So i guess the passengers are more responsible than everyone left on the ground? They will be just as dead as the pilots.
Whether or not you will die is totally irrelevant to your position or responsibility in the operation.
Thompson FSS....wtf...over
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
juicies shadow
- Rank 0
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 7:06 pm
Just so ya all know the juicer will probably be flying lawn darts until 2050. The majors really don't like when perspective employees do silly things like try to hide when it's time to step up to the plate and pay the good old boys at TC for the outstanding sanction to the enforcement boys.
He worships himself and perhaps everyone should let him for he has no other supporters.
Thompson FSS and all FSSers do a great job. It's unfortunate from time to time they make the occassional mistake and become the focus of a conspiracy by some of my fellow aviators. Capt. juicebag is not representative of the general aviation population. Normal aviators have common sense and know when to shut their mouths.
When you screw up again S&J, I hope you go to tribunal so I can come and laugh my ass off.
He worships himself and perhaps everyone should let him for he has no other supporters.
Thompson FSS and all FSSers do a great job. It's unfortunate from time to time they make the occassional mistake and become the focus of a conspiracy by some of my fellow aviators. Capt. juicebag is not representative of the general aviation population. Normal aviators have common sense and know when to shut their mouths.
When you screw up again S&J, I hope you go to tribunal so I can come and laugh my ass off.
-
control_man
- Rank 1
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 1:57 pm
Some of you glorified bus drivers have such over inflated heads that you missed my point entirely. Risk management in aviation is everyones responsibility equally. Yes you are the pilot and ultimatley responsible for your crew and ship etc, etc, etc. However you want to say it as long as it strokes your egoes. But, back to my point. This is a cruel business. It does NOT let you get away with mistakes too often. Everyone can learn from each other, doesn't matter what capacity your job entails in aviation. I was a Flight Safety Offcier for years in my day for our squadron, everyone had an important role to play to keep airplanes flying and people alive. Pompous attitudes about being on top of the aviation food chain as some of you have is going to get you NOWHERE in this business except maybe killed. Who are you going to blame then. Start your day with professionalism. If you consciously thought about what you learned in one day from everyone around you in whatever capacity their job was I think you would be amazaed. Quit fucking blaming others for little lapses in judgement. Learn from them, respect the fact that someone cared enough to correct you so that you could at worst case scenario live another day. Once some of you get off of your egotistical horses you will realize how much responsibilty is shared by different capacities. You are just the end facilitator of a cummulative sum of risk management.
CONTROL_MAN
CONTROL_MAN
There seems to be a curious definition of "responsibility" floating around here.
Responsibility is pretty clearly defined as suffering the consequences of your actions (or someone else's). Death would appear to be a pretty straightforward ultimate consequence, or taking of responsibility.
It's really very simple: when anyone screws up, if the pilot can't pick up the slack, the pilot dies, but everyone else on the ground is ok.
Cases in point:
The following manufacturer's screwup have cost thousands of lives of pilots and passengers, but precious few lives of the manufacturers:
Boeing 737 rudder control system
Airbus vertical fin attach
MD-11 flammable insulation
Maintenance screwed up royally on these:
MD-80 jackscrew (air alaska)
Airbus engine retrofit (air transat azores glider)
ATC screwed up big time in Europe recently, when a russian pilot made the mistake of doing what ATC told him to do, instead of what his RA said.
In all of the cases above, when someone on the ground screws up, either the pilot is able to compensate for their error, or he is not able to and the pilot (and his pax) dies, which is clearly accepting the ultimate responsiblity.
Control man: your very name speaks volumes about your attitudes. It is a fact that ATC controls nothing more than their transmit button. ATC may make suggestions to pilots, who are in command and control of their aircraft. The pilot, for very good reason (eg RA) may decline to accept a "suggestion" from ATC.
It is agreed that capt s&j is an immature person who likely can use his personality as a very reliable form of birth control. Be that as it may, he is still at the pointy end of the sword, and you're safe and sound on the ground, every day, all day.
Responsibility is pretty clearly defined as suffering the consequences of your actions (or someone else's). Death would appear to be a pretty straightforward ultimate consequence, or taking of responsibility.
It's really very simple: when anyone screws up, if the pilot can't pick up the slack, the pilot dies, but everyone else on the ground is ok.
Cases in point:
The following manufacturer's screwup have cost thousands of lives of pilots and passengers, but precious few lives of the manufacturers:
Boeing 737 rudder control system
Airbus vertical fin attach
MD-11 flammable insulation
Maintenance screwed up royally on these:
MD-80 jackscrew (air alaska)
Airbus engine retrofit (air transat azores glider)
ATC screwed up big time in Europe recently, when a russian pilot made the mistake of doing what ATC told him to do, instead of what his RA said.
In all of the cases above, when someone on the ground screws up, either the pilot is able to compensate for their error, or he is not able to and the pilot (and his pax) dies, which is clearly accepting the ultimate responsiblity.
Control man: your very name speaks volumes about your attitudes. It is a fact that ATC controls nothing more than their transmit button. ATC may make suggestions to pilots, who are in command and control of their aircraft. The pilot, for very good reason (eg RA) may decline to accept a "suggestion" from ATC.
It is agreed that capt s&j is an immature person who likely can use his personality as a very reliable form of birth control. Be that as it may, he is still at the pointy end of the sword, and you're safe and sound on the ground, every day, all day.
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
Ahh.. so you reckon someone who causes other people's deaths isn't going to suffer any consequences? He's "ok" is he? I dunno about you, but if I knew I was responsible for causing the deaths of an aircraft full of people, I'd be far from "ok"! I'd rather be on board!hz2p wrote:There seems to be a curious definition of "responsibility" floating around here.
Responsibility is pretty clearly defined as suffering the consequences of your actions (or someone else's). Death would appear to be a pretty straightforward ultimate consequence, or taking of responsibility.
It's really very simple: when anyone screws up, if the pilot can't pick up the slack, the pilot dies, but everyone else on the ground is ok.
I remember this.....I was driving the 402 and was going to taxi off alpha but went 14/32 instead...no big deal. I do appreciate being asked or told that another airplane is holding short on on alpha or likewise on 14/32 though. Just makes things move along quicker if you know where people are sitting. S&J just got his back up for getting a "shot" on the radio, I doubt it even put a dint in his ego. 
At the end of the day it was all good and everybody got home safely. And for the record YTH FSS do a damned good job.
At the end of the day it was all good and everybody got home safely. And for the record YTH FSS do a damned good job.-
lilfssister
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 2783
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 2:51 pm
- Location: Mysteryville Castle
While "indoctrinating" a new brand new trainee today, I stressed the importance of getting into the habit of doing things as if every day was WOXOF or 1/8NM in SN+, so that when the weather WAS bad, you naturally made requests, and managed your paperwork so that you know where everyone on the manoeuvring area and in the vicinity of the airport was, at all times. While Cap'n S+J's being in the taxiway, rather than on the apron, where the FSS thought he would be, turned out to be no big deal on that day, in bad weather it might have been awkward or worse. (I guess that means I'm retracting my statement that I didn't think he'd done anything wrong, now that we have the FSS's side of the story 
).
).-
Right Seat Captain
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 1237
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:51 pm
- Location: Various/based CYOW
I don't know how anybody got off insisting that one group of aviation professionals works for, or services another. Or even to say that one group, ie the pilots are on the pointy end of the sword, and I do say this as a pilot.
I don't know about any of yous, but I work for the customer, and so does the AME in the hangar, as does the ATC in the tower. The customer demands to be flown somewhere, or for someone to ship their cargo, and you require a pilot, an AME and a controller to get it there. These customers are on the pointy end of the sword for trusting all these groups of professionals. They likely don't know the pilot, AME or controller/FSS, they just trust everything is done right, and safely, which falls onto the shoulders of all these professionals alike.
Each group has their specialty, and each group has been deemed required to be part of the journey, whether you think so or not, so live with it, or beat it. It's one thing that S&J got upset at the time, and decided to rant. It's another that this issue has gone this far. Everyone should be over this by now!
I don't know about any of yous, but I work for the customer, and so does the AME in the hangar, as does the ATC in the tower. The customer demands to be flown somewhere, or for someone to ship their cargo, and you require a pilot, an AME and a controller to get it there. These customers are on the pointy end of the sword for trusting all these groups of professionals. They likely don't know the pilot, AME or controller/FSS, they just trust everything is done right, and safely, which falls onto the shoulders of all these professionals alike.
Each group has their specialty, and each group has been deemed required to be part of the journey, whether you think so or not, so live with it, or beat it. It's one thing that S&J got upset at the time, and decided to rant. It's another that this issue has gone this far. Everyone should be over this by now!
I had been once told by a atc in (cysn) manditory frequency, that my heading towards burlingotn was incorrect. 
(I wanted to stay along teh shore line, so it wasnt direct) anyways i continued and when i called 5 miles clear of the zone, he corrected me and said "No your still 4 miles" 
he was a real #$@, and confused me quiet abit since i was still a student.
(I wanted to stay along teh shore line, so it wasnt direct) anyways i continued and when i called 5 miles clear of the zone, he corrected me and said "No your still 4 miles" he was a real #$@, and confused me quiet abit since i was still a student.
There's no such thing as a natural-born pilot.
hz2p,
I have to say you are wrong on a couple of your points.
While the controller was wrong in giving the the Russian Pilot's the wrong order/directive/clearance or whatever you wan't to call it, it was not a suggestion. BUT, the Russian crew was also,and IMO, more at fault for not following their RA.
In this part of the world, we are trained to follow what our TCAS tells us, even if this means ignoring what ATC tells us to do. That has to be engrained in the pilot's mind and there shouldn't be any second guessing it, nor hesitation. Unless you have some compelling reason to do otherwise, like having the traffic visual. Doing otherwise can have consequences like we saw in this case.
You can not be violated for following a RA, if you follow an RA you are to return to your previous clearance ASAP once clear of the conflict and advise ATC of the reason for your deviations, much the same as following a GPWS advisory.
Your other comments regarding ATC are also wrong and not called for. I hope you are not an pilot flying IFR if you only consider ATC's directions (read clearances) as suggestions. When you are coming into a terminal area and ATC is giving you vectors for the approach, do you consider these as being suggestions? I hope not. If ATC is only suggesting something I think they will make that pretty clear to you....ie."Suggest heading 320 until able direct XXXX", otherwise I think you can pretty much take anything that they tell you to do as being a clearance.
There are many reasons for not accepting an ATC directive or clearance, but there are only a few for intentionally deviating from the same without having prior permission.
I have to say you are wrong on a couple of your points.
While the controller was wrong in giving the the Russian Pilot's the wrong order/directive/clearance or whatever you wan't to call it, it was not a suggestion. BUT, the Russian crew was also,and IMO, more at fault for not following their RA.
In this part of the world, we are trained to follow what our TCAS tells us, even if this means ignoring what ATC tells us to do. That has to be engrained in the pilot's mind and there shouldn't be any second guessing it, nor hesitation. Unless you have some compelling reason to do otherwise, like having the traffic visual. Doing otherwise can have consequences like we saw in this case.
You can not be violated for following a RA, if you follow an RA you are to return to your previous clearance ASAP once clear of the conflict and advise ATC of the reason for your deviations, much the same as following a GPWS advisory.
Your other comments regarding ATC are also wrong and not called for. I hope you are not an pilot flying IFR if you only consider ATC's directions (read clearances) as suggestions. When you are coming into a terminal area and ATC is giving you vectors for the approach, do you consider these as being suggestions? I hope not. If ATC is only suggesting something I think they will make that pretty clear to you....ie."Suggest heading 320 until able direct XXXX", otherwise I think you can pretty much take anything that they tell you to do as being a clearance.
There are many reasons for not accepting an ATC directive or clearance, but there are only a few for intentionally deviating from the same without having prior permission.
-
control_man
- Rank 1
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 1:57 pm
Hz2p
Really, I have to fucking LOL at your "responsibilty" definition. Hey did it mention anywhere in that definition the pilot. According to you he is responsible for everything from the design engineering to serving coffee when it comes to an airplane. give your head a shake would you...OK back to quasi reality I hope.
From your post you seem to suggest (by your definition and stunning examples), that the engineering flaw on the rudder system of the 737 ultimately is the pilots responsibilty, "while everyone on the ground is ok". WTF!!! The consequences being death and the pilot suffering the ultimate price for his consequences WTF!!! Did everyone else survive other than the poor old pilot. You are telling me that NOBODY else saw any other form of retrobution in this one case. Come on... Boeing and its engineers were fully at fault for design flaws. Maybe the airplane you fly (if you do), was designed on the premise that the engineers just said "@#$! it" I don't care if it works or not, "its not my responsibilty", "the pilot will take all the balme anyway!!!". Really, your comments were too funny.
On the point of ATC "suggestions" as you graciously put it....Well I won't even comment. I think the readers here will realize how naive that statement was. A clearance is NOT a suggestion. Whether it is accepted or not is up to the pilot, but trust me I am not in the business to suggest things all day in the IFR world.
CONTROL_MAN
Really, I have to fucking LOL at your "responsibilty" definition. Hey did it mention anywhere in that definition the pilot. According to you he is responsible for everything from the design engineering to serving coffee when it comes to an airplane. give your head a shake would you...OK back to quasi reality I hope.
From your post you seem to suggest (by your definition and stunning examples), that the engineering flaw on the rudder system of the 737 ultimately is the pilots responsibilty, "while everyone on the ground is ok". WTF!!! The consequences being death and the pilot suffering the ultimate price for his consequences WTF!!! Did everyone else survive other than the poor old pilot. You are telling me that NOBODY else saw any other form of retrobution in this one case. Come on... Boeing and its engineers were fully at fault for design flaws. Maybe the airplane you fly (if you do), was designed on the premise that the engineers just said "@#$! it" I don't care if it works or not, "its not my responsibilty", "the pilot will take all the balme anyway!!!". Really, your comments were too funny.
On the point of ATC "suggestions" as you graciously put it....Well I won't even comment. I think the readers here will realize how naive that statement was. A clearance is NOT a suggestion. Whether it is accepted or not is up to the pilot, but trust me I am not in the business to suggest things all day in the IFR world.
CONTROL_MAN
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
You're right, the thrust of this thread has morphed a couple times... partly my fault for taking issue with certain comments by you.... so what.
I'm picking on these points only because you're using words like "never", "ever", and "none"... I'm not arguing that you pilots don't regularly have your lives on the line, but you need to realize that you do so only because you have trust in the work of others like AME's and ATC.
...as for this line:
As I said earlier, without an AME's blessing, - his legal responsibility, his signature in the book, you haven't got an airplane to fly!
The passengers, who you and I are both working for, are equally dependant on your skills and mine... Each of us can screw up and cause their lives to be shortened... I doubt they care that you'll be gone too, except that might give them some more confidence that you'll be trying hard not to screw up.
It occurs to me that you really ought to be glad that folks like myself and other non-pilot aviation professionals are so acutely aware of our responsibilities and the potential for horrible consequences.
Finaly... let me ask you: Would you rather have to live with the knowledge that you screwed up so bad that 200 people died, or die yourself as a result? I know my answer. I seriously doubt I could live with that!
Wrong. Many AME's have been killed in the aircraft that they screwed up on. ....And, as was correctly pointed out, that controller was later murdered for his mistake.cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:....ive said this before and I'll say it again...no engineer, no ATC, no FSS has ever paid for their mistake with their lives..
Care to tell that one to the family of all the folks who've been killed while working at their jobs? Airplanes are quite capable of killing people on the ground... it's been demonstrated more than enough times.cpt sweet'njuicy wrote: I am simply saying to all who aren't at the front of the falling arrow...you never get killed at your job no matter how bad you fuk up...
I'm picking on these points only because you're using words like "never", "ever", and "none"... I'm not arguing that you pilots don't regularly have your lives on the line, but you need to realize that you do so only because you have trust in the work of others like AME's and ATC.
...as for this line:
That's where you go seriously wrong!cpt sweet'njuicy wrote: this is what makes the pilot so important and more important than any other component in the aviation chain
As I said earlier, without an AME's blessing, - his legal responsibility, his signature in the book, you haven't got an airplane to fly!
The passengers, who you and I are both working for, are equally dependant on your skills and mine... Each of us can screw up and cause their lives to be shortened... I doubt they care that you'll be gone too, except that might give them some more confidence that you'll be trying hard not to screw up.
It occurs to me that you really ought to be glad that folks like myself and other non-pilot aviation professionals are so acutely aware of our responsibilities and the potential for horrible consequences.
Finaly... let me ask you: Would you rather have to live with the knowledge that you screwed up so bad that 200 people died, or die yourself as a result? I know my answer. I seriously doubt I could live with that!
What a good question to ask our honourable (?) former Prime Minister, Jean Cretien.
Solely as a matter of personal pride, he cancelled the EH-101 helicopter contract - costing taxpayers $500,000,000 - which resulted in the the undesired extension of the operational use of the ancient Sea King helicopter, during which both fatal and non-fatal crashes occurred.
Do you suppose he loses much sleep over that?
Keep signing the logbooks like your honourable government thinks you should.
Solely as a matter of personal pride, he cancelled the EH-101 helicopter contract - costing taxpayers $500,000,000 - which resulted in the the undesired extension of the operational use of the ancient Sea King helicopter, during which both fatal and non-fatal crashes occurred.
Do you suppose he loses much sleep over that?
Keep signing the logbooks like your honourable government thinks you should.
Actually, by your own interpretation, your families lawyer would have no grounds to look for a signature or anything else, as you were ultimately responsible for the safety of the aircraft... right? ...so, all the other lawyers would be going after your estate as you had the ultimate responsibility.cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:...I wont be looking for a signature when I am about to make a divot...but my families lawyer will...
...your're right, of course, this doesn't make much sense either...-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
Concede what?!cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:if I were you griffon..I would like to believe I would bow out on this one and concede
... my signature, as you correctly point out, means an awful lot after the fact... to those lawyers, the families of the victims, and myself.cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:your sinature means 0 when the the rudder on my 737 is causing me to hit the ground
It sounds like we may all be a little better off that you're not an AME, since you apparently attach so little value to that signature... It and the licence that creates it's value, is just as valuable as that licence in your wallet that says you can legally fly that little weed whacker machine. (Please correct me if I'm wrong and you are in fact flying that 737?)
When I sign out an aircraft, it means that I'm betting my entire future on my estimation of it's serviceability. Sometimes, that includes my life, the lives of those I love, and untold numbers of people I won't ever know. If I'm wrong, you can be sure it will cost me my future just as sure as it may cost you your life. I will not be "ok"!
As for the "power" of that signature... try flying any transport category machine without one and - if you can get away with it - see what that does to your future? The fact is you simply have nothing to fly without our blessing.
Well perhaps we know something about your integrity now(?), but I've been married 24 years and haven't pounded the baby sitter yet... nor have I ever taken lighly that signature I put on a document that says that airplane is in a safe a fit condition for flight. I'd think a man in your position ought to be glad we AME's don't underestimate the value of our signatures, as you apparently do.cpt sweet'njuicy wrote:I liken your signature to a mariage certificate...sure you both signed...but how come you are pounding the baby sitter while your wife is out for some black steak
Maybe the essence of the argument here is your experience... I'm guessing you're a young fella with light a/c experience only, and little to no understanding of what it takes to keep a large aircraft airworthy...? I know the world of light aircraft can be much different... some AME's, working in that level, often right next to the poverty line, can sometimes be bullied by their bosses... maybe sometimes even by pilots who think they know better... But it doesn't work that way with large aircraft... at least, not usually without very ugly results. (eg - AT A330, Alaska DC-9, Nationair DC-8...etc.)
We don't have the fancy scrambled eggs on our hats, and eppaulettes on our shoulders, and girls on our arms... the glory... but we know our responsibilities, and I'll be fucked if I'm gonna let some piddle assed little weed whacker jockey (or any pilot) tell me I'm working for him, cause the buck stops there, and he's "more important" than me! If you hit the dirt, even while the critters are busy picking your bones clean, that buck will still be flowing... and it'll only stop when all the charges have been heard, and all fines paid, and sentences delivered. ...and partly because we know that, but mostly because we'd really rather not cause a lot of innocent people to die, you can't have that fucking aircraft unitil we say it's good and ready! If you have a problem with that, I'd suggest you find another line of work.
"Concede?", my ass! Just like you, I work for the folks paying the bills.
Unlike you, however, I don't have such an inflated opinion of my work that I think I'm all that counts. Bone yards and aircraft salvage yards are littered with the results of attitudes like yours. I hope you can fix that before you get to fly anything larger than those puddle hoppers!
...you never answered my question BTW... which would you prefer: to have to live the rest of your life with the knowledge that your mistake was the cause of 200 innocent people's deaths, or to be dead also?
It should not be difficult to comprehend the idea that the decoupling of authority and responsibility at the very best leads to comic situations, worthy of a Monty Python sketch, and at the very worst utterly tragic outcomes.
Everyone is understandably eager to share in the authority, but when push comes to shove, there is precious little responsibility that is shared equally, a very simple concept which many here seem to find quite difficult to grasp.
It is curious that in this strange but politically correct world, responsibility is viewed most importantly in terms of references to pretty pieces of paper with ink printed on them, and very secondarily to the matter of serious injury up to and including death.
Truly bizarre, indeed. I think Aldous Huxley and George Orwell were right after all.
Everyone is understandably eager to share in the authority, but when push comes to shove, there is precious little responsibility that is shared equally, a very simple concept which many here seem to find quite difficult to grasp.
It is curious that in this strange but politically correct world, responsibility is viewed most importantly in terms of references to pretty pieces of paper with ink printed on them, and very secondarily to the matter of serious injury up to and including death.
Truly bizarre, indeed. I think Aldous Huxley and George Orwell were right after all.
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
Me thinks you have it wrong...hz2p wrote:Everyone is understandably eager to share in the authority, but when push comes to shove, there is precious little responsibility that is shared equally, a very simple concept which many here seem to find quite difficult to grasp.
You fellas with all the stripes have all the authority while that ship is airborne. I have no argument with that. You also have all the authority to refuse the aircraft once one of my kind has said you can have it... You don't, however, have any authority to take it until we say you can... and if you should happen to have the extreme misfortune of "serious injury up to and including death.", I can assure you that our responsibility will be quite prominent in the eyes of those investigating and attempting to lay blame.
It is painfully obvious, to this observer, that the pretty paper with ink on it has only symbolic value... however what it symbolizes is the responsibility for that potential serious injury "up to and including death".
And for the last time... I've been trying to convey the point that if you die because I fucked up, I will also be suffering serious injury! First only mentaly... possibly only relieved by jumping off a fucking bridge! I don't want to live with that! I doubt I could.
-
control_man
- Rank 1
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 1:57 pm
You peolple are so pigheaded this is like having a conversation with a simplton. NOBODY is denying the fact that the "pilot is the one who falls on the arrow" when an accident occurs. That is the fucking nature of the job. The implication that the profession that gets killed might some how exponentially have more responsibilty is ludicris. As I have said before RISK MANAGMENT is everyones responsibilty. Being a pilot is NOT the most dangerous job on the planet as some of you might think. Why is that? Maybe because of all the other professions involved in managing the risk just might have responsibilty where licences are involved with checks and balances in place to minimize risk. A ticket in your pocket from TC my friend does NOT mean you alone are the bearer of responsibilty. Last time I checked many professions within the business also had little green tickets signed by TC.
Please do not insinuate that the pilot is king shit and everyone must bow to you as we are insubordinate. When you sign out an aircraft you do so because of a professional trust that the AME who signed it air worthy, working on HIS/HER licence did it according to SOP. When you accept a clearance you do so because of the professional trust that you have with the ATC who also is holding a licence and is operating according to SOP. TRUST is the key word. Why? We trust each other because we all have to be responsible in our functions for the system to operate safely. I do not understand why this point is so hard for you to grasp. Risk of death, or dying is NOT synonomous with responsibilty as some of you seem to think. Again pilots are the facilitators of a cummulative sum of responsibilty. To put it plain and simple. If every job other than being a pilot did not give a shit about their job and the function they perform to make the system operate safely, without worrying about any sort of repercussions, would you fly?
CONTROL_MAN
Please do not insinuate that the pilot is king shit and everyone must bow to you as we are insubordinate. When you sign out an aircraft you do so because of a professional trust that the AME who signed it air worthy, working on HIS/HER licence did it according to SOP. When you accept a clearance you do so because of the professional trust that you have with the ATC who also is holding a licence and is operating according to SOP. TRUST is the key word. Why? We trust each other because we all have to be responsible in our functions for the system to operate safely. I do not understand why this point is so hard for you to grasp. Risk of death, or dying is NOT synonomous with responsibilty as some of you seem to think. Again pilots are the facilitators of a cummulative sum of responsibilty. To put it plain and simple. If every job other than being a pilot did not give a shit about their job and the function they perform to make the system operate safely, without worrying about any sort of repercussions, would you fly?
CONTROL_MAN
-
just another pilot
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1069
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:05 pm
- Location: Edmonton
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
SnJ...
Enjoy your fears of death and illusions of great import...
Enjoy your fears of death and illusions of great import...
Last edited by Mitch Cronin on Fri Jun 25, 2004 4:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
control_man
- Rank 1
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2004 1:57 pm
Capt SnJ
I am officially done with this thread. Completely pointless now. You can keep your visions of grandeur with respect to your job and burden yourself with the incompetency of all others. I have been in this game for a long time now. Isolating yourself as the subordinate occupation in a cohesive network of professionals is NOT going to get you very far. NOBODY works for you unless you are signing paycheques yourself.
CONTROL_MAN
I am officially done with this thread. Completely pointless now. You can keep your visions of grandeur with respect to your job and burden yourself with the incompetency of all others. I have been in this game for a long time now. Isolating yourself as the subordinate occupation in a cohesive network of professionals is NOT going to get you very far. NOBODY works for you unless you are signing paycheques yourself.
CONTROL_MAN
