Scudrunners

[url=http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 8&t=108286]http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 8&t=108286[/url]


....when we are told FTU's can do checkouts on any aircraft without any type experience.


I can't post this comment on elsewhere as the PC police will get hysterical.  Sorry it makes me angry when people die and we are told type specific training / experience isn't valuable.


Direct all training to Authorized FTU personnel, regardless if appropriate expertise is available there.


4 bars know all!


Here I can be more blunt.  Offended I'm taking a shot at precious FTU's that we must protect the image of?


Sorry. What kind of nanny state is this?


Rant over --

So are you insane, batshit crazy or both ? What on earth does a crash in a commercial/business airplane have to do with a claim that most instructors with some experience should be able to privately check out a licensed pilot on a mooney ?? Really, what are you smoking ?

Note that the MU2 is probably one of the only small planes where any random instructor can *NOT* check you out on due to the mandatory FAA training program.

Idiot.

I think you are being a bit to hard on Rookie, I have been trying to form an answer to his post but am having a problem figuring out how to answer him.

It looks like this guy had been flying MU-2s since at least May 2014, according to his posts on beechtalk.com.

I'm not sure what was the cause of the rant. I suspect some inside knowledge about the aircraft, owner or something like that. It would be interesting to know if the sked flights were flying. I have never flown an MU2 but the spoiler system seems to be beyond some pilot's experience level. Having flown aircraft with spoiler systems one thing sticks in my mind - "quiet hands" any thing approaching ham fisted over control will hurt you or at least get you a canoe (wing tip). Looking at the forecast it was one of those maritime days. Low ceilings and high winds. East coasters know exactly what I am talking. I think this will likely turn out to be an example of a crew getting in way over their head with tragic results. I have flown approached in that area with winds gusting over 50 kts. The turbulence was significant with some aircraft discontinuing approaches because of turbulence not the ceiling and vis.

the MU2 ... the mandatory FAA training program.  Idiot.

Uuummmm ... people who live in glass houses ought to be
careful whom they throw rocks at.

FAA SFAR 108 is NOT a requirement to getting a high performance
type rating on the moo-too in Canada, which is all the PIC
requires from a regulatory standpoint in Canada, regardless of
where the aircraft is registered.

I really wish people would get over the paper, and pay a little
bit more attention to developing their abilities as a pilot.

How depressing.  But that's what happens when safety - you
know, not crashing - really isn't very important.  And not crashing
really isn't very important in Canada in aviation.

Colonel Sanders wrote:

the MU2 ... the mandatory FAA training program.  Idiot.

Uuummmm ... people who live in glass houses ought to be
careful whom they throw rocks at.

How depressing.  But that's what happens when safety - you
know, not crashing - really isn't very important.  And not crashing
really isn't very important in Canada in aviation.

Exactly.


But we must protect everyones "feelings" first.


Incompetence sure gets offended when called out. Same in every industry I've ever seen.


MU 2's used to have generalized training. Horrid accident rates, type specific was introduced using instructors experienced in type.  Rates fell.


Same with Cirrus.  FTU models used to be used with those too, until rates got so bad insurance intervened, and Cirrus responded with specific training program. Accident rates fell. 


See a pattern here.


Those defending the FTU be and end all for every model ever created, curious how many one has turned away and said "I'm not the best answer, go see CS, or flightsafety, or John over here. He's a better training option for you"


-----


Didn't think so.

Never mind the Rice Rocket, just try and find a FTU that has an instructor who can give dual on a simple Piper Cub.


We even have a Class one instructor that is now working for TC as an inspector who will not do check outs in a Fleet Canuck unless he can sit in the left hand seat.....


The whole FTU situation can not be better explained than the above comments.

I'm a little lost, which is not unusual but could someone explain to me what an FTU has to do with this. OH ya I had to google it to find out what it was -- lmaooooo -- I'm still not sure what an FTU is but reading between the lines it's has to be an approved school with a check air man attached. I can't see any of these being involved with MU2 training. SimCom has a simulator so would it not be compulsory for any operator to use it. I'm sure after reading various posts here that the FTU system in Canada is sadly lacking but I can't quite connect the dots to this accident.

What I want to know and maybe it has been answered but what was a US plane doing flying charters point to point in Canada?