Heard the 705 AOC has been reinstated, probably some training flights with transport Canada watching.
Westwind
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore
Re: Westwind
Re: Westwind
Ya, with TC watching
I feel much safer now. Maybe if they would have been "watching" in the first f***ing place this probably wouldn't have happened. Muppets.....
Re: Westwind
Not yet it isn't. They're writing the draft report, there is still quite a process to go before the final report is released
Re: Westwind
Hopefully these "big" changes will get the company back to the level it was at 5-6 years ago. It's crazy how fast a company will fall when you appoint the wrong people to be in key upper managerial positions. WWA is in need of a fresh start to get their priorities back on track. This is a step in the right direction.
https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-n ... atal-crash
https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-n ... atal-crash
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 683
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am
Re: Westwind
If you look at the history of the new crew running this show there's been a lot of jobs on their resume over time.GARRETT wrote: ↑Wed Dec 05, 2018 9:35 pm Hopefully these "big" changes will get the company back to the level it was at 5-6 years ago. It's crazy how fast a company will fall when you appoint the wrong people to be in key upper managerial positions. WWA is in need of a fresh start to get their priorities back on track. This is a step in the right direction.
https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-n ... atal-crash
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1989
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Re: Westwind
What WEW needs is for the management of TWA that departed after the merger to return. I think the wrong management team left.
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 694
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 8:43 am
-
- Rank 1
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 11:22 pm
Re: Westwind
Nothing will change with Pat Campling still at the table with the rest of the adults.
Re: Westwind
The bottom line is it is the plots responsibility to ensure the airplane is not flown with contaminated flight surfaces.
The best way to stop these needless deaths, injuries and wrecked aircraft is to sue the pilots into bankruptcy and make them unemployable in the industry.
I have zero sympathy for any pilot who deliberately puts the public at risk or has an accident due to their negligence in the operation of the airplane.
The best way to stop these needless deaths, injuries and wrecked aircraft is to sue the pilots into bankruptcy and make them unemployable in the industry.
I have zero sympathy for any pilot who deliberately puts the public at risk or has an accident due to their negligence in the operation of the airplane.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1989
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Re: Westwind
I'd say do that, but to the operators who teach young and upcoming pilots that "a little ice is okay" "it's like speeding, everybody drives 10 over".C.W.E. wrote: The best way to stop these needless deaths, injuries and wrecked aircraft is to sue the pilots into bankruptcy and make them unemployable in the industry.
The thing cat seems to conveniently forget in his trolling is that there are operators who make their money bending and breaking rules. They hire fresh, moldable 200hr pilots and teach them that this is the way the real world is. If they don't buy into it, then they loose their first job with 220 hours total time. Gross weight, minimums, icing, fuel, all "personal limitations", and the best pilots push the hardest.
Every pilot learns in flight school about the clean wing concept. Then you get to your first job, are taught that "a "little ice" is like driving 10 over the limit. Those deice garden sprayers are there to make TC happy, sorta like the BS excuses you give to a cop when you get pulled over." I have sympathy for those pilots, but cat would rather bankrupt them and make them unemployable.
I bet if TC went to the accountable executive at some of the scummy operators and said "in a week, I'm going to be watching your operation from any one of your destinations, and I'm going to be there for a while. If I see one single plane take off with residential ice on the leading edge, I'm going to fine you personally 2x your annual total income". I bet there would be glycol and proper sprayers set up everywhere immediately. I also bet that the culture and teachings would change just as fast.
Re: Westwind
Good post GNF, every word is true, that's exactly what happens in the north of Canada. As for suing the pilots into bankruptcy, is that really going to do anything positive? What would that change? Just more unemployed 250 hour newbies who tried to stand up to the boss.
What TC really needs to do is make an example of the s**tty "accountable executives" who sit behind their desks and justify not having de-ice facilities available to their crew. Actually hold them accountable for once!! As it stands the AE is just a BS title on a BS safety statement in a manual, nothing more. Maybe sue these guys into bankruptcy instead of the pilots.
I also think some of the CP's out there need to grab a set of balls and stand up for your pilots! If you know they don't have all the tools to do the job properly, why are you not marching into the DFO's office demanding they change things? Do your f**king job!!!!
What TC really needs to do is make an example of the s**tty "accountable executives" who sit behind their desks and justify not having de-ice facilities available to their crew. Actually hold them accountable for once!! As it stands the AE is just a BS title on a BS safety statement in a manual, nothing more. Maybe sue these guys into bankruptcy instead of the pilots.
I also think some of the CP's out there need to grab a set of balls and stand up for your pilots! If you know they don't have all the tools to do the job properly, why are you not marching into the DFO's office demanding they change things? Do your f**king job!!!!
Re: Westwind
If the pilots who break the rules were sued into bankruptcy and out of the industry eventually there would be a shortage of pilots that will fly for these operators.Good post GNF, every word is true, that's exactly what happens in the north of Canada. As for suing the pilots into bankruptcy, is that really going to do anything positive? What would that change?
In the sixty five years I have been flying I can't recall either T.C. or DFO's doing anything worth while to stop illegal flying.What TC really needs to do is make an example of the s**tty "accountable executives" who sit behind their desks and justify not having de-ice facilities available to their crew. Actually hold them accountable for once!! As it stands the AE is just a BS title on a BS safety statement in a manual, nothing more. Maybe sue these guys into bankruptcy instead of the pilots.
I also think some of the CP's out there need to grab a set of balls and stand up for your pilots! If you know they don't have all the tools to do the job properly, why are you not marching into the DFO's office demanding they change things? Do your f**king job!!!!
Therefore I still believe it is up to the individual pilot to refuse to be pressured into flying illegally.
It worked for me and I retired with over thirty thousand accident free hours and zero regulation violations.
Re: Westwind
It is interesting, that in other jurisdictions, the regulator does hold the accountable executive....accountable.
The AE can pretty much hire who they like for ops mgr, DOM, CP. ( a few rules on the CP).
They screw up. It is the accountable executive who is......accountable. That does not excuse them from screwups, but it eliminates the sacrifice of some weak willed people who buckled to pressure.
TC’s enforcement policy seemed to be to bully and beat the weak, and leave the more formidable account executives alone. In my opinion, a rather misguided strategy.
The execption is those pilots who are willing to break every rule asked of them, to build hours and move on,
I wish afew of the parents of those who willing joined these sleazy companies, and lost a child would post on here. Maybe some of the youngins would get the picture.
The AE can pretty much hire who they like for ops mgr, DOM, CP. ( a few rules on the CP).
They screw up. It is the accountable executive who is......accountable. That does not excuse them from screwups, but it eliminates the sacrifice of some weak willed people who buckled to pressure.
TC’s enforcement policy seemed to be to bully and beat the weak, and leave the more formidable account executives alone. In my opinion, a rather misguided strategy.
The execption is those pilots who are willing to break every rule asked of them, to build hours and move on,
I wish afew of the parents of those who willing joined these sleazy companies, and lost a child would post on here. Maybe some of the youngins would get the picture.
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:59 pm
Re: Westwind
As always, ultimately the responsibility lies with the PIC. And I'm not familiar with the operator in question so take the following opinion with that grain of salt and know that it's worth what you paid for it. But I've flown in the north for long enough to be of the opinion that an equal helping of blame lies with the operator and whatever government body is responsible for operating any given northern airport for not providing the necessary equipment for the safe and legal operation of aircraft in and out of these dumps. The operators don't care to because they're really only interested in safety insofar as it doesn't affect their bottom line. In reality, the cost of properly equipping all of the places serviced by companies like this with suitable de-ice equipment for 705 ops would be prohibitive. It would just be cheaper to not go under those conditions. Of course, that's not an option if there's a nickel to be made. So you end up with garden sprayers full of iso. A nice little window dressing to give the illusion of a commitment to safety. Now the flight crew can be good dutiful boys and girls who get the job done and also bear all the responsibility. Just so long as we all agree not to ask exactly how a flight crew is supposed to de-ice all the critical surfaces of a large turbo prop using a garden sprayer while it's dark and snowing and minus 30 and blowing 25 knots and still make any kind of a hold over time. Do they make 30 foot A-frame ladders to get the tail? Hope your copilot has big brass balls to get up there.
And the various governments responsible for operating the aerodromes in these remote locations, do they bear any responsibility? It would be considered absurd if there were no fueling infrastructure on site in most of these places, be it a truck or pumps. In locations like these where there is potential for ice more often than not, wouldn't suitable de-ice equipment be just as, if not more critical to the safe and legal operation of aircraft that the communities supposedly rely on? I mean, outside of the high arctic, I can usually take round trip fuel while happily bumping payload. I suppose that would bring us back to the operators not appreciating that idea very much.
All of that to say that in this case, I don't really believe that bankruptcy by lawsuit is a fair punishment for the flight crew. Should they have attempted takeoff? Obviously not. And it's a devastating mistake they'll have to live with forever. But were they really given the tools required to do their job safely and legally? I don't think so. And for that, the operator should bear some responsibility. Those who fly in the north know the reality of situations like these. You're expected to "make it work" whatever the scenario. Doing it by the book would affect the bottom line, so the flight crew is expected to put their life and license on the line in order to make a profit for somebody else. Those who can and do are considered the best. Those who don't or can't are considered to be not cut out for flying in the north. I can't speak to all of them, but I strongly suspect that, explicit or implied, there's almost always some level of pressure to get 'er done with a lot of operators.
And the various governments responsible for operating the aerodromes in these remote locations, do they bear any responsibility? It would be considered absurd if there were no fueling infrastructure on site in most of these places, be it a truck or pumps. In locations like these where there is potential for ice more often than not, wouldn't suitable de-ice equipment be just as, if not more critical to the safe and legal operation of aircraft that the communities supposedly rely on? I mean, outside of the high arctic, I can usually take round trip fuel while happily bumping payload. I suppose that would bring us back to the operators not appreciating that idea very much.
All of that to say that in this case, I don't really believe that bankruptcy by lawsuit is a fair punishment for the flight crew. Should they have attempted takeoff? Obviously not. And it's a devastating mistake they'll have to live with forever. But were they really given the tools required to do their job safely and legally? I don't think so. And for that, the operator should bear some responsibility. Those who fly in the north know the reality of situations like these. You're expected to "make it work" whatever the scenario. Doing it by the book would affect the bottom line, so the flight crew is expected to put their life and license on the line in order to make a profit for somebody else. Those who can and do are considered the best. Those who don't or can't are considered to be not cut out for flying in the north. I can't speak to all of them, but I strongly suspect that, explicit or implied, there's almost always some level of pressure to get 'er done with a lot of operators.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1989
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am