I looked at Key Lime also.
I am now looking here www.simcenter-carolina.com
Still undecided.
Good Luck!
I am now looking here www.simcenter-carolina.com
Still undecided.
Good Luck!
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.
Yes, people have been killed at Key Lime. Mind you, I'm not passing judgement on the company here, just correcting the above information.DrRaptor said:Yeah, they've had a couple of run-ins and run-offs, but no one's been killed, and most have been minor.
Hey, 7b2 what is your beef with Key lime ? Your participation in this thread has been quite useless. Normally when there is a problem with anything in life we try to get to the root of it.7B2 said:11-18-2003
11-01-2003
09-24-2001 2 fatal
06-05-2000 2 fatal
found this after only 1 search on the NTSB website.
looks like a very professional outfit with safety as their highest priority.
In your 160 hours of glory, and by the comments you posted, I can say you don't know jack...DrRaptor said:I stand corrected. The only reason I didn't find any of the fatals in my original is because I was looking for the specific string - "Key Lime Air" under Part 135, and for some reason it had never come up with any fatal accidents.
I also wish those of you posting these accidents would look at *WHY* these planes wrecked.
The two fatal accidents listed both occured not because of company policies being deficient or because of mechanical failure. In the first case, the crew broke the rules and "hot dogged" down a canyon to look at the scenery while they were supposed to be flying a revenue run. The second occured when the Flight Instructor allowed an approach-to-stall maneuver to proceed into a spin. Whether he just wasn't paying enough attention or it happened too quick isn't the point. The fact still remains that it was a maneuver that was approved by the FAA. I will note that the maneuver has been removed from the Flights, Inc. training procedures for commercial and multi-engine pilots, so my guess would be that the maneuver has also been removed from the Key Lime Air training sylibus. [SP]
I also have to say this as well - I don't understand why people make accusations about companies like - "They have the worst reputation in the industry." If they do, then they won't be getting business, and certainly not MAJOR contracts from some of the largest and most respected companies in the industry. If Key Lime was really as bad as some make it out to be, then why is it that they CONTINUE to expand their operations with UPS? If they were such a bad company, then they'd be out on their butts without a contract, much as Superior Aviation found itself after it had a Metro gear-up at Denver in 2003.
I will give this piece of advice as a person who's been around aviation most of his life, and has learned a LOT from people who started their flying careers during or just before WWII - the measure of a company is the confidence its customers have in it. If a company is good, then it's customers will continue to use it. If it's not good, then they'll stop using it. It's almost MORE true in aviation because there is such an abundance of choices when it comes to competitors for feeder contracts.
The fact still remains that the approach-to-stall maneuver was in the cirriculum of both Key Lime Air and (then) Key Lime Flights. After that accident, the maneuver dissapeared altogether. There are no more banked approaches to stall taught at Flights, Inc. or Key Lime Air. That is a FACT, not governed by FARs or anything. The choice was made after the accident to remove the maneuver from BOTH training manuals. As for them teaching full stalls in spite of the training manual, once again, this is the failure of the Instructor Pilot, not the company as a whole. If he was not following the manual and he did not report to the Chief Pilot or those responsible with the FAA that they were doing non-approved maneuvers, then that's the fault of the pilots is it not?skyking1976 said:The whole reason for the second accident wasn't an approach to stall maneuver. Key Lime used to teach full stalls in their airplanes despite what their Part 135 training manual says. I know several people that can corroborate that. Whether or not it exists in the Part 141 training syllabus is irrelevant. Key Lime Air and Flights Inc. are separate entities. Yes, the same guy owns both, but they are operated under two different sets of rules and two different FAR's govern training curriculum.
And how do you know that for sure? Knowing the persons in Denver responsible for overseeing the Feeder Operations from the UPS side of things, I'd have to disagree because Superior not only had MORE aircraft available, but they were underbidding Key Lime by a fair margin. The only other problem that was routine is that Superior refused to pay their fuel bill on more than one occasion, which resulted in us (ASIG) refusing to fuel their aircraft a couple of times. Key Lime, however, always paid the bill in a timely manner.As to the abundance of choices in feeder service for UPS, the contracts go to the lowest bidder. Key Lime has such a large volume of aircraft and pays their pilots so poorly they can afford to under-cut the competition. Superior's gear up landing had nothing to do with it. If accidents were criteria for dismissal as a UPS feeder, Key Lime would have been finished late last year.
I've done plenty of research. I think that knowing a good chunk of their crews, flying with Flights, Inc (which has more than one Key Lime Air pilot there as an instructor), being around down there for 2 YEARS fueling their aircraft on a nearly daily basis and dealing with their operations on a daily basis, I think I'd have some first hand experience on what kind of company they are.Noone makes comments like these as an arbitrary statement. Trust me when I say that these folks (including myself) have done their research. Maybe you should do some more...