Jump to content
Amby

pilot not qualified to land

 Share

7 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Timeline

A pilot flew 80 passengers from Cardiff to Paris then told them: "We have to turn back - I'm not qualified to land."

The pilot took the decision after thick fog cut visibility to 700 metres at Charles de Gaulle airport and he told passengers he was not trained to land the aircraft in such conditions.

So, they flew the 300 miles back to Cardiff airport - having left just hours earlier.

Cassandra Grant, 29, who paid £220 for her Flybe ticket, said: "Twenty minutes outside Paris, the captain said, 'They are asking for a level two qualification and I only have a level five. We?ll have to fly back?.

"It beggars belief. I would expect an airline pilot to have every qualification possible, and then a few more."

The passengers were bussed to Exeter and Birmingham to catch alternative flights to the French capital.

Flybe stood by its pilot, who has more than 30 years? flying experience. The budget airline said: "He had recently transferred from a Bombardier Q300 to a Q400 aircraft.

?He has not yet completed low visibility training to land in such conditions as in Paris.?

The Civil Aviation Authority added: ?He did the right thing. If he had landed in Paris he could have been prosecuted. It?s not like driving a car where you can pull over and look at the handbook."

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3126117.html?menu=

Life is a ticket to the greatest show on earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many commercial pilots that are not instrument rated.....He did do the right thing.....

The article doesn't say the AC type. A number of passengers perished years ago in Hawaii after a commercial pilot flew into a mountain in conditions that he shouldn't have been in.

miss_me_yet.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many commercial pilots that are not instrument rated.....He did do the right thing.....
:no: The right thing to do would have been to inform the airline that he had not completed training and was thus unqualified to occupy the pilot's seat.

2005/07/10 I-129F filed for Pras

2005/11/07 I-129F approved, forwarded to NVC--to Chennai Consulate 2005/11/14

2005/12/02 Packet-3 received from Chennai

2005/12/21 Visa Interview Date

2006/04/04 Pras' entry into US at DTW

2006/04/15 Church Wedding at Novi (Detroit suburb), MI

2006/05/01 AOS Packet (I-485/I-131/I-765) filed at Chicago

2006/08/23 AP and EAD approved. Two down, 1.5 to go

2006/10/13 Pras' I-485 interview--APPROVED!

2006/10/27 Pras' conditional GC arrives -- .5 to go (2 yrs to Conditions Removal)

2008/07/21 I-751 (conditions removal) filed

2008/08/22 I-751 biometrics completed

2009/06/18 I-751 approved

2009/07/03 10-year GC received; last 0.5 done!

2009/07/23 Pras files N-400

2009/11/16 My 46TH birthday, Pras N-400 approved

2010/03/18 Pras' swear-in

---------------------------------------------------------------------

As long as the LORD's beside me, I don't care if this road ever ends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Philippines
Timeline
There are many commercial pilots that are not instrument rated.....He did do the right thing.....
:no: The right thing to do would have been to inform the airline that he had not completed training and was thus unqualified to occupy the pilot's seat.

Since the airline is responsible for all pilot qualifications and training records they determined he was qualified for the seat....

When you finish your training on a new A/C type, you are considered a "high" minimums (referring to weather conditions) pilot and are not authorized to land when weather goes "low" (ie.. cloud cover, visibility, etc...)...

The only way you become a "low" mins captain is actually flying the aircraft for a certain number of hours... this is a common situation for every airline....

YMMV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like he acted responsibly; the only thing he did wrong maybe was to tell the passengers directly "I'm not qualified" rather than just explaining that they were turning around due to inclement weather, which probably panicked them unnecessarily.

AOS

-

Filed: 8/1/07

NOA1:9/7/07

Biometrics: 9/28/07

EAD/AP: 10/17/07

EAD card ordered again (who knows, maybe we got the two-fer deal): 10/23/-7

Transferred to CSC: 10/26/07

Approved: 11/21/07

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...