CMV

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows 98; PalmSource/hspr-H102; Blazer/4.0) 16;320x320)

This morning on UX 7122, the pilot had to be replaced because, his words, he wasn't qualified to land in the current conditions in BOS (low ceiling & little visibility).

I mistakenly assumed that if a pilot is qualified to fly the plane, he's qualified to fly it in any conditions. The pilot's comments unerved quita a few pax.

qasr

I wonder what would have happened if the conditions were good when you departed, but not when you came to land...

RobotDoctor

Keep in mind this is UX, NOT UA. There is a world of difference here. Most people forget that UX are other airlines contracted by UA to fly routes for UA. The qualification procedures are strictly the airlines responsibility, with some qualification guidelines from UA I suspect.

Look, the son of the airline's owner is just trying to make a living too.

DataPlumber

There is additional training to make low visibility landings. This may not be the exact regulation but the ghist is in order to do CAT III, or lower visibility landings, the pilot must actually do one every 90 days. If he does not he would be illegal to make a low vis landing. A pilot would need to get checked out again and they would do it during his or her recurrant training, no big deal. IIRC, only one pilot needs to maintain the endorsement as well.

stanfordhokie

What a joke....

I wonder what would have happened if I told my employer I was only able to do portions of my job under the most ideal conditions. "If it is difficult, you will have to have someone else do it instead...."

crowe

Bear in mind it's not the pilot forcing this it's the FAA. They also impose limits on duty hours for example, which is not common in other, non-safety critical careers.

choster

Many professions and industries work this way-- some things our in-house legal department does, other things we refer to outside counsel; some facilities maintenance is done by our admin services staff, some by contractors; some graphics are produced by our own marketing staff, others by design firms, etc.

ILUV767

For Pilot's maintaining currency can be a challenge as there are so many things that you need to do in order to remain current. Pilots need to remain landing current, for approaches requiring special authorization they need remain current for those, they need to remain instrument current, and the list continues. What happened here is that the pilot's currency for special authorization approaches (CAT II or CAT III ILS) probably expired. Since they dont do those every day, he or she needs to go back to the sim and regain currency. No biggy...it happens.

A friend of mine who flies for AA told me that if you bid for international relief it is really hard to get your three landings in every 90 days as you are basically a systems monitor while crossing an ocean. He has had his currency run out so he cant land the jet. He had to go to Dallas and sit in the sim and show the he remembers how to land the thing.

SJC1K

For pilots, a lot of the currency (currentness?) regulations are of the form "You must have done maneuver x in an actual aircraft or in a simulator y times in the last 90 days to be legal to do it in an aircraft with anyone except an instructor on board." If a pilot's schedule lets him fall out of currency on one aspect, what do you expect him to do, rent a CRJ for an hour to get current again? It's up to the airline to schedule duty or simulator time to keep him current.

12172003

His wording might have been different. He is probably *qualified* but he might not be *current*. The airline might have their own currencies that are greater than the FAR's. This is often the case. There are also many currencies including but not limited to day VFR, night VFR, IFR, Part 121 (I'm guessing), ILS CAT II and ILS CAT III approaches. Further under Part 121, you are not allowed to even begin an approach unless the weather is above the minimums for that particular approach. I fly under Part 91 (general aviation) but I wouldn't be surprised if in the Part 121 FAR's that the a/c and crew and the weather have to be current for an approach to be accepted by the crew.

So back to the original statement, maybe the airline or crew was lax on keeping up to date on CAT II and CAT III approaches or just by chance the pilot had to cancel his time in the simulator due to MX on the sim or family emergency or he was on vacation for a month. His currency for CAT II/III might have been out as those approaches are not regularly required. He's still current, proficient, legal and safe to fly but not for "all" conditions. In fact, right now I am legal for Day VFR but need another night landing for night currency and 3 more approaches for IFR currency. I'll do that this week since UA isn't flying me. time for a $100 hotdog.

PremiumSeat

Well boy, that's discomforting

JohnnyJet

I was on a flight a few years ago where the same thing happened. The Captain mentioned that he was relatively new and because of that he had lower visibiity minimums in which he could fly. (I think he said that was the case until he had something like 100 hours in the seat and had another checkride)

I spoke with a pilot-friend about the experience and he told me the rule is in response to a Continental Airlines crash in the early to mid 80's where the Captain had just a few hours in the left seat and was trying to take-off in a snow storm.

studentff

Simple, the flight would be diverted to an alternate airport where conditions were more favorable. Major nuisance for pax, but not a safety issue.

couscous

scary...

exAC

You most likely have the right interpretation. 100 hours in command is a limit for most countries. It does not matter if the person has 10,000 hours in the right seat of the same aircraft type. 100 hours in command is needed.

It is nice that UX was able to switch Captains and get the flight to operate. the alternative might have been to cancel the flight.