SLFGuy wrote:
Quote:
I have no dog in this race but until such time as someone shows a correlation between P2F pilots and aircraft accidents the authorities and airlines will maintain their position.
There's an old adage in aviation: safety is no accident. Meaning, it requires a concerted effort by an organisation involved in commercial air transportation on many levels to achieve it. It needs a positive, safety orientated culture throughout. The absence of accidents for a period of time does not automatically prove an operation is safe. The disregard of the social aspects of crew composition, the creeping corruption of selection criteria that gets people into their seats, the financial pressures crew members are facing which may blind their judgement in a critical situation, may not immediately lead to an increase in accidents, just as a decision by an airline not to follow checklists would probably not immediately lead to more accidents.
Would it be wise to allow this airline to proceed with such a plan and wait for a number of accidents to call it off, or doesn't something (experience, tradition, aviation history) already tell us what a bad idea this is?
You have an issue with P2F or you are in favor of P2F because you are one of those that is benefiting from this lousy schemes. I have no dog in this fight, yeah right! Are you are pilot?
Kerosene nails it.
Anyone who does not want to understand that P2F is not safe, is insane.
How can you crawl under a crazy amount of debts, work a real job in order to pay for food/rent, fly as mush as you can in order to finish your hours and... be safe?
P2F is becoming the 'jobs' for nouveau-riche kids who travels with daddy's credit card and don't care spending the money to get an eventual 'well deserved' job.
The way this is heading, anyone from middle class won't be able to sustain that amount of debt.
Last time I checked they are lacking pilots in Asia, but Europeans pay to work.