And who didn’t see this coming? As the experience levels drop through the floor, exactly who are these crew members going to learn from? Well past time for these companies to hire back some of the “old heads” to act as observers out on the line. Guys and gals that aged out the top or stopped early but are still interested in passing on their knowledge and experience but at a lower rate of pressure than actually being in command. Even back when I was still “on the line” I had some pretty young pilots sometimes while Jumpseating. Not often, but I did have teaching / mentoring occasions occur where I was asked a question or two based on my experience. I also had at least on time where I was able to make an “observation” to a fairly new, but not young, Captain. I made such quietly, after the flight of course and he was very happy to have learned something that night.
The hanger flying that occurred when I was a newby doesn’t seem to exist as much anymore. It should and maybe this requirement will grow into something useful as the coming flood of new folks starts settling in to aviation. That is, of course, until the bean counters cut and slash at such a wasteful program that is nothing but a money pit. After all, safety costs money and that affects the bottom line so negatively.
While a very true statement, unlike way back in the stone age of steam gauges and Flight Engineers, the military has manning issues of their own and is extremely unlikely to become the resource of experienced and highly trained warm bodies that it was. For a very, very long time I might add.
In the short quote of the FAA’s statement, the phrase “sterile cockpit rule” occurs twice. There is no doubt that this is the number one failure by pilots in all operations, and a persistent problem that should be mitigated. While commuting or flying in the 121 cockpit, I witnessed it, in the 135 cockpit I saw it, and as a DPE I use it as the distraction I am mandated to create.
Untimely blabbing causes painstakingly trained professional pilots to miss all sorts of details, from benign to critical. Any program that works to reduce the impact of this bad habit is welcome.
Maybe get all the kiddie pilots in the Barbi Jets to stop with the “Guard” nonsense and pay attention to flying the plane?
The sterile cockpit rule is constantly violated and can be especially dangerous on taxi out for takeoff.
So, the Boomers are going to tell the youngsters to sit down, shut up, and pay attention? Where’s my popcorn?
Sounds like a good plan!
Training and testing in leadership aspects is very appropriate and should be required even in Part 91 multiple crew operations. To an extent leadership is already covered in CRM curricula but not specifically or adequately and needs its own stand alone emphasis. And yes one of the most rudimentary lessons unfortunately needing to be passed along in such training is guard frequency ethics which in the boomer days were taught at the student pilot level but which today seem either to be ignored or forgotten.
The most unprofessional and dangerous thing to happen at my airline in recent memory was by a pair of former fighter pilots repoing an airplane following maintenance. I spent 30 years in military aviation and witnessed my share of unprofessional military pilots and fly with former military that have the leadership qualities of a mushroom. I also fly with a lot of young kids coming out of very professional and well designed college and university aviation programs that are complete rockstars and a pleasure to fly with. Coming up through the ranks as a civilian pilot requires a lot of hard work, skill, sacrifice and determination. I think the industry as a whole would benefit from everyone stepping back from this absolute deference to military pilots and judge pilots simply by their merits. Both paths to the airlines produce good and bad pilots and jackasses who frequent GUUUUARRRD.
As society changes, so do the people coming out of this society into the cockpits… daily life full of distractions coming out of the cell phone virtual reality that gets carried into the cockpit. A big part of the operation these days -especially on ground operations- is managing distractions.
What I do miss when the Colgan event is mentioned, is the major factor of fatigue that played a part on both crew members. If one looks at their duties -maybe even forced on them due to employment standards- this cannot be ignored. When one is fatigued a rock-solid foundation of good SOP’s and disciplined operating standards is what keeps things together.
I totally agree with David H on this one. In my opinion, the idea that military pilots are any better than professionally trained civilian pilots is a myth. I have had the opportunity to fly with both on many occasions, with some serious duds on both sides, and also some very talented ones. I do think civilian corporate pilots in many cases have more varied experience, and usually more flight hours than their military counterparts. There are a lot of great pilots coming out of both worlds - just don’t tell me you’re obviously better because you learned in the military. The non-flying public might believe that, but those of us who fly for a living know better.
When I was a staff officer at HQ ACC back in the early 90s we had a program to lease Learjets from the private sector to use as ‘ducks’ to simulate Commie bombers for fighter and GCI controller training.
Most of the pilots were retired fighter pilots. We had several serious incidents where our pilots were doing unauthorized and unsafe stunts in our Lears, including roles, unbriefed low level flying, even rolls at low level!
Military pilots, especially old fighter pilots, are certainly no less likely to shine their asses than any civilian, maybe more so.
Just look at this recent USMC collision between an F-18 and a C-130 in Japan!
We put a stop to the worst of these guys antics by using ACARS and GPS logs to keep an eye on them.
The program still exists today, and it is a good one. But where fighter pilots are involved, keep an eye on them! They might revert to their childhood at any time [OK, I’m kidding. Mostly.]
Now for some reality;
I have already heard from some of our Company’s sic’s who have had to take the ATP required classroom course that it puts students to sleep. Judging from the CRM training I have to take now I am not surprised. I have a feeling this rule may just make the alleged pilot “shortage” worse by lack of interest. I have known many pilots who find out after all the training involved that flying is not the job they imagined. The “operations familiarization” requirement of this rule is the only part that makes sense. As far as “mentoring” is concerned I think there are those who will use that as a way to make up for training that candidates should have had at the private pilot level. I am not a company instructor pilot neither do I want to be. I don’t mind showing things someone new to the company or the airplane we may be flying. What I have a problem with is teaching someone things that should have been learned at the private pilot level. Several items mentioned in the Colgan accident are perfect examples. You would be amazed how many sic’s I have had in the past who could not even fly a visual traffic pattern. I think the FAA should spend a little more time making sure private pilot candidates are getting the training they need, instead of allowing schools to get by teaching the absolute minimum.
Alef Aviation!! Where they heck did THEY come from? Never heard of 'em. So I clicked on the link. Looks like four eAviation fanatics with soldering irons to me? OH! They’re in San Mateo … home of the uber wealthy fruits, nuts and dreamers and eZealots of silicon valley. So they’re the latest ‘vaporware’ purveyor. Swell. They don’t even have a decent picture or description of their design goal.
Maybe they’ll brag about using friction stir welding techniques to put their thing into production so as to save costs … kinda like that Eclipse company did in Albuquerque. OR … maybe they’ll be like that seaplane company building $125K flying jet skis for rich baseball players? Perhaps they’ll use some of that technology used to hook up a Cessna O-2 tail to a Pinto. It actually flew at Van Nuys and proved that crashing a Pinto causes a fire. But then … we already knew that. Maybe NASA will take the idea on since it’s obvious THEY have an unlimited budget.s OR … the CHP might buy some so they could patrol I-5? I think they should call it, “Wishful Thinking.”
There’s NOTHING I’d love better than to be positive and upbeat about something like this but … people like this are spoiling it for everyone.
2 replies
UPDATING…
The promo videos for these types of gizmos have taken the place of Saturday Morning Cartoons.
We need a flying “bathroom” so you can do your morning ritual while already on your way to work…in silly con valley.
It’s as if children are “designing”.
Yup, site has a comprehensive list. Amazing what someone can do with CAD software and an unfettered imagination. Love all the imaginative names. Where’s Paul Moller when his time has finally arrived?
1 reply
This is where the PAL_V flying car comes in. It is a gyro with folding blades and drives on the highway. Gyros are already FAA certificated and no problem there. New Hampshire has now approved it on their highways. It took 75 million dollars in development. Cost–2 seater $300,000- and 4-seater $600,000 If you are interested, I am a dealer in Arizona–send me an email for a picture. brunettoaviation@gmail.com
Flying cars? Never will happen other than someone’s dreams.
Good luck getting part 23 approval on one end for airworthiness and the other NTSA crash test requirements.
PLUS, as a plane must have A&P work on it while US Gov mandates people must be able to work on they own cars if they choose.
1 reply
Minor correction: the Mizar taxied around Van Nuys Airport, but both test flights were from Camarillo Airport in Ventura county.
Had they launched from VNY, the first flight might have ended on a golf course south of the airport, not in a bean field.
(VNY is not a great spot for test flights - too much developed area.)
But there is a Van Nuys connection: one of the partners owned a Galpin Ford dealership in Van Nuys which not only provided the Pinto, but was slated to be the nationwide distributor for the Mizar.
1 reply
The notion of making a viable flying car is every bit as nutty as powering an airplane with batteries. Every now and again, someone has to come along to prove just how nutty it all is. The Mizar was 50 years ago and they’re STILL trying to do it. I remember seeing it on KTLA. Maybe Galpin Ford had too many Pintos it couldn’t sell ?
wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_car#/media/File:AVE-Mizar-1973-N68X-XL.jpg
Enough already! AeroCars flying is just an illusion or trickery designed to deceive people, man. They are like a labyrinth designed to baffle our brains.
No one has ever made a roadable airplane that wasn’t both a crappy airplane and a crappy car.
1 reply
Like most compromises it will likely be the worst of both.
All fo these doofuses like to claim that they’re the first to receive federal approval to fly their contraption but none mention the Taylor Aero Car, designed and built by Molt Taylor in 1949. Though only 6 were produced, they received certification from the Civil Aeronautics Administration in 1956. Taylor made a deal with Ling Temco Vaught (LTV) to produce the Aero Car but the deal required him to secure 500 orders. He was only able to get about half that and so the deal fell through.
Here’s the wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar#Testing_and_certification
1 reply
And the people with the money to buy the combo. aren’t likely to settle for shortcomings in either one of them.
Then there’s always Weather, and Weight & Balance… Flying cannot be done as nonchalantly as driving a car - you know, with a cell phone in front of your face all the way to work and at every traffic light.
And put the barbershops very angry.???
Only 35 mph? What’s the point unless it’s to avoid the congestion that is LA, NY or other major cities? Not a viable means of transportation for any distance.
You guys are harshing my vibe. I bet the next thing you are going to tell us is that the flying AMC Javelin in the James Bond movie “Man with the golden gun” wasn’t real ?
Didn’t the Chinese buy one USA a car project, so there is a market for our spruikers
I had the same thought. But, there could be an angle there: If enough folks find out what is like to need a federally-certified mechanic to do anything but the most basic maintenance to their “car”, maybe we will get to a point where I could perform more of the work on my not-for-hire aircraft myself.
1 reply
If the darned FAA woulda passed the EAA suggested “Primary Aircraft” aircraft certification category in the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act, your wish would have been granted a decade ago. A large group of people worked on the Part 23 update only to have most of it ignored. This is MY major issue … peeps me off every time I think about it.
NOW … snap forward a decade and A&P’s and IA’s are getting harder and harder to find as the old ones retire and the younger ones get sucked up by the airlines. Didn’t have to be this way. The FAA … “Making Simple S&%T hard since 1958!”
Most are ad airplanes and worse cars.
It’s not Paul Moller they are channeling, it is Jim Bede…
Interesting dcmarotta. Thanks.
I’m all for exploring new possibilities and outside-of-the-box designs, but this particular one is downright nutty and looks much more like a delayed April fool’s prank than an actual project.