The Arrogance Of Britannia 034A

[normal_nigel]

As Kreuger said earlier, how can this thread have spawned so much comment?

Because this is pprune.

Its populated (like our profession) by pompous know- it- alls who think they are right about everything. Yep we've all flown with them. Well this forum is their soapbox.

Its part of the fun. I love it. The "who can out pomp each other" competitions are fantastic

NN

[Vox]

One four sick, my statement said that you were wrong in your assumption that it was a BY pilot. In fact it appears it may have been a CAA pilot on a BY aircraft.

My statement about the comments regarding shortcuts in no way accuses you of making them. I suggest you go back and re-read.

Your accusation is just that an unfounded accusation at this time. You appear to be the one who is emotional, you don’t seem to be able to read and understand what is plainly in front of your eyes.

Take a deep breath and go and re-read what has been said…you know it makes sense.

NN no one is trying to be pompous mate, but our young (I presume) pilot friend is happy to make allegations that he/she can’t /won’t prove on a public forum.

I fly with the BY boys and girls and to a man/women they are fine people doing a good job. True we can all improve our operation and we have all sorts of personalities/ accents working as flt crew.

While we are proud of our company we don’t think we are better than everyone else. It seemed like this thread was turning into a playground spat at BY’s expense.

The thing about the anonymity of PPRUNE is that one four sick has forgotten that the very people he says he is in contact with could be reading or replying to this thread.

[normal_nigel]

Vox

I wan't getting at you mate but pprune in general terms. Nearly every hot topic is the same.

Can we have an annual "who's the biggest pompous tw*t" award?

[Farty Flaps]

Why is the Caa man operating the flioght?Run that one BY me again!

Is it to stay current or observe, if the former do the CAA pay, or could it all be a bit cosy.

Bring it on

[Dogma]

N Nigel,

I think we can award the "most incoherent Tw*t award" to farty flaps.

Fart flaps


Christ on a bike.... have you been at the Hooch? To answer your question, the CAA ops inspector flys with all AOC holders regularly. No cost to them.

[Farty Flaps]

Yes i have

christ didnt have a bike

he had a donkey

[Preppy]

BAL Tastic

"If you persist in this vain I will get the all the information, pull the tapes, review the evidence and pursue you"

Your comments cause concern!

If you continue this threat with action you will probably not be in compliance with ICAO Annex 13, JAR and Uk regulations. You will almost certainly be in breach with the agreements that Britannia have made with its CC (i.e. BALPA). Be careful.

Preppy

[BAL Tastic]

Preppy,

Run that by me again?

If this person (one four Sick), persists to make false and misleading comments, we will take action.

Britannia Airways has not written to Mr One four sick.

[JW411]

It has always been my experience that when the CAA guys came flying with us, a training captain had to occupy the right seat so that they could sit in the left seat.

The only way they could fly with a non-training captain was to sit in the right seat which the CAA did not like over much although I have seen it done.

Now it is a while since I flew with the CAA so things might have changed but since BAL Tastic seems to know all the facts, I think it would be useful to know whether it was the CAA pilot on the radio (PNF) or the Britannia pilot (PNF).

If it was indeed the CAA pilot then I am surprised that he would use a phrase such as "Tell the Iberia to pedal faster". Indeed, if it was the Britannia pilot then I am equally surprised that he would use such a phrase in the presence of the CAA!

[Danny]

Talk about handbags at dawn! Even I have to admit that this thread has even surprised me with the level of inaccuracy, presumption, schadenfreude, pomposity and overall amount of toys thrown out of the pram!

From what I can ascertain, a BY flight with a CAA ops guy as PNF (ie. on the radio) into ALC was a bit "out of order" in the view of one LOCO pilot who was ahead of him on the approach. The LOCO pilot expressed his embarrassment at the attitude of the BY (CAA?) pilot towards the Spanish controller who apparently didn't rise to the bait and just carried on, service as normal.

With a comment along the lines of "...Could you ask the Iberia to pedal a bit faster", whilst a fairly obvious attempt at sarcastic humour, obviously lost on the Spanish controller, may have been non-standard, it doesn't appear to imply the broad reaching title given to this thread of "The Arrogance of Britannia 034A". The other sweeping accusations of coathanging responses accusing all BY pilots of pomposity are just ludicrous.

We all have times when frustration at some element of our flight begins to irritate, whether it be another pilot, a controller, a dispatcher or a cabin crew member. Occasionally, that frustration is made more obvious, especially when it is at a controller, whether it be a sarcastic comment or just a heavy sigh. Learn to live with it. It is not the end of the world as we know it.

I can understand if the effects of the chatter is impinging on some safety aspect but in this case, it just appears that a pilot was frustrated at being slowed down so early in the approach. The pilot obviously didn't have the big picture, which sometimes happens. Big deal. I'd be a bit peeved if I was still at 18NM on finals at ALC and I was told to drag it in, never mind at being No. 3 which probably meant he still had at least 30NM track miles to run. A "roger" accompanied with a big sigh would indicate dissatisfaction with the situation. I certainly wouldn't expect one of the other a/c ahead of me to try and start an inquiry into who I was, just because they were embarrassed.

In my experience, BY pilots are as abnormal as the rest of us. They fly the same a/c, they come as varied a background as the rest of us and have the same emotions. Those of you making very broad accusations that they are somehow different from the rest of us should probably try and be a bit more introspective. We all have bad days from time to time and very occasionally a few let it be known to everyone else that they are not happy. It's no big deal and the fact that this thread has gone as far as it has is a sign that some pilots need to get out a bit more often.

To the uninitiated who may be reading this thread, what we have here is the traditional bitchfest that starts when one pilot gets embarrassed at the actions of another. It is all bravado, bolstered by the fact that they have a shield of anonymity, although in this case both parties can probably be identified due to the dates, flight numbers and the sequence in the approach. Not a very sensible thing to do, but there you go!

Mountains out of molehills and all that. We pilots are known collectively as a 'Whinge'. Now you know why!

Gentlemen (and ladies if necessary), can we all put our toys back in the pram and find something a bit more juicy to have a moan about?

[one four sick]

I don't normally give a badger's a$$ about what people say on the RT.

This was DIFFERENT and made us both look at each other in astonishment!! It was THAT different.
Had it not been that different I would have not paid any attention to it.
As I am unable to reproduce this in order to satisfy the doubters, I will just say: pull the tapes if you've got the authority, I wish you would.

I KNOW what we heard, it's your turn BAL Tastic.

Now, I have had just about enough of this, I would have expected the thread to die a deep death by Tuesday last, but there we are.

So, I am going to get drunk and celebrate over 20 thousand hits on PPRUNE for a thread that wasn't meant to be this popular - I thought.


one four sick

[srjumbo]

BAL Tastic gets my vote for the 'who's the biggest pompous tw#t award'.
Good grief, the couple of postings I've put up here may ruffle a few feathers or get a laugh but to actually threaten someone on what is a discussion forum is totally unnecessary.
Loooking at BAL T's profile (bland tasteless curry?) it appears that BAL T is on the 757/767. Thank goodness, I hopefully will never have the 'pleasure' of flying with the Royal Highness!
GET A LIFE!

[JW411]

I have read Danny's posting several times over and I am the first to admit that over the last 46 years I have also transgressed on occasion. However I do think that there is a serious point to be made here.

All of us with a CAA license are well aware that they are tasked with setting and maintaining very high standards. There cannot be anyone out there who has not been exposed at some time to the highest levels of pedanticism by one of these "defenders of the faith".

If we are to believe the account given by "one four sick" (and I have no reason to doubt him) then it was one of these "defenders of the faith" who threw his toys out of the pram in public.

I think it is a bit childish for BAL Tastic to be threatening legal action for if the tapes were produced in a court of law as advertised, there could be a lot of egg on several faces. Is he saying that since it was a CAA pilot then that is OK?

What worries me is that the next time I do my 3-yearly TRI/TRE renewal and the "defender of the faith" tells me that it was not conducted exactly and strictly according to JARs then I am going to find the phrase "double standards" coming to mind.

Perhaps someone from the CAA would like to comment.

[caniplaywithmadness]

Thinkrate

Forgive me for butting in and I stand to be corrected as I am no pro but I thought that certain speed restrictions are not for ATC to be lifted (such as the 250 KIAS below 10K etc.) so "no speed" does not automatically lift certain restrictions ?

ATC CAN AND DO lift the 250 below fl100 spped limit on many occasions as it is often more beneficial for us to have a/c at higher speeds when dealing with a sequence of mixed performance a/c such as the 757, E145, SF34, etc etc

There are restrictions to this such as a/c transiting through class E airspace or traffic outside CAS however the norm (at least where I work) is to let a/c fly at the speed they want to unless we need a slower speed to avoid an extended routeing.

I would also like to add that in my experiece as a controller that ALL the crews that I have had dealings with both on the RT and during the many visits to flight decks have been nothing but professional and not at all pompous or arrogant, yes there are the occaisonal sighs or tones of "GOD BACK AT 220 THIS FAR OUT" but we all have days where we get frustrated at the little things, a little light hearted banter on the RT goes a long way to relieving the stresses of a long day.

I would think that there isn't a pilot or ATCO out there that hasn't made some light hearted comment on the RT, on this occasion perhaps the humour was lost on the controller due to language difficulties and therefore seemed inappropraite to the other crew on the frequency. I for one have aksed a/c to "pedal faster" and the crews have responded in an appropriately humorous fashion with no offence taken, but perhaps that's just the boys and girls at Loganair who have a sense of humour

[goatface]

It's true though, all Brittania pilots do sound the same.....

[Bealzebub]

Who amongst us hasn't become exasperated with something at some time and perhaps unwisely with the benefit of hindsight said something we might have regretted once the blood pressure dropped a bit ? It is very difficult sometimes to guage tone from a radio call and thereby interpret someones mood or frustration. Even when that is not the case, events (not broadcast) that surround the isolated fact may often provide a clearer picture as to why something has happened.

I am not attempting to excuse behaviour that might be or seem inappropriate, but I wonder how sin free some of the stone casters are !

In my opinion it was very wrong for the author of this thread to identify the target of his ire so willfully. The subject could have been as usefully discussed without being so blatant. The fact that this has solicited such a spirted response is perhaps not surprising. In my experience nearly everything you hear on the radio from Pilots and ATCO's is very professional and regular. Yes there are regional quirks and very occaisionally something ( perhaps like this) might cause you to look at your oppo' and roll your eyes. However that is no reason to turn it into an identifiable and personal attack. This thread says more about the authors judgement than the subjects in my opinion.

[BEagle]

Imaginary situation. An aerodrome requires a Continuous Descent Approach technique; the FAF is at 8 DME and 2500ft agl. Usual Speedywings Airlines straight in approach plan is to maintain 250KIAS at the SLP until 2 miles to the FAF (10 DME), then decel as rapidly as possible to begin the final approach.

On a particular day, the controller advises 'due traffic, decel to 220 knots by 18 DME please' on the same straight in approach.

From the 18 mile point, how much longer do you think it'll take to cart your bus load of shell-suited oiks and their harpies at 220 instead of 250?

18-10=8; 8 miles at 250 KIAS takes 1.92 minutes; 8 miles at 220 takes 2.18 minutes. A whole 15.7 seconds longer.

When teaching pilots to fly Air Transport flights, we regularly discussed the perceived time saving which resulted from 'high speed approaches' - and how little it actually was. In fact more could be saved from stand-to-stand by planning the roll-out point and taxiway exit carefully than from keeping 'pedal to the metal' until just before the FAF. We developed a low-drag approach technique for the coal-fired old rust-bucket I used to fly as the Vickers FunBus is hardly a whisperjet and we really needed to avoid upsetting folk under the flight path with unreasonable noise - but the idea wasn't to save time, just noise.

So, although the extra 15.7 secs might be perceived as being annoying, if the traffic ahead is a lumbertub flat out at 180, the difference between closing on it at 40 rather than 70 kts might make the difference between achieving separation minima and busting it.

I doubt whether ATC ever intend to mess people about; they are as aware of your commercial pressures as anyone else. An appreciation of how little extra time an early decel will cost might perhaps be useful to some?

[Vox]

Except we are talking about fuel burn Beagle. Down low all dirtied up we throw around 100kg a minute out the back of the engine. Say we don’t care. On that approach its only say 2-250 kg extra fuel we use. Now multiply that for every approach that aircraft makes in a year. Now multiply that by the entire fleet. Now you get significant extra fuel required to fly your annual program. We had a very bright spark do the cost analysis for us considering all the relevant factors such as engineering costs etc. We even realised that it was worth instigating single engine taxiing after landing. That only saves a cupful at best…but it was still worth it.

[Captain Mercurius]

Dear Beagle,

I agree with your view.

Some people have the tendency to take things by pride, and they feel proud having the perception that in doing a low-drag approach they are saving a lot of money for their company.

In addition, they get upset , whenever they have the impression that somebody is “obstructing” them.

Bear in mind that I am not "tagging" the originator of this topic by all means.

But ,this is a fact, and I have witnessed this thing before, also within my collegues.

Safe flying to all

Mercurius

[Right Way Up]

"Down low all dirtied up we throw around 100kg a minute out the back of the engine. Say we don’t care"
Well slow down earlier to clean speed, then you'll save fuel! A lot of operators fly 330-340 kts in the descent (most probably not the descent speed claimed in the flight plan) and then complain when the guy ahead baulks them.