It was only a matter of time: the media spin on Pinnacle 4712

[Flyer1015]

http://www.record-eagle.com/2007/apr/14jet.htm


Leave it to the media to blow things out of proportion.

Media's aviation reporting = always sucks!

It's not so much that the F/O was on IOE, but it's the actual spin on how they DESCRIBE the F/O as a pilot.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

A rook!

 

[CitationLover]

I love how the company, ie Phil Reed, sells out the check airman with this crap quote:

"The Pinnacle policy and the FAA policy indicates first officers are restricted from operating the aircraft in take-off and landing in adverse weather conditions,” he said.

Every one of these "company" policies waives this if they (green fo's <100 hrs - FAR 121.438) are accompanied by a check airman.

Sec. 121.438 Pilot operating limitations and pairing requirements.

(a) If the second in command has fewer than 100 hours of flight time
as second in command in operations under this part in the type airplane
being flown, and the pilot in command is not an appropriately qualified
check pilot, the pilot in command must make all takeoffs and landings in
the following situations:
(1) At special airports designated by the Administrator or at
special airports designated by the certificate holder; and
(2) In any of the following conditions:
(i) The prevailing visibility value in the latest weather report for
the airport is at or below \3/4\ mile.
(ii) The runway visual range for the runway to be used is at or
below 4,000 feet.
(iii) The runway to be used has water, snow, slush or similar
conditions that may adversely affect airplane performance.
(iv) The braking action on the runway to be used is reported to be
less than ``good''.
(v) The crosswind component for the runway to be used is in excess
of 15 knots.
(vi) Windshear is reported in the vicinity of the airport.
(vii) Any other condition in which the PIC determines it to be
prudent to exercise the PIC's prerogative.

Or am I wrong and Pinnacle's ops specs doesn't state 121.438 verbatim?

 

[Rook]

A rook!

Hey! I resemble that remark:nuts:

 

[Erlanger]

"The first officer on board the aircraft was conducting his operating experience. He has been qualified on the aircraft, but after that, he is required to have 25 hours of flying experience with the check airman,” said Philip Reed, Pinnacle Airlines spokesman.

Why is Pinnacle even making any statement to the media about the experience of the crew? You guys need to get your union all over this. The only statement they should be making, is that everyone is fine and the NTSB and FAA will investigate and you'll have wait till then for anymore info. Done!

But I do like the comment by the Airport Director, Stephen Cassens, when he says in response to a dumb question about if he knew who was in control of the aircraft and he said;

"We don't have that information. That would be like asking the people at Wal-Mart if they know the experience level of the people who are driving into their parking lot.”

Even he realized the media is stupid.

 

[acaTerry]

I'm a little out of the loop here so could someone tell me how long the runway was and if it was wet, etc?

 

[DrewBlows]

Why is Pinnacle even making any statement to the media about the experience of the crew?

Perhaps the reporter asked about the new hire FO after reading it on Flightinfo three days ago.

I heard the FO was on OE fresh out of training...less than a thousand total

Capt is a really good guy, good pilot and ALPA volunteer. He was doing OE with a new hire FO. Don't know anything about the FO. This guy is a very solid Capt with lots of time and perfect record. The only problem with the Capt is that he does thinks "brand-scope" is going to solve this problem.

 

[Oakum_Boy]

That happens over at pprune. "Journos" as they're called frequently quote posts and go there snooping for dirt.

 

[undpilot]

Or am I wrong and Pinnacle's ops specs doesn't state 121.438 verbatim?

That's exactly what our book says.

 

[CitationLover]

That's exactly what our book says.

so Phil Reed is wrong, what a surprise! a company spokesman who quotes a company policy wrongly!

 

[KingNothing]

Braking action poor to NIL. NWA cancelled their flight. Nice work boys

 

[TinGoose1]

Sounds a lot like Wisconsin. When you operate like pinnacle, your going to have "events".

 

[Rook]

Braking action poor to NIL. NWA cancelled their flight. Nice work boys

Any chance you could post a link with the current wx/MU readings and the NWA flight sched at that time?

 

[captain dad]

http://www.record-eagle.com/2007/apr/14jet.htm


Leave it to the media to blow things out of proportion.

Media's aviation reporting = always sucks!

It's not so much that the F/O was on IOE, but it's the actual spin on how they DESCRIBE the F/O as a pilot.

If you don't run off the runway there isn't much to spin.

Here's a novel idea. Stop having accidents and the media will stop talking smack!

If the braking action was so bad why did they attempt to land? If they weren't sure what the braking was, why did they land? If they were close to limits on performance, why did they land? A good pilot knows when not to land more than when to land. How's that for a spin on things? uke:

 

[Ridgeback]

A good pilot knows when not to land more than when to land. How's that for a spin on things? uke:

One of the best quotes so far this year...however when places like UND and ER tell you that you are the next TOP GUN....

I guess the weather dosn't has as much repect for you as your cool leather jacket, revos, and fresh bottle of hair gel, damn that weather

 

[ex j-41]

Don't you think there is a direct correlation between a low time pilot, low pay and increased risk?

I mean the CRJ is not a kids toy. If Pinnacle raised its pay to acceptable rates then they could attract and retain better qualified pilots. Then this might not happen. Far better for someone to have an an incident in a 152 then a CRJ. Accidents can happen with higher time pilots but that's not my point. If pay was resonable then airlines could attract better pilots, but because the pay is so low you get what you pay for.

 

[pgcfii2002]

One of the best quotes so far this year...however when places like UND and ER tell you that you are the next TOP GUN....

I guess the weather dosn't has as much repect for you as your cool leather jacket, revos, and fresh bottle of hair gel, dang that weather

You forgot the gigantic aviators watch on their wrist........

 

[Rook]

You forgot the gigantic aviators watch on their wrist........

And of course...the iPod.

"Below the hard deck does not count."

 

[pgcfii2002]

"He went like this....we went like that...I said to Hollywood...where'd he go, Hollywood says....where did WHO GO......???"

 

[punkpilot48]

Don't you think there is a direct correlation between a low time pilot, low pay and increased risk?

I mean the CRJ is not a kids toy. If Pinnacle raised its pay to acceptable rates then they could attract and retain better qualified pilots. Then this might not happen. Far better for someone to have an an incident in a 152 then a CRJ. Accidents can happen with higher time pilots but that's not my point. If pay was resonable then airlines could attract better pilots, but because the pay is so low you get what you pay for.

Two very experienced pilots went to take off outa LEX one day.....