Jetstar in the news - photos of cabin crew in pilot seat

  • Thread starter Thread starter Platy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
nlagalle said:
If she was asked to sit there by the captain, that it no problem at all. The captain or PIC can authorise someone to sit in the seat. There isn't spare flight crew sitting around to take over. It's then up to the Captain or PIC to justify why.
Click to expand...

I would assume that you are entirely correct in that the onus is on the Captain. Either way, it's hard to imagine taking pix as being justified as part of performance of duties so Captain may be the one to do the explaining (if permission was indeed granted).
 
Check out the latest credit card signup bonus point offers
Read our AFF credit card guides and start earning more points now.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Platy said:
I would assume that you are entirely correct in that the onus is on the Captain. Either way, it's hard to imagine taking pix as being justified as part of performance of duties so Captain may be the one to do the explaining (if permission was indeed granted).
Click to expand...

The explaining might be as simple as, "I went to the loo so the FA was stationed at my seat, upon my return she asked if i could take a photo. AS the FO was seated in the right hand seat, there was no danger to the aircraft".

As for the other photo, there is no issue with the FO sitting in the left hand seat. the jouno seems to think the entire plane revolves around that chair!
 
nlagalle said:
As for the other photo, there is no issue with the FO sitting in the left hand seat. the jouno seems to think the entire plane revolves around that chair!
Click to expand...

I agree, the PIC is the key, not where he sits. What a beat up, we cannot esablish if its a revenue flight with passengers, if it is in the air or is even a real aircraft as many have pointed out, they obviously give out degrees in journalism to a pretty low standard these days!
 
nlagalle said:
The explaining might be as simple as, "I went to the loo so the FA was stationed at my seat, upon my return she asked if i could take a photo. AS the FO was seated in the right hand seat, there was no danger to the aircraft".

As for the other photo, there is no issue with the FO sitting in the left hand seat. the jouno seems to think the entire plane revolves around that chair!
Click to expand...

I think the article does indeed recognise that there are many legitimate reasons for the FO sitting in the left hand seat.
 
Platy said:
I think the article does indeed recognise that there are many legitimate reasons for the FO sitting in the left hand seat.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it also shows his total lack of knowledge in aircraft operations and regulations.

And example:

"The sender of these images points out that the first officer may well have proper cause to be in the left hand seat in providing relief to the captain, or for training purposes if it wasn’t a flight carrying passengers."

Wrong... I've seen a SO in the Left hand seat and the FO in the righthand seat. The captain only needs to be PIC on take off and landing, or the FO can be ICUS (in command under supervision). I've been upfront when an FO was ICUS.

But then I don't think Crikey are a reputable news source - i know one of the "journalists" and he is a fruit loop.
 
markis10 said:
I agree, the PIC is the key, not where he sits. What a beat up, we cannot esablish if its a revenue flight with passengers, if it is in the air or is even a real aircraft as many have pointed out, they obviously give out degrees in journalism to a pretty low standard these days!
Click to expand...

No, indeed, you are right, we cannot establish many things.

But our failure to be able to verify certain things from one photo, does not enable us to discount or discredit the journalist with any confidence. He may or may not have additional supporting evidence, be able to see more detail in the photos, have written statements, checked whether the photo is digitaly altered, etc, we just don't know.

Journalists work under tight limits on article length, so do not have the luxury of going into great supporting detail in many instances.

Articles can also be savagely sub-edited before publication.

What do you expect the journo to do?
 
nlagalle said:
Yes, but it also shows his total lack of knowledge in aircraft operations and regulations.

And example:

"The sender of these images points out that the first officer may well have proper cause to be in the left hand seat in providing relief to the captain, or for training purposes if it wasn’t a flight carrying passengers."

Wrong... I've seen a SO in the Left hand seat and the FO in the righthand seat. The captain only needs to be PIC on take off and landing, or the FO can be ICUS (in command under supervision). I've been upfront when an FO was ICUS. .
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I disagree with your logic on this one.

The quote does not exclude other reasons for a FO being on the left! It provides sufficient information to justify the statement that there are legit reasons for the FO to be photographed on the left (without the need to be exhaustive on all attendant rules and regs)!
 
Platy said:
I'm afraid I disagree with your logic on this one.

The quote does not exclude other reasons for a FO being on the left! It provides sufficient information to justify the statement that there are legit reasons for the FO to be photographed on the left (without the need to be exhaustive on all attendant rules and regs)!
Click to expand...

No, it gives wrong information.

"first officer may well have proper cause to be in the left hand seat in providing relief to the captain, or for training purposes if it wasn’t a flight carrying passengers."

Wrong. the statement itself is wrong. Incorrect. the last bit is wrong.
 
nlagalle said:
No, it gives wrong information.

"first officer may well have proper cause to be in the left hand seat in providing relief to the captain, or for training purposes if it wasn’t a flight carrying passengers."

Wrong. the statement itself is wrong. Incorrect. the last bit is wrong.
Click to expand...

In which case you are saying that the person being quoted by the journo has it wrong?!
 
Yes (according to my understanding of the rules and my time flying), but the journalist should have doubled check it before running it..

He also says:

"She would be incapable of responding to a TCAS or automated collision alert system warning"

She wouldn't need to.. The SO would be in the right hand seat

"In an emergency procedure caused by a cabin depressurisation or an engine fire she would be occupying a seat urgently required by a pilot."

Questionable.. However as the SO is there he would be controlling the situation and if needed assistance, she would be able to help.

"There are enough breaches of air safety regulations implicit in these images to result in criminal prosecutions."
The journalist fails to state what regs have been broken. I wonder if he knows what CAO and CAR means?
From reading this guys other articles, he's on an agenda.. But then most of them at Crikey usually are.
 
The real story may be in a paragraph near the end:

Our informant is critical of the pilot culture at Jetstar and says, "Due to an industrial requirement of keeping costs low promoting pilots in house, the experience, safety culture and compliance with simple regulatory requirements have been neglected.
Click to expand...

but these pictures seem to do little to prove that point.

But we are saved from doom. News is on the case

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24286437-2,00.html
 
nlagalle said:
"In an emergency procedure caused by a cabin depressurisation or an engine fire she would be occupying a seat urgently required by a pilot."
Click to expand...

What if said pilot is in the toilet? They do have to relieve themselves sometimes.
 
oz_mark said:
What if said pilot is in the toilet? They do have to relieve themselves sometimes.
Click to expand...

I know... That's why I believe the journalist has no idea on what he is talking about, and the person who submitted the pics have no idea either.

Which scenario would you prefer:

1. Flight deck with one pilot while the other is off taking a wizz.

2. FA steps in and sits with the other pilot as a "just in case" Sure they can't fly, but there are plenty of other things to be done that they could assist in.

I'd be taking option 2 thanks.
 
nlagalle said:
2. FA steps in and sits with the other pilot as a "just in case" Sure they can't fly, but there are plenty of other things to be done that they could assist in.
Click to expand...

Minus sunnies, of course.

Don't know about CASA (bunch of wimps), but don't try this in the USA...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.

Recent Posts

Currently Active Users

Total: 702 (members: 34, guests: 668)
Back
Top