CAL--This can't be real...

[jetflier]

At NWA we deice as a matter of safety, plus,...."we're taking it back".......time is money. Deicing takes time, and since we get paid by the minute, a trip through the deicing rack can be prosperous !

Safety First, always......

 

[007]

What's wrong with using common sense and saving thousands of dollars for the company? It might be the 1 dollar which puts a company in the black and gives the pilot leverage to request a pay increase.

right, you mean gets the Ceo another stock option. I'll deice.

 

[densoo]

First-officer: "Well, all we need is the inside of the wings anyway? the wingtips are gonna speed up on 80 anyway; they'll shuck all that other stuff."

First-officer: "It's a losing battle trying to de-ice these things. It gives you a false feeling of security, that's all it does."

Captain: "Well, it satisfies the Feds"

Air Florida 90, 1982.

 

[delivery100]

CAL** Safety Update*

February 23, 2007

On Feb. 9, 2007, the EWR Chief Pilot’s Office distributed the following
B-737 Update:

I woke up Wednesday morning and departed for work. I found my car under
an unexpected covering of loose powdery snow. I brushed it off the
windshield, and departed. As I accelerated up the street, the snow
readily blew off my car as I expected it would. When I arrived in EWR
that morning, it was apparent to me that we were in the midst of a
full-blown de-icing operation with our morning bank of planes, for
exactly the same conditions as I found with my car that morning: Loose
powdery snow covering the surfaces of the aircraft. Outside temperature
was well below freezing. Was de-icing warranted that morning? It’s my
opinion it was NOT. Flight Manual Sec 3, page 349 states, “The check to
determine the need for de-icing is an examination of critical aircraft
surfaces to ensure they are free of any ADHERING ice, snow, slush, or
frost. It was more than my opinion that morning that the loose powdery
snow would have departed almost immediately during the takeoff roll; I
actually did an inspection of an aircraft parked at the gate, to
determine actual conditions. Flight Ops Manual Sec 9, cites FAR 121.629,
which says the same about adhering contamination. Yet there was a
line-up of at least 25-30 aircraft waiting to be de-iced, and more to
follow. It was my opinion (and it appears that I am full of opinions
today) that this was a herd mentality. One aircraft asks to be de-iced,
and everyone else follows suit. In light of my continued message
regarding safety, this may seem contradictory. Believe me, I am in no
way suggesting that you compromise safety. Instead, I am suggesting that
we understand the conditions, and exercise common sense. This was an
opportunity to not only be safe, but to be efficient as well. Remember
that Professional statement I mentioned above. It was suggested by
someone that he would not take the chance that a lawyer may be seated in
row 13, as he was approaching the runway for takeoff with snow on his
wings. My answer to that is to make an announcement to the passengers
stating your intentions. Again, Safety and Common Sense prevails, but
knowledge is power.


I am absolutely disgusted that this man is involved in aviation. All it takes is for one weak captain to listen to this $hit and can you say Air Florida.....You CAL guys need to get rid of this POS SOB!!

 

[rapedape]

consider this:

It seems the ACP was breaking NJ state law by driving his car that morning:

39A:37-LL4. Snow or ice falling from vehicle​

a. When snow or ice is dislodged from a moving vehicle and strikes another vehicle or
pedestrian causing injury or property damage:
1. The operator of a non-commercial motor vehicle shall be subject to a fine
between $200 and $1,000 for each offense.
2. The operator, owner, lessee, bailee, or any one of them, of a commercial motor
vehicle shall be subject to a fine between $500 and $1,500 for each offense.
b. No motor vehicle points or automobile insurance eligibility points pursuant to
C.17:33B-14 shall be assessed for this offense.
Source: 39:4-77.1.​

 

[POWDERFINGER]

This is proof that a room full of pilots can't agree on anything. It's like having a roof full of cats and expecting consensus on the question of tuna vs friskies...we love to argue.


As a jetliner pilot who plans to live to a ripe old age, my belief is that you can't be surely free of adhering ice, frost, or snow until the aircraft has been properly de-iced. Does it cost money? Yes. Is it worth skimping on? No, unless you don't mind being wrong and killing a load of passengers. Want to live? Keep a clean aircraft.

It's an operational necessity in winter weather...and fluid is cheaper than bad press, lawsuits, and funerals. There ought to be some kind of spreadsheet that balances cost of risk management vs cost of accident that shows the upside of safety...


Hey, the money doesn't come out of your wallet anyway...

 

[Oh-ryan]

I can see some validity to his letter however his delivery totally sucks. By referring to his (and many other) pilots as cattle in a herd his message was lost. He could have gone about it by saying, "Hey, went its really cold outside and the snow is powdery, you may not really need that de-ice job. It's your call, I know you will do what is safe."

Instead his tone is that of "Hey you bunch of lemmings, stop wasting money and time deicing planes when they don't need to be. Planes don't make money when they are on the ramp."

Agree with Albie... print, copy and save. I would also like to add post... as in post it somewhere. It will be easy for the lawyers and the FAA to find that way.

 

[rapedape]

POWDERFINGER PM me....

 

[densoo]

IAgree with Albie... print, copy and save. I would also like to add post... as in post it somewhere. It will be easy for the lawyers and the FAA to find that way.

It appears they have found it. Word is the FAA has nixed, under certain conditions, Newark's "Snowflake" operation which is the local program that takes the planes through deice/antiice. Many more CAL cancellations tomorrow as a result.

 

[Uncle Bort]

Maybe this is why the FAA has potentially put the nix on CALs snowflake operation as is being discussed on another thread.