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
Corp. pilots and 'other' job duties ?
- Thread starter VA AV8R
- Start date
- Watchers 5
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
avbug,
Ok. I understand. The reason for the question was spurred by your last statement of your previous post.
I have to applaud your efforts while assuming that you performed all of these duties because you have a love for flying. Everyone has their own story to tell about how they got where they are in this business. I won't tell mine here...hard to capsulize.
I will say this. Professional flying and doing it well is demanding for all of us who are below the genius IQ level. There are no and I mean no Master of All Trades. I have flown with hundreds of pilots over the years. The one thing I have discerned is that the person that is a master of a similar but still different trade is not going to be the best pilot. Mentally it is pretty much impossible unless one is extremely intelligent as well as extremely physically capable. Few have the capability to compartmentalize what they are doing at any given time without allowing outside distractions affect their performance. Basically the more outside responsibilites or personal distractions they have the less capable they are of hitting the bullseye day in and day out.
Some, but not all of the reasons that scheduled air carriers have regimented and well defined duties is because of insurability. The same holds true for 135 or 91 operations. Risk management drives the train. Unless you are an operator that is self insured then you must comply with underwriters' expectations. Some underwriters are now requiring a copy of your ops manual for their approval before they will carry you. What are the red flags to them? Experienced pilots, aircraft type changes, crewmember changes and regimented SOPs that follow established standards and job descriptions of all crewmembers. Weaknesses in the written manual can cause real problems, not only for underwriters but for the people who are operating and or maintaining the insureds' aircraft. It is most important to follow the written SOPs since they reduce risk, assuming they are written well.
Now let's put this into perspective. On a somewhat complex aircraft there may be 300 checklist items and >200 written tasks to comply with on each leg of flight. This does not include external ground duties that one might be responsible for.
I personally did not come into aviation employment from the silver spoon route but I know of others who have. It doesn't really matter to me when I look at pilot's resumes for filling positions. I do look for experience and expressed capabilities to get the job done safely, day in and day out. We also use testing in the hiring process to determine a number of other attributes, including whether one might be suicidal, etc. I am sure your comment about being occasionally suicidal was meant in jest. I am right aren't I?
Bottom line is that yes, flying da plane and associated, related duties are enough for most reasonable people. Where I am employed that is what is expected. They want us to be Masters, particularly when they are on board.
I am glad that you are, for the most part, enjoying your job. You should! Life is too short not to atleast enjoy your chosen profession.
Ok. I understand. The reason for the question was spurred by your last statement of your previous post.
I have to applaud your efforts while assuming that you performed all of these duties because you have a love for flying. Everyone has their own story to tell about how they got where they are in this business. I won't tell mine here...hard to capsulize.
I will say this. Professional flying and doing it well is demanding for all of us who are below the genius IQ level. There are no and I mean no Master of All Trades. I have flown with hundreds of pilots over the years. The one thing I have discerned is that the person that is a master of a similar but still different trade is not going to be the best pilot. Mentally it is pretty much impossible unless one is extremely intelligent as well as extremely physically capable. Few have the capability to compartmentalize what they are doing at any given time without allowing outside distractions affect their performance. Basically the more outside responsibilites or personal distractions they have the less capable they are of hitting the bullseye day in and day out.
Some, but not all of the reasons that scheduled air carriers have regimented and well defined duties is because of insurability. The same holds true for 135 or 91 operations. Risk management drives the train. Unless you are an operator that is self insured then you must comply with underwriters' expectations. Some underwriters are now requiring a copy of your ops manual for their approval before they will carry you. What are the red flags to them? Experienced pilots, aircraft type changes, crewmember changes and regimented SOPs that follow established standards and job descriptions of all crewmembers. Weaknesses in the written manual can cause real problems, not only for underwriters but for the people who are operating and or maintaining the insureds' aircraft. It is most important to follow the written SOPs since they reduce risk, assuming they are written well.
Now let's put this into perspective. On a somewhat complex aircraft there may be 300 checklist items and >200 written tasks to comply with on each leg of flight. This does not include external ground duties that one might be responsible for.
I personally did not come into aviation employment from the silver spoon route but I know of others who have. It doesn't really matter to me when I look at pilot's resumes for filling positions. I do look for experience and expressed capabilities to get the job done safely, day in and day out. We also use testing in the hiring process to determine a number of other attributes, including whether one might be suicidal, etc. I am sure your comment about being occasionally suicidal was meant in jest. I am right aren't I?
Bottom line is that yes, flying da plane and associated, related duties are enough for most reasonable people. Where I am employed that is what is expected. They want us to be Masters, particularly when they are on board.
I am glad that you are, for the most part, enjoying your job. You should! Life is too short not to atleast enjoy your chosen profession.
I understand your assertion that one should concentrate all one's efforts while flying the airplane. However, I have never permitted outside influences into the cockpit. A wise pilot, a mentor, once told me that I should place all other values in my life second to my flying. I questioned that, placing my theological beliefs and my family far ahead.
He made the observation that unless I placed the operation of the airplane as my most important priority, I might not live to drive my car, see my children, or attend church. He was right. Point taken.
However, once the flight is over, there is nothing degrading or demeaning about requiring a pilot to do other duties. I know an awful lot of pilots out there who work two weeks on and two off, or even less...working a week out of every month and drawing considerable salaries for the amount of actual work done. I know a lot of very lazy pilots, who whine about the little work that they actually do. More pilots I meet are whiners, than not, and as a result, I feel a great deal of contempt toward such a crowd. I associate with them every day.
I have worked, and work, under various certificate holders, on-demand, unscheduled, scheduled, etc. I've done it in small and large airplanes, single engine airplanes, multi engine airplanes, piston, turboprop, turbojet. In no case have I ever been less than professional, less than devoted to the job. In virtually every case, I have had multiple assignments. Outside assignments including Director of Maintenance, Director of Safety, etc. Did these impact my ability to fly the airplane, plan a flight, or conduct one? No.
In many cases, my employment has been in large part due to my certification and ability to get the job done...all of it. Not simply flying the airplane (which let's face it...a monkey can do). Many jobs have required someone who can turn wrenches, and that division of labor, flying and knowing the airplane more intimately than my wife, has kept me alive.
Conversely, I've known others who felt that doing the parts of the job that I did, were beneath them. They refused. Several particular events, which I am not at liberty to discuss in detail, resulted in multiple fatalities. Crews died, aircraft were destroyed. It is my opinion and belief that had these crews invested themselves as they were supposed to, the events that unfolded in their separate cases might (being an operative word), have been prevented. They might be alive today. Their stolwort refusal to expand their job description was enjoyed at the peril and cost of their lives.
Will this happen because a crewmember whines about restocking coffee cups? Probably not (allowing for the possibility of an errant irate CEO when the flight runs out of coffee cups). But in other areas it might. Peril to life or limb is hardly relevant, however; the fact that an employer tasks a pilot with duties that extend beyond the manipulation of the controls is hardly warrant for alarm, nor license to whine...yet I hear a lot of pilots doing it.
I was invited by an associate to make application to a particular fractional operator. His description of the job made it sound attractive, and I considered the idea. He allowed me access to a private web board being used exclusively by pilots of that company. I took advantage of that access, monitoring the board for about four months, learning about the privileges and gripes in the company.
I was amazed at the number of folks who seemd to sincerely believe that flying a light two-engine turbojet who thought they merited two hundred fifty thousand dollars a year, and who actually suggested they strike to get it. Who whined bloody murder about carrying a bag for a passenger...how such horrors should never be heaped upon them. At length, I decided the job didn't sound so bad, but I didn't really want to be stuck on the road working with the likes of those who complained so bitterly, and so constantly. I wondered how they could do their job when they were so unhappy in their position.
I'm sure they didn't speak for their company, nor for their profession, nor did they represent all pilots in the firm. Their comments are echoed in pilot lounges around the country as I sit and listen to this comment or that.
It is my opinion that stereotypically, and often in real time, pilots tend to be quite full of themselves. I can't count the number of times I've walked into a FBO wearing only a white shirt, with no tie or epaulets...and been snubbed by pilots for their assumption that I was beneath their level. I've been told as much more than a few times, over the years. In many ways. Once, years ago, I was told that I would never measure up to company XXX's clientele, because I lacked a degree. I was told that their clientele consisted largley of attorneys and physicians, and that I could never manage an intelligent conversation or communication with an intellectual lot like that. Rather elitist, I thought.
You should see the looks of distain when I show up in an oil stained tee shirt and greasy blue jeans. Sort of one of those why-don't-you-go-around-to-the-back-and-come-in-the-servant-enterance sort of looks. Labor? A pilot who performs labor? Quick! Evacuate, before he contaminates the building! We surely hope it isn't contageous!
Different worlds, I guess. I wil say this, I have nothing but contempt for those who feel that work is beneath them. I note that Enigma responded to me recently, though I couldn't tell if he thought my comments were directed at him. They aren't. In his case and others, I've corresponded directly over time, and I feel I know something about the character of these individuals as well as others on the board. My comments are attached to no one here, in particular, but are a generalization of my own opinion, my own viewpoint. I'm not here to condemn any one person.
If one might suggest that he or she believes that work is beneath them, then that person might move to condemn themself, but certainly not with my help.
As for suicidal tendencies, I believe that's a musical group of some kind, to which I pay no particular attention. My own demise will undoubtably come in an airplane some day, but my only hope will be that in the rubble, the cause will be found somewhere other than me. My greatest fear in an airplane isn't dying, though I tend to work in environments where that's certainly a possibility. It's the fear of failure, of doing something wrong, and it motivates me to do my best in every area I can.
So long as my epitaph can read, "He did it right, He did his best." I'm a happy camper. Give me a good airplane, some apple beer, and some gummy peaches, and I can die happy. Just don't go scratching anything derrogatory on my coffin lid, and we'll get along fine.
I'm curious about that test...
He made the observation that unless I placed the operation of the airplane as my most important priority, I might not live to drive my car, see my children, or attend church. He was right. Point taken.
However, once the flight is over, there is nothing degrading or demeaning about requiring a pilot to do other duties. I know an awful lot of pilots out there who work two weeks on and two off, or even less...working a week out of every month and drawing considerable salaries for the amount of actual work done. I know a lot of very lazy pilots, who whine about the little work that they actually do. More pilots I meet are whiners, than not, and as a result, I feel a great deal of contempt toward such a crowd. I associate with them every day.
I have worked, and work, under various certificate holders, on-demand, unscheduled, scheduled, etc. I've done it in small and large airplanes, single engine airplanes, multi engine airplanes, piston, turboprop, turbojet. In no case have I ever been less than professional, less than devoted to the job. In virtually every case, I have had multiple assignments. Outside assignments including Director of Maintenance, Director of Safety, etc. Did these impact my ability to fly the airplane, plan a flight, or conduct one? No.
In many cases, my employment has been in large part due to my certification and ability to get the job done...all of it. Not simply flying the airplane (which let's face it...a monkey can do). Many jobs have required someone who can turn wrenches, and that division of labor, flying and knowing the airplane more intimately than my wife, has kept me alive.
Conversely, I've known others who felt that doing the parts of the job that I did, were beneath them. They refused. Several particular events, which I am not at liberty to discuss in detail, resulted in multiple fatalities. Crews died, aircraft were destroyed. It is my opinion and belief that had these crews invested themselves as they were supposed to, the events that unfolded in their separate cases might (being an operative word), have been prevented. They might be alive today. Their stolwort refusal to expand their job description was enjoyed at the peril and cost of their lives.
Will this happen because a crewmember whines about restocking coffee cups? Probably not (allowing for the possibility of an errant irate CEO when the flight runs out of coffee cups). But in other areas it might. Peril to life or limb is hardly relevant, however; the fact that an employer tasks a pilot with duties that extend beyond the manipulation of the controls is hardly warrant for alarm, nor license to whine...yet I hear a lot of pilots doing it.
I was invited by an associate to make application to a particular fractional operator. His description of the job made it sound attractive, and I considered the idea. He allowed me access to a private web board being used exclusively by pilots of that company. I took advantage of that access, monitoring the board for about four months, learning about the privileges and gripes in the company.
I was amazed at the number of folks who seemd to sincerely believe that flying a light two-engine turbojet who thought they merited two hundred fifty thousand dollars a year, and who actually suggested they strike to get it. Who whined bloody murder about carrying a bag for a passenger...how such horrors should never be heaped upon them. At length, I decided the job didn't sound so bad, but I didn't really want to be stuck on the road working with the likes of those who complained so bitterly, and so constantly. I wondered how they could do their job when they were so unhappy in their position.
I'm sure they didn't speak for their company, nor for their profession, nor did they represent all pilots in the firm. Their comments are echoed in pilot lounges around the country as I sit and listen to this comment or that.
It is my opinion that stereotypically, and often in real time, pilots tend to be quite full of themselves. I can't count the number of times I've walked into a FBO wearing only a white shirt, with no tie or epaulets...and been snubbed by pilots for their assumption that I was beneath their level. I've been told as much more than a few times, over the years. In many ways. Once, years ago, I was told that I would never measure up to company XXX's clientele, because I lacked a degree. I was told that their clientele consisted largley of attorneys and physicians, and that I could never manage an intelligent conversation or communication with an intellectual lot like that. Rather elitist, I thought.
You should see the looks of distain when I show up in an oil stained tee shirt and greasy blue jeans. Sort of one of those why-don't-you-go-around-to-the-back-and-come-in-the-servant-enterance sort of looks. Labor? A pilot who performs labor? Quick! Evacuate, before he contaminates the building! We surely hope it isn't contageous!
Different worlds, I guess. I wil say this, I have nothing but contempt for those who feel that work is beneath them. I note that Enigma responded to me recently, though I couldn't tell if he thought my comments were directed at him. They aren't. In his case and others, I've corresponded directly over time, and I feel I know something about the character of these individuals as well as others on the board. My comments are attached to no one here, in particular, but are a generalization of my own opinion, my own viewpoint. I'm not here to condemn any one person.
If one might suggest that he or she believes that work is beneath them, then that person might move to condemn themself, but certainly not with my help.
As for suicidal tendencies, I believe that's a musical group of some kind, to which I pay no particular attention. My own demise will undoubtably come in an airplane some day, but my only hope will be that in the rubble, the cause will be found somewhere other than me. My greatest fear in an airplane isn't dying, though I tend to work in environments where that's certainly a possibility. It's the fear of failure, of doing something wrong, and it motivates me to do my best in every area I can.
So long as my epitaph can read, "He did it right, He did his best." I'm a happy camper. Give me a good airplane, some apple beer, and some gummy peaches, and I can die happy. Just don't go scratching anything derrogatory on my coffin lid, and we'll get along fine.
I'm curious about that test...
Avbug,
I am not sure whether your mentor was correct or not. I do believe that flying could be considered higher risk than flying a desk, though. The point should be be the best you can be when at work and leave personal problems or whatever other baggage you might be carrying out of the cockpit. Seperate home life from work life. In most cases I would have to say that the reason one works hard to be professional in the cockpit is so that he has the opportunity to enjoy the rewards with his family. Family first, foremost and always.
Duties outside of the cockpit related to flying are always part of the mix. Duties not related to performing flying duties have no place in a professional flying environment, if you are flying three days/week or more. There might be some oddball situation where you might only fly one day/week. In this case I would question the job to begin with. You might be current but that does not mean you are proficient.
It is a little over-used phrase to say that a monkey could fly da plane. Got any proof of that? Do they know how to evaluate wx and notams, risk assessments for particular conditions, how to program the FMSs, dodge weather, and a myriad of other tasks that we accomplish each and every time we fly....or I should say we should be accomplishing. Anyone who thinks that monkeys can do what we do has no understanding of what it takes to perform well while flying. It might be fun to make a joke about it but don't let airline management take that view, otherwise they would planning how many bananas would be acceptable per trip at the next contract renewal.
As for testing it is important that one's psychi, drive and abilities match what is required for a given position. Imagine, if you may, what success one might have in the accounting business if one could not operate a calculator. For each job description there are a number of traits that help insure success when matched to the description. In our case we have developed attributes that are required, desired and in other ways helpful in performing the job well. For example, really good pilots have some mechanical aptitude. Another example is pilots that are high risk takers do not fit in the profile. These and many other traits can be measured and matched against the template of the ideal mix of attributes. Personality types that can be identified as "my way or the highway" don't fit into the desirable category. In a crew of more than one there must be effective CRM to be successful over the long haul. And the long haul is what is important. Crews should be motivated to act in such a way as to allow them to fly another day. Passengers have those expectations of us, as well.
Can you imagine the passenger's reaction to briefing them with: "Well folks the weather is at minimums at our destination, we will only have 30 minutes of fuel on landing if things go right, and we have a little mechanical problem, as well. But not to worry because I am the best pilot in the world and I will get us there!" You are probably not going to have any takers and they won't be back regardless of how you view your abilities.
Over decades of flying I have flown with some of the best hands on pilots in the world. Some of these great hands on pilots were lousy in terms of learning to work well with others. There can be no compromising of being a member of a team in this environment. I would rather have someone who has good flying skills, can facilitate CRM and be on the conservative side of the safety curve than the best hands on guy without the other traits. Everyone needs to be trainable and understand that we are all learning until the day we die no matter what our profession.
I am not the best pilot in the world but I strive to be. I hope everyone has a similar attitude. Anyone who strives to work for us will have that attitude or they won't get through the door and occupy a cockpit seat in our airplane. However, we would allow them to sit in the back and learn, assuming they are not suicidal.
Ok, I am off the soapbox now.
Continuous improvement, always! Fly safely!
I am not sure whether your mentor was correct or not. I do believe that flying could be considered higher risk than flying a desk, though. The point should be be the best you can be when at work and leave personal problems or whatever other baggage you might be carrying out of the cockpit. Seperate home life from work life. In most cases I would have to say that the reason one works hard to be professional in the cockpit is so that he has the opportunity to enjoy the rewards with his family. Family first, foremost and always.
Duties outside of the cockpit related to flying are always part of the mix. Duties not related to performing flying duties have no place in a professional flying environment, if you are flying three days/week or more. There might be some oddball situation where you might only fly one day/week. In this case I would question the job to begin with. You might be current but that does not mean you are proficient.
It is a little over-used phrase to say that a monkey could fly da plane. Got any proof of that? Do they know how to evaluate wx and notams, risk assessments for particular conditions, how to program the FMSs, dodge weather, and a myriad of other tasks that we accomplish each and every time we fly....or I should say we should be accomplishing. Anyone who thinks that monkeys can do what we do has no understanding of what it takes to perform well while flying. It might be fun to make a joke about it but don't let airline management take that view, otherwise they would planning how many bananas would be acceptable per trip at the next contract renewal.
As for testing it is important that one's psychi, drive and abilities match what is required for a given position. Imagine, if you may, what success one might have in the accounting business if one could not operate a calculator. For each job description there are a number of traits that help insure success when matched to the description. In our case we have developed attributes that are required, desired and in other ways helpful in performing the job well. For example, really good pilots have some mechanical aptitude. Another example is pilots that are high risk takers do not fit in the profile. These and many other traits can be measured and matched against the template of the ideal mix of attributes. Personality types that can be identified as "my way or the highway" don't fit into the desirable category. In a crew of more than one there must be effective CRM to be successful over the long haul. And the long haul is what is important. Crews should be motivated to act in such a way as to allow them to fly another day. Passengers have those expectations of us, as well.
Can you imagine the passenger's reaction to briefing them with: "Well folks the weather is at minimums at our destination, we will only have 30 minutes of fuel on landing if things go right, and we have a little mechanical problem, as well. But not to worry because I am the best pilot in the world and I will get us there!" You are probably not going to have any takers and they won't be back regardless of how you view your abilities.
Over decades of flying I have flown with some of the best hands on pilots in the world. Some of these great hands on pilots were lousy in terms of learning to work well with others. There can be no compromising of being a member of a team in this environment. I would rather have someone who has good flying skills, can facilitate CRM and be on the conservative side of the safety curve than the best hands on guy without the other traits. Everyone needs to be trainable and understand that we are all learning until the day we die no matter what our profession.
I am not the best pilot in the world but I strive to be. I hope everyone has a similar attitude. Anyone who strives to work for us will have that attitude or they won't get through the door and occupy a cockpit seat in our airplane. However, we would allow them to sit in the back and learn, assuming they are not suicidal.
Ok, I am off the soapbox now.
Continuous improvement, always! Fly safely!
Publishers
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2002
- Posts
- 1,736
Horses
The fact is that there are "horses for courses". In short , there is probably a good job or there for everyone doing what they want. The hard part is to find it.
Other duties, well what is not always stated is how much flying is there. I had a friend who died recently, He flew the owner of a resort in South America down there and was then made to suffer like a guest for three or four days until the time came to take the owner home. Sometimes they only flew every tow or three weeks.
The point here is that he could have been asked to perform other duties. He was not but certainly had the time to do so. He was underutilized as a pilot.
There are all kinds of operations out there where the flying is reasonable and you have time to do other things as required. There are others where they are out to get every last dime out of their asset and work the crew to death.
The fact is that there are "horses for courses". In short , there is probably a good job or there for everyone doing what they want. The hard part is to find it.
Other duties, well what is not always stated is how much flying is there. I had a friend who died recently, He flew the owner of a resort in South America down there and was then made to suffer like a guest for three or four days until the time came to take the owner home. Sometimes they only flew every tow or three weeks.
The point here is that he could have been asked to perform other duties. He was not but certainly had the time to do so. He was underutilized as a pilot.
There are all kinds of operations out there where the flying is reasonable and you have time to do other things as required. There are others where they are out to get every last dime out of their asset and work the crew to death.
Again, I'd disagree with the assertion that if one flies three or more days a week, one's proficiency suffers if one takes on other assignments. Much of my career I've flown seven days a week and carried out full time duties outside the cockpit, in addition to the flying. It can be done. I'd challenge anyone who thinks my proficiency or ability to perform is substandard, for it.
As for the mentor who spoke; we were living in an airplane ten months out of the year, ready to go around the clock, on five minutes notice. The airplane came first, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Our lives revolved around that airplane. Personally, I can't think of a better way to live.
As for the mentor who spoke; we were living in an airplane ten months out of the year, ready to go around the clock, on five minutes notice. The airplane came first, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Our lives revolved around that airplane. Personally, I can't think of a better way to live.
Okay, you got me. I just didn't want to put your friends on the spot. 
Anybody who has a tractor is automatically exempt. Anybody with an avatar of a tractor is automatically appended to the exemption.
Except for folks who live on the PIK program. They're still rat bastards unless they're paying me to spray their field. Then they're really fine folks.
Anybody who has a tractor is automatically exempt. Anybody with an avatar of a tractor is automatically appended to the exemption.
Except for folks who live on the PIK program. They're still rat bastards unless they're paying me to spray their field. Then they're really fine folks.
enigma
good ol boy
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 2,279
avbug said:Okay, you got me. I just didn't want to put your friends on the spot.
Anybody who has a tractor is automatically exempt. Anybody with an avatar of a tractor is automatically appended to the exemption.
Except for folks who live on the PIK program. They're still rat bastards unless they're paying me to spray their field. Then they're really fine folks.
That makes me triple exempt. Get ready for the whining to begin.
8N
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
