax, minus ~$200 a week for rent. You're then left with $200 a week for Food, Phone, Fuel, Car insurance, ASIC renewals, Medical Renewal, Flight Review / IPC etc etc). Management pushed back quite a bit when pilots looked for 2nd jobs stocking shelves in woolies etc to get some more coin coming through to be able to live.
It gets even harder for the remote boys and girls who when a medical, flight review or ASIC comes due have to take leave and fork out $1800 return flights and a hotel in Darwin for a couple days just to get it done.
Although I must admit the company were generally OK when you cancelled flights due weather there was always something in the back of your mind of its either:
Not do this duty = Short on cash and eat rice this week.
Do this duty = Might be able to afford some meat and veggies.
I don't believe this young bloke was under commercial pressures as he had turned back the previous 2 days when attempting the same flight....
Cheers,
TB2D
Don’t you think the commercial pressure builds exponentially after every cancelled flight, even if only for your own financial survival under the abysmal pay system quoted above.
Last edited by Cloudee; 9th Jan 2023 at 06:19.
These companies get a lot of government work and the government departments do their best to drive down the price without ever looking at the working conditions of the pilots. Wouldn’t it be great if the ATSB included this stuff in their investigation?
Don’t you think the commercial pressure builds exponentially after every cancelled flight, even if only for your own financial survival under the abysmal pay system quoted above.
Don’t you think the commercial pressure builds exponentially after every cancelled flight, even if only for your own financial survival under the abysmal pay system quoted above.
I do agree being that it was Christmas Eve and the pax would have wanted to get back to their family (presumably) but it also shows the guy wasn't afraid to give it a go and if it didn't look great then turn back.
It'll be an interesting investigation that's for sure but I suspect the ATSB wont have much information in their report as theirs not much out there.
Cheers,
TB2D
What is needed is pilots to use the resources of Fair Work and/or join the Union. Neither of them perfect, but if people are getting killed because of these reasons then it is worth a try, surely?
I had a chap from a well known HECS-type academy come in and drop off a resume the other day. Within the first two minutes he had said he would work for free. He probably wasn't expecting the lecture I gave him on that subject, nor that a 737 rating wasn't much good for single engine Day VFR with only 70 PIC.
He then revealed he had been in the same class as the unfortunate pilot who was in this accident.
I had a chap from a well known HECS-type academy come in and drop off a resume the other day. Within the first two minutes he had said he would work for free. He probably wasn't expecting the lecture I gave him on that subject, nor that a 737 rating wasn't much good for single engine Day VFR with only 70 PIC.
He then revealed he had been in the same class as the unfortunate pilot who was in this accident.
What is needed is pilots to use the resources of Fair Work and/or join the Union. Neither of them perfect, but if people are getting killed because of these reasons then it is worth a try, surely?
I had a chap from a well known HECS-type academy come in and drop off a resume the other day. Within the first two minutes he had said he would work for free. He probably wasn't expecting the lecture I gave him on that subject, nor that a 737 rating wasn't much good for single engine Day VFR with only 70 PIC.
He then revealed he had been in the same class as the unfortunate pilot who was in this accident.
I had a chap from a well known HECS-type academy come in and drop off a resume the other day. Within the first two minutes he had said he would work for free. He probably wasn't expecting the lecture I gave him on that subject, nor that a 737 rating wasn't much good for single engine Day VFR with only 70 PIC.
He then revealed he had been in the same class as the unfortunate pilot who was in this accident.
Unfortunately, it's a race to the bottom with fresh CPL holders these days. The same people offering to work for free are the same people that just sit there and put up with under-award payments...
I wasn't aware these cadets got typed after leaving the academy. especially a B737, unless they self-funded?
I've had multiple resumes come across my desk from these cadets and it's no wonder they're offering to work for free... The only aeroplanes they've flown are DA40s & DA42s all G1000. I've heard that the academy was trying to get a C210 online to offer some 'GA Training' so the cadets were more employable in GA after graduating. Imagine going through the whole process expecting to come out and join Qantas link and at the end, they give you some C210 time and tell you good luck with it....
Everyone, let's take stock for a minute.
KA has launched the career of Hundreds and Hundreds of pilots over the years. It's a terrible incident that a young fella lost his life. Those of us that where charter pilots have all been in similar situations and in similar financial positions. It's part of the great journey that is aviation.
These companies are used by pilots and the company uses them. The financial incentive isn't what draws you to work for KA/ chartair/ Air frontier/ Broome AV/ GSL etc , it's the hours. They don't force you to fly or accept their terms when giving you your first gig... Many if not all starter companies have duty days, crappy wages and older frames.
Most incidents come down to pilot error, this is probably no exception, yet this guy wasn't lucky like the rest of us where when we did a skud run or maybe went into some weather we really shouldn't have to get back in time for the weekend, a party or in this case Xmas.
Don't bag on KA and their wages and commercial pressures, all companies at that level are the same.
KA has launched the career of Hundreds and Hundreds of pilots over the years. It's a terrible incident that a young fella lost his life. Those of us that where charter pilots have all been in similar situations and in similar financial positions. It's part of the great journey that is aviation.
These companies are used by pilots and the company uses them. The financial incentive isn't what draws you to work for KA/ chartair/ Air frontier/ Broome AV/ GSL etc , it's the hours. They don't force you to fly or accept their terms when giving you your first gig... Many if not all starter companies have duty days, crappy wages and older frames.
Most incidents come down to pilot error, this is probably no exception, yet this guy wasn't lucky like the rest of us where when we did a skud run or maybe went into some weather we really shouldn't have to get back in time for the weekend, a party or in this case Xmas.
Don't bag on KA and their wages and commercial pressures, all companies at that level are the same.
Skippy, it’s 2023 this is simply not an acceptable way to operate.
Even back in the naughties it was frowned upon and most operators went to at least the award.
Just because xyz does it does not make it right. If all operators paid erm the award then all would have to put aircraft out at similar rates and………..
Even back in the naughties it was frowned upon and most operators went to at least the award.
Just because xyz does it does not make it right. If all operators paid erm the award then all would have to put aircraft out at similar rates and………..
The following 3 users liked this post by Global Aviator:
Problem in Aviation and many other industries is that the companies undercut each other for work until it's run on fumes and employees get shafted with substandard conditions and pay. The sad thing is on these subsidised routes is that you could just tender with decent conditions and pay, reasonable aircraft, multi-engine IFR, and they would have no choice to choose your operation if somebody did not undercut you. I ran charter for years, you were always undercut if they rang around, and of course the public has no idea the safety differences of different aircraft, and care even less about whether the pilot gets proper pay. This is highlighted when you do a charter in a PA31 and the customer asks "how long before you go commercial".
Oh they are tendering for a Baron to do the rounds, but I can make 2% on a 210 paying pittance to the newb pilot.
I will say I know nothing about KA, but the MO for GA doesn't change much.
You will generally gain skills for the workplace in slavery as well. This is one of the worst excuses I see used by GA companies, considering no one needs to work at any of these places to get to an airline with cadetships that offer DE now and such. Again nobody is forced to be a pilot, its a choice, the bad companies prey on new pilots with poor networking skills.
Oh they are tendering for a Baron to do the rounds, but I can make 2% on a 210 paying pittance to the newb pilot.
I will say I know nothing about KA, but the MO for GA doesn't change much.
KA has launched the career of Hundreds and Hundreds of pilots over the years.
Last edited by 43Inches; 9th Jan 2023 at 22:47.
Mil-26 has a pressurised cockpit
you felt cheated by not having a nice, airconditioned, pressurised helo complete with a full complement of attractive flight attendants to address your culinary needs