Clunkdriver, I can understand that it is difficult to accept the truth of my story about the two stage amber fiasco with the head of flight training in Vancouver, but it is true, 100% true.
It gets a little more interesting because when I first met him in his office to get his assistance to start my flight school and we got into discussing my renewing my Class two instructors rating, when he found out it had been may years since it lapsed he calmly informed me that it was going to be very difficult for me to renew because I had to many per conceived ideas about how to fly..
..can you believe it!!!
This fu.kin moron sat there and calmly made a decision about me without having ever met me or known me before.
I was so enraged at that mindless comment that I got out of my chair and put my hands on his desk and looked him straight in the eyes and said, " I came over to Vancouver looking for help from TC to set up a flight school and I get a stupid co.ksucker like you insulting me for no reason "
With that I walked to the door and left, and slammed his door so hard the echo must have reached Ottawa.
So with talent like that directing flight training why would you be suprised they are useless?
Cat
Aerobatic Flight Maneuver
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
-
Hornblower
- Rank 7
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 6:58 am
I think what the long-suffering TC guy was trying to point out was that CAR 405.14 says:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... htm#405_14
So, TC guy is saying is that the FIG (and it's contents) is empowered by CAR 405.14
However, my response was that it is necessary, but not sufficient, to be in compliance with only one (or a subset) of the CARs.
It is both necessary and sufficient to be in compliance with ALL CARs.
And there are a laundry list of CARs that are violated by a non-aerobatic instructor teaching aerobatic maneuvers ... without parachutes, to boot.
TC Guy (and others) argue that because these CARs are violated by other people, it is ok for you to go out and do it, too. Try that argument at the Tribunal sometime, and see how loud everyone laughs.
Click on:Flight training that is conducted using an aeroplane or helicopter shall be conducted in accordance with the applicable flight instructor guide and flight training manual or equivalent document and the applicable training manual on human factors.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... htm#405_14
So, TC guy is saying is that the FIG (and it's contents) is empowered by CAR 405.14
However, my response was that it is necessary, but not sufficient, to be in compliance with only one (or a subset) of the CARs.
It is both necessary and sufficient to be in compliance with ALL CARs.
And there are a laundry list of CARs that are violated by a non-aerobatic instructor teaching aerobatic maneuvers ... without parachutes, to boot.
TC Guy (and others) argue that because these CARs are violated by other people, it is ok for you to go out and do it, too. Try that argument at the Tribunal sometime, and see how loud everyone laughs.
Actually, Hedley, I do not argue that at all.Hedley wrote:TC Guy (and others) argue that because these CARs are violated by other people, it is ok for you to go out and do it, too. Try that argument at the Tribunal sometime, and see how loud everyone laughs.
I completely agree with you that spin aerobatics in basic flight training is not covered well in the CARS. As far as the TATC is concerned, no reasonable person could argue against it, provided it done as intended (avoidance, recognition, recovery).
I also believe (as do the people I work with) that spin training in basic flight training is required, for many of the reasons I have stated above.
I would be happy to act as a witness for you if you ever face the TATC on this subject.
-Guy
-
mellow_pilot
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2119
- Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 1:04 am
- Location: Pilot Purgatory
TC Guy: you are a unique individual. In my experience, nearly everyone refuses to testify on behalf of the individual charged by Transport, because they fear retribution from Transport.I would be happy to act as a witness for you if you ever face the TATC on this subject.
An airshow pilot, Rick Volker, sent me an email, saying that the FAA had advised him to not travel to Canada to testify at the Tribunal, because of the Tribunal's poor reputation (which floored me).
Another airline pilot, who flies for Air Transat, whom I will not name, but flies a Pitts, told me he was afraid to testify on my behalf because he thought Transport would get pissed at him and pull his ATPL, and he'd lose his house. "I gotta think about my mortgage payments", he told me on the phone.
Another guy, who flew a Smith Miniplane, was so terrified of Transport's retribution that he refused to even talk to me on the phone - his poor mother, who barely spoke a word of english, is whom I ended up repeatedly talking to, when I was trying to get him to testify.
Another woman, in Toronto, lied to me on the phone and said she didn't remember anything that happened that weekend. Christ, it's not like she pulled a train or anything.
TC Guy: if you actually testified at the Tribunal as a witness of mine, you would be committing career suicide. The slimes that run Transport would never, ever forget that you had turned against them.
FWIW I have spent more time at the Tribunal, Tribunal Review, Federal Court, and Federal Court of Appeals than everyone else here combined, and I think it's fair to say I have a pretty good idea of how it works (or doesn't).
Bottom line: there is NO WAY I personally would give spin training unless I had a current aerobatic instructor rating, was in an airplane certified in the aerobatic category, and me and the student are both wearing chutes that have recent repacks.
That's what I think I have to do, to avoid another run through the Tribunal, Tribunal Review, Federal Court, and Federal Court of Appeals.
If you conclude that the law is being applied differently to different people in different places, well, I would find it hard to disagree with you.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
TC Guy you are a breath of fresh air to the grunts who sweat out their days instructing as you step up to the plate and give of your time to help people.
I can not speak for Hedleys issues but if you were to testify for me against TCCA your career path would take a quick U turn.
The System can not allow one of their own to endanger one of their own.
I could not get the tribunal to give me a hearing because they are part of the system and refused to compromize several of the top level of management in TCCA, can you blame them?
Look at it from their perspective, what would the ramifications be when the news media found out that the top bureaucrat in TCCA the DGCA is dishonest and untrustworthy and does not understand the basic foundation of the rule of law?
The answer is simple, they can not allow that kind of information to get into the news media at the level of the tribunal.
TC Guy I personally admire you as an individual, however the entity that you work for TCCA is a morally corrupt disgrase to Canada or for that matter Darfur. Yeh, on reflection its possible the power brokers in Darfur probably would not trust some of the top people in TCCA, they might have some morals in the Sudan
I can not speak for Hedleys issues but if you were to testify for me against TCCA your career path would take a quick U turn.
The System can not allow one of their own to endanger one of their own.
I could not get the tribunal to give me a hearing because they are part of the system and refused to compromize several of the top level of management in TCCA, can you blame them?
Look at it from their perspective, what would the ramifications be when the news media found out that the top bureaucrat in TCCA the DGCA is dishonest and untrustworthy and does not understand the basic foundation of the rule of law?
The answer is simple, they can not allow that kind of information to get into the news media at the level of the tribunal.
TC Guy I personally admire you as an individual, however the entity that you work for TCCA is a morally corrupt disgrase to Canada or for that matter Darfur. Yeh, on reflection its possible the power brokers in Darfur probably would not trust some of the top people in TCCA, they might have some morals in the Sudan
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
No Nappy, the tribunal is not part of TC.
The tribunal as I understand it are appointed and supposed to be impartial.
The bottom line is if you get on the wrong side of TCCA and you are seen to be a threat to one of TCCA's managers you will be screwed period.
Their system is badly flawed due to a common problem found in many government departments, dishonest morally corrupt people who worm their way into positions of power.
It is evident by your question you do not understand how the system works, so allow me to help you.
If the system is not corrupt, then please explain why they selectively choose which law to uphold and which ones to ignore when they are protecting their own.
Lets pretend that the DGCA has no idea of who I am and never even heard of my allegations that he decided to ignore the rule of law to protect one of his top level people and thus denied me my basic right under law to due process, thereby ruining my business.
Why not just e-mail him as a Canadian taxpayer and ask him why he does not take me to task for my allegations?
But I'm betting that there are many TCCA employees who read this and those at the top are well aware of my allegations, so where does that leave us?
The tribunal as I understand it are appointed and supposed to be impartial.
The bottom line is if you get on the wrong side of TCCA and you are seen to be a threat to one of TCCA's managers you will be screwed period.
Their system is badly flawed due to a common problem found in many government departments, dishonest morally corrupt people who worm their way into positions of power.
It is evident by your question you do not understand how the system works, so allow me to help you.
If the system is not corrupt, then please explain why they selectively choose which law to uphold and which ones to ignore when they are protecting their own.
Lets pretend that the DGCA has no idea of who I am and never even heard of my allegations that he decided to ignore the rule of law to protect one of his top level people and thus denied me my basic right under law to due process, thereby ruining my business.
Why not just e-mail him as a Canadian taxpayer and ask him why he does not take me to task for my allegations?
But I'm betting that there are many TCCA employees who read this and those at the top are well aware of my allegations, so where does that leave us?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
I should explain myself here: If anyone was going to be charged for doing their Instructional job the way it is intended in the FTM/FIG (avoidance/recognition/recovery) I would gladly stand up and testify as an expert witness -- as I would hope ANY expereinced instructor here would.Hedley wrote:TC Guy: you are a unique individual. In my experience, nearly everyone refuses to testify on behalf of the individual charged by Transport, because they fear retribution from Transport.
This, of course, is a theoretical argument, since I cannot see even the most remote chance of it happening. If it does, you can expect to see me.
As far as professional suicide? I would be giving an honest, educated opinion on a subject. I would not do anything to embarass the Minister. In my little corner of TC, we are allowed to think for ourselves. If that changes... well... then I might be hitting up Trey Kule for a job.
That sounds fair enough. I doubt anyone could blow a hole in that arguement.Hedley wrote:Bottom line: there is NO WAY I personally would give spin training unless I had a current aerobatic instructor rating, was in an airplane certified in the aerobatic category, and me and the student are both wearing chutes that have recent repacks.
I sure hope that isn't the case.Hedley wrote:If you conclude that the law is being applied differently to different people in different places, well, I would find it hard to disagree with you.
-Guy
LOL... isn't that what us "old guys" try and do Cat?Cat Driver wrote:TC Guy you are a breath of fresh air to the grunts who sweat out their days instructing as you step up to the plate and give of your time to help people.
I don't have all the answers. In fact, I have found I have very few.
TC has issues. Many inside are frustated-- change happens slowly. Strangely enough, change is happening now (aka "the re-oranization") they will be changing the divisions and structure the department. What does that mean? I don't know... I am just a TC grunt. I go where I am pointed.
<sigh>
-Guy
-
the_professor
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 3:03 pm
If TC corruption and/or misapplication of rules/regs is so uneven and so widespread, and if this actually presents a problem for the Canadian public, I cannot understand why someone in investigative journalism has not yet blown the lid off of it. Sounds like there's plenty of material to work with.
Makes me think the problem is not as bad as it appears on here.
Makes me think the problem is not as bad as it appears on here.
You must be quite young. Remember when Jean Cretin was running for re-election, and the "Shawinigate" corruption scandal came along? He got re-elected with a bigger majority.I cannot understand why someone in investigative journalism has not yet blown the lid off of it
The Canadian public apparently doesn't care much about corruption and mismanagement of the taxpayer's money. Frankly, what some losers at Transport do is pretty small beer - who really cares?
After the Quebec sponsorship scandal, the Liberals got ONE FUCKING HUNDRED SEATS in the next federal election.
I say again, the Canadian public simply doesn't care about poor government.
