Pablo Sacked from MyTravel
I am not an aviator but a retired airframe technician who at least did have the pleasure of knowing Pablo Mason while on 230 Squadron. I will not comment on his professional ability as a pilot because I am not qualified to do so. But I suspect a lot of the comments made to date on this site are from unqualified self-opinionated people who have never ever disobeyed an order/instruction ! I think not.
I think there must be a pool of would-be traffic wardens out there just waiting for a job opening. ( ie They can show no discretion - rules is rules !!!) - Bollocks.
Good luck Pablo.
I think there must be a pool of would-be traffic wardens out there just waiting for a job opening. ( ie They can show no discretion - rules is rules !!!) - Bollocks.
Good luck Pablo.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the best Pablo – you were one of the best Tonka Jocks I knew. I was a sooty and your presence and attitude to us ground crew was fantastic.
Oh and I forgot to say,
"AARON O'DICKYDIDO Well said".
Oh and I forgot to say,
"AARON O'DICKYDIDO Well said".
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not 100% sure if Sir Richard Bandwagon-Jumper would be allowed on the flightdeck of one of his own aeroplanes - although I suspect that if he was officially on the "crew" then it would be OK. However, the Captain would have the right to refuse him entry whatever the circumstances.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I recommend the "Rumours and News" thread on this subject where most of the contributors probably have a better understanding of the relevant legislation than most of the contributors on this MA forum. Furthermore the civilian operators probably understand the shortcomings of the legislation more than their military counterparts. Finally, let's not continue to slag off a fellow pilot publicly, whether his history invites it or not.
Gentleman Aviator
"Never criticise a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes"
.... you're a mile away from him.....
.. and you've got his shoes......!!
SFFP,
"Moggie,
Now I am giggling as I think you actualy believe what you have just posted "
As an civvy airliner-legislation-checking-and-enforcing type of guy, I suggest it might be a good idea for you to stop, and think about those who know who you are, before you get much deeper into the mire!
Rigga
"Moggie,
Now I am giggling as I think you actualy believe what you have just posted "
As an civvy airliner-legislation-checking-and-enforcing type of guy, I suggest it might be a good idea for you to stop, and think about those who know who you are, before you get much deeper into the mire!
Rigga
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Access to flightdeck laws do NOT apply to private jets, nor do they apply to all AOC flights (e.g. a Kingair charter for example). Therefore, Mr Abramovich does NOT have to have a "no access" policy on his private 767.
The Captain has the legal authority to bar anyone from entering his flightdeck - whether he has the will to withstand management pressure from the owner-passenger or manager-passenger is another story. I know a BA Concorde captain who barred Bob Ayling from the flight deck when Ayling was "running" BA. Ayling wanted to get back to the UK and all the seats in the cabin were taken and he wanted to use the jumpseat to get home. The captain refused, saying that having the airline's chief exec on the flightdeck was prejudicial to flight safety as it may have been a distraction for the crew.
Ops manuals may impose more stringent rules than those laid down by DfT and as those manuals are approved by the CAA as part of the process of gaining an AOC then they become legally binding. Therefore, if the MYT Ops Manual says no access then that is binding - full stop, no discussion required.
You're dealing with someone who thinks that common sense trumps the rules despite what the boss thinks... Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: St.Annes (07892890416)
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seldomfitforpurpose (Oxon)
What ever happened to SFFP?
....Mytravel said the company had a "zero tolerance policy" ...
I assume the CAA have the same zero tolerance policy when it comes to aviation law
I feel sorry for the chap, but rule is rules.
....Mytravel said the company had a "zero tolerance policy" ...
I assume the CAA have the same zero tolerance policy when it comes to aviation law
I feel sorry for the chap, but rule is rules.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: london
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is It All What It Seems
I don't write regularly on this site but feel that I should express my opinion on this one!
I knew Pablo as a colleague and family friend for many years and feel there is much more to this situation than meets the eye.
There are/were/still many people who begrudge Pablo. When I knew him - when we still had a real Air Force - he was well known as an opinionated outspoken individual who stood for high standards and exhibited leadership in his own style - which made him many enemies, I doubt he changed when the transition to civvy flying took place, he did not suffer fools gladly.....
Taking Robbie Savage on to the flight deck would have been seen by the company as Pablo doing his own thing, despite the good intention of attempting to give the individual some confidence in aviation. Was this just the straw that broke the camel's back? Companies are only interested in the bottom line, sod the fare payer, and the employee who rocks the boat...
Sadly Pablo is just another victim of the small minded individuals who run companies these days, always remember airlines aren't run by pilots or even engineers, they are run by accountants who are only interested in the bottom line.
Good luck for the future Pablo fly safe
I knew Pablo as a colleague and family friend for many years and feel there is much more to this situation than meets the eye.
There are/were/still many people who begrudge Pablo. When I knew him - when we still had a real Air Force - he was well known as an opinionated outspoken individual who stood for high standards and exhibited leadership in his own style - which made him many enemies, I doubt he changed when the transition to civvy flying took place, he did not suffer fools gladly.....
Taking Robbie Savage on to the flight deck would have been seen by the company as Pablo doing his own thing, despite the good intention of attempting to give the individual some confidence in aviation. Was this just the straw that broke the camel's back? Companies are only interested in the bottom line, sod the fare payer, and the employee who rocks the boat...
Sadly Pablo is just another victim of the small minded individuals who run companies these days, always remember airlines aren't run by pilots or even engineers, they are run by accountants who are only interested in the bottom line.
Good luck for the future Pablo fly safe
When you work for a civilian company you are paid to work to their rules. You don't work to their rules you don't get paid. It's quite simple.
I can arrive at an FPSO ( a tanker converted to an oil processing and storage unit) giving a roll figure of 3 degrees and is therefore out of the company limits, 2.5 degrees. I know, and anybody else with 9000 hrs on Pumas knows, that if you land cross deck and convert the roll into pitch that it can take 8 degrees eyes shut.
I throw it away. It doesn't affect my pay. The company isn't going to turn around and ask you why you couldn't do it. They set the rules, that is what you are paid to do. Once you step out those parameters you are on you own. Should it turn nasty then the lawyers are looking for somebody to nail.
If you havn't followed the book then it's going to be you.
I can arrive at an FPSO ( a tanker converted to an oil processing and storage unit) giving a roll figure of 3 degrees and is therefore out of the company limits, 2.5 degrees. I know, and anybody else with 9000 hrs on Pumas knows, that if you land cross deck and convert the roll into pitch that it can take 8 degrees eyes shut.
I throw it away. It doesn't affect my pay. The company isn't going to turn around and ask you why you couldn't do it. They set the rules, that is what you are paid to do. Once you step out those parameters you are on you own. Should it turn nasty then the lawyers are looking for somebody to nail.
If you havn't followed the book then it's going to be you.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pablo
R-D- bound
Couldn't agree more. Unfortunately this is the way the PC world is going, "jobsworths" hiding behind convenient (and sometimes inappropriate) rules to achieve their desired result....especially regarding uncomfortable but perhaps nonetheless embarrassingly correct employees.
F-e-driver
Typical "I follow-the-rules-and-am-therefore-always-right" reply. How can you justify comparing compliance with defined flight limitations (if you do this , you will crash) with judgemental decisions i.e. chartered aircraft from known customer, known passenger list, therefore = risk of endangering aircraft if passenger on flight deck = zero. I see no similarity.
I didn't have the honour during my time working for HM of meeting Pablo, but have been privileged (and still am) to meet pilots who were / are prepared to make their own decisions instead of referring to the rules for support.
Pablo - fly with you anytime!
F-e-driver - not so sure.
Couldn't agree more. Unfortunately this is the way the PC world is going, "jobsworths" hiding behind convenient (and sometimes inappropriate) rules to achieve their desired result....especially regarding uncomfortable but perhaps nonetheless embarrassingly correct employees.
F-e-driver
Typical "I follow-the-rules-and-am-therefore-always-right" reply. How can you justify comparing compliance with defined flight limitations (if you do this , you will crash) with judgemental decisions i.e. chartered aircraft from known customer, known passenger list, therefore = risk of endangering aircraft if passenger on flight deck = zero. I see no similarity.
I didn't have the honour during my time working for HM of meeting Pablo, but have been privileged (and still am) to meet pilots who were / are prepared to make their own decisions instead of referring to the rules for support.
Pablo - fly with you anytime!
F-e-driver - not so sure.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Rigex - reluctantly I'm with FE Driver. When you work for a company, you follow their rules. You are not paid (unless you are Chief Pilot) to query the rules, and you are certainly not paid to bend/break them when no lives are in danger.
When it's your train set, you can do as you like. Until then, it's best to follow the rules. Expect the worst if you don't. As has been said before, it's possible that Pablo had sailed too close to the wind before/made enemies in the company. It's no surprise that the wolves leapt for him when he gave them the opportunity. (Apologies for the mixed metaphors, but you get my drift).
When it's your train set, you can do as you like. Until then, it's best to follow the rules. Expect the worst if you don't. As has been said before, it's possible that Pablo had sailed too close to the wind before/made enemies in the company. It's no surprise that the wolves leapt for him when he gave them the opportunity. (Apologies for the mixed metaphors, but you get my drift).
did not suffer fools gladly
As a passenger I want to be flown by a SOP crew with the FO 'in the loop' and in a position to mention deviations from standard procedure.
As a first officer I flew with several "I'll show you how I do it" captains.
They were a pain in the butt and placed their flight deck crew in a position where monitoring was well nigh impossible.
I recollect a flight engineer remarking, after a flight with a Middle Eastern operator "Aahh so that was it; I hadn't a clue what you two were up to!" (Abdul had decided to simulate captain incapacity - not that it made much difference either way)
One final point: Horses and courses, ladies and gentlemen, so if you are not an airline pilot you are not qualified to comment on adherance or otherwise to airline SOPs so lets have less of the Top Gun rubbish.
Last edited by Basil; 26th Nov 2007 at 08:22. Reason: to add 'airline' to SOPs
Typical "I follow-the-rules-and-am-therefore-always-right" reply. How can you justify comparing compliance with defined flight limitations (if you do this , you will crash) with judgemental decisions i.e. chartered aircraft from known customer, known passenger list, therefore = risk of endangering aircraft if passenger on flight deck = zero. I see no similarity.
Both of them them are the same. They are in contravention of the company's Operation Manual which is approved by the CAA as a condition of their Aircraft Operators Certificate. Compliance to the Ops Manual is a condition under which the aircraft is insured. There are mandatory requirements under the Air Navigation Act that must be followed and the prohibition of passengers on on the flight deck on a public transport aircraft above a certain weight is one of them.
It's not jobsworth, IT IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.
Outwith that you are flying an aircraft illegally and it is not insured. You can take your chances but if something goes wrong, maybe something entirely unconnected with what you are doing, you are in it, way up to your neck and beyond. It will not only effect you but also your family, perhaps for ever.
The civil aviation safety record in the developed world has been brought about by the strict adherance to Ops Manuals and SOPs. Go back fifty years to when the captain did more or less as he liked or even now in the third world where the same attitude still prevails and it is a completely different story.
I knew Pablo, briefly, and I have a lot of sympathy for him but he overstepped the mark.
F-e-driver - not so sure.
I obviously wasted my time getting a 38Grp 'A' Category.
Don't walk into Graham Bearham on a dark night.
Last edited by Fareastdriver; 26th Nov 2007 at 05:00.