New Specialist Airline Pilot Forum?
 

Looking for input for an idea I have about a new forum where flight safety reports etc. can be discussed. For example, there are quite a few issues raised in each issue of CHIRP that would warrant debate.

My initial thoughts are that the forum would only be accessible to current airline pilots. The main reason for that is because experience has shown that input from those with little or no experience only serves to inflame emotions and detract from the main topics.

The main problem of course would be validating eligibility for access. Whilst we can guarantee anonimity from each other on the forums, we would need some way to verify applicants were who they claimed to be and were qualified for access. What I am seeking is some ideas about how to go about this without generating too much extra workload.

I remember in the days before PPRuNe when the only real place for debate was the AvSig Forum on CompuServe and you needed to fax a copy of your licence to get access to the forum. Whilst I am contemplating what the level of access for this new forum should be, just a professional licence holder or must be in current employment on a recognised a/c type or whatever, I also have to decide whether it should be completely private or open for anyone to read but only accepted members can post.

Your thoughts and suggestions would be appreciated.

Aaaaaaaah the golden days of Avsig! How long ago was that Danny?

FW

Specialist Forum
 

Just my penny's worth

Forum open for any registered PPRuNe user to read, but only for approved people to post.
Use of real name verified by either a scan of licence with transport category aircraft type rating on it and/or ID-card would certainly reduce excesses.

AD

Danny,

I find this entire forum hugely useful - not just for all the great advice, but also for being able recognise bad advice, weigh up different opininons, etc. I am currently training for my ATPL, alongside a full time job, and often use these resources for help, and soemtimers just a distraction or a bit of light relief!

My view (obviously!) would be that just holding a professional licence should be sufficient - after all, if one of the main reasons is for discussing CHIRP, then that is exactly the kind of stuff low houred pilots-in-waiting should be reading up on.

Perhaps it's time to introduce a small handling fee for members to cover the admin to receive and validate an application? Most other forums that I am a member of have a "premium" area where a small fee gets much wider access.

DW.hether open or hidden - maybe hidden will give the opportunity for an area specifically for professionals to be able to discuss things in privacy - something that clearly many people want given the number of non-specialist members currently viewing and posting.

Only my tuppence worth.

DW.

Just an ordinary Pax speaking:

Don't make it readable by everyone, otherwise they will start up new threads, cross post and there will be thread drift everywhere! :( You folks talk about it amongst yourselves and anything that might be of help to the rest of the world - then open an announcement thread.

danny:

I don't know about European certification, but in the US anyone can check on pilot credentials by going to an FAA website.

For example, you or anyone could look up anyone's certification just by using name and state. For example: Jonathan Regas, Virginia

it would then display all with those name (hope not too many john smith's)
and all of their certification.

Would ATCOs be able to view it?

Hello!

Excellent idea! I am no airline pilot myself (although I have an ATPL), but I train future airline pilots and I think that a lot of useful and valuable information could be gained by people like myself just following this new forum passively.

Greetings, Max

danny:

by the way, here is the url for the FAA website to check on certification.

https://amsrvs.registry.faa.gov/airm...ry/default.asp

you can even look me up if you like

jonathan regas

(you won't need my state, only one of me) :-)

Good idea
 

I think it's a good idea and agree that people in training should have access too.

But, however access is regulated, can it not be as complicated as getting onto the pprune BA group - which I still haven't achieved as I'm essentially computer illiterate? :ugh:

Keep it simple, that's my strapline.

Sounds good but what about us ATCO's??

What about airplane designers (both in industry and science), aircraft systems designers, scientists designing the man-machine interface (cockpit), regulators, trainers, writers of training manuals, air traffic controllers, and all of those folks, who contribute to and build the foundations, that airline pilots rely on?

If those folks are excluded from those discussions, quite a few important aspects could not be handled, and both those aviation professionals as well as the airline pilots can not benefit from such discussions.

I am not sure the 'send us a copy of your licence' would work. what could stop me 'borrowing' one?
why can't you set up a screening mechanism so there would be, in all the major areas, (UK; US; Oz; Sand, etc.) someone local who would verify the bona fides and allow access?
In the case of employees working for airlines with their own areas here, the local Mod would be able to confirm.

:\
'Current airline pilots' is a fairly restrictive criteria. It excludes any pilot who my be retired, resting or out of work. Of course it also excludes others whose input could/would be invaluable.
Since most of us in aviation have a licence of some category or another, expired or not, and the information you might be seeking to provide would be of significant benefit to us, then what about a subscription fee and a scanned copy of the paperwork?
It might take you a little time to vet everyone but a one page licence copy would surely take you a very short time to approve or reject?
I think that most professional bodies have a subscription fee of some sort or another, at least those to which I belong do, and since that, in essence might be what you are trying to establish, then why not?
Good luck with an excellent idea anyway. :D
Anyway, you know from reading these, your own pages, how many out there have a clue about matters aeronautical!

With that statement in mind I would recommend access is restricted both on read and reply to licence holders only. Todays CHIRP could be tomorrows sensational headline!

Just a thought but CHIRP also has reports from cabin crew, ATC and engineers.

A forum discussing flight safety by airline pilots without input from other aviation professionals is unlikely to be able to analyise all aspects of a given situation in most instances.

Just airline pilots might also lead to a great deal of egotistical "willy-waving" of how much time on time, years in the industry etc. a particular individual has - let alone inter-company rivalries.

I'm probably just jealous because, as an employed biz-jet pilot, I wouldn't be allowed to play (nor the countless ex-airline pilots in GA)- or maybe there are no GA pilots who could add to a debate on flight safety;)

Sorry Tudor but the Journos already know about CHIRP and it often IS tomorrow's sensational headline!

On a more serious note, I too am a controller and I'd be keen to participate in such discussions. We must remember that aviation is a system - as clearly shown by many of the reports in CHIRP which cross professional boundaries.

My first thought was that maybe those who are eligible to recieve CHIRP in the post should be eligible to participate - but that, of course, is largely limited to UK licence holders. The benefit of the forum that you suggest is that it would have global input which would hugely increase its value. And I would strongly advocate that it is not an open forum so that there is less risk of honest professional debate being misinterpreted (whether in all good faith or maliciously).

I don't know what the answer to how to validate access rights - perhaps a combination of you moderators reviewing a short questionnaire of pertinent info plus a few quid to register for those that have the credentials would do the job.

But the idea gets my support.

Danny, I think your idea is an excellent one as it'll give us CHIRP readers/contributors and anyone else with the correct crudentials to discuss and learn without threads being hijacked etc. I'd make it a private forum so the real nitty gritty sensitive topics can be debated in good strength and good resolutions methodically worked out. If it is private, then I cannot see a problem with users having to log-in with their proper names if available, or just with numbers added on to the end to keep them unique, and a small charge could be applied to get titles added to all contributors with their company and type ratings so everyone knows which aspect the respondent is coming from. This way alone you'd possibly know if you got a gatecrasher as other company employees can verify or not, and as PPRuNe has already shown many times, contributors can see the differences between company and fleet SOP's just by looking at the title and see where a problem for one may not actually occur for another.

And all this from an ATCO, I'd like us to be able to be involved as more and more matters these days do tend to cross over and affect both sides, but obviously having strict rules and disciplinary procedures for those that try to build a bigger "us and them" debate. Will be very interested to see what you decide, good luck whatever you do!

5mb :ok:

Just a thought on validation
 

Checking in online databases may not help restrict access, afterall, at least until a database is built to stop duplication what is to stop me as SLF looking up a record and saying that it is me? - not that I would!

Whatever I decide to do and at what level access will be restricted to, I think that a minimal subscription will be in order to offset all the administration costs involved. Probably an initial trial period of say a month and then say £0.50 - £1.00 a month. Still not figured out how to handle the verification though. Could include a free pprune.com email address and require participants to register using real names or new pseudonyms but with, as mentioned above, qualifications in profile.

Maybe have member status and observer status to allow others directly connected. I do agree that ATCO's should be a part of it. Engineers & Technicians maybe. I remember the days when CHIRP was just pilots and ATCOS followed by engineering but I think thay have become a bit too PC with the addition of cabin crew and ground handling personel. Not that I don't think there's a place for debate for them too but you have to draw the line somewhere and this is primarily the 'Professional Pilot' Rumour Network.

Good input so far. Keep your views coming.