PCL 3701 Multiple Exam Failures

[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.

 

[turbinej]

We can all say that he failed this and that. There are a lot of people that have failed checkrides and orals. If you have not then your time will eventually come. We don't know the exact reasons why they failed their checkrides or orals. I never though it would never happen to me, until it did. I failed my Comm Multi oral on C-310 pressurization systems. The 310 does not have pressurization, but the examiner felt that since one day I was going to be an airline pilot that I should know more on it. My instructor sat in on the oral and I have never seen two individual screaming at the top of their lungs yelling at each other. Then I did two type rides sucessfully then came the third during a pax evac on the CL-65 at the last part of the checkride, I said the memory items correct 3x and everytime I touched the left thrust reverser switch instead of GLD man Disarm. So it could happen to all of us, even the best. Many regional have high failure rates like trans states and great lakes about 10 years ago, don't know how it is now. Also instructor ratings were failed 80 percent of the time on the first try. That was the rumor back them. Nerves play a lot when you take a check ride and can cause you to make simple little error like I did. Just because these individual failed a few check ride does not make tham a bad person or pilot. We all have bad days weather doing a check ride or flying the line. We all make mistakes, but we learn from these mistakes and hope they make each one of us a better pilot next time we do a checkride or go out on the line to fly.

 

[FN FAL]

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.

We'll try to type a little slower for you, as we know that you can't read all that fast.

 

[Sim Sweat]

We can all say that he failed this and that. There are a lot of people that have failed checkrides and orals. If you have not then your time will eventually come.

Yes, it could happen to anyone, and thinking back on all the checkrides I've taken, I could really have busted any number of times if the check airman/DE was in the mood.
But I think what is disturbing about this unfortunate gentleman's history is the trend of multiple failures and problems, along with some of the concerns voiced by the company check airmen after the fact. Passengers placing their lives in your hands really deserve better than that, IMHO.

And it's just one opinion, said with respect for the departed. I've certainly made my share of mistakes over time.

 

[MarineGrunt]

All I can say is that there are some pretty tasteless posts on this thread. Some of you should be ashamed and should pray that karma won't catch up to you.

All that aside, does anyone know why they weren't able to get a re-start, or what caused the flameouts? Before, I thought they lost both engines simultaneously, but after reading the transcript, they happened separate. Were the procedures applied appropriately? The only thing that comes to mind is fuel contamination... ???

 

[ultrarunner]

All that aside, does anyone know why they weren't able to get a re-start, or what caused the flameouts? Before, I thought they lost both engines simultaneously, but after reading the transcript, they happened separate.

If you re-read the transcript, you will see that, upon leveling off at FL410, the aircraft failed to accelerate as they were behind the power curve.

As a result, the aircraft kept pitching up to maintain altitude, since they were in ALT HOLD.

Well, since neither of these idots really recognized what was going on, the aircraft reached excessive pitch attitude. That was the reason for the stall warning indications.

Well, the crew NEVER adequately addressed this "minor problem" and at one point the ANU reached 30 degrees and something like 75 kias..can't quite remember the specifics, but you'll see it there.

It was at this point that the engines overtemped and flamed out....likely not both at the same time, but both engines were so severely overtemped that the flame outs occcured in short order of each other.

Since the aircraft reached such an excessive ANU and a drastically low IAS at the same time, the cores of the engines overheated and resulted in irreversable damage.

It was this reason their feeble attempts at a restart failed.

Heck, had they even followed the correct relight procedure, it would prly have failed.

They sealed their fate at 410.