Mentally unstable airline pilot forcibly removed from flight deck

writes:

You really don't understand the concept of copilot, do you?

Which airliners have you flown?

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

The entire purpose of having a copilot is to relieve the pilot of
workload.

We are not talking about a copilot here.

Yes, we are.

We are talking about a substitute
for a copilot.

Babbling nonsense.

As for not doing what they are told to do, all pilots of real airplanes,
which is what the person in queston is, understand the concept of PIC and
copilot, something you obviously do not.

If that were true, crew resource management training would be a waste of time.

Non sequitur.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

You really don't understand the concept of copilot, do you?

Which airliners have you flown?

Which airplanes of any type have you flown?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Which airplanes of any type have you flown?

I've flown airliners in simulation, which provides me with some knowledge of
procedures.

Which airliners have you flown, in simulation or in real life? If you haven't
flown any, what knowledge of procedures have you acquired, and how?

On Nov 22, 8:55*am, "Morgans" wrote:
"Bob Crawford" wrote

No such announcement was made to the pax. *From the actual report:
"Prior to descent, the Commander asked the Incharge Flight Attendant
to go the Passenger Information List (PIL) to see if there were any
flight crew on board who might be available to assist on the Flight
deck for the remainder of the flight. In the event no line pilots were
on board, but one of the Cabin attendants held a Commercial Pilot’s
Licence, with a Multi-engine Rating, and a non-current Instrument
Rating. The Commander requested that the Flight Attendant occupy the
right-hand (First Officers) seat for the remainder of the flight to
assist as necessary."http://www.aaiu.ie/upload/general/11139-0.pdf

What an excellent report. *Well written, and easy to read and understand.

It sounds to me that the Captain did as well as anyone could possibly do,
for the difficult situation that was taking place. *I can not imagine anyone
could have done better, and the flight attendant that stepped in for the FO
did pretty darn well, too.

When the **** hits the fan, the training and level headed response displayed
is what was called for, and was given. *I can't imagine a psycho simmer
could have contributed, in any positive way.

Especially one that gets nervous "flying" a sim.

You gotta read his flight blogs....

"Landing at Jean still made me nervous. The charts provide elevations
but not in great detail. There are some low mountains around the
airport, except to the east. As I came in, I occasionally saw my
landing light on terrain below—terrain that was surprisingly close. I
also saw lights on the ground appearing and disappearing, telling me
that there was terrain in between me and the lights. For an instant,
even the threshold lights on the runway were blocked, which definitely
kept me alert. Fortunately, I landed uneventfully, even with the wind
behind me (flying a pattern in the darkness didn't appeal to me, and
the runway is long enough)."

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Which airplanes of any type have you flown?

I've flown airliners in simulation, which provides me with some knowledge of
procedures.

Delusional.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"Maxwell" #$$9#@%%%.^^^ wrote in news

wrote in message
...
On Nov 20, 6:55 pm, wrote:
Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Accident reports involving poor cockpit management don't agree with
you. And a personal slam doesn't constitute a well considered
rebuttal either. I for one would like to know why you think his
response was delusional and without bringing up "sims".

-------------------------------------------------------

What accident reports do you have, that would indicate a pilot in this
situation, would be less likely to do as he was told?




You are an idiot.


Bertie

wrote in news:56e83170-7d52-480d-b575-69dd3020f8b2
@k41g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:

On Nov 20, 7:17*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
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 wh
y
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

Amazing. That sounds remarkably similar to what Mxs said.




Actually, no it doesn't.



Bertie

"Morgans" wrote in
:


"Bob Crawford" wrote

No such announcement was made to the pax. From the actual report:
"Prior to descent, the Commander asked the Incharge Flight Attendant
to go the Passenger Information List (PIL) to see if there were any
flight crew on board who might be available to assist on the Flight
deck for the remainder of the flight. In the event no line pilots were
on board, but one of the Cabin attendants held a Commercial Pilot’s
Licence, with a Multi-engine Rating, and a non-current Instrument
Rating. The Commander requested that the Flight Attendant occupy the
right-hand (First Officers) seat for the remainder of the flight to
assist as necessary."
http://www.aaiu.ie/upload/general/11139-0.pdf

What an excellent report. Well written, and easy to read and
understand.

It sounds to me that the Captain did as well as anyone could possibly
do, for the difficult situation that was taking place. I can not
imagine anyone could have done better, and the flight attendant that
stepped in for the FO did pretty darn well, too.

When the **** hits the fan, the training and level headed response
displayed is what was called for, and was given. I can't imagine a
psycho simmer could have contributed, in any positive way.

Can't imagine you contributing in any positive way either.

just a constsant stream of irrelevant BS..


Bertie

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

I've flown airliners in simulation, which provides me with some knowledge
of
procedures.

Yet you use an incorrect procedure for getting the altimeter setting at the
destination field.