ASA clears flightsafety pool.

[MartinFierro]

Hey Martinfierro, glad to hear ATA works out for some. How long ago was that though? Maybe before the airlines were onto ATA's policy of logging PIC time? Wanna discuss that for the rest of the readers? I bet they'd get a big kick out of it, especially avbug! Question: How do 3 pilots log PIC time on the same flight in a light twin?

Well, Eagle was taking grads from ATA up until 9/11. Yes, that logging of PIC in a light twin IS a bunch of crap, but hey, it is legal per the FARs (safety pilot time, for those who are curious, although I wouldn't recommend it), and both ASA and Eagle accepted it. 3 people? More like two.

BTW, CoEx was the airline that sent everybody back, again according to what I heard, not necessarily fact.

Yes, I heard several interviewed there, but they didn't take anyone, because a few people on the board who decided who gets hired didn't like the idea of low-timers. Such is the way it goes.

What is your deal anyway? You apparently have no concrete knowledge of ATA, and seem to be really bitter towards that place. Did you once go there? If so, you may well have a right to be bitter. I know many people that have a legitimate grudge against that place. If not, then you hardly are in a position to pass judgment, especially when you can't get your facts straight.

As for me, I have no love for the place, don't get me wrong. But I don't think it is responsible or helpful to anyone to spread misinformation based on erroneous rumors.

I heard that the guys we got from ATA didn't do too well overall. I heard they were good guys, just was too hard to go right into the jet from a light twin. Go figure....

Unfortunately, a number of ATA people did wash out of training at ASA. But, there are also a lot that had no problems and are flying the line currently, in all three airplanes (E120, ATR, CL-65), most already off probation. Also, I heard that in the most recent new-hire class, many of the FlightSafety guys washed out, I take it from having sat in the pool for so long and maybe not keeping proficient.

 

[Ted Striker]

That could be true, about the pool at ASA. I have heard guys have been swimming for a long time now. We did have a newhire class at the beginning of March ( I believe that was the date). I remember it being fairly small, less than 20 I think.

 

[172driver]

Actually, I have nothing against ATA, and prefaced my statements with the explanation that I did not know if they were factual or just rumor. The only beef I have with them is the way they fly. I routinely have problems affecting my safety with ATA planes in the practice area and around airports.

No use of the radio to announce position in the practice area, failure to work one area, dangerous nontowered field operations, etc. Yesterday I was turning xwind to downwind and rolled out to see an ATA plane flying across the field at TPA, turning right into the downwind. Didn't miss him by much and probably wouldn't have missed at all if I hadn't seen him. When I 'complimented' him on his pattern entry, the CFI blamed it on the student pilot which I thought was chickens**t.

ATA also routinely shoots instrument approaches at nontowered airports without talking to ATC. It's always fun to be outbound on an approach and have traffic inbound, not talking, landing whatever runway they please. Not illegal but unsafe, IMO. Also, not good training. Why not talk to ATC like everyone else...it's a big part of instrument flight.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but did ATA not get in trouble just a year or two ago for their logging of PIC time by three, not two, pilots. 1. Student under the hood = sole manipulator. 2. Student in front seat acting as safety pilot. 3. CFI in back giving flight instruction as an authorized instructor. All legal according to 61.51 but...come on. Those of us paying our dues the legal and moral way take some offense to shortcuts like this. Maybe they didn't do it when you were there?

 

[MartinFierro]

172Driver,

I am sorry to hear that ATA students and instructors these days are flying like you say they are. That does appear to be a problem. It wasn't like that when I was there. Perhaps the quality of instruction has gone down, I don't know.

As for the 3 people logging the time, that did not happen when I was there. Perhaps some instructors log it when they shouldn't from the back seat. If people do it on a regular basis now, I don't know. That would be wrong, obviously.

 

[Zarathustra]

I have more of a problem with ATA and their completely unethical business practices. They continued advertising for several months, in magazines like Flying, ASA as a bridge airline when ASA had pulled the plug on them and their program for poor quality. In addition, with several students they insisted they could not return money due them when the students became fed up with the poor instruction and decided to go to places such as FSI. They only returned the rightful money when complaints to the Attorney General office of Florida had them knocking on the door there in Orlando.

I bear no one any ill will.

To a prospective student, I would advise steering very clear of the ATA operation: it will cost you time and money in the long run.

 

[Sooneruga]

ASA, FSI

I've talked to the HR folks at ASA and they did seem to be very happy with FSI, but I didn't get the same impression about ATA.
And I don't think they will be re-opening the Fast Track program anytime soon (at least a year).

Also, it is my understanding that many of the people who operated ATA about a year or so ago are now running the show at TAB Express

 

[Bluto]

172 driver,
61.51 allows a flight instructor to log pic time when giving instruction, however, 61.195 (g) and 91.109 seem to pretty clearly indicate that logging this time from the back seat is not approved. I think we can all agree that any time logged from the back seat as an instructor is shady at best. Two pilots logging PIC through the safety pilot rules is, however, completely legitimate.

 

[Eagle]

.... I routinely have problems affecting my safety with ATA planes in the practice area and around airports.

No use of the radio to announce position ....... Not illegal but unsafe, IMO. Also, not good training. Why not talk to ATC like everyone else...it's a big part of instrument flight.

blah blah blah.

it is your responsibility to maintain separation. not every airplane has a radio,

Sounds like they are just prepping you for some experience in the real aviation world.

Unless of course they fly gliders. Gliders suck.

 

[172driver]

"it is your responsibility to maintain separation. not every airplane has a radio"
"Sounds like they are just prepping you for some experience in the real aviation world."

I did most of my initial training in the mountains in California where almost nobody had a radio and I didn't mind it a bit, so settle down. BTW, how many mountains (not east coast hills) have you flown in? That's real world. However, we are now flying and practicing within the lateral limits of Orlando Class B airspace where there is a very busy mix of IFR, VFR, training, and aerobatics. Yes, it is my responsibility to maintain separation, and I do, of course. ATA flies brand new airplanes that DO have radios. I feel that they should be used--helps everybody maintain separation.

I think almost everybody would agree that flying instrument approaches in busy airspace without talking to ATC is not very smart. It's a pain in the a** for ATC and the other pilots. Also, as I said before, it's not good training. When are you going to do this in the "real world?" Spoke to an ATA student in another thread who said they have a very tough time talking to ATC because they do a lot of practice approaches without it.

I don't mind a/c at uncontrolled fields not using radios. It is something we have to expect in the "real world" and is good training for my students to have to keep an eye out for this. In fact, I make my students do it to simulate electrical failure or lost comms.

"61.51 allows a flight instructor to log pic time when giving instruction, however, 61.195 (g) and 91.109 seem to pretty clearly indicate that logging this time from the back seat is not approved. I think we can all agree that any time logged from the back seat as an instructor is shady at best. Two pilots logging PIC through the safety pilot rules is, however, completely legitimate."

Bluto,
Agreed. Although those regs don't specifically state that the CFI must be sitting at the station with the dual controls, I believe that is the intent of the regs you mentioned.

Two pilots logging PIC is completely legit. However, I believe the airlines look down upon those hours as a safety pilot. To do it once in a while for instrument practice is totally OK, but to build 500 PIC multi hrs, as they do at ATA, is a little questionable IMO. How many of those hrs do you really think they were under the hood? Employers aren't stupid. 3 pilots logging it, while maybe legal by the letter of the law, is very shady. I think we all agree on that.

Fly safe and have fun all.

 

[Eagle]

I did most of my initial training in the mountains in California where almost nobody had a radio and I didn't mind it a bit, so settle down. BTW, how many mountains (not east coast hills) have you flown in? That's real world.

WoW!! you were a student pilot in the mountains of cali. heaven sakes alive, I stand corrected.

I have plenty of time (think hours with zeros after them) flying terrain, (look it up) As soon as you start flying in the FLs give me a call. or better yet, when you start to work with equipment that doesn't have a propeller...naw never mind