George’s Point of View

New technology is coming in 2013 that will replace pilots current “see and avoid” avoidance system over the Hudson, where pilots rely on listening to a traffic frequency to keep them out of harm’s way. Obviously, this is proving inadequate over the Hudson River where the helicopter and plane collided last August killing nine. All those buildings to avoid–and all those planes and helicopters too.

Until 2013, more regulations will be in place regarding what vehicle flies at which altitude. The new system will involve GPS tracking on visible receiver screens carried on planes and helicopters, a new take on old radar technology.

It’s never too late to save lives. Though one wonders if pilots can’t see a whole plane coming, (or conversely, a helicopter at nine o’clock, or right in front of them) if a blip on a screen is going to be more effective. Given the heavy traffic over the Hudson, it just might look like Space Invaders and how much good will that do?

George’s Point of View

I fly a certain carrier.

I fly a lot of miles on this carrier.

This carrier impresses me as a company. They got through a bankruptcy as a team, and that says something to me.

Now let me tell you what I don’t like.

A half-*** approach to maintenance.

You fill in the blanks.

What if the maintenance of this carrier’s fleet were as bad as the aesthetic condition of the interior and exterior of the planes? Within a couple of months even new and re-configured planes lose that “new plane” smell. I can live without the “new.” What I can’t live without is working parts. I don’t care how shiny the bells and whistles are, I just want the important parts (engine, hydraulics, on board computer systems, etc.) to function. When I board one of these planes, every single time, I send a little prayer skyward that the maintenance has been done, perfectly.

There’s no margin for error. I know I’ve said this before but it bears repeating. It’s not like a car–when you get a lemon, and you have to keep pulling over to the side of the road and calling road service. It’s not like a ship, where at least the passengers can get into a lifeboat and have a fighting chance at survival. There’s no soft shoulder or lifeboat for a plane. There’s only straight down, and certain termination. Every pilot, every crew member, every passenger puts their very lives into the hands of those mechanics. And if they’re American mechanics, I can be relatively confident that they’re well-paid, well-fed, and well-educated. Do I have that assurance if the mechanic is in some other country? No, I cannot.

How can any passenger feel confident when the mechanics can’t read the plane’s manual? When I board a plane, I have every intention of getting where I am bound. With an American maintenance team, I am assured that if there were the slightest inkling that the maintenance were not up to par, I still can be confident that the parameters of maintenance are overseen by the FAA and the NTSB, and prescribed by American standards of excellence; and any default of or deviation from that standard of excellence is proscribed by and accountable thru the massive engine of our legal system. Can I say that when maintenance is farmed out to some obscure third world entity? Of course not.

I had one emergency landing one hour out of Sao Paulo and was forced to stay the night, and wait 24 hours for the dubious right to depart on what turned out to be the same plane. Instead of taking off as expected, we rolled to a complete stop out on the runway. The captain came on the PA system stating that he was just not comfortable with the smell in the cockpit, and we were going back to the terminal.

The pilot knew better to trust his own senses over dubious maintenance practices. So for that flight, it was back to the terminal for more waiting.

I do have some cause to worry about maintenance. If there is belt tightening that must be done, by all means do it. But not if it means sacrificing safety standards in favor of a third world discount.

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.