Mentally unstable airline pilot forcibly removed from flight deck

Denny writes:

Given that the flight attendant holds a Commercial ticket and has the
instrument rating (is not current) it can be assumed that she was
capable of running a check list and handling the radio during an
approach and landing...

Yes. Indeed, one doesn't need a commercial license or instrument rating to do
that.

Anthony, this presumes that one would know what a three dimensional radio
looked like, how to key a mike, where the switches were located, all in a
real airplane that was actually in the air. Of course, you have no
experience in these matters at all.

On Nov 21, 4:49*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Denny wrote in news:2dfb2455-aefb-4fa1-a1e6-
:

Given that the flight attendant holds a Commercial ticket and has the
instrument rating (is not current) it can be assumed that she was
capable of running a check list and handling the radio during an
approach and landing...
It is unlikely that she had 767 specific training, but the pilot knew
the systems and could direct her just the same as if he were giving
dual to a pilot going for the rating...

And the other thing is that landing the jet is not rocket science...
The cabin pressurization needed to be switched to landing mode... The
V speeds calculated (automatically displayed on the glass panel and
the pilot knows how to get those)... Flaps and gear at the proper
times - and remember to flare...
Fewer details than landing a pressurized prop twin...

Actually, none of that is true for the 767.

the cabin is automatic, the destination landing elevation having been
set before departure, the V speeds do not come up on Efis on a 767, they
come from the FMS and are set the old fashioned way with bugs on the ASI
and the flaps and gear thing is the same with one or two guys.
any large jet can easily be flown single hadned, though. Even the old
ones with FEs need very little doing if everything is working OK.



ya, ya, ya, there are lots more details for the onboard PSU/power/
heating/cooling/etc/ systems, but those can all be dealt with after
landing...

Actually, there's very little to do there in a 767. After landing you
just retract the speedbrakes, pull the flaps up, turn off the xponder
and radar and that's pretty much it.

Bertie

Saw a similar comment from a heavy captain on aus.aviation. So why
would they even bother to ask if there was a pilot on board and scare
the **** out of the pax for no reason.

On Nov 21, 8:32*am, "Viperdoc" wrote:
Anthony, this presumes that one would know what a three dimensional radio
looked like, how to key a mike, where the switches were located, all in a
real airplane that was actually in the air. Of course, you have no
experience in these matters at all.

Can you imagine Anthony doing a cockpit check in less that twenty
minutes :-)
With the manual open at the correct pages

He wouldn't be able to fit his lard ass into the seat, let alone run the
check list. Then, he's probably get to the third item and argue about it.

terry writes:

Saw a similar comment from a heavy captain on aus.aviation. So why
would they even bother to ask if there was a pilot on board and scare
the **** out of the pax for no reason.

The pilot may have felt that someone else with piloting experience would be
better at providing assistance than someone with none. However, in this type
of situation, that isn't necessarily so. While a trained pilot would almost
certainly not be worse, he might not be better, either. You need someone who
can follow instructions, not necessarily someone who knows how to fly. A
pilot might understand the instructions more easily at first, but he might
also be less inclined to do exactly as he is told, which could present a
hazard that outweighs the utility of his piloting experience.

Mxsmanic wrote:
terry writes:

Saw a similar comment from a heavy captain on aus.aviation. So why
would they even bother to ask if there was a pilot on board and scare
the **** out of the pax for no reason.

The pilot may have felt that someone else with piloting experience would be
better at providing assistance than someone with none. However, in this type
of situation, that isn't necessarily so. While a trained pilot would almost
certainly not be worse, he might not be better, either. You need someone who
can follow instructions, not necessarily someone who knows how to fly. A
pilot might understand the instructions more easily at first, but he might
also be less inclined to do exactly as he is told, which could present a
hazard that outweighs the utility of his piloting experience.

Your total lack of knowledge of piloting physical aircraft leads you
to a delusional conclusion.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

terry writes:

Saw a similar comment from a heavy captain on aus.aviation. So why
would they even bother to ask if there was a pilot on board and scare
the **** out of the pax for no reason.

The pilot may have felt that someone else with piloting experience
would be better at providing assistance than someone with none.
However, in this type of situation, that isn't necessarily so. While
a trained pilot would almost certainly not be worse, he might not be
better, either. You need someone who can follow instructions, not
necessarily someone who knows how to fly. A pilot might understand
the instructions more easily at first, but he might also be less
inclined to do exactly as he is told, which could present a hazard
that outweighs the utility of his piloting experience.



You're an idiot.


Bertie

terry wrote in news:a8a86859-ec2a-4475-9111-
:

On Nov 21, 4:49*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Denny wrote in news:2dfb2455-aefb-4fa1-a1e6-
:

Given that the flight attendant holds a Commercial ticket and has
the
instrument rating (is not current) it can be assumed that she was
capable of running a check list and handling the radio during an
approach and landing...
It is unlikely that she had 767 specific training, but the pilot
knew
the systems and could direct her just the same as if he were giving
dual to a pilot going for the rating...

And the other thing is that landing the jet is not rocket
science...
The cabin pressurization needed to be switched to landing mode...
The
V speeds calculated (automatically displayed on the glass panel and
the pilot knows how to get those)... Flaps and gear at the proper
times - and remember to flare...
Fewer details than landing a pressurized prop twin...

Actually, none of that is true for the 767.

the cabin is automatic, the destination landing elevation having been
set before departure, the V speeds do not come up on Efis on a 767,
they
come from the FMS and are set the old fashioned way with bugs on the
ASI
and the flaps and gear thing is the same with one or two guys.
any large jet can easily be flown single hadned, though. Even the old
ones with FEs need very little doing if everything is working OK.



ya, ya, ya, there are lots more details for the onboard PSU/power/
heating/cooling/etc/ systems, but those can all be dealt with after
landing...

Actually, there's very little to do there in a 767. After landing you
just retract the speedbrakes, pull the flaps up, turn off the xponder
and radar and that's pretty much it.

Bertie

Saw a similar comment from a heavy captain on aus.aviation. So why
would they even bother to ask if there was a pilot on board and scare
the **** out of the pax for no reason.


No harm to have her there. He could have given her some pretty simple
tasks Just to take some of the load off. Even someone like that might be
more work than they save you, though. Depends.

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Denny writes:

Given that the flight attendant holds a Commercial ticket and has the
instrument rating (is not current) it can be assumed that she was
capable of running a check list and handling the radio during an
approach and landing...

Yes. Indeed, one doesn't need a commercial license or instrument
rating to do that.


Takes more than you got, fukkwit.


Bertie