About Good Pilots and Bad Pilots

[Dudley Henriques]

I've been reading along with the thread about good pilots vs bad pilots and
how these two different scenarios fit into the accident environment.
It's an interesting thread.
If you will indulge me, I'd like to add some personal comment on the good vs
bad issue.
I think most of us as a group will agree that if each one of us were to sit
down and evaluate ourselves to ourselves as pilots, most of us would come up
with a fair analysis that pointed to our taking flying and flight safety
seriously. Oh, I'm sure there are a few of us who wouldn't pass the test,
but for the most part, based on what I've read from all of you for the years
I've been hanging around here, I'd say, the average pilot here is safety
conscious and tries his/her absolute best to make their flying as safe as
humanly possible for both themselves and the people who entrust their lives
to them with every flight.
Some of us are pleasure pilots, actually a great many here are pleasure
pilots. A few of us come from diversified professional aviation backgrounds
and have thousands of hours behind us. All of us share a common interest in
making flying as safe as we can make it, so in that respect, we're all equal
partners in the game.
My perspective on the good vs bad issue isn't any more profound than yours
really. It might however have a slightly different slant.
I spent a great deal of my time in aviation at both extreme ends of the
teaching spectrum. I specialized in teaching primary students and also
pilots who would be flying high performance airplanes. I spent many years
closely involved in the airshow community where life and death in an
airplane were a heartbeat away, and decision and indecision were much more
than mere words.
During my tenure in aviation, counting the pilots close to me on the
military jet aerobatic teams, I've lost no less than 32 close friends and
associates to airshow related accidents. I've written on the subject of
airshow flight safety internationally and have served on more than one
accident investigation committee.
What I'm getting at here is simply to give you the base from which I'm
making my comments on the good vs bad pilot issue. I'm sure many of you have
extensive experience in slightly different areas and would have intelligent
comment to add along with mine.
I'd like to try and pass on to you how many of us in the airshow community
approach the flight safety issue. Perhaps by sharing how we feel about it,
some mutual benefit can be obtained that will result in food for thought
among the group.This is my intent anyway.
We have a saying in the warbird community that basically postulates the
simple fact that flying an airplane is a physical and mental exercise in
avoiding an accident the airplane is trying to make happen. How good you can
make yourself at avoiding that accident and how long you can keep from
having that accident is the name of the game......nothing more...nothing
less.
If we took the time to figure out all the things that could go wrong with a
given flight or go wrong on a given airplane at any given time, we'd
probably never get in one of the damn things. Let's face it; anytime you
take a piece of heavy machinery, point it in a direction and make it go real
fast and real high off the ground, you have a potential for an accident to
say the least.
Avoiding having this accident is job one for us as pilots, and how we
approach dealing with this situation will go a long way in determining our
longevity as pilots.
You can play the statistic game and come up with all kinds of stats on hours
flown vs accident rates but that won't tell you much on the individual
basis; YOU being the individual. I can tell you that we in the display
flying community don't put a whole lot of faith in statistics. We believe
that from the time you first set foot on an airfield and sit your butt down
in the seat of an airplane with the intention of learning to fly, your
ATTITUDE about what you're doing will determine how good you become at
avoiding that accident waiting for you out there.
The key to avoiding accidents and being a good pilot lies in preparation and
training. Even considering this, the odds are up for grabs.
You can be a good pilot for twenty years and end up being a bad one for just
a few seconds and those few seconds can wipe out every moment of those
twenty years of good and safe flying.
Just last year at Mountain Home AFB, Chris Stricklin of the Thunderbirds, a
thoroughly trained and competent pilot who had demonstrated to the entire
Air Force that he was good enough to fly in the most demanding environment
you can possibly imagine, made one simple mistake and in the space of a few
seconds, lost his airplane, came within 1/8 second of losing his life and
effectively ended his career in the Air Force.
I could give you a hundred examples like this one, but what happened to
Stricklin makes my point perfectly. Even if we prepare through constant
training, we can be bitten and bitten hard, and it happens to the best of
us.
The truth is that at any given moment in time, a pilot can be either a good
pilot or a bad one. The trick is to constantly be leaning heavily on the
"good" side. The only way to do this is through constant training and
preparation so that when something goes wrong, and believe me, sooner or
later, something will go wrong, the training kicks in and what could have
been an accident is avoided. In this case, the pilot is a good pilot.
In the airshow community, we believe that being a good pilot is simply being
as prepared for what you are doing as is humanly possible. We cut the odds
this way. Taking catastrophic failure out of the equation, many of us have
survived long careers as pilots by adapting this attitude for being prepared
through proper training.
What I've commented on here holds true, especially true, for the primary
student learning to fly, and the everyday non professional pilot who flies
only for pleasure.
As a flight instructor, I've taught this simple philosophy to every student
who came my way.
"Spend every moment as a pilot preparing yourself for an accident that might
never happen, and have some fun while you're doing it.....THAT'S FLYING!!!!"
Dudley Henriques

[Denny]

Dudley, a few comments...

I doubt that the current discussion of 'good' versus 'bad' pilot is
really about an arena where a half a second controls life or death...
The vast majority of us GA pilots will never fly in that arena... I
don't know the chain of events for Mr. Stricklin... Military flying is
fast and dangerous... They are mostly flown at high angles of attack,
pulling significant G
loads... These machines have the glide ratio of a pregnant rock when
the arabic incense burner flames out... They have unstable flight
characteristics and complicated control
systems with computer interfaces, etc., that generally makes them
uncontrollable when anything goes wrong... They are often stuffed with
high explosives and rocket fuel... Their only purpose is to snuff the
life of an opposing pilot, tank commander, etc... So flying them in a
normal fashion <for them> is a dangerous maneuver under the best of
circumstances... Doing low level aerobatics for the thrills of the
unwashed masses multiplies the risk exponentially, as proven by the
follow the leaders controlled flight into the ground that wiped out a
team...

Next, the discussion of low level civilian aerobatics for crowd thrills
is a hot button for me... There simply is no reason for LOW LEVEL
aerobatics to exist in general aviation... Its' only purpose is to
draw a <paying> crowd of drooling, mouth breathers, who hope to see
carnage and death... In a rational world the inverted ribbon cut would
be flown directly over the heads of the crowd so that the risks taken
by the pilot are shared equally by Billy Bob on the ground... Darwins
law at it's finest...

And, in the original discussion of "no excuse", I specifically
exempted the mechanical failure that cannot be predicted or
prevented... Yes, there are true accidents - the magnetos crap out, a
fuel leak in flight, a control cable breaks, the crank breaks, a jug
fails, electrical fire behind the panel, etc... You are to be commended
for discussing with your students the necessity for preparing and
preplanning for these problems... I suspect that your students do very
well when taking their check rides and later on... but we need to get
back to basics here...
The vast majority of GA accidents happening today are not
'accidents'... They are chains of cause and effect that could have and
should have been prevented... They would not have happened <for the
most part> in military aviation... They would not have happened <for
the most part> in the aerobatic community... They would not have
happened <for the most part> in the airlines..

These are basic issues...
Do you have enough fuel for the flight? Are you cross checking your
fuel consumption versus time and distance left to go at regular
intervals during flight? There is simply no excuse for running out of
fuel - yet in GA it is almost a daily occurence... Military pilots
routinely go to bingo fuel, but it is not a cause of a significant
percentage of military crashes... Why not? Because it is carefully
planned for, every flight, every time..

Did you get a weather briefing and are you making good judgements -
versus the old, 'well, let's go take a look'... Continued VFR into IMC
followed by a crash is almost daily in GA... Weather is not as
controllable as fuel load, yet simply doing the basics would decrease
VFR into IMC accidents dramatically... It is an insignificant
percentage of the crashes in the airlines, military, and aerobatic
community... Therefore it is imminently preventable...

CFIT - flying a functioning airplane into the ground because you don't
know where you are in relation to the terrrain... What can I say about
this... jeez...

Running off the runway during takeoff or landing... A local at my
field just last week on takeoff, no less, ran his plane off the runway
at an angle, across the grass, across another runway, into the weeds
and put it on it's back... He said the sun blinded him... This is his
6th airplane crash <that I know of, there are probably more>... Does a
solution suggest itself here?

I could go on, but this should be enough to get foam at the mouth crowd
nicely lathered up...

denny

[Jose]

> I doubt that the current discussion of 'good' versus 'bad' pilot is
> really about an arena where a half a second controls life or death...
> The vast majority of us GA pilots will never fly in that arena.

I think he's talking about an "attitude of safety", which applies in
every arena. But (for me) the discussion is not about how to be safe,
or how safe to be. It is about us "good pilots" sitting back in our
easy chair judging others as "bad pilots" (a term with predicitive
value) based on the outcome of one error. Of course =we= would never be
so dumb as to do =that=.

> There simply is no reason for LOW LEVEL
> aerobatics to exist in general aviation.

There is no reason for =any= risky activity to exist. What is special
about low level aerobatics? But people do take risks in exchange for
benefits. You may not appreciate the benefits of low level aerobatics
any more than my aunt appreciates the benefits of flying little
airplanes in the first place. But it is up to each of us to make our
own determination of risk and benefit, and to respect the choices others
make.

> I specifically
> exempted the mechanical failure that cannot be predicted or
> prevented...

But most mechanical failures =can= be predicted or prevented (by good
maintanance, and the choice of shop or FBO) or at least mitigated (by
altitude, fuel reserve, backup devices, etc). Why not call somebody a
"bad pilot" because he chose to trust an FBO who was not worthy of such
trust, and did not bring a handheld navigation unit as backup, when the
battery catches fire on an instrument approach?

> Did you get a weather briefing and are you making good judgements -
> versus the old, 'well, let's go take a look'...

"Taking a look" is not in itself a bad thing. Given a weather briefing,
and weather that is not quite as forecast, sometimes it's worth taking a
look anyway, so long as you have sufficient outs should the look not be
so inviting. Although I think you meant flying without a briefing at
all, you cast aspersions on the entire concept of "taking a look".

There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[A Lieberman]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:56:11 GMT, Jose wrote:

> There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.

I'd have to disagree with the first sentence. Making a decision based on
facts known at the time of launch can substantially change after the wheels
go up.

An example of one of my errors was before I got my IFR ticket, I decided to
launch on a forecast of broken 4000 foot ceilings and tops at 6000.
Forecast was to improve by the time I got to my destination. I did flight
following at 8000 so I could be VFR over the top and be in the clear smooth
air. You can guess what happened. Forecast was a bust.

Did I make an error on launch. Hardly. VFR conditions predicted. By the
time I got to the destination, field was IFR with 800 foot ceilings. End
result, no biggie, 'fess up to center, went to another field that had VFR.

Does the above make me a bad pilot for getting caught VFR on top. I made a
launch decision based on the best information at hand. If you make a
judgment on the surface, one would think how could a pilot get stuck on
top. Things happen. To make a blanket statement there is no excuse for
most pilot errors is wrong.

I have made many errors in my short piloting days (536 hours).

The trick is to learn from those errors, not repeat them. We are human.
While the margin for error is narrower when flying the plane, there is some
room for error, albeit very little wiggle room, but there is. An example
of this is landing above the stall speed. Procedurally speaking, you want
the plane to stop flying when you land. Would you call it an error on the
pilot to land at 10 knots above stall speed? Not likely, as that is the
margin of error I am talking about.

I am my own worst critic on my flying. Oversight on preflight is
inexcusable, but any distraction can detract from the quality of a
preflight. One night flight, somebody came up to me and was talking to me,
I got distracted, and forgot the untie the tail tie down. I did check the
control surfaces. Found out real quick after startup needless to say. I
felt like kicking myself for such stupidity. Does this make me a bad pilot
for inadvertently forgetting to untie the plane? I do my preflight like
it's the first time I ever flew the plane, and I own my plane. Errors
happen and can be excusable since we are human.

I had an engine failure once, and declared an emergency. I forgot to open
the door on landing. Does this make me a bad pilot. Procedure says to use
the emergency checklist. Well, guess what, my first priority was to fly
the plane. I didn't have time to pull out a checklist. Does this make me
a bad pilot because I didn't use the checklist or I didn't open the cabin
door on landing?

Lets talk about fuel exhaustion. How can a pilot run out of gas? Yes,
it's inexcusable to launch on a four hour leg with 3 hours of fuel. But,
what's to say the pilot launches with 4 hours of fuel for three hour
flight. Gasket leaks, slowly depleting your fuel. Head winds were higher
then expected. Fan stops, and now the pilot makes an off airport landing.
Media comes out, oh my, pilot ran out of gas. First thought, and last
impression is pilot was stupid for running out of gas. Guarantee you, the
outcome of the gasket leak won't come out in the media one year later after
the NTSB comes out with the final ruling. All we will remember is that the
pilot ran out of gas.

I think the point I am trying to make is to err is human. First
impressions are last impressions

To err is excusable depending on circumstances.

Please note, I am talking about normal everyday errors that pilots make,
not stupid ones like reckless acts of operating an airplane.

Allen

[Jose]

> An example of one of my errors was before I got my IFR ticket, I decided to
> launch on a forecast of broken 4000 foot ceilings and tops at 6000.
> Forecast was to improve by the time I got to my destination. I did flight
> following at 8000 so I could be VFR over the top and be in the clear smooth
> air. You can guess what happened. Forecast was a bust.

Where was the error? If you had outs the whole way and didn't get
yourself up a (figurative) box canyon, you were fine. You were not
"Caught VFR on top", since VFR fields were in range. Needing to divert
is not a sign of error.

You were more vulnerable, as the fan could have quit leaving you to
descend through cloud. But you have a similar vulnerability flying over
water. Flying is risky; we accept the risk for the benefit.

> Does the above make me a bad pilot for...

In my book, being a bad (or good) pilot requires a consistant pattern of
bad (or good) decisions. A single instance does not have predicitive value.

To err is human, and we must accept that even good pilots err, and that
an occasional mistake does not make them bad pilots (a phrase with
predicitive value). "Excusable" means "it's ok". This is why I say
there is no excuse, but there are reasons.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Gene Seibel]

Very good post. I'm one of those GA guys that's had my "bad pilot"
moments - a Tri-Pacer on its back twice and out of fuel once. I have
done my best of learn from my mistakes and avoid them in the future. As
I get older that has become both easier and harder. Sometimes I can
recognize a chain of bad events beginning to form and put a stop to it.
Other times something will pop up suddenly and I'll kick myself for
days about how I reacted. I've survived 29 years and 2700 hours, but
it'll take just as much work and attention to survive my next flight as
it did the first one.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Dudley, a few comments...


> I could go on, but this should be enough to get foam at the mouth crowd
> nicely lathered up...
>
> denny

I'm sorry you chose this path and I won't deal with it.

Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques]

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>
> I think he's talking about an "attitude of safety", which applies in every
> arena.

Exactly!



> There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.
>
> Jose

...................and the whole issue of flight safety, be it in a Piper
Cub, an F16, straight and level, or in low altitude acro, is in developing
the attitude and habit patterns that result in keeping these "reasons" at an
absolute minimum.
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:56:11 GMT, Jose wrote:
>
>> There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.
>
> I'd have to disagree with the first sentence. Making a decision based on
> facts known at the time of launch can substantially change after the
> wheels
> go up.

Pilot error is an extremely complicated issue. It's existence is clear in
some instances but in some accidents, it's vague and clouded with individual
interpretation.
On several accident investigation teams where I've been involved in some
way, I've been present at meetings where the issue of pilot error was being
resolved. Of course,the situation involved those making this call not having
been there at the moment of decision being decided upon.
It's an interesting process, and it usually boils down to the handling of
the changing dynamic you are addressing after wheels up.
There is the level of preparedness that has to be judged, and even that is
arbitrary. Then comes the action taken or not taken under the changing
dynamic during the flight and it's ramification to the accident.
In all too many decisions on probable cause, it comes down to someone who
wasn't there mentally imaging what THEY would have done in the same
circumstance.
This is why we have "probable cause" in our accidentreports...that and the
legal ramifications of a more positive statement. Positive statements in
accident reports immediately become subject to attack legally.
I hate to venture a guess as to how many dead pilots were simply victims of
overtask in a developing situation that exceeded their ability to cope, and
would have exceed as well the ability to cope for those who determined that
pilot error was the probable cause.
When you start thinking about things from this perspective, it becomes clear
that even the very best among us can be bitten. There is risk in flying.
All we can do is prepare to meet this risk through practice, training, and
attitude from day one.
We learn and adjust every day we are in aviation to cut down the odds in our
favor when those "moments of decision" arrive after the wheels hit the wells
or we don't. The plain fact is that there is no such thing as perfect flight
safety, only pilots who practice, prepare, train, and develop an attitude
about flight safety that bends the odds in their favor.
Dudley Henriques

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:56:11 GMT, Jose wrote:
>
>
>>There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.
>
>
> I'd have to disagree with the first sentence. Making a decision based on
> facts known at the time of launch can substantially change after the wheels
> go up.
>
> An example of one of my errors was before I got my IFR ticket, I decided to
> launch on a forecast of broken 4000 foot ceilings and tops at 6000.
> Forecast was to improve by the time I got to my destination. I did flight
> following at 8000 so I could be VFR over the top and be in the clear smooth
> air. You can guess what happened. Forecast was a bust.
>
> Did I make an error on launch. Hardly. VFR conditions predicted. By the
> time I got to the destination, field was IFR with 800 foot ceilings. End
> result, no biggie, 'fess up to center, went to another field that had VFR.

You absolutely made an error. You launched based only one a weather
forecast (which we all know are inherently inaccurate) and with no good
plan B. What if there had been no VFR weather within your fuel range?
These are exactly the bad pilot decisions that we are talking about.


> Does the above make me a bad pilot for getting caught VFR on top. I made a
> launch decision based on the best information at hand. If you make a
> judgment on the surface, one would think how could a pilot get stuck on
> top. Things happen. To make a blanket statement there is no excuse for
> most pilot errors is wrong.

Not having a plan B (and even a plan C if the conditions are marginal)
is a sign of a bad pilot.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jose wrote:

>> An example of one of my errors was before I got my IFR ticket, I
>> decided to
>> launch on a forecast of broken 4000 foot ceilings and tops at 6000.
>> Forecast was to improve by the time I got to my destination. I did
>> flight
>> following at 8000 so I could be VFR over the top and be in the clear
>> smooth
>> air. You can guess what happened. Forecast was a bust.
>
>
> Where was the error? If you had outs the whole way and didn't get
> yourself up a (figurative) box canyon, you were fine. You were not
> "Caught VFR on top", since VFR fields were in range. Needing to divert
> is not a sign of error.
>
> You were more vulnerable, as the fan could have quit leaving you to
> descend through cloud. But you have a similar vulnerability flying over
> water. Flying is risky; we accept the risk for the benefit.
>
>> Does the above make me a bad pilot for...
>
>
> In my book, being a bad (or good) pilot requires a consistant pattern of
> bad (or good) decisions. A single instance does not have predicitive
> value.

Do you mean predictive value? If that is the case, then you really
can't predict much based on a pilots style or behavior. I've know lots
of pilots who are very risk oriented and have never had an accident or
incident and I know a few who are very conservative and safety conscious
who have. I stand by my earlier assertion that it is results that
count, not intent, style, good living, whatever.

Matt

[Dudley Henriques]

Hi Gene;
I've discovered through my career that I do most of my flight safety
"thinking" in between flights where I have a tendency toward self evaluation
on what I did and what I could have done to make the flight better. Doing
this sort of put me in a constant state of "awareness" about my flying in
general and resulted in my making those small adjustmants and improvements
that are necessary to longivity in the business.
I've always been convinced that it's the pilots who "think" about what
they're doing all the time, whether in flight or on the ground between
flights who have the best chance at a higher level of flight safety. Pilots
who put their mind away with the airplane in the hangar don't fare as well
in the long run.
I've had some of those "bad pilot moments" myself. :-)
Dudley

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Very good post. I'm one of those GA guys that's had my "bad pilot"
> moments - a Tri-Pacer on its back twice and out of fuel once. I have
> done my best of learn from my mistakes and avoid them in the future. As
> I get older that has become both easier and harder. Sometimes I can
> recognize a chain of bad events beginning to form and put a stop to it.
> Other times something will pop up suddenly and I'll kick myself for
> days about how I reacted. I've survived 29 years and 2700 hours, but
> it'll take just as much work and attention to survive my next flight as
> it did the first one.
> --
> Gene Seibel
> Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
> Because I fly, I envy no one.
>

[A Lieberman]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:25:54 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

> A Lieberman wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:56:11 GMT, Jose wrote:
>>
>>
>>>There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.
>>
>>
>> I'd have to disagree with the first sentence. Making a decision based on
>> facts known at the time of launch can substantially change after the wheels
>> go up.
>>
>> An example of one of my errors was before I got my IFR ticket, I decided to
>> launch on a forecast of broken 4000 foot ceilings and tops at 6000.
>> Forecast was to improve by the time I got to my destination. I did flight
>> following at 8000 so I could be VFR over the top and be in the clear smooth
>> air. You can guess what happened. Forecast was a bust.
>>
>> Did I make an error on launch. Hardly. VFR conditions predicted. By the
>> time I got to the destination, field was IFR with 800 foot ceilings. End
>> result, no biggie, 'fess up to center, went to another field that had VFR.
>
> You absolutely made an error. You launched based only one a weather
> forecast (which we all know are inherently inaccurate) and with no good
> plan B. What if there had been no VFR weather within your fuel range?
> These are exactly the bad pilot decisions that we are talking about.

While I didn't state it in my original post, this forecast was just before
wheels up. I got a full briefing one hour before departure.

Conditions were VFR for the first hour of my flight, VFR overcast for the
remainder of the flight. (ceilings were to be VFR, and I elected over the
top)

So, when going that kind of distance, I don't have a choice but to go on
forecast. So, where is my error? Conditions were VFR.

>> Does the above make me a bad pilot for getting caught VFR on top. I made a
>> launch decision based on the best information at hand. If you make a
>> judgment on the surface, one would think how could a pilot get stuck on
>> top. Things happen. To make a blanket statement there is no excuse for
>> most pilot errors is wrong.
>
> Not having a plan B (and even a plan C if the conditions are marginal)
> is a sign of a bad pilot.

What's there to plan if I was to expecting to encounter VFR conditions
other then headwind conditions? It was severe clear on departure and the
forecast was for scattered clouds on arrival.

Allen

[Icebound]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
link.net...
> Hi Gene;
> I've discovered through my career that I do most of my flight safety
> "thinking" in between flights where I have a tendency toward self
> evaluation on what I did and what I could have done to make the flight
> better.


Sports psychologists will tell you that 80 percent of most activity is
mental and 20 percent physical. So practicing mentally is suggested, indeed
demanded, for high-performance athletes. There is every reason that it
should be practiced by pilots.

Your potential for superior performance is not just based on your skill at
the activity, but your mental attitude... in many very different categories.
So when I see this thread on "good pilots", what does that really mean? He
may be very skilful at extricating an aircraft from an unusual attitude at
400 AGL, but he doesn't keep a very good visual lookout. He may be able to
flight-plan accurately to the second, but he skips through the pre-flight.
He is real skilful at finding a runway in 200-1/2, so he takes chances and
flies VFR into IMC.

Or alternately, he knows every reg in the book, every word of the safety
seminar, but he still skids his turn-to-final, always lands in a crosswind
with side-force on the gear, and becomes a panicked passenger when the
engine fails.

I believe that very few of us are "good pilots". If the required *mental*
and physical skills of piloting were classified and scored honestly, most of
us would score well is some categories and poorly in others; some
*exceedingly* well in some and *very* poorly in others.

Some of us would be mediocre in all.

Only a very few would score highly in all categories, all of the time. The
NTSB is full of multi-thousand commercial "good pilots" who did a stupid
thing, such as this example of empty-tank selection for takeoff:
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050809X01183&key=1

As a pilot, I can only pledge to try to improve those categories at which I
score poorly. Will I reach a "good-pilot" level of proficiency in them all?
I doubt it. It won't stop me from trying. Will I become a statistic before
reaching proficiency in every physical and mental category? Maybe. Maybe I
know enough about my shortcomings so that I avoid the situations which I am
apt to handle poorly. And maybe I pay special attention to those mental
skills which I know to be weak.

And maybe that is enough to cheat the statistician just a little bit, and
that is all that I can ask of myself.

[Jose]

> Do you mean predictive value?

Yes.

> If that is the case, then you really can't predict much based on a pilots style or behavior. I've know lots of pilots who are very risk oriented and have never had an accident or incident and I know a few who are very conservative and safety conscious who have. I stand by my earlier assertion that it is results that count, not intent, style, good living, whatever.

The race isn't alwasy to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but
that's the way to bet.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Icebound" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>> Hi Gene;
>> I've discovered through my career that I do most of my flight safety
>> "thinking" in between flights where I have a tendency toward self
>> evaluation on what I did and what I could have done to make the flight
>> better.
>
>
> Sports psychologists will tell you that 80 percent of most activity is
> mental and 20 percent physical. So practicing mentally is suggested,
> indeed demanded, for high-performance athletes. There is every reason
> that it should be practiced by pilots.
>
> Your potential for superior performance is not just based on your skill at
> the activity, but your mental attitude... in many very different
> categories. So when I see this thread on "good pilots", what does that
> really mean? He may be very skilful at extricating an aircraft from an
> unusual attitude at 400 AGL, but he doesn't keep a very good visual
> lookout. He may be able to flight-plan accurately to the second, but he
> skips through the pre-flight. He is real skilful at finding a runway in
> 200-1/2, so he takes chances and flies VFR into IMC.
>
> Or alternately, he knows every reg in the book, every word of the safety
> seminar, but he still skids his turn-to-final, always lands in a crosswind
> with side-force on the gear, and becomes a panicked passenger when the
> engine fails.
>
> I believe that very few of us are "good pilots". If the required
> *mental* and physical skills of piloting were classified and scored
> honestly, most of us would score well is some categories and poorly in
> others; some *exceedingly* well in some and *very* poorly in others.
>
> Some of us would be mediocre in all.
>
> Only a very few would score highly in all categories, all of the time.
> The NTSB is full of multi-thousand commercial "good pilots" who did a
> stupid thing, such as this example of empty-tank selection for takeoff:
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20050809X01183&key=1
>
> As a pilot, I can only pledge to try to improve those categories at which
> I score poorly. Will I reach a "good-pilot" level of proficiency in them
> all? I doubt it. It won't stop me from trying. Will I become a statistic
> before reaching proficiency in every physical and mental category? Maybe.
> Maybe I know enough about my shortcomings so that I avoid the situations
> which I am apt to handle poorly. And maybe I pay special attention to
> those mental skills which I know to be weak.
>
> And maybe that is enough to cheat the statistician just a little bit, and
> that is all that I can ask of myself.

From my first post;

"The truth is that at any given moment in time, a pilot can be either a good
pilot or a bad one. The trick is to constantly be leaning heavily on the
good" side. "

......and that, as you have so correctly stated, is all we can do, and it's
in doing this to the best of our ability that keeps us in the game :-)

Dudley Henriques

[John Gaquin]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message

> I've always been convinced that it's the pilots who "think" about what
> they're doing.... who have the best chance at a higher level of flight
> safety.

I agree. Almost 40 years ago now, a long passed fellow named George Day
started my commercial certificate training with a very short flight wherein
he asked me to demonstrate a left bank.....right bank....pitch up......
pitch down........ok, let's go back and land.

That's good, he said after we shut down. Now, everything else you need to
know and do to fly professionally is mental. Thinking is what seperates the
professionals from the amateurs. Get the right attitude to start, and keep
it right, and you'll be fine. He then handed me a book called "Song of the
Sky", by Guy Murchie, and told me to come back next week. [the book dates
from the early fifties, and may be overly sentimentalized for today's
tastes, but is still worth the read, in my view, if you can find it.]

I have subsequently flown 22 years professionally without a catastrophic
failure of anything, without ever having to declare an emergency. I am
convinced that George, although a world-class curmudgeon, had it right about
thinking and professionalism. His advice, along with a very healthy
allotment of good luck, got me through.

John Gaquin

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:25:54 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>
>>A Lieberman wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:56:11 GMT, Jose wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>There is no excuse for most pilot error. But there are reasons.
>>>
>>>
>>>I'd have to disagree with the first sentence. Making a decision based on
>>>facts known at the time of launch can substantially change after the wheels
>>>go up.
>>>
>>>An example of one of my errors was before I got my IFR ticket, I decided to
>>>launch on a forecast of broken 4000 foot ceilings and tops at 6000.
>>>Forecast was to improve by the time I got to my destination. I did flight
>>>following at 8000 so I could be VFR over the top and be in the clear smooth
>>>air. You can guess what happened. Forecast was a bust.
>>>
>>>Did I make an error on launch. Hardly. VFR conditions predicted. By the
>>>time I got to the destination, field was IFR with 800 foot ceilings. End
>>>result, no biggie, 'fess up to center, went to another field that had VFR.
>>
>>You absolutely made an error. You launched based only one a weather
>>forecast (which we all know are inherently inaccurate) and with no good
>>plan B. What if there had been no VFR weather within your fuel range?
>>These are exactly the bad pilot decisions that we are talking about.
>
>
> While I didn't state it in my original post, this forecast was just before
> wheels up. I got a full briefing one hour before departure.
>
> Conditions were VFR for the first hour of my flight, VFR overcast for the
> remainder of the flight. (ceilings were to be VFR, and I elected over the
> top)
>
> So, when going that kind of distance, I don't have a choice but to go on
> forecast. So, where is my error? Conditions were VFR.

You continued on once you encountered weather worse than forecast. This
is one of the leading causes of VFR flight fatalities. Keep in mind
that a flight plan is just that, a plan. I rarely execute a flight
exactly as I planned it. Most flights are very dynamic. Weather
changes. The airplane changes. The pilot may change (some days I just
don't feel 100%). You have to constantly evaluate and adjust to these
changes. Simply flying on and saying "bummer the forecast isn't
correct" is bad piloting.


>>>Does the above make me a bad pilot for getting caught VFR on top. I made a
>>>launch decision based on the best information at hand. If you make a
>>>judgment on the surface, one would think how could a pilot get stuck on
>>>top. Things happen. To make a blanket statement there is no excuse for
>>>most pilot errors is wrong.
>>
>>Not having a plan B (and even a plan C if the conditions are marginal)
>>is a sign of a bad pilot.
>
>
> What's there to plan if I was to expecting to encounter VFR conditions
> other then headwind conditions? It was severe clear on departure and the
> forecast was for scattered clouds on arrival.

You have alternates in mind that are still VFR and use them if needed.
Flying on top of a solid overcast into weather that is by your own
admission worse than forecast (and you have no way of knowing how much
worse it may get) without an instrument rating, isn't a very wise thing
to do.


Matt

[A Lieberman]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 00:41:03 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

> You continued on once you encountered weather worse than forecast. This
> is one of the leading causes of VFR flight fatalities. Keep in mind
> that a flight plan is just that, a plan. I rarely execute a flight
> exactly as I planned it. Most flights are very dynamic. Weather
> changes. The airplane changes. The pilot may change (some days I just
> don't feel 100%). You have to constantly evaluate and adjust to these
> changes. Simply flying on and saying "bummer the forecast isn't
> correct" is bad piloting.

I again still respectfully disagree. I am VMC on top. How would I know
that the weather is worsening BELOW the overcast??? I am plodding along,
dumb and happy, enjoying the view a couple thousand feet above the
overcast. Yes, I could have been checking ATIS enroute, but I was still
very new to the XC process on this particular trip. I now use that tool
even now when I am IFR rated.

It was 50 miles out when I contacted center since overcast did not break
up. It was then I discovered that things went south. And I reacted
accordingly, as stated in my original post, fess up to center and find
another airport reporting VFR conditions. In fact, center suggested an
airport 100 miles away, but due to fuel considerations, I asked for the
closest airport so I didn't go into my self imposed one hour reserve (I was
already 3 1/2 hours in the air). My plane holds 58 gallons and burns 10
GPH.

> You have alternates in mind that are still VFR and use them if needed.
> Flying on top of a solid overcast into weather that is by your own
> admission worse than forecast (and you have no way of knowing how much
> worse it may get) without an instrument rating, isn't a very wise thing
> to do.

Yes, I agree now (where I learned from my own experiences) that VFR over
the top is inheritantly risky without a IFR rating or WITHOUT an alternate.
It was center that got me what I needed for my alternate, so I used every
available tool out there.

I think the key point I am trying to make, is by looking at the surface of
my situation I described, I followed the VFR rules to a tee when the wheels
went up. But somebody not in my situation would say, how in the world can
someone get stuck over the top.

I would not consider the situation I encountered a bad piloting decision
with the information I had in hand from startup to 50 miles out.

If I would have pressed on to my destination without regard to the weather,
that would have been a bad piloting decision. I did not do that.

Allen

[Dudley Henriques]

"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>
>> I've always been convinced that it's the pilots who "think" about what
>> they're doing.... who have the best chance at a higher level of flight
>> safety.
>
> I agree. Almost 40 years ago now, a long passed fellow named George Day
> started my commercial certificate training with a very short flight
> wherein he asked me to demonstrate a left bank.....right bank....pitch
> up...... pitch down........ok, let's go back and land.
>
> That's good, he said after we shut down. Now, everything else you need to
> know and do to fly professionally is mental. Thinking is what seperates
> the professionals from the amateurs. Get the right attitude to start, and
> keep it right, and you'll be fine. He then handed me a book called "Song
> of the Sky", by Guy Murchie, and told me to come back next week. [the
> book dates from the early fifties, and may be overly sentimentalized for
> today's tastes, but is still worth the read, in my view, if you can find
> it.]
>
> I have subsequently flown 22 years professionally without a catastrophic
> failure of anything, without ever having to declare an emergency. I am
> convinced that George, although a world-class curmudgeon, had it right
> about thinking and professionalism. His advice, along with a very healthy
> allotment of good luck, got me through.
>
> John Gaquin

I think those of us who had a George Day somewhere in our past are
fortunate.
My George Day was named Jim Shotwell. :-)
Dudley Henriques

[A Lieberman]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 19:37:32 -0500, John Gaquin wrote:

> I have subsequently flown 22 years professionally without a catastrophic
> failure of anything, without ever having to declare an emergency.

Next time you are at your airport, be sure to thank your A&P.

All the good piloting is only as good as the reliability of the equipment
you fly.....

Allen

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 00:41:03 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

>>You have alternates in mind that are still VFR and use them if needed.
>>Flying on top of a solid overcast into weather that is by your own
>>admission worse than forecast (and you have no way of knowing how much
>>worse it may get) without an instrument rating, isn't a very wise thing
>>to do.
>
>
> Yes, I agree now (where I learned from my own experiences) that VFR over
> the top is inheritantly risky without a IFR rating or WITHOUT an alternate.
> It was center that got me what I needed for my alternate, so I used every
> available tool out there.

That was my point entirely.


> I think the key point I am trying to make, is by looking at the surface of
> my situation I described, I followed the VFR rules to a tee when the wheels
> went up. But somebody not in my situation would say, how in the world can
> someone get stuck over the top.

Following the rules to the letter doesn't make one a good pilot. I'd
say it actually is a great indication of a bad pilot. Good piloting
requires constant situation assessment, judgement and decision making.
Blindly following the rules and regulations is a recipe for disaster.
Most rules are written based on the last accident, not the next one. My
goal is to not be the reason that the next regulation is written and
following the current regulations is grossly insufficient to ensure that.


> I would not consider the situation I encountered a bad piloting decision
> with the information I had in hand from startup to 50 miles out.

I would. Flying over a solid layer such that you can't easily know what
is happening below or even knowing if you can find a hole to descend
through shows bad judgement and is bad piloting in my opinion, unless
there is a really compelling reason to take this significant risk.
There are situations that warrant that, but you didn't give any
information as to any circumstance that would warrant this level of risk
taking by a non-instrument rated pilot.


> If I would have pressed on to my destination without regard to the weather,
> that would have been a bad piloting decision. I did not do that.

That would have been another bad piloting decision. :-)


Matt

[A Lieberman]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 01:24:01 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

>> I would not consider the situation I encountered a bad piloting decision
>> with the information I had in hand from startup to 50 miles out.
>
> I would. Flying over a solid layer such that you can't easily know what
> is happening below or even knowing if you can find a hole to descend
> through shows bad judgement and is bad piloting in my opinion,

Everybody is naturally entitled to their opinion :-)

> unless
> there is a really compelling reason to take this significant risk.
> There are situations that warrant that, but you didn't give any
> information as to any circumstance that would warrant this level of risk
> taking by a non-instrument rated pilot.

What situation would warrant you to waiver from what you are telling me is
an unsafe decision?

If it's unsafe based on your opinion, then it is unsafe for any reason, no
matter how compelling and one should drive instead.

Allen

[buttman]

"Bad pilot", "good pilot"... Who cares?

It's all just pointless namecalling. It's human nature to want to feel
better than someone else. It's tempting for me to say to someone else
"That was a bad descision you made. You are such a bad pilot. If I was
in that situation I'd do something completely different because I am
such a better pilot than you. You deserve to get your liscense taken
away because of your reckless attitude, and you should be banned from
coming within 50 miles of any airplane or airport. You should try to be
more like me, perfect in every facet of flying." But what would that
accomplish? I have seriously witnessed people in this group say things
like the above.

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:

>>unless
>>there is a really compelling reason to take this significant risk.
>>There are situations that warrant that, but you didn't give any
>>information as to any circumstance that would warrant this level of risk
>>taking by a non-instrument rated pilot.
>
>
> What situation would warrant you to waiver from what you are telling me is
> an unsafe decision?
>
> If it's unsafe based on your opinion, then it is unsafe for any reason, no
> matter how compelling and one should drive instead.

If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24 hours to live
and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then I'd take that
risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk, but I'd do it
without hesitation.

However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't factor into
normal decision making.


Matt

[Jim Macklin]

Many people die in plane crashes on the way to hospitals,
weddings and funerals. Several friends of mine died in just
that way and for those reasons, "Got to be there for the
_______." There are people who have airplanes and pilots
who can fly in bad weather, they're called charter
operators. In critical need cases they even sometimes offer
discounts or even free services. But if you are not
qualified to safely complete a trip to delivery the organs,
medicine or what ever, the trip isn't likely to be
successful and everyone dies, in the plane and as a result
of the pilot's over estimation of the skill and equipment
needed.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.



"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
|A Lieberman wrote:
|
| >>unless
| >>there is a really compelling reason to take this
significant risk.
| >>There are situations that warrant that, but you didn't
give any
| >>information as to any circumstance that would warrant
this level of risk
| >>taking by a non-instrument rated pilot.
| >
| >
| > What situation would warrant you to waiver from what you
are telling me is
| > an unsafe decision?
| >
| > If it's unsafe based on your opinion, then it is unsafe
for any reason, no
| > matter how compelling and one should drive instead.
|
| If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24
hours to live
| and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then
I'd take that
| risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk,
but I'd do it
| without hesitation.
|
| However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't
factor into
| normal decision making.
|
|
| Matt

[A Lieberman]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

> If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24 hours to live
> and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then I'd take that
> risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk, but I'd do it
> without hesitation.
>
> However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't factor into
> normal decision making.

Excuse me?

What you describe above is the worst possible pilot decision one could
make.

With what you describe above, your mind will be far from the safety of
flying. I am sure get there itis would kill you and those on the ground
after you bought the farm.

And here I stay within the confines of the rules and regulations, you
accuse me of making bad piloting decisions for flying VFR over the top, and
you want exceptions to break the rules and regulations that are suppose to
keep the airways safe. What exactly is wrong with this picture???

What you described above sure ain't safe or a good pilot decision in my
opinion.

Allen

[Gary Drescher]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24 hours to live
>> and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then I'd take that
>> risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk, but I'd do it
>> without hesitation.
>>
>> However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't factor into
>> normal decision making.
>
> Excuse me?
>
> What you describe above is the worst possible pilot decision one could
> make.

Hardly. It's true that the fatality risk is enormous--perhaps even on the
order of 1% or more. But in the (very unlikely) hypothetical situation Matt
describes--that the flight is the only way to save one of his kids--a 1%
fatality risk is well worth it. So Matt's risk-benefit analysis is
completely reasonable.

--Gary

[A Lieberman]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 22:39:48 -0500, Gary Drescher wrote:

> Hardly. It's true that the fatality risk is enormous--perhaps even on the
> order of 1% or more. But in the (very unlikely) hypothetical situation Matt
> describes--that the flight is the only way to save one of his kids--a 1%
> fatality risk is well worth it. So Matt's risk-benefit analysis is
> completely reasonable.

Do you have anything to back up your statement?

On Matt's situation, you are talking about a pilot who's mind is now
severely distracted by an emergency, not trained to fly a plane under
duress of get there itis. Talk about missing checklist items by rushing
through things to get there.

Matt was saying my flying over the top with a VFR licence was a bad
piloting decision. Would you say that was a bad decision or a good
decision?

I question the decision to launch under conditions he describe as a "good
piloting" decision. AS you say yourself, the risk factor is enormous, so
much more then my decision to fly VFR over the top.

I would think that no matter how bad a medical condition is, there are many
other means to accomplish getting there other then having a very distracted
pilot with get there itis.

Allen

[Jim Macklin]

I disagree, to save the child the flight must be successful
and on time. A professional flight, in a professional class
airplane is the only sure thing to save the child. The
personal involvement of the concerned pilot raises the risks
and reduces the chances of success.

The FAA has changed VFR rules for over the top and night
flights to try a regulatory means to preempt the choice of a
less safe option. If you're out just for fun, solo and you
kill yourself, aside from the bad PR and destruction of the
airplane, that is your choice. But an unsafe emergency
flight is risking more than your life.

I have run into a burning building and put the fire out
while it was still just in the electrical panel (it was a
motel and my wife and son were in the room less 50 feet from
the fire. I know what is involved in accepting a risk. I
had told my family to get dressed and outside while I was
grabbing the extinguisher.

If I needed a flight for a sick family member, I'd call a
detached professional.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
...
| "A Lieberman" > wrote in message
| .. .
| > On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
| >
| >> If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had
24 hours to live
| >> and flying to pick up the organ was the only option,
then I'd take that
| >> risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk,
but I'd do it
| >> without hesitation.
| >>
| >> However, such situations are extremely rare and thus
don't factor into
| >> normal decision making.
| >
| > Excuse me?
| >
| > What you describe above is the worst possible pilot
decision one could
| > make.
|
| Hardly. It's true that the fatality risk is
enormous--perhaps even on the
| order of 1% or more. But in the (very unlikely)
hypothetical situation Matt
| describes--that the flight is the only way to save one of
his kids--a 1%
| fatality risk is well worth it. So Matt's risk-benefit
analysis is
| completely reasonable.
|
| --Gary
|
|
|

[Jose]

> I again still respectfully disagree. I am VMC on top. How would I know
> that the weather is worsening BELOW the overcast??? I am plodding along,
> dumb and happy, enjoying the view a couple thousand feet above the
> overcast.

ATIS. It's an error. Granted, it's one borne of inexperience, but
experience is how we become better pilots - it goes without saying that
prior to experience, we were worse pilots.

> I followed the VFR rules to a tee when the wheels
> went up.

Rules aren't sufficient, as you learned.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[A Lieberman]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 04:21:48 GMT, Jose wrote:

>> I followed the VFR rules to a tee when the wheels
>> went up.
>
> Rules aren't sufficient, as you learned.

Yep, you are so right. That flight made me pursue my IFR rating *smile*

Had I had my IFR rating, we wouldn't be discussing it, it would had been a
non eventful ILS approach with 800 foot ceilings, but as you said, we learn
from our experiences.

Every time I step on the ramp, I am in the learning mode....

Allen

[Jim Macklin]

BTW, VFR ON TOP is an IFR clearance restriction, VFR OVER
THE TOP is a VFR flight. VFR over the top is not allowed to
student, recreational or sport pilots and is not a good idea
for any VFR only pilot. If the edge of a cloud deck is
nearby and you can glide, power off to that edge, not just a
hole in a solid layer, but clear skies, go ahead. But if
you're on top of a layer and need to come down because of
power failure, fire, sickness or any reason, you may not be
able to maneuver to stay 1,000 above, 500 below and 2,000
horizontal (that is a hole about a mile to two mile wide to
allow a spiral and stay 2,000 feet from the edge.

Get a CFI, file an IFR flight to the practice area and
request a block altitude and try to fly down through a hole.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Jose" > wrote in message
. net...
|> I again still respectfully disagree. I am VMC on top.
How would I know
| > that the weather is worsening BELOW the overcast??? I
am plodding along,
| > dumb and happy, enjoying the view a couple thousand feet
above the
| > overcast.
|
| ATIS. It's an error. Granted, it's one borne of
inexperience, but
| experience is how we become better pilots - it goes
without saying that
| prior to experience, we were worse pilots.
|
| > I followed the VFR rules to a tee when the wheels
| > went up.
|
| Rules aren't sufficient, as you learned.
|
| Jose
| --
| Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[John Gaquin]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
news:l3utdxp6k9u6.8nu4f8z2h9p3
>
> Next time you are at your airport, be sure to thank your A&P.
>
> All the good piloting is only as good as the reliability of the equipment
> you fly.....

You'll recall my post referred to "...a very healthy allotment of good
luck...". That good luck was, in great part, in the form of professional
airline maintenance staff and required routine maintenance.

[Morgans]

"A Lieberman" > wrote

> > I would. Flying over a solid layer such that you can't easily know what
> > is happening below or even knowing if you can find a hole to descend
> > through shows bad judgement and is bad piloting in my opinion,
>
> Everybody is naturally entitled to their opinion :-)
>

I'm with you, on this one. You had plenty of fuel, and there were good
alternates close at hand.

OK, group, weigh in. Right now, this is the Matt and Allen show. I would
like to see some more opinions from you'all!
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Macklin]

Remember, when the aircraft operator or owner takes his
aircraft in for an inspection or to troubleshoot a squawk,
unless you fix what they find, it isn't corrected and the
plane may not be safe. Ask a few mechanics at the airport,
how many times they have not been allowed to fix a problem
because of cost or the need to fly a scheduled trip and
they'll do it later?


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
|
| "A Lieberman" > wrote in message
| news:l3utdxp6k9u6.8nu4f8z2h9p3
| >
| > Next time you are at your airport, be sure to thank your
A&P.
| >
| > All the good piloting is only as good as the reliability
of the equipment
| > you fly.....
|
| You'll recall my post referred to "...a very healthy
allotment of good
| luck...". That good luck was, in great part, in the form
of professional
| airline maintenance staff and required routine
maintenance.
|
|

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:tITJf.98200

> Remember, when the aircraft operator or owner takes his
> aircraft in for an inspection or to troubleshoot a squawk,
> unless you fix what they find, it isn't corrected and the
> plane may not be safe. Ask a few mechanics at the airport,
> how many times they have not been allowed to fix a problem
> because of cost or the need to fly a scheduled trip and
> they'll do it later?

My conclusions are based upon many years of Part 121 airline experience.
What are your opinions based upon?

[Jim Macklin]

Going on 35 years as a professional pilot and aircraft
mechanic. My eldest son now also works as a full-time A&P.
Both of us have had owners refuse to fix squawks, saying
they would do it later or just skip it all together because
"we" were just trying to pad the bill.
Even worse, some shops management think that a fast job
keeps the customer happy and the shop manager may tell the
mechanic to stop working on a plane.
We have seen airplanes with landing gear ready to collapse
because rather than fix the motors and linkage, adjustments
have been made that would get a light even though the gear
was not properly locked. When the owner of that airplane
was actually told about the shoddy work that he had been
paying for he was grateful for the proper and more expensive
FIX.
Airlines are generally better at fixing things, but when
they fail to do the job, such as lubricating the elevator
jack screw on a DC 9 [Alaska] because it takes time to get
the grease in the tail. The result of that management
policy failure killed a bunch of people. The crew also
failed to reject flying the airplane even though it was not
really right for some time before the crash.

Remember people, the money you save on maintenance will not
pay for the funeral.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
. ..
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:tITJf.98200
|
| > Remember, when the aircraft operator or owner takes his
| > aircraft in for an inspection or to troubleshoot a
squawk,
| > unless you fix what they find, it isn't corrected and
the
| > plane may not be safe. Ask a few mechanics at the
airport,
| > how many times they have not been allowed to fix a
problem
| > because of cost or the need to fly a scheduled trip and
| > they'll do it later?
|
| My conclusions are based upon many years of Part 121
airline experience.
| What are your opinions based upon?
|
|

[Chris]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24 hours to live
>> and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then I'd take that
>> risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk, but I'd do it
>> without hesitation.
>>
>> However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't factor into
>> normal decision making.
>
> Excuse me?
>
> What you describe above is the worst possible pilot decision one could
> make.
>
> With what you describe above, your mind will be far from the safety of
> flying. I am sure get there itis would kill you and those on the ground
> after you bought the farm.
>
> And here I stay within the confines of the rules and regulations, you
> accuse me of making bad piloting decisions for flying VFR over the top,
> and
> you want exceptions to break the rules and regulations that are suppose to
> keep the airways safe. What exactly is wrong with this picture???
>
> What you described above sure ain't safe or a good pilot decision in my
> opinion.

Staying within the rules and regulations is one thing but they are only set
the baseline for acting properly. Good pilots build on the rules to create a
personal set of rules which go beyond the basics and one needs to recognise
the rules for what they are.
Accuse me of gold plating the rules fine but for me the rules only tell me
what's legal, not what's right.
The rules tell what's legal to retain IFR currency. Personally, it is not
right for me, so I do twice what the rules say.
The rules require the two yearly review, I go up with an instructor and try
things out whenever I feel like it and that is more than every two years.

I remember flying from Niagara Falls to Madison, Wi on the Monday of Oshkosh
last year. The weather was not good.

Set off OK but the headwinds were way above forecast for the trip and would
have taken me down to an hours fuel left on top of the reserve at MSN so I
decided to stop off at Flint. The weather forecast was not good across the
Lake, with a Convective Sigmet issued. However the weather was OK to
Muskegon, so we launched with MKG as the place to stop if it was too bad in
Wisconsin, but with plenty of fuel.

As we flew neared MKG, I got on to the FSS and got the weather update. It
seemed there was a strip of good weather 100 miles wide from Milwaukee
westwards 200 miles. On that basis we continued across the lake and made it
to MSN OK at about 13.00 local time. Once across the lake, then the
emergency alternate field kept changing. Later that afternoon about 4pm
Janesville was hit by a tornado.

The pleasure from that trip came from the actual flying for sure, but the
real sense of achievement came from the decision making that went on along
the way managing risk and applying my limited knowledge of mid west weather
with the information available from the FSS. The other thing that helped was
having 4 hours of fuel on hand when I landed. Too much, some may say, but
fuel was never going to be a factor for me, whereas it could have been.

Chris

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>
>>If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24 hours to live
>>and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then I'd take that
>>risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk, but I'd do it
>>without hesitation.
>>
>>However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't factor into
>>normal decision making.
>
>
> Excuse me?
>
> What you describe above is the worst possible pilot decision one could
> make.
>
> With what you describe above, your mind will be far from the safety of
> flying. I am sure get there itis would kill you and those on the ground
> after you bought the farm.
>
> And here I stay within the confines of the rules and regulations, you
> accuse me of making bad piloting decisions for flying VFR over the top, and
> you want exceptions to break the rules and regulations that are suppose to
> keep the airways safe. What exactly is wrong with this picture???
>
> What you described above sure ain't safe or a good pilot decision in my
> opinion.

Yes, I was intentionally contriving a high risk operation, but giving a
good reason for doing it. You conducted a high risk operation with no
good reason. That is exactly what is wrong with your picture.

Matt

[A Lieberman]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:31:38 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:

> Yes, I was intentionally contriving a high risk operation, but giving a
> good reason for doing it. You conducted a high risk operation with no
> good reason. That is exactly what is wrong with your picture.

Sorry, don't buy it.

You are getting behind an airplane not entirely focused on flying which
makes you much more dangerous then me VFR over the top.

In my opinion, if you get behind a yoke for your stated reasons, that you
have get home itis to get to your destination, you are making the ultimate
poorest pilot decision to fly where as in my situation, I didn't have get
home itis, and have alternatives when I flew VFR over the top.

What would be the difference with your situation and had I pressed on for
an ILS at 800 foot ceilings if the outcome is the POTENTIALLY the same
given the same weather conditions and piloting skills.?

My risk factor would be much lower as I had choices then your stated
reasons.

Risk factors are higher in your situation since you are not completely
focused on flying, but getting there.

Get home itis will kill you if you are not mentally prepared to fly an
airplane.

Allen

[John Gaquin]

So, I take it your experience has nothing to do with Part 121, to which I
was referring.

[Jose]

> Sorry, don't buy it.

The point he's making, I think, is that the risk=reward equation depends
on the reward as well as the risk. "Get-home-itis" has little reward
(getting home), but in his scenario, the reward (his son's life) is much
greater. For purposes of this discussion, assume that there is no
"other way" (i.e. no charter pilots available, too far by car, etc, so
it's fly or die).

A little different, but also showing that context is important, what
would you think of a pilot who routinely flies below 500 feet, in fact
where there are no buildings he flies at more like fifty feet and makes
steep turns at that altitude? Good pilot for skills? Bad pilot for
decisionmaking? Would it make a difference were he a cropduster?

Certain operations, and operations under certain circumstances, are more
risky than others. Sometimes the added risk is warranted.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Gary Drescher]

"Jose" > wrote in message
. net...
>> I again still respectfully disagree. I am VMC on top. How would I know
>> that the weather is worsening BELOW the overcast???
>
> ATIS. It's an error. Granted, it's one borne of inexperience, but
> experience is how we become better pilots - it goes without saying that
> prior to experience, we were worse pilots.

All true, but I think there's also a training deficiency in evidence here.
Prior to the first solo XC, a student should be familiar with the use of
ATIS/AWOS/ASOS, HIWAS, FSS, and EFAS (Flight Watch) to obtain in-flight
weather updates, and should have practiced using those resources during dual
training flights. A pilot shouldn't have to learn this stuff for the first
time while flying alone in deteriorating weather.

--Gary

[Gary Drescher]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:P%RJf.97654$4l5.90774@dukeread05...
> If I needed a flight for a sick family member, I'd call a
> detached professional.

Of course, but Matt contrived (for the sake of illustration) a hypothetical
situation in which making the flight himself was the only possible way to
get need help. His point was just *in those circumstances*, making the
flight is by far the better option.

--Gary

[Gary Drescher]

"A Lieberman" > wrote in message
.. .
> I would think that no matter how bad a medical condition is, there are
> many
> other means to accomplish getting there other then having a very
> distracted
> pilot with get there itis.

There may or may not be other means available. Matt was describing a
situation in which there aren't; *different* kinds of situations have no
bearing on the point he was making about *that* situation.

Just how much more likely do you suppose a fatality is when a pilot is
highly distracted and flying VFR over the top? More than, say, 100 times
more likely than usual? A typical few-hour GA flight has less than one
chance in 20,000 of resulting in a fatality (see the Nall Report), so a
hundred-fold increase in risk would still mean less than a half-percent
chance of death. Or even a *thousand-fold* increase would still mean less
than a five percent chance--still far preferable to the alternative in the
hypothetical situation Matt described. Is there any reason to believe that
Matt's hypothetical situation increases the risk of fatal accident by much
more than a factor of 1,000?

> Matt was saying my flying over the top with a VFR licence was a bad
> piloting decision. Would you say that was a bad decision or a good
> decision?

I'd say it was a bad decision unless you had reason to be confident that
clearer weather was within your flight range, and unless you continued to
monitor the weather using the available en route resources (it would be an
error on a pilot's part--perhaps reflecting a gap in training--to embark on
an XC flight without being prepared to use those resources if needed).

> I question the decision to launch under conditions he describe as a "good
> piloting" decision. AS you say yourself, the risk factor is enormous, so
> much more then my decision to fly VFR over the top.

The risk in Matt's situation is indeed much greater than in yours. But
there's no reason to think that greater risk amounts to more than a
few-percent chance of fatality. In a situation where *not* flying has a
*higher* risk than that of resulting in a fatality, it is therefore a good
decision to fly. You always have to look at the benefit side of the equation
as well as the risk side.

--Gary

[Jim Macklin]

In the civilized world there are always options.

Whether flying under IFR or VFR, the "competent pilot" will
always be checking the weather, particularly the weather
that can't be seen directly. Still the "outside world
indicator" is the most important instrument in the airplane.
It allows the average pilot to navigate, avoid collisions
with the ground and other airplanes, keep track of changing
weather and it provides most of the joy of flight. Being on
top makes checking the weather more important.

Having an instrument rating makes weather much more
difficult because you will be flying in it. The VFR only
pilot, whether caused by airplane equipment, currency or
just not having the certificate, has a much easier time with
weather if he has the smarts to see that 2,000 and 5 is not
good weather at Aspen.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.



"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
. ..
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:P%RJf.97654$4l5.90774@dukeread05...
| > If I needed a flight for a sick family member, I'd call
a
| > detached professional.
|
| Of course, but Matt contrived (for the sake of
illustration) a hypothetical
| situation in which making the flight himself was the only
possible way to
| get need help. His point was just *in those
circumstances*, making the
| flight is by far the better option.
|
| --Gary
|
|

[Matt Whiting]

Gary Drescher wrote:
> "A Lieberman" > wrote in message
> .. .
>
>>On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:28:18 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If one of my kids was in need of a transplant and had 24 hours to live
>>>and flying to pick up the organ was the only option, then I'd take that
>>>risk in a heartbeat. I would fly alone given the risk, but I'd do it
>>>without hesitation.
>>>
>>>However, such situations are extremely rare and thus don't factor into
>>>normal decision making.
>>
>>Excuse me?
>>
>>What you describe above is the worst possible pilot decision one could
>>make.
>
>
> Hardly. It's true that the fatality risk is enormous--perhaps even on the
> order of 1% or more. But in the (very unlikely) hypothetical situation Matt
> describes--that the flight is the only way to save one of his kids--a 1%
> fatality risk is well worth it. So Matt's risk-benefit analysis is
> completely reasonable.

It is reasonable to me. It may not be to others, but in cases like
this, we get to make the call. :-)

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> I disagree, to save the child the flight must be successful
> and on time. A professional flight, in a professional class
> airplane is the only sure thing to save the child. The
> personal involvement of the concerned pilot raises the risks
> and reduces the chances of success.

In my scenario there is no other option. There is no commercial service
available. In my scenario, the ONLY option is to fly yourself in your
GA airplane. Do you still feel the same way?


> The FAA has changed VFR rules for over the top and night
> flights to try a regulatory means to preempt the choice of a
> less safe option. If you're out just for fun, solo and you
> kill yourself, aside from the bad PR and destruction of the
> airplane, that is your choice. But an unsafe emergency
> flight is risking more than your life.
>
> I have run into a burning building and put the fire out
> while it was still just in the electrical panel (it was a
> motel and my wife and son were in the room less 50 feet from
> the fire. I know what is involved in accepting a risk. I
> had told my family to get dressed and outside while I was
> grabbing the extinguisher.
>
> If I needed a flight for a sick family member, I'd call a
> detached professional.

Again, in my scenario this isn't an option. Either YOU make the flight
or your child dies. What is your decision?


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 04:21:48 GMT, Jose wrote:
>
>
>>>I followed the VFR rules to a tee when the wheels
>>>went up.
>>
>>Rules aren't sufficient, as you learned.
>
>
> Yep, you are so right. That flight made me pursue my IFR rating *smile*
>
> Had I had my IFR rating, we wouldn't be discussing it, it would had been a
> non eventful ILS approach with 800 foot ceilings, but as you said, we learn
> from our experiences.

Absolutely correct!


> Every time I step on the ramp, I am in the learning mode....

Yes, as we all should be.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

A Lieberman wrote:

> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:31:38 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>
>>Yes, I was intentionally contriving a high risk operation, but giving a
>>good reason for doing it. You conducted a high risk operation with no
>>good reason. That is exactly what is wrong with your picture.
>
>
> Sorry, don't buy it.

You don't have to.


> You are getting behind an airplane not entirely focused on flying which
> makes you much more dangerous then me VFR over the top.

I'm a very focused person when flying.


> In my opinion, if you get behind a yoke for your stated reasons, that you
> have get home itis to get to your destination, you are making the ultimate
> poorest pilot decision to fly where as in my situation, I didn't have get
> home itis, and have alternatives when I flew VFR over the top.
>
> What would be the difference with your situation and had I pressed on for
> an ILS at 800 foot ceilings if the outcome is the POTENTIALLY the same
> given the same weather conditions and piloting skills.?

The difference is I'd have a good reason for taking the risk.


> My risk factor would be much lower as I had choices then your stated
> reasons.
>
> Risk factors are higher in your situation since you are not completely
> focused on flying, but getting there.

The risk factors are probably higher, that was the point of the
scenario. The difference is that the reward was also MUCH higher. Risk
isn't an absolute, it is about cost vs. benefit. My scenario has a very
high benefit/cost, whereas yours had almost none.


> Get home itis will kill you if you are not mentally prepared to fly an
> airplane.

No, get home itis never killed anyone. A poor decision, or more likely
a series of poor decisions, is the killer. Every time I fly I want to
get to my destination. If I didn't want to get there, I wouldn't be
going in the first place!

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jose wrote:

>> Sorry, don't buy it.
>
>
> The point he's making, I think, is that the risk=reward equation depends
> on the reward as well as the risk. "Get-home-itis" has little reward
> (getting home), but in his scenario, the reward (his son's life) is much
> greater. For purposes of this discussion, assume that there is no
> "other way" (i.e. no charter pilots available, too far by car, etc, so
> it's fly or die).
>
> A little different, but also showing that context is important, what
> would you think of a pilot who routinely flies below 500 feet, in fact
> where there are no buildings he flies at more like fifty feet and makes
> steep turns at that altitude? Good pilot for skills? Bad pilot for
> decisionmaking? Would it make a difference were he a cropduster?
>
> Certain operations, and operations under certain circumstances, are more
> risky than others. Sometimes the added risk is warranted.

Bingo. That is my point entirely.

Matt

[Jim Macklin]

Flying goals in order of importance...
1. Get someplace safely.
2. Get where you want to go, safely.
3. Get where you want to go on time, safely.

If you always follow those rules you should be safe.

Remember the USAF has peace time rules and nuclear war
rules.




--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
|A Lieberman wrote:
|
| > On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:31:38 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:
| >
| >
| >>Yes, I was intentionally contriving a high risk
operation, but giving a
| >>good reason for doing it. You conducted a high risk
operation with no
| >>good reason. That is exactly what is wrong with your
picture.
| >
| >
| > Sorry, don't buy it.
|
| You don't have to.
|
|
| > You are getting behind an airplane not entirely focused
on flying which
| > makes you much more dangerous then me VFR over the top.
|
| I'm a very focused person when flying.
|
|
| > In my opinion, if you get behind a yoke for your stated
reasons, that you
| > have get home itis to get to your destination, you are
making the ultimate
| > poorest pilot decision to fly where as in my situation,
I didn't have get
| > home itis, and have alternatives when I flew VFR over
the top.
| >
| > What would be the difference with your situation and had
I pressed on for
| > an ILS at 800 foot ceilings if the outcome is the
POTENTIALLY the same
| > given the same weather conditions and piloting skills.?
|
| The difference is I'd have a good reason for taking the
risk.
|
|
| > My risk factor would be much lower as I had choices then
your stated
| > reasons.
| >
| > Risk factors are higher in your situation since you are
not completely
| > focused on flying, but getting there.
|
| The risk factors are probably higher, that was the point
of the
| scenario. The difference is that the reward was also MUCH
higher. Risk
| isn't an absolute, it is about cost vs. benefit. My
scenario has a very
| high benefit/cost, whereas yours had almost none.
|
|
| > Get home itis will kill you if you are not mentally
prepared to fly an
| > airplane.
|
| No, get home itis never killed anyone. A poor decision,
or more likely
| a series of poor decisions, is the killer. Every time I
fly I want to
| get to my destination. If I didn't want to get there, I
wouldn't be
| going in the first place!
|
| Matt

[Jim Macklin]

I still don't buy it that there is no other option, maybe in
1903-1928, maybe in the movies, but in the real world, there
is always the option to have the organ flown in rather than
you going to get it [a two way trip, long time] or even you
flying it in one way. You are not the only pilot, there are
at least two airports [or landing sites, roads and fields].
To save the child you have to survive and need a very high
probability of success and on time.

Now, consider this scenario, the only airplane in town, a 15
seat King Air 350 and you have flown a King Air 90. but are
not multiengine rated, let alone type rated in the 350. The
pilot of the 350 was captured by Muslim extremists and his
head was cut off. There are 25 allied troops and you in the
town. The rebels are about to attack.
1. Do you fly the airplane?
2. Do you take only 14 passengers or do you take off with
all 25 people crowded into the airplane. The King Air 350
will be inside the W&B with the mains full and the aux tanks
empty, maybe a little over gross if the troops take their
weapons and ammo.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P
Type rated BE300-350, BE400/MU400
--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > I disagree, to save the child the flight must be
successful
| > and on time. A professional flight, in a professional
class
| > airplane is the only sure thing to save the child. The
| > personal involvement of the concerned pilot raises the
risks
| > and reduces the chances of success.
|
| In my scenario there is no other option. There is no
commercial service
| available. In my scenario, the ONLY option is to fly
yourself in your
| GA airplane. Do you still feel the same way?
|
|
| > The FAA has changed VFR rules for over the top and night
| > flights to try a regulatory means to preempt the choice
of a
| > less safe option. If you're out just for fun, solo and
you
| > kill yourself, aside from the bad PR and destruction of
the
| > airplane, that is your choice. But an unsafe emergency
| > flight is risking more than your life.
| >
| > I have run into a burning building and put the fire out
| > while it was still just in the electrical panel (it was
a
| > motel and my wife and son were in the room less 50 feet
from
| > the fire. I know what is involved in accepting a risk.
I
| > had told my family to get dressed and outside while I
was
| > grabbing the extinguisher.
| >
| > If I needed a flight for a sick family member, I'd call
a
| > detached professional.
|
| Again, in my scenario this isn't an option. Either YOU
make the flight
| or your child dies. What is your decision?
|
|
| Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> Flying goals in order of importance...
> 1. Get someplace safely.
> 2. Get where you want to go, safely.
> 3. Get where you want to go on time, safely.
>
> If you always follow those rules you should be safe.
>
> Remember the USAF has peace time rules and nuclear war
> rules.

I thought the main goal of the USAF was to keep the enemy from getting
anywhere safely. Things sure have changed...


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> I still don't buy it that there is no other option, maybe in
> 1903-1928, maybe in the movies, but in the real world, there
> is always the option to have the organ flown in rather than
> you going to get it [a two way trip, long time] or even you
> flying it in one way. You are not the only pilot, there are
> at least two airports [or landing sites, roads and fields].
> To save the child you have to survive and need a very high
> probability of success and on time.

It is my scenario so I determine the options. I've never seen anyone so
completely miss the point. The point has nothing to do with organs, it
has everything to do with risk being a complex equation involving both
benefit and cost.


> Now, consider this scenario, the only airplane in town, a 15
> seat King Air 350 and you have flown a King Air 90. but are
> not multiengine rated, let alone type rated in the 350. The
> pilot of the 350 was captured by Muslim extremists and his
> head was cut off. There are 25 allied troops and you in the
> town. The rebels are about to attack.
> 1. Do you fly the airplane?

Well, I'd certainly TRY to fly it. Not sure if I could.


> 2. Do you take only 14 passengers or do you take off with
> all 25 people crowded into the airplane. The King Air 350
> will be inside the W&B with the mains full and the aux tanks
> empty, maybe a little over gross if the troops take their
> weapons and ammo.

Sure, I'd give it a shot unless I knew for certain that putting all 25
onboard would have a near certainty of a crash on takeoff.

What's your point?

Matt

[Jim Macklin]

When the Red Phone rings all planes and pilots depart to the
target, zero-zero take-off, no alternate required, in war
time. Peace time rules follow FAA part 121 with some
modifications.

But consider that a VFR pilot on top of an overcast is
depending on the engine, electrical system and all other
elements to work perfectly. The fact that there may be
clear skies 50 miles west does no good unless the engine is
running to get you there. An IFR pilot has the option of a
clearance and approach where the plane is at the time. He
may need to declare an emergency because of the failure, not
because he isn't rated to be in the clouds.

If the weather and other conditions are favorable at the
departure point and you can get to the next airport, depart.
You make the go-no go decision every 5-10-15 minutes. You
may deviate from the planned track, you may fly 500 miles to
do a 350 mile trip, you may land and wait for the bad
weather front to pass and then depart again from behind the
front. 100% safety means you don't fly at all, but you want
to accept only the truly accidental risks. Weather can be
seen, is forecast (forecast means guess) and the pilot in
flight can and should never be fixated on one thing.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > Flying goals in order of importance...
| > 1. Get someplace safely.
| > 2. Get where you want to go, safely.
| > 3. Get where you want to go on time, safely.
| >
| > If you always follow those rules you should be safe.
| >
| > Remember the USAF has peace time rules and nuclear war
| > rules.
|
| I thought the main goal of the USAF was to keep the enemy
from getting
| anywhere safely. Things sure have changed...
|
|
| Matt

[Jim Macklin]

My point was that in my scene there was no other option,
your scene presupposes hospitals, airports and a support
system, which means that there are options you choose to
ignore. The problem is that there are people reading this
who will see it as a reason to take the option and not look
for the safer alternative and they may not have your skill.

The point was understood, I also understand that people make
the wrong choice on a regular basis for all kinds of
reasons, but "wanting" to complete the trip as scheduled is
always a factor. Whether it is organs, funerals, weddings,
football games or a car race, pilots make bad decisions and
kill people. You can do a Google for each of those
situations and find one or more fatal accidents listed.
Google for "aircraft accident+NASCAR" just as an example...
Airplane Crash in Va. Kills 10 (washingtonpost.com) It's not
the first time members of NASCAR's close-knit community have
lost their lives in plane accidents. The sport's 1992
champion, Alan Kulwicki, ...
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
articles/A59212-2004Oct24.html - Similar pages


Celebrity Crashes April 1, 1993: NASCAR driver Alan Kulwicki
(39) died in the crash of the Hooters ... While in flight,
the propeller of his aircraft failed from fatigue, ...
www.check-six.com/lib/Famous_Missing/
Celebrity_Plane_Crashes.htm - 45k - Cached - Similar pages


CNNSI.com - More Sports - Athletes in air-related crashes
.... April 1, 1993 -- Alan Kulwicki, NASCAR's 1992 champion,
in Blountville, Tenn. ... July 13, 1993 -- Davey Allison,
NASCAR driver, the day after a helicopter ...
www.cnnsi.com/more/news/1999/10/25/athletes_plane -
28k - Cached - Similar pages


NASCAR.com - King Air 200 Fact Sheet - Oct 25, 2004 When
using accident rates as a measure of aircraft safety, it
must be remembered that the rates are based ... NASCAR.COM
TravelFor your racing travel needs ...
www.nascar.com/2004/news/
headlines/official/10/25/beech200_info/ - 30k - Cached -
Similar pages


NASCAR.COM - Daytona Countdown: '93 - Feb 7, 2005 There
was sad news in NASCAR in 1993, as Alan Kulwicki and Davey
Allison were killed in separate aircraft accidents.
Kulwicki's best finish in seven Daytona ...
www.nascar.com/2005/kyn/02/07/daytona.1993/index.html
- 37k - Cached - Similar pages


Aircraft accidents (Prevention) Business Articles From
AllBusiness.com Subject: Aircraft accidents (Prevention)
SIC: Air Transportation, Scheduled, And Air Courier Services
Product: Federal Aviation Administration. 7. NASCAR's ...
www.allbusiness.com/periodicals/topic/2711766-1-2.html
- 42k - Cached - Similar pages


Wizbang Ten Die in Nascar Team's Plane Crash. Ten Die in
Nascar Team's Plane Crash ... Most aircraft accidents are
due to pilot error rather than mechanical failure ...
wizbangblog.com/archives/004049.php - 68k - Cached -
Similar pages


Local News | News for Charlotte, North Carolina | WCNC.com |
Top ... Insider gives historical perspective on NASCAR
aircraft crashes. 10:58 PM EDT on Sunday, ... There have
been other accidents, although not deadly. ...
www.wcnc.com/news/topstories/stories/
wcnc-102404-al-other_crashes.204411dd.html - 41k - Cached -
Similar pages



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.





"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > I still don't buy it that there is no other option,
maybe in
| > 1903-1928, maybe in the movies, but in the real world,
there
| > is always the option to have the organ flown in rather
than
| > you going to get it [a two way trip, long time] or even
you
| > flying it in one way. You are not the only pilot, there
are
| > at least two airports [or landing sites, roads and
fields].
| > To save the child you have to survive and need a very
high
| > probability of success and on time.
|
| It is my scenario so I determine the options. I've never
seen anyone so
| completely miss the point. The point has nothing to do
with organs, it
| has everything to do with risk being a complex equation
involving both
| benefit and cost.
|
|
| > Now, consider this scenario, the only airplane in town,
a 15
| > seat King Air 350 and you have flown a King Air 90. but
are
| > not multiengine rated, let alone type rated in the 350.
The
| > pilot of the 350 was captured by Muslim extremists and
his
| > head was cut off. There are 25 allied troops and you in
the
| > town. The rebels are about to attack.
| > 1. Do you fly the airplane?
|
| Well, I'd certainly TRY to fly it. Not sure if I could.
|
|
| > 2. Do you take only 14 passengers or do you take off
with
| > all 25 people crowded into the airplane. The King Air
350
| > will be inside the W&B with the mains full and the aux
tanks
| > empty, maybe a little over gross if the troops take
their
| > weapons and ammo.
|
| Sure, I'd give it a shot unless I knew for certain that
putting all 25
| onboard would have a near certainty of a crash on takeoff.
|
| What's your point?
|
| Matt

[Private]

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
snip
> To err is human, and we must accept that even good pilots err, and that an
> occasional mistake does not make them bad pilots

but it may make them dead pilots.

[Matt Whiting]

Private wrote:

> "Jose" > wrote in message
> ...
> snip
>
>>To err is human, and we must accept that even good pilots err, and that an
>>occasional mistake does not make them bad pilots
>
>
> but it may make them dead pilots.
>
>

Which is bad. :-)

Matt

[Matt Barrow]

"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
> So, I take it your experience has nothing to do with Part 121, to which I
> was referring.
BFD

[John Gaquin]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message news:FtjKf.6

> BFD

??

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"John Gaquin" > wrote:

> > BFD
>
> ??

I would assume he meant Big Deal...

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Jim Macklin]

big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too cold

The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help with flight
planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee. The 135
charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid to fly
pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage, do all
the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and clean
the potty.


"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
news:FtjKf.6
|
| > BFD
|
| ??
|
|

[Dudley Henriques]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
> big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too cold
>
> The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help with flight
> planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee. The 135
> charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid to fly
> pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage, do all
> the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and clean
> the potty.

..................not to mention the cockpit vomit, which is a smell that
never really leaves the airplane, and I can still mentally visualize to this
very day .
:-))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

[Jim Macklin]

I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up the
cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly and
brought his sister along for the ride, a dual cross-country
from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to Wichita.
About half way to Emporia they both became ill. Seems they
had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also were not
feeling well before take-off.
I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used them. When we
got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the trash ands
bought all the sic-sacks they had at the airport, 4 to
restock the airplane. We also took a while to settle down.
But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over again and
shortly they had used all four new bags. Then they still
got ill because of the smell. She dumped the aircraft
paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction and used the
zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand pocket of his
NEW sports coat.
I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used to
shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I was a "pile
it" , before I became an aviator] was able to resist the
need for myself. And the smell is still in my nostrils.

hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my friend and
instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air sick
students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172 airplanes,
open the window and stick their head outside. Never had to
do that.

BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.



"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
.net...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
| > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too cold
| >
| > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help with
flight
| > planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee. The
135
| > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid to
fly
| > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage, do
all
| > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and
clean
| > the potty.
|
| .................not to mention the cockpit vomit, which
is a smell that
| never really leaves the airplane, and I can still mentally
visualize to this
| very day .
| :-))))))))))))))))
| Dudley Henriques
|
|

[Dudley Henriques]

Brings back memories :-)
I've always wondered about those so called $100 hamburger flights. Actually,
for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the Bearcat, those burgers were a
bit more expensive :-)
If I remember right, most of those airport hamburgers bought at those little
"airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and dripping with grease. Just
the thing to settle the old stomach down for a weekend pilot. Add this to
the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a new pilot getting "just a
little bit lost " on the way home and it's a wonder more people didn't end
up puking in the seat pockets :-))
We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to take care of things like
that, but it seems to me remembering back now, that every damn time it
happened, I was the only one on the scene to take care of it :-))
Dudley Henriques

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
> I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up the
> cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly and
> brought his sister along for the ride, a dual cross-country
> from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to Wichita.
> About half way to Emporia they both became ill. Seems they
> had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also were not
> feeling well before take-off.
> I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used them. When we
> got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the trash ands
> bought all the sic-sacks they had at the airport, 4 to
> restock the airplane. We also took a while to settle down.
> But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over again and
> shortly they had used all four new bags. Then they still
> got ill because of the smell. She dumped the aircraft
> paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction and used the
> zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand pocket of his
> NEW sports coat.
> I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used to
> shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I was a "pile
> it" , before I became an aviator] was able to resist the
> need for myself. And the smell is still in my nostrils.
>
> hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my friend and
> instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air sick
> students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172 airplanes,
> open the window and stick their head outside. Never had to
> do that.
>
> BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
>
>
> --
> James H. Macklin
> ATP,CFI,A&P
>
> --
> The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> some support
> http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.
>
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> message
> .net...
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
> | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too cold
> | >
> | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help with
> flight
> | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee. The
> 135
> | > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid to
> fly
> | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage, do
> all
> | > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and
> clean
> | > the potty.
> |
> | .................not to mention the cockpit vomit, which
> is a smell that
> | never really leaves the airplane, and I can still mentally
> visualize to this
> | very day .
> | :-))))))))))))))))
> | Dudley Henriques
> |
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves Cousteau
in the National Geographic. There was a mention of a diver
getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface who threw
up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses that
connected to the regulator. This was before the addition of
check valves in the breathing tubes.

I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at airports in OK
and TX.


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
k.net...
| Brings back memories :-)
| I've always wondered about those so called $100 hamburger
flights. Actually,
| for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the Bearcat,
those burgers were a
| bit more expensive :-)
| If I remember right, most of those airport hamburgers
bought at those little
| "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and dripping
with grease. Just
| the thing to settle the old stomach down for a weekend
pilot. Add this to
| the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a new
pilot getting "just a
| little bit lost " on the way home and it's a wonder more
people didn't end
| up puking in the seat pockets :-))
| We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to take care
of things like
| that, but it seems to me remembering back now, that every
damn time it
| happened, I was the only one on the scene to take care of
it :-))
| Dudley Henriques
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
| > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up the
| > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly and
| > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
cross-country
| > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to
Wichita.
| > About half way to Emporia they both became ill. Seems
they
| > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also were
not
| > feeling well before take-off.
| > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used them. When
we
| > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the trash ands
| > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the airport, 4 to
| > restock the airplane. We also took a while to settle
down.
| > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over again
and
| > shortly they had used all four new bags. Then they
still
| > got ill because of the smell. She dumped the aircraft
| > paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction and used
the
| > zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand pocket of
his
| > NEW sports coat.
| > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used to
| > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I was a
"pile
| > it" , before I became an aviator] was able to resist the
| > need for myself. And the smell is still in my nostrils.
| >
| > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my friend and
| > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air sick
| > students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172
airplanes,
| > open the window and stick their head outside. Never had
to
| > do that.
| >
| > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
| >
| >
| > --
| > James H. Macklin
| > ATP,CFI,A&P
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| > some support
| > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
duties.
| >
| >
| >
| > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
| > message
| >
.net...
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" >
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
| > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too cold
| > | >
| > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help
with
| > flight
| > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee.
The
| > 135
| > | > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid
to
| > fly
| > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage,
do
| > all
| > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and
| > clean
| > | > the potty.
| > |
| > | .................not to mention the cockpit vomit,
which
| > is a smell that
| > | never really leaves the airplane, and I can still
mentally
| > visualize to this
| > | very day .
| > | :-))))))))))))))))
| > | Dudley Henriques
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[Dudley Henriques]

There's nothing that will get you talked about quicker at squadron ops than
puking into your mask :-))
DH

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
>I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves Cousteau
> in the National Geographic. There was a mention of a diver
> getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface who threw
> up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses that
> connected to the regulator. This was before the addition of
> check valves in the breathing tubes.
>
> I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at airports in OK
> and TX.
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> message
> k.net...
> | Brings back memories :-)
> | I've always wondered about those so called $100 hamburger
> flights. Actually,
> | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the Bearcat,
> those burgers were a
> | bit more expensive :-)
> | If I remember right, most of those airport hamburgers
> bought at those little
> | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and dripping
> with grease. Just
> | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a weekend
> pilot. Add this to
> | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a new
> pilot getting "just a
> | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a wonder more
> people didn't end
> | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
> | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to take care
> of things like
> | that, but it seems to me remembering back now, that every
> damn time it
> | happened, I was the only one on the scene to take care of
> it :-))
> | Dudley Henriques
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
> | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up the
> | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly and
> | > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
> cross-country
> | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to
> Wichita.
> | > About half way to Emporia they both became ill. Seems
> they
> | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also were
> not
> | > feeling well before take-off.
> | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used them. When
> we
> | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the trash ands
> | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the airport, 4 to
> | > restock the airplane. We also took a while to settle
> down.
> | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over again
> and
> | > shortly they had used all four new bags. Then they
> still
> | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped the aircraft
> | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction and used
> the
> | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand pocket of
> his
> | > NEW sports coat.
> | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used to
> | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I was a
> "pile
> | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able to resist the
> | > need for myself. And the smell is still in my nostrils.
> | >
> | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my friend and
> | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air sick
> | > students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172
> airplanes,
> | > open the window and stick their head outside. Never had
> to
> | > do that.
> | >
> | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
> | >
> | >
> | > --
> | > James H. Macklin
> | > ATP,CFI,A&P
> | >
> | > --
> | > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
> | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
> | > some support
> | > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
> duties.
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> | > message
> | >
> .net...
> | > |
> | > | "Jim Macklin" >
> wrote
> | > in message
> | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
> | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too cold
> | > | >
> | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help
> with
> | > flight
> | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee.
> The
> | > 135
> | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid
> to
> | > fly
> | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage,
> do
> | > all
> | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and
> | > clean
> | > | > the potty.
> | > |
> | > | .................not to mention the cockpit vomit,
> which
> | > is a smell that
> | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I can still
> mentally
> | > visualize to this
> | > | very day .
> | > | :-))))))))))))))))
> | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly Dudley or
Dudley DoRight?


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
ink.net...
| There's nothing that will get you talked about quicker at
squadron ops than
| puking into your mask :-))
| DH
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
| >I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves
Cousteau
| > in the National Geographic. There was a mention of a
diver
| > getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface who
threw
| > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses that
| > connected to the regulator. This was before the
addition of
| > check valves in the breathing tubes.
| >
| > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at airports in
OK
| > and TX.
| >
| >
| > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
| > message
| >
k.net...
| > | Brings back memories :-)
| > | I've always wondered about those so called $100
hamburger
| > flights. Actually,
| > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the Bearcat,
| > those burgers were a
| > | bit more expensive :-)
| > | If I remember right, most of those airport hamburgers
| > bought at those little
| > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and
dripping
| > with grease. Just
| > | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a weekend
| > pilot. Add this to
| > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a new
| > pilot getting "just a
| > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a wonder
more
| > people didn't end
| > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
| > | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to take
care
| > of things like
| > | that, but it seems to me remembering back now, that
every
| > damn time it
| > | happened, I was the only one on the scene to take care
of
| > it :-))
| > | Dudley Henriques
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" >
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
| > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up
the
| > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly
and
| > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
| > cross-country
| > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to
| > Wichita.
| > | > About half way to Emporia they both became ill.
Seems
| > they
| > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also
were
| > not
| > | > feeling well before take-off.
| > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used them.
When
| > we
| > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the trash
ands
| > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the airport, 4
to
| > | > restock the airplane. We also took a while to
settle
| > down.
| > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over
again
| > and
| > | > shortly they had used all four new bags. Then they
| > still
| > | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped the
aircraft
| > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction and
used
| > the
| > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand pocket
of
| > his
| > | > NEW sports coat.
| > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used to
| > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I was
a
| > "pile
| > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able to resist
the
| > | > need for myself. And the smell is still in my
nostrils.
| > | >
| > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my friend
and
| > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air
sick
| > | > students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172
| > airplanes,
| > | > open the window and stick their head outside. Never
had
| > to
| > | > do that.
| > | >
| > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > James H. Macklin
| > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | > some support
| > | > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
| > duties.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
in
| > | > message
| > | >
| >
.net...
| > | > |
| > | > | "Jim Macklin"
>
| > wrote
| > | > in message
| > | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
| > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too
cold
| > | > | >
| > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help
| > with
| > | > flight
| > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the
coffee.
| > The
| > | > 135
| > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets
paid
| > to
| > | > fly
| > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the
luggage,
| > do
| > | > all
| > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee,
and
| > | > clean
| > | > | > the potty.
| > | > |
| > | > | .................not to mention the cockpit vomit,
| > which
| > | > is a smell that
| > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I can still
| > mentally
| > | > visualize to this
| > | > | very day .
| > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
| > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message >
> The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help with flight
> planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee. The 135
> charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid to fly
> pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage, do all
> the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and clean
> the potty.

Essentially accurate, although you've selected the grandest of 121 for
comparison against the worst of 135 (Pt 121 freighters don't have anyone to
prepare your meals or coffee, and I've flown for excellent Pt 135 airlines
that used canned flight plans and had people to load the luggage, even on
planes so small they had no coffeemaker or head). Having done both, I can
see this, but others may be misled. The overarching point is that your
earlier comments were unconnected. In my earlier post, I acknowledged that
my good dose of good luck had a lot to do with "...professional airline
maintenance staff and required routine maintenance...", to which you replied
with cautions about owners not allowing mechanics to fix things due to
expense, etc., etc. These things can and do occur among the amateurs and
the lower order of commercial operators, but I think my post was pretty
clear in that I was referring to the airline environment.

[Jim Macklin]

Truth is, whether government or airlines, or just the repair
station on the field, maintenance depends on budget and
ethics. Some people won't spend the money and have no
ethics.
Scheduled 121 and 135 are one type of operation, on-demand
135 is another. Part 91 owner flown and part 91
professionally flown is also another. A owner with
knowledge, perhaps a pilot perhaps not is one thing, an
owner with only money and a cheap shop without ethics may be
very happy with his airplane [ for a while] but the cost of
an airplane and the quality of a mechanic, pilot or other,
depends on everybody really doing their job at the highest
possible standard.

Just to tell you about one incident I was personally
involved with years ago... a part 135 mail/freight operator
with a Beech 58 Baron put his airplane in our heated hanger
to remove about 2 inches of ice from the storm that had gone
through over night. I saw the airplane in the hanger and a
quick external check showed these conditions...
The rubber on the tail deice boots was gone, just fabric
left, both sides.
The deice boots on the wings had many large holes and tears
The left engine cowling was burned and warped from the heat
of the fire, there was oil dripping from the cowling and it
appeared to have been on burned.
The anti-ice elements on the props were partially detached.
Tires were flat spotted with cord showing.

The plane left that night even though the FAA did see it,
but the FAA went home at 4:30.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
. ..
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message >
| > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help with
flight
| > planning and a crew to bring and serve the coffee. The
135
| > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets paid to
fly
| > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the luggage, do
all
| > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee, and
clean
| > the potty.
|
| Essentially accurate, although you've selected the
grandest of 121 for
| comparison against the worst of 135 (Pt 121 freighters
don't have anyone to
| prepare your meals or coffee, and I've flown for excellent
Pt 135 airlines
| that used canned flight plans and had people to load the
luggage, even on
| planes so small they had no coffeemaker or head). Having
done both, I can
| see this, but others may be misled. The overarching point
is that your
| earlier comments were unconnected. In my earlier post, I
acknowledged that
| my good dose of good luck had a lot to do with
"...professional airline
| maintenance staff and required routine maintenance...", to
which you replied
| with cautions about owners not allowing mechanics to fix
things due to
| expense, etc., etc. These things can and do occur among
the amateurs and
| the lower order of commercial operators, but I think my
post was pretty
| clear in that I was referring to the airline environment.
|
|

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up the
> cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly and
> brought his sister along for the ride, a dual cross-country
> from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to Wichita.
> About half way to Emporia they both became ill. Seems they
> had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also were not
> feeling well before take-off.



I had a teenager get sick on me once in a C-210. I saw him looking kind of
green around the gills, then he started leaning over my charts. "Oh no you
don't!". I snatched my charts away just in time. He ended up puking into the
emergency gear extension well located between the two front seats. After we
landed, I made him clean it out, then I went looking for some Ozium... which is
great stuff for getting ride of the lovely bouquet of fresh steaming emesis.

The only time I myself got queasy was sitting in the back seat of an Arrow while
somebody else was flying. I didn't disgrace myself but I wasn't comfortable
either. I've always thought it was because I wasn't in control myself.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[Dudley Henriques]

I was of course a civilian pilot flying and demonstrating military airplanes
and in some cases doing research on one thing or another flying by
invitation of the Navy and some foreign governments.
My "given" call sign was "Sparrow", but my wife one day at a JC dinner
happened to pass on to a few of the Thunderbirds what the family called me
around the house. I'm afraid I've been "Baron Von Leftover" ever since!
:-))
Dudley Henriques

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:bTmKf.100900$4l5.42145@dukeread05...
> I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly Dudley or
> Dudley DoRight?
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> message
> ink.net...
> | There's nothing that will get you talked about quicker at
> squadron ops than
> | puking into your mask :-))
> | DH
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
> | >I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves
> Cousteau
> | > in the National Geographic. There was a mention of a
> diver
> | > getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface who
> threw
> | > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses that
> | > connected to the regulator. This was before the
> addition of
> | > check valves in the breathing tubes.
> | >
> | > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at airports in
> OK
> | > and TX.
> | >
> | >
> | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> | > message
> | >
> k.net...
> | > | Brings back memories :-)
> | > | I've always wondered about those so called $100
> hamburger
> | > flights. Actually,
> | > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the Bearcat,
> | > those burgers were a
> | > | bit more expensive :-)
> | > | If I remember right, most of those airport hamburgers
> | > bought at those little
> | > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and
> dripping
> | > with grease. Just
> | > | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a weekend
> | > pilot. Add this to
> | > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a new
> | > pilot getting "just a
> | > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a wonder
> more
> | > people didn't end
> | > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
> | > | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to take
> care
> | > of things like
> | > | that, but it seems to me remembering back now, that
> every
> | > damn time it
> | > | happened, I was the only one on the scene to take care
> of
> | > it :-))
> | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > |
> | > | "Jim Macklin" >
> wrote
> | > in message
> | > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
> | > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up
> the
> | > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly
> and
> | > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
> | > cross-country
> | > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to
> | > Wichita.
> | > | > About half way to Emporia they both became ill.
> Seems
> | > they
> | > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also
> were
> | > not
> | > | > feeling well before take-off.
> | > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used them.
> When
> | > we
> | > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the trash
> ands
> | > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the airport, 4
> to
> | > | > restock the airplane. We also took a while to
> settle
> | > down.
> | > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over
> again
> | > and
> | > | > shortly they had used all four new bags. Then they
> | > still
> | > | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped the
> aircraft
> | > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction and
> used
> | > the
> | > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand pocket
> of
> | > his
> | > | > NEW sports coat.
> | > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used to
> | > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I was
> a
> | > "pile
> | > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able to resist
> the
> | > | > need for myself. And the smell is still in my
> nostrils.
> | > | >
> | > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my friend
> and
> | > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air
> sick
> | > | > students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172
> | > airplanes,
> | > | > open the window and stick their head outside. Never
> had
> | > to
> | > | > do that.
> | > | >
> | > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > --
> | > | > James H. Macklin
> | > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
> | > | >
> | > | > --
> | > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
> rights;
> | > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
> overcome.
> | > | > some support
> | > | > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> | > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and
> | > duties.
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
> in
> | > | > message
> | > | >
> | >
> .net...
> | > | > |
> | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
> >
> | > wrote
> | > | > in message
> | > | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
> | > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc too
> cold
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to help
> | > with
> | > | > flight
> | > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the
> coffee.
> | > The
> | > | > 135
> | > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst job, gets
> paid
> | > to
> | > | > fly
> | > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the
> luggage,
> | > do
> | > | > all
> | > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the coffee,
> and
> | > | > clean
> | > | > | > the potty.
> | > | > |
> | > | > | .................not to mention the cockpit vomit,
> | > which
> | > | > is a smell that
> | > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I can still
> | > mentally
> | > | > visualize to this
> | > | > | very day .
> | > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
> | > | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > | > |
> | > | > |
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

Maybe we should get paid extra to , never mind, money
doesn't fix the problems with airsick passengers and
students. Yep, Ozium.


"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" >
wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody mess up the
| > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to fly and
| > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
cross-country
| > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back to
Wichita.
| > About half way to Emporia they both became ill. Seems
they
| > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both also were
not
| > feeling well before take-off.
|
|
|
| I had a teenager get sick on me once in a C-210. I saw
him looking kind of
| green around the gills, then he started leaning over my
charts. "Oh no you
| don't!". I snatched my charts away just in time. He
ended up puking into the
| emergency gear extension well located between the two
front seats. After we
| landed, I made him clean it out, then I went looking for
some Ozium... which is
| great stuff for getting ride of the lovely bouquet of
fresh steaming emesis.
|
| The only time I myself got queasy was sitting in the back
seat of an Arrow while
| somebody else was flying. I didn't disgrace myself but I
wasn't comfortable
| either. I've always thought it was because I wasn't in
control myself.
|
|
|
| --
| Mortimer Schnerd, RN
|
|
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

Is that grounds for divorce?

My brother called me El Lardo De Fats when we were kids, now
he's 61 years old, 5'10" and about 250 lbs. while I'm 60
next week, 5'11" and 200 lbs even. Sometimes I use
Capt.Kerosene, sometimes I'm John Galt, most of the time I'm
just Jim Macklin, never Jimmy.


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
k.net...
|I was of course a civilian pilot flying and demonstrating
military airplanes
| and in some cases doing research on one thing or another
flying by
| invitation of the Navy and some foreign governments.
| My "given" call sign was "Sparrow", but my wife one day at
a JC dinner
| happened to pass on to a few of the Thunderbirds what the
family called me
| around the house. I'm afraid I've been "Baron Von
Leftover" ever since!
| :-))
| Dudley Henriques
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:bTmKf.100900$4l5.42145@dukeread05...
| > I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly Dudley or
| > Dudley DoRight?
| >
| >
| > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
| > message
| >
ink.net...
| > | There's nothing that will get you talked about quicker
at
| > squadron ops than
| > | puking into your mask :-))
| > | DH
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" >
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
| > | >I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves
| > Cousteau
| > | > in the National Geographic. There was a mention of
a
| > diver
| > | > getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface who
| > threw
| > | > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses that
| > | > connected to the regulator. This was before the
| > addition of
| > | > check valves in the breathing tubes.
| > | >
| > | > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at airports
in
| > OK
| > | > and TX.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
in
| > | > message
| > | >
| >
k.net...
| > | > | Brings back memories :-)
| > | > | I've always wondered about those so called $100
| > hamburger
| > | > flights. Actually,
| > | > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the
Bearcat,
| > | > those burgers were a
| > | > | bit more expensive :-)
| > | > | If I remember right, most of those airport
hamburgers
| > | > bought at those little
| > | > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and
| > dripping
| > | > with grease. Just
| > | > | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a
weekend
| > | > pilot. Add this to
| > | > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a
new
| > | > pilot getting "just a
| > | > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a
wonder
| > more
| > | > people didn't end
| > | > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
| > | > | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to
take
| > care
| > | > of things like
| > | > | that, but it seems to me remembering back now,
that
| > every
| > | > damn time it
| > | > | happened, I was the only one on the scene to take
care
| > of
| > | > it :-))
| > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > |
| > | > | "Jim Macklin"
>
| > wrote
| > | > in message
| > | > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
| > | > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody
mess up
| > the
| > | > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to
fly
| > and
| > | > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
| > | > cross-country
| > | > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back
to
| > | > Wichita.
| > | > | > About half way to Emporia they both became ill.
| > Seems
| > | > they
| > | > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both
also
| > were
| > | > not
| > | > | > feeling well before take-off.
| > | > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used
them.
| > When
| > | > we
| > | > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the
trash
| > ands
| > | > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the
airport, 4
| > to
| > | > | > restock the airplane. We also took a while to
| > settle
| > | > down.
| > | > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over
| > again
| > | > and
| > | > | > shortly they had used all four new bags. Then
they
| > | > still
| > | > | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped the
| > aircraft
| > | > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction
and
| > used
| > | > the
| > | > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand
pocket
| > of
| > | > his
| > | > | > NEW sports coat.
| > | > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used
to
| > | > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I
was
| > a
| > | > "pile
| > | > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able to
resist
| > the
| > | > | > need for myself. And the smell is still in my
| > nostrils.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my
friend
| > and
| > | > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air
| > sick
| > | > | > students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172
| > | > airplanes,
| > | > | > open the window and stick their head outside.
Never
| > had
| > | > to
| > | > | > do that.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > James H. Macklin
| > | > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
| > | > | >
| > | > | > --
| > | > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
| > rights;
| > | > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
| > overcome.
| > | > | > some support
| > | > | > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > | > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights
and
| > | > duties.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "Dudley Henriques" >
wrote
| > in
| > | > | > message
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
.net...
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
| > >
| > | > wrote
| > | > | > in message
| > | > | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
| > | > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc
too
| > cold
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to
help
| > | > with
| > | > | > flight
| > | > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the
| > coffee.
| > | > The
| > | > | > 135
| > | > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst job,
gets
| > paid
| > | > to
| > | > | > fly
| > | > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the
| > luggage,
| > | > do
| > | > | > all
| > | > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the
coffee,
| > and
| > | > | > clean
| > | > | > | > the potty.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | .................not to mention the cockpit
vomit,
| > | > which
| > | > | > is a smell that
| > | > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I can
still
| > | > mentally
| > | > | > visualize to this
| > | > | > | very day .
| > | > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
| > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > |
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[Dudley Henriques]

Nah :-) We're at 40 years now and counting. My wife is greatly appreciative
of a good sense of humor. So were the Thunderbirds that year. They all knew
and loved my wife. She laid that out there knowing that the camaraderie we
shared with the team would be, (and has remained) a lifetime thing.
Even today all of us get a big kick out of remembering that night at the
dinner table.
Don't worry, I got even. One of the guys' wife was and is a world class
baker. He showed up the next day with a tray of hot biscuits. To this day,
his call sign around here is "Muffin"....just the thing for an Air Force
Fighter pilot :-))
Dudley Henriques

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:4brKf.101336$4l5.72356@dukeread05...
> Is that grounds for divorce?
>
> My brother called me El Lardo De Fats when we were kids, now
> he's 61 years old, 5'10" and about 250 lbs. while I'm 60
> next week, 5'11" and 200 lbs even. Sometimes I use
> Capt.Kerosene, sometimes I'm John Galt, most of the time I'm
> just Jim Macklin, never Jimmy.
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> message
> k.net...
> |I was of course a civilian pilot flying and demonstrating
> military airplanes
> | and in some cases doing research on one thing or another
> flying by
> | invitation of the Navy and some foreign governments.
> | My "given" call sign was "Sparrow", but my wife one day at
> a JC dinner
> | happened to pass on to a few of the Thunderbirds what the
> family called me
> | around the house. I'm afraid I've been "Baron Von
> Leftover" ever since!
> | :-))
> | Dudley Henriques
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:bTmKf.100900$4l5.42145@dukeread05...
> | > I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly Dudley or
> | > Dudley DoRight?
> | >
> | >
> | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> | > message
> | >
> ink.net...
> | > | There's nothing that will get you talked about quicker
> at
> | > squadron ops than
> | > | puking into your mask :-))
> | > | DH
> | > |
> | > | "Jim Macklin" >
> wrote
> | > in message
> | > | news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
> | > | >I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves
> | > Cousteau
> | > | > in the National Geographic. There was a mention of
> a
> | > diver
> | > | > getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface who
> | > threw
> | > | > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses that
> | > | > connected to the regulator. This was before the
> | > addition of
> | > | > check valves in the breathing tubes.
> | > | >
> | > | > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at airports
> in
> | > OK
> | > | > and TX.
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
> in
> | > | > message
> | > | >
> | >
> k.net...
> | > | > | Brings back memories :-)
> | > | > | I've always wondered about those so called $100
> | > hamburger
> | > | > flights. Actually,
> | > | > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the
> Bearcat,
> | > | > those burgers were a
> | > | > | bit more expensive :-)
> | > | > | If I remember right, most of those airport
> hamburgers
> | > | > bought at those little
> | > | > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and
> | > dripping
> | > | > with grease. Just
> | > | > | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a
> weekend
> | > | > pilot. Add this to
> | > | > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day and a
> new
> | > | > pilot getting "just a
> | > | > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a
> wonder
> | > more
> | > | > people didn't end
> | > | > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
> | > | > | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed to
> take
> | > care
> | > | > of things like
> | > | > | that, but it seems to me remembering back now,
> that
> | > every
> | > | > damn time it
> | > | > | happened, I was the only one on the scene to take
> care
> | > of
> | > | > it :-))
> | > | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > | > |
> | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
> >
> | > wrote
> | > | > in message
> | > | > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
> | > | > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody
> mess up
> | > the
> | > | > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out to
> fly
> | > and
> | > | > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a dual
> | > | > cross-country
> | > | > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and back
> to
> | > | > Wichita.
> | > | > | > About half way to Emporia they both became ill.
> | > Seems
> | > | > they
> | > | > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and both
> also
> | > were
> | > | > not
> | > | > | > feeling well before take-off.
> | > | > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used
> them.
> | > When
> | > | > we
> | > | > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the
> trash
> | > ands
> | > | > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the
> airport, 4
> | > to
> | > | > | > restock the airplane. We also took a while to
> | > settle
> | > | > down.
> | > | > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took over
> | > again
> | > | > and
> | > | > | > shortly they had used all four new bags. Then
> they
> | > | > still
> | > | > | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped the
> | > aircraft
> | > | > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my instruction
> and
> | > used
> | > | > the
> | > | > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right hand
> pocket
> | > of
> | > | > his
> | > | > | > NEW sports coat.
> | > | > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose used
> to
> | > | > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs [I
> was
> | > a
> | > | > "pile
> | > | > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able to
> resist
> | > the
> | > | > | > need for myself. And the smell is still in my
> | > nostrils.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my
> friend
> | > and
> | > | > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle air
> | > sick
> | > | > | > students and was told that in the Cessna 150-172
> | > | > airplanes,
> | > | > | > open the window and stick their head outside.
> Never
> | > had
> | > | > to
> | > | > | > do that.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > James H. Macklin
> | > | > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
> | > rights;
> | > | > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
> | > overcome.
> | > | > | > some support
> | > | > | > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> | > | > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights
> and
> | > | > duties.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > "Dudley Henriques" >
> wrote
> | > in
> | > | > | > message
> | > | > | >
> | > | >
> | >
> .net...
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
> | > >
> | > | > wrote
> | > | > | > in message
> | > | > | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
> | > | > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer, tfc
> too
> | > cold
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff to
> help
> | > | > with
> | > | > | > flight
> | > | > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve the
> | > coffee.
> | > | > The
> | > | > | > 135
> | > | > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst job,
> gets
> | > paid
> | > | > to
> | > | > | > fly
> | > | > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry the
> | > luggage,
> | > | > do
> | > | > | > all
> | > | > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the
> coffee,
> | > and
> | > | > | > clean
> | > | > | > | > the potty.
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | .................not to mention the cockpit
> vomit,
> | > | > which
> | > | > | > is a smell that
> | > | > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I can
> still
> | > | > mentally
> | > | > | > visualize to this
> | > | > | > | very day .
> | > | > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
> | > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > |
> | > | > |
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

At least your nick name wasn't Cuddles.


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
nk.net...
| Nah :-) We're at 40 years now and counting. My wife is
greatly appreciative
| of a good sense of humor. So were the Thunderbirds that
year. They all knew
| and loved my wife. She laid that out there knowing that
the camaraderie we
| shared with the team would be, (and has remained) a
lifetime thing.
| Even today all of us get a big kick out of remembering
that night at the
| dinner table.
| Don't worry, I got even. One of the guys' wife was and is
a world class
| baker. He showed up the next day with a tray of hot
biscuits. To this day,
| his call sign around here is "Muffin"....just the thing
for an Air Force
| Fighter pilot :-))
| Dudley Henriques
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:4brKf.101336$4l5.72356@dukeread05...
| > Is that grounds for divorce?
| >
| > My brother called me El Lardo De Fats when we were kids,
now
| > he's 61 years old, 5'10" and about 250 lbs. while I'm 60
| > next week, 5'11" and 200 lbs even. Sometimes I use
| > Capt.Kerosene, sometimes I'm John Galt, most of the time
I'm
| > just Jim Macklin, never Jimmy.
| >
| >
| > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
| > message
| >
k.net...
| > |I was of course a civilian pilot flying and
demonstrating
| > military airplanes
| > | and in some cases doing research on one thing or
another
| > flying by
| > | invitation of the Navy and some foreign governments.
| > | My "given" call sign was "Sparrow", but my wife one
day at
| > a JC dinner
| > | happened to pass on to a few of the Thunderbirds what
the
| > family called me
| > | around the house. I'm afraid I've been "Baron Von
| > Leftover" ever since!
| > | :-))
| > | Dudley Henriques
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" >
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:bTmKf.100900$4l5.42145@dukeread05...
| > | > I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly Dudley
or
| > | > Dudley DoRight?
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
in
| > | > message
| > | >
| >
ink.net...
| > | > | There's nothing that will get you talked about
quicker
| > at
| > | > squadron ops than
| > | > | puking into your mask :-))
| > | > | DH
| > | > |
| > | > | "Jim Macklin"
>
| > wrote
| > | > in message
| > | > | news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
| > | > | >I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves
| > | > Cousteau
| > | > | > in the National Geographic. There was a mention
of
| > a
| > | > diver
| > | > | > getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface
who
| > | > threw
| > | > | > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses
that
| > | > | > connected to the regulator. This was before the
| > | > addition of
| > | > | > check valves in the breathing tubes.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at
airports
| > in
| > | > OK
| > | > | > and TX.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "Dudley Henriques" >
wrote
| > in
| > | > | > message
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
k.net...
| > | > | > | Brings back memories :-)
| > | > | > | I've always wondered about those so called
$100
| > | > hamburger
| > | > | > flights. Actually,
| > | > | > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the
| > Bearcat,
| > | > | > those burgers were a
| > | > | > | bit more expensive :-)
| > | > | > | If I remember right, most of those airport
| > hamburgers
| > | > | > bought at those little
| > | > | > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and
| > | > dripping
| > | > | > with grease. Just
| > | > | > | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a
| > weekend
| > | > | > pilot. Add this to
| > | > | > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day
and a
| > new
| > | > | > pilot getting "just a
| > | > | > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a
| > wonder
| > | > more
| > | > | > people didn't end
| > | > | > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
| > | > | > | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed
to
| > take
| > | > care
| > | > | > of things like
| > | > | > | that, but it seems to me remembering back now,
| > that
| > | > every
| > | > | > damn time it
| > | > | > | happened, I was the only one on the scene to
take
| > care
| > | > of
| > | > | > it :-))
| > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
| > >
| > | > wrote
| > | > | > in message
| > | > | > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
| > | > | > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody
| > mess up
| > | > the
| > | > | > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out
to
| > fly
| > | > and
| > | > | > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a
dual
| > | > | > cross-country
| > | > | > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and
back
| > to
| > | > | > Wichita.
| > | > | > | > About half way to Emporia they both became
ill.
| > | > Seems
| > | > | > they
| > | > | > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and
both
| > also
| > | > were
| > | > | > not
| > | > | > | > feeling well before take-off.
| > | > | > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used
| > them.
| > | > When
| > | > | > we
| > | > | > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the
| > trash
| > | > ands
| > | > | > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the
| > airport, 4
| > | > to
| > | > | > | > restock the airplane. We also took a while
to
| > | > settle
| > | > | > down.
| > | > | > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took
over
| > | > again
| > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > shortly they had used all four new bags.
Then
| > they
| > | > | > still
| > | > | > | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped
the
| > | > aircraft
| > | > | > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my
instruction
| > and
| > | > used
| > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right
hand
| > pocket
| > | > of
| > | > | > his
| > | > | > | > NEW sports coat.
| > | > | > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose
used
| > to
| > | > | > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs
[I
| > was
| > | > a
| > | > | > "pile
| > | > | > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able
to
| > resist
| > | > the
| > | > | > | > need for myself. And the smell is still in
my
| > | > nostrils.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my
| > friend
| > | > and
| > | > | > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle
air
| > | > sick
| > | > | > | > students and was told that in the Cessna
150-172
| > | > | > airplanes,
| > | > | > | > open the window and stick their head
outside.
| > Never
| > | > had
| > | > | > to
| > | > | > | > do that.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > James H. Macklin
| > | > | > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > The people think the Constitution protects
their
| > | > rights;
| > | > | > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
| > | > overcome.
| > | > | > | > some support
| > | > | > | >
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > | > | > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your
rights
| > and
| > | > | > duties.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > "Dudley Henriques"
>
| > wrote
| > | > in
| > | > | > | > message
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
.net...
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
| > | > >
| > | > | > wrote
| > | > | > | > in message
| > | > | > | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
| > | > | > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer,
tfc
| > too
| > | > cold
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff
to
| > help
| > | > | > with
| > | > | > | > flight
| > | > | > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve
the
| > | > coffee.
| > | > | > The
| > | > | > | > 135
| > | > | > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst
job,
| > gets
| > | > paid
| > | > | > to
| > | > | > | > fly
| > | > | > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry
the
| > | > luggage,
| > | > | > do
| > | > | > | > all
| > | > | > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the
| > coffee,
| > | > and
| > | > | > | > clean
| > | > | > | > | > the potty.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | .................not to mention the
cockpit
| > vomit,
| > | > | > which
| > | > | > | > is a smell that
| > | > | > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I
can
| > still
| > | > | > mentally
| > | > | > | > visualize to this
| > | > | > | > | very day .
| > | > | > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
| > | > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > |
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:K8nKf.101008$4l5.24143@dukeread05...

Did I miss something somewhere, Jim? Why do you continue to belabor this
unrelated point? I offered kudos to the airline maintenance people that
contributed to my overall career safety, and you responded by commenting
that unscrupulous amateurs often scrimp on maintenance. Not only does this
have no bearing on my original comment, but it is a fact well known to all
that needs no further demonstration. What am I missing here?

[Dudley Henriques]

God Forbid!! Careful, my wife might hear you!!
:-)
D

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:oDvKf.101488$4l5.52883@dukeread05...
> At least your nick name wasn't Cuddles.
>
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> message
> nk.net...
> | Nah :-) We're at 40 years now and counting. My wife is
> greatly appreciative
> | of a good sense of humor. So were the Thunderbirds that
> year. They all knew
> | and loved my wife. She laid that out there knowing that
> the camaraderie we
> | shared with the team would be, (and has remained) a
> lifetime thing.
> | Even today all of us get a big kick out of remembering
> that night at the
> | dinner table.
> | Don't worry, I got even. One of the guys' wife was and is
> a world class
> | baker. He showed up the next day with a tray of hot
> biscuits. To this day,
> | his call sign around here is "Muffin"....just the thing
> for an Air Force
> | Fighter pilot :-))
> | Dudley Henriques
> |
> | "Jim Macklin" > wrote
> in message
> | news:4brKf.101336$4l5.72356@dukeread05...
> | > Is that grounds for divorce?
> | >
> | > My brother called me El Lardo De Fats when we were kids,
> now
> | > he's 61 years old, 5'10" and about 250 lbs. while I'm 60
> | > next week, 5'11" and 200 lbs even. Sometimes I use
> | > Capt.Kerosene, sometimes I'm John Galt, most of the time
> I'm
> | > just Jim Macklin, never Jimmy.
> | >
> | >
> | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
> | > message
> | >
> k.net...
> | > |I was of course a civilian pilot flying and
> demonstrating
> | > military airplanes
> | > | and in some cases doing research on one thing or
> another
> | > flying by
> | > | invitation of the Navy and some foreign governments.
> | > | My "given" call sign was "Sparrow", but my wife one
> day at
> | > a JC dinner
> | > | happened to pass on to a few of the Thunderbirds what
> the
> | > family called me
> | > | around the house. I'm afraid I've been "Baron Von
> | > Leftover" ever since!
> | > | :-))
> | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > |
> | > | "Jim Macklin" >
> wrote
> | > in message
> | > | news:bTmKf.100900$4l5.42145@dukeread05...
> | > | > I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly Dudley
> or
> | > | > Dudley DoRight?
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
> in
> | > | > message
> | > | >
> | >
> ink.net...
> | > | > | There's nothing that will get you talked about
> quicker
> | > at
> | > | > squadron ops than
> | > | > | puking into your mask :-))
> | > | > | DH
> | > | > |
> | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
> >
> | > wrote
> | > | > in message
> | > | > | news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
> | > | > | >I remember reading an article, about Jacques Yves
> | > | > Cousteau
> | > | > | > in the National Geographic. There was a mention
> of
> | > a
> | > | > diver
> | > | > | > getting sick at about 200 feet below the surface
> who
> | > | > threw
> | > | > | > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the hoses
> that
> | > | > | > connected to the regulator. This was before the
> | > | > addition of
> | > | > | > check valves in the breathing tubes.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at
> airports
> | > in
> | > | > OK
> | > | > | > and TX.
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | > "Dudley Henriques" >
> wrote
> | > in
> | > | > | > message
> | > | > | >
> | > | >
> | >
> k.net...
> | > | > | > | Brings back memories :-)
> | > | > | > | I've always wondered about those so called
> $100
> | > | > hamburger
> | > | > | > flights. Actually,
> | > | > | > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in the
> | > Bearcat,
> | > | > | > those burgers were a
> | > | > | > | bit more expensive :-)
> | > | > | > | If I remember right, most of those airport
> | > hamburgers
> | > | > | > bought at those little
> | > | > | > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled and
> | > | > dripping
> | > | > | > with grease. Just
> | > | > | > | the thing to settle the old stomach down for a
> | > weekend
> | > | > | > pilot. Add this to
> | > | > | > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer day
> and a
> | > new
> | > | > | > pilot getting "just a
> | > | > | > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's a
> | > wonder
> | > | > more
> | > | > | > people didn't end
> | > | > | > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
> | > | > | > | We had a bevy of line boys who were supposed
> to
> | > take
> | > | > care
> | > | > | > of things like
> | > | > | > | that, but it seems to me remembering back now,
> | > that
> | > | > every
> | > | > | > damn time it
> | > | > | > | happened, I was the only one on the scene to
> take
> | > care
> | > | > of
> | > | > | > it :-))
> | > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
> | > >
> | > | > wrote
> | > | > | > in message
> | > | > | > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
> | > | > | > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had anybody
> | > mess up
> | > | > the
> | > | > | > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came out
> to
> | > fly
> | > | > and
> | > | > | > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a
> dual
> | > | > | > cross-country
> | > | > | > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton and
> back
> | > to
> | > | > | > Wichita.
> | > | > | > | > About half way to Emporia they both became
> ill.
> | > | > Seems
> | > | > | > they
> | > | > | > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and
> both
> | > also
> | > | > were
> | > | > | > not
> | > | > | > | > feeling well before take-off.
> | > | > | > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they used
> | > them.
> | > | > When
> | > | > | > we
> | > | > | > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in the
> | > trash
> | > | > ands
> | > | > | > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the
> | > airport, 4
> | > | > to
> | > | > | > | > restock the airplane. We also took a while
> to
> | > | > settle
> | > | > | > down.
> | > | > | > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers took
> over
> | > | > again
> | > | > | > and
> | > | > | > | > shortly they had used all four new bags.
> Then
> | > they
> | > | > | > still
> | > | > | > | > got ill because of the smell. She dumped
> the
> | > | > aircraft
> | > | > | > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my
> instruction
> | > and
> | > | > used
> | > | > | > the
> | > | > | > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right
> hand
> | > pocket
> | > | > of
> | > | > | > his
> | > | > | > | > NEW sports coat.
> | > | > | > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a nose
> used
> | > to
> | > | > | > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some pigs
> [I
> | > was
> | > | > a
> | > | > | > "pile
> | > | > | > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was able
> to
> | > resist
> | > | > the
> | > | > | > | > need for myself. And the smell is still in
> my
> | > | > nostrils.
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked my
> | > friend
> | > | > and
> | > | > | > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to handle
> air
> | > | > sick
> | > | > | > | > students and was told that in the Cessna
> 150-172
> | > | > | > airplanes,
> | > | > | > | > open the window and stick their head
> outside.
> | > Never
> | > | > had
> | > | > | > to
> | > | > | > | > do that.
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA Inspector
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > | > James H. Macklin
> | > | > | > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > --
> | > | > | > | > The people think the Constitution protects
> their
> | > | > rights;
> | > | > | > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
> | > | > overcome.
> | > | > | > | > some support
> | > | > | > | >
> http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
> | > | > | > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your
> rights
> | > and
> | > | > | > duties.
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > "Dudley Henriques"
> >
> | > wrote
> | > | > in
> | > | > | > | > message
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | >
> | >
> .net...
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
> | > | > >
> | > | > | > wrote
> | > | > | > | > in message
> | > | > | > | > | news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
> | > | > | > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big hammer,
> tfc
> | > too
> | > | > cold
> | > | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support staff
> to
> | > help
> | > | > | > with
> | > | > | > | > flight
> | > | > | > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and serve
> the
> | > | > coffee.
> | > | > | > The
> | > | > | > | > 135
> | > | > | > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst
> job,
> | > gets
> | > | > paid
> | > | > | > to
> | > | > | > | > fly
> | > | > | > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to carry
> the
> | > | > luggage,
> | > | > | > do
> | > | > | > | > all
> | > | > | > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve the
> | > coffee,
> | > | > and
> | > | > | > | > clean
> | > | > | > | > | > the potty.
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > | .................not to mention the
> cockpit
> | > vomit,
> | > | > | > which
> | > | > | > | > is a smell that
> | > | > | > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and I
> can
> | > still
> | > | > | > mentally
> | > | > | > | > visualize to this
> | > | > | > | > | very day .
> | > | > | > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
> | > | > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > | >
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | > |
> | > | > | >
> | > | > | >
> | > | > |
> | > | > |
> | > | >
> | > | >
> | > |
> | > |
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

The people I was talking about were professional, at FAA
certified repair stations and the airplanes were most often
professionally flown. The owner flown airplanes were often
flown by people who wanted the best maintenance but those
professional shops cut corners to "get the work out the
door."

I think it is related, but since you seem to be upset, I
won't mention it again for a few days.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:K8nKf.101008$4l5.24143@dukeread05...
|
| Did I miss something somewhere, Jim? Why do you continue
to belabor this
| unrelated point? I offered kudos to the airline
maintenance people that
| contributed to my overall career safety, and you responded
by commenting
| that unscrupulous amateurs often scrimp on maintenance.
Not only does this
| have no bearing on my original comment, but it is a fact
well known to all
| that needs no further demonstration. What am I missing
here?
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

Cessna 150, two pilot crew, Cuddles 1 and Cuddles 2
J3 Cub, Spoon 1 and Spoon 2




"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
k.net...
| God Forbid!! Careful, my wife might hear you!!
| :-)
| D
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:oDvKf.101488$4l5.52883@dukeread05...
| > At least your nick name wasn't Cuddles.
| >
| >
| > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
| > message
| >
nk.net...
| > | Nah :-) We're at 40 years now and counting. My wife is
| > greatly appreciative
| > | of a good sense of humor. So were the Thunderbirds
that
| > year. They all knew
| > | and loved my wife. She laid that out there knowing
that
| > the camaraderie we
| > | shared with the team would be, (and has remained) a
| > lifetime thing.
| > | Even today all of us get a big kick out of remembering
| > that night at the
| > | dinner table.
| > | Don't worry, I got even. One of the guys' wife was and
is
| > a world class
| > | baker. He showed up the next day with a tray of hot
| > biscuits. To this day,
| > | his call sign around here is "Muffin"....just the
thing
| > for an Air Force
| > | Fighter pilot :-))
| > | Dudley Henriques
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" >
wrote
| > in message
| > | news:4brKf.101336$4l5.72356@dukeread05...
| > | > Is that grounds for divorce?
| > | >
| > | > My brother called me El Lardo De Fats when we were
kids,
| > now
| > | > he's 61 years old, 5'10" and about 250 lbs. while
I'm 60
| > | > next week, 5'11" and 200 lbs even. Sometimes I use
| > | > Capt.Kerosene, sometimes I'm John Galt, most of the
time
| > I'm
| > | > just Jim Macklin, never Jimmy.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
in
| > | > message
| > | >
| >
k.net...
| > | > |I was of course a civilian pilot flying and
| > demonstrating
| > | > military airplanes
| > | > | and in some cases doing research on one thing or
| > another
| > | > flying by
| > | > | invitation of the Navy and some foreign
governments.
| > | > | My "given" call sign was "Sparrow", but my wife
one
| > day at
| > | > a JC dinner
| > | > | happened to pass on to a few of the Thunderbirds
what
| > the
| > | > family called me
| > | > | around the house. I'm afraid I've been "Baron Von
| > | > Leftover" ever since!
| > | > | :-))
| > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > |
| > | > | "Jim Macklin"
>
| > wrote
| > | > in message
| > | > | news:bTmKf.100900$4l5.42145@dukeread05...
| > | > | > I'm sure that's true. BTW, where you Studly
Dudley
| > or
| > | > | > Dudley DoRight?
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > "Dudley Henriques" >
wrote
| > in
| > | > | > message
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
ink.net...
| > | > | > | There's nothing that will get you talked about
| > quicker
| > | > at
| > | > | > squadron ops than
| > | > | > | puking into your mask :-))
| > | > | > | DH
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
| > >
| > | > wrote
| > | > | > in message
| > | > | > | news:KkmKf.100448$4l5.36@dukeread05...
| > | > | > | >I remember reading an article, about Jacques
Yves
| > | > | > Cousteau
| > | > | > | > in the National Geographic. There was a
mention
| > of
| > | > a
| > | > | > diver
| > | > | > | > getting sick at about 200 feet below the
surface
| > who
| > | > | > threw
| > | > | > | > up into his Aqua-Lung filling both of the
hoses
| > that
| > | > | > | > connected to the regulator. This was before
the
| > | > | > addition of
| > | > | > | > check valves in the breathing tubes.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > I've had some real good chili and or BBQ at
| > airports
| > | > in
| > | > | > OK
| > | > | > | > and TX.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > "Dudley Henriques"
>
| > wrote
| > | > in
| > | > | > | > message
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
k.net...
| > | > | > | > | Brings back memories :-)
| > | > | > | > | I've always wondered about those so called
| > $100
| > | > | > hamburger
| > | > | > | > flights. Actually,
| > | > | > | > | for me in the Mustang, or occasionally in
the
| > | > Bearcat,
| > | > | > | > those burgers were a
| > | > | > | > | bit more expensive :-)
| > | > | > | > | If I remember right, most of those airport
| > | > hamburgers
| > | > | > | > bought at those little
| > | > | > | > | "airport cafe's on the fields were grilled
and
| > | > | > dripping
| > | > | > | > with grease. Just
| > | > | > | > | the thing to settle the old stomach down
for a
| > | > weekend
| > | > | > | > pilot. Add this to
| > | > | > | > | the stress of a hot cockpit on a summer
day
| > and a
| > | > new
| > | > | > | > pilot getting "just a
| > | > | > | > | little bit lost " on the way home and it's
a
| > | > wonder
| > | > | > more
| > | > | > | > people didn't end
| > | > | > | > | up puking in the seat pockets :-))
| > | > | > | > | We had a bevy of line boys who were
supposed
| > to
| > | > take
| > | > | > care
| > | > | > | > of things like
| > | > | > | > | that, but it seems to me remembering back
now,
| > | > that
| > | > | > every
| > | > | > | > damn time it
| > | > | > | > | happened, I was the only one on the scene
to
| > take
| > | > care
| > | > | > of
| > | > | > | > it :-))
| > | > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
| > | > >
| > | > | > wrote
| > | > | > | > in message
| > | > | > | > | news:mslKf.100257$4l5.75119@dukeread05...
| > | > | > | > | > I've been lucky or smooth, never had
anybody
| > | > mess up
| > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > | > cockpit. Did have one student who came
out
| > to
| > | > fly
| > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > | > brought his sister along for the ride, a
| > dual
| > | > | > | > cross-country
| > | > | > | > | > from Wichita to Emporia, Marion, Newton
and
| > back
| > | > to
| > | > | > | > Wichita.
| > | > | > | > | > About half way to Emporia they both
became
| > ill.
| > | > | > Seems
| > | > | > | > they
| > | > | > | > | > had stopped for hamburgers for lunch and
| > both
| > | > also
| > | > | > were
| > | > | > | > not
| > | > | > | > | > feeling well before take-off.
| > | > | > | > | > I had plenty (?) of sic-sacks and they
used
| > | > them.
| > | > | > When
| > | > | > | > we
| > | > | > | > | > got to Emporia we threw the used bags in
the
| > | > trash
| > | > | > ands
| > | > | > | > | > bought all the sic-sacks they had at the
| > | > airport, 4
| > | > | > to
| > | > | > | > | > restock the airplane. We also took a
while
| > to
| > | > | > settle
| > | > | > | > down.
| > | > | > | > | > But half way to Marion the hamburgers
took
| > over
| > | > | > again
| > | > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > | > shortly they had used all four new bags.
| > Then
| > | > they
| > | > | > | > still
| > | > | > | > | > got ill because of the smell. She
dumped
| > the
| > | > | > aircraft
| > | > | > | > | > paperwork in the seat pocket at my
| > instruction
| > | > and
| > | > | > used
| > | > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > | > zip lock portfolio and he used the right
| > hand
| > | > pocket
| > | > | > of
| > | > | > | > his
| > | > | > | > | > NEW sports coat.
| > | > | > | > | > I, being the superior pilot/CFI with a
nose
| > used
| > | > to
| > | > | > | > | > shoveling horse droppings and even some
pigs
| > [I
| > | > was
| > | > | > a
| > | > | > | > "pile
| > | > | > | > | > it" , before I became an aviator] was
able
| > to
| > | > resist
| > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > | > need for myself. And the smell is still
in
| > my
| > | > | > nostrils.
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > hen I was learning to be a CFI, I asked
my
| > | > friend
| > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > | > instructor at Spartan (Auggie) how to
handle
| > air
| > | > | > sick
| > | > | > | > | > students and was told that in the Cessna
| > 150-172
| > | > | > | > airplanes,
| > | > | > | > | > open the window and stick their head
| > outside.
| > | > Never
| > | > | > had
| > | > | > | > to
| > | > | > | > | > do that.
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > BTW, that student is now an FAA
Inspector
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > | > James H. Macklin
| > | > | > | > | > ATP,CFI,A&P
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > --
| > | > | > | > | > The people think the Constitution
protects
| > their
| > | > | > rights;
| > | > | > | > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to
be
| > | > | > overcome.
| > | > | > | > | > some support
| > | > | > | > | >
| > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > | > | > | > | > See http://www.fija.org/ more about your
| > rights
| > | > and
| > | > | > | > duties.
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > "Dudley Henriques"
| > >
| > | > wrote
| > | > | > in
| > | > | > | > | > message
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | >
| >
.net...
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > | "Jim Macklin"
| > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > wrote
| > | > | > | > | > in message
| > | > | > | > | > |
news:nnkKf.100060$4l5.33181@dukeread05...
| > | > | > | > | > | > big ----- deal, also BFH = big
hammer,
| > tfc
| > | > too
| > | > | > cold
| > | > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > | > The 121 pilots have a full support
staff
| > to
| > | > help
| > | > | > | > with
| > | > | > | > | > flight
| > | > | > | > | > | > planning and a crew to bring and
serve
| > the
| > | > | > coffee.
| > | > | > | > The
| > | > | > | > | > 135
| > | > | > | > | > | > charter pilot has the best and worst
| > job,
| > | > gets
| > | > | > paid
| > | > | > | > to
| > | > | > | > | > fly
| > | > | > | > | > | > pretty good airplanes but has to
carry
| > the
| > | > | > luggage,
| > | > | > | > do
| > | > | > | > | > all
| > | > | > | > | > | > the flight planning, brew and serve
the
| > | > coffee,
| > | > | > and
| > | > | > | > | > clean
| > | > | > | > | > | > the potty.
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > | .................not to mention the
| > cockpit
| > | > vomit,
| > | > | > | > which
| > | > | > | > | > is a smell that
| > | > | > | > | > | never really leaves the airplane, and
I
| > can
| > | > still
| > | > | > | > mentally
| > | > | > | > | > visualize to this
| > | > | > | > | > | very day .
| > | > | > | > | > | :-))))))))))))))))
| > | > | > | > | > | Dudley Henriques
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > |
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message

> The people I was talking about were professional,.....

Anyone who requests or provides shoddy maintenance in the manner you've
described is an amateur, regardless of whether or not they are paid for
their activities.

> I think it is related, but since you seem to be upset,

Not upset, just trying to sense where your remarks fit with my comments
regarding airline (121) maintenance.

[Dave Stadt]

"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
>
>> The people I was talking about were professional,.....
>
> Anyone who requests or provides shoddy maintenance in the manner you've
> described is an amateur, regardless of whether or not they are paid for
> their activities.

Wasn't aware that 'amateur' or 'professional' indicated quality. Hadn't
noticed that in my 56 years.

>> I think it is related, but since you seem to be upset,
>
> Not upset, just trying to sense where your remarks fit with my comments
> regarding airline (121) maintenance.
>

[Dudley Henriques]

:-)
Dudley


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>> God Forbid!! Careful, my wife might hear you!!
>
> Good Grief!!! Dudley, and Jim, shame on both of you!!! You just made
> posts (biggest I have ever seen on usenet) of 11 and 12 KB!!!
>
> Please, for our dial-up comrades, take the time to trim your posts!
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[Morgans]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
k.net...
> God Forbid!! Careful, my wife might hear you!!

Good Grief!!! Dudley, and Jim, shame on both of you!!! You just made
posts (biggest I have ever seen on usenet) of 11 and 12 KB!!!

Please, for our dial-up comrades, take the time to trim your posts!
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Macklin]

If they are paid, they are professional, if they do
intentionally shoddy work they are unethical and criminal.



"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
|
| > The people I was talking about were professional,.....
|
| Anyone who requests or provides shoddy maintenance in the
manner you've
| described is an amateur, regardless of whether or not they
are paid for
| their activities.
|
| > I think it is related, but since you seem to be upset,
|
| Not upset, just trying to sense where your remarks fit
with my comments
| regarding airline (121) maintenance.
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

Gee, my ISP just emailed me with an offer of their new very
high speed cable, 9 megabits downloads and 1 mbit upload
speed, I'm only getting half that now, but I do feel your
pain, will snip a little more.


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in
message
| k.net...
| > God Forbid!! Careful, my wife might hear you!!
|
| Good Grief!!! Dudley, and Jim, shame on both of you!!!
You just made
| posts (biggest I have ever seen on usenet) of 11 and 12
KB!!!
|
| Please, for our dial-up comrades, take the time to trim
your posts!
| --
| Jim in NC
|

[Jose]

> Good Grief!!! Dudley, and Jim, shame on both of you!!! You just made
> posts (biggest I have ever seen on usenet) of 11 and 12 KB!!!
>
> Please, for our dial-up comrades, take the time to trim your posts!

At least they top-posted. Imagine having to wade through it all
(however many dozen times it takes for each iteration) before getting to
the little bit of original text.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Dudley Henriques]

You know, I just noticed it :-)
I thought you were kidding.
I wasn't thinking about the size of the post at all.
Thanks.
D

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>> God Forbid!! Careful, my wife might hear you!!
>
> Good Grief!!! Dudley, and Jim, shame on both of you!!! You just made
> posts (biggest I have ever seen on usenet) of 11 and 12 KB!!!
>
> Please, for our dial-up comrades, take the time to trim your posts!
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[John Gaquin]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
>
> Wasn't aware that 'amateur' or 'professional' indicated quality. Hadn't
> noticed that in my 56 years.

Oh, Absolutely! There are many very professional pilots flying a variety
of SELs on weekends, while there are also some very amateur people driving
Boeings for large salaries. And I chose the word 'driving' carefully.

[Dudley Henriques]

Sorry about that Jose; I wasn't paying attention. They were a bit long at
that!
:-)
Dudley
"Jose" > wrote in message
om...
>> Good Grief!!! Dudley, and Jim, shame on both of you!!! You just made
>> posts (biggest I have ever seen on usenet) of 11 and 12 KB!!!
>>
>> Please, for our dial-up comrades, take the time to trim your posts!
>
> At least they top-posted. Imagine having to wade through it all (however
> many dozen times it takes for each iteration) before getting to the little
> bit of original text.
>
> Jose
> --
> Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in

> If they are paid, they are professional,

No. If they are paid, they are paid, that's all. Professionalism comes
from within. If their interest and concern with job performance corresponds
only to the number of dollars they're paid, they're whores.

[Jim Macklin]

You snipped the rest of my post...by legal definition, if
you are paid you are professional. But you can be
incompetent, unethical, criminal and just sloppy.
I also know that there are many private pilots who have
better skills and are more "professional" in the way the fly
than the airline pilots who failed to turn the engine
anti-ice ON before taking off from DC, the airline pilots
who ran out of fuel on a trip from South America to NYC and
crashed, totally out of fuel on Long Island, the mechanics
who forgot to install all the fasteners on the tail of a
Beech 1900 that crashed in Denver, the ... need we need to
go on, every pilot, mechanic, or other person can make
mistakes and some deliberately do shoddy work. Some pilots
force the issue with duck under approaches, or other "stupid
pilot tricks."

You used Professionalism, a different word and meaning, I
said professional which indicates paid.

I don't mind if you and I disagree, it is kind of fun, just
fully quote me.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"John Gaquin" > wrote in message
. ..
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in
|
| > If they are paid, they are professional,
|
| No. If they are paid, they are paid, that's all.
Professionalism comes
| from within. If their interest and concern with job
performance corresponds
| only to the number of dollars they're paid, they're
whores.
|
|

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Jim, my cable provider is about to offer the same in month or so. Are you
getting it? If you do let me know what you thing.


"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:L7PKf.103194$4l5.68876@dukeread05...
> Gee, my ISP just emailed me with an offer of their new very
> high speed cable, 9 megabits downloads and 1 mbit upload
> speed, I'm only getting half that now, but I do feel your
> pain, will snip a little more.
>

[Jim Macklin]

I think that 4 Mbps is fast enough for me, for now. But if
I had a bigger network or was really into Internet gaming or
lots of downloads, it would be worth the extra money because
of the time it would save.


"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
| Jim, my cable provider is about to offer the same in month
or so. Are you
| getting it? If you do let me know what you thing.
|
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:L7PKf.103194$4l5.68876@dukeread05...
| > Gee, my ISP just emailed me with an offer of their new
very
| > high speed cable, 9 megabits downloads and 1 mbit upload
| > speed, I'm only getting half that now, but I do feel
your
| > pain, will snip a little more.
| >
|
|

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in
>
> ......just
> fully quote me.

Not all the time...... too much bandwidth.