Automation / FMS use at your company

[bbwest]

G200 makes me laugh. You are exactly the kind of pilot I am talking about. "People really dont care." ...."Nobody cares"

You are exactly the reason SMS's exist. It's the crowd who thinks none of it really matters and "I can do whatever works for me" that are truly scary in this business.

My bet is G200 has never heard of a best practice, ever been to an NBAA event or a Bombardier Safety Standown or read a Tony Kern book. All a bunch of crap to you who have all the answers.....most of which are simply wrong.

So you think NetJets procedures are screwed up because YOU dont like their checklists?? You must be a joy to share a cockpit with

 

[BoilerUP]

In the immortal words of TO: "Getcha popcorn ready".

 

[Gulfstream 200]

My bet is G200 has never heard of a best practice, ever been to an NBAA event or a Bombardier Safety Standown or read a Tony Kern book. All a bunch of crap to you who have all the answers.....most of which are simply wrong.

So you think NetJets procedures are screwed up because YOU dont like their checklists?? You must be a joy to share a cockpit with

I never said Netjet procedures were screwed up - where did I say that? Don't make $hit up to continue your moronic argument. You think because we wont adopt Netjets procedures we are wrong? LOL. Im sure Netjets spent a lot of time on their SOPs - but what does that have to do with us? Let me guess...you questioned this your first trip huh?

events?? Been to em' all man, multiple times. How does attending an NBAA event have anything to do with this? LOL...wtf are you talking about?

Dont worry about sharing a cockpit...you are the EXACT reason why most decent 91 operations won't consider airline pilots. You just cant adapt or even show the most basic level of common sense. Such mentality is very draining to a corporate department. Outside of very strong internal rec's the airline resumes hit the garbage....Im know it's not everyone, but you simply define it.

This flying thing just isn't as hard or as special as you think.

Good Luck out there.

 

[Partyfoul]

I'd like to see anyone at Netjets flying a GV for those numbers. Even your "normal" numbers are low for quite a few of them...

Back to the show.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

I'd like to see anyone at Netjets flying a GV for those numbers. Even your "normal" numbers are low for quite a few of them...

Back to the show.

well good to hear! - whats a new-hire on a Netjet Gulfstream make?

 

[doublepsych]

bbwest, welcome to the world of 91

I have flown 91 for the smallest of operators (1 jet, 2 pilots), and for a 91 operation with several large cabin ultra long range birds, that to a casual observer would appear to be an awesome dept, flying people that everyone here would know. And I have done a good bit of 91 contract flying in large cabin jets with quite a few different operators. Earlier in life I was with NWA.

While there may be some procedurally solid 91 operations as you referenced, after flying as a contract pilot for some time, I can attest that the large majority of 91 operations and pilots have no clue of the benefits of the procedures you are espousing, nor any interest in doing anything more that staying out of trouble, which pretty much means basic standardization.

Does this mean that they are about to drop out of the sky? No. Even at that level, they are roughly analogous (statistically) to a typical US air carrier in roughly 1975, if not more due to the reliability of modern equipment and also because of tech advances such as TCAS EGPWS etc. Still pretty safe. Better statistical safety than boarding an airliner in many parts of the world in 2010. Most are not going to be interested in even hearing about a "best practice". Even though you and many others may understand the benefits. They are more interested in what hotel they are staying in.

In my opinion, what makes 91 really unsafe is guys not watching what they are doing, not so much how standard-ly they do it. Of course industry best practices can enhance this, but it can be accomplished to a minimally lesser degree without some/all of those best practices. Flip-side: if you are not watching what you're doing, best practices are not gonna help much...

If 91 is the world you want to be in, thats how it'll be. While you might get lucky and be hired as CP by some uber-rich dude who is starting his own flight department with 2 brand new G650s where you can emulate whatever operation you like, if standard procedures really mean something to you, you might want to get that Delta app up to date, the A320 I'm flying there now is very standardized!

ps-build an extended centerline for scottsdale rwy 21 and take a look about 6 miles out on that line...it is not a place you would want to be, low altitude, at night. Procedures and technology can bite, too.

 

[bbwest]

G200 I owe you an apology. You are correct you didn't say NJ were screwed up. SPX's post is what I was confusing you with.

I dont want to offend many in the corporate world in which I now reside. I will say however that prior to 9/11, 95% of corporate guys were in the corporate world and not the airlines for a reason. It wasnt the pay or work schedule.

I think doublepsych has it right.

I remain appalled at how many corporate pilots just dont care - G200 right in the heart of that envelope.

I guess that's the human nature part. 121 and 135 guys incorporate best practices and a disciplined cockpit because they have to - get on board and do things the company way or get gone.

I'm simply a believer in the best way. I have few original thoughts in this business. I have no likes or dislikes. If it's a best practice, it's my new favorite way. If its how the Director says it should be done - I love it.

Doublepsych is right, actually G200 is too - most guys just dont care.

I never meant to imply that you are going to fall out of the sky if the PF touches the FMS or you are going to blow up if you dont extend a centerline in the FMS.

G200 says "Net Jets spent a lot of time on their SOPs but what has that got to do with us."? I say everything. And you say nothing. I'll take dedicated professionals and thousands of hours in type everyday over the high school diploma acting as standardization manager who "likes " to do things his way.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Fair enough BB...

Just keep in mind lots of these Part 91 operations you generalize or compare Netjets to may have stricter/more standardized operations than Netjets themselves? (OK, Im done with the Netjet comparison..) Again, what you described above isn't anything like I have seen in Part 91 (maybe Im lucky)

Many also have well organized, conservative, standard industry SOPs tailored to their operation specifically. Many wont operate at night into mountains/Aspen, etc...many wont extend a minute over duty day, many have annual REAL line checks, standard callouts, etc etc...just like any good operation - 91, 135, 121 etc..

Heck, not one Part 91 operation I have worked at (3) would even use contract guys as they were very concerned with standardization (Aon accident?)

And as far as 95% of corporate pilots being in this sector instead of the airlines for a reason??....well, thats just more reinforcement to the airline bonehead mentality. Everyone wants to be an airline pilot huh?....Many of us never wanted to be anywhere else, certainly not at an airline, and consider our careers a success in doing just so.

How about you? - why aren't you where you want to be? I suppose I would be equally as miserable working at an airline as you are in corporate....so why do it?.....I wouldn't.

 

[spxdriver]

G200 I owe you an apology. You are correct you didn't say NJ were screwed up. SPX's post is what I was confusing you with.

Actually, I didn't say that NJ was screwed up either. I simply said that their checklist wasn't well written, in my opinion. I critiqued the fact that "lights" was on virtually every one of their checklists. Afterall, I haven't heard of any accidents being caused by the tail flood lights not being on.

As you're aware, saying a checklist isn't good is far different than saying an operation is screwed up.

I remain appalled at how many corporate pilots just dont care - G200 right in the heart of that envelope.

I object to that. I have the pleasure of knowing G200 personally and he not only has a deft touch with those who he interacts with, but he is extremely diligent and caring.

I guess that's the human nature part. 121 and 135 guys incorporate best practices and a disciplined cockpit because they have to - get on board and do things the company way or get gone.

I have flown for a few 135 operations, and none have incorporated nearly the best practices nor did they have nearly as much of a disciplined cockpit compared to the 91 outfits that I've worked with.

I believe that you're grouping 121/135 and putting them on a pedestal inappropriately. There are plenty of accidents/incidents related to poor CRM and lack of adherence to SOPs in the 121/135 world, just as there have been some in the part 91 world.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

I object to that. I have the pleasure of knowing G200 personally and he not only has a deft touch with those who he interacts with, but he is extremely diligent and caring.

Why Thank You SPX.

I'd like to think I am known for being a gentle, caring, and helpful part of corporate aviation.

You have potential yourself, I quite possibly see you winding up in a Gulfstream - maybe even cruising along at FL510....which, as you know...really makes us "G" guys smile!


:beer:

 

[bbwest]

I agree that there are many quality operations out there. I've worked at two, one as Safety Manager where we went through IS-BAO process and got certified. Loved my previous job. I actually love this one. I got recruited iby the new director to help them step up threir game - across the board - customer service, safety, stan. The list has gotten longer. Even after firing 3 of 10, there is still resistance and plenty of "old school". Painful to watch guys fly high quality equip like it was a Cessna 172.

Even more painful when despite presenting science, logic, best practices guys refuse to change because "that's the way we've always done it" or worse, "that's the way I like to do it"!!

I do appeciate debate. Sounds like you guys are at quality operations. Actually I'm at a high quality company.....just an evolving flight department that has been a good bit behind the times. Often begin to wonder if it's me. Maybe sometimes it is

 

[ksu_aviator]

G200 I owe you an apology. You are correct you didn't say NJ were screwed up. SPX's post is what I was confusing you with.

I dont want to offend many in the corporate world in which I now reside. I will say however that prior to 9/11, 95% of corporate guys were in the corporate world and not the airlines for a reason. It wasnt the pay or work schedule.

You know, I got out of the 121 world for a reason. Unions, pay and schedule. I'm a solid pilot, I could work for any airline. I choose to fly corporate for the pay, schedule, lack of commuting, no b.s. union rules and the ability to advance based on merit.

Most importantly, I enjoy the flexibility of small flight departments. You can be a trained monkey and do the "best practices" which are not always the best. Or you can fly the airplane for the situation you are in.

You may think that 121 is the golden goose or holly grail, but to me it is hell.

Be a pilot, not a monkey.

 

[bbwest]

Brother lets be clear, I am a corporate pilot because I choose to be, not have to be. I retired from the military and got hired at Delta, SWA, and FEDEX. Chose FEDEX and hated my life. Tired , worn out ALL the time. A corporate opportunity got presented to me and I've never looked back. Corporate flying is absolutely where I belong. I will never do the 2-3 am flying thing again - for any price, nor a scheduled airline for that matter. Works great for many of my friends but not me. Quality of life is far better, more tme off, paid very well based on merit not seniority. I'm here for the same reason as most everyone else in this forum.

That being said, back to my original point. I find that many of the old schoolers around are resistant to doing anything different than they did when they were a CFI in 172's. I see it routinely. Stabilized approaches are a concept for the book but not a requirement or even a goal. Techology use is often a joke.

Was at a Bombardier event where Tony Kern spoke. The topic was something like, "When good enough really isnt" His last book spells it out. I'm all over being flexible. BUT.....

I'll give you a great example. FMS overlay approaches vs. "dive and drive" method on non-precision approaches. Plenty of literature out there on why a constant ange (fms overlay) approach is preferable over the "dive-drive" method. In fact take a look at the first page or two of book 1 of your Jepps - spells it out perfectly. There is also some FAA literature on the same thing.

Meanwhile, I will bet you huge dollars that 50% of the guys in your department cant do this correctly.........if at all. Not a single one of 10 pilots in my current place could. I will tell you that even more than 50% of the FSI or CAE instructors have misconceptions. This is just one area where the part 91 world has not caught up with the 121 world.

Dont give me the "go back to the 121 world" stuff my brothers. I dont care if the Martians (from Mars) came up with it, if its the best way why isnt it our way??

 

[ksu_aviator]

Brother lets be clear, I am a corporate pilot because I choose to be, not have to be. I retired from the military and got hired at Delta, SWA, and FEDEX. Chose FEDEX and hated my life. Tired , worn out ALL the time. A corporate opportunity got presented to me and I've never looked back. Corporate flying is absolutely where I belong. I will never do the 2-3 am flying thing again - for any price, nor a scheduled airline for that matter. Works great for many of my friends but not me. Quality of life is far better, more tme off, paid very well based on merit not seniority. I'm here for the same reason as most everyone else in this forum.

Then why trash guys that chose to be corporate?

That being said, back to my original point. I find that many of the old schoolers around are resistant to doing anything different than they did when they were a CFI in 172's. I see it routinely. Stabilized approaches are a concept for the book but not a requirement or even a goal. Techology use is often a joke.

Was at a Bombardier event where Tony Kern spoke. The topic was something like, "When good enough really isnt" His last book spells it out. I'm all over being flexible. BUT.....

I'll give you a great example. FMS overlay approaches vs. "dive and drive" method on non-precision approaches. Plenty of literature out there on why a constant ange (fms overlay) approach is preferable over the "dive-drive" method. In fact take a look at the first page or two of book 1 of your Jepps - spells it out perfectly. There is also some FAA literature on the same thing.

Meanwhile, I will bet you huge dollars that 50% of the guys in your department cant do this correctly.........if at all. Not a single one of 10 pilots in my current place could. I will tell you that even more than 50% of the FSI or CAE instructors have misconceptions. This is just one area where the part 91 world has not caught up with the 121 world.

Dont give me the "go back to the 121 world" stuff my brothers. I dont care if the Martians (from Mars) came up with it, if its the best way why isnt it our way??

That is all well and good. But "best practices" aren't always best practices. Yes, it is preferable to use the FMS for many approaches. But what happens when the FMS quits and you have to do an NDB approach at night in weather at an unfamiliar airport? You need to be able to calculate your descent rate in your head to make your own pseudo glide slope. You need to be able to have that mental image of where you are. You need to be able to turn off the FMS and fly from point A to point B.

That is why I say you have to be flexible. You have to fly raw data on occasion so that when the FD takes a crap you know what to do. You have to be able to fly green source for the times when the FMS goes tits up. Saying "I will always do best practices" means you will not be proficient when you aren't in the best situation.

If you were in the back of an aircraft during a RAIM outage...who would you want up front? The guy that is used to flying raw data or that guy that just sh*t his pants because the FMS is out and he doesn't have a pseudo glide slope?

 

[BoilerUP]

I was taught to fly non-precision approaches the same way I fly ILS approaches by FSI...fully configured and at a constant rate of descent following an FMS glideslope or to the calculated VDP.

I was trained to dive-and-drive at Air Wisconsin.

 

[spxdriver]

I was taught to fly non-precision approaches the same way I fly ILS approaches by FSI...fully configured and at a constant rate of descent following an FMS glideslope or to the calculated VDP.

I was trained to dive-and-drive at Air Wisconsin.

LD can comment better than I can about this, but I don't think that the Embraer 135/145 even supports VNAV/pseudo glideslopes. Given that, it would be accurate to say that if they're not on an ILS, they're "diving and driving"

 

[ttflyer]

I'll give you a great example. FMS overlay approaches vs. "dive and drive" method on non-precision approaches....

....This is just one area where the part 91 world has not caught up with the 121 world.

I get your point, but is that really the best example? Delta is thinking about putting GPS in their DC-9s so they can get another 5 years out of them. Not every 121 airplane is a 777. I've always thought this was at least one area where corporate was way ahead of 121...

I would also say the odds of flying a "non-precision" approach in corporate world are many times higher than in the 121 world. Those guys could probably go months and not fly a single approach that wasn't an ILS or visual...

 

[ttflyer]

Dont give me the "go back to the 121 world" stuff my brothers. I dont care if the Martians (from Mars) came up with it, if its the best way why isnt it our way??

Because it is possible for there to be more than one "best" way. The problem with pilots is that they always think it's their way or the wrong way. There can be more than one "right" way. Be flexible...

 

[pilotjc]

ps-build an extended centerline for scottsdale rwy 21 and take a look about 6 miles out on that line...it is not a place you would want to be, low altitude, at night. Procedures and technology can bite, too.

Just like the Comair guys taking off on the wrong runway. Just like the Delta guys landing on a taxiway in Atlanta.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Just like the Comair guys taking off on the wrong runway. Just like the Delta guys landing on a taxiway in Atlanta.

Just like Global guys landing on the short runway at Westchester.

"Its for you"

Good to see you in on what is likely the dumbest pilot web board thread in a long time.