I removed myself from an airline flight - long

[Maule Driver]

This happened in Houston years ago - maybe 6 or 7. Curious about what any airline people think of this.

I boarded a full flight in Houston for a flight to the NY area. We're about ready to go and can hear the cargo doors being closed below. I notice that there is some repeated closing going on so I look out from my usual window seat and can see a small conference being held on the ramp. Slam! A few concerned looks.... Slam!

Apparently there was a problem with a door. The conference gets bigger and a few more slams are performed. Now it's getting comical because it occurs to me that whatever the problem appears to be, the plan is to get 'more bigger' guys to keep slamming it until it works. Slam! The crew announces that there is a little problem with a cargo door but that we'll push back as soon as it's fixed.

Then I get spooked. Slam! With too many Flying magazine articles and NTSB report browsing behind me, I start thinking the worse. There is a problem with a cargo door and the half baked fix is for bigger guys to close it. Slam! My mind starts racing back to "cargo door opens and airliner crashes" incidences. And there are a few as I recall.... Slam!

Now my stomach starts to turn and I'm ready to hyperventilate in the stuffed cabin. I look around and no one is concerned in the least. Cattle to slaughter! I try to calm down and think between slams, 'OK, I can see what's going on. I don't know jack about the a/c or the door but it doesn't look like the ramp crew does either (I'm sure I was mistaken but that's what it looked like). I'm thinking that the appropriate thing would be for the pilot to go down and take a look before we push back'.

So I signal one of the cabin crew to come over and indicate that I need to get up and go forward. No urgency or panic inducing stuff. Just matter of fact like I need air. When I get up front I ask to speak to the pilot and I do. "Hi guys, I'm watching the folks on the ramp trying to get the door closed (acknowledged). I do a little flying too and I'm just kinda wondering if you are going to go out and check it out before we leave?" The captain explained that he's sure that the maintenance crew has it under control and that no, there's really no reason for the crew to have to go out too.

Well, they were as nice as could be about it and didn't even let a patronizing smirk out but I was totally spooked and said that I was going to get off the plane. I explained that it shouldn't be a problem since I only had a carry on bag and well, I was just going to stay behind. I went back and very calmly got my bag and got off. Somebody greeted me and told me that there were no more flights tonight and that I'd have to wait until tomorrow. And that the airline wouldn't be responsible. No problem, good night.

After a few calls to get a room I returned to the gate area and it seemed that some or all of the crew got off the plane to take a break while waiting. There were some whispers and finger pointing that were clearly about me but I was at peace with my decision.

What do you think the crew thought of my behavior? Would you ever consider doing something similar? Would I? My actions still make sense to me as I write them but I doubt that I would ever do such a thing again.

[Roger Long]

Ask yourself: If this had been your plane and your passengers, would you have flown it? If not. Be at peace with your decision.

Of course, as a PP, you have a big advantage over the airline guys. You know that, if you cancel a flight for a reason like this, you will still have a job in the morning, you won't suddenly be out in the job market with few transferable skills and crushing debts from flight academies.

I'll bet the crew was thinking, "I wish that was me." as they watched you walk away.
--
Roger Long

[Robert Moore]

"Maule Driver" wrote

> The captain explained that he's sure that the
> maintenance crew has it under control and that no, there's
> really no reason for the crew to have to go out too.

The ground crew has a lot more training and experience with
the cargo doors than does the flight crew. Airlines have
specialist to work on each task and if I recall correctly, at
one time, one of the major airlines even had a line maintenence
foreman doing the aircraft pre-flight inspection instead of the
flightcrew.
Airline pilots are just that, pilots, they are not trained to
do the work of a maintenence crew.

Bob Moore
PanAm (retired)

[Kiwi Jet Jock]

IMO, one of the attributes of a good pilot is the ability to make (and carry
through with) decisions that in your best judgement are the safest course of
action - regardless of peer (and other) pressures.

I'd be a rich man if I had a dollar for everytime an aircraft comes out of
the care of engineers with a different set of issues than those it was being
maintained for - all too often (engineers included) folks default to
laziness and try to pretend the problem doesn't exist rather than making
their own (probably unpopular) decision and getting to the root cause of
it - at the end of the day it's NOT normal to have to slam a cargo door with
ever increasing velocity to get it to close properly.

You erred on the side of caution and safety because you saw something that
(a) "Was NOT the norm" and (b) "Could have had serious in-flight
consequences".

Good call in my opinion.

[John Gaquin]

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message

>I boarded a full flight in Houston for a flight to the NY area....

Did the plane crash? <bg>


Look, no big deal. The crew probably thought you were a bit anal, but that
doesn't matter. With doors like that, there's a light in the cockpit
indicating closed and locked vs not closed and locked. It usually works on
a microswitch or optical system of some sort. [ on the B747 cargo door,
there was an optical beam that had to travel through about 25 holes in metal
parts of the latching assembly, all of which are supposed to align properly
when the door is properly closed and locked. Can you spell f-u-b-a-r?] On
doors that get cycled many times per day, the alignment often goes awry. If
the door is accessible from inside, there's usually a procedure to visually
verify status regardless of light function. If not accessible, then the
light issue has to be resolved. First the handlers would try 25 times or
so, [ :-) ] trying to avoid having to call mx, then they'd advise the
cockpit, and the call goes to mx and they fix the alignment or switch
problem.

Bottom line -- you made a decision based on limited information about a
system with which you were not familiar. Your prerogative.

JG

[Rob Perkins]

>What do you think the crew thought of my behavior?
>Would you ever consider doing something similar?
>Would I? My actions still make sense to me as I
>write them but I doubt that I would ever do such a thing again.

As airplanes go, I think pilots are pretty well-informed people. I've
flown a couple of times commercially since starting flight training
and it's just interesting to note how many similarities there are
between the little planes and the big ones. Right down to the whining
sound the intercoms make.

I think if I started to feel like a flight is unsafe, I'd have done
something similar. What was the airline's ticket policy? Did it cost
you more money to go on a later flight?

Rob

[Jim]

Ok, let me get this straight.... You are asking if you were smart by getting out of an airplane that:
a) had a cargo door that wouldn't latch... hmm wasn't that a bit of a problem with early 727s or was it DC9s?
b) had a cargo loading crew who's solution was "get a bigger hammer" and hit it alot harder... hey, it works with empty beer cans, this is just aluminium!
c) was being flown by pilots who placed all of their trust in the judgement of the "bigger hammer guys" after all, we sit way up here in front
d) was being flown by pilots who where of the opinion that "the bigger hammer guys" some how would guarantee the safety of the flight cause after all, they're staying on the ground

I think you were the ONLY smart one.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

[Bob Gardner]

DC-10. The relevant book is "The Rise and Fall of the DC-10."

Bob Gardner

"Jim" > wrote in message ...
Ok, let me get this straight.... You are asking if you were smart by getting out of an airplane that:
a) had a cargo door that wouldn't latch... hmm wasn't that a bit of a problem with early 727s or was it DC9s?
b) had a cargo loading crew who's solution was "get a bigger hammer" and hit it alot harder... hey, it works with empty beer cans, this is just aluminium!
c) was being flown by pilots who placed all of their trust in the judgement of the "bigger hammer guys" after all, we sit way up here in front
d) was being flown by pilots who where of the opinion that "the bigger hammer guys" some how would guarantee the safety of the flight cause after all, they're staying on the ground

I think you were the ONLY smart one.
--
Jim Burns III

Remove "nospam" to reply

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:03:59 +1300, "Kiwi Jet Jock" >
wrote:

>IMO, one of the attributes of a good pilot is the ability to make (and carry
>through with) decisions that in your best judgement are the safest course of
>action - regardless of peer (and other) pressures.

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article >,
Robert Moore > wrote:
> > The captain explained that he's sure that the
> > maintenance crew has it under control and that no, there's
> > really no reason for the crew to have to go out too.
>
> The ground crew has a lot more training and experience with
> the cargo doors than does the flight crew. Airlines have
> specialist to work on each task and if I recall correctly, at
> one time, one of the major airlines even had a line maintenence
> foreman doing the aircraft pre-flight inspection instead of the
> flightcrew.
> Airline pilots are just that, pilots, they are not trained to
> do the work of a maintenence crew.
>
> Bob Moore
> PanAm (retired)


Maybe not, but the pilots are responsible for the safety of the flight.
It's obviously up to the captain as to whether he trust the ground or
maintenance crew, but to say that he should trust them simply because he
doesn't know any better seems like a huge risk to me. If the captain
doesn't know any better maybe he should spend some time with the ground
or maintenance crew to better educate himself.

The bottom line is that the original author was not comfortable, and he
exercised his option to exit the airplane.



JKG

[Maule Driver]

"Roger Long" m>
I'll bet the crew was thinking, "I wish that was me." as they watched you walk away.
--
Gotta tell you, I think that thought passed thru some of the crew when they saw me sitting at the gate.

[Maule Driver]

"Rob Perkins" > >
> I think if I started to feel like a flight is unsafe, I'd have done
> something similar. What was the airline's ticket policy? Did it cost
> you more money to go on a later flight?

No it didn't. Everything was handled very nicely. Forgot the airline
though.

[Maule Driver]

"Robert Moore" >
>
> The ground crew has a lot more training and experience with
> the cargo doors than does the flight crew. Airlines have
> specialist to work on each task and if I recall correctly, at
> one time, one of the major airlines even had a line maintenence
> foreman doing the aircraft pre-flight inspection instead of the
> flightcrew.
> Airline pilots are just that, pilots, they are not trained to
> do the work of a maintenence crew.
>
That's exactly what the crew communicated to me (my quotes were from memory
but the sense I left the cockpit with was exactly what is said above).

Looking back, what happened was that I truly was spooked for a few minutes.
Once spooked, I reasoned to myself that I'd be a fool not to pay attention
to the fear.

[Maule Driver]

"Jim" > wrote in message ...
Ok, let me get this straight.... You are asking if you were smart by getting out of an airplane that:
a) had a cargo door that wouldn't latch... hmm wasn't that a bit of a problem with early 727s or was it DC9s?
b) had a cargo loading crew who's solution was "get a bigger hammer" and hit it alot harder... hey, it works with empty beer cans, this is just aluminium!
c) was being flown by pilots who placed all of their trust in the judgement of the "bigger hammer guys" after all, we sit way up here in front
d) was being flown by pilots who where of the opinion that "the bigger hammer guys" some how would guarantee the safety of the flight cause after all, they're staying on the ground

I think you were the ONLY smart one.

I would love to agree ... but if I only applied the same conservative, overly cautious thinking to all of my own flights. It's a lot easier to decline a flight as 1 passenger among 100 that to decline one with 100 passengers in the back... or sometimes even when it's just 1 sitting beside you.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

"Maule Driver" > writes:

> This happened in Houston years ago - maybe 6 or 7. Curious about what any
> airline people think of this.

[snip details]

Seems to me there were a series of DC-10 crashes in the early years
(of the DC-10, I mean) that turned out to relate to cargo doors not
being properly closed and fastened.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, >, <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <noguns-nomoney.com> <www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <dragaera.info/>

[Paul Rekieta]

On 12/16/03 1:34 PM, in article
, "Maule Driver"
> wrote:

> Well, they were as nice as could be about it and didn't even let a patronizing
> smirk out but I was totally spooked and said that I was going to get off the
> plane. I explained that it shouldn't be a problem since I only had a carry
> on bag and well, I was just going to stay behind

I bet you couldn¹t do this in today¹s terrorist environment.

[Maule Driver]

"Nomen Nescio" >
> Just curious, after you, a knowledgable and careful pilot, decided that an
unsafe situation was
> developing that could potentially kill 100 people, how could you just walk
off without a word to
> the other (non pilot) passengers? If the plane HAD gone down as a result
of the door failing,
> how would you be feeling right now?
> I, personally, have never been in such a situation. But I think I would
have been vocal enough
> about my concerns that the rest of the passengers might have joined me, or
decided to take
> the chance. At least I would have been able to sleep at night if something
had happened.
> But then again, I've always been too controversial according to my
parents, teachers,employers,
> friends, etc.
>
I thought a lot about that then and now. If it had gone down, I'm sure that
life as a survivor would be unimaginably different. At the same time there
is a perverse desire to have something happen if only to be proved right.

However, in that context I was not a knowledgeable and careful pilot. I was
a private pilot with few skills or training relevant to the situation.
Maybe 100 hours in SEL a/c, 1,000+ in sailplanes, with many thousands
BS'ing. The cockpit crew and the carrier had the skills, training, and
experience to make those decisions and in the end, it's their call.

In fact, nothing was materially wrong. Making an attempt to warn other
passengers would be akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Perhaps a more common situation for pilots is where you know a pilot with
which you won't fly. It may be the a/c, or the pilot's skill, or the
combination of the two. Do you tell other potential passengers? The
pilot's work associates? Family or friends? Do I have a responsibility to
share my assessment with others or a responsibility to allow others to make
their own decisions?

[Tom Fleischman]

In article >, Paul Rekieta
> wrote:

> On 12/16/03 1:34 PM, in article
> , "Maule Driver"
> > wrote:
>
> > Well, they were as nice as could be about it and didn't even let a
> > patronizing
> > smirk out but I was totally spooked and said that I was going to get off the
> > plane. I explained that it shouldn't be a problem since I only had a carry
> > on bag and well, I was just going to stay behind
>
> I bet you couldn¹t do this in today¹s terrorist environment.
>

Couldn't do what? Get off the airplane? That's preposterous, what are
you suggesting they would do? Not let you off? Handcuff you to your
seat?

Please.

[Trent Moorehead]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
news:171220030905080167%

> > I bet you couldn¹t do this in today¹s terrorist environment.
> >
>
> Couldn't do what? Get off the airplane? That's preposterous, what are
> you suggesting they would do? Not let you off? Handcuff you to your
> seat?
>
> Please.

I believe the thought is that you might have left some device on the plane.
I would not be surprised if, while they let you off the plane, they also
make others get off and then inspect the cabin. Maybe with dogs. I know it
sounds outlandish, but I can easily imagine it happening.

-Trent
PP-ASEL

[Maule Driver]

"Tom Fleischman" >
> In article >, Paul Rekieta
> > , "Maule Driver"
> > > Well, they were as nice as could be about it and didn't even let a
> > > patronizing
> > > smirk out but I was totally spooked and said that I was going to get
off the
> > > plane. I explained that it shouldn't be a problem since I only had a
carry
> > > on bag and well, I was just going to stay behind
> >
> > I bet you couldn¹t do this in today¹s terrorist environment.
> >
> Couldn't do what? Get off the airplane? That's preposterous, what are
> you suggesting they would do? Not let you off? Handcuff you to your
> seat?
>
> Please.
Well I'm sure one could get off but I think there might be other
consequences. If a specific procedure is lacking I'm sure the pilot would
attempt to evaluate the request and the person making it and then determine
whether more security actions would be required. Might be a much different
situation for passengers with the same request but different appearances.

[Teacherjh]

>>
I believe the thought is that you might have left some device on the plane.
I would not be surprised if, while they let you off the plane, they also
make others get off and then inspect the cabin.
<<

.... and maybe fix the cargo latch.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Dennis O'Connor]

Who gives a rat's ass what the bus driver thinks? You are a paying customer, not his servant!

You make your decision and you live with the consequences... The fact that nothing happened on that flight (I assume) is neither here nor there... If it had ripped that door off and had to emergency land, and people slide down the chutes and break limbs, would you now be worrying about what someone's hired help thinks of you?

As far as the pilot saying he didn't need to inspect the mechanics work, if the door had departed in flight you can bet he would have been singing a different song to the DOT, as they took his certificate for failing to inspect...

The FAA/DOT and the Federal Courts are on the same play book on that one - "You, the pilot, are 100% responsible if you were aware there was a question of airworthiness (and sometimes even if there is not a question)... Yes, we may also get mechanic, but you, the pilot, will be the first up to the steps to the gallows..."

Denny

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message .com...
This happened in Houston years ago - maybe 6 or 7. Curious about what any airline people think of this.

[Peter Duniho]

"Nomen Nescio" ]> wrote in message
...
> If nothing was wrong, why did you get off the plane?

He already explained that. In fact, that's what his initial post was about.
Did you read it? He left the airplane on a "hunch".

> And there is nothing wrong with yelling fire in a crowded theater, if it's
on fire.

What if you simply think that the theater might catch fire at some later
moment. Is it okay to yell "fire" in the crowded theater then?

> 100 people died in a Rhode Island nightclub last year because people
waited
> too long to"yell "FIRE"".

Your assertion is that someone should have yelled "fire" before the club
actually caught fire? Or are you claiming that the fire was allowed to
progress for some significant time before it occurred to anyone to say
anything about it?

Regardless, that case (and others like it) had much more to do with
violations of safety rules than it did with the actual fire. And, I
seriously doubt that once an actual fire was present, anyone sat around
wondering whether they should say something about it.

The whole point here is that the original poster did not KNOW anything. And
in fact, seeing as how the flight proceeded uneventfully, it could even be
argued that his "hunch" was wrong. It would have been irrepsonsible at
best, and criminally disruptive at worst for him to make a general
announcement to the other passengers that he believed something to be wrong
with the airplane. There was absolutely no actual evidence to that effect.

Get off the guy's back. You might be willing to go around making
pronouncements regarding things you know absolutely nothing about, but that
doesn't mean that's reasonable behavior, nor that you have the right to
criticize someone else for not doing so.

Pete

[Tom Fleischman]

In article >, Maule
Driver > wrote:

> "Tom Fleischman" >
> > In article >, Paul Rekieta
> > > , "Maule Driver"
> > > > Well, they were as nice as could be about it and didn't even let a
> > > > patronizing
> > > > smirk out but I was totally spooked and said that I was going to get
> off the
> > > > plane. I explained that it shouldn't be a problem since I only had a
> carry
> > > > on bag and well, I was just going to stay behind
> > >
> > > I bet you couldn¹t do this in today¹s terrorist environment.
> > >
> > Couldn't do what? Get off the airplane? That's preposterous, what are
> > you suggesting they would do? Not let you off? Handcuff you to your
> > seat?
> >
> > Please.
> Well I'm sure one could get off but I think there might be other
> consequences. If a specific procedure is lacking I'm sure the pilot would
> attempt to evaluate the request and the person making it and then determine
> whether more security actions would be required. Might be a much different
> situation for passengers with the same request but different appearances.

Well yeah, sure, I'm sure that there would be security concerns raised
in the minds of the crew and the Thousands Standing Around, but if they
don't find anything, even in your name were Mustafah, then the
situation would be about the same as what you experienced, it would
just take a lot longer to be on your way.

It certainly would not be a case of "you couldn't do this in today's
environment".

[Peter R.]

Peter Duniho ) wrote:

> Get off the guy's back. You might be willing to go around making
> pronouncements regarding things you know absolutely nothing about, but that
> doesn't mean that's reasonable behavior, nor that you have the right to
> criticize someone else for not doing so.

Peter, take a look at "Nomen's" posting history on Google. It appears we
may have a professional troll here.

Don't feel bad. Earlier today I was snagged in the Student newsgroup...

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[PS2727]

> Might be a much different
>situation for passengers with the same request but different appearances.

Its a sad fact that in today's environment doing this would have severe
consequences. To call for a search because the passenger who wants off is
wearing a turban or has the name Mustafah will get you a discrimination
lawsuit. It has happened to my company already. This is why you see babies and
little old ladies called out for secondary searches at the gate and seldom
folks who may be from the middle east. I hope the liberals sleep tight tonight.

[Peter Duniho]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> Peter, take a look at "Nomen's" posting history on Google. It appears we
> may have a professional troll here.

Ahh...thanks for the warning. I can usually detect the amateur trolls
pretty easily, but the pros are better at fooling us.

[tony roberts]

In article >,
"Maule Driver" > wrote:

> This happened in Houston years ago - maybe 6 or 7. Curious about what any
> airline people think of this.

I used to spend a big part of my life on commercial aircraft when I
lived in the middle east.

Once I was waiting to fly from London to Jeddah when a Saudi asked me if
I would carry some luggage for him. I refused and watched him walk along
the line of passengers until someone agreed. It was one of those
situations where I was uneasy but couldn't decide whether or not to
pursue it (this was a looong time before people started worrying about
terrorists)

So the plane is taxiing to the runway and I unfasten my seatbelt, walk
over to the nearest cabin attendant and told her what happened.

Back to the ramp, unloaded and I have to crouch behind a bunch of
sandbags with the police, trying to identify which box it was.
We eventually find it and blow it up - it was toys!


--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument :)
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:26:05 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
>> Peter, take a look at "Nomen's" posting history on Google. It appears we
>> may have a professional troll here.
>
>Ahh...thanks for the warning. I can usually detect the amateur trolls
>pretty easily, but the pros are better at fooling us.
>

Nomen Nescio is the cognomen assigned to anonymous authors by the
usenet posting gateway.

[Peter R.]

Larry Dighera wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:26:05 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> > wrote in Message-Id:
> >:
>
> >"Peter R." > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Peter, take a look at "Nomen's" posting history on Google. It appears we
> >> may have a professional troll here.
> >
> >Ahh...thanks for the warning. I can usually detect the amateur trolls
> >pretty easily, but the pros are better at fooling us.
> >
>
> Nomen Nescio is the cognomen assigned to anonymous authors by the
> usenet posting gateway.

So they're actually a *collective* of professional trolls.

I see...


--
Peter










----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[David Brooks]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:26:05 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> > wrote in Message-Id:
> >:
>
> >"Peter R." > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Peter, take a look at "Nomen's" posting history on Google. It appears
we
> >> may have a professional troll here.
> >
> >Ahh...thanks for the warning. I can usually detect the amateur trolls
> >pretty easily, but the pros are better at fooling us.
> >
>
> Nomen Nescio is the cognomen assigned to anonymous authors by the
> usenet posting gateway.

And it's Latin for "I don't know the name" (and I last studied Latin in 1965
and didn't have to look it up!)

(Larry, you used the word cognomen intentionally, I suppose?)

-- David Brooks

[Maule Driver]

"tony roberts" > >
> Once I was waiting to fly from London to Jeddah when a Saudi asked me if
> I would carry some luggage for him. I refused and watched him walk along
> the line of passengers until someone agreed. It was one of those
> situations where I was uneasy but couldn't decide whether or not to
> pursue it (this was a looong time before people started worrying about
> terrorists)
>
> So the plane is taxiing to the runway and I unfasten my seatbelt, walk
> over to the nearest cabin attendant and told her what happened.
>
> Back to the ramp, unloaded and I have to crouch behind a bunch of
> sandbags with the police, trying to identify which box it was.
> We eventually find it and blow it up - it was toys!
>
That's taking action. That is a case where you did 'know' something that
was unacceptable. You pointed it out and the pilot made the decision.

In a sense, you did the same thing I did in Houston but the pilot considered
it a show stopper.

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 06:00:04 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
]> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>Given the choice of being spammed by the ton, or having a couple of idiots call me a Troll
>once in a while, I'll let them advertise their stupidity.

Spam is a fact of usenet participation; get over it.

Personally, I view the credibility of articles originating from
anonymous usenet gateways with an eye of suspicion. It raises the
question, what motivation prompts an author to choose to hide his
identity and thus escape public responsibility for his words? The
credibility of anonymous authors is always more suspect than those
authors who have nothing to hide.

Take off your mask and join your fellow airmen as a peer in polite
discussion. It's painless, really, and you'll likely find your
credibility among the participants generally increased, instead of
being viewed as a paranoiac or flame-bait.

[Larry Dighera]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 23:53:14 -0800, "David Brooks"
> wrote in Message-Id:
>:

>(Larry, you used the word cognomen intentionally, I suppose?)

I used the word in its second sense as defined by Marriam-Webster:

Main Entry:cognomen
Pronunciation:k*g-*n*-m*n, *k*g-n*-
Function:noun
Inflected Form:plural cognomens or cognomina \k*g-*n*-m*-n*,
-*n*-\
Etymology:Latin, irregular from co- + nomen name more at NAME
Date:1809

1 : SURNAME; especially : the third of usually three names
borne by a male citizen of ancient Rome
2 : NAME; especially : a distinguishing nickname or epithet
–cognominal \k*g-*n*-m*-n*l\ adjective

[Peter R.]

Larry Dighera ) wrote:

> Personally, I view the credibility of articles originating from
> anonymous usenet gateways with an eye of suspicion.

I wish I could even view his articles. It appears that "Nomen's"
Anonymizer software is causing problems for Usenet propagation. Many of
his posts are not appearing on my commercial news provider's various
servers. Some of his articles that do actually make it have incorrect
article numbers, causing them to be irretrievable.

He's effectively filtering himself...

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Gene Seibel]

Complacency kills.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.






"Maule Driver" > wrote in message >...
> "tony roberts" > >
> > Once I was waiting to fly from London to Jeddah when a Saudi asked me if
> > I would carry some luggage for him. I refused and watched him walk along
> > the line of passengers until someone agreed. It was one of those
> > situations where I was uneasy but couldn't decide whether or not to
> > pursue it (this was a looong time before people started worrying about
> > terrorists)
> >
> > So the plane is taxiing to the runway and I unfasten my seatbelt, walk
> > over to the nearest cabin attendant and told her what happened.
> >
> > Back to the ramp, unloaded and I have to crouch behind a bunch of
> > sandbags with the police, trying to identify which box it was.
> > We eventually find it and blow it up - it was toys!
> >
> That's taking action. That is a case where you did 'know' something that
> was unacceptable. You pointed it out and the pilot made the decision.
>
> In a sense, you did the same thing I did in Houston but the pilot considered
> it a show stopper.

[Peter R.]

Nomen Nescio ]) wrote:

> When my inbox started getting HUNDREDS of spams a day, I decided I had to
> do something about it. (one day the number was 1000+).

So, you are basically saying that you were smart enough to learn about and
use an Anonymizing remailer but never thought about simply providing a
false email address in your news reader?

Hmmm...

<snip>
> But usually, after I explain, the person has enough class to apologize.
> Funny, I've never received an apology on a piloting newsgroup, though.

Then it logically follows that pilots have no class.

> If I've been discourteous to anyone, please point it out and I
> will apologize!

IMO, you were discourteous to MRQB in the student newsgroup long before he
had any words with you.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Kyler Laird]

Larry Dighera > writes:

>Personally, I view the credibility of articles originating from
>anonymous usenet gateways with an eye of suspicion. It raises the
>question, what motivation prompts an author to choose to hide his
>identity and thus escape public responsibility for his words?

Personally, I hardly ever choose to spend my time trying to guess
what the credibility of a poster is. Instead, I react to what he
has written. If I need to know if it's true or not, I try to find
proof beyond the domain name of the sender's e-mail address.

>Take off your mask and join your fellow airmen as a peer in polite
>discussion. It's painless, really, and you'll likely find your
>credibility among the participants generally increased, instead of
>being viewed as a paranoiac or flame-bait.

If you disagree with something written, how 'bout just posting your
reasons instead of attacking someone for unrelated behavior?
Playing the troll-labeling game has no value.

--kyler

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:11:53 GMT, Kyler Laird >
wrote in Message-Id: >:

>Larry Dighera > writes:
>
>>Take off your mask and join your fellow airmen as a peer in polite
>>discussion. It's painless, really, and you'll likely find your
>>credibility among the participants generally increased, instead of
>>being viewed as a paranoiac or flame-bait.
>
>If you disagree with something written, how 'bout just posting your
>reasons instead of attacking someone for unrelated behavior?
>Playing the troll-labeling game has no value.

You see an attack where none was intended.

[Kyler Laird]

Nomen Nescio ]> writes:

>>If you disagree with something written, how 'bout just posting your
>>reasons instead of attacking someone for unrelated behavior?
>>Playing the troll-labeling game has no value.

>Thank you for making that point.

Well, I'm sorry that in making the point I also mistook Larry's
invitation to polite discussion as an attack.

Calling "troll" (instead of investigating the subject) is one of
my hot buttons and I suspect that I overreacted. I apologize.

>Not surprisingly, That's the attitude I would expect from someone who would shell out hundreds
>of dollars of their own money to buy the digitized sectionals from the FAA, and make them
>available to all other pilots for free.

Hey now - this judgement thing cuts both ways. I don't want my
words in this thread to be judged based on some unrelated actions
you've observed. They should stand all on their own or be torn
down on their merit.

>How's that project going, BTW. Have you been able to start working on some of the software
>that you wanted to do?

I made the "chunks" I thought were crucial building blocks.
http://aviationtoolbox.org/munge/mosaic
Then I wrapped up the semester. Now I'm letting my ideas simmer
while I contemplate a Doctoral degree subject. (No, it's not
aviation-related. I'm thinking about robot-assisted dogs. I
asked my wife if I could join her in Aviation Technology and study
the use of therapy dogs in the cockpit, but she didn't think that
would fly.)

--kyler

[Dave]

Nomen Nescio wrote:
<snip>
"I just have a lowly dial up connection"
<snip>
"Spam can cost me money if I miss fast market moves."

Huh?

[Ron Lee]

I had a somewhat similar experience leaving COS. Seems that there
was an issue with weight and balance, fuel, luggage, etc. After
20-30 minutes of delay and obvious confusion, I grabbed my carry-on
and left the plane and rebooked on another flight.

Commercial airline pilots screw up as well and may kill dozens in the
process.

Ron Lee

[Robert Moore]

(Ron Lee) wrote
> I had a somewhat similar experience leaving COS. Seems that
> there was an issue with weight and balance, fuel, luggage, etc.

And unlike General Aviation, where the resolution is left up to
one person (the PIC) to perhaps make an error, airlines are
required to utilize several individuals to reduce the chance of
a disastrous mistake. The Pilot, the Flight Dispatcher,the
Loadmaster, and the Copilot all have responsibilities to reduce
the chance of error. Most General Aviation pilots have no under-
standing of airline OpSpecs and Operation Manuals that allow the
overall responsibility of the operation to be shared and cross-
checked by different persons. In many cases, one or more of these
people may not even be located where the flight will depart.
Major airlines usually operate from 2-3 main dispatch centers
where all flight plans and load sheets are computer generated and
transmitted to local stations for the flightcrew. Any breakdown in
communications results in local hand preparation or a delay until
communications are re-estabilished.

> Commercial airline pilots screw up as well and may kill dozens
> in the process.

Yes....but damn seldom!

Bob Moore
ATP B-707 B-727
PanAm (retired)

[Jack Davis]

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:53:51 GMT, "Roger Long"
m> wrote:

>I'll bet the crew was thinking, "I wish that was me." as they watched you walk away.

I can almost guarantee that is *not* what they were thinking! ;)

-Jack Davis
B-737


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----