jrh
Well-Known Member
Maybe they should. None of them have ever gone down. Just sayin'.
Ameriflight PA-31 Accident - Arizona
- Thread starter Inverted
- Start date
Maybe they should. None of them have ever gone down. Just sayin'.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
AMF training doesn't exist. You either can fly well when you show up and they put you through the wringer or you don't fly for them at all.
I don't know why jrh is getting push back on the idea that safety shouldn't be a movable line depending on what is in back. Seems odd.
I personally think most of the bent metal issues at AMF, maybe this one too, are all about fatigue and it will continue until they realize that.
I don't know why jrh is getting push back on the idea that safety shouldn't be a movable line depending on what is in back. Seems odd.
I personally think most of the bent metal issues at AMF, maybe this one too, are all about fatigue and it will continue until they realize that.
z987k
Well-Known Member
You mean you can't go 5-6 days a week on 5 hours a night, tops, indefinitely?
The training comment is also true. They should just call it evaluation.
Inverted
mmmmmm wine
I disagree with this. You were never a training captain. But I can see how there is a large percentage of people involved with training who might treat it like that, I never did.
z987k
Well-Known Member
I've done some bone headed things while flying single pilot(that an sic probably would have caught), one ATC caught because I was actually in a radar environment. Nothing too terrible, still nothing I'm going to tell specifics of on a public forum. Each one wouldn't even be remotely possible with the avionics I have now. Not unless I became incapacitated.
I don't know if people will call that crutching on the avionics. Honestly I don't care too much. I know I can fly around in the national airspace system /U or /A, I've done it. I also know that my flying is vastly safer with all the bells and whistles. I make mistakes from time to time. I try not to, but I think acknowledging that I will, because I'm not perfect, is better. So, personally, I'll take anything you can give me to help me out.
z987k
Well-Known Member
Ah, well it could be rephrased. The line training was hit or miss. The training capt I had on the 99 was awesome. Pa31 was just terrible. The sim training was beyond worthless.
Tommay85
Well-Known Member
Give me a freaking break! Mountain flying is dangerous????
Mountain flying is a cake walk compared to flying in convective or REAL icing conditions. If you combine any of the three, you're a moron. No question. There's a reason the ACP in OMA despises every single person that hasn't flow in the Midwest.
Mountain flying is a cake walk compared to flying in convective or REAL icing conditions. If you combine any of the three, you're a moron. No question. There's a reason the ACP in OMA despises every single person that hasn't flow in the Midwest.
Inverted
mmmmmm wine
Oh god. I'm not even going to respond to this.
Tommay85
Well-Known Member
I'd like it if you would because frankly, mountain flying seems to be much more black and white in my experience.
Almost every single person I met in SLC had a story why they almost killed themselves or bent an airplane up, and I agree completely with JRH with AMFs perceived safety culture. On one hand, yes, it's the PICs ultimate decision, especially in regards to AMF, but there's a metric crap ton of penis measuring constantly.
Almost every single person I met in SLC had a story why they almost killed themselves or bent an airplane up, and I agree completely with JRH with AMFs perceived safety culture. On one hand, yes, it's the PICs ultimate decision, especially in regards to AMF, but there's a metric crap ton of penis measuring constantly.
I flew feeder for about 4 years, and recently after watching an FAA training video about fatigue and stress, and how it leads us to make mistakes even when we don't feel fatigued or tired, I did some digging in my own logbook, and came to the realization that every single pilot-error that I've had to write reports on, have been within a week of returning from a training event, plus one event that I did shortly after a very stressful period of imminent furlough. None of my screw-ups have warranted more than an "atta-boy, you'll never do that again", but still, flying feeder and keeping a wife had me sleeping 5 hours per night until I could catch up on Saturdays, and the slightest disruption to make this hard schedule harder, lead to the non-random incident pattern in my own logbook.
murphfly
Well-Known Member
If the ACP in OMA is still who I think he is...doesn't mean much!
SpiraMirabilis
Possible Subversive
FTFY.
I know, right? I can't tell you how many times I've wanted to scream that just because it's legal doesn't mean it's automatically smart.
There's been a lot of intelligent people weighing in on this thread so I'm not going to try to add too much, but from my perspective of doing this night freight thing for a year I think the best way to increase safety would be to require an A/P or SIC for ALL 135 IFR ops, not just pax.
We have a small minority of our Navajos that are so equipped and when I've got the opportunity to fly one of those and sit back and "manage" rather than hand fly the six pack the whole trip I'm much more alert and aware.
That could also account for the difference in Cape Air and AmFlight safety records as being a pax operation they're required to have one or the other.
Also to say that Cape Air doesn't have terrain to deal with is not accurate. Sure, they're not the Rockies but New England has its fair share of terrain. Probably more ice than I've had to deal with as well.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
There shouldn't be a different level of safety between either in principle. Neither is more dangerous if use your head. Don't fly through thunderstorms, anything greater than MOD icing, and plan your route so you always have an escape plan and it doesn't make a damn difference whether your flying in Kansas or Colorado. Source: I've done both midwest flat-land flying and mountain flying.
In terms of what I think is more fun? Obviously mountain flying. ;-)
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
This is the thing, it shouldn't be a movable line. Flying boxes in the middle of the night shouldn't be more dangerous than flying passengers in similar equipment. It stands to reason (at least to me) that the issue is "fixable" given proper equipment, proper training, and by addressing hazardous attitudes and conditions that lead to unnecessary external pressures.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Well I suppose it fundamentally comes down to the level of risk that People (at large) are willing to accept. It seems like they're more willing to accept a higher level of risk for the poor bastard bringing them their new IPhone than for the guys bringing them their family. The morality of the question is kind of a second-order thing. Because there will always be a long line of dudes willing to take on a slightly higher level of risk to chase the brass ring of multi time (or turbine-time, or, in some cases, just time). The notion that this is changeable is, IMHO, a fantasy. People aren't going to start caring as much about some faceless aviation appliance-operator as they do about even their theoretical family. Given that it's not going to change (and really, it isn't), we can talk until we're blue at the mouth about it, but it's still going to come down to what you, an individual human being, are willing to take on. Certainly, I don't have anything bad to say about people who value their lives just slightly above the level of risk involved in Freight. That's why God gave us RJs. But the economics of the thing (as those of most things) will sweep over whatever objections the small group of people tasked to do the job have to say (as usual). When it's between $5 shipping for an Iphone and some dude you don't know or care about possibly dying to get it there tomorrow and $10 shipping and it'll get there when it gets there, 99% of the Joe Publics are going to click on the $5 shipping, and feel just fine about it. That's the reality, and I'll bet you dollars to donuts it's not going to change.
Thing is, the equipment is proper. Could it be better? Anything added is nice (and that may be what you're saying). Training should be good, but at the same time, you don't come to a job like night freight without at least some skills/experience/wisdom already. It certainly isn't an entry-level job. The hazardous attitudes, judgement, pressures, etc, Im definitely with you on in terms of setting the proper culture with those. At the same time, as we've both mentioned before, even with doing that...stupid won't be fixed, and neither will the guy who does everything right and still gets dealt a bad hand. But it's good to set that culture within the company.
And with this reality, the easiest thing to come back to is the PIC, in terms of making smart decisions to the best of his ability and being the last-ditch risk mitigator in the operation, combined with making the best decisions for a given situation.
Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
Quite so. I'm glad you posted here, especially, Mike. Because no one would suggest that military pilots have (or should have) the "same level of risk" as running the Skybus from JFK to LAX. I sort of suspect that flying an F-117 over Baghdad (or even, say, a C-17 over the UAE) is orders of magnitude more dangerous than flying a Navajo from any point in the contiguous US to any other point, but I don't know. The point, AFAICT, remains that "one level of safety" is sort of like "all men are created equal". It's a goal to strive for, not a reality that's attainable. And in the mean-time, the stuff needs to move. It's all economics. War, peace, freight, pax. We're all disposable, and there are no absolutes.
Which, I hasten to add, is not to compare, morally, going to War vs flying the rubber dog-doo from one place to another. They bear comparsion only in terms of Risk, and the acceptance/amelioration of the same. Uh, IMHO, etc etc.