|
|
Skip,
I'm sorry that you misunderstood my comment about the FAA 'babysitting' airliners. The intent was to say that the airlines are not much safer than GenAv in spite of the fact that they have all these extra benefits: compete FAA congtrol of movement, latest technology, maxim um training, excellent experience ... as compared to the week-end Airknocker pilot. Isn't that what I said? I don't think I implied you guys needed any baby-sitting. The implicastion was that yhou were over-regulated, and didn't need as much as you have.
Read my comments to Mr. Jensen.
Terrence
N211AL
----- Original Message ----- From: "Skip Slater" <skipslater@earthlink.net>
To: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 01:58 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: response to Terrence O'Neill's posting...
Well said, Ed!
When I read Terrence's comments about airline pilots being "baby-sat" , I just laughed at it's patent absurdity. As a 17,000+ hour Captain for a major airline and former Navy carrier pilot like yourself, that notion was one I'd never heard before. I have to wonder just who is supposed to be doing the sitting??? I sure don't get any baby sitting when I'm being evaluated during my recurrent simulator checks when they can throw any emergency in the book at me.
Thanks for setting the record straight.
Skip Slater
N540ES
--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/lml/
|
|