ExAvantair People

[avbug]

Sure the airplane is a maintenance whore, but what can you expect from an airplane that was designed to fly 10 hours a month.

Setting aside the liklihood that merely posting in this thread may risk lowering one's intelligence quotient by several points...I've long been a proponent of the concept that a poor carpenter blames his tools.

I've had a look at the TCDS for the avanti, as well as the aircraft and component life limitations section of the maintenance manual, and I haven't found any place where that, or any other airplane, has been designed to operate 10 hours a month. If someone can back up that assertion (that gets bantied around a lot, for a number of different airplanes), I'd surely like to hear of it.

Fact is, an airplane is designed to perform to a given standard, and it's provided the continued airworthiness instructions to make that happen...w(h)eather it's used ten hours a month or several hundred...the condition of the aircraft is strictly the responsibility of the owner/operator. PERIOD.

I really hate hearing excuses such as the idea that the aircraft was designed to fly less, therefore acceptance of lesser maintenance is okay. A wise soul once opined that justification is the narcotic of the soul...the industry is awash with addicts.

The airworthiness issues are dear to my heart, as I've spent a lot of time close to airworthiness issues. Either the aircraft meets approved data and it's safe, or not. If not, then it's not airworthy, and no amount of justification will make it so.

If it meets approved data, and is safe, then you have no issues. Don't try to color the issue; it's fairly black and white.

 

[Autoparts2]

The new DO

Word on the street is that MYREALNAME is the new DO C.M lurking on this board. You might want to watch what is said because it may bite you in the end.

My 2 cents

 

[Takeoffroll]

The P180 needs no more or no less shop time than any other aircraft I have flown. My experience with the maintenance of this aircraft is no different than with other aircraft that I have flown. It doesn’t matter if its a C172 or a Learjet. Things break from time to time. Some times they fix themselves, some times they stay broken. It is always easier for maintenance to fix what stays broken. What professional pilot hasn't experienced these conditions. I back our maintenance guys on this. They do their best to get things done the right way. Pilots whining about maintenance is not new. And neither are disgruntled employees. I would say this thread has its share of both.

This thread reads like a bad conspiracy story. Personally, I think the DaVinci Code is a better story than this one. And it is more believable.

 

[avbug]

I couldn't care less were it the CEO, DO, DoM, Chief Bottle Washer, Head Lineboy, or King of Siam. I've never been particularly careful here or elsewhere in political matters; leave that to curtain climbing brass and yuppies. Call a spade a spade.

I have yet to see an airplane so poorly designed that it's meant only to fly ten hours a month. I have yet to see an aircraft that's limited to ten hours a month. I've yet to see an aircraft for which the manufacturer ever designed or intended only a ten hour a month useage.

I've heard from a number of your personnel this same excuse; "what can you expect from an aircraft that was only designed to fly a few hours a month?" Well, I'll tell you what you can expect. You can expect full airworthiness and performance, period, bar nothing. End of story.

If any of YOU expect anything LESS, then you're doing something very, very wrong. It either works, or it doesn't, period. If you are flying an aircraft which is not airworthy, if it isn't legal and safe, then you're in violation, and you're an idiot. Not to mention criminal.

If you're flying an aircraft that's legal and safe, then you have nothing about which to complain.

Either way, this isn't the forum to do it. Your company has channels within which to handle these issues. I don't believe for a minute that this is the place to whine, any more than a man should cry to those outside his marriage that his wife doesn't love him. What he should do is find a way to make himself a little more loveable, and if you're having internal problems in your company, then find a way to fix them internally. Coming here will do exactly squat for you.

Now this thread has been formed from sheer idiocy; it's made up of the bitter, the uninformed, the angry, and those who represent what at best is a fringe element to any operation. Most likely a number of the players aren't even employed there...some admit as much. Possibly one or more that have been fired or quit. If any of you fit in that category, then shut up already; you're free, you're out of there, let it go. You're going to have health problems if you keep up that level of consternation.

Regardless of your category, don't try to justify your acts by suggesting for one second that the aircraft is overutilized, and therefore one cannot expect or one can accept a lesser level of maintenance. If the aircraft flies more, then it will require more attention...however, it should never be in less than a fully airworthy condition. For those of you who are flying the line and crying about this, consider that both the first and last line of defense against flying an aircraft with issues is the PIC. If there's a problem in the cockpit or with the aircraft, then the person responsible for addressing this, and for refusing to fly it, is the PIC.

Don't blame the mechanic. Don't blame the company. If the aircraft is broken and you decide to fly it, then you have one person to blame. It's not the director of operations for your company, nor the CEO of the airframe manufacturer, nor the inspector who approved the fittings attached to your fuel controller. It's you. Don't justify, don't throw blame. If you accept it, it's all yours. If you can't accept it, then don't...but don't throw a fit about it. State the facts, handle it like a professional adult, and move on.

 

[B19 Flyer]

Word on the street is that MYREALNAME is the new DO C.M lurking on this board. You might want to watch what is said because it may bite you in the end.

My 2 cents

To my understanding, this new DO doesn't manage by fear, paranoia and micro-management as the former one did. Even if it is him, (which I doubt) he doesn't appear to subscribe to the same methods as before which means a new chapter is being written and the other one is gone. I've heard that this new DO is fair to crewmembers and is very approachable. This thread was started by mistruths and halftruths told as stories that have never been specifically stated or proven with fact. This tells me that they were B.S. from the start. All the positive threads to support Avantair prove that employees there are on the whole happy and enjoy working for the company. Those that bash the company are either bitter and misguided, after drinking koolaide that leaves them with a sour taste in their mouth. They've got the right to move on into an organization that is more in line with what they believe is right, and to leave the rest of the Avantair employees alone. The airplane appears to serve the company well, and the pilots appear to be happy and very defensive of the company. Those that post bitterly apparently don't really know what they are talking about, and should just GET OVER IT and move on!

 

[Mr. Pebbles]

To my understanding, this new DO doesn't manage by fear, paranoia and micro-management as the former one did. Even if it is him, (which I doubt) he doesn't appear to subscribe to the same methods as before which means a new chapter is being written and the other one is gone. I've heard that this new DO is fair to crewmembers and is very approachable. This thread was started by mistruths and halftruths told as stories that have never been specifically stated or proven with fact. This tells me that they were B.S. from the start. All the positive threads to support Avantair prove that employees there are on the whole happy and enjoy working for the company. Those that bash the company are either bitter and misguided, after drinking koolaide that leaves them with a sour taste in their mouth. They've got the right to move on into an organization that is more in line with what they believe is right, and to leave the rest of the Avantair employees alone. The airplane appears to serve the company well, and the pilots appear to be happy and very defensive of the company. Those that post bitterly apparently don't really know what they are talking about, and should just GET OVER IT and move on!

Interesting. I run into quite a few crews from Avantair and they all sing a different tune than you are. They are all very close mouthed, but they do mangage to convey the idea that they are just killing time until something better comes along. Mangagement that can't be trusted is a theme that keeps popping up....... maybe you're the one on the koolaid????

 

[hangarrat]

Mr. Pebbles is a reliable source - I would believe anything he says. yes I would, uh huh, sure nuf. He knows what he's talkin 'bout.

 

[Mr. Pebbles]

Mr. Pebbles is a reliable source - I would believe anything he says. yes I would, uh huh, sure nuf. He knows what he's talkin 'bout.

Were you drunk when you wrote this? Either that or you are a major hick.

 

[Syncit]

I think Mr Pebbles is Mr DO.

 

[Mr. Pebbles]

I think Mr Pebbles is Mr DO.

Not quite. Did make me smile though to read that. No, if I were the DO, I wouldnt sleep at night for fear of losing my job as anyone who takes that job has 6-12 months left and I sleep fine.