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 6th Jul 2007, 15:02
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: uk
Age: 50
Posts: 33
???

Pardon ?
Propsync is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2007, 16:21
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 50
Posts: 867
Anyone with CFMU, keep an eye out tonight for departures CWL-North Wales area.
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2007, 21:13
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 50
Posts: 867
Did anyone check if G-WWIZ departed CWL or Swansea tonight?
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2007, 22:21
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Well it didn't leave Swansea before closing. Apparently. Well, so I understand ...
Life's a Beech is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2007, 23:38
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 50
Posts: 867
I am arranging a meeting with our FOI regarding this matter, he will be interested if any correspondence with the CAA has sanctioned a "non-profit" Op without an AOC. Seems to me if this is the case most airlines do not need an AOC if profit is a pre-requisite.

I will be in contact with the NHS Trust (TFT) on Monday to check if payment is being made for flights, whether it be @ cost or not, and what method of due diligence they use to ascertain the suitability of an aircraft operator for work within the NHS.

I am also getting a "councils opinion" regarding whether a pilot who has signed a confidentiality agreement can be forced to comply with such an agreement if the reason for breaking such an agreement is to report a perceived crime.

If this company have a disregard for the procedures that bona fide operators have to achieve safe transport of freight and passengers they are probably not suitable to hold an AOC and I will be making that representation to the CAA. If anyone can furnish me with information to prove or disprove that opinion I would appreciate it.

Mike, I have had an email from MD claiming that you have falsified your log book and records, if you would like assistance in your legal defense of this matter please let me know.

Phil
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 10:17
  #66 (permalink)  

Luvverley!
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: --
Posts: 259
Which begs the question....

Why did he take on mikehammer if he thought he'd falsified his logbook??

This guy sounds like a total mess. Mike, get out of there now! Swansea is jinxed - I should know, I worked there too and it was a very "instructive" experience. I learned rather a lot about those who lack scruples...

Keep your chin up Mike. It can only get better from here on in.

Foxy
Foxy Loxy is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 10:31
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Writing to a third party making a defamatory claim? Specifically a third party who is a potential employer. Sounds like libel to me, and an especially nasty, targeted libel, if Mr Hammer can show his logbook to be accurate. Perhaps it won't be Mr Hammer needing to pay for defence. I am sure you are keeping that email, Phil.
Life's a Beech is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 11:42
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 50
Posts: 867
I have no personal axe to grind, but I do have salaries to pay and a business to run, and ilegal operations should be shut down by the CAA. The CAA are an overstretched resource, so to protect my business I will do whatever I can to shut these amateurs down.

I think that the pilots involved should be a bit more careful. If there is no training, no operations manual and no post holdes, it's probably an ilegal op.

P
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 16:41
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In a land of confusion
Posts: 18
Outrageous!

Having read and tried to make sense of the remarks made by pilots who appear to have been shamefully deceived by a company whose legality seems very much in doubt !!!! It seems to me that the official policing body of the powers that monitor the aviation industry need to take immediate action to get to the bottom of this debacle before other aspiring pilots are put in the same position or even worse their lives are endangered and any other person who may be flying in the vaciniity!


What is the real purpose of this company? Who is running it? Who is pulling the strings behind the scenes and to what end?

What do they hope to achieve by putting peoples careers and aspirations and livelihoods including their families in such dire straits?

How many other companies are they in debt to?

Last edited by 2old2dieyoung; 7th Jul 2007 at 16:59.
2old2dieyoung is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 18:14
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 42
Posts: 3,112
Unfortunately Phil, if you have inexperienced people in their first jobs, they often won't know what is acceptable or not. It's only when you work for a decent operator you realise how things should be done.

My alarm bells have certainly been ringing hard since I heard about this outfit.
Say again s l o w l y is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 20:19
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: in a world of my own
Posts: 235
Hi Phil - Just to let you know that if you need me to make a statement, you know where to find me, it shouldn't be a problem - you know what about!

Good luck!
Monkey Boy is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2007, 21:18
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saaaaaaffffhampton
Posts: 340
Me too

Also wiling to help out if required Phil (ref e-mail).
At least Dick Turpin wore a mask
carbonfibre is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2007, 09:55
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Half the problem is the JAA law exams, in the ATPL (or CPL) series. There is very little in the syllabus relating to what is required in a commercial operation before getting airborne.

The CAA needs to sort out the training system so pilots know about requirements for experience, training and paperwork in the office and on the aircraft for a single-crew operation. Then they could start to hold pilots responsible for making sure the paperwork is correct. Until they require pilots to know what the correct system looks like then pilots are going to work for dodgy operators. Most will not know they're breaking the rules, and if they do know they can plead ignorrance.

Incidentally it would make my job as a line training captain easier!
Life's a Beech is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2007, 23:08
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland mainly, rather than at home.
Posts: 387
Falsified Lognook???

Blimey. I've been away in the land of many Guinesses for one weekend, and it turns out I have made up my logbook!

Thanks Phil, for your support, I'll contact you separately on Monday by email regarding this matter, although, some of the emails I'll forward to you in return, from the "investor" in Unique Air, threatening libel action against me (unfortunately for him all I said was the truth and I've been taunting him (a lot!) with the truth ever since, hence his anger) will probably explain their recent email to you.

I am probably a thorn in their side which they would like incised. I hasten to add that it is only due to the extreme nature of the situation I have become such a thorn. Normally I am not prone to such action, and prefer to stay out of the limelight.

For the record I flew with an examiner within the last month, an instructor for differences training within the last week, and another examiner to renew my multi rating around Christmas time, before I went to Unique Air. Prior to that I renewed my IR about October last year, so again my logbook was scrutinised. I reckon therefore, my log book must be pretty accurate! In any event, it hasn't got very many hours in it, so unless I have been taking them off, I can't see what their claim is! Sadly it does not surprise me.

Reading here I get the impression some posts are missing, can someone PM me the full story?

Thanks once again for the many words of support, it is much appreciated, and I am sure other former pilots at Unique will feel similarly encouraged, and similarly grateful.
mikehammer is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2007, 06:50
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 50
Posts: 867
I want to point out that without the Pilots who have been flying these flights helping out with some dates, times and procedures etc this will be a hard one to get to prosecution. Rest assured there will be a certain amount of wrist slapping from the Feds. I am predicting that the CAA will take very seriously any claims that the aircraft was covered by an AOC if anyone has this in writing it would be an extremely useful document. From our broker chums any comercial offers to you or your clients stating operational control and mentioning some money changing hands, whether it be hourly rate or charter costs.
I only have proof of one flight at this stage, but am assured tere are more.

I know the pilots have signed a confdentiality clause and to that end sending stuff to me would leave you open. I will get an email address for the CAA Investigations Unit. There is no chance of upholding a confidentiality agreement if it is broken in the process of reporting a crime. It is impossible to contract a criminal act [FACT].

My personal goals from this are twofold. Removal of one competitor who refuses to play on a level playing field. Ceasing the operations of a company untouched by any regulatory safety body.

As we all kow, there are many people operating aircraft on the hooky charter market, go to any race meeting. However, they do not claim to have bona fide license to operate safely or take on pilots without paying them.

Phil
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2007, 11:04
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 50
Posts: 867
I have been copied a document originally sent by MS clearly stating that the aircraft is operating under an AOC. Are we missing something here? Is the aircraft actually on an AOC? If so, this has a completely different spin.
Phil Brockwell is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2007, 11:59
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland mainly, rather than at home.
Posts: 387
AOC

My experience is that they are good at stating things like the aircraft is on an AOC, but not at backing these statements up with documentation.

Earlier it was stated that AOC documentation needs to be carried in the aircraft. When I flew there was no such documentation, and we were told the reason was that flights were non revenue pending AOC approval. As I mentioned earlier we were very concerned about this, and checked the situation with the CAA, anonymously. I don't even think that at that stage they had applied for an AOC. I don't know if this has been done now. I mean without one where can they go as a commercial entity?
mikehammer is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2007, 15:08
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Saaaaaaffffhampton
Posts: 340
Phil

18/8/06
Swansea - cranfield - stanstead - liverpool - swansea
Passengers picked up from stanstead at Harrods FBO and flown to LPL
There will be tower logs. Be hard to get a non-revenue flight out of those landing fees and fuel etc
Offers of reward for flying were made, that also included some dodgy low level flying offers of aerial photography, over a temporary no fly zone (which I refused actually). Somehow I get the feeling i will be an unsuitable pilot like MH
Mikehammer, maybe we should compare notes
PM me

ps - I never signed any confidentiallity agreements either

Last edited by carbonfibre; 9th Jul 2007 at 15:10. Reason: Addition of info
carbonfibre is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2007, 15:11
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: uk
Age: 50
Posts: 33
AOC

So have they got one or hav'nt they? What position does that put they're pilots in ? ......anyone?
Propsync is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2007, 15:49
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland mainly, rather than at home.
Posts: 387
Carbonfibre

I have just been taking stock of the date of that flight you posted. It sounds like Davies has been at this for longer than I realised. When I joined we were told we were the first pilots with many to come, but that was on March 12 2007. What aircraft was it back then, as the Baron arrived shortly before Unique found me "unsuitable" and before it arrived there was no aircraft?

While we're on the subject of unsuitability perhaps Davies can explain something which I have just remembered. About six weeks in to the job he had me sit in on interviews for new pilots. It was highly embarrassing as his parents led the proceedings and talked liberally about the "fleet". Also the candidates were often far more experienced pilots than me, at the time I thought I had better be civil to them in case they ended up being my boss! If I was unsuitable why have me introduced as the "Assistant General Manager" () to make it sound good? Come on Mark give us an answer - we all need a laugh.

PM on its way, Carbonfibre.
mikehammer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.