Citation Mustang Wheels-Up Closes Cambridge
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks x933
UK Register - I was aware G-FLBK was operated by Blink, however the owner is registered owner is TAG and of the 13 UK registered Mustangs, it is the only one that says 'Potential ownership change in progress'. Which is why I asked.
However PH-TXI make sense now, I assume it would have to be transferred to the UK register before it could actually fly charter for hire flights?
If any one has any photos, or further information on damage to the aircraft, it would be greatly appreciated.
I'm a private pilot based out of Buttonville Airport near Toronto - we currently have 7 Mustangs on the Canadian registry - so far they are a rare visitor at CYKZ!
However PH-TXI make sense now, I assume it would have to be transferred to the UK register before it could actually fly charter for hire flights?
If any one has any photos, or further information on damage to the aircraft, it would be greatly appreciated.
I'm a private pilot based out of Buttonville Airport near Toronto - we currently have 7 Mustangs on the Canadian registry - so far they are a rare visitor at CYKZ!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London, Berlin, Bucharest
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thats intresting. Blink have picked up all their aircrafts this year and have many more firm orders on the way. i dont understand why they would be selling already... from what i understand they are doing extreamly well already and have made a strong brand name for themselves.
i would have thought it was ambeos aircraft as one of the first posts said something about base checks being done at the time.
i would have thought it was ambeos aircraft as one of the first posts said something about base checks being done at the time.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TAG
Click here ] UK Register of Mustangs
It clearly is not a Blink aircraft. As x933 suggested, the most likely involved aircraft is a Dutch registered Mustang ex- of Bikkair, which appears to be in service with Ambeo PLC.
As for Blink, you can check the ownerships on the above link.
It clearly is not a Blink aircraft. As x933 suggested, the most likely involved aircraft is a Dutch registered Mustang ex- of Bikkair, which appears to be in service with Ambeo PLC.
As for Blink, you can check the ownerships on the above link.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In Exile...
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The change of ownership would be commensurate with the granting of their own AOC rather than piggybacking off TAG's, which I know was in the offing. Don't know if it's been granted yet though.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are these the guys who were charging hundreds of pounds for an interview and wanted experienced pilots to pay to use their MCC simulator during the interview process to ensure they got the most very bestest pilots who were the pinnacle of their profession.....?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As well as a gear warning horn (the Horn Silence button is clearly visible on the Cessna website), do these aircraft not have EGPWS with the full range of "Too Low, Gear" and "Too Low, Flaps" warnings?
Aircraft was doing base check (circuits) with a TRE/TRI onboard. Current rumour at Cambridge is that the Gear Horn CB is pulled...
Aircraft was doing base check (circuits) with a TRE/TRI onboard. Current rumour at Cambridge is that the Gear Horn CB is pulled...
Last edited by Jaydee27; 24th Aug 2009 at 09:16.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In Exile...
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Initial Selection - £250.00
Occupational Personality Questionnaire Evaluation - £250.00
Formal interview - £100.00
Pre-Type Rating training - £2,600.00
Occupational Personality Questionnaire Evaluation - £250.00
Formal interview - £100.00
Pre-Type Rating training - £2,600.00
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was on a training flight, apart from the initial type circuits, then it serves them jolly well right.
I maybe out of touch but I am under the impression, all training and checking should be in the simulator at an approved training institute, eg Flight safety or CAE etc. To me checking (including the circuits) on the aircraft is outdated, false economy and should be relegated to the scrapheap.
If it is the same outfit that charges for interviews etc., then it could not have happened to nicer people, IMHO.
I maybe out of touch but I am under the impression, all training and checking should be in the simulator at an approved training institute, eg Flight safety or CAE etc. To me checking (including the circuits) on the aircraft is outdated, false economy and should be relegated to the scrapheap.
If it is the same outfit that charges for interviews etc., then it could not have happened to nicer people, IMHO.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this a case of 'Pay peanuts get monkeys'?
In fact it is worse, you are trying to recruit experienced guys/girls to your outfit and expect them to pay for the priviledge of being interviewed and assessed.
Which monkey is going to pay for his peanuts? Only the desperate with nowhere else to go will apply.
In fact this is happening more and more with pilots having to pay for their own ratings, uniform, recurrent etc.
I get the impression these days that the job of a pilot is seen as very easy, any kid who can hold a Playstation paddle can do it, ATC is excellent, computers do the planning, ops schedule your flights and after all modern aircraft can practically land themselves......so why pay money for good experienced pilots?..........
The first time management realise their mistake is when they see a smoking hole on Sky News with the company logo on the tail sticking out of it.
or
Someone does a wheels up landing on a routine training sortie?
Good pilots already have jobs or will be able to pick and choose, so if companies want them, they have to be willing to pay for them.
Too often HR and the bean counters are winning this battle and this results in the overall degredation of T&Cs and a lowering of basic pay scales.
I am told we are already getting to a point where for young wannabes the cost of training is outweighing the pros of the pilot lifestyle. And the cycle will return with a shortage of pilots and low paying companies haemorrhaging pilots looking to greener fields.
In fact it is worse, you are trying to recruit experienced guys/girls to your outfit and expect them to pay for the priviledge of being interviewed and assessed.
Which monkey is going to pay for his peanuts? Only the desperate with nowhere else to go will apply.
In fact this is happening more and more with pilots having to pay for their own ratings, uniform, recurrent etc.
I get the impression these days that the job of a pilot is seen as very easy, any kid who can hold a Playstation paddle can do it, ATC is excellent, computers do the planning, ops schedule your flights and after all modern aircraft can practically land themselves......so why pay money for good experienced pilots?..........
The first time management realise their mistake is when they see a smoking hole on Sky News with the company logo on the tail sticking out of it.
or
Someone does a wheels up landing on a routine training sortie?
Good pilots already have jobs or will be able to pick and choose, so if companies want them, they have to be willing to pay for them.
Too often HR and the bean counters are winning this battle and this results in the overall degredation of T&Cs and a lowering of basic pay scales.
I am told we are already getting to a point where for young wannabes the cost of training is outweighing the pros of the pilot lifestyle. And the cycle will return with a shortage of pilots and low paying companies haemorrhaging pilots looking to greener fields.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: at the whim of people I've never met
Age: 46
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I maybe out of touch but I am under the impression, all training and checking should be in the simulator at an approved training institute, eg Flight safety or CAE etc. To me checking (including the circuits) on the aircraft is outdated, false economy and should be relegated to the scrapheap.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: all over the place
Age: 63
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For people who are 'out of touch'; To validate a JAA type rating you need (depending on your hours) 4 or 6 actual take off and landings with a JAA TRE. It has been like that for many years.
The FAA will accept the level D sim which IMHO is not good because no simulator represents the landing of the aircraft correctly (especially the EMB 145/Legacy).
Don't know what happened at Cambridge or why but obviously it shouldn't have.
The FAA will accept the level D sim which IMHO is not good because no simulator represents the landing of the aircraft correctly (especially the EMB 145/Legacy).
Don't know what happened at Cambridge or why but obviously it shouldn't have.
My outfit once rented a (small) ship to a TRE who wanted to renew/reval his qual - and I went along for the ride. After several VERY low approaches
w/out gear one of them oop front turned round and shouted "Hey, the GPWS isn't working".
"Maybe coz it isn't fitted?", was the sotto reply.
I still wonder how they managed to complete a pre-flight GPWS check, that might have convinced them that it *would* be...
w/out gear one of them oop front turned round and shouted "Hey, the GPWS isn't working".
"Maybe coz it isn't fitted?", was the sotto reply.
I still wonder how they managed to complete a pre-flight GPWS check, that might have convinced them that it *would* be...
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does have a gear horn though, which can't be cancelled provded you have full flap set...
Can somebody confirm that you need to perform 4/6 landings or is it acceptable just to fly the approaches to a low go-around?
Can somebody confirm that you need to perform 4/6 landings or is it acceptable just to fly the approaches to a low go-around?