mytravel pilot loses appeal

[ayrprox]

The BBC are reporting that Pablo Mason, the MYT capt. who allowed footballer Robbie savage onto his flight deck during a private charter to try and help his fear of flying, has had his appeal against his sacking denied.
Now i know there are rules, but come on. Where has common sense gone in this world??:ugh:
Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/coventry_warwickshire/7111883.stm

[A and C]

Security and common sense ? I don't think so!!!!!!! It is just an excuse for a small number of people to get rich and a job creation plan for the numptys.

However I feel that Pablo is not a victim of the security mafia. It would seem that the company had an agenda with him and "security" was the perfect excuse to get rid of him.

I have no problem with Pablo's action in letting the guy see the flight deck but have to question his judgment with the current security climate now that the truly stupid are in charge and no one is able to question them.

[Pugilistic Animus]

The airline involved, from what I had gathered, from the original posting of this subject on pprune, is that Myt was already looking for a reason to sack this guy, and he gave them all the justification, doing something like that in the US is actually a violation of federal law...and you could lose your licence, pay fines or go to jail---definitely lose your carreer---


At least he has a chance to get another job, and perhaps this is a learning experience for him to do better at a different company or find a company that better suits his management style.


Many folks want to go into the airlines and would gladly follow the rules of their company or nation in order to assure a long tenure---please don't think I'm on a mudslinging expedition....However, he seems to have little choice available but to pick up the pieces and procede on.

and on that I wish him good luck

[whatdoesthisbuttondo]

Pablo Mason what a legend.

Wasn't he the one who vividly highlighted how rediculous some of the security procedures were and how officious the people implementing them had become at BHX?

[Easy Ryder]

Pablo Mason what a legend.

Wasn't he the one who vividly highlighted how rediculous some of the security procedures were and how officious the people implementing them had become at BHX?

Yup!

[scruggs]

Well I for one hope he makes a speedy return to flying asap.

S

[yamaha]

A poor decision in many respects but Pablo will bounce back and continue to behave in a manner that enhances the environment around him.

[No_Speed_Restriction]

playing devil's advocate, if he was "pardoned", wouldnt that throw some kind of a green light at other pilots (especially new ones) who would think there is some kind of flexibility in the law?

[flash8]

Well one lesson that has been reenforced by this hoohaa and which we all probably know too well is their is no room for mavericks in this job. I wish Pablo well however.

[manrow]

Afraid you are right NSR!

[Whitehatter]

Any bets that a huge publicity stunt will follow, with Branson trying to 'rescue' Pablo?

Flame away, it's just little old me being cynical and having seen the Bearded One do something similar with ex-BA staff

[Tigs2]

Well if Robbie Savage gives Pablo a week of his own wages, that will be enough money to keep him going while he writes another book.

[Flap 80]

Unfortunate experience for the gentleman involved but this day and age the opportunities for a maverick to buck the system are negligible in Civil aviation. May well have not been the case in a Tornado at 500kt and 100ft but I wish the adaptability that Pablo saw to enhance his survival in Iraq could have been brought over to Civil aviation. The FO,irrespective of his experience would have been feeling uncomfortable at this breach of Company procedures. How easy it would have been for Pablo,mindful of the PR advantages in flying the football team, to have sought approval prior to take of both with MYT and HIS CREW prior to taking such a Cavalier step. All this gunk about nervous pax needing to visit the F/deck just does not wash.
regards
Capt 20,000hrs P1 Jet 12,000

[Sam-MAN]

Bit harsh in my opinion. However, rules are rules i suppose...

I remember the days when i was little going on holiday with my parents and having flight deck visits :{

[horsleyflyer]

Pablo flew us back from Knock to Birmingham a couple of years ago and gave the most original and entertaining preflight briefing I've ever had. Good luck to him.

[easyprison]

Quite right, Flaps 80.

Sorry Pablo, your in the wrong and an example has been made of you.

Good Luck for the Future. (Get a job at the DFT and change the daft rules mate!)

[The AvgasDinosaur]

I wonder how many flying careers started with a flight deck visit?
Sad that Pablo chose this point in time to use his enviable PR skills on behalf of such a myopic employer. Lack of judgement I fear.
Hope all goes well for him.
Perhaps as display pilot for Tornado To The Ether in a few years time ??
Be lucky
David
I dont think TTTE is new but it fits quite well I thought:O

[Flintstone]

I'm surprised that MyTravel haven't responded publicly as they must be aware of the bad publicity they've brought upon themselves.

Pablo was always going to be a high profile target. If they felt this was a fight they really, really wanted to pick they should have gone about it a different way. Pretty stupid really.

Hey Pablo!! Come and join us in the bizjet world. Passenger visits to the cockpit are practically mandatory for us :O

[Bartender]

playing devil's advocate, if he was "pardoned", wouldnt that throw some kind of a green light at other pilots (especially new ones) who would think there is some kind of flexibility in the law?

Could have been cleared up with a short but stern email to the pilot though no? No need to involve the media quite as heavily if you ask me.

The law isn't flexible but under the circumstances maybe the result was a bit harsh.

Just reading up on the guy, apparantly he's an excellent after-dinner speaker too, plenty of oportunities coming his way I'm sure.

[Oilhead]

"doing something like that in the US is actually a violation of federal law...and you could lose your licence, pay fines or go to jail---definitely lose your carreer--- "

True, but he was not in the US so what is your point?

MyT sounds like a wanky operation anyway; he will get snapped up by a quality operator if he so wishes, however mavericks and whistle blowers do not do very well though these days in civil aviation. He should consider running hard from airline flying; from the coverage he has gotten he seems to think he does not have to observe the same rules and regulations that others he works with do, which is not a good multi crew cockpit situation.

Plenty of Pablos before this one. You can only go so far fixing the world. Sounds like he thought he was untouchable, or at least he did not like being just another number in a roster system. Shame for it to get to this level of publicity though.

[Kit d'Rection KG]

A and C has an excellent point: :)

now that the truly stupid are in charge and no one is able to question them :mad:

However, let's not all forget the fundamental 'reason' for all these security 'precautions'. Take that away, and we can get rid of this nonsense... :ugh:

[Ballymoss]

That is one of the funniest, most apt and indeed, correct comments I've read
in a while!:D
Rgds
The Moss:ok:
PS. I'm not bitter, just experienced:rolleyes:

[Racing Snake]

Anyone know where the appeal can be read.I tried this site but nothing as yet?
http://www.employmentappeals.gov.uk/Public/RecentJudgments.aspx

[763 jock]

Quote:

"Could have been cleared up with a short but stern email to the pilot though no? No need to involve the media quite as heavily if you ask me."

Who involved the media? I very much doubt that MYT called the BBC with the results of the appeal............:ugh:

[Big Tudor]

To all those heaping praise on the good Capt Mason, I suggest you read some of the more informed posts on the initial thread on this subject (or if is already merged then go back a few pages). Breaking a basic company SOP when you have already had your wrist slapped makes your future career prospects fairly grim reading.

The only place for 'Mavericks' is in dodgy homo-erotic movies from the 80's about a certain US Naval establishment. They do not belong in the cockpit of modern, multi-million pound airliners.

[Flap 80]

Big Tudor Exactly my point. Too many ex swing winger:yuk: jocks here at VS anyway!

[Kit d'Rection KG]

Clearly far too many people at VS using the word 'jocks'... :\:mad::cool:

[AdamLT]

wouldn't Mr Savage have thought it was 'risky' even to ask to go into the cockpit?? i mean nowadays since September 11th?????

i think Savage should give some sort of compensation package to Pablo for the risk he took in allowing him into the flightdeck. i mean im sure he could stretch to a little with the 'ridiculous' wage he's on!

[Racing Snake]

Sorry, ref previous post ,think i have jumped the gun, I didnt realize it is still at the company appeal stage....:oh::oh:

[Ballymoss]

BT, On the face of it your comments are correct and obviously 'quite' well informed.I do find it strange however, that you have such allegiance to an outfit that had you over.........
Rgds
The Moss:ok:

[hautemude]

Rules are rules. Once upon a time I worked for Big Airways where I flew a very big aeroplane but age discrimination forced me to leave at the tender age of 55. My little boy now flies almost as big aeroplanes for the same company. Can his Daddy visit him on the flt deck to see how his baby is doing. No he can't, but I don't think this is is the fault of Big Airways but the fault of the CAA, but there you are, rules are rules

[parabellum]

FOK and others who write in the same vein.

From what has been posted here already it seems Pablo wasn't sacked for this offence alone but as the culmination of several previous brushes with management.

So yes, sacking for one offence may be harsh but I don't think he was sacked for just this one offence.

[Big Tudor]

Ballymoss,

I think 'had me over' is possibly putting it a bit strong. I worked there, and now I don't for reasons that are nothing to do with this thread.
As for allegiances, mine go as far as the next pay check. :ok:

You do seem to have me at something of an advantage in terms of identity. :confused:

[Say again s l o w l y]

Another victory of rules over common sense..........:ugh:
Yes, SOP's were broken, but who here would argue that these idiotic rules have advanced aviation safety one millimetre?

The phrase "rules were meant for the blind obediance of fools and for the guidance of wise men" seems to have been discarded. Unfortunately we are a poorer society for it.

Good luck Pablo. It was folk like you letting young boys like me on the flight deck that started my love of aviation and my career.

[PA-28-180]

"I wonder how many flying careers started with a flight deck visit?"
Mine certainly did! :ok:

[BYALPHAINDIA]

MyT sounds like a wanky operation anyway; he will get snapped up by a quality operator if he so wishes, however mavericks and whistle blowers do not do very well though these days in civil aviation. He should consider running hard from airline flying; from the coverage he has gotten he seems to think he does not have to observe the same rules and regulations that others he works with do, which is not a good multi crew cockpit situation.

MYT a Wanky operation - Affirm, This is not the 1st time 'My Little Pony' Airways' have got rid of QUALITY staff - Remember Mr David Henry, One of the most exp Line Pilot's you could ever wish to have, He had over 30yrs of flying exp and held management positions at UK,LEI,MYT - before being 'hung' by the MYT board over something trivial:=

I don't really want to say this, But looking back at AIH/MYT's history, I would say that alot of their problems were down to their own makings??:ugh:

Maybe now as part of TCX, The yes management men of MYT will be walking the plank??:*

All the best Pablo, Yule find a new toy to drive:D

[Tevoro]

Hautemude
Are flight deck visits banned by the CAA? After 9/11 my airline banned visits but has now relaxed the policy and family members of operating crew are allowed to travel on the jumpseat. Seems sensible and unlikely to be allowed if our regulator (not the CAA) had banned such actions.

[beamer]

If did the same I would be hung out to dry by my employers. Why should this 'character' be subject to different rules; this is not to say that the rules should not be changed but for the time being............

[Basil]

I'm surprised that MyTravel haven't responded publicly as they must be aware of the bad publicity they've brought upon themselves.

This may be a big deal within the industry but I don't think the general public know or care.

I'd also bet that Captain Mason is making less of a fuss about it than the uninformed and inexperienced on here.

Sh1t happens. I know a guy who was knocked back for command a couple of days before his Air Force medal for services to training arrived. :*

There's nowt as queer as fowk/pilots/airline managers . . . .

[Agaricus bisporus]

He may be a gung ho pilot of note (I don't know him or his background), but he broke SOPs, company procedure and worldwide airline security standards.
Was he wrong in that instance?
No of course he wasn't



Jeezus, Kite, what colour is the sky on your planet?

You (we) may not agree with various "security" regulations, but that locked door policy is rock-solid enshrined in stone - and he broke SOPs, company procedure and worldwide airline security standards.


How many reasons does a guy need to be wrong? What do you mean, "in this instance?" How was he right to break the most fundamental security barrier we have "in this instance?" How does this instance differ from the next? The rule is the same. Just because the visitor was on a chartered flight makes no difference whatever - 000s of the public - ie, these people, fly charters every day - what makes this occasion special? Put it another way, Kite; describe a situation that is "special" so as to allow a plane load of pax and bags to board without any security checks. What is it you don't understand about rules and SOPs?

The guy broke a rule that is generally considered rock-solid, he can only be WRONG WRONG WRONG. Wake up, pal, this is Professional aviation we're talking about, and it's best taken seriously.

Mr Mason is evidently a larger than life character and an individualist - perfect fast jet stuff, but if he cannot - or will not - conform to the much more disciplined and regulated style of operating in Airlines than perhaps he is in the wrong job? Gung-ho does not belong in Airlines, period.

He was certainly, most utterly certainly, wrong in this case.

[pilotbear]

How many of the loud mouthed smart arses on here have NEVER broken or bent an SOP or company rule??

[virga67]

Ladies and Gents,

I'm so glad not everybody in the world is British or American. Why should the cockpit door be closed on a private charter??? And why should someone be fired over letting a passenger on the flight deck? I'm just lucky to work in a country for an airline where common sense still prevails, and the captain still is the pilot in COMMAND.

[perkin]

But surely, when this individual signed his contract of employment, he committed himself to operating that aircraft within the operating procedures of the CAA and the company with whom he worked. Most companies offer you a charge of gross misconduct and often termination if you break their codes of conduct and/or rules and regs. Any other industry sector would discipline him, so why should the airline be getting stick for this?!

Fair call by MYT if you ask me. As SLF I don't want a 'maverick' who disobeys SOPs in charge of my next flight. Individuals have no place in a team environment.

[RoyHudd]

How stupid, perkin. Teams are made up of individuals.

And successful teams are led by strong individuals. Sometimes called Captain.

Enough rubbish has already written here by fools who consider obedience to SOP's, regulations, contracts etc is an absolute. Human beings should not be totally obedient and are generally not. Thank God.

Absolute adherence to rules/authority brings about events like pre-WW2 Germany, or Cambodian killing fields. Or Maoist China with its "cultural revolution". Or Stalinist USSR.

Back to the subject at hand.

Pablo did nothing in the slightest bit dangerous. His deviation from rules was acceptable. IMHO

[763 jock]

His continued deviation from rules wasn't though. Pablo knew the rules, chose to break one (again) and was fired. Had it been a first or second offence he would probably have got away with a bollocking.

As it was, he was already drinking in The Last Chance Saloon before this stunt. A man's got to know his limitations.

[Flap 80]

Roy Hudd The most dangerous thing Pablo did on that flight was to hazard his employment security and the financial security of his family sould he have one.
No one is doubting that on the flight in question, a footie player would be a miniscule risk on a private charter. However having bent the rules on that occasion,no doubt Pablo would do it on normal charters.
I would feel most uncomfortable if I were a passenger, especially in the company of my family, seeing a person in civilian clothes enter the flightdeck not knowing whether that individual was a friend of the Captain or someone more sinister.
Those pax on a charter flight look forward to a holiday and they do not want any reminders of 9/11.
The issue at stake here is nothing to do with the events on the football flight but a maverick ex A320 pilot who feels that on the back of his Tornado exploits he is somehow above the law of common sense and reasonable SOPs and CAA guidelines .

[John Boeman]

I agree with you 100% Roy H. I am one of the many who go along with all the current rules despite genuinely believing that the lunatics are running the asylum and the terrorists have won the battle, on a scale they could not have imagined in their wildest dreams.
The "infidels" (us) are tying themselves in knots and are screwing their lives up in a fashion, and at a financial cost, that must be unparalleled outside of a world war.
We who sit back and go along with the rules "for a quiet life" should grateful that there are people that take a stand against security rules, which border on lunacy and are patently idiotic.

[John Boeman]

No one is doubting that on the flight in question, a footie player would be a miniscule risk on a private charter. However having bent the rules on that occasion,no doubt Pablo would do it on normal charters.
Flap 80, you really have overstepped the mark there.

[Basil]

How many of the loud mouthed smart arses on here have NEVER broken or bent an SOP or company rule??
Most of us probably have but, in recent years, in the majors for whom I worked, it is fairly rare. This was not just an SOP or company rule; it was the law. Before anyone asks, yes, Basil may have, in the past, done naughty things in aeroplanes but I either didn't get caught or else grovelled convincingly :{ and was let off.

Why should the cockpit door be closed on a private charter???
Because it is still a public transport flight.
Do not confuse 'private charter' with 'private aircraft' which may be flown by a PPL (suitably licensed and rated).

[beardy]

Roy,

you wrote
Enough rubbish has already written here by fools who consider obedience to SOP's, regulations, contracts etc is an absolute.

I agree with you. There are times when fools make a dangerous situation more hazardous by adherence to rules and SOPs that did not cater for the situation they were facing. I don't think that these circumstances fit that category. The rules appear to have been willingly broken, not bent. I agree that this rule is inappropriate for these circumstances, but cannot see how breaking it in these circumstances achieved anything other than unwitting martyrdom and, if he didn't see that coming, one has to suspect his judgement of priorities.

[perkin]

How stupid, perkin. Teams are made up of individuals.
And successful teams are led by strong individuals. Called Captain, generally.

Petty insults just serve to demonstrate who the intellectually challenged are Roy Hudd...

I lead a team and I'm certainly not called Captain, nor would I want to be, especially if that title over-inflates my ego. I lead a successful team, and I am a headstrong individual with a high level of technical competence, yet I know where the limit is with my employer, clients and colleagues and do not cross it as I know what it will result in, even if I know some rules and limits are thoroughly ridiculous. It seems this guy pushed his luck once too often and paid the price. Its a tough world out there sometimes, but sh!t happens. He should be man enough to admit to making a mistake and just shut up and get on with his life/career! :rolleyes:

[tonker]

Does anyone else not see the irony of being sacked by management who constantly steer companies in a rudderless manner until their near demise, only to be "moved on" and given a huge golden handshake for loosing the company millions, and pissing off the workforce and staff.


What he did was wrong from the CAA's and his companies point of view, but compared to some of the cataclysmic management decisions i see being made, from a business point of view it was at most a minor mistake. Lucky for them he wasn't French, i'd be the first to put up a protestor.:(

[beardy]

Tonker,

MYT airline management, much to the disappointment of many, have not been 'pensioned off.' They have been appointed to lead the 'new' Thomas Cook. Nor are they rudderless, they ruthlessly pursue their own (in my opinion) misguided course dragging the rest of us where we don't want to go. I would love the light relief of irony!

[fireflybob]

I just wondered whether Pablo has any further right of appeal? You know Human Court of Civil Rights in Belgium. Perhaps the overriding authority of the Commander has yet to be "tested" in these circumstances?

[Flap 80]

Perkin...well said
John Boeman...overstepped the mark?, I dont think so.
What part of common sense dont you understand.
tell us you are not 1/ A flight simmer
2/ex fast jet
or 3/ Pablo himself

The post from a non aviator ( Perkin) supports my point pretty well.
ATB

[scruggs]

fireflybob,

There was a short report on Pablo on the BBC West Midlands news yesterday evening. I didn't catch it all, but they did state Pablo was going to appeal again (I didn't catch who they said he was taking to appeal to).

Good luck to him I say.

S

[John Boeman]

NO DOUBT Pablo would do it on normal charters

Flap 80, you really cannot spot the part of that statement that is overstepping the mark? (I've made it easier for you this time.)

[OPS1978]

Pablo was a true legend to all of us at bhx on the ground and will be sadly missed good luck mate if you read this we will all miss you. It was allright for mytravel to use for there own publicity ie the last ever mytravelite flight from bhx and guess the capt was? Yes you need to ask "PABLO". He has been treated terrible in all this.

[rsuggitt]

Not a direct reply to you.. and I dont know if this event was made public... but I cant help thinking that if the public learned that the man with most responsibility for the safety of the flight was breaking anti-terrorism rules.... confidence would go down the pan. It would go further down the pan if the public learned that other pilots thought that breaking the anti-terrorism rules should be forgiven..

[John Boeman]

It would go further down the pan if the public learned that other pilots thought that breaking the anti-terrorism rules should be forgiven..

Probably not as fast as it would go down the pan if the public were made fully aware of what the vast majority of professional pilots think of the said anti-terrorism rules.

[tonker]

Beardy i don't know what much about where Mytravel is going, but my post was more of a generalisation based upon my last 20 years experience of management types.:mad:

[windytoo]

robbie savage always was a chopper.....

[The AvgasDinosaur]

IMHO as fare paying SLF I would far rather my security interests were held by a professional using his/her finely honed skills and judgement, and who shares the aeroplane with me, than some nameless faceless numpty in suit near Whitehall who cant tell the pointy end from the noisy bits.
Lets hear it for the crews :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Be lucky
David

[Flap 80]

John Boeman you cloak yourself in the semantics of the English language when losing sight of the big picture...unfortunate.
p.s. you did not answer the 3 questions raised

[kick the tires]

Flaps 80 and Boeman

chill out a bit. We want to read an informed thread not a points scoring exchange between the two of you.

PM each other if you want a fight!

[Flap 80]

K T T My apologies.

[John Boeman]

Flap 80, if it makes you happy, - 1. No, 2. No, 3.No.

K.T.T. I understand where you are coming from. If you care to read my posts you will see that I try to stick to the facts. The majority of pilots do think that what is served up as anti-terrorism security, is farcical. That is obvious to anyone reading the threads on here even if they do not have to suffer the nonsense themselves.

You will notice I did not actually indulge in any point scoring with Flap 80, I merely pointed out the somewhat slanderous nature of his post.
You will also notice his apology was to you, not Pablo or myself.

Just as a point of fact, I have shared a cockpit with Pablo a good many years ago. I cannot comment on his career before or since. All I can say is that I found him to be a caring human being and a conscientious and professionally mannered pilot.

Thanks for the vote of confidence in us David.

[call100]

He has only lost out on the internal appeal. His next step would be to lodge the case at an employment tribunal. However, I do not think that he has much hope in that arena. The criteria would not be, was the reason for sacking correct or not. It would be, whether the procedures leading up to the sacking were fair. This would take into account any prior warnings etc..

As a matter of interest, a question to those who think that he has been harshly treated because he should have some say on what happens on his plane. What would constitute a breaking of a rule that should lead to sacking?
I ask out of genuine interest. I have no thought one way or the other over Pablo's demise.

[hautemude]

As a fairly long retired pilot, I would be interested to know who does make the rules for flight deck visits or lack thereoff. Is it the airline as part of their "approved" ops manual or is it the law of the land"?

With regard to "bending the rules", I'm sure many, perhaps most of us have, at some time, but in my case only if my "right hand man" was happy and if WE felt it was a safe and expedient action in the interests of the flight. Does anyone know what the first officer/co-pilot thought? If he was in agreement, then presumably he also faced some kind of disciplinary board. If he did'nt agree or wasn't consulted, what chance CRM?

[Basil]

It's the law.

[cym]

rules are rules - and there to safeguard all pax

This guys over inflated sense of self imprortance in deciding what he considers to be appropriate is mind blowing

sounds like a bit of a reocurring situation too - big difference between flying a Tornado and an A320.......

[Say again s l o w l y]

It's the law.

Obviously you've never broken, bent or blatantly disregarded a "law" in your life? How about a little bit of speeding or anything else that is "against the law".

It's nice to see the fantastic holier than thou attitudes in here. Let's look at this with a sense of perspective. Letting a known figure onto the flight deck poses stuff all risk, we're not talking here about letting any old punter onto the flight deck (though I personally don't see a problem with that myself).

It's nice to see that the professional pilots of today are so slavishly bound by rules and regulation without any regard to experience and risk management skills.

You may aswell just put a robot into the cockpit if you think that sacking someone for this was a good thing.

Breaking SOP's shouldn't be done lightly, but there are times when the rule book needs to be thrown out of the window. Idiotic "safety" rules are well up on that list.

Common sense really isn't that common anymore...............

[BYALPHAINDIA]

After reading this thread so far, I am divided about Pablo and his 'Flight Deck Circus performance'

I still think that Airlines should give the Captain some degree of trust and decision making.:D

Do you think a Captain does not take everything into responsibility??

Why are other European & Worldwide Airlines still free to allow who they want into the office wether it be family/friends press??:rolleyes:

I am also divided on the rule that the Captain is in full command of his ship in the air - So he/she decides how the show will run, And if he/she feels confident in allowing a FD visit then so be it.:D

The Captain signs the log, So effectively he/she has the last say so??

The comment that always irratates me - We are winning the war on Terrorism!!! - I don't believe a word of it, Try telling that to a group of children who want to meet the captain on a Santa flight but cannot:sad:

I have always said if the US had been more 'Dilligent' with security Then maybe we would not be in this post 9/11 mess!!:=

A re-run of 9/11 nearly happened here, But the UK inteligence prevented it happening with good surveilance The US knew about a threat but were too slow to act.

Why would a group of 'muslims' wish to learn to fly in the US.....Think about it:hmm:

[cym]

or maybe arrogance from people put in a position of trust who decide their own interperation of the LAW is something that those with 4 gold rings need to start need to considering......

Highly respected professionals you are, gods you aint

[Say again s l o w l y]

Just a small chip there then.

This isn't about being an arrogant "sky god", but a captain has to be able to take decisions on all matters once the doors are closed. This sort of decision just undermines command authority and you could potentially end up with a situation where people are worried about making decisions and end up in a far worse situation.

SOP's can't encompass every possible situation, so you have to rely on skill, intelligence and experience in that situation.

If I was in the sh*t on a flight I'd rather have someone like Pablo sitting next to me, rather than someone who has no ability to think outside the box and before any says much, we all know many people in both the LH and RH seats that who couldn't think of a way out of a wet paper bag unless it was written in a book.

[cym]

this was a decision which was wrong and the price needs to be paid by the pilot concered.

To say that once the doors are closed the captain can over ride whatever rules he wishes is nonsense

[Say again s l o w l y]

Nobody would ever say that, but where do you draw the line?

What "price" do you think is acceptable in this situation? Sacking someone for a what is a minor transgression of an idiotic rule is over the top.

To me it sounds like it was used as an excuse.

Do you think people should be fired every time they make a mistake or do something a bit daft? If so you should be fired from here for punctuation.

That's just me being daft of course, but this isn't a back and white issue and statements like this was a decision which was wrong and the price needs to be paid by the pilot concered. aren't really helpful.

If you've never made a mistake or disregarded a daft rule in your life, then maybe you have a point, but I somehow doubt that this is the case for anybody.

[electricjetjock]

There is a lot of rhetoric here about it being okay to disregard "idiotic" or "daft" rules and that the captain can break whatever rules he wants, it is his aircraft.

I may think that the 70mph rule on the motorway is daft especially as the road is clear and dry. If I get caught though I pay the penalty, I somehow do not think the judge would agree with my interpretation or disregard of the "law / rule" because I thought it was "idiotic" or "daft".

When I operate my aircraft I have the ability to go outside the "SOP" or rules but I have to be able to justify it to my company as well as the regulator. Somehow I do not think "PABLO" could do that here. He should have asked for permission and if it was not forthcoming or if he thought it would not be given then he should not have done it.

What seems to be lost here is that outside of MYT, he is running a "fear of flying company" and it could be alleged that this was as a blatant piece of self advertising for his own company, whilst working for another and breaking the law!

As for all the character references and the "whizzo" PA's I am sure there would be just as many going "he likes the sound of his own voice".

MYT have obviously reacted the way they did because of more than this one incident. There is probably no doubt that the spin doctors will not want the other linen to be washed in public as it could be damaging and not good for the "Pablo" cause. There are always TWO sides to a story.

[cyclic gal]

My flying career as was is dotted with memories of characters, mavericks, renegades, call them what you will who are still around, still doing it and still the same, ultimately professional. Without them the world might be a sadder place than it is now. To the ones who were negligent, stupid, silly, go hang!

[phillipas]

Nobody would ever say that [once the doors are closed the captain can over ride whatever rules he wishes], but where do you draw the line?

A good starting point would be whether said action enhances the chances of the flight making it to the destination in one piece. IIRC Al Haynes on is DC10 flight into Sioux City got a suitable qualified pax up onto the flight deck to assist. There was no criticism of him - and even with the changes of rules since then, I'm firmly of the opinion his invitation woould be deemed wholly appropriate.

If Pablo's sidestick was stuck and the presence of Mr Savage to give it a good penalty kick to get it moving again was needed then fair enough - but otherwise exactly how did his presence on the flightdeck help ensure safe passage of the flight in question?

The rules are there, Pablo broke them, he got caught, had no justification - end of story.

[Pugilistic Animus]

From way back at the beginning:
I wrote:"doing something like that in the US is actually a violation of federal law...and you could lose your license, pay fines or go to jail---definitely lose your carreer--- "

and OilHead wrote:

True, but he was not in the US so what is your point?



My Point was that depending on your home country's air/crimal laws he could have had far greater consequences heaped upon him, or far less as the case maybe.???

I was trying to point out that he has his most important asset his license and his freedom---He has the chance to move on with his life as a pilot--- this gentleman sounds like a talented aviator reading some of the writings in the military aviation part of Pprune---I hope that he should find a very happy setting that better suits his ways---I wish that for us all however

Although the details are very sketchy in my mind---

---remember the case of the NWA captain who was sacked, imprisoned and fined for being intoxicated while on duty?

He was later allowed to return but first he needed to re-do the whole entire ATPL over, I mean C-172 stuff--- IR multi, high performance/ complex you kinda know the drill....Mr. Mason should feel grateful


And believe me I think the law stinks, but we are not legislators or politicians---perish the thought---


And

as far as the USA and "homeland security" TSA?/FAA/ NTSB/and Washington AND FEMA here :mad:

[kick the tires]

Phillipas
Al Haynes on is DC10 flight into Sioux City got a suitable qualified pax up onto the flight deck to assist.
What on earth has this pre 9/11 incident got to do with Pablo's post 9/11 transgression???
Today, and I suspect in those days too, the Captain has the authority to deviate from ANY SOP's as he sees fit in order to secure the safe operation of the aircraft. This permission is granted to allow him the freedom to deviate from the SOP's that havent been written for the more unusual emergencies.
Of course, as someone has already pointed out, the Captain has to justify his/her actions at the subsequent board of inquiry.

[phillipas]

Phillipas
Al Haynes on is DC10 flight into Sioux City got a suitable qualified pax up onto the flight deck to assist.
What on earth has this pre 9/11 incident got to do with Pablo's post 9/11 transgression???
A good question. Perhaps if you were to read the next sentence of my post you might find the answer:
There was no criticism of him - and even with the changes of rules since then, I'm firmly of the opinion his invitation woould be deemed wholly appropriate.
Today, and I suspect in those days too, the Captain has the authority to deviate from ANY SOP's as he sees fit in order to secure the safe operation of the aircraft. This permission is granted to allow him the freedom to deviate from the SOP's that havent been written for the more unusual emergencies.
Er, just what I said I think. The issue here is that Pablo getting Mr Savage on the flightdeck was in no way to secure the safe operation of the aircraft.

[kick the tires]

Phillipas, I did indeed read all of your post but wont stoop to sarcasm in this answer.

Al Haynes acted in an emergency situation, Pablo did not.

[Basil]

SAS
Obviously you've never broken, bent or blatantly disregarded a "law" in your life? How about a little bit of speeding or anything else that is "against the law".
Oh, dear. Did you read the post to which I was replying?
hautemude asked:
who does make the rules for flight deck visits or lack thereoff. Is it the airline as part of their "approved" ops manual or is it the law of the land"?

I merely answered.

Re your rather rudely put question, I won't bore readers with all the things I've done and the number of times I've 'sailed a bit close to the wind' whilst doing them.

[Right Way Up]

Breaking SOP's shouldn't be done lightly, but there are times when the rule book needs to be thrown out of the window
Why did this situation require the rules to be broken? In fact it makes a mockery of a Captains authority. If I go outside the rules using my emergency authority, it will be to safeguard the aircraft, crew and passengers!

[lordsummerisle]

KTT,

Think you are missing the point that phillipas is agreeing with you, maybe should read both of his/her( sorry, don't want to cause offence) posts fully

[amos2]

The Captain of this flight we are talking about is a dead duck!!

He busted SOPs, acted like an egomaniac, and will pay the price...

like so many before him, that we all know about!

Sad, but true!

You know it, I know it, we all know it!!!

Can we move on?

[kick the tires]

Lordsummerisle and Phillipas,

Yes indeed, apologies to you Phillipas.

Bit like SMS, if you dont read them carefully they can be misinterpreted!

[lordsummerisle]

KTT,

Not as bad as when SMS are interpretated correctly, but by the wrong person!

[Clarence Oveur]

Why is it that some people continue to ignore (deliberately?) all the hints given that he was not fired for this single transgression. It seems harping on about one's own little pet hate, or agenda, is more important.:rolleyes:

[Mad old uncle Nigel]

Many FO's who flew with Pablo found him eccentric. His PA's and his prediliction for standing in the cabin with the PA doing a pier end stand up routine were either:

a) Well received by an audience of amazed pax

b) Viewed as slightly odd and unsettling by an audience of bemused pax

c) Detested by an audience of pax with an IQ over 100 who didn't want to pay for a (poor) stand up routine as well as their journey costs.


My guess was mostly b's and c's. If there was a head higher above the parapet than Pablos it would be hard to imagine. To then disregard SOP and DfT rules for the sake of cheering up some footballing idiot was frankly taking the p.

Interesting chap, interesting career. Plenty of people on the Mil forum have suggested knobishness. His Civil career speaks for itself. Can anyone name another sacked Captain in the last 5 years?

[Right Way Up]

FOK,
So what do his actions stand for?

[John Boeman]

FOK, post #90. The situation in a nutshell.

And I think someone earlier accused me of not seeing the big picture...........

[Agaricus bisporus]

Is this a forum for Professional Pilots or for chavs who think it is OK to break the law if they feel like it, when they feel like it, and spout forth the unconsidered illogical and ridiculous excuses that so characterise excusing lawbreaking in this gutless, irresponsible world we have to live in?

I suspect though, (Jesus, I dam well hope) that a great number of the posters here are not aviators, let alone Professional ones.

What is hard to get around your heads, people, that this is not SOP, this is the LAW. LAW. It is not optional, it is a decree from the government, and HAS to be obeyed. Laws, for those of the modern persuasion who haven't learned yet, are MANDATORY, and no matter how you regard their practicality, usefulness or personal inconvenience you do not have the option to ignore them, unless you are willing to face the penalty. There is NO EXCUSE AT ALL.

As to the people who have suggested there is no need for a locked door on a football charter (!!!!!!), yes, really, some numptie did! I can only say how sad I feel for someone with such a terminal lack of imagination, not to mention disrespect for, yes, the law, and such a moronic belief, I suppose, in the sanctity of those coked up drunken lawless twits who run about fields chasing inflated pigs bladders. I can think of few "role models" I'd less like to have on my flight deck.

Do you suppose Al Qaida hasn't the wit to charter an aeroplane if they wanted to do it again?

I just hope and pray they don't charter one from a company employing some of the irresponsible posters here...but then, none of those are pilots, are they?

Rant over.

Incoming!!

[John Boeman]

I've got to stop reading this thread....... before I lose the will to live......

[Right Way Up]

FOK & Boeman,
You must get out a bit more if you believe the "locked flight deck door" policy is an important breach of world freedom. :rolleyes:
If this pilot is such an inspiration and has such a way with the media perhaps he would have been better served not using unilateral action, but instead spearheading the pilot masses to fight the authorities on the issue. Perhaps though that is just not his way!

[Oilhead]

By the way, where was the first officer in all of this? Did he verbally object to the breaking of a law and SOP? Or was he in awe of reputation of said Captain? Remember MD80 at Little Rock, and a domicile chief pilot for AA? If you don't understand the connection, you are not familiar with the CLR issues of a relatively new first officer who missed several opportunities to speak up to the Captain and break the chain of events that led up to that accident, costing the Captain and some others their lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1420
http://www.ntsb.gov/Events/2000/aa1420/default.htm

[AbeamPoints]

The first officer was probably in the same situation that many FO's find themselves in when confronted with a non-conforming, SOP-light, Charactar Captain; i.e. watch the shop as hard as possible and do something when the something unsafe happens. Which it always does. As in this case when a sportsman belonging to a team of sportsmen who collectively have a criminal conviction are allowed onto the flightdeck.

Pablo broke a black and white rule.

I might do the same.

You may.

But I wouldn't if my employment record already held issues. Would You? No. Are you therefore happy with his judgement? With your kids as passengers?
Are you?

[Clarence Oveur]

It's OK. Apparently he was a freedom-fighter out on the front-line taking a bullet for all of us. :rolleyes:

There are some truly bizarre reasoning being presented in support of his actions.

[Andy_S]

As in this case when a sportsman belonging to a team of sportsmen who collectively have a criminal conviction are allowed onto the flightdeck.

I'm sorry, but could you explain to me how, when and for what Blackburn Rovers "collectively" picked up a criminal conviction.
Some real tosh being spouted on here IMO.......

[Flap 80]

Not wishing to antagonise John B ,IMHO the posts 92 and 97 are both mature ,sensible and spoken from the viewpoint of the Public although I imagine they have both been writen by professional aviators who,like myself have learnt to adapt to the locked door concept.
Regretable in the extreme that no longer can our families or any prospective aviators join us on the flightdeck, but having been involved with heavy metal for 25+ years,we need to recognise that the halcyon days of flightdeck visits are never going to return.

[wiggy]

Am I the only one that finds your comment "..there are those who are supporting the action against this Captain are supporting the terrorists" grossly offensive?

The UK Flight Deck access rules are nuts..but if I deviate from Company SOPs I know I will almost certainly take the bullet unless I can prove my actions improved safety..

Frankly having done two tours Fast Jet, two tours jet QFI'ing and having toasted three absent friends, killed in fast jet accidents, at a reunion the other night, I don't like the implications that now, with 10000 plus hours of civilian Long Haul, I've turned into a lily livered surrender monkey or some sort of Fifth columnist....

Get some time in, get a Command, and then try the: "I'm entitled to deviate from SOPs because a nervous footballers on board" stunt..and see where it gets you.

Rant off, rant off, go.

[Flap 80]

Wiggy
Well considered comments.

[NineForks]

Not condoning his actions at all.

However our manuals say no flight deck visits in air or on the ground. I have never known one captain to refuse this action from an excited son as they disembark. Has nobody ever left a remote parked aircraft unsecured etc etc?? Indeed i suspect the same applies to 90+% of professional pilots.

Does this mean we should all be disciplined? Following the logic yes as we have deviated from the law.

Some of these things are not black and white there is still some common sense in the world.

However for what it is worth i think there was no grey area with this decision; the man was very foolish and deserved what he got. He excercised poor judgment. This job is all about non-exposure to risk.

[manrow]

Do you really believe this was bad publicity for MyTravel?

For disciplining a captain who thought he could obey the rules when it suited him?

[sapco2]

What he said sounded pretty logical to me FlyingOfficerKite!

[manrow]

The public understand that nobody can enter the flight deck; unless you are a 'celebrity'!

Is that good news for the profession?

[wiggy]

No, I'm not all over the place on this one - I have put my argument and credentials on the table - can I ask exactly what your qualifications are, because I see b*** all on your public profile? MFS flight Sim or perhaps not even that? Please tell us, because the very none CRM expression "no stick, no vote" springs to mind.

Lets be clear about this. In my humble opinion the locked flight deck door policy as decreed by the UK CAA is illogical - in particular exclusion of people known to the crew or even family of the pilots when some who have no criminal record in the UK, clear or otherwise, are alllowed unrestricted access is, IMHO "nuts"...hence my comment.

As to Pablo's punishment - I have no opinion on the punishment itself. I don't know the guy, I've never met him, I don't know his track record in the Airline. However I do know, as he should have done, that ignoring Company SOPs regarding security in this day and age is almost certainly, right or wrong, going to get you the sack...

Moving on to your comments, because as I guess you now realise you have right royally :mad: me off... I feel you are being grossly offensive to the hundreds of guys and girls who have both served their country ( whichever one it is) and who now work to their Airline's SOPs. There's been no apology from you so far so come on, you are the one who stated that anyone who agrees with Pablo's punishment is supporting the terrorists. so what's your "reasoned argument"..?

Oh, and "Creme de la Creme"...me?...I don't think so, some of the others here who know me know my ego isn't that big but, hey, thanks for the compliment.

[Oilhead]

Well I work for one of the airlines that had four pilots murdered in their cockpits on 9/11, not to mention everyone else on board eventually. I can recall no discussion about ever banning passengers from the cockpit while parked at the gate. I see no possible purpose in doing that, other than to make some bureaucrat get a boner for thinking it up. :rolleyes:

No shortage of pilots at my airline with sidearms in the cockpit, so that makes the blood pressure a little lower too, but stopping visitors at the gate makes no sense to me.

OH

[wiggy]

Oilhead

FWIW we (Major UK airline) allow visits pre-start/after shutdown...

[Airbubba]

can I ask exactly what your qualifications are, because I see b*** all on your public profile? MFS flight Sim or perhaps not even that?

Based on his comments on another thread I think you can safely assume he doesn't fly large Boeings for a living. :)

[UFGBOY]

If the illustrious Capt 'fella' Henry was such asset to aviation, why is he not in a suitable position in another airline?

UKL was one of the worst run companies I worked for

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Do you really believe this was bad publicity for MyTravel?
Maybe, maybe not. It is however IMHO a spectacular own goal by the government. If they really feel the need for a blanket ban on access to the cockpit. Then they do not believe the other measures they have put in place are adequate and do not trust the staff they have authorised to carry out the searches and pre flight checks on passengers.
Beggars belief !
Be lucky
David

[perkin]

As others have pointed out before, I think there is more to this dismissal than the single incident involving Robbie Savage. Please do not omit the fact that it appears that this incident was the straw that broke the camels back...

[Clarence Oveur]

Please do not omit the fact that it appears that this incident was the straw that broke the camels back...That is of little interest to those who are determined to use this case as a vehicle for their own agenda.

[beardy]

The locking of the flight deck door was on the agenda long long before 911, this was as the result of previous attacks on flight crew by idiots and those with mental problems. It's implementation was accelerated by that sad event not, as some may think, as a result of it

[Oilhead]

Wiggy
That is a good thing - UA encourages it too:ok:. Good harmless PR. It is interesting that most passengers seem to have forgotten that pilots over here can be federally licensed to carry a weapon on the flight deck now. I wasn't thrilled about it when it first started but, after watching it for a few years, I think it is a good program which is well monitored and managed.
OH

[windytoo]

by your name ""flyingofficerkite"" you should have a moustache however I suspect you have a beard.

[lordsummerisle]

Windytoo,

I appreciated the "beard" comment even if it went miles over the intended targets head!

[Batman]

I went to my opticians last week and got into a conversation with the receptionist about holidays. I was suprised when she said she had been allowed on to the flightdeck of a MYT aircraft whilst enroute to Jamaica!!
I have no reason to believe she was not telling me the truth. Is this wide spead at MYT?

[ShotOne]

It certainly isn't -and if t'management hear of any, those concerned can expect to find themselves down the jobcentre with Pablo. As wiggi rightly says, silly rules but regrettably non-negotiable.

And I agree 100% with oilhead's post. Fitting a secure and locked flt deck door raises major security issues if there is no means to defend the flight deck. A European equivalent to the Federal Flt Deck Officer programme must surely be a priority.

[mindstorm]

Rumour is that Robbie Savage is a private pilot anyway - fear of flying? :hmm:

[pontius's pa]

What, another 7 pages on this dinosaur ?!!!

"He will get snapped up by a quality operator if he so wishes"

I very much doubt it.

[fireflybob]

"He will get snapped up by a quality operator if he so wishes"

I very much doubt it.

Maybe that is true and of course it depends on how one defines a "quality" operator but very often those people that get fired by companies go on to much better things eventually. I predict that in the future Pablo will look back and thank MyTravel for firing him! Time will tell.

[Basil]

Long before 11/9 I rethought FD visits after, at 50ft on finals to a Greek island, a Northern :mad: slapped me on the shoulder and said "Dost tha know where tha's goin', pilot?" :*

[MrBernoulli]

Pablo was something of a maverick in the RAF - left with a couple of clouds hanging over him still. Its happened again. I guess its in his genes?

[AbeamPoints]

If you read between the lines or know somone in MYT you might come to the conclusion that the Cpt in question was a PA hogging legend in his own lifetime. The management chose to sack a Captain for a minor/
medium error says volumes.

AP

[CityofFlight]

Let's stop lynching the guy. :ugh:

For those of us who love to fly, many of us would jump at the opportunity to help someone overcome their fear of flying. Pablo was doing just that on the chartered flight. No better place than the cockpit.
As the PIC he made a huge mistake and because the post 9/11 SOPS are in place, he's been made the poster child for breaking them. I have a feeling Pablo will be on board with another outfit soon.

When one door closes, another one opens...


**By the way, there's a pilot for Frontier Airlines that heads classes for those with a fear of flying. They use actual a/c and take them into the flight deck to educate them more on the noises that correspond with the pilot's actions. She's seen great success and said this type of awareness is key to over coming it. :D Pablo is on the right track.

[Colonel Klink]

I just love all this talk about how Pablo is supposedly much better off than having to work for MYT and how he is about to find a better job with a "quality operator" who appreciates his many talents. GET REAL!!! The guy is sitting at home, wishing he could have another chance to do it properly this time around, knowing with his track record it's going to be quite a while before ANY operator gives him a chance. How on earth is he going to explain his actions at an interview? Taking the moral high ground is hardly going to make up for foolish mistakes of the past or put food on the table. I'm sure Pablo is well aware of this by now!

[Mark M'Words]

I mean...... Robbie Savage!!!...What a waste, now if Nicole Kidman had a fear of flying:cool:

[llanfairpg]

Posts from Flap 80

Unfortunate experience for the gentleman involved but this day and age the opportunities for a maverick to buck the system are negligible in Civil aviation. May well have not been the case in a Tornado at 500kt and 100ft but I wish the adaptability that Pablo saw to enhance his survival in Iraq could have been brought over to Civil aviation. The FO,irrespective of his experience would have been feeling uncomfortable at this breach of Company procedures. How easy it would have been for Pablo,mindful of the PR advantages in flying the football team, to have sought approval prior to take of both with MYT and HIS CREW prior to taking such a Cavalier step. All this gunk about nervous pax needing to visit the F/deck just does not wash.
regards
Capt 20,000hrs P1 Jet 12,000

But on the Private Flying forum he said

Saying how many hours you have logged without being asked is akin to boasting about the size of your wallet.

Hey Flap 80 seems you practice double standards or is it just that you are a hypocrite or perhaps those Big Flaps have gone to your head?

[Stingaling]

As for boasting about hours, there is always someone around with that little bit more.

Hmm.... 20,000 hours. No big deal, expecially when the autopilot has flown a good percentage of that.

I know of one individual who has in access of 30,000 hours and never been near an autopilot in his life!

[Basil]

. . and I know one who is alleged to have a lot on the P51 :}

[bushbolox]

Does it matter anymore.its done , hes fired, weve pontificated, the rule still stands.
Let move on.
Im sure pablo is too busy writing a book or heroically helping fear of flyers, for free of course, to give a toss what we think.

[Donnie Brascoe]

i am sure he will make a fortune on a cargo route somewhere .less chance of getting into trouble me thinks. So all the people pontificating have never broken an SOP ?????? problem is breaking a very visible SOP he got caught.. he sounds like a maverick.
Would be interesting to see what the F/O's that fly with him feel, do they learn something from his vast and wide and differing experiences or do they feel over shadowed ? I am hoping its option number one i am sure someone like this delivers a lot of wise words to those less experienced...Sometimes those who are different in our profession make it interesting, make us all sit back and think a bit more and challenge the common perception. Not saying what he did was right, but lets not nail someone to the preverbial cross because they are not an SOP following automotan

[Stingaling]

Basil

Just for you.

Have a look in here (http://www.aerowork.co.nz) - personal - fixed wing pilots.

Not too much "P51 time" there sonny.



Now back to the thread topic.

Mr. Pablo

As has been mentioned, you would be better off in a corporate outfit, where your skills would be paraded as and asset, not a hindrance. Need to get in with the right sort of private operation, where there is still room for initiative and the crews are allowed to think for themselves, not to mention a better class of pax. Well Robby Savage? Drunk and aggressive bucket and spades? Flying your backside off, at your age? Not for me anymore, thank you very much.

Treat getting the boot from MYT as a blessing in disguise.

All the best for the future. I salute you.

[llanfairpg]

It may seem clever to strip down to your underpants to go through security at BHX and to break company rules by allowing a pax on the flight deck but the signal it sends to the travelling public via the tabloids is not one any responsible public transport pilot should be encouraging. Being a nice guy and a bit of a character is not an excuse for un professional behaviour.

I am all for a bit of a laugh and have been described out of work as a bit of a lunatic in my younger days but I always modified my behaviour in uniform to fall in line with the standards that the industry and the travelling public expect (I hope anyway)

I do however wish Pablo all the best for the future

[Agaricus bisporus]

Some of us still aren't getting this yet, are we?

The locked door policy is NOT SOP. It is a Government directive, and therefore LAW. It cannot ever be subject to exceptions.

Stripping off in "security" is a stunt and in no way comparable with this matter.


An equivalent to this based on an objection to security search would be the pilot in question climbing over the perimeter fence and accessing his aircraft that way, and then lamely trying to excuse his irresponsibility by claiming he had a "famous" passenger on board who no one had ever heard of and she was scared of mice.


I'd be surprised if the reaction to that would be anything but ridicule and utterly negative - what else could it be? but remain bewildered why it isn't the same here. Cos there a'int no difference.

[Basil]

Stingaling,
Very impressive but it wasn't one of them :)

[call100]

I was waiting to go through Security when he did his trouser stunt. To be honest he just looked a D**khead rather than a professional pilot or in fact a professional anything. All he managed to achieve was to delay people who had a job to do from getting there.
He did have the attitude that he was untouchable....Well you can't be right all of the time.:rolleyes:

[llanfairpg]

Stripping off in "security" is a stunt and in no way comparable with this matter.

how does that joke go about CUNNING STUNTS!?

[Champagne Anyone?]

Wasn't it a government directive that metal cutlery etc. was not to be allowed on any flight whatsoever? Haven't they just relaxed this same directive?

Leave the guy alone. Its only jealousy on the part of the ATPL's who didn't get to meet Savage(?) themselves.

If Pablo was a friend of yours, would you be slagging him off in such a manner? Thought not.

[llanfairpg]

Think again!

[Basil]

CA,
Wouldn't, perchance, be QH?

[malc4d]

Is it only in the UK and the USA that its a law against cockpit visits ???
Just asking as spent a lot of time up front when flying back and forth to Orlando to do my flight training.... found it very helpfull to see what the job realy entails..... Hope that one day it will come back in some form or another, maybe as pre booked and cleared ..........

[FAStoat]

Sorry chaps,but as someone who is now out of the loop,what happens to DeadHeadding or Jump seat trips these days?I somehow think those of you are correct ,that he was booted for a series of misdemenours,and that the Cockpit Door was the excuse especially as it is meant to be the law,according to the useless Gov.co.uk!!!!There are times when it is beneficial to have pax come up to the cockpit-not to mention other Pilots travelling with you giving you facts and figures on what is going on elsewhere?What about the DC10 which lost its outboard engine and a Training Captain flying as pax went into the Cockpit to help the eventual crash landing,as he had done it in the Sim,as far as I can remember?Pablo ought to go to Netjets,since it is run by a load of Belge F16 guys!!!!!!!!There are times when Doors and Panels,release of liquid etc are seen by pax,and there is not a Cabin Attendant handy to report it to,when a polite knock on the door will bring it to the attention of the crew.I remember such a case saved an aeroplane,when watermeth was seen streaming from a nacelle,and we diverted back to Jersey to have the Tank straps broken and a nasty incident prevented.Pax can be much more savvy than some of the Flight Attendants that I have flown with.:confused:

[manrow]

While it is understandable that you guys would assume our government applies common sense before introducing new regulations, it is now abundantly clear that they don't. The fact that our security regulations are now the most rigorous in the world suggests they are over the top, and hence some captains will consider they can break them when it suits them.

[BlueTui]

Do not turn this into a cabin crew bashing thread, as i'll be the first to jump down your throat. This thread is about the injustice to Pablo

[BEagle]

'Injustice' to Paul Mason? Or 'Pablo' as he prefers to style himself.....

[llanfairpg]

There are times when it is beneficial to have pax come up to the cockpit-not to mention other Pilots travelling with you giving you facts and figures on what is going on elsewhere?

Pax can be much more savvy than some of the Flight Attendants that I have flown with.


Kegworth for instance, keep attacking Stoat,

[757_Driver]

The locked door policy is NOT SOP. It is a Government directive, and therefore LAW. It cannot ever be subject to exceptions.

Don't think you're right there.

It may be Dept of Transport advice / directive / whatever, but i'm 99% that it isn't a law.

[frontlefthamster]

Chocks away again... :ugh:

It all depends how the CC have been trained and what their view of the commander is... I make sure that mine know it's OK to come to me with any concern at all, and in non-normals I brief them - in detail - about what I want to know and when. :ok:

Anyhow, if the pax are more savvy, how are they going to get a message to the flight deck crew, other than via our colleagues in the cabin? ;)

Doh. :(

[A330Ryan]

Cabin crew tend to work not look out the window! Inflight we don't get that luxury that FD do.

PS word is Pablo was known for not like being told what he can and can't do. The flight deck is now a locked door end off! Don't bend the rules!

[Taildragger67]

malc4d,

No mate, not just US and UK. Indeed prior to 11 Sep. 2001, it still was not just USA - there were other sterile-flight-deck countries (eg. Canada, Philippines). There are now just many more.

There are probably still some countries where it might be allowed, but they're the exception rather than the rule.

I miss it too... :{

[FAStoat]

Why do you want to jump down my throat?I did not even mention Kegworth.In my time in Aviation,which I believe is considerately more than yours,I have only infrequently met a member of the Cabin Staff ,who had the remotest idea on aerodynamics,area rule,let alone panels,seals,fluids creating vortices etc.Anyway,we were discussing Pablo's misdemeanour,and his subsequent punishment,together with the bland Gov.uk rule of locking the Flight Deck Door,and reasons not to have it,thus getting back to the days when Pablo's actions were not Flight Safety threatening.-Were 'nt we!!!????Have some more caffein!

[A330Ryan]

I think it should stay the way it is.. a locked door!

PS why would cabin crew need to know the above????

[Bronx]

Does anyone know EXACTLY what the UK Law says about who is and who ain't allowed in the FD during flight?

Anyone have a link to where I can read it?

:confused:

B.

[Basil]

Bronx,
This (http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2005/jul/securityrules11september2001/letteraboutthesecurityrulesa2332) may help with chronology and, in general terms, who may have access to the flight deck.

Kisses at the bottom from the Dept for Transport are a nice touch :rolleyes:

[mistic mog]

There are aguments for and against the case against Capt Mason, personally I think that he did the wrong thing but with the best of intentions! I say this because no matter what the situation, the only people that really need to be in a flight deck are the crew. It may seem that this is a harsh view point, but who knows who you are on-board with nowadays!!!! Even Mr.Savage may be a threat to security- as mere citizens, who are we to know.:=

But then when looking back, having been lucky enough in the past to sit up front for many flights, it is dissapointing that this is not possible anymore, but then as a passenger, i think i feel safer knowing that the door is locked and only the pilots have access o the controls.:ok:

From a passenger point of view it is very disconcerting to see an "alien" entering the flight deck after 9/11, as you are unsure of who they are!:bored:

[SpamFritters]

Have to agree with the above.
Rules are rules.

I wonder how many other captains have made the same decision as him in the past though...

Also sorry if it has been covered... but who 'dobbed' him in?

[foxmoth]

Reading these posts it seems about 50:50 on Pablos side or the other side, I would be interested to see the split if we knew who had operated with Pablo, who knew anything of his history in the RAF/MYT, who was an airline pilot and who was nothing to do with the industry professionally, I suspect his supporters would be strongly in the last camp.

[joehunt]

FAStoat

Pablo ought to go to Netjets,since it is run by a load of Belge F16 guys!!!!!!!"

Well what action would they have seen?

As for joining the "top guns" at Netjets I think he would need more of that like another hole in his head. No he needs to look for a privately run A/C, where he would still be allowed to think and exercise some judgement.

[parabellum]

The whole point is, joehunt, that he apparently neither thought or exercised judgement.

[SpamFritters]

Exactly...
Simply put... why should other Skippers stick to the regs but not he? What makes him so special...:ugh:

[cap10lobo]

Does´nt this poor fellow have any collegues with spines?

[parabellum]

The "I'll support him right or wrong" idea won't get anyone very far in aviation, cap10lobo.

[lovethesky]

break the rules = getting the sack
end of.

[KandiFloss]

Right STOP right there! I have only just become aware that Pablo Mason who was suspended for allowing a footballer onto his flight deck (Yes I know ... catch up) was the same 'Pablo' who allowed me onto his flight deck (and before you start tut-tutting) it was before 9-11. It was only because of those Al-quiyeda (don't care if i've spelt it wrong either) prats that have caused these problems for aspiring pilots anyway. Thanks to that Bin-Ladin muppet I can't even go onto the flight deck with my hubby when he flies now. Anyway i'm waffling. I owe part of my passion for flying to Pablo, for giving me a chance to experience a life that until that moment I could have only dreamed about. He allowed me to see first hand about the beauty and grace that aircraft have.

I think that some pruners have been getting personal about him which I think is unfair especially if those people who haven't even met him and are just joining in on the attacks. Ok he may have broken a rule, but how many people haven't?


I would love to meet him again to say thank you. What an amazing man.

[Ghostflyer]

Oh god cut the fluffy bunny crap!

If you went back to 1990 and asked how many of his squadron would have been surprised that this had happened to him, the answer would have been close to zero. Pablo was a legend in his own mind who traded on a handlebar moustache and lived the "better to look good than be good" mantra throughout his career.

I have nothing to do with MYT but I guarantee that his sanction had nothing to do with a first offence. I do not wish Pablo ill will and feel for him and the stress that he and his family are under but even the most tolerant management have to put down a marker sometime. His actions over the last 20 odd years lead to this outcome, not some heavy handed management rule.

Hopefully he will take a look at himself in the mirror, recognise his mistake, pick himself up and get on with his life. If he does that he can be an asset to another employer.

[javelin]

Ghostflyer - probably the most sensible post on this thread yet :D

[Fart Master]

As an ex MYT pilot I have to say Ghostflyer has hit the nail on the head.

Pablos final mistake was merely the straw that broke the camels back.:ok:

[sdac]

Spot on Ghostflyer.:D

Can we move on from this subject now? It is getting really tedious:rolleyes:

[rog747]

worlds gone mad

the good old days of flying are long gone...as crew and as a pax.

(looks longingly at my my BOAC junior jet club log book sigh.......
and my caledonian airways boeing 707 boarding pass to palma signed by the captain as it was my jet flight and i sat in the seat behind for landing!)

thats what got me in the industry!

this poor chap capt pablo was on a private charter and lets in one of the players for a look see ... so what!

i hate the environment we are now in and i have sadly but thankfully left the aviation business after 35 years as i did not join it to be a ruddy SECURITY GUARD!!

having no wish to show a diservice to security guards but i am sorry after my love of aircraft, the crews, (and yes some of the passengers too are nice) after reading the posts here about this incident it only confirms to me why i have had to leave the business...
it sucks now due to the ghastly rules and hostile attitudes we now have to deal with on a daily basis iso of an enjoyable career which as many of you have said ALL STARTED WITH A FLIGHT DECK VISIT
lets put it in perspective here!

i was so mad at reading this and espesh at some of the posters here gloating away, sorry to be harsh but i cannot bear to see 2 faced commentaries.

the uk flightcrew industry has always been made of fantastic pilots and to assasinate this guy pubicly here as 'maverick' and a bad boy is appalling,

why dont you all now use your energy and promote and lobby the CAA to relax cockpit visits and lets start to recapture the best days of the industry if thats ever possible but unless we do its a lost cause isnt it and you will be dictated to for ever.
its now in free fall to the lowest depths ever imho

how many of you would be comfortable with offering flight deck visits to kids etc?
i wish we could poll this

[FAStoat]

That was the best blog on the subject I have read so far!!Pablo's problems of over exuberance were,it seems,the main problem,and this incident was the final straw.However,the relationship with passengers has been lost for ever,as allowing them up front on a normal farepaying flights does not bode well for flight safety,with the possibility of one being a Numbskull fundamentalist!!We used to allow them up to the cockpit for the Take Off and Landing,especially during the Year of the Child telethon.We auctioned these positions,as did Air Traffic for descents and climbs,and provided several hundreds of pounds in Donations.The Roaring Lights of the Auroraborialis was another that we auctioned off to the passengers.If the Law now prohibits this,then it is a great shame,but there we are.How many of us now really enjoy this job?We monitor a series of screens,and sit with 5 computers doing the job we used to love.Hand Flying is now a NO No!!!A friend of mine was threatened with "Swords and Medals" confrontation with the Boss,if he dared fly his 747 manually.Do Pilots get any respite from the boring drone of a several hours flight now,unless they wander down the cabin,and chat to the odd interested passenger,or chat with the cabin staff?Most Companies impose a No Chinwagging policy below 10,000 feet,except for checks,so this also can result in Tea and Biscuits .The spy in the Sky,which HR and other gnomes frequently monitor makes for a very boring existence.I can think of No other reason for letting off steam,especially if you have a Charter Flight,where everyone is known to each other in the cabin,and relations between Cockpit and Cabin would be a "Good Thing",to quote" 1066 and All that".We will be hung up on racks in the future and fed into the cockpit on rails,like Thunderbirds,and then put back on hooks after the job is done.Is this how future Airline Pilots will end up????:uhoh:

[E. MORSE]

No, don't think so ; the Thunderbirds needed to scramble to their crafts , therefore they needed the rails , to respond asap to somebody in dire need for International Rescue.

[rog747]

sigh

i know, its all ghastly now...

i suppose when i think back to my days at BMA, then yes we had what some here describe as 'mavericks' maybe, did i feel unsafe though>? NO

as i put in one of my other posts about BMA and its viscounts,
we flew liverpool to palma on friday nights on summer charters,
(it took all night lol)

i could sit with the capt on the flight deck for t/o, always usually,
he came down the cabin later in the (long) cruise and chatted to all the passengers and then he had his dinner in the empty last row !
(cries into my porridge)

where are we now eh?

i know we can all be nostalgic and blurry misty eyed (we all loved steam trains too) BUT it isnt that long ago this all was stopped.
you guys as pilots could put your foot down and say enough is enough and reown your skills and qualities and then maybe we rekindle something which if we lose now we lose forever.

as i said in my previous post i wish we could poll this.
a nasty thought is that you will all end up like tube train drivers on automatic, and not airline pilots.;)

[joehunt]

rog747 & FAStoat

2 good posts, with sanity prevailing.

Agreed, lobby the CAA, MP's and anyone else we can think of. Why just roll over and accept stupidity?

As someone pointed out in one of the previous posts regarding this unfortunate business. "I was only following orders..." was heard at the Nurnberg war trials on many occasion.

God save me from Robots please.

[flyinthesky]

Errr, so this thread has now got to the point of comparing nazi war tribunals with Pablos' antics!! Come on, grow up.

Whether we like it or not, our livelihood is governed by the CAA and a large framework of rules. Many of us in the industry DO NOT agree with a large percentage of the rules, BUT they are here to stay. You can lobby the CAA/ Government/ Uncle Tom Cobblys grandmother all you like. It won't make a blind bit of difference.

Many on this website sit at their desk and think about flying as it was 30 years ago. It has changed along with many other industries, not always for the better, but it HAS changed.

We pilots, although on here we now seem to represent a minority, still have to make a living and if that means sticking to the rules then so be it. I can't see many accountants and such like making up their own rules and expecting to get away with it. Unfortunately rules are a sad addition to modern life. If, as a pilot you wish to fly with a minimum of rules, then go to Africa. There you can have minimum rules, along with minimum safety standards and a few more crashes per year than here. You pays your money etc.

As I said many pages ago, if you do not work for MYT then how in gods name can you ask for him to be reinstated. The man is not a living legend, he is a walking nightmare for many that have to work alongside him. He broke rules many times. Ergo he knew he would have to face the consequences. This WAS the final straw. Therefore he has to find alternative employment. It doesn't matter whether the company in question was MYT or Tescos. The employment contract is still the same.

[everynowandthen]

This nostalgia's all well & good, I have great memories as a child visiting the cockpit for take off, landing etc. However it's a vastly different world today. I think there are many, many more threats out there to flight safety than there ever were, terrorists apart. With the drinking/charter culture as it is now, it will never be as safe it was and therefore, for me, cockpit security is sadly a necessary evil nowadays. Way too many horror stories from flights all over the place to make me feel happy about an open door policy, even if it is a selective one.

[Ye Olde Pilot]

Lock the doors and lock this thread.
If Paul wants cabin visits he can learn to drive a London black cab.
Or buy a Cherokee:}

[Piltdown Man]

So now we've come to the end, which arse dobbed him in? Yup! Absolutely the right thing to do, but my advice would be to you, never, EVER make a mistake. Never, EVER trust anyone and check your brake pipes every night. Because these things come back to bite you. The time to have spoken up was before the incident. Because if this really was a "Safety related" issue, that would have been the correct time, wouldn't it? But you did what you had to, didn't you. It good to be right, isn't it?

PM

[pontius's pa]

"We pilots, ALTHOUGH ON HERE WE NOW SEEM TO REPRESENT A MINORITY, still have to make a living and if that means sticking to the rules then so be it."

Flyinthesky is right on the button.

Even though many PROFESSIONAL WORKING pilots have said time and time again that this is the law and you comply with it like it or not, and that this incident was but one of many in this person's career and his demise was inevitable, there are still many posters, most of whose aviation experience seems only to reside in an extensive library of Biggles's books, prattle on about the freedom of the skies, the privileges of command etc.

A lot more than "enough already."

As an aside, I've nothing against Biggles, but he has a lot to answer for regarding my choice of career.

I think I will go to bed now and hopefully wake up in a world where Paul, Pablo, or whatever his name is, is heard of no more.

[joehunt]

".......wake up in a world where Paul, Pablo, or whatever his name is, is heard of no more."

The guy also served and fought for his country. Have you ever done anything like that? No I bet you haven't. Let me try and make it a bit easier to get your head around. Have you ever put something back into your country or is it, take, take,take......? The latter I think.

[411A]

The sad fact remains, joehunt, that Pablo was just not suited to be a civvy Commander.
He should have stayed in the military, where he was more at home.
Many military guys just are not especially able to make the transistion, and Pablo was one of them...he was not especially bright it would appear.
Twist the tail of the tiger too often, prepare to be bitten.:ugh:

[flyinthesky]

Joe Hunt,

I don't believe anyone was casting aspersions on Pablos military career, although we have a few guys in MYT who were in the RAF at the same time and their comments are quite illuminating.

We are talking about a situation that occurred on a commercial aircraft governed by commercial laws. He broke the rules repeatedly, he got fired. End of....

Mods; is it not about time this thread got locked. I think the few pilots on here who can be bothered to reply are rapidly losing interest. In fact, can we have a forum where you actually have to prove your quals to gain entry. Now that would be useful from a professional perspective.

[pontius's pa]

joehunt

Since you ask, yes

Have you??

[joehunt]

pontius's pa

Since you ask, yes I have.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

perkin - it is most disappointing to read such ill-considered and foolish comments about the contributions of brave men, whose sacrifices have won you the right to make a public exhibition of yourself with only your own embarrassment to be concerned about. It is completely irrelevant that in your eyes the Iraq war: had very little real bearing on the occupants of this country, with the exception of oil prices We could argue all day about the rights and wrongs of individual conflicts - the fact you did not approve of this war does not lessen the contribution made by Pablo and numberous others in the service of his country.

The key thing is that the individual concerned, like countless brave men and women before him, was willing to lay his life on the line for his nation - I for one am profoundly grateful to such people in all our wars and not just the ones I liked. In this country, our servicemen and women do not have the luxury of choosing the wars they fight and die in - that is the responsibility of the government of the day.

Regarding your crass comments about Pablo receiving many tens of thousands of pounds worth of training at the taxpayers expense which potentially set him up for a fine career in commercial aviation after he left the RAF your woeful ignorance is again on display for us all to marvel at. You may be interested to know that the RAF actually spent millions in cash and many years of effort on his training, and not one penny of it was spent to set him up for a career in commerical aviation. It was spent so that when his country required him to fight, and possibly die, on its behalf he would have necessary skills to do so. The fact that some years later he took up a career in commercial flying is neither here nor there.

Will you turn round to the mother who has seen her son's legs blown off by the IRA in Ireland, or the wife who lost her husband at the hands of the Taleban in Afghanistan, and tell them their loved ones' contributions did not count because they were in the 'wrong' wars? I trust not.

You may have no sympathy for Pablo - I personally do. My own experience of life is that 'what goes around comes around'. You may one day require a bit of a break - with the same mercy you treated others you yourself will be be treated. Could be interesting!

[jackharr]

I feel sorry for you people working today. I had retired long before the 9/11 business and before PC and anti-terrorist measures took over completely. It would drive be absolutely mad if I were working in today's climate

During my career, several times I had messages from the back that we had a nervous passenger who would like to see us. Typical was the evening when one man was terrified of the flashes from distant thunderstorms. I invited him to the flight deck, showed him the radar and he appreciated how we pilots were really enjoying the free light show. His fears were certainly calmed and he thanked us profusely.

I have a daughter who when young was terrified of thunderstorms. I started showing her growing cu-nims and saying how they might develop into thunderstorms. She began to understand and no longer has any fears.

The pre-PC era is amusing to look back on. I was flying with a very senior pilot who was in the right hand seat. A young boy visited the flight deck and the senior pilot was all too happy to have him sit on his lap (!) and let him "pretend" to hold the control column! It seemed harmless at the time but what on earth would people make of all that nowadays?

Jack Harrison

[JEM60]

Yes, but rules are rules!!!!!!! and he broke them, and paid the penalty for it. No defence. He signed a contract with the company accepting these rules. I think personally that this has been done to death and is now getting quite boring.

[joehunt]

JEM60

Rules are rules!!!!!, you are correct. Better watch that ticker of yours as you aren't getting any younger now, are you. So calm down.

Can you honestly say you have never, ever broken a rule?

Maybe you may have broken a rule and if one of you collegues had "dobbed you in" you may have lost your job and your lively hood.

The people that worry me the most, are the ones that never ever make mistakes, because when they do eventually screw up, they screw up big time.

[Bronx]

Norman SF
Great post. :ok:

joehunt
There's no point trying to reason with the "rules are rules" guys who think anyone who breaks a rule or a law deserves to lose their job and their livelihood.

And before you waste any more time on JEM60 here's another gem from him so you can decide if it's worth itI used to be a PPL before I bought a flight sim. Now, with about £700 of add ons it has EVERYTHING I need to imagine myself with four bars on my shoulder. Being an early riser, I fly to the Balearics before my wife is even awake. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[joehunt]

Bronx

As for JEM60, yes I am a sucker! Ha, why didn't someone warn me before?! Teach me to read the previous posts before I submit but also find it depressing to read a lot of the garbage.

Totally agree though, great post by NSF and eloquently put across.

Does anyone know if Pablo has another flying job BTW? I am aware he probably doesn't need or want it, after confronting the BS he's had to endure of late.

I would give aviation up myself if I could afford to.

[J.O.]

The people that worry me the most, are the ones that never ever make mistakes, because when they do eventually screw up, they screw up big time.

I would hardly call the act of inviting someone into the flight deck a "mistake", particularly when it was done by a man who has a reputation for airing his frustrations with post 9/11 security requirements in public. He knew exactly what he was doing at the time. Whether it warrants dismissal or not is another matter, but don't call it a mistake.

[Daifly]

Pablo was the front page story in European Business Air News (www.ebanmagazine.com) this month. He is looking to move into the corporate world apparently.

It was a wierd story for the frontpage of a magazine all about what the business aviation community's getting up to. Maybe he knows the editor ;-)

I'd give him a job though. He might have broken the rules, but with a moustache like that, he should be allowed to break them...

[JEM60]

Well, Bronx. What a smallminded post from you. Just because I am not a 'Sky God' doesn't actually disqualify me from having a brain, or an opinion. As it happened, I chose not to be an airline pilot, and went on to other things equally stimulating, and rather more exciting. Y our post was childish in th xtreme. Suggest you grow up a bit!!!

[kick the tires]

How long are people going to bang on about this thread??

Over and over, same old same old!

Mod's, isnt it time to lock it off??

[joehunt]

kick the tires

Getting bored with it are we, old chap.

Let me try to make it a little more interesting.

Anyone who has flown professionally for 10 years or more in any field of aviation, and not broken any rule or law?

Can anyone answer yes to the above question? Honest, hand on heart answers please.

I answer no and I run the flight department for a very large muti national Corporation.

[Fork Handles]

So Joe,
Why dont you give him a job then?

[JEM60]

Bronx. Next time you quote somebody off a Microsoft FLight Sim thread, you might include my closing remark, which, what I surprise, you somehow omitted. That remark was 'IT'S ONLY A GAME'. You, obviously never play computer games at all of course. I also find it rather amusing to discover that you also must have browsed the site in order to discover my post. So, therefore, you are obviously as sad as you think I am. I would also say that I have never posted on Pprune any opinion on how to fly ANYTHING or replied to any technical questions at all. I don't, unlike some people, post on subjects I don't have knowledge of. But I do still have opinions. Come to that, why am I bothering with someone who writes such juvenile replies. Last word. Can't be bothered any more. Bored.

[joehunt]

Fork Handles

Unfortunately, at the moment we need experience on type, otherwise he would be at the top of my list for sure.

We don't have a great turnover of staff either. Ever heard of "dead man's shoes"?

[parabellum]

Ever heard of BS?

[joehunt]

Well I have heard of you, so the answer has to be yes. Does that answer your question? 8th wonder.......

[stellair]

JEM60,

I chose not to be an airline pilot, and went on to other things equally stimulating, and rather more exciting

What's the point of you being on a pilots forum then with your "opinions"?

Why not leave the discussion to those who can debate the rights or wrongs of Pablo's actions and flight deck security having experienced it first hand.

That's the problem with aviation forums, because it's a high profile subject everyone has an opinion, often unjustified!

Pprune is littered with it!

[JEM60]

Stellair, I do actually take your point, and will say that virtually all my posts are to do with either spectators gallery [not a spotter] self loading freight [large amount of experience] and Aviation History. VERY rarely do I post on rumours and news, and, if you read my post again, you will find it has NOTHING to do with flight deck security, but deals with people and how they follow rules and regulations. Also, I think you are well justified in your criticsims of people on Rumours and News. I amSure that there are people on there masquerading as Airline Pilots, when they are not. I, however, am NOT one of them, but have had a lifetime of interest in Aviation.

[JEM60]

Woops. My apologies. Just read the full banner at the top of this site.[how the HELL DID I MISS THAT???] I will retreat immediately to the Non airline sites, and hopefully take some other people with me. APOLOGIES!!