Are We Safe?

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Illya Kuryakin
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1311
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:14 pm
Location: The Gulag Archipelago

Are We Safe?

Post by Illya Kuryakin »

Bunch of hiring going on. Everybody with 1000 hours and a smile is getting hired. And these pilots are not going to the Navajo (example type only) but going to fly Q400’s or jets. The exams are written, off these guys (and girls...I’m using “guys” as a non gender specific term here) go to the promised land. A few short years ago ( months? ) these same pilots would be forking out bond money to sit right seat in baffed out crap in towns starting with Fort, or ending in Lake. Now, with the training given by companies where these 1000 hour wonders are ending up, and the experience levels of their left seaters, all is probably going to be okay.

But, the lower levels of the industry are in really serious trouble. Safety wise, and experience wise. King Air ads are asking for total time levels that just don’t cut it. Safety wise. Sure, there are extremely good pilots with, say 1000 hours....but they’re buggering off to the aforementioned Q400 jobs.......see where I’m going here?

Question is a simple one. Are you SAFE in the back seat of that Navajo? The experience level of a short time ago is gone. Personally, I don’t think you are. Again, I’m using the poor Navajo as an example. I think our industry at this level is in dire trouble. Hope I’m wrong.

Illya
---------- ADS -----------
 
Wish I didn't know now, what I didn't know then.
sunk
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:51 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by sunk »

I totally agree with you. I would not put my family in anyone that operates Navajo's or king airs. Same goes for most floatplanes. I've seen more runway incursions, sloppy radio work, planes touching down long on short snow covered runways, etc. I think it's only a matter of time. People are being put left seat before they are ready.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Illya Kuryakin
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1311
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:14 pm
Location: The Gulag Archipelago

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by Illya Kuryakin »

sunk wrote: Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:00 am I totally agree with you. I would not put my family in anyone that operates Navajo's or king airs. Same goes for most floatplanes. I've seen more runway incursions, sloppy radio work, planes touching down long on short snow covered runways, etc. I think it's only a matter of time. People are being put left seat before they are ready.
It’s not just Navajos and King Airs, (used these as examples only) but any aircraft flown in this manner. I get that it’s hard to find experience. I really think we’re going to see an increase in accidents.
Illya
---------- ADS -----------
 
Wish I didn't know now, what I didn't know then.
User avatar
JasonE
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 837
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 8:26 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by JasonE »

Guess we have to either fly on wide bodies or fly ourselves!
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Carelessness and overconfidence are more dangerous than deliberately accepted risk." -Wilbur Wright
sunk
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:51 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by sunk »

I was using Navajo and king airs only in name as well. It's all smaller aircraft. Airport operators in Manitoba have some pretty scary stories with the DC-3 in the last six months as well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
valleyboy
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 797
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by valleyboy »

Was anyone ever safe in a Navajo or cabin class twin and of course don't get started on single engine turbines on wheels and imc. Life is a crap shoot. Anything can happen to anyone at any time. 😈
---------- ADS -----------
 
Black air has no lift - extra fuel has no weight
http://www.blackair.ca
digits_
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5931
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by digits_ »

I can see your point, but there are a few things that could balance it out, or make it even more safe.

1) People can walk away from unsafe jobs. Feel forced into doing stuff you are not comfortable with? Leave and within 2 weeks you can have another job.
2) Low time people are most often aware that they are "low time" and act accordingly. Low time people might be more comfortable going around or refusing trips, where as experienced pilots (but possibly new to the type) might perceive a lot of pressure to get the job done because they are experienced. Closely linked to 1)
3) Operators themselves are aware that pilots are being more and more low time, so they might/should adjust how they deal with bad weather etc
4) Going of the runway/making bad landings are obviously things to be avoided, but are accidents/incidents that are usually survivable without big injuries. CFIT/bad weather/icing are the big killers, which is more related to flying in iffy conditions when you shouldn't.

So I'd say the chances of getting into an aviation incident/accident have increased, but the chances of actually dying in one, are decreased.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
tired of the ground
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:38 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by tired of the ground »

1) People can walk away from unsafe jobs. Feel forced into doing stuff you are not comfortable with? Leave and within 2 weeks you can have another job.

True, but when the people themselves are the unsafe part, they can't just walk away from themselves. So, No.

2) Low time people are most often aware that they are "low time" and act accordingly. Low time people might be more comfortable going around or refusing trips, where as experienced pilots (but possibly new to the type) might perceive a lot of pressure to get the job done because they are experienced. Closely linked to 1)

No. They don't know, what they don't know. History has taught us that inexperience is absolutely a killer. It can be mitigated (I.E. airforce) but it is expensive and not seen at your typical sub 705 operation.

3) Operators themselves are aware that pilots are being more and more low time, so they might/should adjust how they deal with bad weather etc

Maybe. Again though that is a lot of babysitting and micromanaging that would need a very experienced person to do...... who left last month to Air Canada. So, probably No.

4) Going of the runway/making bad landings are obviously things to be avoided, but are accidents/incidents that are usually survivable without big injuries. CFIT/bad weather/icing are the big killers, which is more related to flying in iffy conditions when you shouldn't.

No. Inexperience is how one gets into conditions they shouldn't be in, otherwise you'd know not to be in that situation. I'd say a 1000 hour King Air captain with a 250 hour F/O is way more likely to have a loss of control incident the likes of which we traditionally have usually seen in doctor killers.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Zaibatsu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 602
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by Zaibatsu »

I think it’s going to insult a lot of sky gods when young pilots with a fraction of their hours and years of experience are going to do the same job just as good and hit the big iron pay dirt much sooner.

Seriously. You didn’t learn a lot on the ramp for years slogging bags waiting for a seat. You learned the basic ins and outs of the trade your first year as an FO... everything else was sitting on your ass, talking to the same guys on the radio, and going to the same airstrips until you got that coveted upgrade 2-3 years later.

There’s always hiccups and polishing your trade, but we have a lot of technology too that makes things already more efficient than they ever could have been in the old days. What’s going to happen when a 1000 hour King Air capt bends tin? Probably the same things that happen when a 5000 hour King Air capt did it.

I will say this, though. The lack of experience in Encore and Jazz aircraft is telling. But it’s more the efficiency than the safety aspect. Missing flow times. Not reading NOTAMs, doing full procedure Instead of contact, visual, or cancel on clear days, getting sprayed every time it’s colder than 0. Little things that are like... these are the guys Big Red and Team Teal are so desperate for?
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by C.W.E. »

I think it’s going to insult a lot of sky gods
Who are these " Sky Gods " Zaibatsu and how do we identify them so we can avoid them?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Redneck_pilot86
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1328
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: between 60 and 70

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by Redneck_pilot86 »

Its only going to get worse if/when these new duty regs come in to play.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The only three things a wingman should ever say: 1. "Two's up" 2. "You're on fire" 3. "I'll take the fat one"
TG
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2090
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 11:32 am
Location: Around

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by TG »

C.W.E. wrote: Sat Dec 23, 2017 7:40 pm
I think it’s going to insult a lot of sky gods
Who are these " Sky Gods " Zaibatsu and how do we identify them so we can avoid them?
No offence but you sound like one :mrgreen:
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by Cat Driver »

I think it’s going to insult a lot of sky gods when young pilots with a fraction of their hours and years of experience are going to do the same job just as good and hit the big iron pay dirt much sooner.
Yes the newer younger pilots can do the same job and just as well as those who did it thirty years ago because the airplanes are far more reliable and far more easy to fly due to modern technology.

But I still don't get the comment about sky gods?
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
shimmydampner
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1764
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:59 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by shimmydampner »

I’ve thought about this quite a bit lately, as I’ve watched former copilots I flew with when they had 200 hours get picked up by the majors and now are going captain in short order. Some were incredibly competent for their relatively low time, and others less so. My hope is that the training departments across the country continue to maintain high standards and don’t start lowering the bar in view of potential staffing issues. I think things will be ok at the 705 level. Let’s face it, the vast majority of 705 ops are dead simple. Autopilot from one huge paved runway to a precision approach at another is something that a 1500 hour ATPL should be capable of on an average day. If they have to do full procedures to feel comfortable because they haven’t flown a visual circuit since flight school, ok I guess. If we can’t have highly experienced crews, let’s let the inexperienced ones take an extra 10 minutes to paint by numbers.
As for 703/4 ops well, some pilots that would have learned stuff in a 185 or 206 or Navajo will now learn it in a Beaver or Caravan or King Air. I don’t know that that will make them any more prone to error, it will just up the ante slightly.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by Rockie »

shimmydampner wrote: Sun Dec 24, 2017 9:54 am Let’s face it, the vast majority of 705 ops are dead simple.
I would disagree with that opinion. And even in your view there's the corresponding "slim minority" that crews must also deal with safely.
---------- ADS -----------
 
atphat
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by atphat »

shimmydampner wrote: Sun Dec 24, 2017 9:54 am Let’s face it, the vast majority of 705 ops are dead simple.
Spoken again like someone who has never done it. I've done both. Major 705 ops are infinitely more complex. They aren't even comparable really. All flying should be paint by numbers flying, save floats and skis. That's what makes it safe. :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by C.W.E. »

Major 705 ops are infinitely more complex.
In what way are they infinitely more complex?

Can you elaborate and give a few examples so those of us who do not understand the complexity can learn?
---------- ADS -----------
 
atphat
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by atphat »

Nah I’m good. But I’ll edit by saying “vastly” rather than “infinitely”.
---------- ADS -----------
 
C.W.E.
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1262
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:22 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by C.W.E. »

Nah I’m good
So you are unable to back up what you posted?
---------- ADS -----------
 
atphat
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Are We Safe?

Post by atphat »

C.W.E. wrote: Sun Dec 24, 2017 10:51 am
Nah I’m good
So you are unable to back up what you posted?
I just don’t care what you think or if you understand.
That’s all

Merry Christmas
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”