United GRU-ORD Divert to MIA to Offload Purser
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't hold back, Old Schoolie, tell her what you really think!
-----
Seriously, there's a modicum of truth in what Rainboe and Old School Flyer are saying here, and, as unpalatable as it undoubtedly is to many who are reading and contributing to this thread, when it comes to operating an airliner, "it ain't a democracy" is the final rule of survival that every crewmember needs to understand.
Unless you believe "Capt Queeg's" actions are going to quite literally kill you, if you're not wearing the four bars yourself and (more importantly) have not been given the tech log to sign for that particular sector by your employer, you swallow your pride, take careful notes on all the unreasonable behaviour he's exhibiting to be acted upon later - and then, most importantly, get on with your job and submit a formal complaint after you and your crew have reached the destination.
In my experience, it's amazing, on most occasions, how, when you sit down after the flight and catalogue all that unreasonable behaviour, on paper and in the clear light of day, (which is where your bosses are going to be when they see it), it looks like the petty storm in a teacup the high emotions you feel at the time really are. ("He didn't pick up the document until 37 minutes after you you slipped it under the cockpit door? Really? 37 minutes... Tell me more.")
-----
Seriously, there's a modicum of truth in what Rainboe and Old School Flyer are saying here, and, as unpalatable as it undoubtedly is to many who are reading and contributing to this thread, when it comes to operating an airliner, "it ain't a democracy" is the final rule of survival that every crewmember needs to understand.
Unless you believe "Capt Queeg's" actions are going to quite literally kill you, if you're not wearing the four bars yourself and (more importantly) have not been given the tech log to sign for that particular sector by your employer, you swallow your pride, take careful notes on all the unreasonable behaviour he's exhibiting to be acted upon later - and then, most importantly, get on with your job and submit a formal complaint after you and your crew have reached the destination.
In my experience, it's amazing, on most occasions, how, when you sit down after the flight and catalogue all that unreasonable behaviour, on paper and in the clear light of day, (which is where your bosses are going to be when they see it), it looks like the petty storm in a teacup the high emotions you feel at the time really are. ("He didn't pick up the document until 37 minutes after you you slipped it under the cockpit door? Really? 37 minutes... Tell me more.")
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By Old School Flyer Those of us who made it to the left seat and have coped with a plethora of issues with our carrier, i.e. bankruptcy, lowering of pay, crumbling pensions, greedy CEOs, and hundreds of other negative changes to our profession that would fill this entire forum, is ON TOP OF being a Pilot In Command. You will never be able to comprehend being in charge of and responsible for thousands of lives, multi-million dollar A/C, your crews, or having often, mere minutes to deal with all the issues that can and do arise with the operation of the A/C, WX, the Crew, the PAX and more, unless you have been there.
Again I quote bearfoil:
There is not a hint of anything from the Company, or the crew involved. I expect there will be none. Done, are we?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I agree people should not be subjected to abuse, I can see why sometimes Rainboe takes the stance he does. I often do not agree with his views or his manner, however when people who have no experience nor expertise continuously attack the profession and the essential role of the Captain (mostly propogated by "empowering" CRM sessions that have got it all the wrong way around), I can see why people get a bit firey.
I, like many others, am sick of reading opinion on operational matters on a PROFESSIONAL forum from those who have clearly never been involved in the operation of an aircraft. Questions are fine... most of us are 'aviation people' and are happy to share that... but when it turns into a "No, all of you old Captains are wrong, this is how it must be done" by people who are not qualified to give that opinion, it is very offensive.
The surgeon example has been given a few times, but there are others - how many industries tolerate abuse and insulting comments from outsiders? I can't think of many.
Unfortunately, ignoring is not always an option. There are MANY young and upcoming aviators and other interested people reading these forums, and the professionals here just can not sit by and allow the drivel that comes out of some people's keyboards go unchecked. There is nothing more deadly than giving someone wrong information on a flight deck, and the same principle applies here - giving uninformed opinion as fact (like so many seem to do) is very bad for the industry and needs to be corrected.
I would repeat the calls of the others - if you have a genuine question, please do ask it. But do not pass off uninformed opinion as fact, and if you decide your tactic is to insult us by questioning the actions of a flight crew member without intimate knowledge of the role, then expect someone to bite back.
I, like many others, am sick of reading opinion on operational matters on a PROFESSIONAL forum from those who have clearly never been involved in the operation of an aircraft. Questions are fine... most of us are 'aviation people' and are happy to share that... but when it turns into a "No, all of you old Captains are wrong, this is how it must be done" by people who are not qualified to give that opinion, it is very offensive.
The surgeon example has been given a few times, but there are others - how many industries tolerate abuse and insulting comments from outsiders? I can't think of many.
Unfortunately, ignoring is not always an option. There are MANY young and upcoming aviators and other interested people reading these forums, and the professionals here just can not sit by and allow the drivel that comes out of some people's keyboards go unchecked. There is nothing more deadly than giving someone wrong information on a flight deck, and the same principle applies here - giving uninformed opinion as fact (like so many seem to do) is very bad for the industry and needs to be corrected.
I would repeat the calls of the others - if you have a genuine question, please do ask it. But do not pass off uninformed opinion as fact, and if you decide your tactic is to insult us by questioning the actions of a flight crew member without intimate knowledge of the role, then expect someone to bite back.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The debate has been rather 'loopish' for months, here. The information is lacking for a definitive or conclusive wrap up, and the delineated 'personal' positions are patent and predictable. Every incident is a chain; there are so many links missing here, the original post has lost all relevance. So much energy being lost in argumentative noise. This occurrence may end up an airborne myth, lasting generations. Degenerated into personal insults and claims of no standing, I frankly concede this post is Off Thread, but so what? What a Bitchfest. The pros gain no respect, and the ams gain no stature.
bear
bear
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
37 minutes
Now that I think about it, those 37 minutes seem a bit strange. Not "over 30 minutes", not "about 40 minutes", but precisely 37 minutes. Can it be supposed that she slipped the papers under the door, checked her watch and spent the next over a half hour keeping an eye on them? What was she doing in the meantime? 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well spotted, belfrybat. My point exactly.
Some US cabin crew used to wear a pin-on badge saying "I'm here to save your ass, not kiss it." That badge speaks volumes about their attitude to service to their customers - and by extension, their tech crew. (It's been my contention for many years now that if the cockpit crew aren't being looked after satisfactorily by the cabin crew, I can safely assume that the passengers aren't being looked after satisfactorily either.)
Yes, I accept that cabin crews are there to provide a vital and important job in the event of an emergency, that of saving passengers' lives. However, in the meantime, they're fulfilling a rather important commercial job as well, that of being the major point of contact for their employer with the customer and providing a service to their employer's customers. I think there'd be quite a few who'd agree that a substantial percentage of the US FA fraternity (or, more accurately, sorority), particular those of 'a certain age', have long forgotten that part of their job description.
If the purser in question was too busy to have the time to knock on the cockpit door and provide the documents the captain asked for face to face, but somehow had time to see that he - or someone - from the other side of the cockpit door didn't retrieve the document she left half under the door until 37 minutes after she had put it there, someone (like her line manager) reading her report in the clear light of day might be forgiven for asking how she (or some member of the cabin crew) spent the 37 minutes between her putting the papers under the door and that someone seeing they were retrieved.
Some US cabin crew used to wear a pin-on badge saying "I'm here to save your ass, not kiss it." That badge speaks volumes about their attitude to service to their customers - and by extension, their tech crew. (It's been my contention for many years now that if the cockpit crew aren't being looked after satisfactorily by the cabin crew, I can safely assume that the passengers aren't being looked after satisfactorily either.)
Yes, I accept that cabin crews are there to provide a vital and important job in the event of an emergency, that of saving passengers' lives. However, in the meantime, they're fulfilling a rather important commercial job as well, that of being the major point of contact for their employer with the customer and providing a service to their employer's customers. I think there'd be quite a few who'd agree that a substantial percentage of the US FA fraternity (or, more accurately, sorority), particular those of 'a certain age', have long forgotten that part of their job description.
If the purser in question was too busy to have the time to knock on the cockpit door and provide the documents the captain asked for face to face, but somehow had time to see that he - or someone - from the other side of the cockpit door didn't retrieve the document she left half under the door until 37 minutes after she had put it there, someone (like her line manager) reading her report in the clear light of day might be forgiven for asking how she (or some member of the cabin crew) spent the 37 minutes between her putting the papers under the door and that someone seeing they were retrieved.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
37 minutes? That they noted the exact time isn't necesarily unusual. It's not unusual for crews have elapsed time, or time remaining, running on timers, clocks, or their wristwatches, and to be aware of the time.
Eg, saying goodbye to passengers last trip and a F/A's watch alarm went off - "that's when we were supposed to land". She set a countdown timer because they had certain services to start with X time left.
When giving written reports sometimes the times I report are close estimates and sometimes the times are exact. It just depends if I, for whatever reason, was able to recall exactly when an event occurred.
Eg, saying goodbye to passengers last trip and a F/A's watch alarm went off - "that's when we were supposed to land". She set a countdown timer because they had certain services to start with X time left.
When giving written reports sometimes the times I report are close estimates and sometimes the times are exact. It just depends if I, for whatever reason, was able to recall exactly when an event occurred.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If, as it was reputedly stated by the senior CC in question, she was too busy to bring these forms to the flight deck then it seems highly unlikely she would have time to note when she placed them under the door and note exactly when they were pulled in by FD crew.
It would help if we knew precisely what the CC did say/report, the 37 minutes could have been thrown in later by her colleagues or it could just be a guesstimate based on other events during the flight.
It would help if we knew precisely what the CC did say/report, the 37 minutes could have been thrown in later by her colleagues or it could just be a guesstimate based on other events during the flight.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This threads shows the diference between the perception of flight and cabin crew, their egos and reality.
Cabin crew don't exist for safety anymore, they exist to serve the customers. They are the waiters and waitresses at restaurants. The safety functions they provide are minimal. Even the active ones they do provide can be automated (eg door arming). Door opening and evacuation initialisation can, and has been, done by passengers. In fact there are many cabin crew around the world who almost never open doors, let alone open one in an emergency.
Indeed, the only apparent health and safety-critical tasks they do are food preparation and tending to ill passengers at the level of a Health Care Assistant. These are not skilled jobs.
As for flight crew, their role is being reduced to that of a shop manager. Certainly pilots are not equivalent to surgeons! They don't need a good degree, when they have degrees they are low-ranking three-year bachelors from low-ranking universities. There are people successfully flying large commercial aircraft in the UK with minimal training or experience. We are in a situation where crews can, and are encouraged, to sleep - without any harm resulting. Aircraft can fly themselves better, smoother, more efficiently than a human could, they can land themselves, soon they will taxi themselves and soon they will take off without crew control input. The aircraft can workaround problems, fix itself, diagnose itself, prognose itself and knows it's systems better than the crew. The majority of accidents are still caused by flight crew mistakes. The flight engineer has been successfully removed from the flight deck, the first officer will be next.
We live in modern times. Technology is making pilots redundant. A population with increasing intelligence and improved tehnology is making safety-related cabin crew redundant.
This incident was the result of egos that were too large given their relative contribution. This thread shows that many are so on awe of their own ego that they don't realise the inevitable: market forces having already started to make their jobs unnecessary and will make them totally un-needed shortly.
Cabin crew don't exist for safety anymore, they exist to serve the customers. They are the waiters and waitresses at restaurants. The safety functions they provide are minimal. Even the active ones they do provide can be automated (eg door arming). Door opening and evacuation initialisation can, and has been, done by passengers. In fact there are many cabin crew around the world who almost never open doors, let alone open one in an emergency.
Indeed, the only apparent health and safety-critical tasks they do are food preparation and tending to ill passengers at the level of a Health Care Assistant. These are not skilled jobs.
As for flight crew, their role is being reduced to that of a shop manager. Certainly pilots are not equivalent to surgeons! They don't need a good degree, when they have degrees they are low-ranking three-year bachelors from low-ranking universities. There are people successfully flying large commercial aircraft in the UK with minimal training or experience. We are in a situation where crews can, and are encouraged, to sleep - without any harm resulting. Aircraft can fly themselves better, smoother, more efficiently than a human could, they can land themselves, soon they will taxi themselves and soon they will take off without crew control input. The aircraft can workaround problems, fix itself, diagnose itself, prognose itself and knows it's systems better than the crew. The majority of accidents are still caused by flight crew mistakes. The flight engineer has been successfully removed from the flight deck, the first officer will be next.
We live in modern times. Technology is making pilots redundant. A population with increasing intelligence and improved tehnology is making safety-related cabin crew redundant.
This incident was the result of egos that were too large given their relative contribution. This thread shows that many are so on awe of their own ego that they don't realise the inevitable: market forces having already started to make their jobs unnecessary and will make them totally un-needed shortly.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We live in modern times. Technology is making pilots redundant. A population with increasing intelligence and improved technology is making safety-related cabin crew redundant.
market forces having already started to make their jobs unnecessary and will make them totally un-needed shortly.
market forces having already started to make their jobs unnecessary and will make them totally un-needed shortly.
As for flight crew, their role is being reduced to that of a shop manager. Certainly pilots are not equivalent to surgeons!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I can accept that technology will one day be able to carry out most of the tasks involved in getting a passenger aircraft from A to B I don't accept that they will ever become pilotless. The simple reason is security, imagine the mayhem if dedicated terrorists took over a ground control station, either by force or by jamming a ground station with powerful equipment, the resulting carnage would be worse than a world war.
And no one has suggested that they are, only that it seems a lot less likely that people with little or no specific knowledge of medicine would dare to cast aspersions on a medical forum compared to the many, similarly unknowledgeable of aviation, that frequently come to an aviation forum such as PPRuNe for just that malevolent purpose, your post here being a classic example.
Finally, it seems that yet again the assumption is made that if you don't agree with a certain clique here then you're branded as someone 'unknowledgable of aviation' - without even checking if I work in the industry!
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet clearly you came to this forum to have a dig at pilots and CC. I suspect you may be an engineer and pilots are usually very wary about offering opinions to engineers.
No matter where you put control of pilotless aircraft it will be vulnerable and airborne control is likely to be more expensive than pilots. It will never happen.
I am glad you find aviation relatively simple, fortunately most aviation professionals don't and work at it to maintain a very high standard of professional competence.
No matter where you put control of pilotless aircraft it will be vulnerable and airborne control is likely to be more expensive than pilots. It will never happen.
I am glad you find aviation relatively simple, fortunately most aviation professionals don't and work at it to maintain a very high standard of professional competence.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Violator.....Ignorance is bliss!!
Violator.....seldom have I seen such an opinionated post from one who apparently knows nothing about either the Pilot or CC role.
Firstly can I admit to not having read every post on this thread or was I onboard this plane at the time of the incident. I therefore consider myself uninformed on this aspect. The only thing I have an opinion on is the alledged conduct of the PU. IMHO it was disgusting and had the potential to compromise safety. The crew dec incident is indicative of a much bigger picture I feel and I also feel the Captain recognised that. I don't know that as I wasn't there.
There is no place for ego's on a plane. There doesn't need to be. It's why we have a chain of command. At my mob it goes on a non training flight:
That said our commanders will listen to their crews and evaluate the info given to them by the people actually in the cabin. That applies to whether it is a crew member or a pax and is called CRM. It is based on mutual respect and effective communication amoungst other things....none of which seemed in evidence on this flight.
Your comments regarding the role of CC I will ignore as they are beneath contempt.
As for our "shop managers"? Well the last time I looked my local manager at Tesco's couldn't land a plane on the Hudson River saving over a hundred lives and yes he does have a degree. I wonder if "Sully" did?
I don't think "sully" used the computer either......he did it all by himself because that is what he is trained to do.
If the computer had landed that plane (if indeed it could be programmed in those circumstances) there may well have been a different outcome........I could stand corrected by that by a Pilot which I'm sure you are not.
The day we ever take our people away from the pointy end will be the day I never fly again.
Firstly can I admit to not having read every post on this thread or was I onboard this plane at the time of the incident. I therefore consider myself uninformed on this aspect. The only thing I have an opinion on is the alledged conduct of the PU. IMHO it was disgusting and had the potential to compromise safety. The crew dec incident is indicative of a much bigger picture I feel and I also feel the Captain recognised that. I don't know that as I wasn't there.
There is no place for ego's on a plane. There doesn't need to be. It's why we have a chain of command. At my mob it goes on a non training flight:
- Captain
- SFO/first officer
- Senior cabin Crew Member (thats me)
- Cabin Crew. My deputy is the person whom I consider appropriatly experienced to take over my duties should the need arise and manage the rear of the plane.
That said our commanders will listen to their crews and evaluate the info given to them by the people actually in the cabin. That applies to whether it is a crew member or a pax and is called CRM. It is based on mutual respect and effective communication amoungst other things....none of which seemed in evidence on this flight.
Your comments regarding the role of CC I will ignore as they are beneath contempt.
As for our "shop managers"? Well the last time I looked my local manager at Tesco's couldn't land a plane on the Hudson River saving over a hundred lives and yes he does have a degree. I wonder if "Sully" did?
I don't think "sully" used the computer either......he did it all by himself because that is what he is trained to do.
If the computer had landed that plane (if indeed it could be programmed in those circumstances) there may well have been a different outcome........I could stand corrected by that by a Pilot which I'm sure you are not.
The day we ever take our people away from the pointy end will be the day I never fly again.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you, OSF, for reminding a long-retired flyer (multi-engine 1948) of the half-forgotten sacrifices and commitments needed to reach the port side seat.
The responsibilities were onerous enough in my day - it takes an unusually special person to effectively command in today's climate. I remember becoming somewhat tongue-tied with nervousness as I greeted the 15 or so passengers with what I hoped was a cheery "Good morning, everyone" as I ascended the aisle to the Lodestar cockpit and hoping that a mag drop would not spoil everyone's day. Weather and engines were pretty well all we had to worry about. There's no way I could ever cut it now, even if I was 25 again.
Sadly, being a PAX in the security-driven paranoia attendant upon current air travel also requires unusual facets of character but that's something different.
Others should consider your comments and reflect before rushing into print with the control locks in - like wot I have done . . .
The responsibilities were onerous enough in my day - it takes an unusually special person to effectively command in today's climate. I remember becoming somewhat tongue-tied with nervousness as I greeted the 15 or so passengers with what I hoped was a cheery "Good morning, everyone" as I ascended the aisle to the Lodestar cockpit and hoping that a mag drop would not spoil everyone's day. Weather and engines were pretty well all we had to worry about. There's no way I could ever cut it now, even if I was 25 again.
Sadly, being a PAX in the security-driven paranoia attendant upon current air travel also requires unusual facets of character but that's something different.
Others should consider your comments and reflect before rushing into print with the control locks in - like wot I have done . . .
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ based on facts
re: post 140 and 153 .....
If I ever felt that way about a skipper or any other crew member for that matter I would most def have done what I could to ensure the flight did not continue with said skipper in control of the aircraft. Passenger safety would have been foremost in my mind, not my crew losing their jobs etc ...... just a thought 
re: post 140 and 153 .....
We, the crew told the Purser that we indeed wanted to walk off with her for several reason. Support, loyalty and we did not feel safe with a captain who made such a poor judgement call and was displaying such erratic behavior. Thanks to our Purser who displayed concern for our welfare and showed us what professionalism truly is, she asked us to continue on to ORD as the plane had to get there, the passengers needed to get there and she did not want us to suffer any potential negative repercussions. She was concerned about the passengers and crew alike...unlike the captain, who basically needed to feed his ego. Hope he enjoyed it as it cost him his career!!
To be on an aircraft as a crew member and not to feel safe with the captain in charge is a very terrifying feeling and you feel very vunerable with absolutely no control. Thanks to the efforts of our Purser, we were able to "keep it together" until we landed.
If I ever felt that way about a skipper or any other crew member for that matter I would most def have done what I could to ensure the flight did not continue with said skipper in control of the aircraft. Passenger safety would have been foremost in my mind, not my crew losing their jobs etc ...... just a thought
Last edited by mizwings; 4th Jan 2010 at 12:18.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
40&80
Exactly 
If I thought my cpt was not of sound mind I would have not hesitated to voice my concerns and refused to continue the next sector with him onboard. There seems to be much more to this story than meets the eye, but alas, apart from one person who was allegedly there at the time, it is and will all remain speculation.
If I thought my cpt was not of sound mind I would have not hesitated to voice my concerns and refused to continue the next sector with him onboard. There seems to be much more to this story than meets the eye, but alas, apart from one person who was allegedly there at the time, it is and will all remain speculation.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft can fly themselves better, smoother, more efficiently than a human could, they can land themselves, soon they will taxi themselves and soon they will take off without crew control input.
Another comment, from someone lacking two clues. "Auto Land" technology has been around for 30 years. The rest of your statement isn't going to happen in your life time.
At the end of the day, little has changed with the introduction of "Guidance" technology. The Pilots still fly the Aircraft as much, or as little, as they choose.
You had best continue to hope there are skilled Pilots, in Command of any Aircraft you choose to ride in the back of.
Another comment, from someone lacking two clues. "Auto Land" technology has been around for 30 years. The rest of your statement isn't going to happen in your life time.
At the end of the day, little has changed with the introduction of "Guidance" technology. The Pilots still fly the Aircraft as much, or as little, as they choose.
You had best continue to hope there are skilled Pilots, in Command of any Aircraft you choose to ride in the back of.