Feds & ALPA questioning RJ pilots training & supervision

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Every pilot should give serious pause prior to balancing fuel after an engine failure.

Many times you will be on the ground prior to a serious imbalance....or if you must crossfeed...do it with a serious imbalance pending...and give it great consideration.

[/ QUOTE ]

After many years of V1 cuts around the pattern to an engine out landing, I can't think of an airplane that wouldn't at least be approaching imbalance limits on such a manuver. Most of the time would exceed. Now I don't think the airplane is going to fall out of the sky if it exceeds imbalance limits, but I think it would be a hard sell to the FAA to say "our new procedure is no fuel balancing, regardless of limitations being exceeded, just in case there might be a fuel issue."

Air Transat was a unique situation. They were late catching the excessive fuel consumption, then the captain refused to believe it for awhile. Don't know what relevance it has to an engine out situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are going to exceed imbalance limits...then crossfeed. It seems I fly the sim with almost 100% of pilots that instinctively reach up and open the crossfeed valve after securing the engine...then forget about the fuel until after landing...as if this will keep them in balance. This is not crossfeeding and will many times take you further out of balance. That's why I state that crossfeeding should be done with great consideration...and not abitrary action.

I like what Doug said previously...isolate the fuel systems until necessary to correct an imbalace. Immediately opening the crossfeed valve is arbitrary and unnecesarry.
 
I think more than anything, if these airlines want to start getting better pilots, they need to find more professional pilots. Professional pilots realize their faults and limitations, and they realize what they don't know. Then they try to fix it. Employees just do the job based on the minimum they know, and "get by." The problem is, there is no "getting by" in aviation. You either know it, or you don't. When you don't, it's only a matter of time when you will be tested on what you don't know. Whether it be a system, radar, aerodynamics, or anything of the sort.

We all know I got hired with low time. For that, I am fortunate. But that didn't mean I could just sit on my hands and say, "Cool, I'm here. I can relax." No, that's not the way it works. You must find the things you need to know, and learn them. On your own, on your off days if that's what it takes. Right now, I have nine books stacked in my room that I'm going through one by one, each with something new to learn.

This captain had nearly 7000 hours. That is a good chunk of flight time, especially at a regional airline. There is no excuse for not knowing about high-altitude aerodynamics and the altitude charts. Not relating a high ISA to climb. I see examples of this all the time.

Yes, experience is important. But even more important is what you do while gaining that experience. You can have 10,000 hours, but if it's all time full of immmature horseplay, then it won't be worth much compared to the pilot who is diligent, professional, and has 1/4 of that time.
 
Someone told me a while back that in 1969, United Air Lines was hiring pilots out of Berkeley (among other schools) with little or no flying experience? I'm sure the UAL Captains had thousands of hours. Does anyone have additional insight?
.
 
Re: Food for thought

It's been relatively known for some time both guys were from Gulfstream, but it wasn't just this accident that prompted Pinnacle to say "no more". There was a rash of five accidents/incidents at Pinnacle, culminating with that crash, which had Gulfstream pilots behind the controls.

I highly doubt minimums will be raised across the board unless there are a stream of accidents stemming from lack of experience.

On the CRJ, there is a structural limitation on the fuel imbalance between the left and right tanks. Usually, through automation, fuel is automatically balanced between the two tanks, however, there is a manual overrride.

Thanks.
 
Re: Food for thought

5?? I know of the JEF and MKE accidents....what are these other "incidents?"



Remember NWA landed at the wrong airport last year.... this recent attempted mating between an A319 and DC-9....and every winter at least a couple DC-9's go skipping off the end of some runway. They've got one of the best training departments around too.
 
Re: Food for thought

[ QUOTE ]
Remember NWA landed at the wrong airport last year....

[/ QUOTE ]That's actually happened to some pretty intelligent, well-trained pilots. Not that it should . . . but our eyes/minds have a nasty habit of showing us what we expect to see, not necessarily what's really there.

[ QUOTE ]
this recent attempted mating between an A319 and DC-9....and every winter at least a couple DC-9's go skipping off the end of some runway. They've got one of the best training departments around too.

[/ QUOTE ]I would argue those are mx issues, not pilot training. Although I suppose there is an argument that the A319/DC-9 pilot should have called for a tow after landing with hydraulics issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top