Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AIN on Avantair

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Honest, Mom. I was just trying to push the goat over the fence. :)
 
Yeah......the one on the left is oil pressure in the yellow. We were asked to fly a few more days like that before we could take it into maintenance. I have video too....LOL
 
Yeah......the one on the left is oil pressure in the yellow. We were asked to fly a few more days like that before we could take it into maintenance. LOL

And you said "no way", right? LOL
 
Broke, know what a new PT6 costs? I don't either, but I bet it's a lot. Do you really believe that they were asked to fly with the oil in the yellow? Also, he was the copilot. It would have been his job to say no. If he were telling the truth, he would have flagrantly violated an FAR. One or the other has to be true. I know which one I believe.
 
Last edited:
This is laughable...

If BeenThereSpunIt's (BTSI) avatar picture is true then the needle is either in the green or the yellow as the picture doesn't really show.

Of those two options either:

A. It's in the green and there is no problem, or

B. It's in the yellow and there is a problem. If that is the case then there are two options;

.....B1. It's in the yellow and got fixed, or

.....B2. It's in the yellow and Mr. BTSI flew it.



If A or B1 are true then great and there is no story to gloat about.

However, if B2 is true (as BTSI proclaims) then BTSI admits to having flown a plane outside the aircrafts limitations and is now bragging about doing so. If I were to unintentionally violate an FAR I'd fill out a NASA report. In contrast, BTSI takes a picture (and the video he now proclaims) and proceeds to INTENTIONALLY violate the limitation.

This is the 2nd or 3rd time I've addressed his avatar with the oil guage and once again I'd like to point out that,

1. At Avantair I have NEVER been pressed to fly broken equipment, and

2. If BTSI has been pressed to fly broken equipment then he is, as an FO, provided toe brakes and does not have to allow the plane to take off.

If B2 is true then BTSI knew he was breaking the limitations of the aircraft when he left. Rather than get maintenance involved or call the chief pilot like a normal pilot, he photographs and videos his FAR transgression and then posts it on a public forum after he quits.

Remember, BTSI quit, not for pushing him to fly, but for not upgrading him in these extremely tough economic times in the time frame that he expected.

I do believe any rational person can deduce exactly what happened here. And once again I'd like to point out that as a current Piaggio pilot familiar with this gauge, I can not ascertain where that needle lies in BTSI avatar. It looks like it's on the line to me.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top