Colgan POI forced out during Q400 certification

It's not exactly clear in the article who he is suing. Is it gulfstream or the FAA because of PRIA documents or something?
 
tonyw said:
I think I went to high school with the guy who wrote that article. Charlie...there's your in.
Click to expand...


I've actually already spoken to members of that paper- they wanted to interview me but schedules clashed before they went to print.

If you can put me in contact with that particular author or others like him, please do.

Send him to the R3407P site, if you want.
 
jtrain609 said:
One fed?

It's THE fed. The guy that is supposed to make sure that Colgan is following the FAA rules, reviews their ops specs, operations, blah blah blah.

This is THE CONNECTION between the FAA and the company, not some random inspector.
Click to expand...

HE ABSOLUTELY 100% WAS NOT THE POI AT THE TIME. He was the POI in 2004 for a SHORT time.

Our POI is Douglas Lundgren, a person who was completely satisfied with the implementation of the Q400.

Christopher Monteleon was the inspector in charge of overseeing th Q400 when it came. He failed his Q400 PC at Colgan and therefor was removed as the inspector in charge.

He also was fired from CCAir for landing at the wrong airport!
 
Everyone, HOLSTER your flaming balls of fire.. I'm asking a simple question:

Anyone know how many of the regional crashes lately have involved a Gulfstreamer behind the yoke?
 
SmitteyB said:
3 out of 4. Long thread already.
Click to expand...

Kinda what I thought.. I couldn't remember..

Worst captain's I've flown with have been Gulfstreamers.... I've had several that were decent.. I've had more who evenutally mentioned they were Gulfstreamers and it all made sense..

I haven't sifted through this whole thread.. It makes my head spin.. :)
 
SmitteyB said:
3 out of 4. Long thread already.
Click to expand...

[general comment]

I'm no fan of Gulfstream. But to be fair, even the crashes where someone from Gulfstream was part of the crew, they were still trained at their new job and passed a checkride, to even be able to be where they were to crash the plane. Point being, there was time and traning post-Gulfstream and in their new job, that Gulfstream shouldn't have to be held accoutable for.

That's like me being in an accident when I was in the AF, and someone trying to say that my first 135 cargo job 15 years prior was somehow causal in some way to the accident.

The Lexington accident as well as the 3701 accident, I wouldn't attribute to Gulfstream at all, even though there were crewmembers who did the Gulfstream program. If anything, broke system of hiring low-time guys, or of training at their current carrier, or lack of instilled flight disipline at their carrier (3701); were far more causal.

I too don't like Gulfstream's program or any other PFJ, but I don't let that dislike get in the way of some of the true factors of various accidents.

[/general comment]
 
SmitteyB said:
HE ABSOLUTELY 100% WAS NOT THE POI AT THE TIME. He was the POI in 2004 for a SHORT time.

Our POI is Douglas Lundgren, a person who was completely satisfied with the implementation of the Q400.

Christopher Monteleon was the inspector in charge of overseeing th Q400 when it came. He failed his Q400 PC at Colgan and therefor was removed as the inspector in charge.

He also was fired from CCAir for landing at the wrong airport!
Click to expand...

Which inspector was around when Colgan was getting all the speed busts and they had to have pilots put in the jumpseat to help watch the speed? The Chris guy or the Doug guy?

Also, years back when I was at Colgan, we had a POI decide we couldn't do pre-contaimination checks on the aircraft, that was another guy I thought.

Also in regard to POI's failing tests and such. Our Saab fleet is restricted to 35 knot crosswinds because the POI couldn't land the sim with one and didn't see how the real aircraft could, no matter how many pilots told him the opposite. So a POI not passing a PC doesn't surprise me I guess.
 
MikeD said:
[general comment]

I'm no fan of Gulfstream. But to be fair, even the crashes where someone from Gulfstream was part of the crew, they were still trained at their new job and passed a checkride, to even be able to be where they were to crash the plane. Point being, there was time and traning post-Gulfstream and in their new job, that Gulfstream shouldn't have to be held accoutable for.

That's like me being in an accident when I was in the AF, and someone trying to say that my first 135 cargo job 15 years prior was somehow causal in some way to the accident.

The Lexington accident as well as the 3701 accident, I wouldn't attribute to Gulfstream at all, even though there were crewmembers who did the Gulfstream program. If anything, broke system of hiring low-time guys, or of training at their current carrier, or lack of instilled flight disipline at their carrier (3701); were far more causal.

I too don't like Gulfstream's program or any other PFJ, but I don't let that dislike get in the way of some of the true factors of various accidents.

[/general comment]
Click to expand...

I still find myself breaking old habits that I learned from Colgan that were a part of the cowboy mentality. Being my first 121 job I feel that has a lot to do with the old rule of primacy. I've been at Mesaba for a while now and have had great training, but the old "can-do" attitude pokes its head out every once in a while when things get tight and fast.

While I agree with your point Mike, and I think someone else made a similar point earlier in the thread, I wonder sometimes if you can't teach an old dog new tricks, no matter how good a teacher.
 
jynxyjoe said:
I still find myself breaking old habits that I learned from Colgan that were a part of the cowboy mentality. Being my first 121 job I feel that has a lot to do with the old rule of primacy. I've been at Mesaba for a while now and have had great training, but the old "can-do" attitude pokes its head out every once in a while when things get tight and fast.

While I agree with your point Mike, and I think someone else made a similar point earlier in the thread, I wonder sometimes if you can't teach an old dog new tricks, no matter how good a teacher.
Click to expand...


Here at Eagle, we call that the 'Mission Mentality'. The Union just put out an email about avoiding that.

Our jobs, after all are to get people there.. safely.

Timeliness is secondary. Remind's me of MikeD's comments on "mission creep".

Seems we let all sorts of imperatives get into our heads these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top