For All You FLOPS BJ Pilots, a little memory lane action

[brokeflyer]

If it's broke then it's broke.

The PIC determins that and that is that.

That list is no diffrent than a checklist.

 

[B19 Flyer]

If it's broke then it's broke.

The PIC determins that and that is that.

That list is no diffrent than a checklist.

Same company issued checklist you got in recurrent or initial? Go ahead and yank that checklist out in front of your POI while he's sitting in the jumpseat and watch the look on his face. Non-company document? Interesting.

If not, and the source of the write-up is on a public board, the door is open and expect a smart company lawyer like the two who have already set precidents to walk through it.

Your call...

 

[fob727]

come play on some other boards

B19, Why are you always on the frac. board? Why don't you come play with the other union members? (ie. IPA, SWAPA, Teamsters, ALPA) Or are you just lowering expectations here for the next contract? Dividing the workforce?

Come on down!!! We'll be waiting on LCC, Nationals,-Cargo- Majors. I hope to see you soon!

 

[fischman]

Same company issued checklist you got in recurrent or initial? Go ahead and yank that checklist out in front of your POI while he's sitting in the jumpseat and watch the look on his face. Non-company document? Interesting.

If not, and the source of the write-up is on a public board, the door is open and expect a smart company lawyer like the two who have already set precidents to walk through it.

Your call...

Or go ahead and fly your last flight with an undocumented broken item.

I don't know what is so hard for you to understand? Broke is broke regardless if it is on a checklist or not.

 

[fischman]

B19, Why are you always on the frac. board? Why don't you come play with the other union members? (ie. IPA, SWAPA, Teamsters, ALPA) Or are you just lowering expectations here for the next contract? Dividing the workforce?

Come on down!!! We'll be waiting on LCC, Nationals,-Cargo- Majors. I hope to see you soon!

Seeing as how he works for a large non-union super-heavy jet carrier, I'd say that's where he belongs.

Eh KB?

 

[William Holiday]

The hanger is the hanger. This is nothing more than hanger talk....A place where pilots can share their experience with others. Many of us have learned from those that have been there, done that. Told us what to look out for. Told us what to "CHECK OUR SIX ON.'' Only God knows, what harm this may have saved us from.......or our pax. Good luck at your "Book Burning Party."

 

[Fozzy]

Same company issued checklist you got in recurrent or initial? Go ahead and yank that checklist out in front of your POI while he's sitting in the jumpseat and watch the look on his face. Non-company document? Interesting.

Humm, my Citation, company approved checklist says nothing about looking at tires for flat spots. So am I to assume that if one was flat spotted, because it was not on the "company issued checklist", I am good to go. Is this your lame a$$ argument?!?

B19 you are a moron. Believe what you want, but there is a reason you don't fly the line. Leave it to the professionals. We will keep the flying public safe as management tools, such as yourself, keeps pushing them into danger.
Fool.

 

[Myster79]

Same company issued checklist you got in recurrent or initial? Go ahead and yank that checklist out in front of your POI while he's sitting in the jumpseat and watch the look on his face. Non-company document? Interesting.

If not, and the source of the write-up is on a public board, the door is open and expect a smart company lawyer like the two who have already set precidents to walk through it.

Your call...

So, you only check what is on the checklist????

You either have no experience, are a dangerous pilot or both. A checklist is just that, they are items that the manufacturer, feds and the company require you to check. It does not state that these are the only items that you are allowed to check. If I made a list of other items that I felt needed checked that were not on the "company document", I would gladly show the POI, the company and their attorney's. I would love to hear their response.

Again, judging from your previous posts, I truly do not believe you have any business in a cockpit. Therefore, I will enlighten you a little, THE PILOTS HAVE FINAL AUTHORITY REGARDING THEIR ASSIGNED AIRCRAFT AND ITS AIRWORTHINESS. WE CAN CHECK AND RECHECK WHATEVER THE HELL WE WANT! So, If my POI or anyone else wants to question me, let them!

Your lack of knowledge regarding our field is embarrassing. Please continue posting here and stay out of any cockpit. Pilots with your mentality, kill people.

 

[Semore Butts]

"The buck starts here".

I once had a maintenance evaluator eval in a UH-60.

That is the ride where you are designated to give army maintenance pilots their check rides.

The oral is brutal. I expect to pass, but I know it will be painful.

The evaluator walks up and says show me your pre-flight, and tell me everything in the last 6 months that you have run into as a maint pilot.

It was one of the most enjoyable evals I ever had. I would tell him a problem, and he would tell me about how other units had the some or similar problems and how they dealt with it.

The information learned by the experiences of the line pilots and mechanics eventually becomes written doctrine and is many times incorporated into the manuals and checklists.

So, Gentlemen, (and Skanza) That is how that works. The information and doctrine comes from information recieved from maintenance and guys on the line, and then makes it's way into the manuals.

(I also wrote manuals for the Army on the Kiowa Warrior and UH-60)

The sooner we can make that information known the better.

(To my Fellow Fractional Pilots, Please accept my apology for posting on a non-Netjets thread. I felt the message was important.)

 

[B19 Flyer]

Complete ignorance.

So, you only check what is on the checklist????

You either have no experience, are a dangerous pilot or both. A checklist is just that, they are items that the manufacturer, feds and the company require you to check. It does not state that these are the only items that you are allowed to check. If I made a list of other items that I felt needed checked that were not on the "company document", I would gladly show the POI, the company and their attorney's. I would love to hear their response.

Again, judging from your previous posts, I truly do not believe you have any business in a cockpit. Therefore, I will enlighten you a little, THE PILOTS HAVE FINAL AUTHORITY REGARDING THEIR ASSIGNED AIRCRAFT AND ITS AIRWORTHINESS. WE CAN CHECK AND RECHECK WHATEVER THE HELL WE WANT! So, If my POI or anyone else wants to question me, let them!

Your lack of knowledge regarding our field is embarrassing. Please continue posting here and stay out of any cockpit. Pilots with your mentality, kill people.

Let me teach you a little history lesson there sonny boy... You need to go and read those court cases to see the evidence that was provided that the judge found strong enough to sanction those two unions.

Let me give you facts. Message boards were scoured, lists like the one on this thread was printed and write ups (which happen to have MEL's tied to many or them and appropriate ATA numbers) were used for trending.

When items popped up on those ATA numbers that had never been used or deferred before happened, and all of a sudden they became the write-up of the day, they provided evidence to the court to show a pattern outside of the ordinary. Statisitics 101.

So, you think you are smarter than the numbers? Go ahead and parade around the BS you wrote, because if it gets to be bad enough, the lawyers know how to trend it because they've been successful before at having not just unions sanctioned, but individual pilots. It's easy to identify the individual pilots involved in the write-up campaign and where they got the information.

Like I said.. post the lists all you want. Any college intern can trend the data and provide management with the information to support the injunction.

You are acting dangerously by allowing your union opinions to distract you from the everyday business of flying by your union woes. Every time you write up an item you know is airworthy but are making a union statement saying is not distracts you from your normal preflight. Go ahead, take the time and go throught that non-standard checklist you have and use those message board posts to create havic with your fellow employees and customers. You are the one that looks like a jerk, not the company.

What you wrote tells me that you value union business above that of flying the airplane safely. Your beginner's attitude and complete ignorance about how the court system works and how easy it is to trend all the data is amazing. What a tool.

 

[B19 Flyer]

Acting like fools...

Humm, my Citation, company approved checklist says nothing about looking at tires for flat spots. So am I to assume that if one was flat spotted, because it was not on the "company issued checklist", I am good to go. Is this your lame a$$ argument?!?

B19 you are a moron. Believe what you want, but there is a reason you don't fly the line. Leave it to the professionals. We will keep the flying public safe as management tools, such as yourself, keeps pushing them into danger.
Fool.

Pilots that support union activites by write-up campaigns of airworthy items are not professionals and shouldn't pose as pilots. They give those that do act professionally a bad name. Instead, they are nothing more than bus driving union mongers that are greedy and self serving. The only ones that are fools are those that think anything is being gained by acting in such an unprofessional manner.

 

[brokeflyer]

yup that is correct. "officialy" you can use any checklist you want, provided it covers the minimum item requied by the mfg and/or faa.

So lists like those that are published here are perfectly legal and encouraged by the faa.

Now if you wrote on there something like "this is a union organized method to attempt a work stoppage" then you'd have a problem.

But until the faa decides to change the regs and make me no longer responsible for the safe outcome of a flight, I can prefligh whatever I want.

I can take the cowlings off and look at the engine, I can have mx take the panels off and look at whatever I want.

that's that.

 

[waka]

Let me teach you a little history lesson there sonny boy... You need to go and read those court cases to see the evidence that was provided that the judge found strong enough to sanction those two unions.

Let me give you facts. Message boards were scoured, lists like the one on this thread was printed and write ups (which happen to have MEL's tied to many or them and appropriate ATA numbers) were used for trending.

When items popped up on those ATA numbers that had never been used or deferred before happened, and all of a sudden they became the write-up of the day, they provided evidence to the court to show a pattern outside of the ordinary. Statisitics 101.

So, you think you are smarter than the numbers? Go ahead and parade around the BS you wrote, because if it gets to be bad enough, the lawyers know how to trend it because they've been successful before at having not just unions sanctioned, but individual pilots. It's easy to identify the individual pilots involved in the write-up campaign and where they got the information.

Like I said.. post the lists all you want. Any college intern can trend the data and provide management with the information to support the injunction.

You are acting dangerously by allowing your union opinions to distract you from the everyday business of flying by your union woes. Every time you write up an item you know is airworthy but are making a union statement saying is not distracts you from your normal preflight. Go ahead, take the time and go throught that non-standard checklist you have and use those message board posts to create havic with your fellow employees and customers. You are the one that looks like a jerk, not the company.

What you wrote tells me that you value union business above that of flying the airplane safely. Your beginner's attitude and complete ignorance about how the court system works and how easy it is to trend all the data is amazing. What a tool.

Myster79's comments still stand. Preflighting beyond the minimum is the mark of professionalism....something you know nothing about. As you have shown many times over, you have no business in the cockpit. The industry is better off that you cannot hold a medical. Good riddance.

With you constantly paying lip service to your vast aviation industry experience, you have repeatedly demonstrated to be, essentially, a hobbyist. Leave this business to the pros, junior.

 

[fischman]

Let me teach you a little history lesson there sonny boy... You need to go and read those court cases to see the evidence that was provided that the judge found strong enough to sanction those two unions.

Let me give you facts. Message boards were scoured, lists like the one on this thread was printed and write ups (which happen to have MEL's tied to many or them and appropriate ATA numbers) were used for trending.

When items popped up on those ATA numbers that had never been used or deferred before happened, and all of a sudden they became the write-up of the day, they provided evidence to the court to show a pattern outside of the ordinary. Statistics 101.

So, you think you are smarter than the numbers? Go ahead and parade around the BS you wrote, because if it gets to be bad enough, the lawyers know how to trend it because they've been successful before at having not just unions sanctioned, but individual pilots. It's easy to identify the individual pilots involved in the write-up campaign and where they got the information.

Like I said.. post the lists all you want. Any college intern can trend the data and provide management with the information to support the injunction.

You are acting dangerously by allowing your union opinions to distract you from the everyday business of flying by your union woes. Every time you write up an item you know is airworthy but are making a union statement saying is not distracts you from your normal preflight. Go ahead, take the time and go through that non-standard checklist you have and use those message board posts to create havoc with your fellow employees and customers. You are the one that looks like a jerk, not the company.

What you wrote tells me that you value union business above that of flying the airplane safely. Your beginner's attitude and complete ignorance about how the court system works and how easy it is to trend all the data is amazing. What a tool.

You and Skanza are the ones bringing unions into the discussion.

All I see are professionals discussing safety information, and it is commendable.

I went ahead and ran a spell check for you. You're welcome.

 

[Myster79]

Let me teach you a little history lesson there sonny boy... You need to go and read those court cases to see the evidence that was provided that the judge found strong enough to sanction those two unions.

Let me give you facts. Message boards were scoured, lists like the one on this thread was printed and write ups (which happen to have MEL's tied to many or them and appropriate ATA numbers) were used for trending.

When items popped up on those ATA numbers that had never been used or deferred before happened, and all of a sudden they became the write-up of the day, they provided evidence to the court to show a pattern outside of the ordinary. Statisitics 101.

So, you think you are smarter than the numbers? Go ahead and parade around the BS you wrote, because if it gets to be bad enough, the lawyers know how to trend it because they've been successful before at having not just unions sanctioned, but individual pilots. It's easy to identify the individual pilots involved in the write-up campaign and where they got the information.

Like I said.. post the lists all you want. Any college intern can trend the data and provide management with the information to support the injunction.

You are acting dangerously by allowing your union opinions to distract you from the everyday business of flying by your union woes. Every time you write up an item you know is airworthy but are making a union statement saying is not distracts you from your normal preflight. Go ahead, take the time and go throught that non-standard checklist you have and use those message board posts to create havic with your fellow employees and customers. You are the one that looks like a jerk, not the company.

What you wrote tells me that you value union business above that of flying the airplane safely. Your beginner's attitude and complete ignorance about how the court system works and how easy it is to trend all the data is amazing. What a tool.

Sonny boy??? I must have irritated you....good.

Where did you read that I would write up an aircraft that was not broke? What I said is that the crew is allowed to inspect the aircraft regardless if the item is on the checklist or not. The company has it stuck in their head, that there are all these illegal checklists everywhere, I have never carried one or saw another pilot with one. See, all that info is our heads. However, if I did carry one, I would show it to anyone who asked.

As far as the court cases, I don't care, I am a pilot not an attorney. Every item I have written up has been broke and a good write-up. Furthermore, I will pre-flight my aircraft exactly the same regardless of union and company relations. I am a professional and I pride my self on being a safe pilot. You are the type that would fly the broken airplane and end up killing yourself. This isn't about union and management issues, this is about safety.

Your response just cemented that you really have no idea what you are talking about!