Air Nelson
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I guess that makes you a "tossa" too, if you know as much as we do and yet still comment! 
Doesn't matter why they did it, it is the rampant disregard for the rights of poor NZ GA pilots that should be noted.
And as for "The reason it went to Air Nelson is that they have a full flight simulator, and the aircraft is a glass cockpit similar to the upgrades on the C130 and P3. Plus being a straight wing TP would be similar configuration to what they are going back to!" - what complete bollocks. The Dash is nothing like either the C130 or the P3 in configuration or performance, and the only way the avionics are similar is that they both have an ADI and HSI!
And if they really are recent Wings graduates - well, that is an even worse insult to poor downtrodden NZ GA guys looking for a break! ALPA and the Air Nelson pilots should hang their heads in collective shame!!!
Somebody needs to grow a pair and stand up to this nonsense!
Doesn't matter why they did it, it is the rampant disregard for the rights of poor NZ GA pilots that should be noted.
And as for "The reason it went to Air Nelson is that they have a full flight simulator, and the aircraft is a glass cockpit similar to the upgrades on the C130 and P3. Plus being a straight wing TP would be similar configuration to what they are going back to!" - what complete bollocks. The Dash is nothing like either the C130 or the P3 in configuration or performance, and the only way the avionics are similar is that they both have an ADI and HSI!
And if they really are recent Wings graduates - well, that is an even worse insult to poor downtrodden NZ GA guys looking for a break! ALPA and the Air Nelson pilots should hang their heads in collective shame!!!
Somebody needs to grow a pair and stand up to this nonsense!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: .
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with most of the comments on here, but not those regarding the ability of the RNZAF pilots about to come through.
To say that a guy off the wings course (BE200) is not up to flying the Dash is rubbish. These are guys that if things were running correctly would be operating as a Captain on the 200 and moving quite quickly on to either a Herc or P3. They are more than capable of flying the Dash. They will have a big advantage over a lot of GA guys coming through in that they have had exposure to multi crew ops, retract gear, pressurisation, relatively high speeds. Yes their total time is low, but they have had good training.
Yes, the avionics will be a little different, but the use of the Dash FMS will stand them in good stead, as will the use of the EFIS etc. Of course they will already have some experience of this from their training.
As to performance differences, I think you will find that the Dash and the Herc are remarkably similar. Yes the Dash is slower and a lot smaller, but in terms of handling there is a lot that can be read across. When one of these RNZAF guys moves from the Dash back to the Herc they will find the transition of handling skills pretty easy.
I just hope these guys are given a fair shot at the whole thing. Im sure they would rather be off flying a P3 than doing airline stuff, but they dont have the same rights to bitch/moan/complain that their civvy counterparts have. They are only doing what they are ordered.
As to whether this whole thing should have been set up in the first place, well thats a different story. Im sure it will help to mask a shortage in pilot numbers, and for that and many other reasons it deserves to be looked at very closely. But thats not the fault of these young pilots, and I think some people on here need to remember that.
To say that a guy off the wings course (BE200) is not up to flying the Dash is rubbish. These are guys that if things were running correctly would be operating as a Captain on the 200 and moving quite quickly on to either a Herc or P3. They are more than capable of flying the Dash. They will have a big advantage over a lot of GA guys coming through in that they have had exposure to multi crew ops, retract gear, pressurisation, relatively high speeds. Yes their total time is low, but they have had good training.
And as for "The reason it went to Air Nelson is that they have a full flight simulator, and the aircraft is a glass cockpit similar to the upgrades on the C130 and P3. Plus being a straight wing TP would be similar configuration to what they are going back to!" - what complete bollocks. The Dash is nothing like either the C130 or the P3 in configuration or performance, and the only way the avionics are similar is that they both have an ADI and HSI!
As to performance differences, I think you will find that the Dash and the Herc are remarkably similar. Yes the Dash is slower and a lot smaller, but in terms of handling there is a lot that can be read across. When one of these RNZAF guys moves from the Dash back to the Herc they will find the transition of handling skills pretty easy.
I just hope these guys are given a fair shot at the whole thing. Im sure they would rather be off flying a P3 than doing airline stuff, but they dont have the same rights to bitch/moan/complain that their civvy counterparts have. They are only doing what they are ordered.
As to whether this whole thing should have been set up in the first place, well thats a different story. Im sure it will help to mask a shortage in pilot numbers, and for that and many other reasons it deserves to be looked at very closely. But thats not the fault of these young pilots, and I think some people on here need to remember that.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you will find that the Dash and the Herc are remarkably similar
the use of the EFIS etc. Of course they will already have some experience of this from their training
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: .
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak,
My mistake, I thought the King Airs had been fitted with EFIS. That being the case it is still not much of an issue to move from non-EFIS to EFIS, whether they are civvy or Air Force.
As for speaking out of a hole in my head, you are quite right, its called a mouth. (Any particular need for the aggressive response?) I didnt say the two types are identical, I said there is a lot that can be compared in terms of the handling of the two. I stand by that, they are very similar.
In relative terms the controls are both quite heavy, the rates of change are similar, the approach and flare are much the same. Speeds on final are comparable, and t/o and landing distances are similar as well. The guys coming off the Dash and moving to the Herc will know that they are on a bigger aircraft, but the handling will be surprisingly similar.
My mistake, I thought the King Airs had been fitted with EFIS. That being the case it is still not much of an issue to move from non-EFIS to EFIS, whether they are civvy or Air Force.
As for speaking out of a hole in my head, you are quite right, its called a mouth. (Any particular need for the aggressive response?) I didnt say the two types are identical, I said there is a lot that can be compared in terms of the handling of the two. I stand by that, they are very similar.
In relative terms the controls are both quite heavy, the rates of change are similar, the approach and flare are much the same. Speeds on final are comparable, and t/o and landing distances are similar as well. The guys coming off the Dash and moving to the Herc will know that they are on a bigger aircraft, but the handling will be surprisingly similar.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for speaking out of a hole in my head, you are quite right, its called a mouth. (Any particular need for the aggressive response?)
Anyway, flew the C100 (civil Herc) once, many moons ago, and did half a Dash 8 sim course before being yanked off it to do a 146 course instead. They felt pretty different (in the finer points of handling) to me. Having said that, all civil aircraft of that size fly more or less the same, that is the whole goal of certification. I can honestly say, for example, that the old F27 I used to fly handles much the same, in general terms, as the 146 I flew for ten years after that. The differences are in systems and procedures, mainly.
Also important to realise that I have no issue at all with any of this, I was just pointing out in a slightly sideways manner that, if you accept the premise given to me and others by Air Nelson for requiring the infamous 50 hours (protecting local GA hopefuls), you would expect them to be consistent and not allow RNZAF chappies to "jump the queue" as they put it to me. You would also expect those trying to get into Air Nelson to be more than a little miffed, but they seem to be strangely silent.
So to summarise, all Transport Category aircraft fly more or less the same, analogue to EFIS is no biggie (although proper FMS can be a struggle for some), RNZAF pilots are fine chaps/chapettes and snappy dressers to boot, Air Nelson can do whatever they want, and all Kiwi pilots should be treated identically in the job market. OK?
Join Date: May 2005
Location: DOWNUNDER
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During the recent industrial action Air Nelson used Federation and indepedent pilots to crew aircraft during the strikes. This saw training captains used in the right hand seat as a large majority of non ALPA pilots are captains. Should this experiment with two air force pilots go well there is nothing to stop this from becoming part of the standard air force training progression with more than just two pilots on secondment.
Air Nsn get FREE pilots and the air force get increased flying experience without the expense of operating aircraft. Both parties win from the deal so would you not expand it. The examples given previously with Jet Airways and Airwork were as far as I know were short term. This could become permenent if the Air Force decide that a year on the Dash should be part of the training progression.
Should strike action be taken in the future the Air force FOs can be used to undermine the effect of that strike action as more aircraft can be crewed.
I do not like the idea that my taxes are being spent in a way that could seriously undermine my unions ability to negotiate increased terms an conditions in the future.
I am sure the two pilots in question are good guys but I am worried that they could be pawns in a much larger conspicacy.
Air Nsn get FREE pilots and the air force get increased flying experience without the expense of operating aircraft. Both parties win from the deal so would you not expand it. The examples given previously with Jet Airways and Airwork were as far as I know were short term. This could become permenent if the Air Force decide that a year on the Dash should be part of the training progression.
Should strike action be taken in the future the Air force FOs can be used to undermine the effect of that strike action as more aircraft can be crewed.
I do not like the idea that my taxes are being spent in a way that could seriously undermine my unions ability to negotiate increased terms an conditions in the future.
I am sure the two pilots in question are good guys but I am worried that they could be pawns in a much larger conspicacy.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And conspiracy I think it mostly will be.
Free seat fillers is all JH wants. Non unionised resources is something JH would love if it came to others downing tools for a while.
I cant see John Key loving the idea of tax dollars in effect crewing publicly listed companies. Political minefield if it goes too much further.
That the govt is the major shareholder is an awkward convenience.
I dont think it will come to any long term significance. Well, I hope not anyway!
Free seat fillers is all JH wants. Non unionised resources is something JH would love if it came to others downing tools for a while.
I cant see John Key loving the idea of tax dollars in effect crewing publicly listed companies. Political minefield if it goes too much further.
That the govt is the major shareholder is an awkward convenience.
I dont think it will come to any long term significance. Well, I hope not anyway!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NZ
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the original Q
A mate of mine got rung by Air NSN today and was given a heads up about an interview late April.
He was also told that there was to be two rounds of interviews and that they were struggling to find people with suitable experience, so for those keen, get your updates in and follow up calls dialed...
good luck.... have fun in invercargill
S2K
He was also told that there was to be two rounds of interviews and that they were struggling to find people with suitable experience, so for those keen, get your updates in and follow up calls dialed...
good luck.... have fun in invercargill
S2K
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where the beer is cold and the weather is colder.
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice lady but a life supply of cheese rolls wouldnt be worth it. You would need a door big enough for me and my telephone pole.
Last edited by ZK-NSN; 20th Mar 2009 at 11:28.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
interview late April.
Just on the off-chance they don't play ball, is anyone prepared to supply the humble pie for me to eat?
Doubt I'll need it though. Who do you send your CV to?
This should be entertaining...
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: .
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak,
Dont mean to be rude here, but have you thought that perhaps the 50 hour IF requirement that you talk of is perhaps a nice way for the company to say they arent interested in somebody?
Where I work stipulations like this are often used as a way of telling people thanks but no thanks. Perhaps Air Nelson are doing the same?
Dont mean to be rude here, but have you thought that perhaps the 50 hour IF requirement that you talk of is perhaps a nice way for the company to say they arent interested in somebody?
Where I work stipulations like this are often used as a way of telling people thanks but no thanks. Perhaps Air Nelson are doing the same?
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where the beer is cold and the weather is colder.
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remoak: Game on!
If you dont want someone to work for you just tell them, There is no point in making up some story. Even if you dont have the stones to tell them in person, you can just write a letter.
If you dont want someone to work for you just tell them, There is no point in making up some story. Even if you dont have the stones to tell them in person, you can just write a letter.
Last edited by ZK-NSN; 20th Mar 2009 at 22:46.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
blah blah blah
A lot of Air Nelson guys trot that one out in their rather smug way. The problem with that idea is that it is completely unnecessary; all they have to do is say "no thanks", they don't need to invent a reason why. And if you were going to invent a reason, it should be rather less specific.
The other problem with that reasoning is that if the pilot goes away and does the 50 hours, their reason for rejecting him or her evaporates and they either have to hire them, or invent another reason not to; or just say "no thanks", which they could have done in the first place!
Sorry, doesn't make any sense, even for Air Nelson.
Dont mean to be rude here, but have you thought that perhaps the 50 hour IF requirement that you talk of is perhaps a nice way for the company to say they arent interested in somebody?
The other problem with that reasoning is that if the pilot goes away and does the 50 hours, their reason for rejecting him or her evaporates and they either have to hire them, or invent another reason not to; or just say "no thanks", which they could have done in the first place!
Sorry, doesn't make any sense, even for Air Nelson.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: .
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope it doesnt make a lot of sense, it would be better to just say no thanks.
Doesnt seem like you should spend so much time worrying about it.
By the way, with reference to the previous post re Herc v Dash, I say they are a lot closer than merely just two types certified to transport category standards. Ive operated both in the past. Neither fly anything like my current type which is also a transport type. No idea about the 146, but pretty sure it wont give you much of an insight into either the Herc or the Dash.
Doesnt seem like you should spend so much time worrying about it.
By the way, with reference to the previous post re Herc v Dash, I say they are a lot closer than merely just two types certified to transport category standards. Ive operated both in the past. Neither fly anything like my current type which is also a transport type. No idea about the 146, but pretty sure it wont give you much of an insight into either the Herc or the Dash.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don 't spend much time worrying about it, this is just my morning entertainment while drinking my first coffee of the day. Sometimes in the afternoon as well, if I'm really bored.Air Nelson make such a good target that it's hard not to poke the borax a little...
Beats talking about J* I reckon!
Beats talking about J* I reckon!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The RNZAF using Air Nelson is a disgrace.
Why cant they send their pilots to other airforces around the world.
RAAF, RAF, USAF they do plenty of flying on the types mentioned.
Why cant they send their pilots to other airforces around the world.
RAAF, RAF, USAF they do plenty of flying on the types mentioned.