Watch out FOs on Before T/O PAs

[kmox29]

So please Mr. Fed, say what you want about how I operate per my FAA APPROVED FOM, but you better know what it says.

I hope you've had time to calm a bit...

As a norm, FOMs are not "approved" by the FAA, they are "accepted". Unless your airline is an exception, the FAA can't enforce your FOM (unless a procedure is tied to a specific regulation). Notice that this is different than a POM (or CFM). Those manuals are "approved" as they are used in lieu of the AFM.

I fully agree with the last part of your sentence. As an Inspector, if I'm going to critique a crew on a procedure, I better know their procedures. Seems like that is common sense...but then again, we're the FAA.

Inspectors need to put some pressure on the airlines too help. Like not allowing discipline for Fatigue Calls, and monitoring schedule manipulations to make it legal.

We do monitor schedule manipulations, but those are done on a frequency schedule based on risk. I believe in your post (which not all is quoted here), you wanted us to fix the fatigue issue, stop holes from appearing in aircraft, etc. I agree with you and that those are important issues. I'd rather work on those, than focus on monitoring your schedule 24/7.

Finally, we have very limited power to put pressure on the airlines for anything that is not regulatory. Think of it this way: every airline meets the regulations (the MINUMUM for safety). Any procedure that is more restrictive than a regulation is negotiated.

Truth be told, we can kick and scream all we want if we think a carrier should be operating a particular way, but if there is no violation occurring, then we have very little ground to stand on.

I've seen what happens when Inspectors "put pressure" on a carrier. Generally, the carrier thinks it's unfair and complains to everyone (including Congress) that they're being held to a "higher standard" than other carriers.

Be safe out there.

 

[Always deferred]

Believe me kmox, HQ inspectors were just as frustrated..

 

[kmox29]

Believe me kmox, HQ inspectors were just as frustrated..

Roger that. :beer:

 

[laserman2431]

There is a pretty good chance this Fed was getting a free ride on a Monday morning or a Friday afternoon and possibly bumped a pilot who was trying to JS to work.

Even if the Fed was techincally right, he was being a DB for making an issue about a minor thing while getting a free ride.

The best way to deal with this is for everyone to make sure that no Fed gets his way for a month or two. When you see some out of shape dork wearing a cheap ugly tie and looking all self important around the ramp and gate, open your oxygen valve until you have enough left for two crewmembers but not enough for three. When you explain the problem to the FAA puke, follow it up by asking him, on an unrelated note. if the FAA is violating pilot for making TO PA's. They'll get the message!

Yes, some innocent Feds will get f'ed but that's OK. These POS's want to get a free ride and be a dick at the same time. Let them know they can't have it both ways.

 

[laserman2431]

There has always ben a kind of unspoken detent agreement. It benefits no one for one side to start picking on the other. Look at the way ATC has been getting kicked in the balls the last couple of weeks. I really feel sorry for them. The latest one I heard was that some Air Force small penis types reported the Cleveland tower guy because they could hear a TV in the background. What was the point of that. Work it out on the spot and keep the violations out of it unless there is a real safety hazard.

What do you think that CLE tower guy is going to do the next an Air Force guy makes a mistake in his airspace. I can tell you what I would do.

KMOX sounds like a reasonable type of person. Everyone know that the 10%ers in the FAA inspector ranks really add up to about 40%. The sad thing is that the airline guys let them get away with it.

 

[JAFI]

laserman, your education may be expanded if you decide to act on your rant.

I only ask that when you decide to act, let it be me.



Some CFR's that you need to review:

PART 25--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRPLANES
25.785 Seats, berths, safety belts, and harnesses.
(l) Each forward observer's seat required by the operating rules must be shown to be suitable for use in conducting the necessary enroute inspection.

PART 121—OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS
121.581 Observer's seat: En route inspections.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, each certificate holder shall make available a seat on the flight deck of each airplane, used by it in air commerce, for occupancy by the Administrator while conducting en route inspections. The location and equipment of the seat, with respect to its suitability for use in conducting en route inspections, is determined by the Administrator.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

One question you need to ask your self:

If the jump seat was not required by code for enroute inspections, would your company really pay to have it installed and maintained only to assist pilots get to work?

I think they would just make you move to your base like many companies do.


The observers seat is there for use by the Administrator or his/her proxy. If you work for a Air Carrier or fly a part 25 airplane, You do not have a say in when an Inspector uses it for inspections.

 

[johnpeace]

Isn't the j/s deferrable?

 

[JAFI]

Isn't the j/s deferrable?

Look at your MEL and the Catagory. It should be short term. As for O2, again look at your MEL. I will have to check but not having enough O2 is not a reason for "defering" the jumpseat. I just means you have to call maintenance to get it filled. Been down that road more than once.

 

[ace6453]

Look at your MEL and the Catagory. It should be short term. As for O2, again look at your MEL. I will have to check but not having enough O2 is not a reason for "defering" the jumpseat. I just means you have to call maintenance to get it filled. Been down that road more than once.

Actually it is deferrable due to not enough O2. Yes it is short term and it must be fixed, however you can't delay the flight and wait for contract mtc to fill the O2 just so the fed can ride the JS.

 

[sunlitpath]

Gentlemen, be careful on going to battle with the FAA (if you are considering it). It's a battle they will win 99.99% of the time.