Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
What do you have? 14 minutes? If it’s a real fireDoes anyone actually care what kind of maneuvers are used as long as it's a minimum (safe) time to ground situation and is reasonable, prudent, etc.?
What do you have? 14 minutes? If it’s a real fireDoes anyone actually care what kind of maneuvers are used as long as it's a minimum (safe) time to ground situation and is reasonable, prudent, etc.?
"An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic."What do you have? 14 minutes? If it’s a real fire
No, I mean before you die on average in an honest to god inflight fire"An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic."
Well that was easy enough.
"An aircraft in distress has the right-of-way over all other air traffic."
Well that was easy enough.
The point here is that the Company had a procedure and the OP deviated from that procedure on a CHECK RIDE. Not the best play on the board as far as I'm concerned. Fly their "stupid" procedure, pass the check ride, then do what you need to do when the smoke is actually spewing from your plane.No, I mean before you die on average in an honest to god inflight fire
Maybe I misread or misremember, but I thought he said he had been teaching and doing his technique for quite a while, then the new guy came in with his preferred technique and it went south from there…not a company procedure per se(?).
That's how I read it, and if that's the case, I don't see why OP wouldn't be pretty pissed off.Maybe I misread or misremember, but I thought he said he had been teaching and doing his technique for quite a while, then the new guy came in with his preferred technique and it went south from there…not a company procedure per se(?).
I believe that number is derived from the study of fires on transport-category aircraft. In a single-engine airplane, turbine or piston, I'm willing to bet you don't have nearly that long.What do you have? 14 minutes? If it’s a real fire
Very good point.I believe that number is derived from the study of fires on transport-category aircraft. In a single-engine airplane, turbine or piston, I'm willing to bet you don't have nearly that long.
I believe that number is derived from the study of fires on transport-category aircraft. In a single-engine airplane, turbine or piston, I'm willing to bet you don't have nearly that long.
I was also attempting to point out the difference between technique and procedure.He was a captain and IOE captain, he didn’t say anything about training captain so I’m not sure in what capacity he was teaching, regardless if the CP/ACP change or revise a procedure, then it’s incumbent on the training /ioe captains to use, demonstrate and teach said procedure. If a check airman doesn’t like it, then it’s up to them to work with the DOT/CP/ACP and not just teach their own way of doing things. Nobody has posted the SOP’s yet, so I’m not sure what they call for.
Re: single engine yes, still talking single engine. Go fly gliders a bunch and the notion of a pattern without an engine becomes far less daunting. If said engine is a confirmed burning fire and the checklist doesn’t extinguish it, then by all mean get it on the ground. It’s been my experience though, that we tend to set our plan of action by the first indication and pilots often make a “not a big deal” into a big deal. I’m guessing that more happened in the spiral that the ACP didn’t like.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Does anyone actually care what kind of maneuvers are used as long as it's a minimum (safe) time to ground situation and is reasonable, prudent, etc.?
I'm gonna assume there's booze involved. Drinking and posting can get...spiritedThe best takes.
But at least there's no mass and/or kinetic energy involved.I'm gonna assume there's booze involved. Drinking and posting can get...spirited
I'm pretty sure that very thought hung heavy in the mind of the FO on Swiss 111 as the Senior God Chief Training Captain ran line...
by line...
by line...
through every...
single...
line...
of the Cabin/Cockpit Fire Checklists in "Zee Buch of Instruction".
You are correct, he didn't post "training captain" this one is on me, my apology to the OP. What he wrote was that he is a Captain that has been training his method (technique, if you will) of handling an engine fire emergency that is contrary to the Company's training doctrine.He was a captain and IOE captain, he didn’t say anything about training captain so I’m not sure in what capacity he was teaching, regardless if the CP/ACP change or revise a procedure, then it’s incumbent on the training /ioe captains to use, demonstrate and teach said procedure. If a check airman doesn’t like it, then it’s up to them to work with the DOT/CP/ACP and not just teach their own way of doing things. Nobody has posted the SOP’s yet, so I’m not sure what they call for.
Re: single engine yes, still talking single engine. Go fly gliders a bunch and the notion of a pattern without an engine becomes far less daunting. If said engine is a confirmed burning fire and the checklist doesn’t extinguish it, then by all mean get it on the ground. It’s been my experience though, that we tend to set our plan of action by the first indication and pilots often make a “not a big deal” into a big deal. I’m guessing that more happened in the spiral that the ACP didn’t like.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How long can you glide?
Not disputed, merely ”argumentative.” Agreed.The point here is that the Company had a procedure and the OP deviated from that procedure on a CHECK RIDE. Not the best play on the board as far as I'm concerned. Fly their "stupid" procedure, pass the check ride, then do what you need to do when the smoke is actually spewing from your plane.