False log book entries
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:54 am
False log book entries
What do Airline pilots think of pilots that have falsified their pilot times in the log book that fly among them?
thanks
Tractor747
thanks
Tractor747
Re: False log book entries
Are you just trolling? What do you expect to hear?
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:54 am
Re: False log book entries
Pilots opinionssstaurus wrote:Are you just trolling? What do you expect to hear?
-
- Rank 1
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:25 am
- Location: CNU8
Re: False log book entries
Gotta love Friday Troll posts. Nothing to see here folks, keep it moving...
Re: False log book entries
Ok I'll bite.
The idea of basing your hiring on the number of hours in a logbook is foolish. If a pilot's flying and knowledge is good enough to get them the job, the hours shouldn't change anything. Experience matters, but I know some 2000 hour guys who are far better all around pilots than many 10 000 hour guys.
Most pilots view career progression as a pay your dues or seniority system rather than a meritocracy. Obviously when you have sat there for years accepting crappy conditions to "build up your hours" because that's how you get a less crappy job and someone shows up who is just as good a pilot as you but skipped the crappy job part you get upset regardless of how they got there.
Integrity though, is also an important quality for a pilot. It really bothers me how many pilots we have out there who just don't value their integrity. I personally know 3 705 airline chief pilots who would view with disgust any pilot who they found good enough to hire but turned out to have lied about their hours while at the same time they have no problem lying to their pilots, staff, mechanics, and passengers.
The idea of basing your hiring on the number of hours in a logbook is foolish. If a pilot's flying and knowledge is good enough to get them the job, the hours shouldn't change anything. Experience matters, but I know some 2000 hour guys who are far better all around pilots than many 10 000 hour guys.
Most pilots view career progression as a pay your dues or seniority system rather than a meritocracy. Obviously when you have sat there for years accepting crappy conditions to "build up your hours" because that's how you get a less crappy job and someone shows up who is just as good a pilot as you but skipped the crappy job part you get upset regardless of how they got there.
Integrity though, is also an important quality for a pilot. It really bothers me how many pilots we have out there who just don't value their integrity. I personally know 3 705 airline chief pilots who would view with disgust any pilot who they found good enough to hire but turned out to have lied about their hours while at the same time they have no problem lying to their pilots, staff, mechanics, and passengers.
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2396
- Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:47 am
- Location: The weather is here, I wish you were beautiful.
Re: False log book entries
They love it, it's admired; it shows the ability to think outside of the box and to not believe in the no-win scenario. That's how I beat the Kobayashi Maru.
-
- Rank 4
- Posts: 288
- Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:55 pm
Re: False log book entries
Dumb question Tractor, I'm sure you know the answer. It is known as "Parker Penning" and it is only done by the lowest, skum-bag, bottom feeders, known to man.
They (usually) get caught and their names spread like wild fire. It is a very small industry and there are no secrets.
They (usually) get caught and their names spread like wild fire. It is a very small industry and there are no secrets.
Re: False log book entries
See what I mean. We'd rather work with pedophiles than someone who got his position solely on flying ability.Stu Pidasso wrote:Dumb question Tractor, I'm sure you know the answer. It is known as "Parker Penning" and it is only done by the lowest, skum-bag, bottom feeders, known to man.
They (usually) get caught and their names spread like wild fire. It is a very small industry and there are no secrets.
Re: False log book entries
Oh gosh, I should run someone's political campaign.ahramin wrote:We'd rather work with pedophiles.
Re: False log book entries
Seems a bit extreme.... I'd like to think that good employers, recognize good time. I'm not sure that applies somewhere with an HR department. As to what are my thoughts on the matter? I think if you do it to get the "good jobs" it's going to bite you, really hard.Stu Pidasso wrote: It is known as "Parker Penning" and it is only done by the lowest, skum-bag, bottom feeders, known to man
E
- single_swine_herder
- Rank 7
- Posts: 627
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:35 pm
Re: False log book entries
ahramin put it well ..... numbers in the log are not solely indicative of a pilot's skill, cunning, ability to properly operate a multi-million dollar company asset, or above all ..... aviation knowledge.
A recent pilot upgrade to Captain interview series at a major employer also included a sim session based on the most common emergency drill memory items, and a short written exam. After several failed the written exam, the union steward filed a complaint about the upgrade process being way too hard and containing all kinds of really tough physics questions..... asking "what does physics have anything to do with flying an airplane?"
The questions were prepared by a "Copy & Paste" method with maybe 5 questions taken directly from each subject area of the sample examination for the Private Pilot exam ....... so where have these people been since they had about 50 or 60 hours of experience?
Oh, the two that did well on the interview, sim, and written? As you may expect .... were people who continued to learn about aviation and its state of the art as classic examples of the classic "its a licence to learn." The others seemed to think all that was required to have a long, diverse, highly successful aviation career paying six figures as a Captain on a glass cockpit aircraft was to have the ability to roll a drum of fuel up a ramp or land an airplane without anyone being hurt.
Heaven forbid there should be any of that "Book learnin' stuff" involved in the process of being a pilot in this technology based industry over the next few decades.
A recent pilot upgrade to Captain interview series at a major employer also included a sim session based on the most common emergency drill memory items, and a short written exam. After several failed the written exam, the union steward filed a complaint about the upgrade process being way too hard and containing all kinds of really tough physics questions..... asking "what does physics have anything to do with flying an airplane?"
The questions were prepared by a "Copy & Paste" method with maybe 5 questions taken directly from each subject area of the sample examination for the Private Pilot exam ....... so where have these people been since they had about 50 or 60 hours of experience?
Oh, the two that did well on the interview, sim, and written? As you may expect .... were people who continued to learn about aviation and its state of the art as classic examples of the classic "its a licence to learn." The others seemed to think all that was required to have a long, diverse, highly successful aviation career paying six figures as a Captain on a glass cockpit aircraft was to have the ability to roll a drum of fuel up a ramp or land an airplane without anyone being hurt.
Heaven forbid there should be any of that "Book learnin' stuff" involved in the process of being a pilot in this technology based industry over the next few decades.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:54 am
Re: False log book entries
So what you are saying then that it won't hurt anyone if we all added a few hours whether it was 50 or 500 or 1000 to get us over that hump and in front of the line as long as you are a skilled and can carry the experience. It does make sense, but what happens if one of these pilots that all of a sudden carried a few hundred hours in their log book illegally and ended up putting the airplane into the ditch and injured or killed a few people. Would their employer go back and investigate their past and if it happens to be that they cheated could this employer then be sued for hiring a corrupt pilot or would they be off the hook because they trusted the log book of this pilot?ahramin wrote:Ok I'll bite.
The idea of basing your hiring on the number of hours in a logbook is foolish. If a pilot's flying and knowledge is good enough to get them the job, the hours shouldn't change anything. Experience matters, but I know some 2000 hour guys who are far better all around pilots than many 10 000 hour guys.
Most pilots view career progression as a pay your dues or seniority system rather than a meritocracy. Obviously when you have sat there for years accepting crappy conditions to "build up your hours" because that's how you get a less crappy job and someone shows up who is just as good a pilot as you but skipped the crappy job part you get upset regardless of how they got there.
Integrity though, is also an important quality for a pilot. It really bothers me how many pilots we have out there who just don't value their integrity. I personally know 3 705 airline chief pilots who would view with disgust any pilot who they found good enough to hire but turned out to have lied about their hours while at the same time they have no problem lying to their pilots, staff, mechanics, and passengers.
Just trying to learn the whole liability issue and also the respect of your peers and how would you feel if your captain was found to have cheated on their log book and how would you see your comrade in action?
my two cents
747
Re: False log book entries
Just don't crash
If you're flying with a someone who added time to his logbook, I don't think he would be stupid enough to ever tell anyone.
If you're flying with a someone who added time to his logbook, I don't think he would be stupid enough to ever tell anyone.
-
- Rank 4
- Posts: 205
- Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 8:48 pm
Re: False log book entries
TC verifies times for PPL, CPL, and ATPL. After that it's a free for all! There is no system in place to verify the times...which is stupid considering our companies keep track of these times and could easily pass them along to TC each year!
Almost as useless as the medical system...now that I think of it, the doctor asks me how many hours I flew in the past year and 90 days!
Bottom line, if you're going to require something, then someone should be verifying it! As for the medical, I don't think an aviation medical is any different then a regular checkup at your family doctor...except the $$$ you have to fork up in cash!
Almost as useless as the medical system...now that I think of it, the doctor asks me how many hours I flew in the past year and 90 days!
Bottom line, if you're going to require something, then someone should be verifying it! As for the medical, I don't think an aviation medical is any different then a regular checkup at your family doctor...except the $$$ you have to fork up in cash!
Re: False log book entries
Actually tractor, if you read my post you will see that I consider integrity an important point of being a pilot. I thought this would be clear but I'd better spell it out: Someone willing to lie in order to get a job is obviously lacking in integrity. Claiming an experience level you don't have is lying pure and simple and shows someone is unfit to be a pilot.tractor747 wrote:So what you are saying then that it won't hurt anyone if we all added a few hours whether it was 50 or 500 or 1000 to get us over that hump and in front of the line as long as you are a skilled and can carry the experience. It does make sense, but what happens if one of these pilots that all of a sudden carried a few hundred hours in their log book illegally and ended up putting the airplane into the ditch and injured or killed a few people. Would their employer go back and investigate their past and if it happens to be that they cheated could this employer then be sued for hiring a corrupt pilot or would they be off the hook because they trusted the log book of this pilot?ahramin wrote:Ok I'll bite.
The idea of basing your hiring on the number of hours in a logbook is foolish. If a pilot's flying and knowledge is good enough to get them the job, the hours shouldn't change anything. Experience matters, but I know some 2000 hour guys who are far better all around pilots than many 10 000 hour guys.
Most pilots view career progression as a pay your dues or seniority system rather than a meritocracy. Obviously when you have sat there for years accepting crappy conditions to "build up your hours" because that's how you get a less crappy job and someone shows up who is just as good a pilot as you but skipped the crappy job part you get upset regardless of how they got there.
Integrity though, is also an important quality for a pilot. It really bothers me how many pilots we have out there who just don't value their integrity. I personally know 3 705 airline chief pilots who would view with disgust any pilot who they found good enough to hire but turned out to have lied about their hours while at the same time they have no problem lying to their pilots, staff, mechanics, and passengers.
Just trying to learn the whole liability issue and also the respect of your peers and how would you feel if your captain was found to have cheated on their log book and how would you see your comrade in action?
my two cents
747
What I was pointing out is that we have many pilots already in the system - some of which are in management - who regularly demonstrate a lack of integrity that goes far beyond parker penning a logbook and yet no one is up in arms about it. Why? Because of the messed up system we have that open positions should go to the pilot with the most hours in his logbook. Naturally the guy with the most hours is going to feel he deserves the position regardless of his flying ability or integrity and is going to call the person with the falsified logbook every name in the book if he jumps the queue.
Re: False log book entries
Not sure I understand the point Bede. Are you suggestingBede wrote:Oh gosh, I should run someone's political campaign.ahramin wrote:We'd rather work with pedophiles.
doesn't apply to pedophiles?Stu Pidasso wrote:lowest, skum-bag, bottom feeders, known to man.
And as a point of personal privilege Bede, I don't do political campaigns. I put my name in the hat, and if the membership wants me they'll elect me . I realize this puts me at a disadvantage against smart political operators but every time I feel I should try to get someone to vote for me it just feels too sleazy to go through with the process. Same reason I can't sell Amway.
Re: False log book entries
Why is this on the Air Canada forum? Shouldn't it be in general?
So if you are asking specifically AC: My experience getting hired, they took copies of my logbooks, call all my former employers even the ones I didn't list as a reference. For the one employer who went out of business (and because he didn't certify my log book when I left) I had to get a letter from a former manager stating that I worked there and that the flying I logged actually happened, and submit this before attending ground school. So as far as any verifying goes, I think they did as much as they could do.
As far as how I feel on a personal level about people falsifying their log books, I think it is a form of fraud. You are claiming to have experience that you don't have. And on that basis a company is putting you in a position of trust, with their passengers, their aircraft, and their reputation. It won't matter if you are a skilled pilot when you are involved in an accident (perhapse due to circumstances beyond your control) and the insurance company and laywers find out you falsified your credentials. Good luck keeping your house after that one.
So if you are asking specifically AC: My experience getting hired, they took copies of my logbooks, call all my former employers even the ones I didn't list as a reference. For the one employer who went out of business (and because he didn't certify my log book when I left) I had to get a letter from a former manager stating that I worked there and that the flying I logged actually happened, and submit this before attending ground school. So as far as any verifying goes, I think they did as much as they could do.
As far as how I feel on a personal level about people falsifying their log books, I think it is a form of fraud. You are claiming to have experience that you don't have. And on that basis a company is putting you in a position of trust, with their passengers, their aircraft, and their reputation. It won't matter if you are a skilled pilot when you are involved in an accident (perhapse due to circumstances beyond your control) and the insurance company and laywers find out you falsified your credentials. Good luck keeping your house after that one.
Re: False log book entries
So what is worse? A pilot who falsifies his personal logbook, or a pilot who falsifies weight and balance calculations?
Re: False log book entries
Log book v W&B…Potentially both could kill the culprit and his/her passengers…way back when I investigated a W&B falsifying which killed a twin full of pax and gear, and watched (with a little smile) when a guy known for his parker pen time was pulled from a B757 command course and fired after he was outed for parker pen time by the company he worked for…he actually had the temerity to falsify his time on other types flown within the company he worked for! Logbook falsifying is low and Karma usually bites those who cheat…although in this guys case he actually ended up flying heavy metal overseas (Asia somewhere) but he never flew in Canada again…says a bunch about how some head hunters do their due diligence hey?
- complexintentions
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2183
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
- Location: of my pants is unknown.
Re: False log book entries
This line has been making the rounds since Christ was a carpenter. But I've never - ever - found it to be true. I have seen a couple guys with a lot of hours show some weakness, but inevitably it was during a transition from one type of operation to another. One was a longhaul pilot making the transition to a corporate gig and in spite of having close to 10,000 hours struggled a bit to adapt to the smaller machine and operation, the "hands and feet" were getting a workout they hadn't for many years. But after the transition course and a few months on the line, was fine - and then the extensive overall experience was a great asset over the lower time colleagues.ahramin wrote:Ok I'll bite.
The idea of basing your hiring on the number of hours in a logbook is foolish. If a pilot's flying and knowledge is good enough to get them the job, the hours shouldn't change anything. Experience matters, but I know some 2000 hour guys who are far better all around pilots than many 10 000 hour guys.
I do agree with the premise that total time isn't the only indication of how "good" a pilot one is. The very definition of what makes a good pilot is hard to frame, and beyond the basics, different jobs require slightly different skill sets. But I have always found a general correlation between experience and quality. And I also find that those stating the "2,000 versus 10,000" hours myth usually are a lot closer to having 2,000 hours of experience than 10,000...
not you, ahramin!
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.