Primate70 Norwegian Air pilots are on strike after negotiations regarding basic terms and conditions failed.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/28/norwegian-air-strike-idUSL5N0W200W20150228
The pilots have demanded a collective labour agreement with the Norwegian Air parent company instead of its local subsidiaries, and have asked for uniform terms across the Nordic region.
The pilots said they have feared that their social security will be weakened as the company seeks to cut costs.
These pilots may be spearheading an important struggle for many of us.
While it is necessary to try and adapt in a highly competitive market, some (including me) fear that deteriorating working conditions for airline pilots and cabin crew can ultimately affect flight safety.
PrimateI have been out of work since last July, I have over 10,000 hours of which over 4,000 are on 727s. I’m battling to even get work as an instructor because the market is saturated with newly qualified pilots who are resorting to flying instruction to get hours. Therefore the future industry is being trained by instructors with just over 250 hours total experience.
I think that has been the normal state of things at some or many schools for years. I was fortunate enough to attend a school where the staff mostly consisted of former military and airline pilots with heaps of experience from operations and training. Not sure if there are too many of those around.
PrimateI agree that the whole thing is largely systemic in terms of current EU legislation and so on. I won’t blame companies for trying to cut costs within the frames of the legislation, but I think they should be really curious about the potential safety implications of this practice, e.g. whether it’s contributing to a slow drift towards an unacceptable safety state. The safety literature is full of interesting theories about stuff like this (i.e. James Reason, Jens Rasmussen).
http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?133734-Petition-Stop-quot-Pay-to-Fly-quot&p=2205307#post2205307 – I suggest these threads be merged.
PrimateDon’t know all about it, but what have things come to in terms of honour and integrity?
A sad fact of the matter is that some of us who try to maintain these values are lagging behind those who manage to gather valuable experience faster by joining these schemes. Ironically, a number of these candidates seem to head for legacy carriers at first chance after having gone through an LCC employment scheme which undermines said carriers…
Flying SEPs at low altitude over nice terrain can be great, but it’s not very profitable and hardly a fast track to a multi-crew, multi-engine turbine job. I love dilemmas.
Nice signature and photo, by the way.
Primatehttp://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?133734-Petition-Stop-quot-Pay-to-Fly-quot
UGent report and conference material:
There are unscrupulous operators who CHARGE inexperienced pilots to get experience (500 hours glass cockpit/jet/multi etc). Because most airlines these days want those kind of hours and already have the type rating before they will look at you and I despise them for that. If that sort of experience was necessary, Neil Armstrong and his colleagues would never have landed on the moon. It also insinuates that less experienced pilots or non type rated pilots are more likely to have an accident or incident, which is hogwash as we have seen with some recent crashes.
I’m currently staying put as an FI while studying some more. Not ready to “surrender” to FR just yet..
PrimateIt is standard NATO Air Policing policy. The recent spate of missions are more than routine. That was highlighted on the 28th January with the flight half way up the English Channel. This was an area that wasn’t exploited by the Russians even during the height of the Cold War. The consequence was disruption to commercial aviation for both Eire and the UK. What is the alternative here when it is standard NATO policy combined with the disruption and nuisance to extremely busy commercial air routes? Under those circumstances it certainly isn’t a waste of money intercepting them and providing assistance to civilian ATC. The RAF in these recent missions were also providing support to Eire and their ATC control zones as the Tu-95s flew down the west coast of Eire. IMHO it would be pure negligence if the Tu-95s were not intercepted and monitored by fighters in these circumstance. Why take the risk and not shadow them?
Spot on, IMHO.
Now to get a scary Putin mask for that ball! Are you coming too, kev?
PrimateApparently they have been flying further south than normal.
Statement and some statistics from the RNoAF (in Norwegian). According to the RNoAF, the Russians were far more active in this area during the 1980s. The number of RNoAF QRA scrambles and the number of aircraft identified has been relatively high from 2007 onwards (compared to normal levels since the 1990s). A temporary reduction was seen until 2012, presumably due to changes in the Russian base structure. Note that the numbers don’t reflect Russian air activity in total, only flights that were selected for VID and successfully identified.
From October 2014:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/29/us-nato-russia-exercises-idUSKBN0II27S20141029
PrimateOn any other day you’d be right and I’d agree with you, but considering the situation in Ukraine and the increasing tensions between NATO and Russia, there is an extra dimension that comes into play. I’m not advocating any physical action, even during the height of the cold war we managed to avoid that, but clearly there are enough concerns in the prevailing conditions to justify close monitoring of these flights, and the recent disruptions to civilian ATC is an example of that.
Agree. AFAIK the VVS resumed regular strategic flights in the North Atlantic area in 2006-07 after they were suspended in 1992. Besides civilian ATS concerns, I believe maintaining presence and capability is somewhat important for NATO QRA assets. This was also the case well before the Ukraine crisis.
PrimateAgreed on that, I was simply pointing out a pilot’s opinion doesn’t preclude further discussion. You may value them more, and I would value manufacturer given data more; its a personal choice.
True. I fly a bit myself and I think it’s only natural that aviation professionals have different opinions about some things. Piloting is a craftmanship. During training and flying you’re bound to develop some individual habits and preferences. You experience the world through your very own set of mental schemas, which may also change and adapt over time. Some people prefer centre sticks, while others like yokes. Given that some minimum standards remain shared and stable (i.e. reliable behaviour towards safety, SOP etc.), being able to draw on different experiences and such can add to the “requisite variety” within an aviation community and perhaps contribute to its overall proficiency. Spreading experiences through story-telling and such can be a valuable cultural trait within almost any organisation.
Articles like this one should be taken for what they are – personal accounts based within a certain context. Some bias is to be expected when humans are involved. An understanding of this combined with some healthy openness and a bit of well-reasoned critical thinking should do for a while. Had I been in this guy’s squadron I’d probably love to hang out by the coffee table and talk cr@p for hours.
PrimateVery annoying assesment to write on a forum. You are looking childish while trying to dismiss many people’s posts as fanboyism. So what? If a pilot says something, there is nothing to discuss over it? Pilots are THE single most biased sources particularly toward’s their own Air Force’s aircraft. Only the most brainwashed of the fanboys tend to take pilots as oracle of knowledge and a source to backup their claims or pimp up their favourite aircraft. What is funny is they also dismiss other pilots as liars and untrustworthy.
For example, quoting this pilot talking about F-15 and F-16;
Quote of another pilot on this article
Then, suprise! A quote from German MiG-29 pilot;
Which is the liar? MiG pilot or F-16 one? IMHO this leaves both to be invalid, and leaves everything to be discussed.
For the record, I liked the article in overall, and for the record I neither like MiG-29 nor I think its a better aircraft overall than F-16 of F-15. However I do sense the typical negative bias towards MiG that I would expect from a USAF pilot. As a result, there are some points his ideas are invalid and wrong to me.
Taking his remark a bit seriously, are we?
I’m not very active on this forum these days. One reason for that is closely related to sandiego89’s remark, which I believe has something to it (besides being funny, IMHO). I might have been seen as a “fanboy” myself back in the days, but I like to think I’ve put much of that behind me.
I for one appreciate accounts from operational personnel with hands-on experience. It has little to do with a positivist view on things, but I rather think it can add interesting perspectives which can be good for discussions. Perhaps you’ll find as many opinions as there are pilots.
Call me childish.. :stupid:
PrimateVery good read, thanks :eagerness:
Primatehttp://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/03/us-mideast-crisis-killing-idUSKBN0L71XE20150203
(Reuters) – Islamic State militants released a video on Tuesday appearing to show a captured Jordanian pilot being burnt alive, and Jordan promised to avenge his death.
RIP and condolences.
Safe ops to the rest.
PrimateThe security forces know that whatever they do there is always the chance of one or two of these scum pulling off a Paris style attack.
Just part of modern life I fear.
Agree.
I think a broad, “intelligent” and tireless effort is required to minimise the threat and to mitigate post-attack consequences as best we can. At the same time we must be able to live on alongside what might be a perpetual threat. Violent extremists will continue to challenge our liberty, dignity and so on. I suspect that some or all of them wish to provoke something like a spiralling conflict among what they see as infidels and righteous or whatever. Let’s deny them this pleasure.
PrimateFirst time I’ve seen pod footage with multiple target designator boxes, or whatever those symbols are. Visual cues for different radar returns, heat sources, laser…? F-15, according to the caption. Sniper ATP with multi-targeting? Some other platform / sensor involved?
http://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/f-15e-strike-sniper-atp/
According to The Aviationist:
Blast aside, the symbology that appears in the ATP footage is interesting: target aside, there are a lot of symbols that we know nothing about, a result of the so-called “sensor fusion,” the combination of sensory data derived from the plane and other assets’ data sources.
PrimateFirst time I’ve seen pod footage with multiple target designator boxes, or whatever those symbols are. Visual cues for different radar returns, heat sources, laser…? F-15, according to the caption. Sniper ATP with multi-targeting? Some other platform / sensor involved?
Sign In
