US Pilot Labor Thread 7/27-8/3

[767jetz]

Captain's authority is captain's authority, whether it is with regard to the jumpseat or the fuel load, and should be defended equally and by all. As I said in my previous post, there will always be those on the fringe that abuse CA regardless of the flavor of the day. And allowances must be made for them in order to preserve the integrity of CA for the vast majority, as long as those few do not negatively affect safety.

 

[EastUS]

Captain's authority is captain's authority,.

On this jetz...we've the fullest agreement...even if some insist on playing the part of irresponsible little children, versus any semblance of actual professionals. I will note that anyone who's so easilly "distracted" by any jumpseater so as to be made "unsafe" shouldn't ever be trusted with, or even certified for commanding ANY aircraft in any case.

"I'm starting to believe it's more a case of "They honestly just don't know any better"."

 

[exB717Flyer]

Do you know the reason he was allegedly "fired"?

Does it matter? If the company wants to terminate a pilot it has to follow the contract. The final determination of whether the termination holds comes from an arbitrator. Of course, if you don't like the arbitrator's decision just vote in a new union that has a different procedure in its C&BL and you can then tell the company "Oh, that's a USAPA thing so it's irrelevent now."

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Situational Awareness appears to be an entirely neglected concept in some circles. "Give us a break, Landing." Good thing you didn't say "a brake" as that poster, within a previous thread, noted that with Madrid..among the longest runways in the world, he'd land a 330/no flaps using maximum manual braking, no autobrakes and that the only issue would be to (unbelievable..I know) taxi to the gate before the fuse plugs melt...neg notions of brake cooling procedures..neg concerns for ground personnel safety....and NO...seriously, I'm NOT kidding...all may look it up within the archives. NiceLandingCaptain: "After we touch down, its pretty much max everything - full reversers, heavy breaking, and keep sure you stay on the centerline. The last bit is important because it tells you that you are applying equal pressure to both sets of brakes." "Maybe you'd rather have Semen or Seham - whatever - explain the logic of using autobrakes". "After you've stopped its simply a matter of getting to the gate before all the fuse plugs melt and your tires go flat." NLC: "You eastyz just continue to ad lib your procedures like you always have. Us west pilots will continue to follow the procedures provided in our manuals like we always have." I did wonder what "manuals" he got the "procedures" of using max manual braking, on a runway literally useable as a space shuttle recovery point, and then to blithely taxi with superheated brakes all the way to the gate from....no matter I suppose = Folks..you just can't make this type of "Professional" ignorance and wholesale insanity up....Who would believe it?

I can't think of anyone more qualified to speak for the west on transatlantic fuel planning issues...and that's the saddest part 😉

"You whine about CA's authority and safety on the silly issue of jumpseats, but you attack us when it comes to fuel and CA's authority." Yes...mind-boggling indeed, but sadly typical "thinking" for some it seems. Apparently...it's an impossibly heroic effort to maintain even a "safe" level of awareness when accompanied by a jumpseater..and is righteously declared to be completely beyond the abilities of many out there..but mere trifles, such as fuel, are viewed as insignificant and even "political" in nature. The very same magnificent heroes and world class aviators there that've declared themselves to be utterly unable to even safely fly with merely the hideous distraction of a jumpseater......now turn and preach their clearly superior, nay, even awesome knowledge of atlantic fuel planning to any and all..without their having ever made so much as one such flight themselves...and even to an extremely experienced check airman. What can truly and fairly be said of such people?.... that's at all suitable for any public forum anyway? 😉 I'll just note that the truly scary part is that these people seem to actually believe their own BS, feel that dispatched fuel loads should never be questioned, immediately accept whatever management tells them, and seemingly haven't the slightest clue about even basic fuel planning concepts.

"I'm starting to believe it's more a case of "They honestly just don't know any better"."

Whoa nelly - east, you're on a roll today! Must have taken a look at your LOA 93 paycheck, minus u$$sap dues, and got a little agitated, I see.

Anyhow, why is it that every time a post appears from the west that effectively counters a philosophy of yours, you end up screwing yourself into the ceiling over it?

You rant and rave over just how awesome and experienced the east group of pilots are. You simply cannot stomach the fact that there is a ton of experience and professionalism on the west, too.

Tomorrow is July 31, and when this pilot group makes it past that benchmark, we will have completed 25 years of flying without having a single fatal accident. I won't say anything more than that. Our record speaks for itself - regardless of anything you have to say about it.

Once again: Twenty five years. Zero fatal accidents.

You should consider reeling that ego in a bit - your foibles are starting to fester a bit because of it. And your rants have become simply that: rants.........

 

[EastUS]

Whoa nelly - east, you're on a roll today! Must have taken a look at your LOA 93 paycheck, minus u$$sap dues, and got a little agitated, I see.

Not at all sir...I've just never gladly suffered fools.

"Once again: Twenty five years. Zero fatal accidents." An excellent thing that, and you might wish to properly give thanks to The Allmighty on all counts...rather than stupidly puff up your own tiny chest. I earnestly pray that, regardless of any/all differences..that not ONE of you ever suffers any crash or incident. I've no thoughts that, as referenced by your own sorry ignorance alone..that your record's reflective of any unusual skills or knowledge in any way.

I've lost good friends better than myself to whims of the sky, and mechanical failures, or simply fate if you will, and one to enemy action. For anyone to EVER arrogantly presume themselves "bulletproof" is the ultimate of all fool's errands...and is likely indicative of having never been sorely tested aloft. That I'm yet blessed with life I thank God and His Providence for...and am properly and completely greatfull.

You should consider reeling that ego in a bit -" Agreed. A few references to consider = "Pride cometh before a Fall. The Devil takes care of fools and drunkards. I'd rather be lucky than good anytime".

As for "rants"...That's just a nice additional attempt at distracting from your own clear and manifest inadequacies within issues of professional knowledge.
To that...I'll simply ask the following:

True or False: You posted the hopeless idiocy pertaining to how you would handle an A330 no flap landing at Madrid that I noted above??? 😉 Hint..it's archived.

 

[N965VJ]

Yeah, we feel real "outclassed". Man I wish Parker would have let your pile of rust airline go down the drain.

[/yawn]

<SNIP> Once again: Twenty five years. Zero fatal accidents.

What is with these westies making comments like this? It’s like whenever they run out of steam trying to make a point, the poo starts to fly out of the monkey cage.

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

True or False: You posted the hopeless idiocy pertaining to how you would handle an A330 no flap landing at Madrid that I noted above??? 😉 Hint..it's archived.

The post I made regarding this incident was in response to a non-insider (i.e. - a non-pilot) question here on the board. It did not reference MAD specifically, but was germane to Airbus non-normal landiings in general. The fuse plug comment was tounge-in-cheek - as opposed to one comment made about evacuating the aircraft right there on the taxiway. You seem to be too tight there , east. Have a chill pill or two.

It was you and your fellow drama queens who decided to mindelessly embelish, belittle, and otherwise berate my post. And it was you and your fellow DQ's who commented that you would not be flying the aircraft by the book - specifically the QRH. Take a look a it sometime: all the non-normal landing distance data is provided for landing using maximum manual braking.

Autobrakes are a wonderful system, but rely upon them in a non-normal situation, and you may have some explaining to do.

But of course, nothing like this would ever happen to you, east. You're too good........

So, to answer your question, false. My post was neither hopeless, nor was it idiocy. Those two words would more appropriately apply to you, Mr. 5000 Posts on US Av.

 

[EastUS]

[/yawn]


What is with these westies making comments like this? It’s like whenever they run out of steam trying to make a point, the poo starts to fly out of the monkey cage.

Umm...perhaps they just ran out of envelopes and stamps to send it with?

 

[EastUS]

The post I made regarding this incident was in response to a non-insider (i.e. - a non-pilot) question here on the board. but was germane to Airbus non-normal landiings in general. - as opposed to one comment made about evacuating the aircraft right there on the taxiway. You seem to be too tight there , east. Have a chill pill or two.
US Av.

NLC: "It did not reference MAD specifically," I see..which is why it was specifically posted within the thread addressing a no flap into Madrid...Yep..that makes sense.

NLC: "The fuse plug comment was tounge-in-cheek " Really?..It seemed pretty much in earnest..let's let the viewing audience decide. =NLC: ""After you've stopped its simply a matter of getting to the gate before all the fuse plugs melt and your tires go flat."

NLC: "And it was you and your fellow DQ's who commented that you would not be flying the aircraft by the book - specifically the QRH." Oh Really?..and in specifically what way?..I can't seem to find that anywhere. Perhaps you can provide a quote for us all?

NLC: "Autobrakes are a wonderful system, but rely upon them in a non-normal situation, and you may have some explaining to do." So...in the case of landing on one of the world's longest runways at Madrid,or most anywhere for that matter..You think it best to manually jam on the brakes instead "heavy breaking" as you stated....Interesting...and ridiculous. A better prescription for blown tires, brakes and possible fire I can't imagine.

NLC referencing he QRH: "Take a look a it sometime: all the non-normal landing distance data is provided for landing using maximum manual braking." Do you have not even the least clue that charts are based on Worst Case scenarios? Minimum landing disatance charts assume inoperative equipment = basic brakes, neg autobrakes. Do you NOT even understand that reverse thrust is not factored into the charts as well? Is it now your contention that, because the QRH doesn't have charted landing distance based on reverse thrust..that you "might have some explaining to do" if you use reverse thrust in an abnormal landing scenario? Do you even BEGIN to understand how charted data's even established?.and what it means to you as a supposed "pilot"?

NLC: "But of course, nothing like this would ever happen to you, east. You're too good........" Actually..a lot worse has happened to me. I've followed the appropriate procedures rather than inventing my own BS though. No one's ego ever has the least effect on what can and does happen.

NLC: "So, to answer your question, false. My post was neither hopeless, nor was it idiocy." I suppose that we'll all just have to take your word for that.

NLC: "Once we get suited up into our speed suits we all get down to focusing on what we do best - because, remember, wherever you go, we go too!"

I think we're done here.

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

NLC: "It did not reference MAD specifically," I see..which is why it was specifically posted within the thread addressing a no flap into Madrid...Yep..that makes sense.

NLC: "The fuse plug comment was tounge-in-cheek " Really?..It seemed pretty much in earnest..let's let the viewing audience decide. =NLC: ""After you've stopped its simply a matter of getting to the gate before all the fuse plugs melt and your tires go flat."

NLC: "And it was you and your fellow DQ's who commented that you would not be flying the aircraft by the book - specifically the QRH." Oh Really?..and in specifically what way?..I can't seem to find that anywhere. Perhaps you can provide a quote for us all?

NLC: "Autobrakes are a wonderful system, but rely upon them in a non-normal situation, and you may have some explaining to do." So...in the case of landing on one of the world's longest runways at Madrid..You think it best to manually jam on the brakes instead "heavy breaking" as you stated....Interesting...and ridiculous. A better prescription for blown tires, brakes and possible fire I can't imagine.

NLC referencing he QRH: "Take a look a it sometime: all the non-normal landing distance data is provided for landing using maximum manual braking." Do you have not even the least clue that charts are based on Worst Case scenarios? Minimum landing disatance charts assume inoperative equipment = just basic brakes. Do you NOT even understand that reverse thrust is not factored into the charts as well? Is it now your contention that, because the QRH doesn't have charted landing distance based on reverse thrust..that you "might have some explaining to do" if you use reverse thrust in an abnormal landing scenario? Do you even BEGIN to understand how charted data's even established?.and what it means to you as a supposed "pilot"?

NLC: "But of course, nothing like this would ever happen to you, east. You're too good........" Actually..a lot worse has happened to me. I've followed the appropriate procedures rather than inventing my own BS though. No one's ego ever has the least effect on what can and does happen.

NLC: "So, to answer your question, false. My post was neither hopeless, nor was it idiocy." I suppose that we'll all just have to take your word for that.

I think we're done here.

The thread was about a specific flight into MAD. My post, again, was a merely general comment. Please pay attention.

I can tell, there is no "instructing" you in the simulator. You have all the answers. But wait........

What is that there on the bottom of the page (14 P, for example, in the A320 green chapter)? Well, lookie there! Corrections for use of reverse thrust - right there on the chart! My goodness, how could such a steely eyed airdale such as eastus missed something as obvious as that?

As far as the data representing "worst case scenerio" you once again are merely blowing smoke. The landing data has nothing to do with adjectives. Its just pure numbers determined either by actual flight test or by emperical engineering computations.

Regardiing the "I think we're done here" comment: one could only hope.

 

[ussnark]

Does it matter? If the company wants to terminate a pilot it has to follow the contract. The final determination of whether the termination holds comes from an arbitrator. Of course, if you don't like the arbitrator's decision just vote in a new union that has a different procedure in its C&BL and you can then tell the company "Oh, that's a USAPA thing so it's irrelevent now."

On what rationale did the company supposedly base his termination? That would be a key issue, I would think. Beyond that, I don't think you or I have enough information to extrapolate anything more.

The article implies he was terminated to make the DHS actions easy, no employment, no gun. If so, he might have a couple of avenues for redress.

 

[EastUS]

You have all the answers. But wait........

What is that there on the bottom of the page (14 P, for example, in the A320 green chapter)? Well, lookie there! Corrections for use of reverse thrust - right there on the chart! My goodness, how could such a steely eyed airdale such as eastus missed something as obvious as that?

NLC: "The thread was about a specific flight into MAD. My post, again, was a merely general comment. Please pay attention." Nice tap dance attempt. You tried that one earlier on the Madrid thread after being called on your insane BS..it didn't work there either.

NLC: "I can tell, there is no "instructing" you in the simulator. " And you're comletely wrong in that assumption. I don't think of flying airliners as "Getting suited up in our speed suits", but rather as a very, very conservative endeavor,..and one which I'm always willing to learn more about.

Sorry son..don't have any A320 QRH handy to reference. You'll perhaps excuse my "missing" something within..my having never even seen the inside of an A320 QRH.

NLC: "The landing data has nothing to do with adjectives. Its just pure numbers determined either by actual flight test or by emperical engineering computations." Duh..what's your point?..and do you even know what said data's based upon?

NLC: "Regardiing the "I think we're done here" comment: one could only hope." Suits me..as you've nothing to show me.

 

[ussnark]

What is that there on the bottom of the page (14 P, for example, in the A320 green chapter)? Well, lookie there! Corrections for use of reverse thrust - right there on the chart! My goodness, how could such a steely eyed airdale such as eastus missed something as obvious as that?

He did not "miss that".

He stated that the data, as presented in the chart, is with manual brakes, as advertised. The chart does not mean such a landing must then be accomplished with manual brakes. The procedure, however, might, but that is a different animal indeed.

 

[boeingplt]

EastUS said:

"I've lost good friends better than myself to whims of the sky, and mechanical failures, or simply fate if you will, and one to enemy action. For anyone to EVER arrogantly presume themselves "bulletproof" is the ultimate of all fool's errands...and is likely indicative of having never been sorely tested aloft. That I'm yet blessed with life I thank God and His Providence for...and am properly and completely greatfull."

East,

This topic has generated some of the most troubling exchanges I have seen - going all the way back to the

good ol' days of the ALPA ntl forum. I always fell short of the mark when trying to provide the appropriate

response to these exchanges. Thank you very much, indeed, for so eloquently saying what needed to be said.

JD

 

[Phoenix]

But wait........

Oh no...

Ginsu Infomercials are so 80's.