ASA DTW CP pulls IAD pilot offline for refusing aircraft

[SpaceShipEarth]

No, but I agree that "THERE" is a difference between legal and safe. Just saying...

 

[Holy Shiite]

It would be nice if a little birdie would get the feds in the loop on this. HS

 

[airplane wizard]

Just make the FO hand fly the trip

 

[CRJ puppy]

yeah surprised it wasn't 777 who started it :laugh:

If you are too fatigued to fly without an A/P, how will you be able to handle an emergency? Can't fly the arrival into LGA? How about setting V/S to 1.5 and follow the FD. It's not rocket science and any captain, let alone FO should be able to do it. If you are too tired to fly without AP, then you are too tired to fly with it on and you should call out fatigued. If they MEL is legal and pax safety is not compromised (ie APU in the summer, etc), then stop being lazy and do your job.

Agreed.

 

[eaglepilot6]

There's a big difference in accepting an aircraft because we're trained to handle no AP, no FMS, on a bad WX night down the East Coast (did it myself a few weeks ago), and refusing an aircraft based on all that + long duty or rough day (fatigue). Sure, any one of us SHOULD be able to handle multiple deferrals on any given day, but when you add in fatigue for whatever reason the game changes. Fatigue makes us all do dumb stuff, even the best of us (DeucesWild "Maverick").

I don't know the full story, and I doubt anyone on here really knows all the details, but good call by the PIC for refusing the aircraft based on what I've heard about this so far. Sure the crew could probably physically do it, but lets say they take off and halfway to HSV they have a full electrical failure. I know I don't want to find myself in a situation like that after this kind of day. It's unnecessary to put yourself, your crew, and those happy, trusting passengers in that kind of situation, however unlikely it is.

Safety > Completion Factor. End of story.

And yes, ASA does have a fatigue call out policy, but it's up to the CP to determine if it's warranted and if you get paid. Unfortunately, I feel this leads to people who need/want the money coming to work when they have no business behind the yoke. (Just my $.02)

 

[altimaklr]

Full electric failure would probably 86 the autopilot

 

[russtgol]

It would be nice if a little birdie would get the feds in the loop on this. HS

You sound like a child..I'm Telling!!! Why don't you tell your mommy....No wonder why the general public hates pilots..

 

[Abernathy]

You know, with all that "threat and error management" stuff we go through in training, you'd think the company would abide by the same philosophy.

 

[Freebrd]

That sheet is all eyewash, means nothing

 

[SSDD]

All the internal ASA drama aside, if you are too tired to fly without the autopilot, then you're too tired to fly. Period. Its a good thing to have, but it is not a necessity. If you are that tired, but a fatigue call may be in order.

 

[DeucesWild]

Tell me why you think I was weak to refuse the aircraft and I will show you what the attitude profile of "machoism" and how that has lead to multiple aircraft disasters.

I have almost 15k hours and did not feel weak nor did I feel like less of a pilot. In fact, I don't think a whole lot of pilots have the ballz to refuse a perfectly legal flight based on safety. And I am sure you will agree that their is a difference between legal and safe. As PIC, I need to evaluate every situation for legallity, safety, and practicallity. All 3 have different definitions that I need to follow.

So, how was I weak to refuse a perfectly legal flight.

I am not being 'macho'. I am just stating the simple facts.

I get paid to FLY airplanes. I can do that with or without an autopilot.

Obviously I don't know you or your abilities. If you cannot operate a part 121 aircraft SAFELY and LEGALLY without an autopilot, maybe you need to click the autopilot off once in a while, and relearn how to fly, or find a different profession.

 

[Clutch]

I am not being 'macho'. I am just stating the simple facts.

I get paid to FLY airplanes. I can do that with or without an autopilot.

Obviously I don't know you or your abilities. If you cannot operate a part 121 aircraft SAFELY and LEGALLY without an autopilot, maybe you need to click the autopilot off once in a while, and relearn how to fly, or find a different profession.

What a doosh

 

[Nevets]

Keep in mind that in any deferral, the pilot still has to make the determination that it does not constitute a hazard to the aircraft, even if it's legal. That's actually an FAR.

 

[Maria]

Amazing how the little pukes are supposed to fly aircraft on a wing and a prayer, yet, I sat in the back of a SWA bird (who's airline everyone tends to worship on here), and the captain informed us that the autopilot was inoperative and they were currently deciding if they were going to take the flight. Because it was the autopilot, SWA gave them the right to refuse the aircraft, no matter that it was a short hop, clear night with a full moon, in the mountain west, and only their second leg of the day. Class act, SWA. Too bad the regionals don't understand.

BTW, if Captain, those four stripes mean you never have to raise your voice. If FO, those three stripes mean never having to raise the voice either, you choice of actions and the consequences are a bit different than those of the Captain, but, if you're not there, the flight can't go 'til you are replaced. Then, the flight you don't want to be on goes without you, and, you are safe. If you're not willing to tell the person that has the power to fire you, "no", you're not ready for commercial aviation at any level.

 

[makersmarc]

No wonder why the general public hates pilots..

Really?

 

[blesko]

I've kept my mouth shut here, but its time to chime in. We have a company challenging of an FAR. 91.3 "captains authority." This is a serious issue folks. Furthermore The pilot-in-command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.” FAR 121.535 (d) further states: “Each pilot in command of an aircraft is, during flight time, in command of the aircraft and crew and is responsible for the safety of the passengers, crewmembers, cargo, and airplane.”

Read the PREAMBLE to the MEL. I doubt many of you have, but I'll post the highpoints.

Operators are responsible for exercising the necessary operational control to ensure that an acceptable level of safety is maintained. When operating with multiple inoperative items, the interrelationships between those items and the effect on aircraft operation and crew workload will be considered.​

Assuming what I read from this is true (this is FI afterall), the PIC did not determine there was an acceptable level of safety with the multiple deferrals. Furthermore, when MEL's are written, they must account for the "next critical failure." With four deferrals, what's next? ​

Airplanes most certainly can and should be hand flown from time to time, and can be hand flown well and safely. BUT, do we handfly in the sim during an emergency situation? No, the autopilot is ALWAYS used. You think the crew is weak, take your next pro check with the autopilot off and let me know afterward how well it went. ​

The crews, in complying with the MEL MUST comply with the preamble and consider the next critical failure. ​

 

[ASA_Aviator]

I've kept my mouth shut here, but its time to chime in. We have a company challenging of an FAR. 91.3 "captains authority." This is a serious issue folks. Furthermore The pilot-in-command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.” FAR 121.535 (d) further states: “Each pilot in command of an aircraft is, during flight time, in command of the aircraft and crew and is responsible for the safety of the passengers, crewmembers, cargo, and airplane.”

Read the PREAMBLE to the MEL. I doubt many of you have, but I'll post the highpoints.

Operators are responsible for exercising the necessary operational control to ensure that an acceptable level of safety is maintained. When operating with multiple inoperative items, the interrelationships between those items and the effect on aircraft operation and crew workload will be considered.​

Assuming what I read from this is true (this is FI afterall), the PIC did not determine there was an acceptable level of safety with the multiple deferrals. Furthermore, when MEL's are written, they must account for the "next critical failure." With four deferrals, what's next? ​

Airplanes most certainly can and should be hand flown from time to time, and can be hand flown well and safely. BUT, do we handfly in the sim during an emergency situation? No, the autopilot is ALWAYS used. You think the crew is weak, take your next pro check with the autopilot off and let me know afterward how well it went. ​

The crews, in complying with the MEL MUST comply with the preamble and consider the next critical failure. ​

I think this thread has a bad case of "we don't know the entire story." But in typical Flight Info fashion, we have jumped to a lot of conclusions.

 

[JumpersAway]

Why is it so difficult for many folks to understand it has everything to do with workload and stress management, and nothing to do with stick and rudder skills. This post is rampant with posters that should continue to remain first officers, based on poor judgement and views of what being an airline captain is truly about. Sitting in the left seat and having the 4th stripe has far more to do with judgement than stick and rudder skills.

It's fine flying with a deferred AP until something else breaks................have fun doing all that with multiple deferrals, a green FO, and in heavy weather. Running an intensive QRH procedure with all that is going to be all sorts of sporty.

 

["TheBigPicture"]

Can't hand fly in RVSM....but I still get your point.

Actually you can, as long as ATC agrees to it...but I get YOUR point.

 

[TOOL CRIB]

I've got a great idea... you ready for this? Its called...a jump to conclusions mat!