Instructor Fired?

[UAL747400]

Originally Posted by excessthrust

I always thought that the rationale for some of these questions was because the systems are so straightforward, and there were only a handful of speeds you need to know there was room to learn more. I guess I always thought people asked extra stuff because otherwise the aircraft knowledge tasks in the PTS would be 14 seconds long. Knowing systems (Studying for the DPE's MEI POH test) in and out i think helped me with initial for the C90 and BE-400. In the airlines, don't you just have to drive? I thought there were teams of helpful, happy mechanics to take care of everything else

I like extra questions like that. I like to learn little trivial things like that as well. I just don't like when someone gets their panties in a twist when I don't know the answer.

[UAL747400]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Bottle pressure IS a limitation: 1000 psi for a 767 and 1300 psi for a 767-300 with four crewmembers!

I guess it depends on the aircraft. I had to know a lot more for the 727 because of the nature of the systems and the nature of the job of a flight engineer. We pretty much had to 'build the plane' during the oral, but orals that I had for the 737 and MD-88/90 weren't as intense as the 727 FE oral.

But nothing was as wicked as my Beech 1900 FO oral -- a lot of UND grads, at that time, were in the training department so lots of questions about p2.5 valves, speeder springs in the FCU how many rows of axial flow compressors versus centrifugal compressors in the PT-6.

And the fetzer valve... and the flux capacitor!

Isn't there just the one centrifugal compressor rotor in the PT-6? Just joshin ya! Bah, I think I'm thinking of the allison helicopter engine anyway.

[Doug Taylor]

As far as I remember, yes!

So I was told. I might have been lied to! I can't see it.

[JaceTheAce]

Originally Posted by excessthrust

Even if they admit their name, IP address, multiple references to their identity, and post a picture of themselves??

IP address doesn't appear to members other than admin/mods on this message board.

I'm not at all scared of being "sued". I haven't even gone near the definition of libel.

[excessthrust]

Originally Posted by JaceTheAce

IP address doesn't appear to members other than admin/mods on this message board.

I'm not at all scared of being "sued". I haven't even gone near the definition of libel.

Dude- I never said you would be. Read the post that just says I only was listing ways for someone to find out who you are. Nobody's trying to figure out if you're actually an ace, or taking you to court. Relax.

BTW - Are you an ace? It's 5 kills, right?

P.S. that was sarcasm meant to be funny...

[Snickersnwa]

Originally Posted by excessthrust

I always thought that the rationale for some of these questions was because the systems are so straightforward, and there were only a handful of speeds you need to know there was room to learn more. I guess I always thought people asked extra stuff because otherwise the aircraft knowledge tasks in the PTS would be 14 seconds long. Knowing systems (Studying for the DPE's MEI POH test) in and out i think helped me with initial for the C90 and BE-400. In the airlines, don't you just have to drive? I thought there were teams of helpful, happy mechanics to take care of everything else

Studying for the DPE’s MEI POH test was very helpful. It did take some time to go through the POH and learn all the numbers, cautions, warnings, etc, but it’s proven itself useful when actually flying the airplane that’s for sure. I’m glad that I invested the time to really get to know the POH for the Semi…

And, the POH test doesn’t only pertain to POH questions per say; knowing the autopilot is also something that is vital to know how to do, and is/was on the POH test (as well as other things). Not only for flying efficiently/effectively in the IFR system, but when you’re taking on the responsibility of teaching another pilot applicant how the stuff works. Obviously, we want the best education given for the student’s sake.

[Kristie]

Doug - out of curiosity, if names or conjecture were thrown out on this post and the parties involved disputed it or found it libelous, would the forum or the poster be responsible, and what would JC do? (not WWJD...different thing all together)

just to be clear, JC wouldn't have a dog in this fight because JC isn't responsible for what it's members say/do. We just provide the service for people to talk.

most of what's talked about is based on hearsay/opinion... so i don't think the poster would be libel for either...i don't see the big deal anyways, people get fired all the time and threads, like most typical threads, die down fairly quickly once people stop posting in them!

[CaptainChris87]

Originally Posted by AngelFuree

Rumor or not, I can see it definitely being real, but I learned from a UND flight instructor that a certain individual flight instructor was fired. The reason was he would actually fail the engine in air by pulling the keys from the ignition. If such is the case, I'm extremely happy he got fired. That is unacceptable...and for the record, I had a bad experience with this instructor in another stage. Another UND JC member had a bad experience with his stage for 222 for asking very trivial information, as well; name withheld.

why would you do that lol!

Why not just have a UND CFI or stage check pilot (not all, just the ones who think they are God's greatet gift to aviation) Cut out the BOTH mixtures and have his student run an engine shutdown/secure/restart checklist 450FT AGL after rotation while putting his hand on the gear down lever, under the hood, partial panal and RAIM failure.

[CaptainChris87]

As some JCers would tell you Angel:

"ITS ALL WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT, ITS ALL YOUR FAULT YOU DIDDNT STUDY ENOUGH!"

"YOU CANT EVEN PASS A MEESLY UND STAGE CHECK WHAT MORE FOR AN RJ GROUND COURSE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO RECONSIDER A CAREER IN BEING A LAV CLEANER OR F/A"

"TOO BAD CUZ IM GODS GREATET GIFT TO AVIATION SEE MY UND CFI UNIFORM AND THE WAY I SIT AT THE SOF DESK WITH TACTLESS DEMEANOR"


no seriously make a complaint, and I was always wondering who you can make a protest when failing a stage check.

[AngelFuree]

Originally Posted by CaptainChris87

As some JCers would tell you Angel:

"ITS ALL WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT, ITS ALL YOUR FAULT YOU DIDDNT STUDY ENOUGH!"

"YOU CANT EVEN PASS A MEESLY UND STAGE CHECK WHAT MORE FOR AN RJ GROUND COURSE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO RECONSIDER A CAREER IN BEING A LAV CLEANER OR F/A"

"TOO BAD CUZ IM GODS GREATET GIFT TO AVIATION SEE MY UND CFI UNIFORM AND THE WAY I SIT AT THE SOF DESK WITH TACTLESS DEMEANOR"


no seriously make a complaint, and I was always wondering who you can make a protest when failing a stage check.

LOL, but I DIDNT fail the stage...!

[CaptainChris87]

sure you didd'nt ;P

[UAL747400]

Originally Posted by CaptainChris87

sure you didd'nt ;P

Yeah, I didn't either. I've only failed two stage checks, one was stage 46 when I could fly NDB approaches perfectly fine for normal lessons, but couldn't for the life of me do it for the stage. The 70mph+ winds aloft could have been a factor. haha I don't like to make excuses though.

The second was the 323 oral. It was a question about oxegen systems and stupid me not saying what he wanted to hear I told him that medical oxegen and aviators breathing oxegen is exactly the same, they just change the stickers so you would be alright if you went up with medical oxegen. Practically speaking you could, but as far as the regs go, you can't. I think I'm gona go buy those stickers! If you remember Human Factors with Doc Jensen, they, in fact, only change the stickers. They do NOTHING to remove the "water" that is supposedly in medical oxegen. The instructor obviously didn't remember that, so I unsat on that. I was weak on pressurization too so that contributed, but if I would have just said "aviators breathing oxegen" instead of being a smart ass I would have passed.

[JaceTheAce]

Originally Posted by UAL747400

Yeah, I didn't either. I've only failed two stage checks, one was stage 46 when I could fly NDB approaches perfectly fine for normal lessons, but couldn't for the life of me do it for the stage. The 70mph+ winds aloft could have been a factor. haha I don't like to make excuses though.

The second was the 323 oral. It was a question about oxegen systems and stupid me not saying what he wanted to hear I told him that medical oxegen and aviators breathing oxegen is exactly the same, they just change the stickers so you would be alright if you went up with medical oxegen. Practically speaking you could, but as far as the regs go, you can't. I think I'm gona go buy those stickers! If you remember Human Factors with Doc Jensen, they, in fact, only change the stickers. They do NOTHING to remove the "water" that is supposedly in medical oxegen. The instructor obviously didn't remember that, so I unsat on that. I was weak on pressurization too so that contributed, but if I would have just said "aviators breathing oxegen" instead of being a smart ass I would have passed.

Yeah the oxygen is all the same now... isn't it 99.5%???

[UAL747400]

Originally Posted by JaceTheAce

Yeah the oxygen is all the same now... isn't it 99.5%???

I'm not sure, I just know that all they do to make "aviators breathing oxegen" is change the sticker. Kind of a B.S. way to unsat a stage check because the instructor didn't have as much knowlege on the matter as I did. Oh well, I guess that just taught me a lesson that there's a time and a place to be know-it-all.

[Dugie8]

Originally Posted by JaceTheAce

Yeah the oxygen is all the same now... isn't it 99.5%???

There abouts. The quality of the O2 is actually more important in the welding side of the house than the breathing side (water content). Medical O2 is just as pure as ABO, but water is introduced at the "bed" in the hospital (no crusty boogers for patients). The largest distinction to be made between medical and ABO is liablility from the supplier. I believe you can use ABO as medical, but cannot use medical as ABO. Semantics, pretty much, something that will get your butt in a heap of trouble because you like to mince words, you bet.

[UAL747400]

Originally Posted by Dugie8

There abouts. The quality of the O2 is actually more important in the welding side of the house than the breathing side (water content). Medical O2 is just as pure as ABO, but water is introduced at the "bed" in the hospital (no crusty boogers for patients). The largest distinction to be made between medical and ABO is liablility from the supplier. I believe you can use ABO as medical, but cannot use medical as ABO. Semantics, pretty much, something that will get your butt in a heap of trouble because you like to mince words, you bet.

So the air in the tanks is the same, but the hospital adds water when they hook up the tank? Am I understanding that correctly?

I figured it was merely a liabity thing.

[BajtheJino]

Originally Posted by UAL747400

So the air in the tanks is the same, but the hospital adds water when they hook up the tank? Am I understanding that correctly?

I figured it was merely a liabity thing.

You are absolutely right about the O2 and adding moisture.

[Dugie8]

Originally Posted by UAL747400

So the air in the tanks is the same, but the hospital adds water when they hook up the tank? Am I understanding that correctly?

I figured it was merely a liabity thing.

My wife is an Xray tech, so I spend some time in the hospital visiting and such. Next time you are in a hospital look at the wall where the O2 lines come in you will see what looks like a ball check valve, moisture is added there, so yeah the stuff in the tanks is basically the same, it as made the same, boiling off of liquid O2.

I wonder about bottle and valve assemblies though. It would seem to me that the bottles for AOB would need to be a bit "tougher" to withstand high alt ops while medical O2 wouldn't need as thick of a bottle, but I could be wrong.

Don't think of it as "merely" a liability thing. If you choose to use medical O2 and something goes wrong, you put yourself and your company at a lot of risk. Just like using parts that are not FAA approved (I forget what that acronym is now) just because they are technically the same.

To be perfectly honest with you, for a 323 stage 70, if I asked the O2 question and someone answered they would use medical O2 because it is the same I would unsat them as well. There are simply just things that have no room for error or creative interps, just like only dipping 50 feet below the MDA, etc etc. Plus, there is one rule you must learn to live by in the training world, cooperate and graduate, rules is rules, answer the question correctly (as per the rules) and keep the brainiac stuff to yourself.

[UAL747400]

Originally Posted by Dugie8

My wife is an Xray tech, so I spend some time in the hospital visiting and such. Next time you are in a hospital look at the wall where the O2 lines come in you will see what looks like a ball check valve, moisture is added there, so yeah the stuff in the tanks is basically the same, it as made the same, boiling off of liquid O2.

I wonder about bottle and valve assemblies though. It would seem to me that the bottles for AOB would need to be a bit "tougher" to withstand high alt ops while medical O2 wouldn't need as thick of a bottle, but I could be wrong.

Don't think of it as "merely" a liability thing. If you choose to use medical O2 and something goes wrong, you put yourself and your company at a lot of risk. Just like using parts that are not FAA approved (I forget what that acronym is now) just because they are technically the same.

To be perfectly honest with you, for a 323 stage 70, if I asked the O2 question and someone answered they would use medical O2 because it is the same I would unsat them as well. There are simply just things that have no room for error or creative interps, just like only dipping 50 feet below the MDA, etc etc. Plus, there is one rule you must learn to live by in the training world, cooperate and graduate, rules is rules, answer the question correctly (as per the rules) and keep the brainiac stuff to yourself.

Oh no, I never said that I would use it. I didn't make that very clear in my first post. We just got into a discussion that the actual oxegen, aviators breathing oxegen, had something special compared to medical oxegen. I think he interpreted that as that I would use it, just like you did when you read my previous post.

You're right though, I should have left that out and just said aviators breathing oxegen. I think the exact words I said when I answered that question was: "aviators breathing oxegen, but medical oxegen is the same." I can see how that specific wording can be misinterpreted. We were merely talking about the actual air, not the tanks, not the valves(which I'm sure that is probably one thing that is different now the you mention it), so he was still in the wrong. I might not have made it clear to him that I was talking specifically about the air, not the tanks or the valves or anything, either. So, my mistake too.

[UAL747400]

Where have you been by the way. I missed arguing with you about stuff.

[Dugie8]

That makes sense UAL, I took it as you would use med O2 if needed and so on.

All things aside I would not have made a big deal of it back in the day as an instructor, I would have stressed AOB only and moved on, but being out and seeing what can happen when people start getting creative with regs and interps, now I have a bit firmer stance on the stuff that will kill you and the stuff that is merely "nice to know".

[excessthrust]

Although part 91 just says 'supplemental' oxygen, I'm fairly certain parts 21 and 23 do specify ABO for supplemental oxygen certification. I think the argument here is pretty much a moot point though, because you said you may have had other difficulties in that area of operation on that particular checkride. I don't think just saying ABO and medical-grade were the same thing was a sole breaking point.

If I remember correctly, my former chief pilot and one of our training captains attended the ALPA accident course at UND a year or 2 ago, and one of the NTSB's actual contributing factors to that accident they investigated was the pilot was using non-certified O2. (I think for a scuba tank or fire fighter's supply).