Poor Record Keeping.

[Driving Rain]

Paperwork, or better yet, Tranport Canada's idea of paper work, is nothing but picking the"fly shit" out of the pepper. I remember we we're called on the carpet by them because a Co-pilot had signed off the DI instead of a Captain. I still to this day don't know how we got through that day alive. I'm I to take it that Co-pilots aren't reponsible enough to be trusted with a DI?

[snaproll20]

My rear view mirror on nearly 50 years in aviation is littered with the dead.
Some were innocent victims, some are dead because they bought into faulty cultures. Some, unfortunately, were purely Darwinian.

As usual, the moronic CID has a slanted and purient view. Any pilot who, for instance, reported to TC that his company flew overloaded would probably be first in line at the door of Enforcement, stuck with a self-confession. There is no help from TC in doing anything about the bottom line in safety. Anybody who believes otherwise is naive or is a TC manager.

I remember once describing problems to a friend in TC Enforcement and he merely told me "they would not be interested."

Their specialty is in making things difficult, or, deliberately and sometimes dishonestly, disrupting or terminating operations for good companies who are anxious to comply. TC never takes on the "bad" companies until people die. (sometimes, often).That is one of the ultimate facts of aviation. The question is why? What makes is so hard to shut down a company when, out on the street, there is evidence from employees revealing that some of the managers should be facing jail for criminal negligence? (I am generalizing here, but know of one recent case where that is deserved!!!!) Is this evidence so invisible to inspectors? And there have been occasions where honest inspectors have tried to shut down companies, but been thwarted my their managers.

I was very glad that one company, reportedly, was suing TC because TC did not shut them down. How very apt!!!

One of the major problems, as has been said, is that the lowest bidder almost always wins. A victory in "business acumen" to these kind of operators produces the next-day conundrum of how to make it work.
Well, in order of preference this seems to be:

salaries cut or non-existant
parts not bought to repair aircraft
insurance not paid
stretch the duty hours
bills not paid, cheat, cheat, cheat
etc etc
(.................but WE did not kill anybody.)

This West coast malaise has been around for years.
Now that the media has been clued in, I would urge everybody who has stories to tell, going back however far, to contact the media and tell these stories. Let's get it out into the open and provide some moral support to Ed, who tried, but got trampled in the rush.

Those of you who have such stories, and I know some of you........must do this, you owe it to him, his family, and the general public.
If you do not, you are part of the problem.

Thank you.

[CLguy]

CID states:

So tell me. Where did you get the information about TC employee salaries? Here's a link defining the salary of a TC civil aviation inspector (M and M):

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpub ... c532693767

Tell me how many of those people make in excess of $100K then reconsider who you call an idiot.

Well CID I get my information from the people who presently work there and from friends who used to work there. Those numbers only show base salaries without overtime. Ask any inspector how much they make annually and you will find my numbers correct.

Accumulating large amounts of overtime annually is not very hard for any inspector to achieve, especially when they are up to their armpits in reams of paper trying to determine whether the compass correction card was updated on time.

[FrankD]

to CID:

have you ever lost a friend in a crash? Watched someone you were joking with the week before put into the ground? If you haven't (and I'm pretty sure you haven't based on your posts) I strongly suggest you SHUT THE @#$! UP RIGHT NOW!!!

You don't have the first clue what people are going through and your insensivty is beyond contempt. I always advocate learning something from every single crash because if you then maybe the person didn't die in vain, but there is a time and place and right now on this forum is not it!

[FrankD]

to CID:

have you ever lost a friend in a crash? Watched someone you were joking with the week before put into the ground? If you haven't (and I'm pretty sure you haven't based on your posts) I strongly suggest you SHUT THE @#$! UP RIGHT NOW!!!

You don't have the first clue what people are going through and your insensivty is beyond contempt. I always advocate learning something from every single crash because if you then maybe the person didn't die in vain, but there is a time and place and right now on this forum is not it!

[FrankD]

double post

[CID]

Now that the media has been clued in, I would urge everybody who has stories to tell, going back however far, to contact the media and tell these stories.

Yes. The media. They always get it right. And they're unbiased. Heck, they always provide accurate coverage of aviation related news.

As usual, the moronic CID has a slanted and purient view.

OK...I know what "slanted" means. I don't think its all that derogatory because it just means that I am using a unique perspective. But what does "purient" mean? I'm not familiar with that word. If you're going to call someone a "moron" you should be careful to only include words you understand. (and maybe don't make any up…that would help too)

Any pilot who, for instance, reported to TC that his company flew overloaded would probably be first in line at the door of Enforcement, stuck with a self-confession. There is no help from TC in doing anything about the bottom line in safety. Anybody who believes otherwise is naive or is a TC manager.

So I guess all that's left is to leave the profession because according to you there is no way forward.

Well CID I get my information from the people who presently work there and from friends who used to work there. Those numbers only show base salaries without overtime. Ask any inspector how much they make annually and you will find my numbers correct.

I see. So these people work 80 hour weeks? Or is it the upper echelon who are making the big bucks that are going around doing ramp inspections?

[CID]

to CID:

have you ever lost a friend in a crash? Watched someone you were joking with the week before put into the ground? If you haven't (and I'm pretty sure you haven't based on your posts) I strongly suggest you SHUT THE @#$! UP RIGHT NOW!!!

You don't have the first clue what people are going through and your insensivty is beyond contempt. I always advocate learning something from every single crash because if you then maybe the person didn't die in vain, but there is a time and place and right now on this forum is not it!

Thanks for the sermon FrankD. I know all about the grieving process and how it affects emotions. I also know all about what is appropriate or unsavory and I even know all about timing with respect to grieving. That is why I'm not posting in the threads that directly relate to the accident we are all tippy toeing around. Now let me tell YOU a little bit about the meaning of "insenstive".

Can you imagine the family of the 3 year old that died in that crash reading that the pilot knew that the airplane was unsafe but continued to allow people to fly in it?

Can you imagine how insenstive it is to have a huge number of people in the aviation industry post how they knew damn well that the airline was unsafe and did nothing about it?

FrankD, I could care less if you're upset about what I write. As I'm sure what YOU wrote offers very little consolation to the families of the passengers involved in crashes of unsafe operators. Remember, there is nothing stopping them from reading these posts.

I made no deliberate attempt to belittle the memory of the pilot involved and I really didn't want to go down that path. I simply offered a little advice on how to make your concerns known. Take it or leave it, but don't preach to me about sensitivity.

[Cat Driver]

CID wrote:

" Can you imagine how insenstive it is to have a huge number of people in the aviation industry post how they knew damn well that the airline was unsafe and did nothing about it? '

I assume you are including TC in the " Knew damn well the airline was unsafe and did nothing about it? "

CID what really scares me is if you are not with TC you may actually be working in the aviation business.

You are a very nasty piece of work whoever you are, in my opinion of course.

Cat

[Flying Nutcracker]

CID wrote:

"Now to the real problem. What kind of person takes the controls of an airplane he thinks is unsafe? What kind of person continues to do so and allows innocent people to board? Why "report" unsafe things to your parents and not to TC?"

The real problem, CID!?!?!?! To report something to TC you need paperwork to prove that something is a problem. Documentation! I could walk up to TC today and rant about my issues, but without proper documentation... I'd have no case!!! Paperwork can be used and abused. Sometimes abused to get away with shortcuts to save money and so on. As long as the books look right I can't prove that there is something unsafe with the airplane. But nevertheless I know. So how do you back that up??? Apart from snagging the crap out of the airplane...

Come on CID! Your rant on here is nothing but useless circle-jerk! Just to quote yourself. Just when I think that you might be on to something really clever, you start off on another tangent that doesn't make any sense and not to mention the fact that people on this board are starting to wonder what side your on?!?!? If anyone was to go to TC I hope it isn't you, because diplomacy is obviously not your thing!

You make your point, a point which we have no choice but to respect, but we don't have to respect the way your point is brought across! Maybe tone it down a little bit and get more postitive response...? Something I'm not so sure I will get for this particular post...

[CID]

The real problem, CID!?!?!?! To report something to TC you need paperwork to prove that something is a problem. Documentation! I could walk up to TC today and rant about my issues, but without proper documentation... I'd have no case!!!

I've got three comments for you. First, check my first post in this thread. It contains a link to a site where you can learn about reporting anonymously. Try it.

Second, some here suggest that THIS is the time to contact the media. If you don't find satisfaction with the regulator, why not contact the media? Why wait until people are killed?

Third and last, if you think an airplane is unsafe, refuse to fly in it. If the company is dangerous, report them immediately and look for another job.

Is a job with a dangerous company worth the risk?

not to mention the fact that people on this board are starting to wonder what side your on?!

We're supposed to pick sides? You've fallen into what I like to call the "Cat-Trap". The "us against them" mentality gets you nowhere. Don't be blinded by the rhetoric.

[Cat Driver]

Contacting Securitas will get you about the same lack of action to a complaint as TC's " Quality Assurance ".

Some years ago I tried to get help from Securitas about drug use during duty time by a couple of people who I was flying with, one the FO and the other an engineer.

In the end nothing was done because no one wanted to rock the boat with a provincial government contract
for water bombing we were flying on.

Pilots are really on their own when it comes to trying to get help from any government bureaucracy.

The only way you can protect yourself is quit the job.

Cat

[Cat Driver]

Deleted

[1LostPilot]

Can you imagine the family of the 3 year old that died in that crash reading that the pilot knew that the airplane was unsafe but continued to allow people to fly in it?

CID.....

We are talking about a Van here with a 200hr new engine. We do not know the reality of what actually happened yet so don't go making insensitive generalisations like the one above. Who the hell do you think you are to pass such judgement?

Get out and shut up. Leave us to grieve for our close friend that we have just lost. Save your assertions for another time when this isn't so raw.

[The Old Fogducker]

Hi Cat:

That unfortunate young man could have easily been me 30 years ago ... I was flying for a poor operator and didn't know the difference because I was ... like my peers, dumb as a two-day old piglet. We just thought we were excellent hands & feet pilots that flew hard .. like in the John Wayne movie "Flying Leathernecks."

One day I screwed up my courage and walked from our dock at the Bayshore Hotel and went to DoT office on Burrard and spoke to one of the Inspectors looking for help. I was afraid I would end up as shrimp food at the bottom of the ocean in some mangled wreck.

After listening to my story of what was going on, they did nothing except to remind me I was the PIC and it was my responsibility to make sure nobody ploughed into the sea when the Ops Mgr pushed me out the door in vis so bad you couldn't see across the street threatening to fire you if you cancelled.

There were lots of fired ex-company pilots around the area airport coffee shops to prove that was the fact and not an idle threat, so we all knew he wasn't bluffing. Just like being a player on a pro sports team, there was always the knowlege that someone on "the farm team" wanted your job so bad they'd do anything to get your seat.

In our case, we got all the pilots together and organized an internal revolt and refused to do some of the most dangerous acts we were expected to do on a daily basis. Had our little "mutiny plot" been discovered before we could get enough support to approach Capt Quiggly the Ops Mgr, it would have meant the unemployment line for sure. We "mutineers" would then have just been described as being another pilot that just "didn't have what it took to make it in the industry" because we didn't have good enough pilot skills or had a "bad attitude."

I think TC should give serious consideration to getting away from their "Paperwork Audit Mentallity" and get far deeper into the "Ramp Check Mentallity" instead. Meet airplanes in godforsaken locations to look for overloads, wx mins, loose loads, fuel problems, snags not entered or cleared, etc.

On top of that, buy tickets on small air carriers and board the airplane as a "just one of the crowd" passenger and observe how things are really run in ABC Airways by looking over the shoulder of the pilot ... recognizing its the responsibility of the company owners to control their flight operations, not busting poor Capt Biggles for doing what he's told under duress just as surely as if they held a gun to his head and were holding his wife & kids hostage.

Just like torture can employ a wide range of methods, there is an entire range of staff intimidation methods that will force a pilot to accept a trip when his common sense tells him "it ain't right."

We all have the same objective ... you & I & TC ... getting lousy companies that put the unsuspecting & trusting public at risk out of the air and making sure "their kind" never gets the opportunity to hurt people a second time .. preferably by seeing the error of their ways and turning the corner into a clean, well controlled & supervised, safe operation on their own (fat chance in all too many cases) .. or by slapping them silly with a fine so big they can't afford a single one of those sanctions before the bank moves in a closes the doors and sells off the equipment opening the area for somebody that will conduct safe operations.

It has to be exceptionally frustrating to be a decent, safe company owner that takes pride in doing his best to consider the basic air regs to be a safety floor of conduct rather than some airy-fairy unattainable ceiling that nobody in the country can possibly comply with except Air Canada while some scumbag who is stuck in a 1920's attitude is running an operation across the ramp and undercutting him due to scrimping on maintenance, pilot pay, understaffing, etc.

I agree with the sentiment that a nicely completed wt & bal form does little to detect a scumbag operator that pushes pilots out the door into bad wx in unairworthy overloaded airplanes with a load of unsuspecting paying passengers but what is the alternative? How should it be accomplished?

Inspectors rarely fly in a company's airplanes any more. Most of the check rides are now being done by CCPs or DACPs from industry. Next year, TC is totally out of the PPC business and will likely never ever put their butts in an airline's equipment again while the engines are running.

At least before, if a ride was booked, a TC guy would have a look at the guts of the airplane from a pilot's perspective and it was certainly not unheard of for an airplane to be grounded before, during, or after a ride for snags or a poor training program. All too many pilots view a flunked ride with an Inspector as a personal affront rather than a reflection of a poor company training program that views the 2 hour per year training flight as a maximum rather than a minimum. Very soon, its going to only be a Company Check Pilot that's paid X number of dollars to pass a pilot and get him online asap. I understand there is a large disparity between the pass/fail ratio of Inspectors to CCPs. I suspect there is more at play here than just TC Inspectors being such hard-butted buggers they take some delight in failing a pilot and applicants were so flustered by flying with a DoT guy as opposed to a CCP their ablity to perform basic actions was severely compromised.

Also, before long SMS will be on the scene and companies will have even more autonomy to look after themselves. For what little I know of the SMS that is likely a good thing. It will place the responsibility for safe and compliant flight operations squarely on the shoulders of company owners rather than hiding behind some sacrificial lambs in Ops Mgr & Chief Pilot positions that aren't given the lattitude or resources to actually do their jobs.

For some places that are well managed, SMS will be a positive move toward ... for want of a better term ... "self regulation." For a few poorly managed companies it will just be seen as a wide open chance to run roughshod over the regulatory system until they screw up bigtime enough to finally do themselves harm and eventually lose their operating authority. Hopefully they won't hurt anyone in the process.

Again, my take on it ... for what little its worth... more "grassroots" semi-covert surveillance of the public transportation system and slap the lousy companies with such hefty fines they are gone in an instant ... a Draconian crackdown. Go fishing with a fine mesh net.

The problem with this suggestion is a tiny thing we have in Canada called the legal system. TC would doubtless become entangled in expensive lawsuit after lawsuit for doing what the taxpaying public expects of them .. protection.

Poor operators don't seen to have any problem hiring very capable legal counsel to weasel out of TC's attempts at taking them to task for safety violations. If they were equally as willing to put the money into the flight ops section, they likely wouldn't need "the mouthpiece."

Next, it seems whenever an OC is suspended this forum goes nuts with people ranting about how heavy handed TC is ... how Bloggins Airways were a wonderful company that offered new pilots a place to work & gain experience and learn about "the real world" gaining hands and feet skills and complaining that big bad TC Inspectors have overstepped their authority and couldn't tell a safe airline from a gopher hole. After all, there seems to never be any shortage of posters here that say Inspectors only go to TC because "they can't make it in industry" and are universally incompetant boobs with no "real experience."

So I look forward to hearing you take on what needs to be done....specific actions .. to protect Gramma and Felix in a cat kennel going to see the family for Christmas when she gets on board a 703 carrier.

Fog

[Flying Nutcracker]

Fog... that post hit the spot! Not to mention the nail on the head!

It's funny how everybody wants something done as long as it doesn't affect themselves, eh!?!?!

I have always greeted TC in an inviting manner, because I feel that I got nothing to be afraid of. I am not saying TC doesn't make me nervous, because they do, but I always try to please TC in a professional and corteous manner when running into them on the ramp or during audits.

It's not that much of an inconvenience to let them ask their questions and check their stuff. It is, however, an inconvenience if they find something to put their fingers on! That's why pilots should appreciate it more, maybe even invite TC to do rampchecks whenever they're having doubts about their operation, so that you can go back to your boss and say "TC told me so!".

Some pilots laugh about the phrase "I'm with TC, I'm here to help you"... I don't think it's that funny... There's actually a lot of truth in the helping part, believe it or not. You just got to figure out how to utilise the help that they can offer without shooting yourself in the foot! Just like making the regs work for you instead of breaking them... or at least something to that extent...

FN

[Flying Nutcracker]

deleted

[CID]

We are talking about a Van here with a 200hr new engine.

Yes I know. Are you telling me that a 200 hour engine can't quit? Or that it can't be installed or maintained improperly enough to cause it to quit in flight? What are you trying to say?

We do not know the reality of what actually happened yet so don't go making insensitive generalisations like the one above.

My comments were based on statements made by those involved, verified by the news media and repeated by others on the forum. What "generalizations" are you talking about?

Who the hell do you think you are to pass such judgement?

Is there a problem or isn't there? Is the airline unsafe or isn't it? Read the posts, read the news, make up your own mind. I passed no "judgment", just stated opinons and offered advice. Feel free to ignore it if you like.

Cheers

[Cat Driver]

Old Fogducker:

You posted some interesting thoughts, this one stands out as something worth talking about.

"On top of that, buy tickets on small air carriers and board the airplane as a "just one of the crowd" passenger and observe how things are really run in ABC Airways by looking over the shoulder of the pilot ..."

When I was chief Pilot at Air West Airlines I was unable to enforce the aeronautics act to try and bring some semblance of safety to their flight operations.

Regardless of how many times TC did checks and found that Air West was not in compliance with the regulations I could get nothing changed.

So I used logic and decided that as the aeronautics act was Federal Law it should come under the jurisdiction of the RCMP...

..to make a long story short I eventually managed to get the RCMP to assist me in bringing charges against the airline and also TC for failure to back me up in my duties as chief pilot to ensure compliance with the law.

So, yes you are on to something with your suggestion.

And of course I would be more than willing to do what ever I can to bring more accountability to the industry.

I also have some other ideas, as it is now the industry is drifting without a regulatory rudder like a ship lost at sea.

Cat

[BeaconInbound]

Nice post, Fog. Paperwork is important, but TC needs to look beyond that to really get a sense of how a company operates. I've worked for a few companies in this industry and have seen management scrambling to get the paperwork in order for an upcoming audit. But, once it's over we are back to the status quo. An effective enforcement program would include the things you suggest. If the police services of this country worked the same way TC did, nobody would get speeding tickets and we'd all have our insurance and registration up-to-date before they paid us a visit.

..to make a long story short I eventually managed to get the RCMP to assist me in bringing charges against the airline and also TC for failure to back me up in my duties as chief pilot to ensure compliance with the law.
Cat

So, CAT...you were successful in your quest? Tell us the rest of the story. Did the charges stick?

[BeaconInbound]

hmmm...forum did a funny thing..sorry for the triple post.

[BeaconInbound]

deleted

[proper]

I was previously involved withthat whole f***** Regency mess. Just be aware that they didn't give you anything to work with. Managmt would encourage "make the numbers work" thus miraculously uploading fuel here and there etc. And that's just W&B don't get me started on the maintenance. When my name appeared in the book I ran it 100% with honest numbers but I also had a job waiting for me thus no pressure. This business is a joke, engineers and thinking minds have set out these minima, weight limitations, OverHaul times as INSURANCE. Flying is risky enough as it is, let's not ask for it.

[The Old Fogducker]

This entry is to bump the thread to the top again.

Disappointed there is so little reaction to my post ... come folks ... put some thought into this.

Fog

[Cat Driver]

Fog..

I liked your suggestion of buying a ticket and riding along to observe how they operate.

Here is another one.

Go back to giving Chief Pilots full responsibility for flight safety in their company flight department. Then deputize them and give them the same power as a law officer with regards to the Aeronautics Act and the Regulations.

That would make a company think twice about trying to intimidate the Chief Pilot.

It May also help to weed out incompetant Chief Pilots.

Cat