PCL 3701 Multiple Exam Failures

[DoinTime]

Ahh, that's right.....

Yet another reason to book around RJ operators.

RJ operators are no more likely to hire these guys than any national or major carrier. In fact, due to the lower total time nature of most RJ operators hiring departments its actually probably less common than at nationals and majors. All anyone has to do is to keep a clean record for five years and their entire past goes away. At least until the accident investigation.

 

[ePilot22]

Your post referenced multiple pilots and insinuated that it was a common perception at Pinnacle.

Yep. Some=more than one!

You might be better served to take advise from people that walk the walk instead of reading into some bureaucratic report with your extreamly limited background knowledge.

Funny isn't it, that the NTSB DIDN'T ask for your input. Seems they might have the same thing to say to you.

...and have a greater understanding of what happend (and how) than you ever will

Well, I can only hope to be a Jedi Master like you someday! Please tell me how grand you are, how cool it is to fly a jet...nevermind.

You're the man. . Smell ya later.



eP.

 

[ultrarunner]

Quote:The one FO that said "just for a better fuel burn." . Yeah, right. . I guess he is really concerned with saving the company money on fuel....

haha..that's funny...

I'll bet you a "Dude Plaque" that had those two idots even known where to look, they'd have seen that 350 or 370 would have yielded better burns than 410.

Now, I don't know what the temp or weight was at TOC, but it doesn't matter since they wanted to die that night anyway.

"DUDES" should be on surfboards...not flying jets.

 

[ePilot22]

If...

2.0 Investigators formed the impression that there was a sense of allure to SOME pilots to cruise at FL410 just to say they had, “Been there and done that.” Pinnacle’s chief pilot said that he had first learned of such “rumors” subsequent to the accident. One company FO said he would have wanted to climb to FL410 but was never able to because the airplane was too heavy. However, he said that was only for a more efficient fuel burn and for no other reason. Another FO said that she did not see FL410 as “Any particular goal to achieve.”

Word for word from the report. Seems the people who "walk the walk" are the ones who gave the impression.

Your company's pilots' words, not mine.

Bugger off.



eP.

 

[DoinTime]

Blah Blah Blah Blah

I had wondered why its was that you somehow think that your knowledge is so great and then I clicked on the link at the bottom of your post. That explained everything.

Funny isn't it, that the NTSB DIDN'T ask for your input. Seems they might have the same thing to say to you.

I was interviewed by the NTSB regarding FLG3701 jacka**.

 

[ePilot22]

Where's the aloe vera?

I had wondered why its was that you somehow think that your knowledge is so great and then I clicked on the link at the bottom of your post. That explained everything.

ohh...burn.





eP.

 

[ePilot22]

You might be better served to take advise from people that walk the walk instead of reading into some bureaucratic report with your extreamly limited background knowledge.

I was interviewed by the NTSB regarding FLG3701 jacka**.

Another FO said that she did not see FL410 as “Any particular goal to achieve.”

I'm sorry, I see now that they did put your input into their bureaucratic report.

I hope the gave you a gold star for your forehead and a lollypop.

If not, here ya go...





eP.

 

[NuGuy]

PRIA records can only go back five years.

You can bet this will change as a result of this accident. The NTSB is already hot and bothered about training history due to an accident down here in SoFL with a charter outfit. This has been one of their perrenial bitching points, and the PCL accident will only serve to re-inforce their position.

I would expect a NPRM to come out after this to extend the PRIA lookback to 10-15 years, or maybe if they get pumped up and go the distance, your entire flying career to include any part 61 or 141 student records.

Nu

 

[BE90flyer]

Let me see if I got this correct. You should not be allowed to be an airline pilot if you have bad credit?

 

[ePilot22]

Cash or Credit?

Let me see if I got this correct. You should not be allowed to be an airline pilot if you have bad credit?

Ironic or oxymoron? Airlines and good credit?





eP.

 

[NuGuy]

Let me see if I got this correct. You should not be allowed to be an airline pilot if you have bad credit?

Actually, maybe this might not be a bad thing. Think about it...if you eliminate pilots for the following reasons:

Bad credit/No credit
Under 5'5" or over 6'2"
Corrected vision
Cholesterol over 200
Any checkride busts
Ever had difficulty with a concept in training, even with just one thing
No college
Any dirty thoughts and/or cursing
Any speeding tickets/other infactions
Ever belonged to a labor union
Ever thought of belonging to a labor union
Ever cursed your boss/commanding officer under your breath for being an a$$
Ever engaed in pre-marital affairs

There would be so few pilots left, there might really be a pilot shortage. Actually, even if you just picked 3 of the above, you would probably thin the heard quite a bit.

But for now, I think the only airline that really cares if you have bounced checks is GIA...

Nu

 

[FN FAL]

Change?

Do you think change is coming?

 

[Sim Sweat]

Geez, anybody read the transcript of the CVR?
Chilling.

"Aw -!- We're gonna hit houses dude."
"Whoop whoop pull up!"
"Sound similar to impacts"

http://www.ntsb.gov/events/2005/Pinnacle/exhibits/CVR_Factual.pdf

 

[ultrarunner]

Let me see if I got this correct. You should not be allowed to be an airline pilot if you have bad credit?

No $hit head, you should NOT be allowed to be an airline pilot if you have shown a history of FAILING CHECKRIDES - MULTIPLE TIMES, especiallly AIRLINE checkrides, which one of these pilots had....MULTIPLE TIMES.

Did you not even bother to read this pilots' checkride history???

"....friends don't let DUDES become airline pilots...."

 

[chrisdahut24]

I would expect a NPRM to come out after this to extend the PRIA lookback to 10-15 years, or maybe if they get pumped up and go the distance, your entire flying career to include any part 61 or 141 student records.

Nu

Not a bad idea...but 141 records are destroyed after 1 year, and as far as I know, your logbook IS your part 61 record?

 

[BE90flyer]

OK ultrarunner....... My question was regarding credit. I asked if you should not be allowed to be an airline pilot with bad credit. Someone stated earlier that you should not be allowed.

You call me a shoothead and then continue to tell me that you should not be a pilot with failed checkrides and such.

I will give you another chance to read my first post and answer my question. Please put your glasses on so you understand my easy to understand first question.

 

[ultrarunner]

I will give you another chance to read my first post and answer my question.

No, bad credit by itself should not disqualify someone wanting to be an "airline" pilot, nor more than it should disqualify someone from many other professions.

However, it IS something that is looked at, so it behooves anyone interested in having a career in a 'safety sensitive position' to keep their records clean.

However BE90, I did look at your original post, and it appears to simply be a statement out of the blue. Did someone previoulsy post it should be disqualifying???? Not sure of your statement/question??

 

[FN FAL]

No, bad credit by itself should not disqualify someone wanting to be an "airline" pilot, nor more than it should disqualify someone from many other professions.

However, it IS something that is looked at, so it behooves anyone interested in having a career in a 'safety sensitive position' to keep their records clean.

True, overall, I think the complete package should be looked at and credit rating is a viable factor in determining whether or not a person is trust worthy. But it shouldn't be a sole factor in determining employability, nor should it be used as a means of determining good pilot v. bad pilot. Which is separate from whether or not a person is a good employee. You can be an outstanding pilot and be bad at paying bills and making it into work on time.

As far as busts go, you have good days and bad days. I have a couple of busts and the examiner was first to admit that he wasn't happy with the level of teaching expertise and professionalism at my 141 school. I also have won awards for perfect checkrides. Will the FAA or any employer look at that award and assume that it wipes out one bust?

I'm sure there are plenty of professional pilots that have busted more than one checkride, all that proves is that some examiners are doing their jobs and not giving candy ass rides.

 

[ultrarunner]

I also have won awards for perfect checkrides.

No $hit??

Just another example of how far behind in my reading I really am, when I'm not even up to speed on the FAA Checkride Award Program.

 

[ultrarunner]

Let me see if I got this correct. You should not be allowed to be an airline pilot if you have bad credit?

I read this again BE90, and with no mention of it in previous quotes, other than Amish's babbling, you seem to be coming across that CREDIT is the only thing looked at.

That's not the case.