BIK_116.80
Long time no seeum, great chat the other night
Thanks for the usual eloquent disquisition on fact v fantasy
methinks
tobzalp has his countries confused, but we wouldn't want to confuse the discussion with facts or reason.
It's much easier to try and marginalise any who have the temerity to discuss issues or hold an opposing view by attempting to demean them. I had a very good run with Volvos and the '75 Station Wagon bought as a new shopping cart for mother and the first of three babies, was stored and handed on down through my three children as they grew up and moved on, it's still going strong and still looks like new with a neighbours son and his wife around the corner, carrying their new baby in it.
Deja vu;
Circa 1969 and I'm standing on the tarmac at Perth Airport being roundly berated by an apoplectic airline captain for having the temerity to;
a. operate an aircraft in IMC within 100nm of his AIRLINE AIRCRAFT (F27)
b. causing a hazard to his passengers by causing our aircraft to arrive at the approach fix several minutes before him and not having the wit to cause ATC to send us off to Bunbury or someother safe place to hold whilst he worked out how to get himself on the ground.
We had just unloaded around half a billion US Dollars worth of passengers. I guess they were just lucky we amateurs didn't kill em.
Seems like not much changes.
I digress.
ferris me old
You miss my point, I should have qualified it with the enroute non radar Class E case.
In non radar Class E base is FL180, hardly Indian country for the so called "VFR Flying Jacket Crowd = Volvo Drivers of the sky".
In Radar Class E is down to 8,500ft but with a transponder "billy blowfly" can be seen as traffic by the controllers radar AND the TCAS.
I'm also here to tell you that from my experience most of the Vovo Drivers get nosebleed above 5000ft. That is 8500ft is hardly a VFR traffic jam enroute and in close, due to climb and descent profiles positively empty and yet again they can be "seen".
I'm a bit concerned about the furore around the
As was mentioned a lot of less than professional VFR operators don't switch their transponder on. Secondly when was the last time the mode C was verified. If the transponder is incorrect it is more harm than good.
and the general construction of the argument on the basis that unless you're an airline pilot you're not a real one, neither is your aircraft and in any event they, the airline pilots, are much too busy to be looking out, perhaps we need more eyes or hands in the cockpit then, just for good CDF airmanship.
That logic presupposes that the bugsmasher has a higher magnitude of deathwish than the airline guy. I have said it in these halls before, it really doesn't matter whether you have one or many hundred bodies behind you, we all have the same responsibility towards each other and our individual a&seholes in the airspace . It might be a good ego feeder for some but I cant process the notion that "I am/have to be 400 times more responsible than you, therefore........". I wonder if the pax are comfortable about the 146 guys only being a quarter as reponsible as the B744 ones
I dont think it is intentional but I am sure that there is more a lack of information and the facts than virtue in the argument.
Simply why would ASA and CASA sign off on anything that they can not justify in safety terms.
As has been revealed here they ASA are flat out retraining and qualifying staff, maybe when the dust settles and more information gets out there, it will become clearer.
We are signed up to 2b education and we have been assisting, as has I understand Qantas is in the production of the pilot educational material.
Oh and the DC10, I actually do understand the difference, I was merely pointing out how flexible the US system is.
Of course that happens routinely in Oz doesn't it.
Slagging off by everyone here just doesn't cut it