George’s Point of View
I came across this Safer skies article discussing Continental Express Flight 3407, and panning the Federal Aviation Administration for lack of supervision.
The article mentions that “The co-pilot of the doomed flight in Buffalo lamented moments before the crash that she lacked flight experience in icy weather conditions? Does it care that she was making about $11/hour…” and goes on to pressure government agencies to better regulate pilot training, so that future pilots have the experience to fly the planes they are flying.
I’d like to make a point here about being a pilot.
Pilots are professionals. GOOD pilots have spent many hours learning their craft; and it is proper that they do so, because the lives of so many people rest on their shoulders. They SHOULD be expert if they have been given the control of the cockpit. Even co-pilots have spent significant time getting educated and up to speed, getting licensed.
IF the FAA does its job and regulates pilot training, then co-pilots should be earning more than $11/hr. They’re not flipping burgers. They’re not selling footwear.
Think about this: when you get into a taxi, you’re paying for someone who can drive the taxi. Whatever their vehicle, they are licensed to drive. Even the cheaper or shabbier taxi companies can not operate with drivers who are not licensed. They MUST be licensed if they are behind the wheel. To stay in business, even the funkiest, rattiest, cheesiest taxi company has drivers who are professionally qualified for their taxi licenses. I have no idea what they make for a living. But it is probably more than $11.00/hr. And if they wreck their taxis, they’re not going to fall 10,000 feet.
When you get into a plane, as a passenger, you trust that your pilot and your copilot are highly paid, highly skilled professionals. If they aren’t highly skilled, they shouldn’t be at the wheel.
So I would urge the FAA to step up to the plate and raise the bar on pilots; raise the bar on supervision; raise the bar on training. And with the professional standards well maintained–with adequate supervision–pilots and co-pilots should be paid wages that reflect their skill and professionalism.
$11.00 an hour doesn’t cut it.
Our pilots don’t need to ferry from one corner of the country to another, coming in to work exhausted, and flying planes on which they are not adequately trained. They should know the planes they fly, backwards and forwards, upside down, inside out and sideways. They should be paid commiserate to that degree of knowledge and skill. Or else, they should not be pilots at all.
Imagine the responsibility of the pilot and co-pilot. All those lives on the plane are completely dependent on the pilot’s skill.
What if the pilot has a heart attack? a bout of food poisoning as was recently in the news? or is otherwise unable to fly the plane? It’s like the co-pilot is the spare tire. You wouldn’t have a spare tire that was flat.
That’s what the copilot is there for. Except the co-pilot is not a spare tire. The co-pilot is not some kind of sub-human or half-pilot, deserving of a half-pilot wage. In this case, they’re the expert who’s on hand in case of emergency.
The co-pilot bears the responsibility of all those lives. The co-pilot shares the responsibility because they HAVE the responsibility. It’s their job. They should be prepared to do their jobs; and they should be paid a legitimate professional wage to do so.
Similar Posts
Door Switch Oops Rolls Nippon Flight
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer Andrew BowdenWhat: All Nippon Airways Boeing 737-700 en route from Okinawa to Tokyo Haneda
Where: Hamamatsu
When: Sep 6th 2011
Who: 2 crew injured
Why: While en route, the co-pilot accidentally activated the rudder trim switch instead of the door mechanism.The plane descended 6000 feet and rolled, injuring a couple of flight attendants. The first officer—2400 hours— leveled off, and was able to admit the captain who was stuck outside the cockpit, waiting to get in.
The flight continued without incident.
In George’s Point of View
If there is a problem, it comes out, eventually. My pilots tell me that after there is some kind of incident, we need to keep an eye on new incidents, reports, recalls, and especially advisories, directives and safety alerts. There can always be a relationship, no matter how obscure it seems at first glance.
You know how everyone has been looking at Air France Flight 447 with a new eye, ever since examination into the Air France Flight 471 on July 22 apparently fooled the autopilot into quitting with a swift descent. And Airbus investigators looked at this event twice because you have two the same plane types doing something similar?
Well, on the surface, this Nippon incident reminds me of Ethiopia Flight 409. It only reminds me because I saw a line drawing of the route of the plane as it spiraled out of control. It also was a 737.
I’m not calling the situation identical. Certainly if one of the pilots were locked out on a bathroom break—not that a pilot would do this on takeoff!—it would turn up on the voice recorder.
What if on Ethiopia Flight 409, someone had needed admission into the cabin?
It just makes me wonder if it is possible that the cabin crew accidentally activated the rudder trim switch. The Ethiopian Airlines plane had just taken off; it would not have been high enough to drop 6000 feet before recovery.
I know this thought is right out of the blue, and probably has no basis in anything but my wild imagination, but I am told by my pilots that although the switches are dissimilar, the door unlock switch is right next to the rudder trim. So, is it possible the trim switch could have been inappropriately engaged by accident on Flight 409?
Some airlines rectify this by requiring a third party to open the door if someone leaves the cockpit, but I have to wonder if this could be a design problem.
ATC Catches Runway Incursion, China Airbus Possible Collision
Click to view full size photo at Airliners.net
Contact photographer K.H.YimWhat: China Airlines Airbus A330-300 en route from Taipei to Hong Kong
Where: Taipei
When: Aug 19th 201
Who: 288 passengers
Why: As the China Airlines Airbus was accelerating for takeoff, a private jet was also taxiing on to the same runway after landing. ATC caught the runway incursion and prevented an inevitable collision, and held the China Airlines Airbus flight, delaying the takeoff by an hour.The pilots of the South Africa registered aircraft reported they had been instructed to taxi taxiway NC to the end. At a crossing, they requested direction and were told to turn right onto taxiway NC. They made an error based on unclear signage turning back on to the runway instead of to the taxiway.
In George’s Point of View
HeyaJust another everyday incursion.
Ok, someone needs to commend Taipei ATC on a pretty stupendous catch. From this side of the screen, it looks like this was a practically inevitable disaster.
And do I have to say that someone needs to fix the signs? Something needs to be amended there so that even pilots unfamiliar with the airport can see which is the on ramp and which is the off ramp.
I’m just saying.
Good job, ATC.
Satellite view:
Memorial Day
Happy Memorial Day weekend, everyone. It’s time honor those who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our country, to gather together, to remember the ones who need remembering, to thank the ones who need thanking, and to pull out the barbecue tongs and feed everybody else.
May 27, 2013“The secret of Happiness is Freedom, and the secret of Freedom, Courage.”
Thucydides