Jump to content

BadMonkey

Member
  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

BadMonkey last won the day on February 13 2016

BadMonkey had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

22 Excellent

About BadMonkey

  • Rank

  1. Lol, I'm not sure there is anything out there worse than OpsMobil.
  2. Well, if you ran down to the local junior high and asked to see the kids in the special needs class, then asked those kids if they new anybody dumber than they were, went and found those kids, and replaced our current government with them.....you'd have a vast improvement.
  3. If it's just for Nav it's not an EFB. If you want to run your checklists and manuals off it...then it needs EFB approval. As far as mounting a RAM ball....well, Transport has a pretty broad interpretation (or lack thereof) of a "minor mod". Here's a good article on major/minor modifications & repairs, and some of the problems you can have. http://amumagazine.com/?p=3030
  4. You should be able to attach a 1" RAM ball mount to the dash as a minor mod without an STC. All kinds of RAM IPad mounts to available to you then.
  5. Well, if you can hold an infant up to 2 years old in your lap legally without anything more than your arms as restraint, then anything else that can be held or stuffed under a seat is fair game too......as it's always been. "Restrained" does not necessarily have to mean "tied-down". Transport Canada would be better served by terminating the employment of any inspector with alternative ideas of what "restrained" means...
  6. Now, if only they'd make it mandatory to pass a drug test to receive a welfare check I'd be very happy.
  7. Almost 20 years in industry, 8000hrs accident free, with an IFR ticket, and I can't get a call back or interview for a VFR or IFR job these days. Pretty slim pickings these days, and the few companies advertising for pilots right now aren't really hiring...they're resume baiting.
  8. Maybe you could elaborate a bit on what it is you're actually looking for....
  9. Tough days ahead. We could be looking at 2-3 years of this. Aviation is always one of the first industries hit during a recession and one of the last to recover. A person is wise to have a second trade to fall back on in this industry.
  10. There is pretty much zero movement in IFR these days. The recession is hitting all sectors.
  11. Well, if it's "feel good" legislation that addresses a basically non-existent issue backed up with junk science, will accomplish none of what it's supposed to and cost industry a fortune to implement......then yeah, I'd say a Liberal government will be all over it.
  12. ****, they even started making us...sorry, strongly suggested...that we start attaching photocopies of the aircraft log sheets to pilot training records so that their PVI audits would be easier. The reasoning was some operators were fudging training records by having 1.0hrs Flight Time recurrent, but only 0.5-0.6hrs Air Time in the journey log. Somewhere along the line many Transport inspectors seemed to think their opinion is regulation, and many operators caved in just to save themselves the headache of dealing with them. The problem with demanding clarifications for certain things within CARs is that few in Transport will nut up and put their necks out, and when they're finally forced to, you end up with the most restrictive and extreme interpretations to take liability off the regulator.
  13. Any company that wants to hold to the "airtime equals flight time" is just shooting themselves in the foot. Funny how an organization that states it wants to move toward ICAO harmony, actually goes against it. As a senior pilot and company trainer, I always told guys they could go either way they wanted, just be aware that in a wreck, Transport may want to audit your logbook. If I saw a discrepancy of 10% between his personal logbook "flight time" and company tracked "air time", I wouldn't bat an eye since it accounts for what we're really doing in the field. I see 20%....it's gonna raise some flags. Look at it this way, if a contract required a 1500hr pilot, a 10% loss in logable time puts him down to 1350hrs instead of 1500hrs he would have had. 150 hrs may not seem like much, but depending on how much that pilot flys, he could be another 6 months to a year before his company could put him on a 1500hr contract. Is that smart business? Is that good for the pilot? Does it really effect safety in any way? Is that not the ICAO standard anyway? All that loss for what? So your paperwork is easier?
×
×
  • Create New...