Pablo Mason (Spelled M.A.S.O.N) Tribunal
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Quote:
Oh, yes and when your a/c is burning and you want to get the thing on the ground pronto, you cant, not allowed. Why? Well the Emergency checklist (Law not an SOP) says you cant, as you are above the max landing weight. So land now or die waiting to get down to landing weight. That is the choice.
Oh, yes and when your a/c is burning and you want to get the thing on the ground pronto, you cant, not allowed. Why? Well the Emergency checklist (Law not an SOP) says you cant, as you are above the max landing weight. So land now or die waiting to get down to landing weight. That is the choice.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am ex-Tornado aircrew who both flew in the 1991 Gulf War and was based at RAF Laarbruch in Germany on a different Squadron but at the same time as Pablo Mason. I can vouch for the truth of itwasme's statement and confirm that the only reason Pablo survived the crash was the fact the Germans had recently raised the low flying limit to 1000'agl and that his navigator initiated the command ejection sequence to autmatically eject them both. The aircraft was totally serviceable but had been placed in an irrecoverable situation by pilot error. It is a long time ago now, but from memory the mishandling was the simultaneous application of 63 or 67 deg wingsweep, high alpha and full speed brake. I vaguely remember some mod limiting wingsweep to 63 deg rather than 67, hence the doubt about the actual wingsweep on the day.
I wish Pablo no ill, but if you want a debate on this, the facts rather than apocryphal tales are best. There is considerably more that could be said here, but I will limit myself to these facts.
I wish Pablo no ill, but if you want a debate on this, the facts rather than apocryphal tales are best. There is considerably more that could be said here, but I will limit myself to these facts.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who has been in this industry a few years will recognise the type......
The ex mil fast jet guys fall into two categories.
Either the most brilliant, nicest, most competent, self effacing and best teachers/commanders one could get
or
total arrogant sh£t heads of questionable competence who consider themselves greater than demi gods to whom company rules did not apply.
Nothing in between.
The ex mil fast jet guys fall into two categories.
Either the most brilliant, nicest, most competent, self effacing and best teachers/commanders one could get
or
total arrogant sh£t heads of questionable competence who consider themselves greater than demi gods to whom company rules did not apply.
Nothing in between.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I have been in it a few years, and have to say that the two extremes you describe (particularly the latter,) are so rare as to be almost non-existent. Like most people from any professional background there is the entire gamut of personalities in between. You are either very unlucky or have a severely polarized viewpoint ?
Grizzled, thanks for adding your observation regarding the changes that occurred partly as a result of the SR 111 accident. The checklists were modified subsequently to better highlight the imperative. I was replying to post no 63 which was not relevant to the date in that particular context, however I completely accept your point.
Grizzled, thanks for adding your observation regarding the changes that occurred partly as a result of the SR 111 accident. The checklists were modified subsequently to better highlight the imperative. I was replying to post no 63 which was not relevant to the date in that particular context, however I completely accept your point.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beelzebub
So tell me, which category do come under. God's gift to aviation?
"the changes that occurred partly as a result of the SR 111 accident. The checklists were modified subsequently to better highlight the imperative."
to better highlight the imperative?!
Does the imperative need to be highlighted? Probably for the likes of you, it would need to be. Here was me thinking you had something to think with. Now I am not so sure.
May I put this too you?
If there was an amendment that appeared in your FOM stating all crew were to have a biometric chip, that contained all information about you, implanted in your forehead right between the eyes.. What would do?
No don't tell me it won't happen, it just may.
So tell me, which category do come under. God's gift to aviation?
"the changes that occurred partly as a result of the SR 111 accident. The checklists were modified subsequently to better highlight the imperative."
to better highlight the imperative?!
Does the imperative need to be highlighted? Probably for the likes of you, it would need to be. Here was me thinking you had something to think with. Now I am not so sure.
May I put this too you?
If there was an amendment that appeared in your FOM stating all crew were to have a biometric chip, that contained all information about you, implanted in your forehead right between the eyes.. What would do?
No don't tell me it won't happen, it just may.
Last edited by doubleu-anker; 14th Mar 2009 at 17:13.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So tell me, which category do I come under. God's gift to aviation?
to better highlight the imperative?!
Does the imperative need to be highlighted? Probably for the likes of you, it would need to be. Here was me thinking you had something to think with. Now I am not so sure.
Does the imperative need to be highlighted? Probably for the likes of you, it would need to be. Here was me thinking you had something to think with. Now I am not so sure.
You did however earlier post the statement that:
Oh, yes and when your a/c is burning and you want to get the thing on the ground pronto, you cant, not allowed. Why? Well the Emergency checklist (Law not an SOP) says you cant, as you are above the max landing weight. So land now or die waiting to get down to landing weight. That is the choice.
May I put this too you?
If there was an amendment that appeared in your FOM stating all crew were to have a biometric chip, that contained all information about you, implanted in your forehead right between the eyes.. What would do?
If there was an amendment that appeared in your FOM stating all crew were to have a biometric chip, that contained all information about you, implanted in your forehead right between the eyes.. What would do?
Anyway, back to the topic.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tribunals are usually only interested in whether you were sacked fairly. Usually meaning the process not the reason.
Doubt they are bothered too much about SOP's.
Doubt they are bothered too much about SOP's.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, yes and when your a/c is burning and you want to get the thing on the ground pronto, you cant, not allowed. Why? Well the Emergency checklist (Law not an SOP) says you cant, as you are above the max landing weight. So land now or die waiting to get down to landing weight. That is the choice.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Like I said, I think there are a few 'posers' here.
Anyway, these idiotic cockpit cowboys who have their own rules are fortunately nearing extinction.
Don't know how the tribunals tend in the UK but in my experience the arbitration hearings in the U.S. give the union-represented pilot a very good chance of keeping a job except in the most egregious cases. Of course, sometimes the person fired is empowered when they are returned to work and the second time around the company has their ducks in a row and the termination is made permanent after a subsequent offense.
I've seen folks like Pablo time and time again over the years. They are God's Gift to Aviation, geniuses compared to those fools in management, in their own minds anyway. They get on the union forum, pound their chest like Magilla Gorilla and push the envelope with the company every chance they get. After ignoring repeated verbal and written warnings, they are terminated and squeal like stuck pigs. The union goes out, spends large amounts of money and time on lawyers and hearings and sometimes cuts a quiet deal to get the pilot back on the property to start the cycle anew.
Anyway, these idiotic cockpit cowboys who have their own rules are fortunately nearing extinction.
Don't know how the tribunals tend in the UK but in my experience the arbitration hearings in the U.S. give the union-represented pilot a very good chance of keeping a job except in the most egregious cases. Of course, sometimes the person fired is empowered when they are returned to work and the second time around the company has their ducks in a row and the termination is made permanent after a subsequent offense.
I've seen folks like Pablo time and time again over the years. They are God's Gift to Aviation, geniuses compared to those fools in management, in their own minds anyway. They get on the union forum, pound their chest like Magilla Gorilla and push the envelope with the company every chance they get. After ignoring repeated verbal and written warnings, they are terminated and squeal like stuck pigs. The union goes out, spends large amounts of money and time on lawyers and hearings and sometimes cuts a quiet deal to get the pilot back on the property to start the cycle anew.
Last edited by Airbubba; 15th Mar 2009 at 04:20.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I said, I think there are a few 'posers' here.
Anyway, these idiotic cockpit cowboys who have their own rules are fortunately nearing extinction.
Don't know how the tribunals tend in the UK but in my experience the arbitration hearings in the U.S. give the union-represented pilot a very good chance of keeping a job except in the most egregious cases. Of course, sometimes the person fired is empowered when they are returned to work and the second time around the company has their ducks in a row and the termination is made permanent after a subsequent offense.
I've seen folks like Pablo time and time again over the years. They are God's Gift to Aviation, geniuses compared to those fools in management, in their own minds anyway. They get on the union forum, pound their chest like Magilla Gorilla and push the envelope with the company every chance they get. After ignoring repeated verbal and written warnings, they are terminated and squeal like stuck pigs. The union goes out, spends large amounts of money and time on lawyers and hearings and somtimes cuts a quiet deal to get the pilot back on the property to start the cycle anew.
Anyway, these idiotic cockpit cowboys who have their own rules are fortunately nearing extinction.
Don't know how the tribunals tend in the UK but in my experience the arbitration hearings in the U.S. give the union-represented pilot a very good chance of keeping a job except in the most egregious cases. Of course, sometimes the person fired is empowered when they are returned to work and the second time around the company has their ducks in a row and the termination is made permanent after a subsequent offense.
I've seen folks like Pablo time and time again over the years. They are God's Gift to Aviation, geniuses compared to those fools in management, in their own minds anyway. They get on the union forum, pound their chest like Magilla Gorilla and push the envelope with the company every chance they get. After ignoring repeated verbal and written warnings, they are terminated and squeal like stuck pigs. The union goes out, spends large amounts of money and time on lawyers and hearings and somtimes cuts a quiet deal to get the pilot back on the property to start the cycle anew.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Pablo Mason is not being represented by a Union....He is conducting his own defence.
Last edited by Airbubba; 15th Mar 2009 at 03:15.
Regarding the remark made by `Pilothouse`, whether or not BALPA are supporting Pablo in this case.
Providing he was a member of BALPA, I would certainly like to see them in there batting on his behalf. Can we please have confirmation from 81 New Road Harlington, that they are supporting Pablo as much as possible.
Providing he was a member of BALPA, I would certainly like to see them in there batting on his behalf. Can we please have confirmation from 81 New Road Harlington, that they are supporting Pablo as much as possible.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: manchester
Age: 70
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
doubleu-anker
I think Bealzebub has no need to respond to your last post. His previous posting admirably stated his position. I would suggest more diligence on your behalf.
Bealzebub -
Perhaps this is in answer to a post from someone recently retired from aviation who has lived through the fast and loose days (if there were! I am not qualified to say.) Only a thought.
Bealzebub -
You are either very unlucky or have a severely polarized viewpoint ?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Middle England
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbubba, I think Pablo is going it alone. I don't know whether he carries a card or not, but BALPA are the recognised negotiating body in the now merged Thomas Cook/MyTravel.
Nice bloke Pablo, but he frequently pushed his luck. Despite all this "Tornado Gulf War Hero" crap, he was certainly no better an airline pilot than anyone else. Suffice to say that the management had plenty on him (only some of which has made it to Pprune) and the Savage thing was the last incident on the list. Over the years, I would venture that he had more tea without the biscuits than anyone else. He should have been able to see what was coming, everyone else could.
As far as the tribunal is concerned, he may win his case if they have screwed up how they fired him. I don't think he'll win if the question is why they fired him.
Nice bloke Pablo, but he frequently pushed his luck. Despite all this "Tornado Gulf War Hero" crap, he was certainly no better an airline pilot than anyone else. Suffice to say that the management had plenty on him (only some of which has made it to Pprune) and the Savage thing was the last incident on the list. Over the years, I would venture that he had more tea without the biscuits than anyone else. He should have been able to see what was coming, everyone else could.
As far as the tribunal is concerned, he may win his case if they have screwed up how they fired him. I don't think he'll win if the question is why they fired him.
What is that old saying about a defendant that defends himself has a fool for a client? Unless Pablo is a qualified employment lawyer, he is not doing himself any favours. In my very limited experience in these matters, employees tend to win on points of procedure rather than the misinterpretation of law.
Burden of proof is normally on the employer, but it does appear to be overwhelming. If Pablo is reading this thread, he would be well advised to spend a few thousand Pounds and pay for expert advice. Unless he doesn't need this job?
Burden of proof is normally on the employer, but it does appear to be overwhelming. If Pablo is reading this thread, he would be well advised to spend a few thousand Pounds and pay for expert advice. Unless he doesn't need this job?
He will get lots of publicity which he will love, It sets him up for his next book and soon you will see him on Sky presenting another series on Aviation disasters. The tribunal should in theory be un-winnable on his part.
SOP stands for 'Standard Operating Procedure', note the term 'Standard'. If it is a requirement to operate to SOP's then that is that, however if a Captain finds himself in a 'non-standard situation' then he or she can use all resources available to come up with a decision that they believe will offer the safest outcome. I do not see how it can be argued that the footballers requirement to go on the flightdeck was a 'non-standard situation', more like an opportunity for a bit of networking by Pablo (he would just love those footballers parties!).
All the references to Col Bud Holland on the B52 are 100% valid. He was a rule breaker, nobody stopped him and just came out with terms like ' Oh I know but hey that's Bud you know', he was a maverick and thought himself to be above the rest. Not only did he kill the crew but four families had to grow up without their 'Dad".
Norman is on the money, so everyone please take note of what he says. The crash was pilot error. Now I know Pablo well, and nice and charismatic he is. But Gulf war hero.. No. Fantastic pilot ...No. There is a lot more and like Norman I will stay nap, there is enough of what he got up to in the Prune archives. However I also know the navigator of the Jet that Pablo flew into the ground, I worked with him for two years. Had it not been for RW, both he and Pablo would have been dead. I flew over the crash site 30 minutes or so after the event and it was clearly a very close call, with one chute being perhaps only 50 meters from the first impact of the aircraft. RW suffered for a long time after as a result of what was really flying misconduct.
I am glad he is raising a public view to the idiotic security measures faced by everyone, but as for all the other waxing lyrical about the guy on here, please stop it. He is charismatic, that's it, and a lot of people on this thread have been sucked in by that.
SOP stands for 'Standard Operating Procedure', note the term 'Standard'. If it is a requirement to operate to SOP's then that is that, however if a Captain finds himself in a 'non-standard situation' then he or she can use all resources available to come up with a decision that they believe will offer the safest outcome. I do not see how it can be argued that the footballers requirement to go on the flightdeck was a 'non-standard situation', more like an opportunity for a bit of networking by Pablo (he would just love those footballers parties!).
All the references to Col Bud Holland on the B52 are 100% valid. He was a rule breaker, nobody stopped him and just came out with terms like ' Oh I know but hey that's Bud you know', he was a maverick and thought himself to be above the rest. Not only did he kill the crew but four families had to grow up without their 'Dad".
Norman is on the money, so everyone please take note of what he says. The crash was pilot error. Now I know Pablo well, and nice and charismatic he is. But Gulf war hero.. No. Fantastic pilot ...No. There is a lot more and like Norman I will stay nap, there is enough of what he got up to in the Prune archives. However I also know the navigator of the Jet that Pablo flew into the ground, I worked with him for two years. Had it not been for RW, both he and Pablo would have been dead. I flew over the crash site 30 minutes or so after the event and it was clearly a very close call, with one chute being perhaps only 50 meters from the first impact of the aircraft. RW suffered for a long time after as a result of what was really flying misconduct.
I am glad he is raising a public view to the idiotic security measures faced by everyone, but as for all the other waxing lyrical about the guy on here, please stop it. He is charismatic, that's it, and a lot of people on this thread have been sucked in by that.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Derby
Age: 45
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's obvious here
We've learned something.
If we are supposedly gods gift to aviation... we are allowed to bypass the SOP's as much as we want and whenever we feel like it.
If it means letting Robbie Williams on the flight deck or Vinnie Jones, Michael Jackson etc it doesn't matter because we are renowned "hero's" i.e. "legends"
Clearly Pablo is being victimised for no real apparent reason. Correct?
What exactly would have happened if he had simply stuck to the SOP's?
One he would still have his job. Two the fellow he DID not allow on the flight deck would simply get help professionally regarding fear of flying.
He pushed his luck/fame seems entirely accurate.
1/60
If we are supposedly gods gift to aviation... we are allowed to bypass the SOP's as much as we want and whenever we feel like it.
If it means letting Robbie Williams on the flight deck or Vinnie Jones, Michael Jackson etc it doesn't matter because we are renowned "hero's" i.e. "legends"
Clearly Pablo is being victimised for no real apparent reason. Correct?
What exactly would have happened if he had simply stuck to the SOP's?
One he would still have his job. Two the fellow he DID not allow on the flight deck would simply get help professionally regarding fear of flying.
He pushed his luck/fame seems entirely accurate.
1/60