Why is it so?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: OZ
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An obviously stupid post from a small minded individual - how bout we generalise about every QF pilot based on the arrogance of one 747 crew I dealt with one day - quote 'you will address the F.E not myself, I wear four bars for a reason you know'.
I bet you tick a mental box in your head every time someone has had previous employment with AN and you judge them straight away - perhaps you have missed out on a different angle on doing something becase they too have other operator experience (something you obviously pride yourself on) but it sounds like you know everything their is too know (that isnt your line about the four bars is it?)
Lose the chip I say
Thats your input from an engineer ex AN, NJS, Gen Aviation and QF.
P.S Back at Ansett we were warned about people like you!!!
I bet you tick a mental box in your head every time someone has had previous employment with AN and you judge them straight away - perhaps you have missed out on a different angle on doing something becase they too have other operator experience (something you obviously pride yourself on) but it sounds like you know everything their is too know (that isnt your line about the four bars is it?)
Lose the chip I say
Thats your input from an engineer ex AN, NJS, Gen Aviation and QF.
P.S Back at Ansett we were warned about people like you!!!
Most other bulletin boards on the 'net don't allow edits: as they say on the Adobe BB: "you can't change history"!.
I reckon any edits should be a separate post.
CC:
Tried to train you...
I reckon any edits should be a separate post.
CC:
except for one who trained me years ago on the Smurf Jet
Thread Starter
As for the comment from ozyozyozy:-
The defence rests! In fact its gotta be wind up A?
BTW ozyozyozy my facts are based on observation and practical experience of many people over many years ............ and I have learnt not to pre- judge ....... by bitter experience.........
Capt Jack Sparrow
The defence rests! In fact its gotta be wind up A?
BTW ozyozyozy my facts are based on observation and practical experience of many people over many years ............ and I have learnt not to pre- judge ....... by bitter experience.........
Capt Jack Sparrow
Well, I'm on my third post AN job.
The first was almost 100% ex AN and a start-up with no established procedures. Yet there was still a general willingness from MOST of the AN guys to adapt to the different environment (and it doesn't get much more dirrerent than Japan!!) and "Do it their way". I do remember a couple of "Full frank and open" discussions to try and get some points over to some individuals (E.G- Approach bans-
Instructor:- It is not permissable to commence an approach if conditions are reported as below minima.
Bloggs:- Yeah, but you can go and take a look can't you??
Instructor:- Let me repeat.......)
The second was also a relitivley new operation in the UK, also with a high pecentage of AN guys (in fact their training manager is now ex AN). No question of "Did it this way at AN". This was Europe, and traffic/weather/ATC/procedures meant you learnt THEIR way very quickley.(I'll 'fess up to one instance. I demonstrated an A/P off, A/T on landing to a newby onto a 1600M runway in Greece- Bloody A/T didn't go into RETARD as it should and led to a tense couple of seconds!!)
Now with a large(orange) UK LOCO. There are pre '89, post '01 and never were either Aussies and KIWIs here. We follow the companies (very well thought out) SOPs, get on with the job and are (if the representaion in traning and other management positions is an indication) well thought of as a group.
If anything, I shake my head at some of the "Way we used to do it" stuff. Rock up to Kalgoolie with a 1500' cloud base, one runway and no alternate? NUTS!! ( I remember MR telling me how, if a lightie gear-upped in front of me, some un-named person would come and bulldose the wreck off the runway before I ran out of fuel...yeah right!!) Do an approach to a Cat1 Minima when you KNOW there's 100m vis to "Take a look"? That would get you a quick trip out the front door with no license and a big, red boot mark on your A$$$ just about any where else in the world.
The "Way we did it at Ansett" worked quite well in Aussie condition under Aussie rules.
If the training made good pilots out of us, it did so by giving us good background skills, and the ability and willingness to LEARN!
The first was almost 100% ex AN and a start-up with no established procedures. Yet there was still a general willingness from MOST of the AN guys to adapt to the different environment (and it doesn't get much more dirrerent than Japan!!) and "Do it their way". I do remember a couple of "Full frank and open" discussions to try and get some points over to some individuals (E.G- Approach bans-
Instructor:- It is not permissable to commence an approach if conditions are reported as below minima.
Bloggs:- Yeah, but you can go and take a look can't you??
Instructor:- Let me repeat.......)
The second was also a relitivley new operation in the UK, also with a high pecentage of AN guys (in fact their training manager is now ex AN). No question of "Did it this way at AN". This was Europe, and traffic/weather/ATC/procedures meant you learnt THEIR way very quickley.(I'll 'fess up to one instance. I demonstrated an A/P off, A/T on landing to a newby onto a 1600M runway in Greece- Bloody A/T didn't go into RETARD as it should and led to a tense couple of seconds!!)
Now with a large(orange) UK LOCO. There are pre '89, post '01 and never were either Aussies and KIWIs here. We follow the companies (very well thought out) SOPs, get on with the job and are (if the representaion in traning and other management positions is an indication) well thought of as a group.
If anything, I shake my head at some of the "Way we used to do it" stuff. Rock up to Kalgoolie with a 1500' cloud base, one runway and no alternate? NUTS!! ( I remember MR telling me how, if a lightie gear-upped in front of me, some un-named person would come and bulldose the wreck off the runway before I ran out of fuel...yeah right!!) Do an approach to a Cat1 Minima when you KNOW there's 100m vis to "Take a look"? That would get you a quick trip out the front door with no license and a big, red boot mark on your A$$$ just about any where else in the world.
The "Way we did it at Ansett" worked quite well in Aussie condition under Aussie rules.
If the training made good pilots out of us, it did so by giving us good background skills, and the ability and willingness to LEARN!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It really does come down to the individual, doesn't it. I do recall from years ago that a number of places around the world had a large influx of Aussie pilots, some of whom didn't fit in well, for many reasons, one of which was, "this isn't how we did it back at XXX". Eventually most fitted in with time.
I don't think it is productive to bag anyone unfortunate enough to have lost there career as a result of company collapse, just because they were part of that company. It can take a long time just to get over that.
I don't think it is productive to bag anyone unfortunate enough to have lost there career as a result of company collapse, just because they were part of that company. It can take a long time just to get over that.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi Wiz,
My 4th.
Captain Jack, perhaps the ex AN people were mearly being conversational is relating the SOPs of a company that was dear to their hearts? It may not have been the critisism of their existing employer as you have supposed. My experience has found that most SOPs are pretty similar wherever you go; practicality being the mother of invention.
The real difference, I have found, is in cultural differences, where the ex-AN have a different approach to situation, such as WX avoidance. What one perceives as 'safe' depends on you aviation pedigree, I have no doubts! The term for FOs, "dogs" that you speak of came from AN WA and was not in use in the rest of the AN network. Apparently the term came from the MMA days, wher the captains were simpley legends and the FOs just dogs hit.
A while ago, I was talking to someone in the industry who didnt know I was ex -AN and said something along the lines of ".. those AN guys are all a bunch of smart @$$s". I recon some ex AN guys have actualy pulled poeple into line with some common sense when some stupid cokpit suggestions have been made and that is the reason for the sour grapes.
The only time that I have said anything along the lines of "That's what we used to do at Ansett " in a way that disparaged the proceedures was in the context of...
" The green returns on the radar contain turbulence and we should go around them" (That's what we did at Ansett).
"Sure, put on an extra 8 tons of fuel, but we are going to burn 2 to carry it so it is really only 6. Why dont you add 10?" (That's what we did at Ansett).
"Because of the windshear, how about we use TOGA and a lower flap setting. Taking off with a headwind would help too" (TWWDAAn)..
Get the picture??
My 4th.
Captain Jack, perhaps the ex AN people were mearly being conversational is relating the SOPs of a company that was dear to their hearts? It may not have been the critisism of their existing employer as you have supposed. My experience has found that most SOPs are pretty similar wherever you go; practicality being the mother of invention.
The real difference, I have found, is in cultural differences, where the ex-AN have a different approach to situation, such as WX avoidance. What one perceives as 'safe' depends on you aviation pedigree, I have no doubts! The term for FOs, "dogs" that you speak of came from AN WA and was not in use in the rest of the AN network. Apparently the term came from the MMA days, wher the captains were simpley legends and the FOs just dogs hit.
A while ago, I was talking to someone in the industry who didnt know I was ex -AN and said something along the lines of ".. those AN guys are all a bunch of smart @$$s". I recon some ex AN guys have actualy pulled poeple into line with some common sense when some stupid cokpit suggestions have been made and that is the reason for the sour grapes.
The only time that I have said anything along the lines of "That's what we used to do at Ansett " in a way that disparaged the proceedures was in the context of...
" The green returns on the radar contain turbulence and we should go around them" (That's what we did at Ansett).
"Sure, put on an extra 8 tons of fuel, but we are going to burn 2 to carry it so it is really only 6. Why dont you add 10?" (That's what we did at Ansett).
"Because of the windshear, how about we use TOGA and a lower flap setting. Taking off with a headwind would help too" (TWWDAAn)..
Get the picture??
Thread Starter
It all depends on ones perspecive I suppose. I am looking from the outside in and you are looking from the inside out (of ex AN) The two sides will never agree.
But how do I reply to people from all over the world who say "Why are they so different?"
My original post asked why is it so and no one has answered this so I am deserting this post and going back aboard the "Black Pearl" for another cruise....... Haul up the Skull and Crossbones.......
Capt Jack Sparrow.
But how do I reply to people from all over the world who say "Why are they so different?"
My original post asked why is it so and no one has answered this so I am deserting this post and going back aboard the "Black Pearl" for another cruise....... Haul up the Skull and Crossbones.......
Capt Jack Sparrow.
Whispering "T" Jet
"Sure, put on an extra 8 tons of fuel, but we are going to burn 2 to carry it so it is really only 6. Why dont you add 10?" (That's what we did at Ansett).
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in them thar hills
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been my pleasure to train (or retrain if you like) many ex-Ansett pilots, and generally I can say that they all responded very well to new ways and new ideas. Particularly when it was pointed out to them that the people who built the airplane wrote in their manuals that it was so. And probably because they knew they would fail the final check if they didn't see the light. I can't remember any of them being unprofessional, and most (not all) were also gentlemen.
But it has also been my pain to have been checked by some ex-Ansett pilots who never got re-educated before they got into the check role. These characters were in some cases totally out of control. Wacko ideas, rigid attitudes and anal to the extreme. Blame it on the culture they came from. They had been beaten into doing it a certain way when they were F/O's or being upgraded, and they were going to damn well pass on all the furphies as well as insist that all pilots under check or training knew all the trivia no matter how irrelevant.
Those ex-Ansett pilots who have had exposure to other Airlines since (the more the better) should be an asset - those coming straight from that culture are, imho, a potential liability if put in any position of power.
But it has also been my pain to have been checked by some ex-Ansett pilots who never got re-educated before they got into the check role. These characters were in some cases totally out of control. Wacko ideas, rigid attitudes and anal to the extreme. Blame it on the culture they came from. They had been beaten into doing it a certain way when they were F/O's or being upgraded, and they were going to damn well pass on all the furphies as well as insist that all pilots under check or training knew all the trivia no matter how irrelevant.
Those ex-Ansett pilots who have had exposure to other Airlines since (the more the better) should be an asset - those coming straight from that culture are, imho, a potential liability if put in any position of power.
Thread Starter
At last a glimmer of light:-
"Blame it on the culture they came from. They had been beaten into doing it a certain way when they were F/O's or being upgraded, and they were going to damn well pass on all the furphies as well as insist that all pilots under check or training knew all the trivia no matter how irrelevant."
Thank you Gas-Chamber
PS. I dont think I accused anyone of unprofessionalism. None of them were that.
Capt Jack Sparrow.
"Blame it on the culture they came from. They had been beaten into doing it a certain way when they were F/O's or being upgraded, and they were going to damn well pass on all the furphies as well as insist that all pilots under check or training knew all the trivia no matter how irrelevant."
Thank you Gas-Chamber
PS. I dont think I accused anyone of unprofessionalism. None of them were that.
Capt Jack Sparrow.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After 2001 a term came into QFs engineering Vocab..
E A C
The firt two letters of the acronym stand for Ex Ansett you get to guess what the last letter stands for.
I hate to tar a group with one brush ( I am talking pilots and engineers alike) but the name stuck like the preverbial to a blanket.
Perhaps this is why the "PIRATE" started this thread..
PS Don't shoot the messenger
E A C
The firt two letters of the acronym stand for Ex Ansett you get to guess what the last letter stands for.
I hate to tar a group with one brush ( I am talking pilots and engineers alike) but the name stuck like the preverbial to a blanket.
Perhaps this is why the "PIRATE" started this thread..
PS Don't shoot the messenger
