Know your place boys and girls!

[Inspector Gadget]

Check out Alfredo_Garcias opinion of us on page 4 of "BA 15% pay cut" on rumours and news!! :eek:

[pepe le-tec]

Hey Inspector, still with the highland express? Give me a call sometime - D from tours

[SchmiteGoBust]

I'll just post it hear for all to see!!!

"I have no axe to grind with the engineers, the vast majority I have met are hard working, professional and good at their job. there is, however, a job hierarchy within every profession and most engineers will recognize that pilots come above them. No malice, just reality"

This is the sort of opinion that does nobody any good whatsoever. Personally I'm proud to be an engineer. You have to prove you've got brains to get an engineering apprenticeship, having loads of money just doesn't count!!HeHeheHe!!

[cotos]

Schmite, wise words, but these words are just the ramblings of someone up themselves a bit too far. By the way it's 'here', not hear. Keep up the good work. Cotos

[Bus429]

Schmite - I'd expect a higher standard of spelling from an engineer with a degree!

Know your place! ;) :p

[lame]

Schmite,

Sadly you will always get a percentage of pilots like him, hopefully only a small percentage of the total, however there ARE many good pilots around that DO appreciate Engineers.

Just ignore him..........

Best regards,

"lame"

;)

[dogs body]

If flying was difficult, engineers would do it. :p :p

[lame]

Also remember, that for years now, the major manufacturers have had the knowledge and technology to build airliners that do not need pilots at all, but they still NEED Engineers.. :rolleyes: :eek: ;) :D

[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: lame ]

[marcel's minder]

Old jungle saying You can teach a monkey to ride a bike , but you cannot teach him to fix it" :D :rolleyes:

[Capt Pit Bull]

Thats 'cos a monkey can't write "Ground tested and found serviceable". ;)

Seriously though, I don't have respect for groups of people, like engineers or pilots. I reserve that for individuals, and I have the good fortune to work with several guys whose judgement I trust, and whose guidance I rely on.

But the bottom line is that the skipper signs the tech log to accept your work, not vice-versa. There is an implicit heirachy there, is there not? That doesn't mean I think I'm gods gift, or that you are lowly peasants, its just the way it is.


CPB

[A/c Slave]

Sorry 'Pit Bull' but you DO not accept my work, you accept the Aircraft overall, who are you to query my work anyways?
Can you inspect a signed off rudder pcu change with panel sealed close or a main landing gear change with swing test carried out etc. I don't think so.
So my friend you HAVE to accept the aircraft as fit for flight unless you can really prove other wise. Or your company will send you packing!

cheeky bloke! :mad:

[HiSpeedTape]

Yeah! Sod off Pit Bull. As you know it does'nt go anywhere until we've said you can take it.

[Capt Pit Bull]

Who am I to query your work?

The guy who dies if you've got it wrong. Fair enough?

Your absolutely right that I can not cross check everything you do, I don't have time, the tools, or in some cases the skill (I should point out I am also an engineer, I just don't work as one at present). But thats why I have faith in the Engineers that I work with.

Whereas, it is interesting to note from the post above, that you guys think of pilots as (1) having money rather than brains (Schmite), (2) flying as being too easy (dogs body) (it may quite often be, but not always, of that you can rest assured), (3) Unnecessary (lame) and (4) being equivalent to monkeys (marcels minder). Finally we have Hispeedtape whose idea of a civil conversation is to tell me to 'Sod Off'.

I view Engineers as a vital part of the team, but it doesn't look like that view is reciprocated by some of you. Lets assume the comments above were in jest and leave it at that, eh?

Although I do have faith in the guys, its still common sense to cross check when possible. And there have been times, not many I'm happy to say, when the aircraft has not been in an acceptable state, in spite of protestations to the contrary. When that happens, its down to me. My call. The buck stops with me. I am the last guy that can intervene and prevent the aircraft from leaving terra firma in an unsafe condition. And I've had to do it.

Now I'm really sorry (I mean it - I'm not being sarcastic) if that somehow seems to offend some of you, but thats the way it is.

Finally:

A/C slave, as you say I accept the aircraft. To suggest that I can somehow accept the aircraft without implicitly accepting any work that has been carried out on it is pure semantics. Anyhow, I also sign pages that only have maintenance action. And your arguement can be used against you. When I write a tech log report of routine testing (say engine overspeed test) how can you check my work? Does that stop you countersigning? Thought not.

Hispeedtape. You're right, I can't take it until you release it. However, come hell or high water, you can not force me to accept it.

Its a team effort. I appreciate good engineers, and from what i can tell they appreciate detailed fault write ups that ease their fault finding workload.

But the guy that carries the can when it all goes to rat**** is the guy with the moral authority to say 'I'm sorry, but I'm not flying that aeroplane'.

Regards,

CPB

[Bus429]

CPB - you have to look at pilot related forums to realise how vitriolic exchanges get! "Sod-off"is mild and aggression is rare here.

I appreciate your point of view but people like Garcia only seem to confirm the view some engineers have of some pilots. :rolleyes:

[lame]

Capt Pit Bull,

All I pointed out was the truth, the technology has been around for many years, to build an airliner with NO pilots at all. The manufacturers spent a fortune on this technology in order to remove, what they consider the weakest link, the pilot. I am SURE that you and 99.99999% of pilots do an excellent job, however more aircraft have been lost in recent times from pilot error than any other cause, tragic accidents where pilots think they know better than the latest technology. The ONLY reason this has NOT been done, is the manufacturers know the public will not fly in a pilotless airliner. Some manufacturers wanted an Engineer (or 2) on board instead, a computer expert/s with a batch of spare computers, others go along with the old joke, what is the best 2 man crew to have, answer 1 pilot and 1 dog, the pilot is there to feed the dog and the dog is there to bite the pilot IF he touches ANYTHING....

Also things must be different in Europe, but I have been in the Industry for over 38 years, over 33 of those as a LAME, and NEVER EVER in all that time has any pilot signed for my work. Here anyway, the tech log is presented to the crew signed by the LAME. It is obviously normally accepted as is, the Captain does NOT sign for the aircraft after the LAME. IF the Captain is NOT happy with the aircraft he can of course refuse it, but he must raise a defect in the tech log, thus invalidating the previous entry by an LAME.
The FINAL clearance even then though will still be, as always, the LAME, but as I said it must be different in Europe?

Best regards,

"lame"

[DoctorA300]

Come on guys,
Captain Poodle has got some valid points. Pilots don´t have as much indepth knowledge about maintaining an aircraft as we do, but we don´t know sh%t about flying them, really.
As for the arrogant attitude some pilots show engineers think about this, how many times have you told a cleaner or loader that they did a great job and that their work was essential and appreciated, because thats what this argument is really about. Flight engineers being arrogant, now there is a screaming session waiting to happen.
Brgds
Doc

[lame]

Doc,

I agree with you, everyone has their job to do, and everyone is necessary, just some have much better pay and conditions than others.

I really hate this arragant attitude of some pilots, NOT most pilots but some, because of what you said in your second paragraph.

I have always mixed with the cleaners and porters, as well as pilots and others, to the extent at one airline I was chastised by management several times, for being far too close to the cleaners as in managements opinion they were below Engineers. That is why I absolutely hate this crap about pecking orders, or anyone being better than anyone else...... I take everyone as I find them, be they fellow Engineer, Cleaner or Check Captain.......

Best regards to ALL,

"lame"

[DoctorA300]

Lame,
Thanks for agreeing with me, I was beginning to think that I was the only one that thought everyone was needed. I too have been slagged for fratenizing with cleaners, loaders etc. but unfortunately it was by my fellow engineers.
I have started and run several outstations all over the world, and I have always tried my best to be , if not freindly, then at least civilized with everyone involved with my aircraft, and I have yey to come across a loader, cleaner,security officer, redcap etc. that wouldn´t give me a helping hand or that I couldn´t give some constructive critizism. The same goes for crews, I always try to be friendly with them, and I rarely, allthough it does happen occationally, come across a complete bast%rd.
What I am trying to say is, that everyone IS needed, and no one is irreplaceble, not pilots, not cabincrew, engineers, redcaps or anyone it is a team efford. The sooner we all realize that, the sooner we can improve the allmighty efficiency and safety.
Brgds
Doc

[lame]

Doc,

Yes I agree with you 100%, but I think you still have some people to convince?

Perhaps the problem is worse in England, than here in Australia, because of all the old class hang ups??

Best regards,

"lame"

[spannerhead]

Come on guys. Capt pitbull is talking nothing but common sense!
He is not putting himself on a pedastal and you are trying to knock him off it, even tough it dosen't exist!
He, like us is mearly another vital link in the industry.
Your comments here sound Garcias, but from an engineering point of view. Which goes to show that there are these premadonnas in both
roles.
Doc...you took the words out of my mouth.

[ 17 October 2001: Message edited by: spannerhead ]

[429 CJ]

I'm sorry I don't hold with the views of some that there is a "food chain" as such and therefore a hierachy with pilots at the top. To me, that sort of self-serving claptrap is NOT the idea that most people hold with. By my own admission I am a spannertwirler (of 12 years) in another life (think motor vehicles), and got what I could out of that industry. It took me to many different places in Australia (my home country) and gave me more than just a basic understanding of the machinery that I am now fortunate to be flying (C185-both on wheels and floats, Maule MX-7 and M5-235 etc etc).

O.K., I am not the typical airline pilot, nor do I possess the ability to diagnose any technical component of an air transport cat a/c, but I do know that one thing is for sure, and that is that without each-other (pilots and lames etc) we both do not have a future!

Why it is that people need to big note themselves in this day and age is well beyond me. About 6-8 weeks ago I was helping with a 100 hrly on a C185 amphib at BK (had the a/c chained/jacked-up and wheels off replacing wheel brgs, and about to do retract tests), when into the hanger walked a pilot (20yo tops, and with more gold braid than entire airforce) who proceeded to dress me down for leaving this heap of s... in his way and didn't we know that his a/c was in here and he just HAD to get it out NOW! I stood up to my full height (6'4") and asked him if he would like to help me finish, I'd be delighted to move it for him. His response I couldn't print here, but it was sure funny to see the look on his face about a week later when he came down to Palm Bch looking for a job, as his his boss had turfed him out!

I wonder why? Do you remember me?

Bottom line..... We both need to be as good as we can AT OUR OWN JOBS, and respect the other for his professionalism. Query and question, by all means, but berate and belittle, and take the consequences you have brought upon yourself.

Have a nice day, y'all. ;)

[ 17 October 2001: Message edited by: 429 CJ ]

[WideBodiedEng]

As far as I'm concerned Aviation is like an orange. We're all segments, fitting together just like an orange. If one segment is missing then it ain't an orange. Similarily, we need Pilots, Loaders Lav Dumpers and yes ourselves.
However due to the varous authorities (Initially) being full of ex Service flight ops people it's natural that they would tend to favour their own. Also thanks to a few wars the general public is accustomed to Pilots being "Square jawed, steely eyed superheroes"
For a different viewpoint have a look at this article in Business & Commercial Aviation http://www.aviationnow.com/content/publication/b_ca/management/mgt01.htm
If the link is confused, it's called "Wrenching Command"
I've always made an effort to get on with Apprentices, loaders, cleaners and pilots. This has resulted in any time the aircraft was damaged, I was informed FIRST!!
But I DO get really peeved over the pay differentials with pilots!!!

[DoctorA300]

Widebodyeng,
About your signature, It´s only true if your NOT trying to defend yourself against a horny purser :D :D :D :o
Otherwise I agree with you, but your final comment about the salary difference, we have only our self to blame, Eng.´s traditionally are as united as a loaf of sliced pan.
Brgds
Doc

[Capt Pit Bull]

Lame,

It might be possible to create reliable pilotless passenger aircraft. Personally, I have my doubts. You've only got to look at other areas of technology where the reality doesn't live up to the hype!

As far as the legality / responsibility for aircraft issues goes, I don't claim to be a lawyer however I can tell you that the company ops manual specifically charges me with ensuring that the aircraft is serviceable. Whether that is a realistically achievable objective is another matter, as others have mentioned above.

But to echo the sentiments raised by others, everyones got a part to play and we are only as strong as our weakest link.

As far as the pay differentials go the real problem here is a lack of a decent career path for all kinds of people in the industry, and the unfailing nature of the 'bean counters' to only ever think of 'price' rather than 'value'.

Heres to all of us. I'm off for a pint!

Heres a question for everyone:

How many pilots does it take to change a light bulb?

CPB

[4Rvibes]

In answer to Capt PB's lightbulb question above, the answer is eleven. One to tell a co-pilot to phone the lightbulb engineer and ten to sit around in the dark whining about pay and conditions... ;) :)

[Hand Solo]

No! Good job there's a pilot here to tell you rude mechanicals how it is! The answer is obviously one! He holds the bulb while the world revolves around him! :) :) :)

[lame]

Capt Pit Bull,

I'll drink to that...........


http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guin.gif


Best regards,

"lame"

:D :D :D

[Capt Pit Bull]

Lame,

Excellent!


Everyone:

The answer is none. Why would he bother changing a light bulb when he already thinks the sun shines out of his posterior!

CPB

[Techman]

How come pilots can't sink?.

[Bus429]

Could somebody please email me a pint of one or all of the following?
Greene King IPA or Abbot
Flowers
Pigswill
Fuller's London Pride
Bearskin's Bitter
Bishop's Finger
Failing any of the above, could anyone advise the best way to get rid of this Macromedia thing that keeps flashing up on the screen as I type?


:D :)

[Chris@AirMech]

If you are runnings Windows 98 Try start -> run -> msconfig.

See whats causing it and turn it off.

[Blacksheep]

To those who are bothered by hierachies I recommend the following philosophy:

I don't care who the f*ck you think you are, I'm me and it'll be ready when I'm done, it'll be to the required standard and if you want to argue about it you'd better have all the facts in hand.

I'm off for a pint as well - its your round Pit Bull.

(Bus, is it OK if I e-mail you a pint of Ex? I'm right out of all that Southern muck right now)

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[lame]

Bus429,

Go ahead and instal the Flash 5, it will then disappear........

Best regards,

"lame"

:D

[Multi-X]

Bus 429

How are things in your part of the world? I see you are still not up to speed on the PC.

you must be busy as you have not been winding the pilots up lately. Overpaid, expenese, only 100 hours a month etc.

Have you mellowed in your old age?

[Pen it off!]

Techman,

Is it because their to full of 'HOT AIR' my friend? :p

[Techman]

Pen it off!,

Or because of their inflated egos. :D

[Bus429]

Hey Multi-X,

No haven't mellowed, just busy. Lots to do outside work as well.

Re computer - I find the best way to increase my knowledge is to ask those who know more than me!

Anyway, how is it going? Job safe? :)

[Bus429]

Blacksheep,

I forgot to add your namesake to the list. If you have any Tim Taylors Best or Landlord, that'll do. Bring it round this evening! :D

[Secret Squirrel]

LAME

Small point really but I take issue with your rather naive assertion that aircraft constructors have been spending fortunes on pilotless aircraft, implying that it is for the good of mankind or the benefit of aviation. Let's face it, the only aircraft manufacturers who have been spending any money on this research are military aircraft manufacturers. They do this for one reason only; it's unpopular to lose airmen in wars.

I would challenge you to get on a pilotless aircraft and fly to say, Bolivia, Katmandu or even Innsbruck; now or even in fifty years. It's all very well to keep quoting figures about recent crashes and how they are mostly due to pilot error. What about all those times we do save the day; or even, if I may be so bland as to suggest we do our job so well that we don't have to save the day.

The issue is, really, what single mistake could one engineer make that would cause a catastrophic failure in a major airliner. Most of the power to do so has, due to previous mistakes (as, to a certain extent, with flying admittedly) been eliminated by procedures put in place. To give one example close to my heart we could perhaps mention that on the RJ series aircraft (and probably all multiengined aircraft, I presume) the servicing of the engines has to be staggered. Was that due directly to the queen's flight incident? I admit I don't know, but in any case someone has obviously thought about it.

What I'm driving at is that it's very easy to point fingers but our job is inherently different to yours. You always have the leisure to correct any mistakes that you make. An engineers ability to fault find is matched by a pilot's ability to assess conditions and have a situational (funny, it originally came out as situanal) awareness. The difference is that if at first YOU don't succeed, YOU can try, try again. Need I say that this is not always true for us? There, I've said it!

Also, your job is subject to far less variables than ours is. Something is either broke or it's fixable; if you're not sure, you can change the part anyway to be on the safe side. We call you because we're not allowed to fix the bloody things ourselves.

Whilst we're on the subject of pilotless aircraft, I could turn the argument around on you and say that not only has the technology for designing and building aircraft automatically (or at least with far less input from engineers than before) been around for far longer than the technology to fly them remotely; but also to maintain them.

BUS 429

I've been waiting for you to come and clean my car for a whole year now. I'll leave my shoes in there too, be a love!

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Secret Squirrel ]

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Secret Squirrel ]

[ 23 October 2001: Message edited by: Secret Squirrel ]

[avmech]

Well Secret Squirrel, you are absolutely correct. It most certainly takes MUCH more effort and expertise to accept the uplinked flight plan into the FMS and engage the autopilot at 400' than it does to figure out why the A/C won't accept the uplink or why the FMS doesn't make the autopilot follow the flight plan. Before things get out of hand here, let me say that I have come across many pilots that respected what we do, but unfortunately the vast majority of these "part-timers" are egotistical narcissistic windbags. Might I remind you that you put your pants on the same way everyone else does - one leg at a time. Pilots are no more or less important to operating an airline than the engineers.

[neil_further]

Why build pilotless aircraft when Ryanair and Southwest can charge you to fly them?
If your remotely maintained aircraft is an A320, what the fu*k am I doing out in the rain at 4 am. If it could really fix itself it wouldn’t break in the first place would it.
After a hard day avoiding stationary objects and saving the day with your decision making, or checklist to the rest of us, don’t worry about those who are allowed to fix the bloody things, it all happens automatically now days.

[lame]

Secret Squirrel,

I thought all this had been amicably put to rest? Here we go again........ :rolleyes:

I did NOT say that I was particularly in favour of the idea, OR that I would gladly fly in one........ :rolleyes:

I was at one manufacturer (had better not name names I guess) in the early 1980s and at a different one in the early 1990s. At BOTH of these manufacturers, during talks with their senior engineering people, both groups stated that their personal preference would be to take pilots out of the aircraft, as they are the weakest link nowadays. Both groups also said they were confident that they could build such aircraft, but KNEW that the travelling public would NOT have it.
You would probably find the pilots at these manufacturers would NOT agree, but I didn't get to talk to them.

Now I am truly sorry IF you do NOT believe it, but that is what happened.... :)

Best regards,

"lame"

[Bus429]

Squirrel (funny, I mis-typed it as Squirt first),

I'm a long way from Redhill now!

Where are those beers? :D :p

[Secret Squirrel]

Avmech

You show an incredible lack of awareness for someone from a body of people which claims higher intelligence. You obviously missed my point completely. You have the leisure to figure out why the link doesn't engage, as well as the expertise. You can saunter over to your van and get a book out if you need to. We, on the other hand have to figure it out as well as obeying air traffic, following a profile, getting the aircraft to do what we want, making sure that the checks are done, avoiding obstacles and the ground!. Not that your example is particularly dangerous; I can fly manually and often do. However, the point is that when things go wrong and you are distracted from your usual rythm, this is when things get missed and you may get a snowball effect. As I said before, you only ever get to hear about the times when we get it wrong and if you think about it proportionately in terms of the number of worldwide airborne technical difficulties, I think that we do rather well.

The main reason you don't hear of any engineering related fatalities these days is because it's an easier variable to control and in the main very much a black and white decision process. You're all very competent, I'm sure, but you never feel the pressure like we do sometimes.

All this wasn't said in order to make us seem better than you in any way at all. You have your job and we have ours; neither would have a job without the other but it does rankle a bit when engineers sneer at us quoting accident figures when they couldn't cause a major accident except willfully. In short, humans can't be trusted to do a good job 100% of the time, but in the air it has to be a calculated and accepted risk.

BUS

They're all lined up, ready for you.

[A4-Heliworker]

So much for "the pilots point of view" and all that nonsence spoken recently. This is just a directionless brawl that will have no outcome.

Haven't you got anything better to discuss than some garbage about pilotless aircraft??
I mean, really, the public won't have it even it it was feasable, and it must be some way off considering the crappy little drones the military use are probably cutting edge technology at the moment.

[topman]

Secret Squirrel- just to clarify, the seperation of engine maintenance on the Avro RJ that you mentioned was not put in place as a result of the Queens Flight incident. It was in fact in place prior to that date and was the result of the implementation of prudent engineering practices, back in the very early days of the company's existance. As in any walk of life prudence is king (or Queen).

[Bus429]

Fellow engineers - type carefully and brush up on your spelling and grammar (I expect brick-bats for this one!). People like SS will pick up on it and believe it confirms their notion that they are superior!

Squirrel,

You demonstrate a lack of knowledge concerning the tasks carried out by engineers. Several accidents in the UK and the rest of the world over the last 12 years have proved that engineers are as susceptible to human error as pilots. Engineers, particularly line engineers, work in a very dynamic environment and mistakes do get made. A night transit with a charter airline in the middle of summer will prove how hard they have to work, and think, in the space of an hour (and often on their own). Next time you harrass an engineer by claiming you have a tight slot (!?), consider how responsible his/her task is.
By the way, I'd just like to say I respect politicians more than I respect pilots and that's saying something! :p :D

[Alfredo_Garcia]

To Inspector Gadget and all others engineers:-

Sorry that I've taken so long to make this posting, the thread has only just come to my attention (I've been working hard recently).

The comment I made on the R+N forum regarding engineers was poorly written and didn't portray what I was actually thinking at the time - The Guvnor had wound me up and I should have chosen my words more carefully.

As I said, I have nothing but the utmost respect for all the engineers out there, they are undoubtably part of the front-line team that is essential to the running of all airlines.

What I was trying to say (very poorly) was that the system has placed them below pilot's when it comes to the question of remuneration. That system is flawed in more ways than one. The skill and technical ability of all the engineers I work with is, without a doubt, comparable with that of pilot's (and considerably more in many cases). Apart from the questionable pay increment to compensate for jet-lag, I see no reason why engineers are not paid a similar salary.

Apologies to all - I'll just get my coat.

[Blacksheep]

Not quite so Alfredo old chap. As I have mentioned elsewhere in Aircrew Notices, I calculate that over my working lifetime I will have amassed a greater amount of wealth than the average flying machine operator.

As to pecking orders, one cannot compare Engineering with Operations. For instance, B747 Airline Captains are at the top of a Flight Operations pecking order. Maintenance Engineers (or Technicians or Mechanics as the case may be) who are still plying their trade down on the flight line on night shift are somewhat below the top of the Engineering pecking order. Comparing Pilots to Engineers is really as pointless as comparing apples to oranges. The majority of pilots never get to meet an engineer.

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[Secret Squirrel]

Bus 429

The esteem in which you hold us is well documented on this website. You obviously feel the need to reassure yourself of your convictions at every turn: a bit like some of our straight cabin crew who feel the urge to mention the words 'girlfriend' and 'shag' as often as they can; and preferably in the same sentence!

I never said that engineers don't make mistakes, or that they are not serious. What I said was that the power to make catastrophic mistakes has been all but eliminated. Neither am I so ignorant (in spite of what you may think) as to think you are never under pressure; I'm sure that you do have a tight schedule to keep quite often. So what? If maintenance hits a snag, that's the schedule out of the window, no question; safety first.

Quite how you can equate this style of pressure to ours is beyond me, but there again, I am a pilot and as such not mentally equipped to grasp the finer points of your superior thought processes.

topman

Thankyou for the clarification. I wasn't sure but it does surprise me that the RAF, renowned for their quality and training, should have overlooked such an obvious consideration.

As a final thought, and this is targetted specifically at BUS 429; how many engineers do you know who were airline pilots before? (not including re-incarnations!); I know plenty of pilots who were engineers before. What then, does our profession have that yours doesn't? It's not necessarily the money as Blacksheep has dispelled the myth. So, what do you think, bus. Yawwwwn, do tell me zzzzzzzzzzzz....

[dogs body]

This argument has been going on since Orville Wright's engine dropped a piston ring at Kittyhawk, Its life folks, so why dont we drop this thread and go and get one ;)
Mine's a large Malt & where's the Sheep?

[SchmiteGoBust]

Secret squirrel,
I think one of the main reasons why Engineers become pilots is because pilots are treated with much greater prestige.
Being a pilot is deemed as a much more glamorous lifestyle than being an engineer.
However,as an engineer myself, I have no ambitions to take up flying as a profession. I reserve my private time to flying hang gliders which is exhilarating and keeps me happy. Having been in the flight deck of a passenger jet many times I have no doubt that I would find the job a bit too sedentary for my tastes. :D

[Bus429]

Secret Squirt,

I do know a pilot who became an engineer! :D

[Blacksheep]

Orville and Wilbur were the first pilots to successfully control and fly a practical powered flying machine. Only, however, after first designing and building the machine.

Interestingly, they subsequently considered themselves to be engineers rather than aircrew - the machine's the thing. I've no idea how much the Wright Flyer cost but it was obviously worth it...

**********************************
Through difficulties to the cinema

[A4-Heliworker]

I'll say it again for the hardcore ppruners, who just said a few weeks ago "It's really good to have a pilots point view".

Really. Sounds like we are being put right in our place. This is what pilots think of us. If pprune is a pilots penthouse, then we are in the potting shed at the bottom of the garden.

[Mice]

Only one clarification for Capt Pit Bull.

Here at my current employer, the captain signs for the aircraft, but this is not for the work the engineer does on it, far from it!

He signs for the responsibility for the aircraft. Up to that point, from whence the previous crew signed the incoming log book, we, the lowly serfs actually had the onerous responsibility.

Oh, the number of times I have heard the whinging about this and that that did not work, and all I say to the Captain is :
Just write in the log that you are not willing to take the aircraft and I will happily sit it on the ground and fix it for you.

Only ever had one guy do it, and he was right to as well, but as an engineer, I could not arbitrarily ground it, even if I was not altogether happy with what the previous station had done. Even god has limits it seems.

[Daget]

I know a story about a pilot who thought he would take a plane when the eng told him it need some more checks. The plane was loaded and ready to depart other than one final check, the eng told the pilot what was happening but while the eng was back in the libary the pilot had the doors closed and pushed back and tried to go flying. The eng made a phone call to the tower and told them what had happened the a/c was then refused permission to take off and ordered back to the terminal. The pilot tried to argue that he was happy with the a/c so it was OK but no dice the tower refused him.

I could list many other examples of pilots being told they cant go when they want to and pilots refusing planes engineers have ofered them. its something that goes both ways we double check each other for departures its a fail safe system we both can stop an a/c from departing its the safe way.

Unfortunatly a pilots view often changes depending on the destination hes going to or if his friends are on staff travel. After all we are all human thats why we have the systems there.

[Coriolis]

Secret Squirrel:
"If maintenance hits a snag, that's the schedule out of the window, no question; safety first"

If only life were that simple 'twould indeed be easy... and I'm not going to burst into song about how that shows your lack of knowledge of how the engineer works....

It's very simple really...since the whole world is now run by accountants, and we are all paid (even if unequally) we can be totally confident that we are ALL needed, otherwise we would not be employed - the bean counters will only pay for that which is totally indispensable, from FMS down to the weedkiller for the runway cracks.

Anybody else agree that this has now been talked to death and hasn't a cat in hell's chance of resolution?

:D

[wasteofcargospace]

The reason engineers become pilots is often for an easier life, I know, that's why I did a CPL. As a licensed engineer I was tired of long hours and hard work and my life ruled by an ever ringing mobile phone. As a pilot you can go home and forget about work and not worry about the company calling you in at 2am even though you have already worked 80 hours that week.
It is very unfair that captains are paid more than engineers, as I know from personal experience that it is far harder to gain an engineering licence than a pilot licence.
The ATPL was a breeze compared to the engineering licences I hold.

[The Weasel]

Ever considered this point: As an engineer, becoming insulin dependant diabetic has not cost me my career. It is annoying that I am not allowed in fuel tanks and not allowed to drive airside, but I have not lost any pay. What if a pilot gets this, or one of many other illnesses. It won't be an ADD for him/her. It will more than likely mean a career change. Perhaps this vulnerability warrants a higher level of pay to encourage people to become pilots.

[Secret Squirrel]

WCS

Can't argue with your point about forgetting about work when you go home. However, that raises another point, that of the amount of time you spend away from home. Even many SH companies now send their pilots away for tours of up to five days to say nothing of the amount of time the LH boys 'n' gals spend away sometimes.

I think that this subject is done to death every so often. We are arguing cross purposes here: from your post I take it that your stance is that remuneration should be based on academic achievement. I am absolutely sure that it takes far more study to become an engineer than it does to become a commercial pilot. However, I believe it should be based on responsibility and accountability. Also, captains don't come out of a CAP 509 course with 210 hours under their belt. Let's face it the types of salaries you are talking about are senior captains on jumbos and 777's. People who have been waiting up to 17 years to get there. Sure, there are charter companies who pay their captains a fair whack, but I wouldn't want their job, at least not the SH side of it!

Then of course there is the precariousness of the job. You have the instance of the chap who was initially sacked for ridiculing a scaremongering racist pax (admittedly doing it on the PA was a bit unnecessary!). Not to mention the various health problems that can get you grounded as mentioned above.

No, we don't get calls out of hours because we have strict laws on rest periods and duty times which the CAA have seen fit to impliment. We have to abide by them or risk losing our licences. If you had genuine concerns about the quality of your work due to lack of rest, then it is up to you (as a body) to make those concerns known and make a case for introducing restrictions.

Instead of beating us down and bleating about how good we get it, why don't you make a case for improved conditions for yourselves? The wonderful thing about capitalism is that it is self regulating and you makes your choices and takes your chances.

[ 06 November 2001: Message edited by: Secret Squirrel ]

[prenders]

Secret squirrel in his last paragraph makes some sense. The reason that flight crew have their ivory tower is that as a body they have a very strong identity. Most companies think twice about taking their flight crews on over any issue. Why do you think there has been very little news on the pain flight crews are taking while engineers are loosing overtime, allowances, pay and even jobs. Pay is set by market forces but status is decided by the strength of your bargaining position. If it were different then certifiers would have First Officer status, at least. This is not such a ridiculous suggestion when you consider the contribution a certifier makes to an airlines operation. The reason we don't is that our representative body is not strong or cohesive enough to bring pressure. We even have cabin crew and in flight beauticians as members now. Secret squirrel has a point when he sayes we need to take this issue in hand as a body, and force our status higher. Your thoughts please.