Biz Jets, Ag Flying, GA etc. The place for discussion of issues related to corporate, Ag and GA aviation. If you're a professional pilot and don't fly for the airlines then try here.

Unique Air Swansea

Old 13th Nov 2007, 23:02
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saaaaaaffffhampton
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RW
The article had alink to it on here somewhere it was MD who was a 777 captain and was looked at my an american pilot who flies for said airline, it was published in the south wales paper im sure it could be found again so no porkie there, it was fact, even Phil Brockwell from Centreline had info on his operation too, I doubt a well respected individual would mention anything but fact, which i think you will find most is, show us otherwise, maybe you should read from begining before making assumptions, sorry guessing
So we can assume or guess that he lied a lot about his qualifications, his flying ability and most definatley his ability to run a company
To state that how a pilot was found out or not is very relevant to the way the company was run, that is obvious, "excuse me give me a job I have an IR and 3000 hrs" works well for me too. Whether he had one or not like you say bears no relevance in the fact that a shoddy outfit failed to complete the correct checks nothing more nothing less.
Back to reading from the start i would suggest again as I could and many others could publish the offensive e mails and txts that were sent by the said company but would invalidate any legal action of which im sure your aware is going on if they were that honest and open.
Good luck if you think there that good
carbonfibre is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2007, 23:51
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting on the article but maybe someone could point me to it? I am not saying it is not true that it exists, but I would prefer to read it more for information than much else. However I do not like "that we assume he lied about his qualifications"....guess. If he HAS lied about his qualifications then the CAA would be interested, but has he?

The strange bit is that the current organisation does not seem to have much to do with MD. Certainly the name did not come up and as far as I can tell it is a new company but that would only really come out at any second interview which I will not be attending.
The lack of catching a licence issue is not that good for any organisation but it depends really on why it was not picked up and when it was, how it was dealt with?
The current group will only accept an application through an agency presumably for the same reason.They came to me.
What they are like to work for.....don't know.

I have read through the thread and also others that were linked and a lot of rumour seems to be on it but not that many facts. Interestingly a few points in the interview appear to be true....but ......porkies maybe too. I cant work it out.

Unprofessional emails, sms etc are pretty stupid from any organisation.

What the point that keeps getting deflected at the moment for some reason is DID Rebellious1 have a rating or not?

On this thread he has been quite "enthusiastic"in his comments (and good luck to him if they are true!!!) BUT, JUST BUT,

So, how about an answer first on that matter before the rest of the assumptions and guesses?

On duty tomorrow afternoon so will hope for info Thursday from Rebellious1 ?
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 00:01
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 45
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I smell a big honking rat in your posting Runway Wide.

If you are a professional pilot, then you need your head examining for even considering working for a company that has the track record of this shower.

You seem to be totally obsessed about one persons qualifications, when quite frankly they are none of your business unless you are trying to besmirch the name of someone who just happens to be in judicial conflict with the seemingly Walter Mitty type character who purports to run the business at the heart of this thread.

If you are who I'm positive you are, then I'll give you some free legal advice. Delete your postings, because they WILL be used against you in court once your IP address is checked.

Rebellious1's legal team will use them to make even finer mincemeat of you.

Don't say you weren't warned and don't try and pretend otherwise. You just aren't a good enough liar to pull it off. If I can see through you his easily, so can everyone else.
Say again s l o w l y is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 07:30
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saaaaaaffffhampton
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So RW
I repeat my claim, lied about qualifications, didn't say who too, but the clip above shows you that, anything else you would like to add to all us people who are guessing!!!
Like to hear your views, again if they sounded that good and there T+C's are industry best why not attend the 2nd interview.
There are most defo big porkies going on
carbonfibre is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 08:26
  #345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WOW, this has opened up some worms.

Carbon where have I said best T&C in the industry? Actully said I didn't like T&C's....which is why no second interview.

Why would I consider working for them? Well going through this whole site there are very few companies that have not had bad postings! Have learnt long and hard to find out myself. Its all about personal choice really and maybe learning the hard way.

Say again slowly -Why do I have a focus on ONE pilot -well he was one of the answers given and has been very citical on the thread....and if true OR false may or may not explain the rest. Threat of legal action against me by Rebellious1 legal team for what? I asked a question and ironically could be a witness for Rebellious1. Also very careful not to name names. Funny though that I start to get threats when I ask a question?......that is not being answered.

Saying again slowly -Smelling a rat? Your comments are interesting - anyone who does not agree or asks a question is challenged this way? Yes, maybe I do begin to smell a rat.

Interesting article on MD....wonder why it was never challenged by MD? What was intersting in this particular one is that it does not actually say Captain? He could have been FO or even SO ? Where did Captain come from?
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 08:55
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 45
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is nothing to ask questions about. This guy MD is a charlatan as proved by the proof that he has lied about his experience and qualifications. He strung a lot of people along. End of story.

Threads like this one don't come out of the blue and whilst every company has good days and bad ones, this isn't just a bit of "bad press" this is the complete destruction of one man's house of cards.

If you aren't the man himself or someone close to him, then I'll be extremely surprised. Nobody with more than 10 working braincells would go near a company with this reputation, I also try not to listen to gossip, but this isn't simple gossip.

Interesting article on MD....wonder why it was never challenged by MD? What was intersting in this particular one is that it does not actually say Captain? He could have been FO or even SO ? Where did Captain come from?
Who cares? He's never worked for Continental, never flown the 777, so who cares if in his imagination he sat in the left or right seat. The man is a liar.
Say again s l o w l y is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 09:49
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saaaaaaffffhampton
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SAS,
Hear hear well said.
RW maybe it dosn't say Captain, thats what he informed everyone he was, just some more anyway as stated the man you want to know about his IR etc is irrelevant, as I have said it says more about the operation, I don't know of any other that would not check a pilots credentials even just for the insurance or at least a check ride of some sort. Besides if he was qualified in '05 then by 2012 he will have done 7 years on it!!!

I cannot even go to the most basic PPL flying school and not get away with a checkride and a scrutiny of my credentials, it's just beyond belief.

I will say again that if you are thinking that most of us have an axe to grind we do, its to protect hard earned licence holders from being shafted, some who have spent there entire savings, begged , stole, borrowed to become there dream of a commercial pilot just to have some wannabee destroy it for them.

As for the CAA they have a lot of info now as for your question further back.

Why has MD never challenged it, well be in his mind he probably thinks he was working for the said airline. Nobody who has been involved with this outfit wants people to suffer, hence why this thread is useful to all potential pilots, young, old starting out etc.

Personally i think they should make it a sticky but probably would never happen, again I will make the suggestion that you go through every post with a fine tooth comb before suggesting that porkies are thrown about by so many, not a complaint, just a fact - not everyone can be wrong, show me the people who worked for this guy who can state they were happy with unique air (that are credible)

Hope this thread remains as it should as a warning to all!!!!!!!!!
carbonfibre is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 10:47
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Say again - Not MD or his mate or even his wife..............but it doesn't stop me having an opinion or asking views that are maybe the opposite...does it?

Lies and lies and more lies about running a business are not good whatever the industry. One assumes that the CAA are involved? Maybe that is why he appears not to be relevant in the current organisation?

The point is that I have gone through the thread, maybe not as much as I should (need some family time!!!) but I can't finger "hearsay" from "truth".

MD, no matter how bad he appears to be in business, does not appear to have claimed anywhere to be a Captain of 777. He maybe may have told you in person.....and I have no reason to doubt your words, but so far all I get back is either hearsay or threats.

I am sure that there are 10000 people with bad things to say about MD (some appear on here) and maybe, just maybe there is 1 that has something good to say about him.

My point in the first case which seems to have started a world war in my direction was that there "appreared" to be some alternative answers.
Why none were ever put on here is beyond me....maybe they are not true? Thats what I first started to ask.

A thread can go in a thousand different directions if allowed. MD should defend himself of some of the allegations if they are false...

I asked a very specific question on something that I was told and no one has actually answered it (apart from telling me to remove my posts!!!!).
This sort of tells me that maybe, just maybe, something is wrong.
As for lawyers, I have no problems giving statements to them on what was said. I can only state what was said. Any lawyer can PM me and organise this!

Finally, one of the other guys waiting at the interview claimed to have worked for MD before
I can't verify that...and not really bothered unless he wants to show on here.

Anyway guys, the boss is calling and I have a wondeful trip to Vantaa coming my way.
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 11:04
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 45
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And you would listen to that 1 voice in 10,000. Yeah right.

You seem to be missing the articles posted here about Davies being a 777 pilot. Where did they get that information from? Could it have been from the man himself?... I wonder.

Davies hasn't defended himself, because to be honest it would be impossible given the situation he has put himself and others into to do so.

There is no "alternate" reality at work here, the simple fact is that he has lied about his qualifcations and experience, set up a pretty shonky operation of dubious legality and given lots of people the runaround.

The chap is a Walt and the sooner muppets like that are hounded screaming from the industry, the better for all of us.

You tried to cast aspertions on someone on this thread without a shred of evidence and it just happens that that one person you chose to have a go at is locked in a legal battle with Davies.
How can that be seen as suspicious?................

You are Mark Davies and I claim my 10!
Say again s l o w l y is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 11:42
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Runway wide,

There are three threads safely tucked away you can't see. We've also got a 27 page fax from MD in here the Towers repeating his claims. He is the person who claims a Continental 777 skipper as the prime investor.

At other times MD is the Continental pilot as in the Bridgewatergate document, the full colour version of which also resides safely on our server.

We can also confirm that the CAA were involved in reports of possible flights without documentation as well as hire and reward with a non EU aircraft. Reputable brokers have confirmed proposed availablilty at these times. Times when only an N reg aircaft was on the line. MD's response was that the flights were for charity.

The other threads also reveal MD pretending to be an office worker whom he later 'sacks.' Whether in posts here, emails and faxes to us or SMS messages to enemies and employees, his scant and extremely distant relationship to spelling and grammar made forensics laughably simple. He is obviously also inextricably tied to his fixed IP address and mobile phone number for the entire period of his claims, counterclaims, touting for inexperienced applicants and, later, threatening texts to those 'employees' who finally walked away looking for recourse in law.

The company now risen from the ashes of this debacle quite understandably want to distance themselves wherever possible. However certain choices made during registration of the new company and maintaining the core company name despite the reputation earned seems, on the face of it, to be madness.

Why persevere with a name that automatically flags alarm bells with pilots, other operators and brokers? Building a solid business is hard enough but they've set hurdles that seem so avoidable.

Rob
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 11:50
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LOL

So anyone who has a different opinion to you is MD??? Yeah right.

Do I believe the 1 in 10000? Did I say that? Don't think I did somehow but
it is interesting how things get twisted to suite your purposes!

Why am I focused on one guy who is suing MD? I did not realise I was since others claim to be doing so.........but he was one of the specific answers that I got from Mr O'Reilly.

No answer though

Really got to go
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 12:10
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi Rob,

Thanks for that information.

Why on earth is the newco linked in the name because of this is a little strange I agree.
I will ask the agency, maybe they know.

The newco was very specific on items and I must admit that the answers were very carefully given more possibly because of this site. They never mentioned MD and in the company structure chart he did not appear.

I did find their points interesting and they were quite open about them. I guess they must have expected some form of questions.
There were 3 specific points made one of which was about "Rebellious1" and licence which they said could be verified....yet in the same breath said it was nothing to do with them
Don't know,

Maybe I should have carried on reading and never commented!

Always have nagging doubts though.

MD seems a little odd in profile...hospital, heart attacks, clerks but then again it is not easy to run a business!

If all of the facts were given to you why did the CAA not act?

Late for flight now. Got too hooked on this >

See ya
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 13:14
  #353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MD admits that he was investigated by the CAA but when it closed the results were between him and them.

An understandable response and I've no reason to disbelieve him but I know of no instance where he operated again. Others may however have further information regarding whether an EU registered aircraft, other than a cross hire, operated for Unique Mk 1 after the investigation.

Rob
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 15:35
  #354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Runway Wide

The currency of MEP/IR is irrelevant. OK, I am going to assume that rebelious1 had held a CPL/IR, and the last IR renewal was in the previous 5 years, but I don't think that is in question.

Under an AOC any new line pilot would be required to complete a company LPC/OPC before commencing line training. This would renew both MEP and IR. That is the case for all companies operating legally under and AOC. Therein lies the problem.

Last edited by Life's a Beech; 14th Nov 2007 at 15:46.
Life's a Beech is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2007, 16:13
  #355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: here there and everywhere
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
do you think so

Prop,
It seems not all agree with you not having a MEP/IR and hiding the fact seems to be frowned upon unless its on the unique thread as its something to post correct or not, post it anyway, as long as everyone agrees thats ok have your own opinion and god help us. Now lets all go and polish our halos
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=297442

F.I
fix it is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 09:49
  #356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lifes a Bitch, sorry Beach. Can't believe what you wrote!

Are you seriously saying that its OK for a Pilot not to disclose something because it will be sorted out under the AOC?

Firstly, one would assume that it is a criminal offence to start a job without ratings stated or at least disclosed? (Any lawyers out there?- not armchair versions!!!)?

Secondly would you fly with a professional pilot who did not disclose things?

I AGREE FULLY with you that Unique should have had procedure in place to sort out this but that does not excuse the fact....if it was true? Does it?
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 09:53
  #357 (permalink)  

L'enfant Terrible
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The bar of Mumbles rugby club
Age: 42
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rob,

A remarkably accurate precis of both the company and the bloke in question. If this latest incarnation of Unique are indeed distanced from MD, why on earth keep a name that marks them as all but untouchable in this industry? I do indeed smell a rat.

Runway, the accusation of 'padding out a log book', or 'had no IR' is a fairly normal one bandied around by MD when faced with criticism. Accusations were made on this very thread by him (under the tag of Im here) and subsequently withdrawn.

I'm not involved in any legal action against him currently (more's the pity) but worked in the office prior to new pilots being hired. I am more than happy to spill my guts about anything you wish to know.

Regards

SK
SmilingKnifed is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 10:18
  #358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
LOL

SmilingKnifed are you the clerk MD clamed to have fired as mentioned by Rob ???????

Funny how ANYONE who asks questions is a rat.



How about another question?

Any US Guys reading this?
Are licences re-issued every 2 years? Would the copy on this thread possibly be a re issue???????????????

No smilingknifed not a Rat but it does not stop me from asking a question......or does it?
Runway Wide is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 10:31
  #359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saaaaaaffffhampton
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RW

With the evidence you have infront of you how can you contemplate defending the indefensible

You have just been offered info and you have disregarded this and in your previous posts state that they mentioned 1 person, now appears 2.

They seemed to reveal a lot at this interview about people you asked about, very very suspicious that is why people are asking.

Why not just accept the fact the name is mud!!! if you dont believe what you see on here or want to question the people on here, because you think they are good (but dont want to work for them).

Also it is upto a pilot to reveal qualifications, hours etc, however it is upto the airline etc to confirm, again i will say again, i dont know of even 1 PPL school that wouldnt check, so you tell us why you think they shouldn't have it would be easier
carbonfibre is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 10:40
  #360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: here there and everywhere
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Runway

I would agree with you it appears if you disagree with a post you must be MD there seems to be just a handful of unique haters here the same people posting the same dribble all day, I would say that time will tell if this company has changed or not.

F.I

Last edited by fix it; 15th Nov 2007 at 10:51.
fix it is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.