Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Sentient Jet

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Haha I can take a joke. I have pretty thick skin when it comes to ribbing it doesn't bother me. I do keep all the information I get even though its not on a spreadsheet. Research is key to me and thats why I ask all the questions.
 
English said:
I was referring to safety audits, not flight time minimums.

Crew qualifications is ONE of the things they audit. And the standards, unlike an accounting audit, are completely arbitrary and...looking for the right word...retarded.
 
Last edited:
AZ Typed said:
This is correct. Wyvern and Argus (spelling?) are 90% business scams sold to people - folks buy into their sales pitch of their audits. Safety is increased - but it's also degraded. I've flown with people who meet the audit requirements but have no business being in a cockpit. I've flown with people who don't meet the requirements and could fly single pilot...safely. In the end these two audits are schemes sold to morons with more money than brains. The bottom line, however, is that we are now forced to live with them.
AZT

An external audit is often required by investors and creditors. Unless the major accounting and management firms start performing aviation specific audits, you're stuck. The auditors only seek to compare the company's policies and practices with a set of standards that they (the auditor) have set. Then they make recommendations to management based on their findings. Management can choose to follow the recommendations or not, provided they can provide a good enough reason to the board not to. Wyvern can no more ensure that a pilot with a 10K hrs and 2 moon landings isn't a dangerous, drunk, tool, than KPMG can ensure that the CEO of a public company isn't going to run it into the ground.

I hope I don't sound too pro-audit. I think the Wyvern standard for pilot requirements is ridiculous (by the time I'm Wyvern qualified, I'm looking for a better job!) Unfortunately audits are a neccessary evil when doing business at that level. In a previous job, I spent so much time answering pre-audit questionaires, responding to auditors ?s during audits and giving rebuttles as to why we didn't do something their way after the audits that I didn't have time to actually do my JOB!
 
Sentient Jet is nothing more than a fractional bottom feeder, who finds 135 charter companys without there own business.I flew numerious flights for them the last three years and my next job will not include flying for them.
 
Last edited:
pilotman121 hit the nail on the head. Furthermore...those "audits" by various money-grabbing firms are a joke.
 
I was reading an article about Sentient in Forbes and how they monitor all of there operators for safety. What a joke.
 
Sounds like another dog and pony show,there is an operator out of Lincoln Nebraska that they use and it has one of the worst reputations in the midwest.The company had three crashes in the last four years with one fatality.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom