BlueHenFlyer

As I was boarding UA 457 from DEN - PDX today, the Captain was whining vociferously to the Purser about some issue - really whining it up. I was on the phone with Ms. BHF and told her that I'd bet money we'd take a mechanical on the flight.

Sure as shootin' once the jet way was pulled back, Cap'n Whiner was on the PA claiming that there was a problem with something up front that he had never seen in his 4 decades of flying the A320 (just kidding on the tenure).

Well, we ended up with 5 maintenance guys who came to look. They fixed whatever problem he had within about 10 minutes and we were off. They didn't need to sign a log or do any paperwork.

Am I correct to assume that whatever the issue was it was something that we could easily have flown to Portland with? Are there airworthiness issues that can be addressed without paperwork?

Does Cap'n Whiner get paid more for the 30 minute delay?

FriendlySkies

Perhaps there was a lit illuminated in the cockpit that they wanted to check before flying to PDX? Maybe there was an issue with the IFE?

Probably best to ask our resident Pilots.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...l#post15687628

Doc Savage

Did you miss a connection at PDX? If not, the answer may be in the thread below.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...ain-about.html

SJUAMMF

I experienced this once in Chicago. In that case they changed his seat.

Happy Hour

What's up lately with passengers jumping into the cockpit? Recently, there was another thread with self loading cargo demanding a pilot be grounded for executing a go around after a less than stellar landing attempt. ...?

I'm sure the pilot in command wants to get to the destination as much as you do, safely. You'd think with all the pressure to make on time arrivals it would have to be something serious to warrant a delay, right?

I'm going out on a limb saying that pilots are professionals that take pride in their work and there are standard procedures in place that say what you can and can't take flying.

[unduly personalized reference deleted by Moderator per FT rules]

Berrenger

I was sitting in the front row of F on the flight. After the mechanics left I heard the captain tell an FA she should verify the fix since it affected her more.?.? What I found odd was that the captain made a big deal about the issue he had never experienced before, but never actually explained the problem - even after it was taken care of. I certainly would have liked to have been let in on the "secret."

Bear96

No.

And I am having trouble following your logic. How do you get to your conclusion as stated above from witnessing a "vociferous" conversation between the Captain and a F/A?


Most likely, no. Unless the delay is excessive, flight crew are generally only paid after the breaks have been released. So if the problem was fixed at the gate, they would not have been "on the clock" yet.

united78

Reference deleted by moderator to now-deleted post.

To the OP, it is easy to complain, but if a circumstance had arisen during the flight that impacted yours and others safe travel, you may be singing a different song about the Captain..

mh3265a

This really does belong in the least substantial thing to complain about forum. I think almost everyone except for the OP would want to make sure the pilot is 110% confident in flying his aircraft regardless of what the actual problem might be. Further the log may have been filled out after the flight left so as to not further delay the plane.

flyinbob

Wow.

To the OP, no you can't assume anything regarding maintenance of an aircraft. The captain, likely not "whining" but just trying to get the attention of one of the many UA employees who don't seem to care too much about their job performance, may have seemed a bit trivial about things, but I'm not sure it warranted that comment.

To the UA apologists, please stop. If nothing else, a matter of maintenance and operational practice was argued in front of customers, which is a GIANT no-no in any company. The professionalism of all involved is seriously in question. Given that passengers were aware of the situation, the pilot or ground staff should have better explained the delay and problem to the customers. It is a problem of long-standing at UA, and not enough people stand up and make their objections heard on the matter of passenger treatment, and your perpetual cheerleading for UA simply reinforces the attitude that this is acceptable. It is not, and neither is your support of it.

aluminumdriver

Well, first off the OP's story has many holes in it. First, just because the OP saw the captain talking with the purser about it doesn't mean it was done out where all the passengers could see and hear, maybe just one nosey one? Secondly, if any maintenance action is done on the aircraft, it usually requires a new maintenance release. No way the OP could know what paperwork was required, or what the maintenance issue was, so his "whinning" category I find rather whinny myself.

Just what was the purpose of this thread? He wasn't delayed, the plane was found safe by mechanics, and it appears he is wondering if the pilot did it on purpose to get paid more??? Please Sometimes maintenance problems do not appear right away, they come back later on. The ISSUE, is whether the pilot blows it off, or does the right thing and consults maintenance, which this pilot did. Sometimes we give a detailed explanation, other times not. I'm usually a less detailed type of PA person. I've had passengers get all worked up over a maintenance issue that is very minor based on their percieved notion of what I said, so less is more in my opinion. But I will keep people up to speed with time constraints and all.

Oh well, another wonderful FT moment lol. Cheers.

AD

LessO2

Eight minutes.

According to United.com, the flight arrived EIGHT MINUTES late into Portland.

Clearly a new low.

For this forum.

nzpilot

I think flyinbob makes a reasonable point about how the matter was handled, however, I believe don't really see this as a UA apologist issue. The OP described the event in emotional terms of "whining" when he really had no idea what the problem was. In fact, there is so little known, there is no way to tell what problem actually brought them back to the gate. He then wonders aloud if there was financial incentive for the Capt to delay the departure. flyinbob characterizes questioning the OP's approach to the event as being a UA apologist. I think not.

The biggest confusion to me is that the OP is BlueHenFlyer, yet the amplification comment about being in row 1 was made by Berrenger, so it looks like we have 2 FT posters on this flight.

Put me in the group that prefers a reasonable explanation of delays once it is clear something is amiss. I too hate to sit in the back with no clue as to what's up. I am not there to second guess a/c systems, but we've all heard intelligent announcements of status, and recognize the exact opposite.

While I disagree with the OP's rhetoric, I agree with flyinbob that it could have been handled better....

axl

BHF,

I think the other posters have addressed the tenor or your post adequately, so I won't go there.

As far as your other questions, here is my take.

I (UA pilot) often find maintenance issues that impact the F/As. In those cases it is appropriate to discuss with impacts with them. Sometimes this may be a 'what if' or 'in my experience' type discussion. Sometimes I may offer my opinion on what has (or hasn't) been done my maintenance. The bottom line is that we want a safe plane, functioning systems that allow the FAs to do their jobs, and a functional & comfortable cabin for the passengers. I should add that with the minimum number of FAs being assigned to flights, they don't usually have time to stand in the cockpit for these discussions so I usually go to see them...they're normally very busy during boarding.

It's not uncommon to see that many Mx guys come to the plane in Denver. Denver has gotten better in the past year or so, but IME it was the WORST place to deal with a mechanical! Five mx guys all complaining about having to investigate or fix a problem was the norm....Throw in the visit from the supervisor who thinks we are FOS and complains about how 'he'll take a mx delay'/. As I said, IME it's better recently.

Our 'logbook' is electronic so you won't see a mechanic handle a logbook or sign anything. They fix the problem and then go inside and document the fix/deferral/ect... on the computer. A MRD (Maintenance Release Document) is generated and prints on the cockpit printer.

Maintenance is a HUGE deal obviously. We are NOT allowed to proceed without the EXACT documentation required by the FAA and UA. I (nor will my colleagues) cut any corners in that regard. We are required to know the exact maintenance status of the plane -- that means EVERYTHING about the plane. Whenever we find a problem we ARE REQUIRED to document it when we find it. Since there is no paper logbook EVERYTHING is documented via ACARS. I really upset our contract mechanic if Frankfurt a year or so ago when I wrote up a missing screw on the engine pylon. After he replaced it, he had to drive to his office to document the fix and re-release the plane. It was inconvenient for him, but if it isn't written up, there is NO history of the work being done! EVERYTHING must be documented...just ask any friendly FAA inspector. You may find that inconvenient, but that is how it works. Remember, this isn't the family car!

Some writeups can be 'deferred' if legally allowed by the FAA. This can be anything from a reading light to an engine driven generator. The deferral may list conditions required for the deferral (eg no forecast icing, functional APU, ect...). The deferral may also list steps that must be verified or accomplished by flightcrew or groundcrew. For example, on a recent flight we had a cargo door indicator light that had illuminated on the inbound flight. Mx determined that the sensor switch was bad, but didn't have the part locally. The indicator system was 'deferred', but the door had to be physically checked prior to departure. There were additional steps for the pilots to be aware of in flight. Not only are we legally required to be aware of everything about the maintenance status of the plane, but it is just good common sense! We will not rush through this. Of course if I get a plane with no deferred items, it takes no time at all. One more thing -- the Captain is the ultimate judge of what is or is not acceptable for the flight. At UA, we can (and will) refuse a plane because of a 'legal deferral'. This can be a highly contentious issue at times.

I'm sure our pay has been addressed ad nauseum here somewhere But the answer is 'no' he did not get extra pay. Our pay starts at brake release (with the doors closed). I can assure you that he wasn't trying to make an extra buck .

LongingForORD

I for one DO get the family car checked out if something indicates that there is an issue with my car's safety or performance. Especially if I am driving a car full of people.

In my 40+ years of flying, I have never once questioned a pilot decision to ask for an extra check or even pull the plane on a mechanical. I can not fly or fix a plane, therefore I am not qualified to give an opinion on what is safe to fly. I defer to the pilots expertise. My safety when flying is my #1 priority!