Passenger safety compromised at TAP
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Endok,
Isn't that bit too much inside info for a Londoner who registered specially to post on this thread?...
Why would someone questioning TAP's pilots safety culture offend the Portuguese people in general is something I honestly don't get. Does questioning Alitalia's management throughout the last few years offend the Italian people?... It doesn't, does it? Not that any Italian would care anyway, but still...
Every airline has its incidents over the years. That's just the way it is! How about Air France's A340 Toronto crash, Lufthansa's famous Hamburg go around, Qantas B747 depressurisation, Iberia's Quito overrun, etc. Just to name a few recent ones. All flag carriers most of us trust and will probably fly with in the future.
There might be a few black sheep at TAP, but this press release clearly had a political motivation. I don't think a lot of people doubt that now. The timing (just after an unsuccessful maintenance personnel strike), the evidence that never showed up, you name it!
And as someone stated, TAP's good reputation made this press release even bigger news. And we all know how much the press likes "big news".
Honestly, I wouldn't think twice about flying with them again.
Isn't that bit too much inside info for a Londoner who registered specially to post on this thread?...
Why would someone questioning TAP's pilots safety culture offend the Portuguese people in general is something I honestly don't get. Does questioning Alitalia's management throughout the last few years offend the Italian people?... It doesn't, does it? Not that any Italian would care anyway, but still...
Every airline has its incidents over the years. That's just the way it is! How about Air France's A340 Toronto crash, Lufthansa's famous Hamburg go around, Qantas B747 depressurisation, Iberia's Quito overrun, etc. Just to name a few recent ones. All flag carriers most of us trust and will probably fly with in the future.
There might be a few black sheep at TAP, but this press release clearly had a political motivation. I don't think a lot of people doubt that now. The timing (just after an unsuccessful maintenance personnel strike), the evidence that never showed up, you name it!
And as someone stated, TAP's good reputation made this press release even bigger news. And we all know how much the press likes "big news".
Honestly, I wouldn't think twice about flying with them again.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: London
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again I'm not offending anyone. The problem is TAP are not used to being criticized, unfortunately. It's like Olympic, Alitalia...
"TAP's good reputation"
From where? For me their reputation is just like any other small european carrier (Olympic, Austrian, CSA, LOT or Adria). I don't like the mega-ego of many TAP employees feeling they are above the others just because, like I stated in my first post, they work for a state owned never profitable airline where they are overpaid just because no one can touch them. That has to stop.
Again if someone feels offended that it's because they don't feel confortable with themsleves. All I wrote is 100% true. Facts.
"TAP's good reputation"
From where? For me their reputation is just like any other small european carrier (Olympic, Austrian, CSA, LOT or Adria). I don't like the mega-ego of many TAP employees feeling they are above the others just because, like I stated in my first post, they work for a state owned never profitable airline where they are overpaid just because no one can touch them. That has to stop.
Again if someone feels offended that it's because they don't feel confortable with themsleves. All I wrote is 100% true. Facts.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: farawayfromyou
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Safety Concerns
Where did you ran from?
Taking a look at your posts, I think either from a zoo or a psychiatric hospital.
Does the company you fly for (if any) belong to a big alliance such as TAP, where the company has to pass thousands of external audits periodically?
Do you know TAP maintenance reputaion and which companies they work for?
Do you know TAP accidents and safety records?
1 Accident since 1940. What about your safe company? 10-15 years existence?
Do you know anything about TAP TRTO among operators, pilots and authorities?
So SC, get a life, get informed first and then if you still buy the press crap, send me a PM and I'll give you the number of a good psychiatrist (in Lisbon).
By the way, I don't work for TAP and never did.
Taking a look at your posts, I think either from a zoo or a psychiatric hospital.
Does the company you fly for (if any) belong to a big alliance such as TAP, where the company has to pass thousands of external audits periodically?
Do you know TAP maintenance reputaion and which companies they work for?
Do you know TAP accidents and safety records?
1 Accident since 1940. What about your safe company? 10-15 years existence?
Do you know anything about TAP TRTO among operators, pilots and authorities?
So SC, get a life, get informed first and then if you still buy the press crap, send me a PM and I'll give you the number of a good psychiatrist (in Lisbon).
By the way, I don't work for TAP and never did.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks gibas for the extremely professional reply. Your response says more about yourself and TAP than I could have achieved.
You also urgently require an eye test, its been a long time since I have come across someone so short sighted!
My own inquiries into TAP instigated due to some comments here have in fact uncovered some very interesting issues. I would prefer not to wander off course but it must be said that:
If we accept the press release as fact, TAP pilots have much much more to lose than the engineers would gain.
If the press release was fiction, it would be downright stupidity on behalf of AEI, probably putting the very existence of the organisation at risk.
So now if I were to look at statistics and probability, I would suggest that the press release is probably accurate.
You also urgently require an eye test, its been a long time since I have come across someone so short sighted!
My own inquiries into TAP instigated due to some comments here have in fact uncovered some very interesting issues. I would prefer not to wander off course but it must be said that:
If we accept the press release as fact, TAP pilots have much much more to lose than the engineers would gain.
If the press release was fiction, it would be downright stupidity on behalf of AEI, probably putting the very existence of the organisation at risk.
So now if I were to look at statistics and probability, I would suggest that the press release is probably accurate.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that no impartial reader is going to accept the press release as fact until we are provided with some evidence. We still have no evidence and the longer the AEI fail to provide it the more it looks like an industrially motivated smear campaign.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also think that is a fair point carnage. I still haven't had a reply to my email on that but would suggest its due to the time of year.
That said perhaps AEI need to consider what has happened here in respect of the timing of such a release.
I too would be more than disappointed if this was just a PR stunt. I hope something is forthcoming before next week but suspect we may have to wait till the 5th.
That said perhaps AEI need to consider what has happened here in respect of the timing of such a release.
I too would be more than disappointed if this was just a PR stunt. I hope something is forthcoming before next week but suspect we may have to wait till the 5th.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portugal
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety Concerns
One cannot talk about something it knows nothing about and that is not wandering off, it is lack of imagination.
We accept the PR as a fact, not the same fact that you keep trying to push over, but many people here have said that they have serious doubts about its motivations. Some of these people actually have a clue of what is going on here, and are not trying to play the same tricks as you are trying to, but not quite achieving.
And why is that? Who gives a damn about them, nobody who is for real cares about AEI. They will still carry on existing, finding another host to parasite a bit longer, or their owners find a useful way to fill up their pockets and their free time, which is that much.
And if we look at your posts we would suggest that you had something to do with it, and trying to keep it hot, while it rapidly goes cold and die. This subject is going down really quick, so have a nice life.
My own inquiries into TAP instigated due to some comments here have in fact uncovered some very interesting issues. I would prefer not to wander off course but it must be said that:
If we accept the press release as fact, TAP pilots have much much more to lose than the engineers would gain.
If the press release was fiction, it would be downright stupidity on behalf of AEI, probably putting the very existence of the organization at risk.
So now if I were to look at statistics and probability, I would suggest that the press release is probably accurate.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they truly feel passenger safety is being compromised they are displaying an admirable degree of urgency ( not ) by sloping off for Xmas & New Year
Bit like the Frog administration charged with investigating the XL A320 accident.
Bit like the Frog administration charged with investigating the XL A320 accident.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm
Endok, by the look of it it seems you've failed to get a job at TAP and probably had the "pleasure" to work for the late Air Luxor or something of that ilk.
It's the only way I can understand why you wouldn't miss the opportunity to kick some arse provided by your friend Safety Concern with his ill conceived and politically driven posting. Grow up will ya.
Safety Concern, if you are doing PR work for this AEI organization, you'd better start looking for another job, because your credibility is zero. You can't just come in here and accuse this airline, or any other for that matter, without presenting a single piece of evidence.
from wiki:
Does it ring any bells now?
Endok, by the look of it it seems you've failed to get a job at TAP and probably had the "pleasure" to work for the late Air Luxor or something of that ilk.
It's the only way I can understand why you wouldn't miss the opportunity to kick some arse provided by your friend Safety Concern with his ill conceived and politically driven posting. Grow up will ya.
Safety Concern, if you are doing PR work for this AEI organization, you'd better start looking for another job, because your credibility is zero. You can't just come in here and accuse this airline, or any other for that matter, without presenting a single piece of evidence.
from wiki:
In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image.
I too would be more than disappointed if this was just a PR stunt. I hope something is forthcoming before next week but suspect we may have to wait till the 5th.
This thread should have been deleted long ago.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have posted an article/press release taken from a PR wire. No crime there and its not a crime to agree with the contents even if they end up proven to be false.
I still expect evidence to be forth coming. This reminds me a little of my history lessons in school surrounding the build up to world war 2. If only all those naive do-gooders had listened to the warnings rather than wait for the evidence (invasion of Poland) things may not have taken 6 years or had been so bad. I suppose once again time will tell.
I still expect evidence to be forth coming. This reminds me a little of my history lessons in school surrounding the build up to world war 2. If only all those naive do-gooders had listened to the warnings rather than wait for the evidence (invasion of Poland) things may not have taken 6 years or had been so bad. I suppose once again time will tell.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: 3433N 06912E
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Safety Concerns"
You mention that many people are *missing the point* concerning your initial post, however, you have to also bear responsibility for missing the point yourself.
You posted a "press release" from AEI and made certain comments about that post and indeed I have to concur with CaptPlaystation's comments concerning the indications toward the press release as being more in tune with "political motivation".
First off, the press release is directed toward the company and the pilots during a period of industrial action. However, there is no indication as to which period of industrial action this was during.
As this is a engineering association, we are left to surmise that this was during a period of industrial action by engineering staff. This is again surmised by the direction and the intimations toward maintenance related issues.
The general direction of the press release, IE the title summary and the accusations levied are serious accusations and that while evidence is held it has not been alluded to and that accusation is directed toward pilots that reduced the impact of industrial action by maintenance staff, if that is indeed the industrial action being referenced.
As you may, or may not know, Pilots do not have a death wish. They are not individuals that push the limits of human activity to risk death.
They are people, with a desire to live to see their next birthday and those of their families and loved ones.
As such, pilots have an inherent propensity toward self preservation and in a professional manner. This is why CVR and FDR data show pilots working to resolve a problem right to, in some cases, the point of impact.
Again, as you may, or may not know, pilots have the ultimate responsibility toward the safety of and aircraft, its crew, its passengers and its cargo. This caveat, is often levied toward pilots who have been placed in safety critical situations by others outside of their scope of command.
Again, as you may, or may not know, pilots are also within their liberties to sign off certain items under their licenses. This is why commercial licenses require study, understanding and examination of many aircraft systems, again with the type rating. The MEL items are considered by the manufacturer and by the authority as well the operator for approval by the authority.
As such, any pilot acting in command of an aircraft, not fit for the flight intended will face investigation and repercussions by the authority. That is their license will be tugged and their career with it.
The falsification of maintenance records and inspections completed and signed off by unqualified personnel would be the responsibility of the operators maintenance department. As such this allegation would lead to an investigation and a suspension of operating certificate, IE grounding of an operator pending investigation.
Of course this would have serious repercussions to *ALL* staff of the operator and the investigation would be focused on the engineering department and it's staff.
When we consider the allegation that this was also conducted by outside contract maintenance facilities, that would have repercussions toward that facilities licenses to perform.
So we have to consider the aspect "why would an external maintenance company risk it's business by falsifying records for TAP?" indeed, an external maintenance facility would not be subject to TAP's internal industrial action, furthermore, they would have carte blanche to undertake profitable business that the operators own maintenance facility could not perform. That means good business for the external maintenance facility.
This would then revert to a situation, bearing in mind industrial action by maintenance staff, that it would be more beneficial for an operator to outsource its maintenance.
As you, yourself pointed out, you made a request for this evidence and have received no response. Sorry, but the Christmas period is both irrelevant and relevant.
This was released on the 23rd December, the day prior to Christmas eve. If AEI is off on a Christmas break, then it is HIGHLY irresponsible to make an allegation that could ground an airline and be away till lord knows when to provide evidence to their allegations.
If these allegations are false, unsupported or based on incorrect evidence then this would be what is termed in the days of spin as an "oversight".
That oversight could unjustly cost an operator it's existence, not only in a period of "economic uncertainty" but also in times of economic health.
As such it is irrelevant in the timing, as such an allegation should be able to be supported no matter what time of the year. It is also relevant in that such an allegation should not be made just prior to a period when it cannot be supported.
Indeed, the statement made by the General Secretary is defamatory if it cannot be supported. That is a dangerous path to tread. Furthermore, any ensuing legal action over defamatory press releases would incur time and expense to both parties and it would have to be some very hard and conclusive evidence of complicity and "knowingly".
The statement also includes recommendation that the European aviation authorities individually and as a whole are lacking in regulation.
Quite the opposite.
European aviation authorities, individually and as a whole suffer from over-regulation and mis-directed regulation. This has been the effect of the authorities both individual and as a whole trying to leverage their positions both within Europe and on a global scale. This is a completely separate subject, which I will not go into a dissertation of, however, the allegation of lack of regulation is not only incorrect but scaremongering, as indeed the entire press release attempts to incite.
As such I have to conclude that this press release is irresponsible, incorrect and potentially defamatory and only serves to attempt to give PR to AEI and serve spite toward TAP and it's pilots over the operators ability to maintain operation during a period of industrial action.
It is also damaging to the industry and to the maintenance personnel as it serves to give mitigating circumstances to outsource maintenance.
Sorry to say it, but you didn't *only* post a press release you also made your own statements over "new evidence emerging everyday" that evidence has not been *evidenced* and that we should work together side by side, which is what pilots and engineers do, day in, day out around the world.
An engineering association making allegations toward pilots or an operators maintenance department and management that are incorrect and so far unfounded, is NOT working side by side THAT is creating division.
Especially when that association is doing it serve no one else but it's own publicity.
If you do get the evidence i would be pleased to see it, as would anyone else reading this thread. As we, as industry care about our industry. Pilots, Engineers and management all care about safety.
As for History Lessons and the reference to WWII, it would do well to remember WW2 was inevitable following the Versailles Treaty the result of WW1 which in a nutshell..
You mention that many people are *missing the point* concerning your initial post, however, you have to also bear responsibility for missing the point yourself.
You posted a "press release" from AEI and made certain comments about that post and indeed I have to concur with CaptPlaystation's comments concerning the indications toward the press release as being more in tune with "political motivation".
First off, the press release is directed toward the company and the pilots during a period of industrial action. However, there is no indication as to which period of industrial action this was during.
As this is a engineering association, we are left to surmise that this was during a period of industrial action by engineering staff. This is again surmised by the direction and the intimations toward maintenance related issues.
The general direction of the press release, IE the title summary and the accusations levied are serious accusations and that while evidence is held it has not been alluded to and that accusation is directed toward pilots that reduced the impact of industrial action by maintenance staff, if that is indeed the industrial action being referenced.
As you may, or may not know, Pilots do not have a death wish. They are not individuals that push the limits of human activity to risk death.
They are people, with a desire to live to see their next birthday and those of their families and loved ones.
As such, pilots have an inherent propensity toward self preservation and in a professional manner. This is why CVR and FDR data show pilots working to resolve a problem right to, in some cases, the point of impact.
Again, as you may, or may not know, pilots have the ultimate responsibility toward the safety of and aircraft, its crew, its passengers and its cargo. This caveat, is often levied toward pilots who have been placed in safety critical situations by others outside of their scope of command.
Again, as you may, or may not know, pilots are also within their liberties to sign off certain items under their licenses. This is why commercial licenses require study, understanding and examination of many aircraft systems, again with the type rating. The MEL items are considered by the manufacturer and by the authority as well the operator for approval by the authority.
As such, any pilot acting in command of an aircraft, not fit for the flight intended will face investigation and repercussions by the authority. That is their license will be tugged and their career with it.
The falsification of maintenance records and inspections completed and signed off by unqualified personnel would be the responsibility of the operators maintenance department. As such this allegation would lead to an investigation and a suspension of operating certificate, IE grounding of an operator pending investigation.
Of course this would have serious repercussions to *ALL* staff of the operator and the investigation would be focused on the engineering department and it's staff.
When we consider the allegation that this was also conducted by outside contract maintenance facilities, that would have repercussions toward that facilities licenses to perform.
So we have to consider the aspect "why would an external maintenance company risk it's business by falsifying records for TAP?" indeed, an external maintenance facility would not be subject to TAP's internal industrial action, furthermore, they would have carte blanche to undertake profitable business that the operators own maintenance facility could not perform. That means good business for the external maintenance facility.
This would then revert to a situation, bearing in mind industrial action by maintenance staff, that it would be more beneficial for an operator to outsource its maintenance.
As you, yourself pointed out, you made a request for this evidence and have received no response. Sorry, but the Christmas period is both irrelevant and relevant.
This was released on the 23rd December, the day prior to Christmas eve. If AEI is off on a Christmas break, then it is HIGHLY irresponsible to make an allegation that could ground an airline and be away till lord knows when to provide evidence to their allegations.
If these allegations are false, unsupported or based on incorrect evidence then this would be what is termed in the days of spin as an "oversight".
That oversight could unjustly cost an operator it's existence, not only in a period of "economic uncertainty" but also in times of economic health.
As such it is irrelevant in the timing, as such an allegation should be able to be supported no matter what time of the year. It is also relevant in that such an allegation should not be made just prior to a period when it cannot be supported.
Indeed, the statement made by the General Secretary is defamatory if it cannot be supported. That is a dangerous path to tread. Furthermore, any ensuing legal action over defamatory press releases would incur time and expense to both parties and it would have to be some very hard and conclusive evidence of complicity and "knowingly".
The statement also includes recommendation that the European aviation authorities individually and as a whole are lacking in regulation.
Quite the opposite.
European aviation authorities, individually and as a whole suffer from over-regulation and mis-directed regulation. This has been the effect of the authorities both individual and as a whole trying to leverage their positions both within Europe and on a global scale. This is a completely separate subject, which I will not go into a dissertation of, however, the allegation of lack of regulation is not only incorrect but scaremongering, as indeed the entire press release attempts to incite.
As such I have to conclude that this press release is irresponsible, incorrect and potentially defamatory and only serves to attempt to give PR to AEI and serve spite toward TAP and it's pilots over the operators ability to maintain operation during a period of industrial action.
It is also damaging to the industry and to the maintenance personnel as it serves to give mitigating circumstances to outsource maintenance.
Sorry to say it, but you didn't *only* post a press release you also made your own statements over "new evidence emerging everyday" that evidence has not been *evidenced* and that we should work together side by side, which is what pilots and engineers do, day in, day out around the world.
An engineering association making allegations toward pilots or an operators maintenance department and management that are incorrect and so far unfounded, is NOT working side by side THAT is creating division.
Especially when that association is doing it serve no one else but it's own publicity.
If you do get the evidence i would be pleased to see it, as would anyone else reading this thread. As we, as industry care about our industry. Pilots, Engineers and management all care about safety.
As for History Lessons and the reference to WWII, it would do well to remember WW2 was inevitable following the Versailles Treaty the result of WW1 which in a nutshell..
When the Archduke of Austria was assassinated, Austria used it as an excuse to send troops into Serbia and declared war on the Serbs.
Serbia was aligned with Russia who declared war on Austria.
Germany was allied with Austria so that meant war between Germany and Russia.
Russia had a treaty with France so war with Russia meant war with France and war with France who had a treaty with England, meant war with England. Europe was caught in its own trap.
The Kaiser seemed not to understand the system of alliances which had been created before his taking the thrown and he removed from power the only man in Germany who did, Bismarck.
Bismarck once said that it would be some damn fool thing in the Balkans to throw Europe into war, and it did.
Believing it would be a quick conflict, he was the most surprised when it turned into the horrible affair it became; Just before the shooting started, Wilhelm tried desperately to stop it all by sending telegrams to Czar Nicholas (his cousin) but it was too late.
The saber rattling had gone too far and all of Europe was mobilizing.
This was a war which had no purpose, was fought without good reason and by the time it was over 9 million would be dead, four empires destroyed and the stage set for World War Two.
The upshot of this little history addendum is that alliances, association, sabre rattling, rhetoric and an unprecedented failure of repercussions of actions can and does have major impact.
Last edited by Bruce Wayne; 30th Dec 2008 at 14:10. Reason: typo
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did consider responding point for point due to the numerous inaccuracies and emotional comments that cannot be supported by facts but felt that in the circumstances (lack of evidence, which incidentally I agree is a major oversight) patience would be the more appropriate virtue.
I do suggest though you read AEI's EU Unfit to Regulate European Aviation press release. The facts and their source are mentioned in the document.
As to your further enhancement of history you are bang on and we are already there. World war 1 has finished (JAA) and the stage has already been set for the next disaster world war 2 (EASA).
I do suggest though you read AEI's EU Unfit to Regulate European Aviation press release. The facts and their source are mentioned in the document.
As to your further enhancement of history you are bang on and we are already there. World war 1 has finished (JAA) and the stage has already been set for the next disaster world war 2 (EASA).
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: portugal
Age: 54
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pilots are also within their liberties to sign off certain items under their licenses
-"Again, as you may, or may not know, pilots are also within their liberties to sign off certain items under their licenses. This is why commercial licenses require study, understanding and examination of many aircraft systems, again with the type rating. The MEL items are considered by the manufacturer and by the authority as well the operator for approval by the authority."-
Dear Bruce:
Do you consider as good practice that a cpt answer in aircraft log book at JAR 145 maintenance certified/licenced staff area, considering solved a previous other cpt report of "brake out of limit" and realesed it to service?
Is this in MEL?
Do you know the dirty dozen?
yours
MH
Dear Bruce:
Do you consider as good practice that a cpt answer in aircraft log book at JAR 145 maintenance certified/licenced staff area, considering solved a previous other cpt report of "brake out of limit" and realesed it to service?
Is this in MEL?
Do you know the dirty dozen?
yours
MH
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1 - The MEL is not the low limit, the MMEL is...
2 - I think AEI has the proofs about SOME pilots (which problably were pressured by their bosses) took the A/C w/out it correctly signed-off or maintained. You know, if you don't perform a test, you will never know if that system was working at that time, or not. What does this mean? If we think of SpanAir (mercy on the victims souls), everyone is trying (natural issue on mankind) to get the mechanics to jail. Do you know if it was someone at the backoffices that screwed things up by not delivering to the mechanics the document saying "this test must be acomplished", and so the they did not performed it and that lead to the disaster?
3 - AEI certainly did not come to Portugal and get the evidences, did they? Who knows? Maybe someone got tired of being abused (not by the pilots, they usually are as good as any one of us) by the system? Who knows?
4 - One thing is sure: THIS IS NOT the right place to post the evidences, there are courts and EASA, and if the proofs exists, someone is going to loose their FCL maybe for life.
5 - LAMEs are not gods, nor are the PILOTS. All people have a breaking point (and an Airline can do such a pressure), a point were you think you are doing things right, but you are not! Because if you perceived that, you would realize you were making a mistake, and you wouldn't do it! Or you just don't give a d**n and then you shouldn't be working in aviation. Or you trust your boss, but he's just being complacent and tells you "take the plane". And you're the one who gets scr***d.
5 - By now you are wondering who am I. I'm a LAME, working in Portugal.
2 - I think AEI has the proofs about SOME pilots (which problably were pressured by their bosses) took the A/C w/out it correctly signed-off or maintained. You know, if you don't perform a test, you will never know if that system was working at that time, or not. What does this mean? If we think of SpanAir (mercy on the victims souls), everyone is trying (natural issue on mankind) to get the mechanics to jail. Do you know if it was someone at the backoffices that screwed things up by not delivering to the mechanics the document saying "this test must be acomplished", and so the they did not performed it and that lead to the disaster?
3 - AEI certainly did not come to Portugal and get the evidences, did they? Who knows? Maybe someone got tired of being abused (not by the pilots, they usually are as good as any one of us) by the system? Who knows?
4 - One thing is sure: THIS IS NOT the right place to post the evidences, there are courts and EASA, and if the proofs exists, someone is going to loose their FCL maybe for life.
5 - LAMEs are not gods, nor are the PILOTS. All people have a breaking point (and an Airline can do such a pressure), a point were you think you are doing things right, but you are not! Because if you perceived that, you would realize you were making a mistake, and you wouldn't do it! Or you just don't give a d**n and then you shouldn't be working in aviation. Or you trust your boss, but he's just being complacent and tells you "take the plane". And you're the one who gets scr***d.
5 - By now you are wondering who am I. I'm a LAME, working in Portugal.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would just like to wish you all, regardless of your opinion on the contents of this and other threads, all the best for the new year.
I do sincerely hope that the increase in accidents seen in 2008 is just a blip but I have to be honest and say that unfortunately I believe it will get worse.
My own "PPRUNE" wish for 2009 is that a bar of soap is taken to the mouths of some posters. Some of the language here is totally unnecessary and not befitting of professionals.
Happy New Year
I do sincerely hope that the increase in accidents seen in 2008 is just a blip but I have to be honest and say that unfortunately I believe it will get worse.
My own "PPRUNE" wish for 2009 is that a bar of soap is taken to the mouths of some posters. Some of the language here is totally unnecessary and not befitting of professionals.
Happy New Year
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: -11`
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a windup!
This AEI is a joke. The affiliate organisation in my homecountry is only a minor representative of AMT`s.
AEI states on its website: A.E.I. maintains a constant liaison with Flight Crew Associations . Well, not with my union! And not with ECA either, I can assure you.
This kind of behaviour will not change that either, I suspect.
This AEI is a joke. The affiliate organisation in my homecountry is only a minor representative of AMT`s.
AEI states on its website: A.E.I. maintains a constant liaison with Flight Crew Associations . Well, not with my union! And not with ECA either, I can assure you.
This kind of behaviour will not change that either, I suspect.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are missing the point. To the best of my knowledge AEI have requested a private discussion about the situation on a number of occasions. The request has fallen on deaf ears.
Therefore due to the FACT that those discreet requests have been ignored and due to the FACT that pilots are continuing to fly on for the company even ignoring MEL no go items, we have reached the stage we are at now.
The next step I personally don't agree with and didn't want to see hence my postings. I am though personally sick to death of pilots going too far as it may well be my wife and kids on board next time. Whether Pilots do risk their own lives as well as those of the passengers is possibly a question of interpretation; continuing to fly on without logging an MEL no dispatch item, you tell me.
So there you have it. I feel as though I have done my bit and whatever happens from now on in is in someone else's hands.
I have no connection to AEI other than I feel strongly about this issue and have reported my experiences to them. As to whether engineers or pilots come out of this next phase without damage remains to be seen but I believe industry could do without it.
I just find the whole thing rather sad that to solve the issue of pilots ignoring the MEL, a real mud slinging match in public is necessary.
So much for professionalism from both sides!
Therefore due to the FACT that those discreet requests have been ignored and due to the FACT that pilots are continuing to fly on for the company even ignoring MEL no go items, we have reached the stage we are at now.
The next step I personally don't agree with and didn't want to see hence my postings. I am though personally sick to death of pilots going too far as it may well be my wife and kids on board next time. Whether Pilots do risk their own lives as well as those of the passengers is possibly a question of interpretation; continuing to fly on without logging an MEL no dispatch item, you tell me.
So there you have it. I feel as though I have done my bit and whatever happens from now on in is in someone else's hands.
I have no connection to AEI other than I feel strongly about this issue and have reported my experiences to them. As to whether engineers or pilots come out of this next phase without damage remains to be seen but I believe industry could do without it.
I just find the whole thing rather sad that to solve the issue of pilots ignoring the MEL, a real mud slinging match in public is necessary.
So much for professionalism from both sides!