The Great Jumpseat War of 2019

Roger Roger said:
I look forward to the new era of F tha OM.

Uniform policy? That’s not safety related, wear what you want!

Alcohol within 12 hours? FAA says 8, we coo’!

Beards? Demonstrated to be a non-issue, go for it!
Click to expand...

You sound like a ticked off RAH or SKY pilot. Do you fly for one of those? I didn't say disregard everything in the FOM. I said I'll stick with the safer course of action and be able to explain my actions if called to a CP. If your FOM says wear a hat, there is no safety related reason not to wear a hat. There's no safety reason that shows 8 hrs is better than 12 hrs for alcohol. The longer the time that passes, the more of the alcohol that can get out of your system and reduce your BAC levels.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
You sound like a ticked off RAH or SKY pilot. Do you fly for one of those? I didn't say disregard everything in the FOM. I said I'll stick with the safer course of action and be able to explain my actions if called to a CP. If your FOM says wear a hat, there is no safety related reason not to wear a hat. There's no safety reason that shows 8 hrs is better than 12 hrs for alcohol. The longer the time that passes, the more of the alcohol that can get out of your system and reduce your BAC levels.
Click to expand...


Two questions here, re: your coke can.

1.) Have you never once brought an unsealed drink onto the flight deck?

2.) You have an avenue to effect change to your FOM. Everyone does. Have you attempted to do that?

If the answer to either of these is no then you are making excuses for casual non-compliance.
 
trafficinsight said:
Two questions here, re: your coke can.

1.) Have you never once brought an unsealed drink onto the flight deck?

2.) You have an avenue to effect change to your FOM. Everyone does. Have you attempted to do that?

If the answer to either of these is no then you are making excuses for casual non-compliance.
Click to expand...

No. Now when I bring a coke can into the flight deck, it’s sealed for “later use.” I just drink coffee or water now with crew meals.
 
trafficinsight said:
Two questions here, re: your coke can.

1.) Have you never once brought an unsealed drink onto the flight deck?

2.) You have an avenue to effect change to your FOM. Everyone does. Have you attempted to do that?

If the answer to either of these is no then you are making excuses for casual non-compliance.
Click to expand...
I have the guy you're talking to blocked but I'm literally a banner example of making excuses for casual non-compliance and I turned out fine. Joint I'm at now literally says do exactly what the book says except whenever captain wants to do something else.

I sure hope you're a big time captain worrying about this because if ur just FO'ing it in and taking any part in stuff that ain't yours and you can't control, just shrug and enjoy not having to worry about it. If this doesn't apply to you then if any skypest FO is reading this chill and while you're at it go make more money for a union carrier.
 
I think it's obvious where I'm at on this, but I do think there's a difference between the FAA violating me for my non-compliant Tacosaurus socks vs access to the flight deck. That said, you can't say "IT'S AN FOM VIOLATION" when it's right in the FOM. Stop bullying pilots into compliance with a stupid agenda.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
No. Now when I bring a coke can into the flight deck, it’s sealed for “later use.” I just drink coffee or water now with crew meals.
Click to expand...

So here's the deal...

You can't make the safety excuse for ignoring the rule because you are willing to bring an unsealed beverage into the flight deck when it suits you, and you haven't challenged the rule under safety grounds.

That said, you can do whatever you want with any rule in your FOM and choose to accept the consequences.

Want to fly an unstable approach and descend below mins without the required stuff? Go for it. But you will have to answer for that when something happens and nobody is going to buy your "my way was better" argument.

There are certain things in an FOM that would result in embarrassment, certain things that would result in unemployment, and then there are things that would result in unemployability.

Uniform standards are still not in our FOM, by the way. it seems as though some folks are having a hard time determining the difference between an FOM and a policy manual.
 
trafficinsight said:
So here's the deal...

You can't make the safety excuse for ignoring the rule because you are willing to bring an unsealed beverage into the flight deck when it suits you, and you haven't challenged the rule under safety grounds.

That said, you can do whatever you want with any rule in your FOM and choose to accept the consequences.

Want to fly an unstable approach and descend below mins without the required stuff? Go for it. But you will have to answer for that when something happens and nobody is going to buy your "my way was better" argument.

There are certain things in an FOM that would result in embarrassment, certain things that would result in unemployment, and then there are things that would result in unemployability.

Uniform standards are still not in our FOM, by the way. it seems as though some folks are having a hard time determining the difference between an FOM and a policy manual.
Click to expand...


So here’s the thing. Actually I can for soda cans, for my own safety reasons. Others may disagree with that assessment and think walking in and maneuvering to sit in their seat with a full open can is okay. Descending below mins and uniform stuff has nothing to do with this.
 
trafficinsight said:
So here's the deal...

You can't make the safety excuse for ignoring the rule because you are willing to bring an unsealed beverage into the flight deck when it suits you, and you haven't challenged the rule under safety grounds.

That said, you can do whatever you want with any rule in your FOM and choose to accept the consequences.

Want to fly an unstable approach and descend below mins without the required stuff? Go for it. But you will have to answer for that when something happens and nobody is going to buy your "my way was better" argument.

There are certain things in an FOM that would result in embarrassment, certain things that would result in unemployment, and then there are things that would result in unemployability.

Uniform standards are still not in our FOM, by the way. it seems as though some folks are having a hard time determining the difference between an FOM and a policy manual.
Click to expand...
Too much alphabet soup. Gets confusing numerous places with “non-standard” acronyms. First place had an FOM (right @Autothrust Blue ?), AOM I/II. Second (and I forget so thanks for correcting) had FOM and PPM. For the last couple years I’ve had a GOM and AOM I/II again. So some of us must be excused for thinking the FOM was equivalent to a GOM, or perhaps other carriers call it an FOM. Whilst you have a PPM that has that stuff in it. My mistake. Honestly just forgot. But, SAPA still done messed up.
 
B767 said:
Too much alphabet soup. Gets confusing numerous places with “non-standard” acronyms. First place had an FOM (right @Autothrust Blue ?), AOM I/II. Second (and I forget so thanks for correcting) had FOM and PPM. For the last couple years I’ve had a GOM and AOM I/II again. So some of us must be excused for thinking the FOM was equivalent to a GOM, or perhaps other carriers call it an FOM. Whilst you have a PPM that has that stuff in it. My mistake. Honestly just forgot. But, SAPA still done messed up.
Click to expand...
I’m just here so I don’t get fined.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
So here’s the thing. Actually I can for soda cans, for my own safety reasons. Others may disagree with that assessment and think walking in and maneuvering to sit in their seat with a full open can is okay. Descending below mins and uniform stuff has nothing to do with this.
Click to expand...

Neither do coke cans, which are merely an embarrassment scenario, depending on how many times you spray the overhead panel with sugar water I guess.

Allowing an unauthorized person into the flight deck is a different level of consequence.

So far nothing has changed and I hope it doesn't.


B767 said:
Too much alphabet soup. Gets confusing numerous places with “non-standard” acronyms. First place had an FOM (right @Autothrust Blue ?), AOM I/II. Second (and I forget so thanks for correcting) had FOM and PPM. For the last couple years I’ve had a GOM and AOM I/II again. So some of us must be excused for thinking the FOM was equivalent to a GOM, or perhaps other carriers call it an FOM. Whilst you have a PPM that has that stuff in it. My mistake. Honestly just forgot. But, SAPA still done messed up.
Click to expand...

It's understandable. All I'm really saying is that I'm going to guess that nobody's airline requires FAA approval for a uniform update.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top