Urgent Help please

[abovetheclouds]

I have just been released from service on a Twin piston aircraft, When I had my interview a few months ago I was current I was also current when I was offered the Job but wasn't given a definite start date. I started with the company a few weeks ago, but my license is now not current my MEL or IR, I did not tell the company on my first day. Do they have the right to sack me without pay or could I go to the small claims court as I was current in my Interview. I did also fly with a check pilot
Any thoughts on this would be a great help.

Rgds
ATC

[Kit d'Rection KG]

released from service

I think that means sacked..?

:ugh:

My advice? Quit posting here for a while, hope that the people who know who you are forget you, and that intelligent folk don't check up on your 'other posts', then come back after a while with another user name.

Oh, and if you're going to play clever with your employers, get ready for a very rough ride in your aviation career (which may, in fact, already be over).

[kwachon]

I concur with Kit, I think you may have blown it. Surely you knew what you were doing would result in serious problems if you got caught.

At the end of the day, you are responsible for your own currency whether you are a PPL, CPL or ATPL, you have a duty to inform your employer of your status:*.

[SNS3Guppy]

You're going to take the employer to court for what?

When each subsequent employer looks back over your employment history, how excited do you suppose they'll be when they find you've sued a former employer? How much do you think that will help your prospects down the line.

You haven't detailed much of your information, but if you intend to move beyond small light piston twins, then each job you work right now should have one goal in mind...to get experience and get a good recommendation for the next job.

I understand what you're saying; you hired on as current, and lost currency while waiting.

This spring I interviewed for a position in a turboprop. I was flying a turbojet, and current in the turbojet. However, the agency doing the interviewing used a rented piston twin to do a checkride as part of the interview. I hadn't flown a piston twin for some time. I hadn't used the types of charts they were using. I showed up a couple of days early, bought the necessary charts, rented the same type piston twin and an instructor, and got dual prepatory to the interview. I passed with flying colors.

In the meantime, if you're not current do what you can. If you're out of work, you may not be able to rent airplanes, but you can get access to computer simulators, anything at all to keep a scan going. You can study and prepare, and above all be honest and open with the employer.

I can't imagine that the employer fired you for not being current, as that's n easy thing to fix. I suspect that we're not hearing the entire story.

[carbonfibre]

Looking back at the posts, sounds like the owner of the most dodgy outfit in air taxi work known to man !!!

[No Country Members]

When each subsequent employer looks back over your employment history, how excited do you suppose they'll be when they find you've sued a former employer? How much do you think that will help your prospects down the line.



Ridiculous to rule out a case against an employer (assuming good grounds, which appears to be in dispute here) on this basis. I can hear thousands of dead union men turning in their graves. If there is a principal, stand by it. That said, I suspect you are in reality, right about the fallout later. Sad indictment on justice in this country!

Why didn't you tell your new employer that you were not current? Have you flown therefore, without the necessary ratings? If so, I fail to see how you would have a case against them.

Do they have the right to sack me without pay or could I go to the small claims court as I was current in my Interview

At the interview did they at least have sight of your license and rating? Better still did they take copies for their files (they should)? Whilst I take the point that it is your responsibility to be current, it is theirs too to ensure flight crew remain in current training and qualification. However why did you not tell them? An oversight?

I think that the calls in the posts above that your career is over are a bit previous. Calm down!


I can't imagine that the employer fired you for not being current, as that's n easy thing to fix. I suspect that we're not hearing the entire story.


Agreed.

[abovetheclouds]

I bought a rating for a C550 a few years ago as I have reasonably low time, at the time I was hoping to go with a company such as eagle jet and built hours but my money ran out, this position I needed to recoup my expenditure, with the current pilot market I didn't want to loose this chance so when asked about my currencies I skirted around it I was hoping to get renewed once I had some money, safe to say I did not get that far, I did fly on 3 occasions which I presume is why I have been sacked.

Rgds
ATC

[kwachon]

"when asked about my currencies I skirted around it I was hoping to get renewed once I had some money, safe to say I did not get that far, I did fly on 3 occasions which I presume is why I have been sacked."

I think you have said it all. Case closed.:(

[abovetheclouds]

Does it make a difference this was not an AOC operator it was a private owner who has 3 different aircraft it is not as if I cant fly the aircraft I just needed a little more time I do think it was a little harsh to sack me under the circumstances.

Rgds
ATC

[buzzc152]

For clarity, are you saying you flew 3 times with lapsed licenses or they have now lapsed so you can no longer fly ?
I can't understand why you haven't been honest with them from the outset. People understand how expensive it can be to remain current, I'm sure you could have come to some arrangement. If it were my current company (twin pistons also), we would have sorted it out straight away with no hard feelings...... it would be in our own best interests to do so.
Makes no difference if it's AOC or not............ you are an employee and pilot with certain responsibilities.
There's a life lesson here, perhaps learnt the hard way. Be 100% upfront and honest from the outset. If not it WILL come back and bite you.

[abovetheclouds]

No it was lapsed when I was flying, but I was not flying PIC I was flying with another pilot, in my defense when asked about my FAA CPL for the C550 flying I did after being asked come clean that it was only a ppl this is what I think led to the full checks being made. With the cost of gaining more hours how are we supposed to keep current and get a job when everywhere asks for more experience it seems to be catch 22.

Rgds
ATC

[kwachon]

"asked about my FAA CPL for the C550 flying I did after being asked come clean that it was only a ppl "

Seems to me that you have been "somewhat frugal" with the truth with your employers to say the least. Look at it from his/Insurance company point of view.

I would suggest you take a good look at yourself and formulate a plan (legal) whereby you can earn some money in order to go back and get current again. Problem is, in the aviation world, a known problem pilot becomes a pariah in no time. I fear you have already gone down that path. Perhaps it is time for a career change.:suspect:

[Kit d'Rection KG]

No Country Members wrote

I think that the calls in the posts above that your career is over are a bit previous

May I say that I'm very much hoping that they were right on the money.

People with this sort of crass judgement and willingness to hide the truth will find themselves as welcome in aviation as a nasty case of the clap at a swingers' convention.

[Flintstone]

abovetheclouds.


I don't know how to put this nicely but you've really done yourself no favours here. While I'm always a firm believer in not passing judgement without the full story your version thus far paints a less than flattering picture.

Do yourself a favour and stop digging. Put it behind you, try again and for Christ's sake don't even think about doing something like this again.

[kwachon]

The phrase "By hook or by crook" comes to mind, It is clear you have been less than honest with your employer and I fear this trait will continue.

Aviation has no place for pilots (this term used lightly in your case) who acted in the manner that you did and never will. Leopards never change their spots as the saying goes....For the betterment of all I suggest you stay out of aviation and take a good look at what government institutions may have in store for you should you continue on your present path.

[Flintstone]

A bit harsh kwachon.

A wise one once told me "Son. The most dangerous thing in aviation is an untested assumption" and I think we all agree there's more to this than we've been told.

On the face of it (and I really would like more information before reaching my own conclusion) he's been stupid but who knows what led him to it? We don't that's for sure. Whatever it was I'd say there's a valuable lesson here and his career is salvageable. Scary forecasts of him being doomed to menial jobs for the rest of his natural are unwarranted although I'd say he wouldn't have many chances left.

Can we knock the melodrama on the head?

[kwachon]

Flintstone, I think as more facts come out it becomes clearer that the intent was far from honorable here, whether it was to get current or not. What if a member of your family was onboard the aircraft and god forbid something happened, what then?, I for one do not need an individual of this kind in the right seat of my aircraft, there are many others myself included who went through all the hoops legally to get to where they are now and this kind of behaviour does none of us any favours. Harsh yes, real yes, but true.

[His dudeness]

Quote Flintstone: "On the face of it (and I really would like more information before reaching my own conclusion) he's been stupid but who knows what led him to it? We don't that's for sure. Whatever it was I'd say there's a valuable lesson here and his career is salvageable. Scary forecasts of him being doomed to menial jobs for the rest of his natural are unwarranted although I'd say he wouldn't have many chances left."
Sums it up, IMO.
@ATC: I was and am chiefpilot in 2 different operations, and what I fear most is dishonesty. i cant cope with e.g. a dented radome, but I would hate to learn the hard way (e.g. during takeoff) that someone overtorqued my engine and it comes apart therefore.
And thats why IMO honesty MUST be part of your nature. We can just hope you learned something from that. Seeing the court is IMO the worst thing you could now, Aviation is a small world - no one will touch you even with protective gear if you sue someone that sacked you with good cause...

Still, as a colleaugue and not a jugde, I hope you can get a decent job in some other place and learn from what just happened.

[Flintstone]

kwachon, we still don't have the whole story. Aviation has taught me to seek out ALL the facts before pointing fingers. It may well be as you describe but if I arrive at that conclusion it will be when/if I have all the information, not by joining dots.

What if my family had been on board? You mean realistically or in a Daily Mail fashion? Realistically I suppose the flight would have concluded safely (as I assume all three did) albeit under the guidance of an illegal pilot.

Would I have been happy? Of course not but neither would I have been wringing my hands, moaning "Wailey wailey" and telling all concerned they'd never work in this industry again.

Never bust a rule yourself? Ever? Honestly?

[No Country Members]

The call to knock the melodrama on the head was well founded. The original question was can the employer be taken to court? Short answer from what has been said is: no.

Someone above suggested it would be a foolish move to contemplate court action, and I would have to agree. Head down, get current, move on, and being honest in future seems to be good advice, however much it hurts at the time.

By the way, I knew a chap once who flew with a lapsed rating, which was due to a genuine oversight rather than desire to deceive. He decided, on realising what had happened, he must own up to the authorities, and whilst a letter came back rapping knuckles firmly and squarely, no further action was taken, and he continues to fly now, perfectly safely I might add, without further incident.

[abovetheclouds]

The fact is that even though I was not current I did fly in the right hand seat on which would normally be flown by a single pilot, I have now removed these hours from my log book, shouldn't I still get paid at least as a pilot assistant I turned up for the job which costs money, I should be entitled to something or not.

Rgds
ATC

[No Country Members]

I would say not. Deceiving your employer about something of this nature probably constitutes grounds for summary dismissal. Why should they pay you for doing something you were not qualified to do, when they thought that you were?

[Legalapproach]

You do not want to go anywhere near a court with this claim. I suspect that a court would decide that there was an implied representation that you were and would remain qualified to carry out the job and that would include currency/current medical etc.

If at the time you applied for the job or at interview you knew that you were not current or might not be current (I assume this from your comment that you skirted around the issues) you could be guilty of the criminal offence of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception (Section 16 (2) (c) Theft Act 1968). In such circumstances you would not be entitled to be paid for the job and no civil court would enforce payment by your erstwhile employer.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

ATC,

I'll try to be kind...

We now know quite a lot about you - not much of it very impressive.

A good number of people who are involved in recruiting will now be vaguely aware that there's a pilot who's got an FAA PPL with a C550 rating (and that's not a combination you see very often in candidates for employment), whose MEP and IR ran out in September or October or thereabouts, who's probably in the south of the UK, and is interested in BFC and LEA, and is looking for work. (If some of this is not completely on the money doesn't matter, it's a starting point for someone to build doubts on).

You've probably already sent CVs out to various places with bits of information which might jive with the above.

You've outed yourself here in an appallingly poorly-judged manner, and folk who recruit (including some very close to me who are looking for people like you to take on at the moment) are now forearmed. :cool:

For heaven's sake, you've made a string of errors of judgement, you've demonstrated that you need to make some huge changes in yourself before you're fit to be involved in commercial aviation, STOP DIGGING THE HOLE! :=

[abovetheclouds]

The C550 rating is on my JAR f/atpl, That is not Current either, are you now trying to say that because of my post LEA or BFC would not give me a job, I'm actually based in the north of England just thought of moving south away from where my last employer is based. I was just looking for advice on the matter

[Flintstone]

ATC.
Seriously, drop this. You're doing yourself no favours. Just take the lesson learned and let it die.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Surely this must be a wind-up... :cool:

LEA or BFC would not give me a job

No, I'm saying that any company who worked out who you are wouldn't even open the door to you. And you're making it genuinely astonishingly easy to work it all out.

No-one capable of outing themselves so publicly could be intelligent enough to get a licence... :uhoh:

Here's a thought...

(Deep breath)

ATC, could you post your real name and address just to remove any shadow of doubt? :yuk:

[abovetheclouds]

I made a mistake I have done things I should not have I have been caught I am not stupid I just need to recoup some money, it started as a simple question even though I was not current should I still get paid as pilot assistant. Can You say that you have not made any mistakes, once in the situation and flying it was hard to come clean thats all. We all try so hard to get the jobs then when you get it due to what was an over sight in the begining it is easier to just avoid it and get current as soon as possible I know I should have come clean.

Rgds
ATC

[SNS3Guppy]

Abovetheclouds,

I'm not from the UK or EU, so smoe of the terminology here I don't understand completely. You've indicated that you weren't current. From my perspective, that means you lacked six instrument approaches and three landings. However, other comments here suggest it's actually considered to be a lapsed rating...what does that mean in the UK?

No it was lapsed when I was flying, but I was not flying PIC I was flying with another pilot, in my defense when asked about my FAA CPL for the C550 flying I did after being asked come clean that it was only a ppl this is what I think led to the full checks being made. With the cost of gaining more hours how are we supposed to keep current and get a job when everywhere asks for more experience it seems to be catch 22.


You appear to be suggesting that the only way to get job is to lie or cheat your way into the assignment. You also appear to have misrepresented your level of certification (allowing the employr to believe you held commercial FAA certification when it was only a private??). Further, you appear comfortable with the idea that you would have allowed this deception to continue if you had not been caught with "full checks," and that it would have been justified by your overcoming the "catch 22."

If indeed this is the case, then you have bigger problems than a single employer rejecting you. You have yourself as your own worst enemy.

You stated that it wasn't your deception that got you fired; it was your flying. This brings up an additional concern. You still haven't stated why you were fired, and you give the impression (by being vague) that you don't know. I don't believe this; you know the entire story, we're not getting it, and you're not willing to share it. You know exactly why you lost your job. You've alluded to the idea that you lost it based on performance, rather than the deception (which would be sufficient grounds for termination all other factors not withstanding).

You can probably file a law suit over nearly everything. In the US, it would be a law suit for wrongful termination, and wouldn't hold much water because such employment is considered "at-will," where you can quit any time, and the employer can let you go at any time.

Perhaps the best you can hope for at this stage is to quietly move on, and let this short employment disappear from your history. You'd be better off showing yourself unemployed during this period, than allowing this brief interlude to paint a picture of you to former employers. Of course given your lack of concern thus far for truth in representation, I suspect you will have no problem with that.

[Stan Woolley]

What a bunch of self-righteous replies!
It seems to me the kid was more naieve than criminal.
It happens the other way around all the time!

Here's a post from this very forum a few days ago..........where are the indignant replies to this? :ugh:

'Worked my notice period, successful references taken up etc..was fairly positive and as helpful as possible and then on the very day due to start... job offer was withdrawn without any explanation

Salary was around 82K plus car and usual benefits (LOL, death in service.etc) had a very strong impression that the principal "micro-managed" and interfered with the entire operation from start to finish'

[Kit d'Rection KG]

ATC wrote:

Can You say that you have not made any mistakes
I've certainly never tried to commit professional suicide with anything like the enthusiasm you're applying to the task!

Guppy offered:

Of course given your lack of concern thus far for truth in representation, I suspect you will have no problem with that

...and I'd advise ATC to bear in mind that from this day onwards, for the rest of his career (if he has one), there's the real risk of someone finding out who he is, what he's done, and how he's been dishonest. You wouldn't believe the dirt that some people, from Chairmen of airlines to senior civil servants to folk who clean the bogs, have in their pasts. I personally know one individual who would, if the truth were to come out, not only lose his job, but very likely face jail, over things that he hopes have been 'covered up' through judicious changes of name by deed poll and the like.

Stan, while your forgiving nature is, on the face of it, commendable, are you really saying that lying about your qualifications in order to fly professionally is just a matter of being 'naive'? Are all those hours studying air law just so much wasted time?

How will this naive young pilot tackle being asked to take an aeroplane with unresolved defects outside the MEL, or being persuaded to cover a flight when he's already had a beer, or being approached to pick a few folk up and drop them off somewhere quiet without immigration knowing, for a fat roll of used notes?

Perhaps your 'case study' is simply ATC several years down the line, and the boss simply found out about his previous misdemeanours just in time to get rid of a problem before it started?

Finally...

Guppy, I'm getting the impression that his MEP and IR were expired, so he needed much more than a few approaches...

Conclusion

The sky is a better place without this character and his like in it, in my opinion.

[PicMas]

.... You are supposed to get a fat roll of used notes for that work description?
Could've used that information a little earlier in my career.
On a more serious note, have you considered finding a shady flight school to do the renewal and then backdate it?
Or scan similar documentation and "improve" it in photoshop.
A few years ago I nearly flew into a mountain during bad weather, had a new pilot with me for company indoc. he had a logbook full of hours. Never met anybody with such weak skills, set the navaids up - I never checked so basically it was my own fault - not checking was my fault, trusting a colleague to perform a simple task was too, I guess. Turns out he flew the aircraft for about 250hours and the pen for about 1,000...
Which employer would not prefer you to notify them about currency issues?!?
And why did they decide to do a full check??

[Stan Woolley]

Kit d'

I'm not that forgiving,I just don't know the whole story.The only thing I would say is that I would be much more tolerant if he is young.


How will this naive young pilot tackle being asked to take an aeroplane with unresolved defects outside the MEL, or being persuaded to cover a flight when he's already had a beer, or being approached to pick a few folk up and drop them off somewhere quiet without immigration knowing, for a fat roll of used notes?

Perhaps your 'case study' is simply ATC several years down the line, and the boss simply found out about his previous misdemeanours just in time to get rid of a problem before it started?


Paragraph 1) These would be employers requests/demands I take it? The same people who scrutinise your CV with a fine tooth comb!

Paragraph 2)Don't offer the guy the job until you've done your own homework. If you do have grounds to sack him at least have the decency to let him know why, especially after he has resigned and worked his notice.

Point is I may well rather hang out with atc than the owners of many companies I've worked for.

If you're a honest decent employer then you have my great respect.My experience is that they are in reality few and far between in this business.

[Flintstone]

I'm not that forgiving,I just don't know the whole story.The only thing I would say is that I would be much more tolerant if he is young.


At last, someone less pious than the Pope.

Would those at the back form a queue, slip on the wings and haloes http://www.pistonheads.com/inc/images/angel.gif and hop on here http://mail.flat3.org/b3ta/bandwagon.jpg

[kwachon]

What is interesting about this thread is, that as it gets further along and our young pilot (sic) offers more replies and excuses, another little snippet of information pops out. Now this may be just through sheer stupidity, guilt or ignorance, it does however continue to support the case that this individual cannot be trusted and has lied up until now.

Or, this could all be a hoax, I am not sure, read again his proffers, could all this be a game to wind up as many folks as possible?.

[SNS3Guppy]

Guppy, I'm getting the impression that his MEP and IR were expired, so he needed much more than a few approaches...


Pardon my ignorance; I presume you mean multi engine privileges and instrument rating? I'm not familiar with the UK policies, but instrument currency in the US is 6 appraches in 6 months with tracking and holding, and it never expires. If one goes past six months, one has six months more in which to do the approaches, or one must pass an instrument competency check...not a big deal at all. For multi engine privileges, it's merely three landings in 90 days. Multi privileges and type ratings never expire.

I'm just trying to understand the situation better. Has the individual in question flown with expired certificates for which no privilege is available, or was he simply out of currency with respect to recent landings, approaches, etc?

[unablereqnavperf]

Gentlemen please stop being so gracious, this individual has lied and cheated and now wants to sue the company that caught him out! He clearly has no moral fibre and therefore has no place in aviation! Sure we all make mistakes but he has actually got into an aircraft and flown it in the clear understanding that he was not qualified to be there. He then broadcasts this fact on pprune. Naieve maybe stupid definatley!

Let this idiots problem be an example to all those others that think buying a type rating is an easy way to a quick job, because if you cannot afford to keep it current you cannot afford the rating!

Honesty,persevereance and good charecter are what I look for when recruiting this individual by his own admission has none of these!

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Guppy,

The situation here is very different. Without going into the technicalities:

To keep my MEP privileges on one type of multi piston, for commercial transport, I must do a test lasting about an hour and a half every year, plus another shorter test (usually about 40 minutes) six months through the year, plus a line check every year, plus a right seat check lasting about 25 minutes twice a year to keep my training privileges current. :hmm:

Once the year expires, there are no privileges until the test is passed again. :)
That adds up to 4 check rides and a line check each year. As I fly and train on three types of multi piston, as well as a medium jet, I end up doing an amazing amount of time being checked! :\

You can learn more in LASORS (on the web).

Perhaps you're thinking of MEP/IR privileges for private flying, which are slightly, though only slightly, different..?

[Flintstone]

Regardless of what ATC's saying now too many people here are quick to crucify others on the basis of a snippet of information, a crumb, a partial story. Prophecies of doom, holier than thouness (made up word), the glare from the haloes is blinding.

Everyone but everyone deserves a second chance and I'll bet there's not one person on here who can say hand on heart they've not had one. I've no time for cheats and liars either but I like to think I can hold back on the condemnation until I know the full story. It's akin flying an approach with half the plate missing.

I notice I never got an answer to my question "Never broken a rule?".

[No Country Members]

Flinstone, hear hear, and the Pope Pious post very funny, you have not lost your touch!

I'll answer your question: YES. But I ain't tellin' which rule, or when.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Flintstone,

I'm guessing that you're not aware that the man who said...

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"

...was one Douglas Bader. Certainly a man who had his faults, but in this respect he was absolutely spot on. Some rules, however, such as those that say "don't lie about your qualifications to get a job flying an aeroplane" do not deserve the flexible treatment which Douglas suggests...

[kwachon]

Spot on Kit. Could not have said it better. Pass the popcorn, this can only get better...

[SNS3Guppy]

Perhaps you're thinking of MEP/IR privileges for private flying, which are slightly, though only slightly, different..?


No. Presumably MEP means multi engine privileges. I hold an FAA ATPL, which has no expiration, nor do any FAA multi engine privileges. FAA instrument currency is as described, 6 approaches in 6 months, with holding, and tracking of a course logged (soon to be changed somewhat). Formerly a requirement existed for 6 hours of instrument time every 6 months, but this was dropped several years ago.

For multi privileges, the recency of experience requirement is only category and class specific (airplane, multi engine land), and involves landings...three takeoffs and landings (at night for night privileges, to a full stop).
If one wants those privileges under charter or airline regulations, additional requirements apply, but that's about it. No expiration dates at all.
If I understand correctly, then; the original poster arrived with expired pilot certificates and was unable to fly at all?

Regardless of what ATC's saying now too many people here are quick to crucify others on the basis of a snippet of information, a crumb, a partial story.


We can only respond with what ATC provides us. ATC has made the decision to supply only part of the story, and let us not forget that he came here looking for counsel on taking a former employer to court. He sought that counsel based on misinformation; he deceived his employer, and attempted to deceive us, too. As we act only upon what is provided, and ATC only provided a partial story particular to what he wanted us to hear (and has refused to provide all the story), we can safely conclude that if any crucifixion has taken place, ATC has crucified himself.

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"

...was one Douglas Bader.


Douglas Bader was one of my heroes as a kid. He still is.

[His dudeness]

Quote Flintstone:
I notice I never got an answer to my question "Never broken a rule?".
I did, I did! - do I get a chocolate bar now ?

[Flintstone]

I'm guessing that.............
BUZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!! You guessed wrong Kit. I'm well aware of the quote and the man himself having read a fair bit about and by him.

Your guess (or untested assumption) is a classic example of what I wrote earlier about people here being prepared to express opinions and pass sentence without knowing the full story. You guessed I'm not aware of the quote just as some people ****-canned ATC from the off on the basis of a partial story. I'm fairly sure that we still don't know all the details either.

Breaking rules and making wild guesses have as much place in aviation as each other. I'm curious though as to which rules exactly you're happy to break? That's assuming you agree with Bader? I'll lay the question open to kwachon too as he's in close agreement with you.

Which rules, specifically, are you prepared to break in aviation? Please tell me you only mean those which prevent you from protecting your aircraft, passengers and self in an emergency.

His dudeness. I've a Kit-Kat, Mars, Hershey bar or Snickers. Which would you like? NCR, you get second dibs though I've just found a Creme Egg covered in fluff down the back of the sofa you can have.:p

[abovetheclouds]

Listen, I have given the full story the reason extra checks were made is that one of the other pilots had an I.R renewal and was under the understanding that the MEP was renewed the same time it turned out that it had not then everyone was checked up, I made a mistake I just wanted to know if I should make a claim for some payment, I didn't ask to be told I made a mistake I already Know this why does every one judge instead of just giving advice. Is everyone so self obsessed they are all perfect and don't make mistakes.

Rgds
ATC

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Flintstone,

I guessed wrong. Big deal. :cool:

Which rules, specifically, are you prepared to break in aviation?

Fascinating topic for a paper, or lecture, or new way of analysing regulation (genuinely, there might be mileage in this given the western 'problem' with pilots stepping outside the rules). Lots of research required. Not cheap. :p

Your guess (or untested assumption) is a classic example of what I wrote earlier about people here being prepared to express opinions and pass sentence without knowing the full story

No, it was a guess in a thread on a web forum; I said so with clarity. Back in your box! :cool:

By the way, how did a creme egg get down the back of your sofa? Must have been some night! :ugh:

ATC,

We've judged you because you've given us all the evidence we need to secure a <<PPRuNE conviction>>.

I made a mistake

No, a mistake is a specific type of human error - google it if you want to know more. Your actions amounted to much, much, more.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

By the way, [free advice alert] if you synchronize your IR renewals with your MEP renewals you'll save time and money, but end up with slightly longer check rides once a year. :hmm:

[kwachon]

Flintstone, I am not going to get into it with you as that is not the reason for writing. The point of all the exchanges was not breaking the rules, but telling lies with regard to qualifications and currency and trying to sue when he got caught. Enough said.

[Flintstone]

I guessed wrong. Big deal.Yep. You guessed wrong, used that incorrect guess to suggest that I pay blind obeisance to 'rules', inferred that I am a fool for doing so and now submit a ':cool:' in place of an apology for your misplaced sleight. How........interesting.

Fascinating topic for a paper, or lecture, or new way of analysing regulation (genuinely, there might be mileage in this given the western 'problem' with pilots stepping outside the rules). Lots of research required. Not cheap. Except I'm not asking for such research. I'm merely asking you, Kit, who expound the acceptability of breaking rules to clarify which rules you would break. It costs nothing but a few seconds of your time. Come now, if you can find the time to educate ATC as to the error of his ways and me, mine surely you can afford to clarify which rules you will/would/do break?

No, it was a guess in a thread on a web forum; I said so with clarity. Back in your box! A (bad) guess, like others. At least you're consistent. My box? Really? How arrogant.

Flintstone, I am not going to get into it with you as that is not the reason for writing. So let me clarify this. It's ok for you to pronounce sentence on ATC on the basis of something he wrote here but when I ask you to clarify which rules you would/will/do break (you admitted as much by your 'could not have put it better myself' comment) you're suddenly all coy? Come, come. No need for such shyness. We're all friends here.

Answer the question please. Both of you. I'm all intrigued now.

[kwachon]

"It's ok for you to pronounce sentence on ATC on the basis of something he wrote here"

Seems like you are getting all screwed up here Flintstone. Please advise when, where and what rules I have broken seeing as you seem to know everything about me, failing that quit stirring the pot when there is nothing to stir!.

[Flintstone]

kwachon.

Kit wrote "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men" to which you added " Spot on Kit. Could not have said it better.".

I merely asked which rules need not be obeyed whereupon Kit backpedalled at olympic speed behind a smokescreen of waffle about an expensive survey being required while your defense mechanism kicked in with "Why don't you....?".

At this point I could ask you both again, press you for an answer, labour the point but then you'd become too distracted to learn the lesson here which is that it's not nice being backed into a corner by someone selectively quoting out of context, is it? A little unpleasant being denounced in front of your peers? Uncomfortable being picked on in public?

Maybe next time you'll remember that before coming down on someone with a <<PPRuNE conviction>>.:rolleyes:

Here endeth the lesson.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

It costs nothing but a few seconds of your time

No, you asked me which rules exactly you're happy to break? and to answer your question properly would require an analysis of my view of every rule in every situation. I still think this would be a fascinating exercise, though a very time-consuming one. [What do you consider amounts to a 'rule', in any case?]

Classification of rules by pilot interpretation would also be interesting:

As a starter I'd suggest that there are:

1. Some inconvenient rules which are routinely 'broken', without consequence (delaying entering a minor defect into the Tech Log until return to base);

2. Some unworkable rules (never use a mobile phone on the ground engines running);

3. Many unknown or misunderstood rules (temperature corrections to approach minima are hardly ever applied);

4. Some rules which inspire obedience in fear of prosecution (low flying);

5. Some which inspire obedience in fear of catastrophe (flight in IMC below MSA).

Then we'd have to consider the motives for disobedience and the inevitable risk/benefit analysis which takes place when an individual makes such an assessment...

But given that you wrote used that incorrect guess to suggest that I pay blind obeisance to 'rules', inferred that I am a fool for doing so

...which doesn't make sense, and isn't what I said or inferred at all, I fear that (to misquote a famous line from a film we'll all know), your keyboard is writing cheques that your argument can't cash... ;)

[Flintstone]

which doesn't make sense

It makes perfect sense if you take into account the whole of Bader's quote ie, in context (ooh, look. There's that phrase again). I'm sorry if you can't grasp that.

Waffling on now about classification of rules is merely an attempt to drag the thread further off topic. When your turn comes (as it surely will in some way, shape or form) let's hope for your sake those around you are more understanding.

[kwachon]

Flintstone, perhaps you should look at your own comments before judging others and quit spouting that sanctimonious crap about breaking rules.

Glass houses and throwing stones comes to mind!.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Flintstone,

If I ever need to infer or opine that you're a fool, I shall do so with clarity! You may not be a fool, but you're certainly foolish, if you can't see that, in fact, I simply mis-guessed that you didn't know the origin of the quote.

Indeed, I contradicted Bader's tenet by suggesting that some rules are not simply for guidance. In that respect, Bader was wrong, though his statement stands very well as a guiding principle for the informed thinker.

When your turn comes (as it surely will in some way, shape or form) let's hope for your sake those around you are more understanding.

What, my turn to lie about my qualifications? That's not a foolish act, it's stupidity at the least. Lying about your qualifications and then broadcasting the facts to all and sundry (in righteous indignation), here, is a step further still. I really can't understand why you're banging on trying to defend someone who's put forward such a story of deceit...

[No Country Members]

Cheers, Flinstone, I'll take the cream egg. They're bound to improve with age. Just like my good self. http://www.barryboys.co.uk/phpBB2/images/smiles/drunken_smilie.gif

[Flintstone]

kwachon. Did I say I'd never broken a rule? Please try to focus.

Kit. So touchy. I never said you would lie about your qualifications. Feel free to quote me if I did. The suggestion (as you well know) was that at some point we all need to be heard before being condemned. Those of you issueing "<<PPRuNe conviction>>"s would do well to remember that.

My point was that you were very quick, too quick, to sanction someone. The waffle about surveys and the suggestion I was accusing you of breaking rules were merely your reactions to being put on the spot, something you were quite prepared to do to ATC early on but were clearly uncomfortable with yourselves. kwachon's accusation of my being sanctimonious bent the needle on my irony-o-meter and that goes all the way up to 11.:rolleyes:

If the lesson here escapes you then I guess there's no hope.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Flintstone,

Not touchy, nor in need of any lessons from you, thanks. :uhoh:

And rather set in my opinion that my reaction to ATC's first post in this thread was completely on the money. :D

I'm not uncomfortable with anything I've done in an aircraft, thanks. Sometimes I've done the 'wrong' thing, but to err is human, and the 'system' is set up to permit errors. Sometimes I've broken 'rules', perhaps, but never big ones, and never without good cause. :O

And if there's no hope then I'm just glad that as a hopeless case I have such a smashing job!!! :ok:

[Runway Wide]

So apart from all of the stories about rule breaking right/wrong and so on........has anyone worked out if this "pilot" is still working....and where?
Did he claim?
New business in Outer Mongolia might be recruiting?

[abovetheclouds]

No I do not fly besides I only have around 253 hours total including 126 M/E and in December I will be 36 so with getting caught with my ratings issue and low time does anyone think I will get a job or is it time to move away from aviation. :*

Rgds
ATC

[Runway Wide]

The problem is that it could be my family on board with a pilot with no ratings, low experience and presume no insurance.

Heard a rumour and think I know who you are............

Go get a life somewhere else OR sort out ratings and get experience before you take passengers.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

I am confident that I also now know who you are.

You made a huge error of judgement.

Professional pilots need to prove themselves trustworthy.

You're not.

Your posts here prove that you lack the ability to judge the right course of action.

Time to give up flying. The professional flying world has already given up on you.

:sad:

[Duck Rogers]

Ok fellas, point made. If you've any more to say to the OP please do it by private message.


Duck.