I must be the STUPID CMR pilot.

[h25b]

I see what you are getting at, and you have a point. I suppose if you consider the lower number of flight hours with corporate operations they would then have a lower accident rate over a period of time, just not over a specific number of hours flown. Anyway, I'm getting too tired to think about it myself...good argument as always though.

Good night. Sleep on it. The numbers are what they are.

 

[AvroSucks]

I don't know how he got his numbers, but what I do know is that I recall at least 3 corporate accidents in the past couple of years where they have failed to deice and people have been killed. Any significant 121 accidents you care to share with us in recent years? I don't recall very many that were pilot error since AAL ran it off the runway in LIT, and that was about 7 years ago. By the way, don't bring back the dead horse about the Pinnacle plane..that wasn't even a 121 flight.

How about American in Cali? American in New York? Fedex in Memphis? Want me to keep going? All Pilot error.

 

[h25b]

How about American in Cali? American in New York? Fedex in Memphis? Want me to keep going? All Pilot error.

Or FedEx in TLH ??? Oh, that one didn't kill anyone, doesn't count...

 

[100LL... Again!]

The incessant flood of low time PFTers into the airline biz should, if anything, cause the corporate safety rate to close any gap with 121.

Just wait, I'll bet the vast majority of cookie-cutter sjs kids are still in the right seat.

Can you imagine how the fractional shareholders would shriek if they knew that their multimillion dollar jet had a 500 hr wonder in it?

 

[SkyBoy1981]

How about American in Cali? American in New York? Fedex in Memphis? Want me to keep going? All Pilot error.

Well, mainly what I'm talking about here, and what this thread is referring to in general, are accidents where people have knowingly chosen to do something stupid simply because they've flown X thousand hours and have yet to have an accident. Its a matter of becomming complacent, which then leads to carelessness. In my opinion (which some will argue with), this attitude tends to be more common in 91/135 type flying, simply because pilots there are given more freedom to make their own decisions and do things their own way. These pilots are also often put under more pressure to make unsafe decisions than those of us that fly 121. Their ARE exceptions to this, I'm simply making a generalized statement.

American 965 in SKCL is going a bit farther back than a few years, 11 to be exact, but yeah that was definitely pilot error. Those guys goofed up on their FMS input and ended up off course. There was no unnecessary risk taken there, they just screwed up. With that being said, I put just as much blame on the Colombian government for allowing two fixes with the same ID's to exist within a hundred miles or so of each other. I suppose we all learned a great deal from this one, no matter what set of regs you fly under.

American 587 departing JFK? Prior to this accident very few pilots would have expected that a few full scale rudder deflections on an A300 going 200 knots or so would cause the entire vertical stabilizer to detach from the aircraft. Those guys unfortunately increased everyone's awareness.

And as h25b mentioned, the FDX crash in TLH was non fatal. But even so, no unnecessary risk were taken there either. He just got too low flying a "black hole" approach.

 

[SkyBoy1981]

The incessant flood of low time PFTers into the airline biz should, if anything, cause the corporate safety rate to close any gap with 121.

Just wait, I'll bet the vast majority of cookie-cutter sjs kids are still in the right seat.

Can you imagine how the fractional shareholders would shriek if they knew that their multimillion dollar jet had a 500 hr wonder in it?

Oh c'mon. I've read your posts on here for a while now and I know you're smarter than this. The real low time PFTers of the mid to late 90's have been Captains for quite some time now. Hell, the FO's being hired by my airline now are like veterans compared to some of the guys hired back in those days.

 

[WickedPissa]

I usually just ask for type IV in the morning and hope it keeps us anti-iced all day long......severe non-seriousness.

When you refer to a crappy day for example, it is "IMC", "C" for "Conditions". It is not IFR or VFR out. Those are "rules", like a flight plan. You operate under IFR in IMC. There is my first and only geeky post. Enjoy.

 

[Paul R. Smith]

How much experience does it take? See ice on the airframe, call for deice. Not that hard.

Seriously. I'm with you imacdog.

Would this guy rather call him stupid for crashing at the departure end for whatever airframe icing reason.

This place gets wierder by the day.

 

[Long Time Gone]

........(sorry kids, 3000hrs in a senaca fartin around FL doesnt count),.......

Not to be a perfectionist, but it's a Seminole, not a Seneca, which is even worse. The counter-rotating props do no justice for training, especially when they fly a real twin and lose an engine.

He's one of those "ACADEMY" dorks, anyway, who thinks (s)he's God for going there and getting hired by Conair (that was on purpose).

Good call on the ice (or rather, "ICE"), bad call on admiting where you trained and worked at. The "ACADEMY" is a rip off. I went there, too (Damn, bad call on me.....).

 

[PA44Jockey]

I went to the Academy when it was still affordable and it hasn't bit me yet?

 

[PA44Jockey]

With little to no experience these days in the cockpit (sorry kids, 3000hrs in a senaca fartin around FL doesnt count), I'd rather see these monkeys de-ice when they dont have too

So I suppose if my flying around in Florida(So you assume that my experience stops there) doesn't count, then I believe to a Mainline guy flying a larger guage aircraft than you that your pitty 5 grand in Gulfstream nor the RJ count either. That would also mean that we can take away your first 2 or 3000 hours because I'm sure you you didn't gain your ALMIGHTY experience in a Gulfstream or any jet for that matter.