Ex-Gulfstream International Airline pilot files complaint with FAA

[airmack]

How about that Teamster's Union?? Way to go guys!!!

 

[BOHICAgain]

according to the artical the tcas was fixed and signed off by a mechanic in TPA....therfore there was no reason to refuse it on that basis. There were other "issues" with this particular Captain and past refusals and this event was more than likely just the icing on the cake. Sometimes the sqeaky wheel gets the grease...sometimes it just gets replaced. I know both Herfort and Bystrom personally and professionally....I can tell you from first hand experience that if you have a VALID beef then they will back you BUT if you don't then they will hang you as well....that is thier job and they both do it well. No one should go to GIA if you don't expect to work your as@ off. The reward is a pretty decent contract, above average $ for a 1900 and home nearly everynight not to mention building 121 turbine pic like it's going out of style. This is a small commuter, problems should be expected, no outfit is flawless. But in defense of GIA., I was impressed with thier maintenance and keeping things running. The Mel's serve a purpose and they are approved by the FAA...it's it's legal and safe to go with it mel'd then that's what you are expexted to do....whether at GIA or NASA and all stops inbetween. Not sugar coating my time there, I had a few phone calls with both Bystrom and Herfort where we had "discussions" about legality and the right thing, bottom line is you have to pick and choose your battles wisely. But if the guy who signs your paycheck says to you that you have a choice: fly it or be fired. I can guarantee you that Tom Herfort would NEVER say that if it were NOT legal. This guy made his choice and now he has to live with it. He will be able to recover his career and chalk this up as learning experience. I think in the meantime though he's waisting time and $$ in court.

Flame away!

Ops check ok does not mean its fixed

MEL's does not mean its safe to fly just legal

There are ways not to fly if you don't think it is Safe,

Im surprised that they did not swap airplanes to make him happy

 

[RP170]

All turbine aircraft require a tcas to be installed and operating

That's interesting. Most of our Citation Ultra's at NetJets don't have TCAS. They are currently being installed but have been flown for several years without it.

That may be the case for Part 121, however.

 

[Say Again Over]

My 2 cents, not really sure if this was an issue about TCAS or an issue of a dispute with maintenance, the crap the company puts out to the newspaper is probably a lie. It's real easy to see if the system works while on the ground, I don't get it.

 

[PUNISHER]

That's interesting. Most of our Citation Ultra's at NetJets don't have TCAS. They are currently being installed but have been flown for several years without it.

That may be the case for Part 121, however.

If you were to operate a Ultra under 121 it would not be required to have TCAS installed.

 

[Bako Cap]

Didn't an Eagle guy win something like $10M in court back in the late 90's for being wrongfully terminated because he would not fly into SLD icing conditions in DFW? Everyone but him was taking off into icing conditions that he thought was unsafe in an ATR42 (pre-boot mod if I remember). Juries seem to side with the FINAL person who determines the safety of their future flights.

 

[WSurf]

Scariest part of the article was this quote from Gulfstream's VP of Legal Affairs:

"In general, we operate within the guidelines of the FAA," he said.

Wait, WHAT?

No doubt!

 

[DrewBlows]

One more vote: The combination of TCAS + Pressurization MELs has long been on my B1900 no-go list. I'd have told 'em to pound sand.

For the CFIs that don't have either: It's different. Similar speeds, less heads down time, while monitoring practice area frequencies mitigate the risk. Meanwhile blowing through the same practice area at 275 ktas while talking to center and performing airline procedural B.S. is a whole different level of risk.

This deserves a quote. It is not a matter of whether an MEL is legal or not, it's a matter of whether the operation is safe. In this case I think the flight could have been safely flown without pressurization, or without TCAS, but not through a high volume training area without both.

 

[DrewBlows]

JUST my opinion here....and they are like as$holes, we all have them.

You screwed up this quote, here, I've fixed it for you...

JUST my opinion here....and they are like as$holes, there are a lot of them on flightinfo.

 

[andyd]

The artical also said that the return flight from TPA to PBI was at night in the wx, there wouldn't have been anyone in the Coral Springs practice area anyway.....AND the routing from TPA is Llakes.PHK.PBI.....not even close to a practice area and well north of North County and anyone in a light a/c up at that time of night in the wx would be IFR shooting approaches.

I think this guy overplayed his hand to prove a point and screwed himself in the process.

 

[PCL_128]

andyd, what airline do you work for? I want to make sure I never fly on one of your flights.

Tom Cooper (CEO) - SCAB and all around d0uchebag
Tom Hertfort (VP Flt Ops) - a flight attendant that plays airline manager in his spare time
James Bystrom (Chief Pilot) - universally regarded as one of the biggest d0uchebags you'll ever encounter. For example, his answering machine is a recording of him pretending to be talking to ATC

This Captain will hopefully sue the ever loving sh-- out of these scumbags.

 

[Say Again Over]

This Captain will hopefully sue the ever loving sh-- out of these scumbags

For what, and on what basis, the aircraft was technically airworthy right?

 

[WSurf]

So did his replacement Captain take the flight or did he back him up and not fly also?

I can see his concerns, but I think this dude had a axe to grind from the beginning.

Company should have just called in a replacement pilot and would have only had to deal with this guy for 2 more days. Now they screwed themselves by firing him and having the FAA breathing down there necks, along with the most important thing- Negative Publicity.

 

[ToiletDuck]

(insert game show incorrect answer buzzer...here)

It is a common misconception but, no TCAS is required for RVSM operations. I get this question at least once a week, so you're not the only one that thinks this.

All you need is two independent altitude measurement systems, a functional autopilot system, an altitude alerting system, and a Mode C transponder.


While, from the dispatch perspective, he was kinda being a pain in the arse to refuse a deferred TCAS...I hope he sues them, too. I don't see how he wouldn't win.

A B1900 isn't going in RVSM anyways. Secondly what is he doing at Tprop CA and Gulfstream after 20yrs of aviation? Another strike for the non-union guys. I'd like to see that happen at another company.

 

[007]

Now because he's chosen this path and it's on his PRIA AND in the newspapers that he ran to the FAA crying foul.....Good luck getting past HR for the next job. He's better off flying cargo, 135 or ex-pat flying. He's pretty much screwed himself for 121 work here in the US. JUST my opinion here....and they are like as$holes, we all have them.

Wow, with a future generation of captains like you airlines will never have to fix anything again.

My feeling is your tune will change once you upgrade.

 

[rtmcfi]

Well andyd, I hope mgmnt knows who you are. I would hate to see all your sucking up, and gunning so hard for a management position go unnoticed.

 

[1flier]

In regards to the captains time in aviation. He wanted to move back to Florida and GIA was the quickest route to do so for him. He was a captain for Skywest and wanted ot fly more (EMB120 Captain). Worked for GIA before pre and post 9/11, left shortly there after and paid his bills and then returned to aviation at Skywest. Honestly, this guy is not anal about MEL's or aything, so if he was concerned I would have to believe him. And if you havent flown through those training areas, do so and then come back and say he was wrong. More VFR traffic out there than you can imagine that doesnt talk to ATC. Any pilot flying out of Opa Locka, Tamiami or FT Lauderdale Exec can attest to that. The point of this is more that the Captain is not the final authority on safety for a flight as far as companies are concerned. He is not the first pilot to be fired for making a decision on safety that a company did not agree with. Any current or former freightdogs out there know this, "I am delaying the flight for the lines of embedded thunderstorms across my line of flight for 100 miles each side." Company response, "Go ahead checkout and go home, a standby pilot will fill in, we will call when we are ready for you to come back to work." Of course the call never comes and you have be fired in a subtly manner. I am hoping he wins any lawsuit involved, since it will make companies think twice about pushing the envelope and Monday night quarterbacking a decision made by the PIC. As far ar MEL's are concerned, the FAA shares blame since no operator can use a MEL unless its approved by the FAA MMEL list or a waiver is issued. Legal does not always = safe.

 

[machaf]

(insert game show incorrect answer buzzer...here)

It is a common misconception but, no TCAS is required for RVSM operations. I get this question at least once a week, so you're not the only one that thinks this.

We CANNOT dispatch into RVSM airspace with TCAS inop. Straight out of the MEL. So it depends..

 

[CA1900]

Let's further speculate that this Cessna crashed right into an Orphanage and tragically killed Tiny Tim and 350 other poor children in the middle of a midnight mass service.

Something like this?

http://www.snotr.com/video/388



:laugh:

 

[be-400xpdriver]

If it is signed off then there is no argument. If it is mel'd, then the FAA has deemed it to be both legal AND safe. This guy does not have a legal leg to stand on.

You are made for airline management!!!

That was the argument from great lakes management trying to get a crew to fly a 1900 with the GPWS mel'd and the Flaps mel'd. So when you get close to the ground you would not get the "to low flaps" or "to low gear" call out. So what happened to this legal and safe flight?

They landed gear up in ORD. The FAA then decided that maybe it was legal to mel the gpws and flaps at the same time but it WAS NOT SAFE. And know they you cant mel those two items together.

Also I have refused flights in the 1900 because of the is tcas mel'd and mel'd pressurization and used the ORD accident as evidence that just because the FAA says it is legal does not mean it is SAFE.

Will there have to be a mid air with a 1900 and C-172 before the we dont allow these two items to be mel'd at the same time?

 

[Amish RakeFight]

It appears the captain was well within his rights to be justified, but it also seems that he intended to stick it to GIA as well. Looks like GIA beat him to it. It's quite odd that all this transpired a few days before his scheduled resignation.

As is usual, there is definately more to this story than what the news reports.

 

[PCL_128]

For what, and on what basis, the aircraft was technically airworthy right?

Again, what airline do you work for so I can make sure never to fly on one of your flights? Any pilot that is dumb enough to believe legal = safe shouldn't be allowed to sit in an airplane, let along fly one with people in the back. The PIC is responsible for determining the safety of a flight, not some bureaucrat or some management dweeb that moonlights as a flight attendant.

 

[Princedietrich]

In response to the previous poster who stated that, due to weather, there wouldn't be anyone in that particular practice area.... The proper way to phrase that is that there SHOULDN'T be anyone in that particular practice area, because we all know that for every one of us who is smart enough to not fly in deteriorating weather there is going to be someone who decides to go anyway. So while there shouldn't be any trainers or weekend warriors buzzing around down there, there just might be and in all likelihood there probably will be.

When it comes to mid-air collisions, it doesn't matter how big you are or how small the other guy is. You're both very likely going to lose (with a few notable exceptions in the past). I've flown in that mess called Florida airspace, and I've flown in the busy practice areas (not south Florida, but Orlando which is psychotic on its own and I would imagine is very similar). You may be watching your act and everyone around you may be doing the same, but all it takes is one bonehead who isn't paying attention and you've got flaming metal fragments raining down. Compound that with questionable weather and the poor visibility that comes with twilight flying and you've got a bad situation indeed.

I will not argue that a MEL will allow you to legally fly with something that is broken, because that is the entire purpose of an MEL. The problem with the document itself is that it does not account for two things: the environment into which you are going to operate, and any other deferrals that you might have at the same time. Sure, I can legally defer my boots and my prop heat and my windshield heat, but would I feel safe deferring all three at the same time and then flying through the soup in a Milwaukee winter?

TCAS isn't immunity from a mid air collision, but it does act as a great insurance policy to help protect you from that one guy you didn't/couldn't see coming. Being able to go up above the crowded airspace will exponentially increase your safety margin, especially if your aircraft is more massive and less maneuverable and flies faster than everything else down there. Having both of these taken out of the equation, with the added factor of low twilight vis and worsening weather, creates an unsafe situation.

In my humble opinion, I think this captain did the right thing. He felt that there was a safety of flight issue and did not want to put himself or his passengers or his copilot at risk. While it may be justified and perhaps even expected for management to argue with him for refusing the trip, I believe that firing the captain over a safety concern is absolutely uncalled for. The captain is the final authority for the safe operation of the flight, so says the regs. The aftermath of this that I can see coming is that this will send a message rippling through the ranks of the GIA pilots in that they had better take that trip if the boss says so, regardless of maintenance or MEL issues. Sooner or later, that may end up in a B1900 and a CE172 getting tangled up and making the prime time news.

Sorry for the ramble, just wanted to get my thoughts out there.

 

[Poahi]

If the statements in the article are true, it's going to boil down to a factual dispute as to whether or not the TCAS was actually working.

 

[andyd]

andyd, what airline do you work for? I want to make sure I never fly on one of your flights.

Tom Cooper (CEO) - SCAB and all around d0uchebag
Tom Hertfort (VP Flt Ops) - a flight attendant that plays airline manager in his spare time
James Bystrom (Chief Pilot) - universally regarded as one of the biggest d0uchebags you'll ever encounter. For example, his answering machine is a recording of him pretending to be talking to ATC

This Captain will hopefully sue the ever loving sh-- out of these scumbags.

PCL_128.....Dude, you must have a huge set of balls and a short memory. I've read all your posts on here for the past few months and you are quick to bite the hand that feeds you. You GET OFF on bashing Pinnacle and now GIA. Funny thing is dude, where did YOU come from...where are YOUR roots......Oh yeah....you were at BOTH Gulfstream AND Pinnacle and if it weren't for your experience at both of these carriers you would NOT be at Air Tran today. If it wasn't for Tom Cooper putting together GIA you would have had a much different career path. As for Tom Herfort being a former flight attendant...WHO CARES? He's was also a Captain at GIA for over 10 years before he moved into management...you failed to mention that. You love to bash Pinnacle at every opportunity but if they had not hired you, employed you and an given you an upgrade opportunity you'd...again.....NOT have ended up at Air Tran.

As for who I fly for? www.newglobalairline.com The "Blue" side of the house.

By the way, I am a big supporter of Alpa and a firm believer of clear and concise boundary's between managment and employees spelled out in a great contract. I have been managment (not airline) before so I do tend to think like one, however I have no desire to go down that path again, I enjoy being an employee without the respondsibilites beyond the cockpit. One thing that I was curious about Pcl...if your such a HUGE Alpa cheerleader then WHY did you sell yourself short and accept employment at a non-alpa carrier?

 

[knewhigher]

Something like this?

http://www.snotr.com/video/388



:laugh:

perfect.

 

[Buzo]

The replacement pilot did refuse the flight, up until he was threatened with termination.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

The replacement pilot did refuse the flight, up until he was threatened with termination.

The million dollar question.

If TCAS was operational on that flight, did he receive any RA's?

 

[Buzo]

The million dollar question.

If TCAS was operational on that flight, did he receive any RA's?

TCAS 1 does not give RA's

 

[CA1900]

TCAS 1 does not give RA's

Is that what GIA has installed?

TCAS-II is certainly available for the 1900 (we had it at CommutAir), but an operator can get away with TCAS-I if they're cutting corners.