Tired of arm chair pilots

Have you ever heard the term "walk a mile in their shoes"? I would like to preface my two cents with, I have more than a few friends that are mechanics,dispatchers,schedulers,gate agents,ramp personell,flight instructors,private pilots etc.
The day you take multiple bird strikes that completey cover your windshields with a thick vision imparing (in this case) eliminiating goo. And get the pleasure of safely landing that plane, and all of its occupants safely with absolutely no visual reference. Only to hear the passengers comlain about the firm landing. I felt like saying, Hey asshole I just saved our fu!!ing lives. A simple thanks would have worked in that situation. That's just one of the interesting events that have ocurred in my airline career. And you guys want to talk about money? You can't possibly fathom the Professionalism the airline pilots impart on day by day basis.
The only criticism I've read on this forum are from people who don't fly for a living. I only have to say "shut the fuck up".
Let the man make up his mind with facts and opinions of people who have actually achieved the goal many have sought after and fallen short. I love my job, give Greg a chance to explore it on his own. He's not a child. If he is serious, than he will research the facts and formulate his own opinions. I only ask, that if you have'nt walked a mile in our shoes, than shut up.

 

Should have proof read first. Lets stick to the point not my spelling. Hey Red Fox stay in training, we all respect you guys. Who else do we call with any Qs. And ETEMPLET I agree with your opinions. I think it was Steve Thompson who also brought in some very good insight.
Take care
Kevin Nov#229
P.S. I also got the letter earlier this week. So you guys think we are all a bunch of whining pilots. So be it! I missed half the season do to relocation. But,the letter still ended up in my mailbox.
Kevin
Not trying to say I'm fast
Just tired of some of you slamming my Proffession!

 

Re: Tired of pilots

After quickly reading this diatribe, I wondered, were all airline pilots just as pompous, arrogant, self-centered and rude? No, I thought, they aren't, after remembering several while working at UAL.

Perhaps a few people would have groveled at your feet if you would have first instilled panic by announcing an instruments only landing due to bird guts totally obstructing the view from the "cockpit" of the plane.

You drive a bus with wings. Get over yourself.

 

Re: Re: Tired of pilots

Since I have flown almost over the entire country and now send the guys the work for me around the country on planes, most of which I know their families, I'm glad that pilots do a little better then bus drivers. I think there was two bus wrecks in Cincy just this week, but no plane crashes that I'm aware of... My guys (and myself) have a few stories of close calls or scary landing where they wanted to shake the pilot's hand.

As far as being self-centered etc, I really could care less as long as they keep getting us there and home... (There's plenty of that on this board for less....)

 

Glad you recognized my exaggeration and sarcasm...

 

Why do I want to play the theme from "The High and the Mighty" while reading this? You're not John Wayne, so stop acting like it.

Some facts for you. According to an FAA study conducted for the period 1990 - 2002, there were 46,514 strikes reported to the FAA, of which 97% were bird strikes. Of the 45,323 bird strikes, 38,148 provided information about damage. 84% (32,069) of those reported no damage to the aircraft, 9% (3,297) reported minor damage, 5% (1,741) reported substantial damage, 3% (1,032) reported uncertain damage, and less than 1% (9) reported destruction of the aircraft. 93 bird strikes resulted in 107 injuries to humans, with a total of 6 fatalities in those 13 years. You clearly exaggerate the potential danger of bird strikes in an attempt to glorify your job.

Perhaps you could cite the FAA statistics for the number of deaths caused by pilot error?

 

If people are going to quote FAA reports please don't do so misleadingly. For example here's an excerpt from the same report conveniently omitted:

"The civil and military aviation communities widely recognize that the threat to human health and safety from aircraft collisions with wildlife (wildlife strikes) is increasing (Dolbeer 2000, MacKinnon et al. 2001). Globally, wildlife strikes have killed more than 147 people and destroyed over 120 aircraft since 1990 (Richardson and West 2000, Thorpe 2003). [...] experts within the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and U.S. Air Force expect the risk, frequency, and potential severity of wildlife-aircraft collisons to escalate over the next decate."

I hope the loss of 147 lives isn't statistically too small to warrant your attention. Furthermore there is NO QUESTION we don't have even more bird/wildlife strike casualties precisely because how good professional pilots are in handling emergency situations.

Yes pilots, mechanics, air traffic controllers, etc. all play important roles ensuring the safety of the system; BUT at the end of the day, when the plane is going down, only the pilots are onboard.

When a mechanic fucks up he loses his job; when a pilot fucks up he loses his life and those of his passengers.

-peekay

 

The statistics I quoted are not misleading. The fact is that there has NEVER been even a single fatality caused by a bird strike on a US airline operating a jet aircraft. There have been only two incidents in the entire history of US airlines, one in 1960 and one in 1962, and both of those involved prop engined aircraft. The 147 lives lost that you cite due to bird strikes did not involve US airlines. So I stand by my point that the quote in relation to a US airline was presented mainly for drama, because statistics indicate that the threat is minimal or almost non-existent.

Another fact is that 55% of all aircraft accidents that resulted in fatalaties during the 1990's were due to pilot error. Compare the death count due to pilot screw-ups to the count of zero caused by bird strikes and you'll understand my point.

As I said in the other thread on this topic, I don't begrudge any airline pilot a single penny of their salary. That's not what the other thread on this topic was about.

 

Im looking to become a pilot here in the near future im torn between two schools however either Flight Safety or Pan Am Academy both in FL.Do any of you all have any advice for a new guy on getting into the buss.Im not sure id want an airline job maybe something along the lines of a smaller comapany to build my hours then maybe netjets.Im really partial to Gulfstream aircraft having worked for the company building them.Any advice would be greatly appreciated.....Thanks

 

Jeez, who pissed in your Cheerios?
I've never had a problem with a rough landing, usually joke with the pilot about it on the way out the door, they're cool with it. And I always compliment them on an exceptionally smooth landing.

 

Now aren't you the polite flyer. One gold star for JohnnyB.

 

What were the other 3%??

If there were 1395 "other strikes," that couldn't mean collisions with other planes. All I could think of was really big hail.

 

Really tall deer.



(And yes, 147 people over 13 years is statisticly insignificant. More people probably die falling off ladders on an anual and per-capita basis. Hell, I'd be willing to bet more than 11.3 people die per year in stupid darwin-award-candidate accidents. )

- Roach

 

Of course it is significant. Risk analysis shows there's a one-in-four (26%) chance we'll have a fatal bird strike incident involving a large jet transport in the US or Canada by 2008. That's far from "non-existant."

-peekay

 

Like Roach said, other wildlife - usually on the ground.

 

I've seen those reports, and I argue that they are flawed, because the historical data used treats non-jet and jet aircraft equally. The .26 chance is also a binomial distribution and predicts more than just the probability of a single event. Also, a fatal bird strike incident doesn't mean total loss of the aircraft, it means just one fatality. I believe the report you are referring to (Bird Strike Committee USA) predicts only 9.2 fatalities total.

History shows that there have been a total of only 5 hull losses out of 3 million flights since 1959 due to strikes. Never had one on a jet aircraft on a US airline.

Maybe you could work out the risk assessment to predict the chance of a fatal accident due to pilot error. Think that may look significantly worse?

 

that's it. kill all the birds. now.

what is the clown who started this thread rattling on about anyway? where did this prattle come from?

 

I was wondering the same thing last night when I saw him post. I almost replied to say that I thought I was the only wacko up at 2 a.m.

 

Greg Moore started a thread a while back asking for career recommendations on becoming a pilot. Jay and Papa got every pilot on the board PO'ed.

http://forums.13x.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37403

 

I remember that thread, but why all of a sudden is this person so irritated?