Regional airline crashes & failed checkrides

[HA25]

Probably. But if I remember correctly, there is a certain cargo carrier who hired a pilot with a record not unlike the Colgan CA had. Good thing they all made it out of that thing. Also, probably a good thing it was a cargo plane with the fire that ensued.

Sadly, when it comes to women pilots, the rules seem to be applied differently.. All so we can worship at the alter of equality.

 

[dojetdriver]

Sadly, when it comes to women pilots, the rules seem to be applied differently.. All so we can worship at the alter of equality.

True. But for some reason, I think that if you were to go through the pilot records of EVERY "legacy" or cargo airline, there's probably people just like said cargo carrier, or the CA at Colgan. Regardless of demographic.

You know, the types of pilots that chew up valuable union resources to keep their job, etc.

 

[Nindiri]

How many accidents at airlines using AQP vs airlines using old-fashioned "you bet your job" checkrides?

 

[major payne]

you get what you pay for

 

[PURPLEHAZE21]

There is No Substitute for Experience....The media is still, "Highly Ignorant" when it come to any aviation discussion, so don't get wrapped around the axle trying to defend our profession...

 

[LAFrequentflyer]

FoxNews now saying that the FAA is going to take action on the pilot training situation...

 

[crj567]

Sadly, when it comes to women pilots, the rules seem to be applied differently.. All so we can worship at the alter of equality.

Yep-

Just ask around about the ASA guy who landed the plane at Waycross.... There is no dooubt he would have hit the street had he been a plain white boy. Also, think about the white dragon and the other crazy female who scares the heck out of everyone-ever wonder how they never got fired?

 

[crj567]

How many accidents at airlines using AQP vs airlines using old-fashioned "you bet your job" checkrides?

Good point-
Kinda hard to fail a checkride when you never actually take a real checkride.
-Also-people from some 121 flight schools take "stage checks" rather than check rides. From what I understand, a failed "stage check" doesn't show up on an FAA record.

 

[jon210]

so if only 1 of ten pilots from major airline crashes had multiple failures. Does that prove that guys with multible failures are safer

 

[jmreii]

FoxNews now saying that the FAA is going to take action on the pilot training situation...

I can hardly wait, the government is going to try and fix something with our money. More powerful than a speeding kingair, able to leap over a 777 in a single, its a bird, its a frog, its the government. Whatever!

 

[SLUF4]

I'm sure there will be a push within the gov't to get rid of those who fail multiple checkrides, but do you really think the union will go for it? I've never failed a checkride, but I do understand I'm just a screwup away from failing one. I just had a LOFT on the midnight-0400 sim session-do they really expect me to be at my best for that when my body is used to being asleep then from working a normal schedule? I'm not sure if we are doing PC's at that time or not, but I could see complications from that. I think it should be a case by case basis and not necessarily a limit that is arbitrarily set. Obviously if a guy fails 10 or 20 checkrides he shouldn't be flying around. What I'm saying is, what if a guy failed 2 checkrides when he was 17 and in flight school and has a spotless career for 40 years after that? Then he comes in and fails a PC one night. Should he be canned? That's 3 strikes.

 

[QOL_is_great:)]

Docs win when killing

There are 12,000 deaths per year due to unnecessary surgery

There are 7000 deaths per year due to medication errors in hospitals

Another 20,000 individuals die each year due to other errors in hospitals

Still another 80,0000 die each year due to infections in hospitals

And (inside and outside of hospitals combined), 106,000 individuals die each year due to negative effects of drugs.

Seems docs kill their share of people per year as do pilots. It's only makes news when we do it since we do it in big numbers.

 

[DTWFO]

I'm down for that too.. I mean we've all taken enough checkrides to know that no checkride ever goes perfectly... and that most (if not all) check airman use a more common sense method when evaluating whether a person should pass or fail. Most I've spoken to say something to the effect "I ask myself if I'd put my own family on their airplane at their level of proficiency, and if the answer is no then they fail".. I've seen many a check airman pretend to drop their pencil when a guy temporarily deviated on a ILS or maybe in a steep turn but recovered quickly and safely and had a more or less good ride.. AND, I've seen on a few occasions a check airman give a guy one or two chances to try to recover what should already have been a failed ride, but the guy was a lost cause and would fail.. So in the end, a failed ride is rarely (but I'm sure not always) a case of a one time minor deviation from ATP standards, but usually a sign of a poorly prepared pilot or a poor pilot to begin with./QUOTE]

This is not always the case. When you work for an airline such as Pinnacle, your job is on the line every time you go down for your PC. And even though I haven't failed a 121 PC in 7 years, that doesn't mean that it won't EVER happen. The only way you could mandate this is to have the FAA do EVERY airline's PC's for them and set a common set of standards to meet. The way it is now (at my airline) you roll the dice every time as to who administers your PC. I don't buy the premise that people don't bust PC's at the majors as much because they've been "weeded" out. More like they are given better training and opportunity to show how they can handle situations....not one chance and UNSAT. Some airlines allow a warm up session and then the PC. Here, it's get in the box at 5am and you better not make one minor error or you're fired.

 

[jmreii]

I'm down for that too.. I mean we've all taken enough checkrides to know that no checkride ever goes perfectly... and that most (if not all) check airman use a more common sense method when evaluating whether a person should pass or fail. Most I've spoken to say something to the effect "I ask myself if I'd put my own family on their airplane at their level of proficiency, and if the answer is no then they fail".. I've seen many a check airman pretend to drop their pencil when a guy temporarily deviated on a ILS or maybe in a steep turn but recovered quickly and safely and had a more or less good ride.. AND, I've seen on a few occasions a check airman give a guy one or two chances to try to recover what should already have been a failed ride, but the guy was a lost cause and would fail.. So in the end, a failed ride is rarely (but I'm sure not always) a case of a one time minor deviation from ATP standards, but usually a sign of a poorly prepared pilot or a poor pilot to begin with./QUOTE]

This is not always the case. When you work for an airline such as Pinnacle, your job is on the line every time you go down for your PC. And even though I haven't failed a 121 PC in 7 years, that doesn't mean that it won't EVER happen. The only way you could mandate this is to have the FAA do EVERY airline's PC's for them and set a common set of standards to meet. The way it is now (at my airline) you roll the dice every time as to who administers your PC. I don't buy the premise that people don't bust PC's at the majors as much because they've been "weeded" out. More like they are given better training and opportunity to show how they can handle situations....not one chance and UNSAT. Some airlines allow a warm up session and then the PC. Here, it's get in the box at 5am and you better not make one minor error or you're fired.

You are right they do bust their PC's sometimes and recieve additional training and another checkride with another check airman. I have been away from the regionals for 10 years, and the regional company I worked for was a sh#T bag operation like many of the operators are right now. The major carriers put a little more time and money into candidate's training than your typical regional, however your typical candidate has better experience than the candidate going to a regional. The major airline pilots also have a union for that dipstick check airman that you may run across. The sh#t bag operation I work for would allow a pilot to get another check airman for a PC check.

The bottom line is some pilots need to spend more time on trying to find out what type of employer this company will be instead of what type of airplane they are flying so they won't cry about it later.

I have had friends come out of the military and tell me there is no way they would fly for some of these sh#t bag operators. They would prefer not to fly.

 

[Nindiri]

The traditional checkride is a relic of the past that needs to be retired along with NDBs and whizwheels. It teaches nothing and simply takes a snapshot of a pilot at one specific moment in time; sometimes it's a good day, sometimes a bad day. Roll the dice and see what happens.

Some form of AQP is the way to go. With AQP, every checkride is now a learning event that improves pilot knowledge and skills. Deficiencies and weaknesses are now identified and corrected, and trends among the entire pilot group are detected and used to further enhance training.

hehe :nuts: I sound like an AQP salesman.