-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
P3 Mishap article
- Thread starter S.O.B.
- Start date
Do you have a comment to go with your post?
Is that a requirement tough guy? :icon_mi_1
Actually, it is pretty well accepted here that we don't fire and forget links on the site. This ain't Drudgereport--if the article is thought-provoking enough to post, then presumably you might want to start off with a thought or two about it.
The article raises some issues with currency in P3s I'd like to hear about from guys in the know.
The article raises some issues with currency in P3s I'd like to hear about from guys in the know.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
I think this is but just the tip of the iceberg from "Costwise Readiness" and "FLM" and the impacts they have on pilot skill and proficiency.
I don't particularly care; I found the article interesting and decided to share it. But here it goes anyway: it appears that low flight hours may have contributed to this mishap. What do you guys think?
How does a CO keep a crew safe in a sit like this? IOT have at least one 10-hr+ guy there as the article posits, it mean he has to further concentrate flt hours to just a couple pilots, presumably, assuming they're hurting so badly.
Usually someone has to FOIA request it. They don't just put them out.
Target fixation, scan breakdown . . . take your pick of phrases.
It's been a pretty big discussion here at VP-30 and there are some reasons why they guys didn't have as much hours as they should have. I don't know necessarily if I'm allowed to post why or why not though. I can tell you one thing though, having an aircraft that breaks down frequently and having a limited number of them sure doesn't help the situation.
This is a really good discussion item in the P3 community right now. For those outside of our community, go ask your Safety officer to pull our SIR and read through it. Quite a few CRM take aways as general discussion items. Unfortunately, due to the nature of SIR releasability, it will not be posted on this site.
One of the "hot topic" items in the P3 community right now is currency and proficiency. There are varying metrics out there from 3710, NATOPs and Wing stan notes that set different bars of minimum hours/approaches/landings. What does YOUR community count as a "minimum" hour requirement to fly/sign for the aircraft? Is it a sliding scale based upon hours or quals, ie the more senior or experienced you get, the less hours you need to maintain proficiency? And what constitutes proficiency? I can rack up quite a few hours on repo flights, but does that make me safe to go out a fly as an IP and do funny landings (3eng, 2eng, no flap) instruction? hmmm?
One of the "hot topic" items in the P3 community right now is currency and proficiency. There are varying metrics out there from 3710, NATOPs and Wing stan notes that set different bars of minimum hours/approaches/landings. What does YOUR community count as a "minimum" hour requirement to fly/sign for the aircraft? Is it a sliding scale based upon hours or quals, ie the more senior or experienced you get, the less hours you need to maintain proficiency? And what constitutes proficiency? I can rack up quite a few hours on repo flights, but does that make me safe to go out a fly as an IP and do funny landings (3eng, 2eng, no flap) instruction? hmmm?
If VP-1 Ops was cognizant of the flight hour deficiency for both the IP and PPC getting the NX and they schedualed the event ( arguably a higher risk evolution than most with simulated emergancies) than Ops would/should fry. I saw quite a bit of circumvention of the 10 hour law, (among others that were wantonly circumvented or ignored all together...including crew rest) when I was at VP-1 a few years back, and I talk to some of my contemporaries that were there with me at the time that agree that it was miraculous that we didn't lose a crew. Is this a consequence of being asked to do more with less?? Absolutely. Hopefully this mishap is a wakeup call before the swiss cheese slices really start to pile up. And oh BTW, this was just a pilot trainer evolution on the squadron's home cycle. On deployment, crews are routinely preflighting broke dick aircraft for 7-8 hours, and then expected to fly for another 8 hours . I don't see the situation being rectified until the P-8 arrives in numbers to the fleet....another 6-10 years down the pike....OR a squadron Skipper or Wing Commodore tells group that they cannot maintain crew qual requirements/Optempo with the cards they are dealt....and the latter will NEVER happen!