|
|
| Feminists vs. Aviation (1297259) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1297259) | |
Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 02:50:57 2015 linkWomen want to ruin aviation. |
|
|
| (1297265) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Wed Jul 1 07:43:17 2015, in response to Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 02:50:57 2015. Women flying planes. Yeah, that's really scary. Sure. IMO, I'd rather fly with a competent pilot. Nothing in the article leads me to believe these women are anything less than that. |
|
|
| (1297279) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 10:14:02 2015, in response to Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 02:50:57 2015. Holy crap. Thanks for posting this information. |
|
|
| (1297284) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by Newkirk Images on Wed Jul 1 10:30:35 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 10:14:02 2015. |
|
|
| (1297303) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 11:17:00 2015, in response to Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 02:50:57 2015. I cannot imagine flying with a hormonal woman in the cockpit |
|
|
| (1297308) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jul 1 11:29:53 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 11:17:00 2015. I'd take a hormonal woman over Andreas Lubitz.Seriously, I think it's even. Women have mood swings, and so do men. Would you like to have a pilot who is really, really angry at his wife right now? You probably already have had such a pilot and just don't know it. |
|
|
| (1297312) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 11:32:57 2015, in response to Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 02:50:57 2015. The Captain who totaled the Southwest plane at LGA was a female. Also reported that many pilots at the airline had a standing request not to work with her because her CRM skills were utterly lacking. She did not appreciate that the first officer was about to execute a "go around" as they had become destabilized on the approach so she improperly took over control at low altitude and ended up landing on the nose gear |
|
|
| (1297320) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jul 1 11:54:07 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 11:32:57 2015. Is it ever "improper" for the captain to take command of his or her ship, at any time during the flight? I was under the impression that the words "my airplane" were sufficient to for control of the aircraft to change hands.Now, if this particular captain made a gross error, leading to the crash, that's on her, of course. But, AFAIK, the NTSB hasn't released its findings in this accident yet, so we don't know, conclusively, what the proximate cause of the incident was. I'm fairly certain, however, that the weather played a major role in the crash, amid other contributing factors. |
|
|
| (1297325) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 12:24:01 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jul 1 11:54:07 2015. When you do it at 400' or lower to force a landing when situation called for a "go around" then that would be improper. Weather was a factor in that it caused the approach to destabilize and that should have caused a "go around" but the Captain was determined to land the plane on that approach at all costs |
|
|
| (1297330) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 12:43:14 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jul 1 11:54:07 2015. Is it ever "improper" for the captain to take command of his or her ship at any time during the flight?Trick question. The |
|
|
| (1297337) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:25:21 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 11:32:57 2015. and a female was involved in the Continental crash at Buffalo a few years ago. She screamed and panicked in the final moments.Feminists are bad news you know. |
|
|
| (1297338) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:27:56 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 10:14:02 2015. we'll discuss it further at a #summit.Just need to nail it down to Tampa or Newark. But we must #summit. |
|
|
| (1297341) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 13:35:37 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:25:21 2015. While true that her screams were heard on the CVR, the Captain, Marvin Renslow, was Pilot Flying on that leg. It was his improper reaction to the stall that caused the plane to crash. Morever, Delta 1141 and Air Florida 90 (among others) you had all male crews and you can hear screaming as they are about to crash. A female (and scab at that) was the Captain and Pilot Flying of ValuJet 592 and a female was the First Officer (I am not sure if she was Pilot Flying) of United 585 |
|
|
| (1297343) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 13:40:57 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:27:56 2015. How 'bout we meet halfway? Say like, I don't know, Grand Rapids or Spokane? I can make it this weekend. You still have time to take the National Railroad Passenger Corporation or Greyhound. I am not holding my breath since, if history is any indication, you will not show. That's alright, I might have time to meet up with you in another couple three |
|
|
| (1297345) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:43:11 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 13:40:57 2015. why are people afraid to #summit? |
|
|
| (1297348) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Wed Jul 1 13:48:44 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:43:11 2015. Thanks for the Central Islip homicide update. Even I will sometimes hesitate when rolling through the Wyandanch - Brentwood - Central Islip Corridor of Death and that is saying something since nothing scares me - I do not run from trouble but rather I go the other way towards it. |
|
|
| (1297362) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Wed Jul 1 14:43:43 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 13:35:37 2015. You're spoiling Luch's story line. |
|
|
| (1297366) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Wed Jul 1 15:35:40 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by AlM on Wed Jul 1 14:43:43 2015. Look, I am willing to call a spade a spade, but I do not purposely overlook inaccuracies |
|
|
| (1297372) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 16:17:40 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by AlM on Wed Jul 1 14:43:43 2015. my storyline is that feminism will push for more females in the cockpit regardless of merit.that's not good. |
|
|
| (1297449) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Wed Jul 1 22:03:14 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 16:17:40 2015. Won't happen. |
|
|
| (1297451) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Wed Jul 1 22:06:52 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 16:17:40 2015. As if incompetent males in the cockpit is an improvement? I don't think so..... |
|
|
| (1297465) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 23:08:26 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Wed Jul 1 22:06:52 2015. #fatfeminism |
|
|
| (1297506) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 07:17:40 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 23:08:26 2015. That doesn't solve the problem of incompetent males in the cabin. |
|
|
| (1297517) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Jul 2 08:48:40 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 07:17:40 2015. According to Wikipedia, the "cabin" is the part of the aircraft where the passengers are seated. Why would you care about incompetent males there? I'd be more concerned about who is in the cockpit flying the plane? Wouldn't you agree? |
|
|
| (1297545) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Thu Jul 2 09:48:50 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 07:17:40 2015. I'm more worried about incontinent males in the cabin! |
|
|
| (1297597) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 13:17:16 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 07:17:40 2015. males are not advocating hiring pilots based on gender.women are. that's the problem. |
|
|
| (1297601) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 13:22:17 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 13:17:16 2015. Even if true it's not a problem. No airline is ever going to hire pilots based on anything but their qualification to operate an airplane. They could go out of business from the law suits if they engaged in negligent hiring practices. |
|
|
| (1297606) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 13:28:58 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 13:22:17 2015. the government is already lowering standards in air traffic control to meet diversity pressure.did you know that? and sticking to the cockpit, of course I'm right. activists will argue diversity will make everyone safer. |
|
|
| (1297620) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 14:07:43 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 13:17:16 2015. I don't see any variety of evidence backing that up. There is a world of difference between motivating girls to get themselves qualified for aviation and companies hiring anyone that isn't. You really need to do something about your hate issues. It's holding you back and getting worse with time. |
|
|
| (1297622) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 14:10:07 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 14:07:43 2015. How is this about hate?The percentage of female pilots is small. The answer is to force airlines to hire women for the job. |
|
|
| (1297624) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 14:13:17 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 14:10:07 2015. It's small for a reason. Not many women got into it thus far. Those that are have been talking to younger girls about seeking positions in aviation and learning to fly. That will produce higher numbers of QUALIFIED women pilots. |
|
|
| (1297625) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 14:19:02 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 14:10:07 2015. The answer is to force airlines to hire women for the job.And when do you think Congress is going to pass that law? |
|
|
| (1297626) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Jul 2 14:21:05 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 14:13:17 2015. It is not an easy lifestyle and the mergers, furloughs, etc. have created a glut of younger pilots because most of the senior guys who would be retiring now took the early retirement incentives a decade ago so you don't have the quick jump to the major carriers that you had during the 1990's. That is a tough sell to women. |
|
|
| (1297632) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 15:19:19 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 14:13:17 2015. I don't hate nobody.This should not be an issue. But there are those who keep score card of all this stuff to stir shit up. |
|
|
| (1297633) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 15:19:59 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 14:19:02 2015. AlM, you're trolling me and I love it.Affirmative action. Public opinion. Mood in AMerica. |
|
|
| (1297638) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Jul 2 15:36:58 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by JayZeeBMT on Wed Jul 1 11:54:07 2015. The aircraft in question, N753SW, was declared a total loss, and she was fired. (It was floated off to Albany on a barge for scrapping.) |
|
|
| (1297639) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Jul 2 15:39:19 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jul 1 13:25:21 2015. That was actually on the other pilot, who should have pitched the nose down instead of up. |
|
|
| (1297641) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 15:45:43 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 15:19:19 2015. Like who? |
|
|
| (1297644) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 16:24:45 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 15:45:43 2015. feminazis.The mentality that men dominating an industry is divisive. |
|
|
| (1297645) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 16:29:04 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 16:24:45 2015. There is no such thing as "feminazis" outside of lardmouth's sociopathic imagination. That we need to get more women into aviation is an issue time itself will take care of....most commercial pilots come up through the military, and as the number of female military pilots grows, so will the number in commercial aviation. |
|
|
| (1297646) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 16:33:06 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Jul 2 14:21:05 2015. Okay, then explain the number of women that have been working as flight attendants over how many years? Like since commercial aviation began? Schedule's not that much different.The issue here is getting girls to pursue the scientific ends, the career path into the cockpit. No reason any intelligent woman couldn't do that. |
|
|
| (1297659) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Jul 2 17:07:35 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 16:33:06 2015. It is easier as a Flight Attendant because you can be certified on multiple types and the pay for a Flight Attendant is not dependent on aircraft type (so at Airline X if you are the lead Flight Attendant on a 737 operating New York to Los Angeles it is the same pay as if you are the lead Flight Attendant on a 777 on the same route). On the other hand, pilot pay is tied directly to the aircraft you fly and pilots only fly one type of aircraft (unless the certification permits other types as is common with 757/767 or Airbus single aisle jets). If I am a Flight Attendant with enough seniority I can combine aircraft to make the desired scheduled so that I can handle other needs. On the other hand, if I am a pilot and the type of aircraft I fly (because it is better paying) only operates flights exceeding 4 hours one way from my base such that I would have to fly multi-day trips everytime I fly (as 2 person flight crews can only operate by federal regulation a maximum of 8 hours in a 24 hour period) I cannot mix and match so I can work flights starting at 6 AM and am back in time to be home with my family in the evening and avoid the multi-day trips |
|
|
| (1297671) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by cortelyounext on Thu Jul 2 17:21:58 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by mtk52983 on Thu Jul 2 17:07:35 2015. FYI, no more, no less. This is a minor point not germane to discussion but that has never stopped me before. Depending on your acclimated report time, unaugmented flight deck crew can fly up to 9 hours. The 8 (or 9) hours is calculated from time aircraft moves under its own power to block in. All that is based on FAR 117. |
|
|
| (1297672) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Thu Jul 2 17:27:40 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Jul 2 15:36:58 2015. Yep. And after buffing out the damage, a few new rivets, it's back in service as an American Eagle shuttle to Syracuse. :) |
|
|
| (1297673) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by mtk52983 on Thu Jul 2 17:28:42 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by cortelyounext on Thu Jul 2 17:21:58 2015. Thanks. I was trying to keep it simple, although it did end up quite long-winded |
|
|
| (1297687) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Thu Jul 2 17:54:24 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 13:28:58 2015. the government is already lowering standards in air traffic control to meet diversity pressure.Unfortunately, this is true. |
|
|
| (1297695) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by R2Chinatown on Thu Jul 2 18:15:23 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by Dave on Thu Jul 2 17:54:24 2015. How long do the think it will be before the "cockpit" becomes the "Aircraft Control and Communication Module" (ACCM) to sooth the politically correct crowd. |
|
|
| (1297707) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Thu Jul 2 19:21:39 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by bingbong on Thu Jul 2 16:29:04 2015. we need good pilots.gender should not be an issue. |
|
|
| (1297710) | |
Re: Feminists vs. Aviation |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Thu Jul 2 19:30:27 2015, in response to Re: Feminists vs. Aviation, posted by R2Chinatown on Thu Jul 2 18:15:23 2015. You're way too late. It's been the "flight deck" for 30 years at least. |
|
|