Citation Shares

[metrofo]

The first time that C/S takes an a/c off the runway I GUARANTEE someone will make this known to the FAA. If there is any evidence that the management of C/S fosters an enviornment that calls for comfort over safety, this company is F@CKED. Dont get me wrong, I really like the idea of a comment card for the passengers/owners, but just for things these people are qualified to make judgements on. You can place a "notes" section at the bottom and if they choose to comment on the landing, then fine, but you should not be soliciting comments on the pilots technical performance. That type of evaluation should only be done by the qualified crewmembers and instructors of CitationShares.
One more thing, should it become common practice to base evaluations and promotions of individuals on such comments, or in any way, shape or form, wind up in a persons employment file, I can also guarantee you will find the vast majority of your crewmembers will seek the "protection" of a lobor union.

 

[Diesel]

Skyking650 Thank you for such a candid and honest resonse, it was a true pleasure reading it. I just logged on after a couple of days of beating the snow storm of the NE to death. IT's been one of the toughest tours here. Long delays, a lot of calls to the PM's, bad runways, deicing problems.

I fly an Ultra every landing feels like a contolled crash. We landed today all over the place and I grinned on short final because I knew we were going to land really firm. (normal for an ultra) Wind is not a straight legged airplane's friend. Then by the miracle of god the plane touched down light as a feather. The other guy turned to me and said "jeezus I didn't expect that." HE was THE GUY FLYING. I knew it had nothing to do with his skil it just touched down right. The pax were happy.

What would we have done if we landed firm or hard. The wind was +- 10 on landing. He did a great job fighting the plane all the way down. Would the pax had known that I don't think so.

I don't go back and explain firm landings. It's an ultra. It sucks to taxi, and land. Excuses aren't what is needed, information is.

Now with respect. I think our two companies are made up dferently. We have schedulers, dispatchers, weather, flight managers, and crew managers.

I'm not sure but I think what your talking about in your company is that schedulers are dispatchers. For us we have a different department they are there to just schedule, dispatchers are there to dispatch. That's it. We are just too big for many jobs for one person.

Our PM's job is to answer questions. They all live in cmh. Some trips require pm approval. They need to do runway stuff. I'm not sure if that's what you do but we might have to call our PM's 3 times a day or i might not call them in 2 tours.

What do PM's do at citaton shares? Not being a pain just trying to see how the two companies are set up.

I think merit works for a small company. Not one with 2000 plus pilots. Just because you bid an upgrade doesn't mean you are going to pass, it's just an oportunity to try.

 

[Skyking650]

Diesel,

Thanks for your response. Its nice to see constructive comments and views brought forward on this forum amoungst so much of the bashing and beating that is so common on these message boards.

Our schedulers used to wear many hats..they still do, but we have hired several licensed dispatchers to intercept and deal with the daily flight activity and deal with the flight crews. Being a growing start up from 2 years ago, many of us (including our Schedulers) know each other, and to some degree our personalities and demeanors. In my opinion this is a good thing. Sometimes when a company gets to big they loose track of some of these little things. Many commercials on TV have used this as great material for audiences.

I have flown the Ultra..it will humble even the best of us. The point I made about the passengers/owners commenting on the landing on our comment cards was meant to show that we really do care about quality and are not afraid to allow our customers to comment on anything that they want. Whether they are aviation oriented or not, doesn't matter...the fact that THEY think that we care about each and every aspect of their ownership experience does.

Our PMs are flying Captains. I wouldnt have it any other way.

Take care

 

[Majik]

SkyKing650,
I agree with Diesel, I really enjoyed the candor of your post. I also agree there is merit to the "merit system" for a smaller company. I think there are some pilots flying fractional that really don't understand the "customer service" aspect and importance of this job. Some like this added challenge; others wish for the airline style of little to no interaction with passengers.
The danger of CS's system is that the bigger you get, the harder it will be to fairly judge and award merit equally to deserving pilots. Also, there will be those who, through little fault of their own, will be judged unfairly due to uncontrolled circumstances. You sound like you are one of the "good guys" that will take the time to use the scale of merit with a fair hand.
I used to be the Chief Pilot of a small flight department and I'm sure there were times that I incorrectly blamed cancelled flights or maintenance problems on someone that may have just been consistently unlucky. I also had the odd pilot that tried to abuse every rule to his personal advantage. It sure felt good letting him go and increased the morale of the pilot group.
I enjoy the customer service part of the job but I agree with Lrjet55 that it sure is reassuring to have 284 in my back pocket. That doesn't mean that you can't be fired if you deserve to; it means that it's harder to fire you if you don't derserve it.
Good luck and keep your objectivity.

 

[Turbinehead]

Graded on landings by customers

Hey...

If the customers knew better, they would grade you and A on a rough landing and an F for a screecher. Why you ask?

Citations are supposed to be landed with very very little flare...that is if you read how the test pilots came up with their landing numbers.

Idle power at 50 feet and vref. Means you gonna controlled crash. IF you dont, you are not doing it the way Cessna wants you to, and your landing distance numbers will not be as promised from old Clyde.

Shows ya how much passengers know.

 

[Toploader]

I do not want to start a thread on landing technique for the Ultra, but I will say this.

An Ultra CAN be landed smoothly, and in the touchdown zone. Yes, it takes practice to do it consistently, and after only 1,000 hrs in the thing I believe I had a 70% chance of a decent landing every time, regardless of conditions. And I am not that great of a pilot.

I believe it depends greatly on being trimmed for no faster than ref+10, and I mean on speed and hands off on the glidepath. At about 100 ft, start slowly reducing power 1 or 2% at a time to slow to ref. Retard the throttles over the threshold and flare into the 1000 ft marker.

Guys who try to carry extra power and speed in hopes of milking their way to a smoothie just use up an extra 2000 ft of rwy before hammering it on.

There you go, landing 101 by Toploader.

 

[gump88]

I tend to agree with Turbinehead regarding doing it "by the book." However when facing an 11000 ft dry runway, I am gonna take an extra 1000 feet and try for the greaser. 50% of the time, my attempts are futile, but its fun trying. If I am facing a short runway, its over the fence at Vref, power to idle, and just enough flare to arrest the sink.

Good discussion!
gump

 

[Toploader]

Gump, I gotta respectfully disagree. The touchdown point should never be considered a variable just to "grease" a landing.

To me, one should become proficient at hitting the touchdown zone first , every time. Then get proficient at hitting the touchdown zone AND getting a respectable landing out of it.

I have seen a few people, myself included, who have been surprised at how hard it can be to hit the touchdown zone on a short runway after using 2,000 ft or more for the previous 50 landings. It takes a lot of practice and discipline to hit that spot every time. I guarantee, that if you're aiming for it on all of your landings, you'll never float very far or undershoot by much.

This is a good discussion.

Toploader

 

[gump88]

My God, how have I survived 20 years of flying???? Just KIDDING fellows!

Seriously, I agree. Maybe I failed to communicate my point. I always "pick a spot", however; with an extremely long runway I will hold it off a little more to try for the smoother touchdown. But I shoot for a minimum float/short field landing at least every other time to keep up the proficiency. You are correct in saying that if you always accept the long flares/floats, when its time to get it down and stopped in 3500 feet, the rust will be glaring at you as it antiskids off the end.

Next tour, I will work on it some more. I am always learning.

gump

 

[CL600Pilot]

Having personally experienced some of Gump's better efforts all I can say is that ya'll really need to put him in something with trailing link gear so the poor pax at least have a chance

Seriously - I know it's a little 'off topic' but this is one of the better threads that has been on here for a while. Just out curiosity what would be the 'actual landing distance' of an Ultra at a typical landing weight?? Anybody have a QRH handy??

CL600