Gee thanks Raven Careers

[derg]

And my point is this niche needs to be admonished. Not hand held to pass the next interview.

When you wrote Raven, what was their response?

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Seriously. Why do you care so much? Honest question. Why is this another one of the many hills that you're willing to die on?

Because the last two crashes, this was literally the issue with them in terms of many failures. And it left people dead. That’s why.

You have any other MO other than asking why I care about what ever topic it is? Seems kinda lame that’s what you fall back on every time.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

When you wrote Raven, what was their response?

Better idea. James, the owner of Raven, is a frequent contributor to the 21.Five podcast. I’d write them, and let James address the question to their large audience of aviators and avgeeks. If you write to Raven you probably won’t even get a reply. But if they air your question on the podcast, Raven will be forced to reply…

 

[BEEF SUPREME]

Better idea. James, the owner of Raven, is a frequent contributor to the 21.Five podcast. I’d write them, and let James address the question to their large audience of aviators and avgeeks. If you write to Raven you probably won’t even get a reply. But if they air your question on the podcast, Raven will be forced to reply…

Oh now. He doesn't care THAT much...

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Because the last two crashes, this was literally the issue with them in terms of many failures. And it left people dead. That’s why.

You have any other MO other than asking why I care about what ever topic it is? Seems kinda lame that’s what you fall back on every time.

I mean, it’s a good reason to care, and I agree that Max’s recent “you shouldn’t care about anything” attitude is a little too fatalist and nihilistic, but I think your conclusions may be faulty. Where is your data that demonstrates that multi-failure pilots have a higher accident rate?

 

[CFI A&P]

are you kidding? Do you know how many times some lawyers fail the bar exam? Once you pass on the 12th try, the other 11 are forgotten. At least with flying it sticks with you forever.

Or votes to become Speaker of the House.

 

[SteveC]

I mean, it’s a good reason to care, and I agree that Max’s recent “you shouldn’t care about anything” attitude is a little too fatalist and nihilistic, but I think your conclusions may be faulty. Where is your data that demonstrates that multi-failure pilots have a higher accident rate?

I thought that if something is anecdotal, and repeated often enough, that you were required to treat it as factual, no?

 

[EIR]

I know several ass*oles at the major airlines. Almost all of them took interview prep courses. They undoubtedly helped them help get hired.

This is no different. They prep you to pass.

Maybe an unprepped guy would say in an interview that he failed because they were out to get him, that it was really one examiner who hated him, and no one wanted him to pass, etc.

You know, point the finger everywhere but inside at self.

These prep courses help pilots present the proper format and lots of “don’t do” stuff so they can pass the interview.

And.....You're point is what?

 

[SteveC]

And.....You're point is what?

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

And.....You're point is what?

*eye twitch*


The point’s been made. People that have multiple, repeated failures in 121environments should be shown the door. Not coddled and encouraged towards a major airline. Q400 BUF, 767 IAH.

 

[Jimmy_Norton]

Who are you talking about?

You. I remember you caterwauling on when you were at XO about how you should get more tips when you land at SMO cause the runway is so short. Darn those people for making you work!

 

[Jimmy_Norton]

He’s questioning the standards that allow someone to fail 4 separate training events and get hired at a major. I think that’s a legitimate thing to question.

No one is perfect and we all have bad days, but multiple failures indicate a pattern of issues.

Then the legacy airlines need to improve their screening process.

 

[Kingairer]

*eye twitch*


The point’s been made. People that have multiple, repeated failures in 121environments should be shown the door. Not coddled and encouraged towards a major airline. Q400 BUF, 767 IAH.

I can understand why Raven would advertised they got this 'walking pink slip' hired. It says that "this is probably the worst candidate we've seen and we got him hired at a major. If we can get him hired, we'll easily get you hired."

 

[Kingairer]

*eye twitch*


The point’s been made. People that have multiple, repeated failures in 121environments should be shown the door. Not coddled and encouraged towards a major airline. Q400 BUF, 767 IAH.

I think failures of an instrument checkride or CFI something of that nature, not as big a deal 1 or 2 meh. You dont even know if you're a career pilot at that point, weak instructor, weird examiner or whatever. But you're exactly right, to fail 4 121 checkrides you need to be shown the door and find a new career.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

*eye twitch*


The point’s been made. People that have multiple, repeated failures in 121environments should be shown the door. Not coddled and encouraged towards a major airline. Q400 BUF, 767 IAH.

Again, present your data that supports this opinion. Not anecdotes. Data.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Again, present your data that supports this opinion. Not anecdotes. Data.

The data is based on crash history, recent accidents. I forgot UPS at BHM, although a lot of those failures/training issues were earlier in his career at UPS. But recent accident history shows when the cause was primarily due to pilot error, there has been a history of failures and paints a picture about that one pilot.

I have to remember, you were a rep and you defended pilots in these positions. So I get it, your mindset and viewpoint is different.

 

[SteveC]

The data is based on crash history, recent accidents. I forgot UPS at BHM, although a lot of those failures/training issues were earlier in his career at UPS. But recent accident history shows when the cause was primarily due to pilot error, there has been a history of failures and paints a picture about that one pilot.

I have to remember, you were a rep and you defended pilots in these positions. So I get it, your mindset and viewpoint is different.

That isn't technically "data" that you are presenting. At least not with any meaningful statistical validity.

 

[derg]

Oh now. He doesn't care THAT much...

He wrote US about it tho!

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

That isn't technically "data" that you are presenting. At least not with any meaningful statistical validity.

Luckily in this country, accidents are rare. For the most part, crashes that had pilot error as the primary cause almost always had a weak pilot in terms of training issues and failures. I’m not sure what else you’d like to see.

 

[SteveC]

Luckily in this country, accidents are rare. For the most part, crashes that had pilot error as the primary cause almost always had a weak pilot in terms of training issues and failures. I’m not sure what else you’d like to see.

It wasn't my request to begin with. I'm just sitting on the sidelines, pointing out that you were asked for data, and you provided something that was not data.

Talk to @SlumTodd_Millionaire about alternative proofs, if you think that will get you anywhere.