Union coming at Flexjet!

[FraxJockey]

We don't do training at flexjet. We do flight checks. You don't get any training unless you fail and that's only if the TRB says your worthy of training. Food for thought.

Sorry Bunman but I'll have to call BS on that. Everyone who busted got another chance. Some even got two. And realize to bust a 135 check you have to screw up 2-3 events. By the time someone busts, they earn it. No saying it is right, just stating the facts.

 

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

We don't do training at flexjet. We do flight checks. You don't get any training unless you fail and that's only if the TRB says your worthy of training. Food for thought.

Bunman,

What do you call the simulator time the night before the checkride? How about the 4 days of ground training during your long recurrent? The FAA considers that training, not sure what your definition is.

You are also incorrect on the TRB. The TRB doesn't have the authority to give training. The TRB gives a recommendation to DG who makes the decision regarding additional training. This is usually re-qualification training, not the same as the training you are saying we are lacking.

If you want to scare our pilots into a union, at least use facts not myths. You lose credibility every time you post something that is so far from the truth.


TWA 2 ASA FO

 

[jetmaster727]

Sorry Bunman but I'll have to call BS on that. Everyone who busted got another chance. Some even got two. And realize to bust a 135 check you have to screw up 2-3 events. By the time someone busts, they earn it. No saying it is right, just stating the facts.

ok so if it isn't right then what is it? I can tell you this; turning the FD off on a single engine approach is BS!

 

[bunman45]

Bunman,

What do you call the simulator time the night before the checkride?

If you want to scare our pilots into a union, at least use facts not myths. You lose credibility every time you post something that is so far from the truth.


TWA 2 ASA FO

The sim the night before the flight check is a practice flight check. When is the last time you had any failures similar to what you had on your type ride? This is what i'm refering to. Not ground training. If you read my second post, you would see i just said their is serious room for improvement and there is. Clearly a nerve is struck here with you. Also, why does only one person have control over ones employment in regards to training rather than your committee who actually still flies the line? I'm Not trying to scare anybody into the union because I don't have to. You guys are doing it all by yourselves. Convince me your training is above and beyond industry standard. If your under the delusion everything is fine in the TC and no changes are needed, then maybe your not the guy for the job. Just sayin.

 

[2dotslow]

Just ask what is happening to a senior 45 captain and then ask yourself why you need a union!

So what happened? From what I hear, he's on a LOA. He still has a job.

 

[warlord19]

For Bunman and Jetmaster, the 2 checkrides given each year are ALMOST 100% driven by FAA requirements for these checkrides ie 2 precision and 2 non-precision approaches, single-enginge approach, etc. It is spelled out in FAA documents. If someone goes into the training center and wants nothing but practice on, say V1 cuts, I imagine the instructors would accommodate this wish as long as the student realized that his 2nd ride would be the normal checkride (and without the benefit of having practiced anything other than the V1 cuts that he(she) requested. The only manuever I am aware of that is not FAA-driven is the raw date approach, which is DO driven. And if Mr. Jetmaster727 is so afraid of flying the plane without a FD, he probably should try another profession...these FD's do fail occasionally, and having practiced in the Sim for such an event is the exact training I would want to have practiced.
WL

 

[brokeflyer]

these FD's do fail occasionally

it's the union's fault.....


haha

 

[warlord19]

Uh, Brokeflyer, we don't have a union(otherwise, it would be it's fault). that's supposed to be a joke for all you humour-challenged folks.
WL

PS, yea, I know it's coming blah blah blah.

 

[brokeflyer]

you're not too bright are you. Think about it some more.

 

[jetmaster727]

For Bunman and Jetmaster, the 2 checkrides given each year are ALMOST 100% driven by FAA requirements for these checkrides ie 2 precision and 2 non-precision approaches, single-enginge approach, etc. It is spelled out in FAA documents. If someone goes into the training center and wants nothing but practice on, say V1 cuts, I imagine the instructors would accommodate this wish as long as the student realized that his 2nd ride would be the normal checkride (and without the benefit of having practiced anything other than the V1 cuts that he(she) requested. The only manuever I am aware of that is not FAA-driven is the raw date approach, which is DO driven. And if Mr. Jetmaster727 is so afraid of flying the plane without a FD, he probably should try another profession...these FD's do fail occasionally, and having practiced in the Sim for such an event is the exact training I would want to have practiced.
WL

If not FAA required then why do it? This is the problem with you guys; when someone makes a valid point you get all defensive and attack the person. I'm
hardly afraid of flying without the FD as I have been doing this for a long time. I mean according to your logic, we should shut down both engines because it could happen, right?
I would seriously question the judgement of a captain who continues to an airport on one engine with the weather at mins and no FD. But what do I know, I've only been flying transport cat airplanes for over 20 years!

 

[FraxJockey]

Actually Jetmaster it ,the raw data approach, is in the ATP PTS with this caveat:

"NOTE: Two precision approaches, utilizing NAVAID equipment for
centerline and glideslope guidance, must be accomplished in
simulated or actual instrument conditions to DA/DH. At least one
approach must be flown manually without the use of an autopilot.
The second approach may be flown via the autopilot, if appropriate,
and if the DA/DH altitude does not violate the authorized minimum
altitude for autopilot operation. Manually flown precision approaches
may use raw data displays or may be flight director assisted, at the
discretion of the examiner.

If the aircraft is equipped with advanced flight instrument displays,
the raw data approach should be flown by reference to the backup
instrumentation as much as is possible with the airplane’s
configuration.

For multiengine airplanes at least one manually controlled precision
approach must be accomplished with a simulated failure of one
powerplant."

http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/airmen/test_standards/pilot/media/FAA-S-8081-5F.pdf

Page 61 of the ATP PTS PDF. I don't know about you, but I would rather fly without a flight director instead of peanut gyros. We don't make this stuff up. As far as a single engine raw data approach, take it up with the 135 certificate holder's D.O. they require this, not Flexjet.

 

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

. If your under the delusion everything is fine in the TC and no changes are needed, then maybe your not the guy for the job. Just sayin.

So your attacks now become personal because you don't like the response given. Sorry I respond to your post with logic and facts. Is that iceberg still "dead ahead"?

Since you seem to think you have a greater understanding of what we should be doing at the training center, please give us some honest suggestions that are workable under the FAR's we operate. We are always open to suggestions on ways to improve "your" training experience.

TWA 2 ASA FO

 

[doh]

it's the union's fault.....


haha

Now that's funny! I don't care who you are!:laugh:

 

[can99]

After seeing both the Flex training and the Bombardier instructors training , give me the guys at flex any day. (now I have offended the Bombardier instructors, so my next recurrent is going to be an adventure).

But out of my last 4 Bombardier based training events, I feel I am actually going backward in standards each time, the standards seem really lax on the other side of the fence, and as for the ground school, its really day and night, what you learn and have to memorize at flex I feel does make you a better pilot than what you do for the 135 world under Bombardier training .

 

[lr45drvr]

The sim the night before the flight check is a practice flight check. When is the last time you had any failures similar to what you had on your type ride? This is what i'm refering to. Not ground training. If you read my second post, you would see i just said their is serious room for improvement and there is. Clearly a nerve is struck here with you. Also, why does only one person have control over ones employment in regards to training rather than your committee who actually still flies the line? I'm Not trying to scare anybody into the union because I don't have to. You guys are doing it all by yourselves. Convince me your training is above and beyond industry standard. If your under the delusion everything is fine in the TC and no changes are needed, then maybe your not the guy for the job. Just sayin.

The only "one person" that controls the destiny of ones employment is YOU. If a pilot goes to a TRB (the commitee, which has line pilot representation, that you seem to disregard) makes a recommendation. I have never seen anyone not recieve more training. In fact the only time DG over rode the recommendation was when the TRB recommended a person be removed from training. He asked the pilot what they thought they needed. That pilot stated she could take her check right now and pass without any problems. She subsequently failed her checkride in stellar fashion and was terminated. So there is one person in control of your employment BUNMAN, and that person is you!