Buzo
The Jack of all trades
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 254
Is that what GIA has installed?
TCAS-II is certainly available for the 1900 (we had it at CommutAir), but an operator can get away with TCAS-I if they're cutting corners.
It had TCAS 1
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Is that what GIA has installed?
TCAS-II is certainly available for the 1900 (we had it at CommutAir), but an operator can get away with TCAS-I if they're cutting corners.
PCL_128.....Dude, you must have a huge set of balls and a short memory. I've read all your posts on here for the past few months and you are quick to bite the hand that feeds you. You GET OFF on bashing Pinnacle and now GIA. Funny thing is dude, where did YOU come from...where are YOUR roots......Oh yeah....you were at BOTH Gulfstream AND Pinnacle and if it weren't for your experience at both of these carriers you would NOT be at Air Tran today. If it wasn't for Tom Cooper putting together GIA you would have had a much different career path. As for Tom Herfort being a former flight attendant...WHO CARES? He's was also a Captain at GIA for over 10 years before he moved into management...you failed to mention that. You love to bash Pinnacle at every opportunity but if they had not hired you, employed you and an given you an upgrade opportunity you'd...again.....NOT have ended up at Air Tran.
As for who I fly for? www.newglobalairline.com The "Blue" side of the house.
By the way, I am a big supporter of Alpa and a firm believer of clear and concise boundary's between managment and employees spelled out in a great contract. I have been managment (not airline) before so I do tend to think like one, however I have no desire to go down that path again, I enjoy being an employee without the respondsibilites beyond the cockpit. One thing that I was curious about Pcl...if your such a HUGE Alpa cheerleader then WHY did you sell yourself short and accept employment at a non-alpa carrier?
You are made for airline management!!!
That was the argument from great lakes management trying to get a crew to fly a 1900 with the GPWS mel'd and the Flaps mel'd. So when you get close to the ground you would not get the "to low flaps" or "to low gear" call out. So what happened to this legal and safe flight?
They landed gear up in ORD. The FAA then decided that maybe it was legal to mel the gpws and flaps at the same time but it WAS NOT SAFE. And know they you cant mel those two items together.
Also I have refused flights in the 1900 because of the is tcas mel'd and mel'd pressurization and used the ORD accident as evidence that just because the FAA says it is legal does not mean it is SAFE.
Will there have to be a mid air with a 1900 and C-172 before the we dont allow these two items to be mel'd at the same time?
Ouch, you really have me there, now please answer the question, have you ever been in a court of law?Again, what airline do you work for so I can make sure never to fly on one of your flights? Any pilot that is dumb enough to believe legal = safe shouldn't be allowed to sit in an airplane, let along fly one with people in the back. The PIC is responsible for determining the safety of a flight, not some bureaucrat or some management dweeb that moonlights as a flight attendant
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/service...local/sfl-flbpilot0504pnmay04,0,1147673.story
I don't get.
Maybe you guys figure this one out.
Ah, judge, even though the aircraft was perfectly airworthy, I as PIC decided that it was unsafe, I am smarter than the aircraft manufacturer and the FAA.
Don't believe all of the fairy tales Lakes is telling you. I was taxiing out that night in ORD when those yahoos landed gear up on 4R. The reason they landed gear up is gross disregard for sterile cockpit and professionalism. They did not run ANY checklists (as proven by the CVR).
Great job Captain Pascal!
even though the aircraft was perfectly airworthy
Legal does not = airworthy. It's up to the PIC to determine whether the aircraft is truly airworthy.
Close but no cigar, I think I understand the point you make but the pilot in question will need a bit more, valid concerns that will defend his final decision.Legal does not = airworthy. It's up to the PIC to determine whether the aircraft is truly airworthy.