Bullied by the Boss?

[kamanya]

There is speculation on our local forum that the PIC may have been bullied into trying a questionable landing by the Boss (CEO of business that owned/rented the jet) that resulted in a crash being fatal to all.

http://www.pprune.org/biz-jets-ag-flying-ga-etc/442343-crash-plettenberg-bay-south-africa.html

Whether the speculation is true or not, is there a precedent for this in your experience? How do you deal with it?

Some Chairmen, Presidents and CEO's can be pretty forceful.

[His dudeness]

Whether the speculation is true or not, is there a precedent for this in your experience? How do you deal with it?

Some Chairmen, Presidents and CEO's can be pretty forceful.

At my present position its nearly viceversa, the boss being very, very interested in his safety, he would ask us after every landing that is not conducted in VMC wether this was dangerous....

But back to the q, as an air taxi pilot I had these issues regurlarly at hand, can´t really say there is a 'one does it all' solution to it. Some need forceful feedback, some need convincing that it is not just us being to lazy, some need to be reminded that we don´t wan´t to be forced into unlawful actions.
Most I have to say, have not exerted pressure. But then, some of us feel pressure just by being asked "can we land?"

What you have to have in hand though is a second solution. Like, "well, I´m sorry, but Farnborough is closed for weather, we can get you to Luton and have a limo ready and reposition to Fab when the wx has improved to pick you up later in order not to hurt your schedule more then necessary". If you can provide a new calculation and what time penalty is involved you have done your homework correctly.
Also, when in doubt bout the wx, I tell my guests up front that we might need to divert and ask which alternate (obviously one mentions only the ones that should work) would be more convinient should the need arise...

Just standing there saying no, not poss, is definately not to the liking of most pax I flew yet...

All in all, just use common sense.

[Gulfstreamaviator]

That's the theory, but sometimes the PIC makes the call, and for whatever reason the VVIP has many times put pressure on the crew to operate outside their comfort zone, That is the crews responsabililty to determine.

Once we took the VVIP, who sat in the jump seat, on a mins ILS (due FOG) to Venice.....he never saw the ground, and when we landed in Treviso, he then drove to Venice, as he passed Marco Polo his drive complained that at 50kph, it was dangerous, the boss then upon his collection, stated that he would never question our policy in future.

End of that story, but not the end of the VVIP who shouts loudly, and continues to bully the crew.
glf

[LGW Vulture]

One probably just has to have a look at the Polish Presidential Flight thread to see what any kind of pressure gets exerted when the Boss is in charge!

[DERG]

Politely ask the supervision to take a look at the reason of your decision which is in the closet and of "some urgency". Make sure he or she enters first. When the door is shut advise as necessary. Always works well.

[Miles Magister]

It happened to me once, I just gave the CEO the aircraft keys right there and then and walked off. Of course you have to be old, ugly and have no mortgage to do that but you can do it politely.

Take care, be polite and try not to get upset then walk as soon as you can making sure you are still alive to walk.

MM

[dc10fr8k9]

"Take care, be polite and try not to get upset then walk as soon as you can making sure you are still alive to walk."

Excellent and eloquent advice Miles Magister.

I have always said it is better to be unemployed for a little while than dead for a long time. And better to arrive late in this world than early in the next.

Fly safe all, and remember who's the boss when the door is closed! Not the CEO, not the President. The PIC is boss. and if he/she forgets that, then trouble is brewing.

[PLovett]

IIRC the G3 that crashed at Aspen back in 2001 had pax pressure as one of the causes alongside other shortcomings.

Aspen Crash (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Avjet_Aspen_crash)

[aviatn]

A similar occurrence had happened to me as well. Moscow Vnukovo was snowed in and had closed the airport for about 20 minutes to clear the runways of snow which had fallen just earlier. We were put in a Russian hold.
My colleague spoke with the pax to inform him of the delay. The guy replied in a very harsh voice that he doesn’t care and “ordered” him to land.
He aslo told him to call a number on the ground to obtain the necessary clearance. My colleague didn’t stand up to pressure very well and actually called the number given.
The result was that this individual on the phone had no clue who we were and we stayed in the “hold” for about 20 minutes.
It is harder for some to stand up to pressures applied.

[BeCareful]

"Sir/Your Highness/Your Excellency, you are paying me to keep you safe, and that's what I am doing. We cannot land here due to weather being below landing minima. However, here are your choices, select one and we'll make it happen."

If they're insistent, you say "Sir, I am sorry, but I will not risk your life and lives of everyone else onboard. Our destination is not an option due to weather being below SAFE (gotta throw this in instead of legal) landing minima, but here are our viable options. Please choose one, and we'll make it happen."

The trick is, you have to make them feel in charge without letting them kill you. That's what you do by giving them choice of other options and letting them choose that option. If you stand your ground firmly, but politely, your clients will definitely respect your more.

[sovereign680]

In more than 20 years of corporate flying, including a lot of CJ single pilot flying. I walked away two times, a third time I did not show up to fly a CJ over gross weight across the north Atlantic.(That private pilot owner tried / used 12 pilots in the 3 years since he got the aircraft, he offered me a contract in which I had to waive the authority of pilot in command) In all cases I was out of a job after it. But I would do it again.

[I.R.PIRATE]

Pilots that are weak enough to be bullied, normally end up making the headlines.

In the battle of job vs survival, there can only ever be one victor.

[BestAviation]

There was a really good article in B&C Aviation this month dealing with the issue of receiving pressure from the boss to do things that may very well kill you.

SmithKline/Quest - the largest part 91 [private] operator I the US had a horrendous safety culture, and when pilots where interviewed why they let themselves pressure into some of the things they did, the common answer was "well, I also have a mortgage to pay".

it took them 5 fatal accidents before someone more levelheaded (NTSB) decided to investigate what was going on within the company's culture.

Should be compulsory reading for everyone - A Failed Culture of Safety | AVIATION WEEK (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_content.jsp?channel=bca&id=xml/bca_xml/2011/02/01/BC_02_01_2011_p53-280745.xml&headline=A%20Failed%20Culture%20of%20Safety&next=20)

[PBY]

I am a safety bully. I bully the bullies. They seem to respond well, because a bully understands another bully. It is the weak and too polite types, who in my opinion have problems with bullies. So far I have lost job because of that only twice. But once it does not count, because I got it back 3 days later. The other case, I have quit the job myself.
I never understand, how people can exchange life for job. How can they be afraid of loosing job, but not afraid of loosing life.
May be, I have to learn, how to be polite with those guys. That could be my weakness. But as I said, being polite only seems to make the problem worse.
The best is to say, shut up and sit down. Now I am the president. After we land, you are the president.

[DERG]

PBY..oh yes. The problem is that we are only maybe 5% of the population that has the guts to do that.

More often than not it is the middle managers who are so ignorant. The boss often can clearly see the benefit. If the boss cannot see the benefit then you walk away.

I call the middle managers "the greasy pole climbers". Save $5 today and next year the company pays a $5000 dollar cost.

[411A]

Many years ago, when I was the overseas aviation department manager for a quite large international company, the local area manager desired the flight crews to fly 7 days per week, as the local branch was very busy.
This was not acceptable, as the duty days were quite long, so I told the guy it was not possible.
This fellow had a hissy fit, so...I picked up the telephone and called the company chairman in LosAngeles (3am his time) and appraised him of the situation.
The chairman asked to speak to the local area manager.
It was a very short conversation...the local manager was told in no uncertain terms that the aviation manager reported directly to the company chairman, and no one else.
Slight problem solved.:E

[theficklefinger]

Most pilots can't fly to the defined performance capabilities of the aircraft that the boss bought. It's just a classic case of the boss buying more plane then pilot. If you can't fly with the seats full, and in the weather, down to minimums, into tight fields, go do something else. The reciprocal of this concept is pilots never getting out of the aircraft they are flying because the boss is so tickled pink that you can make a Citation fly GIV loads, down to minimums, into small strips, single pilot, and burn 1/9th the fuel his buddy is paying and he still has to drive to get to where you landed. I guess I never learned to feign incompetence under the guise that the aircraft wasn't capable enough to get the job done, ergo, we need to buy a bigger plane.

[hawker750]

I guess most, or all of the posts, here are from corporate flyers and it seems the attitude is that the bosses may bully and it can compromise safety. So surely this is a good example of why your sector should be regulated with a "private AOC" and Ops manual. In charter we do not get bulied because all we have to do (if necessary) is quote the manual, which is the law. If the pax don't like it they can go hassle another operator. QED.
I know a lot of you have expressed concern about the forthcoming regulation of your sector but from what has been said here it seems long overdue.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

15 replies all of them historical, 10 of them anecdotal does not a problem make.

It may seem wierd to those that prostitute themselves to the CAA by way of putting up with Airline levels of Bull**** to do a chartered Geneva daystop that there is a corner of the industry that can easily self regulate and simply get things done for private owners who have no interest in sharing their aircraft with others.

Its worked for years without intervention, whilst I welcome improvements in CRM, Simulator Technology and groundschool refresher training (the latter of which will be foreign to some AOC operators) there seems little point in documenting best practise when its happening anyway - whos going to audit us the boss?

Why regulate for regulations sake, its almost like you're trying to share the pain that you're made to suffer. You all made your bed by choosing to operate for hire and reward and put yourself under commercial financial pressure,I would suggest that you pull the blanket up and get on with it and leave those who operate in the purely corporate and private leisure arena to themselves.

With the recession, reduced experience levels of captains and the desire to continue to operate in a market which has too much capacity, its the AOC holders that require closest scrutiny. The FOI's wont have time for private operators.

Whats next FOI's for PPL's

[DERG]

Litigation during corporate manslaughter proceedings.

Once a case has been recorded like this A Failed Culture of Safety | AVIATION WEEK (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_content.jsp?channel=bca&id=xml/bca_xml/2011/02/01/BC_02_01_2011_p53-280745.xml&headline=A%20Failed%20Culture%20of%20Safety&next=20)

following offenses can be classified. Once the high court has found that "the boss" is guilty then comes the sanction. The old days are ending.

[hawker750]

G-SPOT
I think I hit a raw nerve with my point. I am in no way a lover of paperwork and bull**** for the sake of it, quite the reverse, I am quite vocal over some of the more inane practices of EASA. But, unless the posts above have been fabricated (all 10, I doubt)) there has to be a safety issue, an issue you either ignore or are not worried about, either way that in itself is a serious safety issue, but I suppose ignorance is bliss as they say.

[His dudeness]

Hawker 750
I guess most, or all of the posts, here are from corporate flyers and it seems the attitude is that the bosses may bully and it can compromise safety. So surely this is a good example of why your sector should be regulated with a "private AOC" and Ops manual.

my post (no.4)

At my present position its nearly viceversa, the boss being very, very interested in his safety, he would ask us after every landing that is not conducted in VMC wether this was dangerous....


Implying that I´m not an air taxi pilot anymore, but coorperate...

But back to the q, as an air taxi pilot...


... I had these issues regurlarly at hand, can´t really say there is a 'one does it all' solution to it. Some need forceful feedback, some need convincing that it is not just us being to lazy, some need to be reminded that we don´t wan´t to be forced into unlawful actions.
Most I have to say, have not exerted pressure. But then, some of us feel pressure just by being asked "can we land?"

What you have to have in hand though is a second solution. Like, "well, I´m sorry, but Farnborough is closed for weather, we can get you to Luton and have a limo ready and reposition to Fab when the wx has improved to pick you up later in order not to hurt your schedule more then necessary". If you can provide a new calculation and what time penalty is involved you have done your homework correctly.
Also, when in doubt bout the wx, I tell my guests up front that we might need to divert and ask which alternate (obviously one mentions only the ones that should work) would be more convinient should the need arise...

Just standing there saying no, not poss, is definately not to the liking of most pax I flew yet...

All in all, just use common sense.

Okay hawker, I understand why you are jealous, I was it too when I was in your position.... 'over here' I enjoy no commercial pressure, best possible maintenance, no flights to range limits with LRC sold at low prices that were calculated without wind and will clearly have headwinds, no flights with overweight, regular refreshers in a sim etcetcetc.

The numbers show with distilled clarity, that AOC operations are WAY more dangerous than coorperate ops.

There is no need for a private AOC, no matter how often you AOC guys repeat it. It seems to be the mantra of an industry, that was and is so divided that a single company (NetJets) can give you such a hard time that you now try put us out of a job and our bosses become your clients because a private operation is getting complicated and expensive.

I have news for you: won´t happen, at least not at the scale you want it too happen. People will go N or maybe M or whatever.

The only thing you (the 'aoc industry') have done better than we did ourself, is lobbiing in Montreal and Brussels. Lets wait and see what happens.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

G-SPOT
I think I hit a raw nerve with my point. I am in no way a lover of paperwork and bull**** for the sake of it, quite the reverse, I am quite vocal over some of the more inane practices of EASA. But, unless the posts above have been fabricated (all 10, I doubt)) there has to be a safety issue, an issue you either ignore or are not worried about, either way that in itself is a serious safety issue, but I suppose ignorance is bliss as they say.

Well this seems to be the problem, you're basing your judgement on 10 stories across two continents over an undetermined length of time and concluding we need to legislate and when proved to be foolish you play the "safety issue" card so you're either a fool, a health and safety auditor or you work for EASA which one is it......;)

Im not ignorant to the problem in the same way that you're not ignorant to the fact that AOC operators sometimes falsify load sheets, now Im not saying you falsify load sheets but what if I made you sign a declaration prior to each sector to say specifically that YOU HAVE NOT falsified the load sheet, if you dont already how would you feel if I lobbyed to EASA that you should?

I set my stall out early days with the boss, I'll try my best but once the door shuts our roles are reversed. As somebody said previously once those roles are not reversed theres only going to be one winner which will no doubt be the side of a mountain.

If you're under the impression that he pays you to get him there then thats wrong, he pays you to keep him safe. All I have to do is remind him of that and theres never an issue. If you need an ops manual to hide behind stay doing charter work...

[hawker750]

G-SPOT
AOC operators already have to certify a loadsheet is in accordance with written instructions and the ops manual. That is tantamount to saying that it has not been falsified. The copy of that load sheet has to be left on the ground prior to departure. Do you leave a copy of the load sheet on the ground? I know a lot of corporates do not even do one. It would have been quite intersesting to see the (non existant) loadsheet of the citation accident at Biggin a few years ago.
Why bang on at AOC operators? It seems that you have some sort of axe to grind aganst them. What is the problem, were you once employed by one? I did not bring up the subject of bosses putting pressure on crews, the corporate guys brought up this subject and I was only commenting on it, comments you seem not to like.
I am sure that certain AOC operaors are more unscrupulous than others, they are the ones who tend not to last too long.

[BestAviation]

When did the bureaucrats take over the control of the flight deck!? :bored:

No such thing as BIC yet is there, or is that coming next?

As Donald Douglas once famously said "When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the airplane, only then is it time to go flying." I think that's were we're all heading folks. I just don't understand how more manuals will make us safer, they just excuse us from applying some common sense.

Sorry - I guess that's a bit off topic but my point is that all these manuals don't mean anything unless the user (boss, management or pilots) respects them.

Bullying is an attitude problem that can't be solved with more paperwork.

[I.R.PIRATE]

The law is already there in black and white. All it takes is common sense and adherence and you have no issues.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

H750

You sort of missed the point, im not saying that theres a problem with load sheets and yes you do one anyway but theres the rub. documenting something you already do seems pointless.

Your manual states you need to do one, so thats ok then....my point being notwithstanding your legal requirement to do it and do it properly it could be falsified by an unscrupulous operator, you dont hear me crying out for more oversight on loadsheets for charter operators

Ive no axe to grind with AOC operator I used to happily fly for one, far from it. You have a job to do and a margin to make, you could call the captains fuel league at Ryanair more subtle bullying from the boss than anything Ive ever experienced and its there every day!

We operate a large mid size bizjet with a very small team, the bull**** to flying ratio is all out of kilter anyway and we're on the very operator friendly M reg. More oversight will just mean less time for small teams such as mine to concentrate on something important and could well be deemed a hazard to flight safety.

May I respectfully suggest you're been lugging around this AOC for so long you've sort of forgotten how straightforward it can actually be to operate an aircraft safely - just asking.

Sorry about the tone of the last post but you can see theres very little support or sense of viability for a toothless ops manual that has no enforcibility or place in law

The SMS arrow has left the bow, do we really need one for a team of two? Before you give me the stock answer have a really good think, despite my crap tone there's a good discussion to be had here

[hawker750]

G-SPOT
I hear what you say, and being an AOC operator I have opposed many things over the years that I deemed pointless. However, I came to the conclusion that no one listens and one has to just get on with it (like it or not). I do operate AOC and there is nothing realy I can legally do to change that.
I think what the aviation authorities around the world are working towards, especially VP and to a certain extent M is to avoid flags of convenience like the shipping industry got into whereby Liberian tankers with untrained Philippeno crews were tramping around the world dumping cude everywhere. I am not accusing your sector of our industry of this, just explaining how the authorities work and think.
We are a vey small team here but we do have to dedicate time to paperwork (SMS, quality and all that). I do not wish it on you but I think you are adopting a head in the sands attitude if you do not think a certain amount of this will not filter down to you.
We own two aircraft of our own and manage another for a private owner. We previously managed an aircraft for an owner who realy took liberties. 16 hour duty days, 8 hours in a hotel etec etc. The crews who also operated AOC hated it and it realy did not fit in with our AOC requirements. This latest management deal is on the basis that the aircraft is operated to public transport standards in all respects. Problem solved.
I am against bull**** paperwork, but you realy cannot agree that not having legislation on your crew flight times is good for flight safety. In these times of job shortages I am sure many private crews would be tempted to fly 10 hours and then be told by the boss to fly straight home. I have heard of such instances.
I have more of your type of attitude than you may think so do not bash me I am certainly not trying to bash you.
PS thanks for the apology

[G-SPOTs Lost]

Ok...

I hear what you are saying, however the talk of Liberian Oil Tankers is a little extreme if indeed the authorities do see pvt/corporate operators in that way, its almost like the AOC operators are beleiving their own merchandising and fabricating in their own heads potential safety risks in the great unwashed private/corporate sectors. Its simply not true and as somebody has already pointed out the evidence apparently\allegedly supports the alternative point of view.

I cringe when I see crews in Hawkers and Excels "off to do an LPC" and arrive back on the ramp less than an hour later. We hired in an aircraft 10 days ago and lets just say a perfectly legal AOC day wasn't very legal/sensible in my eyes. No account was taken of the fact that the skipper was up a little after 4am had an hours drive to work and had his final sector at 1900 that day, I just hope he was able to get his head down during the day and this is before we embrace Subpart Q purported by the very agency that you wish to impose upon us.

I dont see the problems to the degree you suggest certainly in our operation and those of freinds and colleagues, the reasoning you forward is based largely on maybe's, "I've Heard"s, "tempted" so forgive me if I'm resistant to fixing something that really hasn't yet proved to be broken.

Maybe Ive been insulated from it, maybe I need to hug my boss next time I see him.

As IR PIRATE said

The law is already there in black and white. All it takes is common sense and adherence and you have no issues.

Which pretty much sums up where I'm coming from.

[hawker750]

G-SPOTS
Believe me that I think I invented the phrase "Rules are for the guidance of the wise and for the blind obedience of fools" but I think it was Earnest Gann. Unfortunately most authorities do not take this atitude.
As regarding skimpy LPC check rides. I agree less than 1 hour is a bit tight, our average is 1 hour 40 minutes when done in the aircraft. However, you are not comparing like with like. Do not forget we have to do 2 check rides a year plus a line check plus a company check ride with the CAA. I would opt for your once a year in the sim if I could.
If you charter aircraft from time to time, try us, we are not as inflexable as you may think, just a dedicated small team trying to make it work (within the contraints of an AOC)

[NuName]

At the end of the day, with whatever new rules are put in place to fix a problem that doesn't exist, there will still be pilots, and operators asking pilots, to bend the rules or outrightly disregard them. It has always been that way and it always will be. If your boss asks you to do something that you consider unethical, illegal or dangerous, you are the only lonely one who can deal with it. The buck stops at the front on the left.

[His dudeness]

In Germany, operating to the german FDR is mandatory as soon as you get paid for flying. Is that different in the UK?

NuName, exactly and that is the same for AOC and non AOC ops.

[His dudeness]

I was very surprised at how slack the LBA were.

I know.... remember an accident, were a Citation 2 SP went from A (over weight, established by the fuel upload) to airfield B, tried to land at B to fly then (over weight, since the flight with 8 pax/650nm in a IISP cannot be done with out being over 12500lbs) to Port C, arrived at B and tried to land during Cat III, left parts of the of airplane there (hit the ground before THR, in the missed almost hit the terminal) and as a result went back and did land minus one main gear at port of origin. A/C was substancially damaged
The operator was not shut down. The boss himself flew this very trip.

'My' guy from the LBA was the auditor there as well at the time. I asked him several times what one would have to do to have his AOC revoked. Apparently - and that happened to a friend of mine who had an AOC at the time as well, the only time they really react if you can´t produce the 80.000€. THEN they pull the plug. And quick.
BTW, the question why they don´t pull plugs at airlines that have annonced losses into hundreds of millions of € went unanswered.

JAROPS, EU-OPS and the proposed EASA-OPS delegate control into the companies. Its all about paper, and the ability of the authority to explain, - should the train derail - that all requirements were fulfilled and checked by the authority. Checks are done only - as you say - at the annual auditing events/checks and when SAFA checks are conducted. I personally know an AOC operator that was caught twice without a MEL and proper checklists and had a very hard time to stay in business. This seems to be an effect of EASA.

I don´t share your view that we are under regulated. I think there is some regulation that does not make too much sense or is just aimed at airlines and not at biz aviation (e.g.FDR), most of it does and is there.
I also think that less regs, but more clear ones are the way to go. And they have to be enforced.

In my experience there is underpunishing of repeated offenders, in case of the LBA some operators are cut way to much slack. Some individuals that have crossed my career path belong anywhere, but not in a cockpit, let alone in the chair of a CEO or DO or the like, but thats exactly where they sit. It seems, that being responsible and knowing what one does is out of fashion.

What you can see in legislation and I feel its very obvious especially in aviation, is how lobbying on the European level works and in whos favour it goes.Look at minimum requirements for command, look at the MPL,why are PPLs/CPLs/ATPs to be renewed etcetc.? Look at the States, there the licence stays with you for life - but then the individual pilot isn´t so dependend on an employer and the checkrides he needs to stay current or attractive on the job market. Class/typeratings: the same.

Of course I follow all the rules to the letter of the law

Me too, me too! :-)

[His dudeness]

If the general public flying on the airlines realised who they could be sharing airspace at 500 mph with, I think they would be shocked!

This argument goes also both ways, since I know some of the people at the pointy end of, say, a 737 and even a 747 that went there in the good times from CJs and the like.
I´m not sure wether everything in the shiny airline world is as shiny as advertised....


And that is btw the same on the roads, where a coach shares the motorway with all sorts of people....

Sadly the ' we are a small operator, and are able to police ourselves' argument does not hold water, as lots do not uphold any form of standards.

The question is - and thats where this thread started - is that so in the coorperate part of the business? If yes, then why is there so little accidents compared to the more regulated and checked AOC operators? Are "we" just the luckier dudes? Or do we fly idiotproof aeroplanes vs. the real hard to drive ones in exec charter?

I know both sides of the coin, been in the AOC world for 16 years (and still do some freelancing 'there') and being coorperate nearly 4 years now. The standards we use are more or less JAROPS 1 - I have put down the essential stuff in a little manual and had the boss sign it. The main things we don´t apply is runway factor (T/O only to FAR/JAR25 standards, so no difference here, but for landing we use 1,25 dry and 1,44 wet) and we throw away all the papers after landing. (I never understood how equalling the weight of flight docs and payload enhances safety...) Since we are just 2 guys flying one aeroplane, I don´t want to do SMS and all that other crap, because it ONLY will increase my workload - which in turn is decreasing safety IMHO. Its enough to keep all the records, stay in touch and ahead of mx records, have all courses current, schedule the refresher, do the ETS crap etcetcetc.

In the end, what would be your solution? Have a policeman/woman/person in the airplane at all times? Download the FDR/CVR after every flight and sent it to the CAA?
Who checks these nuclear power station 'drivers'? Is there a policeman checked their actions at all times? What about surgeons? And who checks the policeman?

I think there is a certain point, where we need to put faith and trust into some people. If there is a high concentration of 'unworthy' in our industry (which I doubt) then we need to ask ourselfes why and change something in the beginning - training.

I fear we won´t agree aeronca. I feel - with all the possibilities to misunderstand each other when communicating on the net - that your reaction is sort of like the one the swiss BAZL takes with Samedan following the 2 accidents there...

[His dudeness]

Sometimes I think we all need the services of a good therapist!

That might be true....why haven´t you told me that you spoke with my copilots? :p

[G-SPOTs Lost]

If the general public flying on the airlines realised who they could be sharing airspace at 500 mph with, I think they would be shocked!

Just as the thread was turning into a healthy debate :ugh: :ugh:

[Thomascl605]

Guys, I wouldn't worry too much about the ramblings of Aeroncaman. I flew with a guy once who came from an AOC op who neither knew or cared about emergency checklist memory items or aircraft performance. I questioned him about this and it was apparant that his previous company LPC was a joke, and his so called line check was another joke. Quite clearly LPC's are an extremely unsafe practice, and are nowhere near thorough enough. Get them in the sim once a year and practice the procedures in a thorough, proper manner.

[His dudeness]

Quite clearly LPC's are an extremely unsafe practice, and are nowhere near thorough enough.

Thats a generalization I wouldn´t join. There are good checkers out there, ideally one ends an LPC having learned something.

[Thomascl605]

Perhaps there are a few, but a sim recurrent is far more thorough than an LPC. The guy I mentioned clearly didn't learn anything from his LPC and the only thing he got out of it was a signature which condemned the rest of us to fly with him, briefly as it turned out.

The other annoying issue is the blatant snobbery this guy exhibited. Just because some of us didn't fly on a JAA licence, we were deemed inferior by him.

As it turned out the knowledge that we took from a comprehensive recurrent over a number of days in the sim far outweighed his measly 1 hour LPC, which he clearly only had to turn up with his scrambled egg on to enable a pass.

That same blatant snobbery has been exhibited time and again on this forum. On this particular thread it was Hawker 750 that started the flags of convenience crap. I mean, making comparisons between a well trained crew that have regular sim and no accidents to a Liberian tanker with filipino crew - f*cking insulting ! :ugh:

And you also stated earlier that it's a well known fact that the stats for AOC accidents are far worse than Private.

[His dudeness]

@thomascl605: no doubt a sim refresher together with systems knowledge school is the best way to do it. I never understood why JAA and now EASA did not made the step to mandatory sim training for T/Rs and mandatory refreshers every other year or the like. This would have stipulated a bigger market and thus lower sim prices.

@aeronca: wow, you seem to have real bad luck. I know a pilot or 2 that had missed that their licences have a renewal date, yet I fail to see why this makes a dude dangerous. A piece of paper is just that. (yes one needs a licence, I don´t doubt that)
Age: I have flown with a guy aged 75 who was as sharp as a razor. If the guy has a valid medical and licence?

The SIC thing is a serious slip.

Owners...yes this can be a real pain. However, it does not seem to be too dramatic, otherwise we would hear more often bout them...

[NuName]

The events you point out above are truly amazing and worrying. However, regulations exist to cover all these points, if the regulations are not being observed and enforced then whats the point of introducing new regulations for other totaly unrelated subjects in a vain attempt to improve something that is not a problem in the first place. The things you pointed out are fundemental, if these things cannot be controlled then the authorities are not doing their job. I do not see how you can criticise anyone just on age, I am no spring chicken and just completed a mission with a combined age of 134, if a guy has a 1st class medical and the relevant type ratings are you insinuating it is not correct for them to fly? I don't much like getting older but I do not intend to stop flying any time soon. All I am trying to say here is, let them fix what already exists and is broken, not ignore it and make more regulation to give the impression that they are actualy a required item and they know what they are doing.

[hawker750]

Quote
"And you also stated earlier that it's a well known fact that the stats for AOC accidents are far worse than Private."

Interesting, where can one download these statistics? As the company Flight Safety Officer it would be very constructive to bring up at the next safety meeting.

On another point I did not compare the privates to flag of convenience ship operators, I used that analogy to point out the attitude of the European Regulatory Authorities.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

H750

Can you outline any other posts you hold? Just curious

[His dudeness]

For starters:

http://hub.easa.europa.eu/crt/docs/viewnpa/id_72


Pages 27/28.

Accident rate complex aircraft:

Air taxi: 2.08 per 100.000 departures (30,4 % of all departures in 5 years)

Corperate: 0.15 (55,3%)

Owner operatored: 1.7 (14,3%)