Seeker
-
Posts
8,638 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
196
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Seeker
-
-
RC pilot does (unintentional) re-enactment of B-52 crash. Skip to 3:55 if you're impatient:
B-52 crash 1994:
-
56 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:
I used to be able to do all that stuff too, but, I must admit my bike was a lot easier to ride.
Even if you could do it Kip, somehow I don't think I'd enjoy watching it as much.
-
Very talented:
-
The future is here. Not animation:
-
19 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:
The pax were spoiled..
...and so were the pilots (from what I've heard).
-
I love user fees - those who use a resource pay for it. Landing fee for the airport - just fine with me.
Now, on to the next topic; how much do we charge each person for using public parks? Two dollars/visit sounds fair. What about the public library - let's charge $1 per kid per visit and a surcharge of .25 for every item you borrow. What's that? You don't feel there should be a charge for using the park or the library? Why not? Just a little user fee for those who use the resource.
-
On 12/4/2020 at 5:33 PM, A330PilotCanada said:
Good Afternoon All:
A great video of a young Kiwi pilot flying a small turbo prop in the wild jungles and mountains of Indonesia. The airstrip was built by a remote indigenous tribe over 14 years and the joy of the first flight in was amazing even more was the take off which looked like the HMS Ark Royal.
Excellent video. Reminded me of this one:
-
On 11/5/2020 at 9:57 AM, deicer said:
House Cleaning at the USAF Museum in Dayton!
Great video (best seen in full screen) of my second favourite aircraft!!!
Thanks for posting that - makes me wish I had a bigger monitor (a lot bigger). I can't believe they didn't have a drone flying to get video from above instead of just a couple of GoPros on tripods.
-
1
-
-
Crazy compilation - jumps from military to civilian, from good to bad, old and new. Mixed in there is some really unique clips - worth watching.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, FA@AC said:
And it goes both ways. A certain supposedly knowledgable, genius, rah-rah WestJet poster who no longer shares his infinite wisdom here recently posted on a different forum that Porter had made a smart move and that it would soon be back.
What forum and user name? (by PM if you prefer)
-
On 9/30/2019 at 11:00 PM, MD2 said:
Very clever move! So far Onex has played this really well and got Air Canada exactly where they want it. Its vanity is its great folly, and Onex is several moves ahead!
What clever move? I fail to see any great advantage Westjet has or any way they are ahead of AC?
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:
However, to be clear, I will admit that I often make value judgements OF people , not FOR people, and on occasion verbalize that inclination...but that is just me....a
nd so far, even after being accused of being an old man yelling at clouds, I feel that seeing my present life is filled with music. laughter, grandkids/family/friends, I am pretty much one happy old guy....
I get you, think we're saying the same thing. I am often of the opinion that other people are doing stupid stuff but always try to keep in mind that I don't truly know their situation - hey, maybe I'm wrong.
-
23 hours ago, Kip Powick said:
Lotta lemmings out there...
That's true but if stocking up on toilet paper fills the phycological need to do "something" what's the harm. For you or I the idea of filling a closet with toilet paper seems ridiculous while for others it gives a sense of security. I choose not to make value judgements for other people.
-
On 2/6/2020 at 10:22 AM, thor said:
Advertising for cash flow!
Yup, looks like a death spiral.
-
On 1/20/2020 at 1:57 PM, deicer said:
“We’ve asked Boeing to get rid of that word Max,” Udvar-Hazy said. “I think that word Max should go down in the history books as a bad name for an aircraft.”
Renaming the Max will help address public reluctance to fly on the plane
Awesome. Help address public reluctance to fly on the airplane by hiding the fact that they're on the airplane they are trying to avoid. Wow. Can't see any problem with that!
This is the most idiotic idea ever. Can you imagine the fallout from the public learning, as they are sure to, that the company that deceived the FAA, all the 737 pilots and the entire world with the development/certification of the aircraft is now trying to hide the true identity of the aircraft by changing the name?
-
Always stop watching when they get fundamental facts wrong. At 2:10, start talking about bigger engines making the nose point up and about the MCAS being needed to counteract this. Wrong, or at best, a gross simplification. Yes, you could argue that the finer points are not needed for whatever the intended audience is. This may be true but if the finer points aren't being covered in this part of the video how do I know that the finer points in other parts of the discussion are also not being covered?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, rudder said:
AC now has the perfect arrangement with CHR/Jazz:
- Long term regional feed cost certainty.
- Willingness of CHR to put some of the Express fleet renewal debt on its own balance sheet.
- Labour stability until at least 2026 (and perhaps beyond).
- majority of Express operation at a full service CPA vendor (dispatch, crew scheduling, MTC, etc)
- transparency of CHR future plans due partial ownership and BOD representation
AC will no longer have to expend oversight resources on an underperforming Express vendor. This is the latest but perhaps not the last development on the AC Express front.
Some of these points that you describe as being the perfect arrangement were the exact points raised by Chorus back when back when AC decided to diversify its CPA structure in the first place. The impetus for that decision was the realization that job action by the Jazz pilots would cripple the network. I guess they feel that's no longer a threat, or at least, a smaller threat than continuing to use GGN.
-
29 minutes ago, deicer said:
Start with a small unmanned aircraft, gain experience, then scale up. Yes, it will start with cargo, but won't take long to transfer to pax when the savings are realised. Just ask elevator operators.
Again? Really? How many times do we need to discuss pilotless aircraft?
Look, I already gave you the answer. It is possible to have pilotless aircraft now but it isn't possible, nor will it likely ever be possible to simultaneously achieve the current levels of safety, reliability and cost without a human at the controls. You don't even need to be airborne - who will check the wings for contamination? Take the Westjet evacuation last week in Toronto - without a pilot who will call the evacuation?
-
Wolfhunter;
The question you have to ask yourself is this; "Can I outlast the companies that are doing the hiring?" Eventually it will get to the point at which companies will need to pay more but if you have to wait 30 years (or 20, or 10) is it worth waiting and what will you do while you're waiting? Of course if all pilots thought the same and acted together the day would come sooner but since there are always a few who act in self-interest, perhaps out of necessity, you may find the wait to be unacceptable.
Your point about veteran pilots refusing to accept lower wages is interesting. Veteran pilots, perhaps with the mortgage paid off and money in the bank, can afford to be altruistic but a young guy with loans to pay and no pay cheque in sight can't really be faulted for making the hard choice to accept a position with a training bond.
-
4 hours ago, J.O. said:
The “operations control” tag is a fairly broad brush. It can mean anything from the management team itself to their supporting processes like dispatch, weight and balance, flight planning and such. The devil is in the details which have not been shared publicly.
Yeah, that's kinda my point - none of those things are "pilot experience".
-
2 hours ago, Bobcaygeon said:
Who’s managing the operation control systems? Your personnel.
With most of the positions being thankless jobs with long hours and on call it’s tough to get people to come into the office, never mind stay there.
The industry turnover and opportunities hurt two fold. It’s hard to get people to stay long enough to be qualified in the positions and with the high turnover rates the job sucks more than ever because you keep on training staff to a level where you can relax and not micromanage and they leave and you start again.
These last few years have seen massive hiring, of pilots, by Air Canada and Westjet and a subsequent turnover at smaller companies. Is there also a large turnover in the backend operations staff? I don't know. The suggestion earlier was that perhaps the pilots were low-experience and, perhaps, that had something to do with the crash. While this may still turn out to be a factor the initial finding from Transport was that the operations control was deficient. I don't interpret this as being linked to pilot turnover. Maybe it is but I don't read it that way.
-
6 hours ago, blues deville said:
I hope I am wrong but when there is a lot of growth in this industry the more qualified sometimes move on and smaller outfits are left promoting whomever they have left into more responsible positions. Sometimes it works and sometimes not. With the current hiring at all majors and the planned expansions at each plus large waves of retirement, this might be the result for the little guys serving Canada’s north.
Well, you could be right but the article says this: "Transport Canada said it had identified deficiencies in the company's Operational Control System, which ensures that the company's everyday actions comply with safety requirements for things like dispatching personnel and aircraft. " so that doesn't sound like a personnel experience issue.
-
1 hour ago, Kasey said:
How about de-icing?
I know nothing about Westwind, or the ATR for that matter, and therefore can't comment on what deicing procedures might have been available or in use.
-
Not to jump the process but I'd be very surprised if icing didn't turn out to be a factor.
-
1
-
Lockdown Distractions
in Airline Aviation Forum
Posted
They were actually both stalled.
Crashed during an airshow practice flight. While executing a "go-around" Approximately three quarters of the way through the turn, the aircraft banked past 90 degrees, stalled, clipped a power line with the left wing and crashed. https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/17433
I get your point though; the B-52 was out-of-control and then it stalled while the A330 stalled and then went out-of-control - in one the stall was the cause and in the other the stall was the effect. My point was more about inability to recover from high bank angle/nose low upset at low altitude.