Jump to content


VR Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Mikemv last won the day on December 18 2017

Mikemv had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

406 Excellent

About Mikemv

  • Rank
    VR Veteran Poster
  • Birthday 12/31/1946

Previous Fields

  • Company working for
    HelicopterSBT, Unmanned Safety Institute

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Naples, Florida
  • Interests
    Helicopter Aviation for the last 50+ yrs
  1. R22Butters, Participation requirements should be checked with program administrators. "I know you want to see these concepts open to anyone and they are. Just go to one of the schools offering participation, commit to a career in helicopter aviation, complete the steps, get interviewed, and possibly get hired." I believe both programs begin at the initial flight school levels. Contact the programs for exact details. Mike
  2. R22Butters, It is not my intention to speak for either of the mentioned programs but rather offer some info on them in response to your post. For details on either program, contact the sources in the articles. Both programs in the articles are designed to not just take someone "off the street" but rather to interview pilots that have committed to a career and demonstrated that from day one and through out the process. The industry has been interviewing "off the street" and it creates trying to select pilots from an "unknown pool" which has shown itself to be costly, time consuming and inadequate. I have been involved in discussions with principles from both programs, trained 54 CFIs at one school and all CFIs at the other. Both schools have superior programs to immerse pilots in training in a SMS, college programs and effective FTDs. I know you want to see these concepts open to anyone and they are. Just go to one of the schools offering participation, commit to a career in helicopter aviation, complete the steps, get interviewed, and possibly get hired. This is somewhat similar to the vetting process used by the airlines. End users (companies doing the hiring at this level, want to know who and what they are drawing from and have that be a selective pool of skilled pilots with both demonstrated flying and head working skills. You can expect other employers to be looking for the same pilot pool to draw from as they programs mature and show their successes. Well I'm working for a company now driving a semi (Fedex) who will hire a guy off the street (employers want to know the background and commitment level of pilots-vetting) who does not have a Class A CDL, (totally know possess the desired skill sets) put him through a pre-course with a "driver developer" (mentor) for about two weeks (know they have trained in the desired"pre-course"), then a three week training course with a company trainer (specific line oriented company 135 training), followed then by a two week post-course with the driver developer again (new hire evaluation period, expected to be very successful with little or no attrition), after which he is sent to DMV for testing. After all that he gets with the station manager for final evaluation and then gets to do the job solo. This program not only costs him nothing, but all the while he is actually getting paid! (Companies that are "end" employers do not take on the massive expense of training pilots that could drop out at any time, that need to be monitored and developed and possibly not suited for hire) Now I'm guessing driving a semi around city streets isn't as hazardous as flying tourists up and down The Strip all day, but at least this program is open for anyone who wants to apply! Both of the programs in the articles are open to anyone that wants to participate and show the structure of how to move forward. I should also mention that a job like this, as a city driver, generally requires at least one year of experience driving a tractor/trailer (our version of the 1,000 hour thing) yet somehow Fedex feels that if they develop the driver then it works out just the same. (the programs are the developing) I myself actually went through this program, because even though I already had my Class A CDL I didn't quite have the one year's experience driving a semi, kinda like if someone already had a CPL, but still less than 1,000 hours. Sundance could hire someone like that, put them through a similar program, then let them fly Strip tours part-time for a while. Then later they could progress to Canyon tours, and eventually a full-time position. (Why would any company want to take all of this on when these programs are in place that will meet their requirements?) ,...just sayin' Mike
  3. Here is one we published with permission of Shawn Coyle. http://www.ihst.org/Portals/54/insights/energy.pdf Be educated before you attempt something different. Then, be both current & proficient in what you are doing.
  4. https://www.verticalmag.com/news/aviation-futures-to-provide-career-paths-for-helicopter-pilots/ There are a few industry individuals that have shared their ideas on this and worked hard to take them forward. I have collaborated with them in the past as we worked on other initiatives. Aviation Futures has pilots currently proving the value of the ideas to provide for pilots.
  5. https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20170923X01730&AKey=2&RType=Prelim&IType=LA
  6. WolftalonID, Respectfully as an industry professional I know you do not adhere to not following industry SOPs and manufacturers requirements. Accepting the procedure of not writing up an exceedance leads to accepting other procedures that become standardized (accepted) in the company structure. I do not believe you would teach this as the company 135 chief instructor! The USHST has addressed this as causal factors in accidents and is certainly not an industry SOP or Best Practice. When we have questions about maintenance that are not clearly defined, go to the OEM for guidance. Company DOMs are not qualified to make these determinations. There may be a NDT procedure recommended or other procedure for continued airworthiness post A/S - Q limitation exceedances?
  7. Guys, All exceedances of limitations should be written up (documented) with quantity and duration "Every" time. When there is no subsequent action listed in the MM for the exceedance, OEM Tech Reps either in the region or at the factory support center should be contacted for guidance. This limitation is about mast bending in an area that was not tested during initial engineering calculations. The exceedance puts pressure on the mast, mast bearing and other transmission locations/components. I do not believe this limitation was listed in the early B206 models but grew to be an issue with time in service. Factory information will tell us what they consider to be a grounding condition if one exist, possiibly something like "I flew at 110 kts. for 4 minutes at 95%Q or I flew at 89 kts. for 30 seconds at 87%Q which would both be exceedances but I suspect with different recommendations if any from the OEM. That said, if there was a list of 12 or 27 exceedances listed due to accepting this practice, I would not fly the aircraft and expect component changes to be recommended or required by the OEM. No pilot should ever state that it is not a limitation exceedance because no immediate inspection requirements are required!
  8. Tail booms are not made to hold 50# within 3 feet of the T/R. Did you figure CG movement during fuel burn to near zero fuel?
  9. I am looking for some current 135 check pilots/check airmen, qualified to perform checks in a R66. If you give me the company name of 135 R66 operators, I will make the phone calls. Single pilot 135 operators do not meet the requirements. As a heads up to 135 operators, search on faa.gov for N8900.432 Thanks Problem solved at this time 9/21/2017 2PM
  10. Received from my peers at HAI today in a daily email. Attention all FAR Part 135 R44 operatorsNews Staff posted on July 06, 2017 10:39Note: This applies only to "N" Registered A/C that are operating under FAA regulation FAR Part 135 Effective April 25, 2017, to conduct operations under FAR Part 135 your R-44 was to have been equipped with a “Radio Altimeter.” On June 5, 2017 the FAA published Change 527 to 8900.1 (Part A Operations Specification). This change effectively extended the compliance date for your Robinson R-44 to October 24, 2018. If you wish to take advantage of the above extended compliance date and delay the equipping of your aircraft with a “Radio Altimeter” system and be able to continue operations under FAR Part 135, you must still apply for a “Letter of Deviation Authority” per OpSpec A160. This LoD Authority allows you to operate without a Radar Altimeter for Part 135 operations until October 24, 2018, or until your Radio Altimeter is installed, whichever occurs sooner. If you have questions about this rule or LoD, please contact HAI Flight Operations Department. Note: If you are currently being prohibited from operating your R44 on your FAR Part 135 Certificate due to perceived noncompliance with OpSpec A160, you need to contact your local FSDO ASAP to resolve the issue. Also please advise the HAI Flight Operations Department so we can monitor the situation.
  11. Guys, FSIMS 8900.405 https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/notice/n_8900.405.pdf can be used to get an extension but installation will be required! The LODA was never intended for the R44 or R66. HAI & USHST are working on getting a revision to the RA requirement as it was initially intended for accident reduction in the HAA/EMS world of night operations. The R44 has a factory kit for installation. I assisted a local 135 operator get this done for a R66 which has no retro fit kit from the factory. STC & DER required. Robinson does ask if you want the RA installed during production. I was contacted when the article came out by FAA/HAI for USHST input/feedback and my reply was: {{Thanks for the article attachment. Here are some comments to parts of the article: [135 Operators (even single pilot operators need to stay abreast of regulation changes that they will have to comply with!) No excuses. As far as brown out, white out (any off airport site) and flat light which can happen and it should not be stated or accepted that most 135 operators could not encounter these conditions, she is required to address these with training in those areas. She needs to use the OEM as a source for equipment upgrades and guidance, - Robinson has a kit for the RA in a R44.] I do understand her frustration and views, but she could have been more professional in her overall statement of operations.}} All of this said, we can post NPRMs that will effect us here and assist each other in keeping ahead of coming requirements. Mike
  12. OP/Sir: So you want people to notice that you have achieved performance and at the same time have experienced professionals disregard standard industry practices for determining performance, weight and balance, ballast operations? Do you verify what the max designed skid loading was? As a member of the US Helicopter Safety Team, many of my peers have discussed these kinds of videos and the example and mind set it shows. My USHST peers have written a Safety Bulletin about showing the correct example. http://ihst.org/portals/54/training_videos/Setting_the_Right_Example/story.html http://www.ihst.org/portals/54/IHST_News/2014%20Right%20Example%20Bulletin.pdf So, you were successful in showing a disregard for industry standards and risk management practices. If you want recognition and accolades you could do better. Mike
  13. The FAA requires UAS operators to hold a pilot certificate (Sport to ATP) for the 333 COA commercial operations.
  14. Of course they are still doing all of the same required training. That never changed but AOPA did put something on Facebook to the contrary. If anyone actually read the PTS change 1, they knew this and did not go off on the FAA? ASIs & DPEs can still require it on the practical test at their discretion even if an endorsement is made. The Touchdown endorsement is a risk mitigation tool for examiners to use if desired.
  15. Here is the press release I mentioned above https://www.rotor.org/RotorNews/June16/USHST-2.pdf Mike
  • Create New...