Business Week Article

[pilotyip]

your right that is dumb

Dumb argument.

Point is that passengers are a lot more valuable a payload than car parts.
With respect, look at Fedex- think any airline could have that accident record and so little press.
The responsibility is simply much greater flying people.

You are right how silly of me, we in the cargo business could never understand the awesome burden of that responsibility of being a pax pilot. I mean the responsibility to our families; our company and our profession are nothing compared to pax pilot responsibility. Thank you so much for even responding to one of my posts, I am graced by your insight and hopefully will be a better person because of your interest in my humble place in the pilot pyramid.

 

[jonjuan]

Dumb argument.

Point is that passengers are a lot more valuable a payload than car parts.

The responsibility is simply much greater flying people.

I have seen most of your pax and I disagree.

 

[waveflyer]

Wow- is this really an argument?

 

[jonjuan]

Wow- is this really an argument?

Wow- are you really a year one WN F/O?

 

[waveflyer]

Are you a f^cking nerd?
Ego was not the point geeks

 

[jonjuan]

are you a f^cking nerd?
Geeks

lol.......

 

[ualdriver]

http://members.tripod.com/fly_fast/Psa-182L.jpg

That's PSA flight 182. You can google it if you're not familiar. It collided with a Cessna in the busy southern CA airspace.

Imagine if that was a picture of a Gulfstream Beech 1900 instead of a PSA 727, snapped after it had collided with a light, GA aircraft in the busy south Florida airspace. I have many hours down there, and it's full of GA guys flying around....lots of training.

For those of you who think this Gulfstream Captain should have flown that "legal" TCAS deferral......if you saw the picture of a flaming Gulfstream Beech 1900 going down with your kids, your spouse, or your parents on board, and later found out that the Captain accepted this aircraft with the TCAS inop in order to not cause a delay, would you be OK with that? Would you sue?

Or is it OK to have a PSA 182 once every few decades in order to facilitate airline schedules?

 

[AirCobra]

Dumb argument.

Point is that passengers are a lot more valuable a payload than car parts.
With respect, look at Fedex- think any airline could have that accident record and so little press.
The responsibility is simply much greater flying people.

But what if those people inherited their money?

Wave this is the second nutty statement you have posted in the last few days. You are starting to come off like a bit of a loon. Maybe you should take a breather.

 

[pilotyip]

so what does this mean?

http://members.tripod.com/fly_fast/Psa-182L.jpg

That's PSA flight 182. You can google it if you're not familiar. It collided with a Cessna in the busy southern CA airspace.

Imagine if that was a picture of a Gulfstream Beech 1900 instead of a PSA 727, snapped after it had collided with a light, GA aircraft in the busy south Florida airspace. I have many hours down there, and it's full of GA guys flying around....lots of training.

For those of you who think this Gulfstream Captain should have flown that "legal" TCAS deferral......if you saw the picture of a flaming Gulfstream Beech 1900 going down with your kids, your spouse, or your parents on board, and later found out that the Captain accepted this aircraft with the TCAS inop in order to not cause a delay, would you be OK with that? Would you sue?

Or is it OK to have a PSA 182 once every few decades in order to facilitate airline schedules?

Does this mean in all cases of TCAS deferral the flight should be refused, how about a generator on a 3 generator airplanes, should that also be refused every time? If we never flew there would never be an accident

 

[Scope out RJ's]

Does this mean in all cases of TCAS deferral the flight should be refused, how about a generator on a 3 generator airplanes, should that also be refused every time? If we never flew there would never be an accident

Every time this guy opens his mouth he proves more and more how much of a dipsh!t he really is.
All the more reason age 65 is dangerous!

 

[ualdriver]

Does this mean in all cases of TCAS deferral the flight should be refused, how about a generator on a 3 generator airplanes, should that also be refused every time? If we never flew there would never be an accident

Yip-

It means this: Let's say your wife was on an airplane flying out of ABQ to Disney World to take the grandkids for a vacation. TCAS wasn't working, but the Captain decided to take the aircraft anyway. On approach into MCO the aircraft your wife and grandkids was flying in collided with a Cessna, with pictures like this showing up on the news from people on the ground who happened to catch some shots of that aircraft's final moments. During the course of the investigation you found out that had your wife and grandkid's aircraft had an operable TCAS, it is likely the collision with the Cessna never would have happened.

So Yip, would you sue? Would you be "OK" with the Captain's decision to take the aircraft with a broken TCAS? Wanna bet that you would sue the pants off that airline? Wanna bet that you would be extremely upset that the death of your loved ones could have been avoided if they had simply made the repair instead of flying? Wanna bet that if you were called as a witness you'd be criticizing the Captain's decision to take the plane with TCAS inop? Wanna bet that you wouldn't shrug your shoulders and say, "Oh well, it was a legal deferral" and not take part in any legal action?

So if you're asking me, Yip, it means that if I'm sitting at a station like the Gulfstream Captain was where the repair could have been made and the TCAS was broken, it means fix it and then I'll take the aircraft. No brainer to me and most of the guys I fly with at my airline from what I have seen. Things like TCAS and EGPWS shouldn't even be deferrable IMO, but unfortunately we have a weak regulatory partner in the FAA, so that's where the Captain needs to step in and fill that gaping void left by that organization.

And if you think I'm going to waste my time arguing about "every time" pretend scenarios, forget it. Find some new guys to play with over on the Training and Instruction forum if you want to talk about "what if's." I'm sure they'd get a lot of the discussion.

If you decide to answer this post YIP, in the first sentence please state whether you would sue or not. Yes or No please.

 

[pilotyip]

would not sue

There it was in the first sentence. I am not a safety conscious as you; I can see from your posts you are way above me when it comes to understanding aviation safety. So it would be foolish to even attempt to match wits with someone as safety conscious as you. BTW I fly non-TCAS airplanes into some of the busiest airports in the country. I do not feel it is a risk. To each his own. Keep up the good work

Yip-

It means this: Let's say your wife was on an airplane flying out of ABQ to Disney World to take the grandkids for a vacation. TCAS wasn't working, but the Captain decided to take the aircraft anyway. On approach into MCO the aircraft your wife and grandkids was flying in collided with a Cessna, with pictures like this showing up on the news from people on the ground who happened to catch some shots of that aircraft's final moments. During the course of the investigation you found out that had your wife and grandkid's aircraft had an operable TCAS, it is likely the collision with the Cessna never would have happened.

So Yip, would you sue? Would you be "OK" with the Captain's decision to take the aircraft with a broken TCAS? Wanna bet that you would sue the pants off that airline? Wanna bet that you would be extremely upset that the death of your loved ones could have been avoided if they had simply made the repair instead of flying? Wanna bet that if you were called as a witness you'd be criticizing the Captain's decision to take the plane with TCAS inop? Wanna bet that you wouldn't shrug your shoulders and say, "Oh well, it was a legal deferral" and not take part in any legal action?

So if you're asking me, Yip, it means that if I'm sitting at a station like the Gulfstream Captain was where the repair could have been made and the TCAS was broken, it means fix it and then I'll take the aircraft. No brainer to me and most of the guys I fly with at my airline from what I have seen. Things like TCAS and EGPWS shouldn't even be deferrable IMO, but unfortunately we have a weak regulatory partner in the FAA, so that's where the Captain needs to step in and fill that gaping void left by that organization.

And if you think I'm going to waste my time arguing about "every time" pretend scenarios, forget it. Find some new guys to play with over on the Training and Instruction forum if you want to talk about "what if's." I'm sure they'd get a lot of the discussion.

If you decide to answer this post YIP, in the first sentence please state whether you would sue or not. Yes or No please.

 

[waveflyer]

Sarcasm is the protest of the weak-

 

[ualdriver]

There it was in the first sentence. I am not a safety conscious as you; I can see from your posts you are way above me when it comes to understanding aviation safety. So it would be foolish to even attempt to match wits with someone as safety conscious as you. BTW I fly non-TCAS airplanes into some of the busiest airports in the country. I do not feel it is a risk. To each his own. Keep up the good work

You wouldn't sue, huh? You'd opt out of the resulting class action? You wouldn't be a bit upset with the Captain and/or the airline you entrusted your wife and grand kids for flying around with inop TCAS? Somehow, I doubt it, but I guess I'll take your word for it. Personally, if that happened to me, saying I would be extremely vengeful would be an understatement. As a paying passenger (which I am a few times a year with the family), I'd thank the Captain if I found out he delayed my flight because the TCAS was inop.

I second the thought about your sarcasm. I will keep up the good work. When you're flying around with your TCAS inop, just make sure you have your transponder on so I can at least avoid you if one of us screws up an altitude or heading.

 

[pilotyip]

different world

I second the thought about your sarcasm. I will keep up the good work. When you're flying around with your TCAS inop, just make sure you have your transponder on so I can at least avoid you if one of us screws up an altitude or heading.

Inop, how about not even on the equipment list, we live and fly in different worlds, if it is legal to fly, and the trip can be competed safely; I fly. And yes I do keep my transponder on at all times. BTW I would receive some compensation for the accident, which would be satisfactory. My dislike of ambulance chasing atty's is so strong, I would not want to be involved in anything to do with them. I am older, comfortable approaching my retirement. Still living the dream of a 5-year, I am truly a very lucky guy.