helonorth Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 (edited) Getting the interview is all about you and your hours. You gotta get the foot in the door first, and right now that means hours. Employers demand it. The days of the 800 hour pilot sneaking in on a 135 job are long gone. I don't care how swell of a guy you are and who you know, the hours are a real deal breaker right now. Too many pilots with 1000-2000 hours looking for work. Right or wrong, you're going to have to meet at least the minimums, then you can put all your super networking skills to work. I know it ain't right, but pilots have been getting jobs with a Parker pen since the Wright brothers. Edited August 9, 2012 by helonorth 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam32 Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Since there's been some "scenario" talk...how about this one... A 600hr Commercial pilot (no CFI) went straight to an AG job at 150hrs, is going for a tour job that requires 700hrs, he fudges 100hrs. A CFI with 800hrs that went straight to instructing also applies for the job. Who has more actual "stick time", more experience for the job and who would you hire assuming everything else is equal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ridethisbike Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 EDIT: Misread adam32's post. My response was invalid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wally Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 It seems to me that the real issue is integrity. Clear as the definition is, words don't mean the same thing every time. What is clear is that when one rationalizes an act that varies from the standard, one is excusing the action in spite of it not meeting an accepted standard, You could rationalize that the minimum flight loggable is 0.1 hrs, so every time the skids break ground it's 0.1 hrs. and be perfectly honest. if the intent is to do something other than the definition, say you needed 10, 15 hours, and you pulled a 150 landings in an hour based on the 0.1 rule, the intent of the definitions has clearly been changed and there is no real yardstick at that point except what you want. A rotor overspeed that's only a few turns over the limit? The write-up and hassle is probably more trouble than it's worth, why bother? Well, I'm not qualified, but it will "probably" be okay. And a 900 hour pilot could "probably" fly a 1000 hour job. I would rather work with the pilot who calls it as it is rather than what he wishes it were. I won't work with a pilot that has record otherwise. Do what you gotta do and sleep well every night. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I couldn't sleep at all last night. -Bobby Lewis- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arotrhd Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 Ripped from ANN/Fri, Aug 24, 2012- I'm guessing he was a plankwinger: Falsified Logbook Leads To Probation For Iowa Pilot Attempted To Get Commercial Rating Based On Inflated Hours A pilot who attempted to get his commercial rating without having flown the requisite number of hours to enter the program was sentenced to four years probation for falsifying his logbook. Fahad Nabeel Hussein Al-Daous, who holds joint U.S. and Saudi Arabian citizenship, pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FAA. The 33-year-old Iowa resident and stay-at-home father presented the falsified logbook to a pilot examiner at the Ottumwa, IA, airport in May of 2011, according to a report from the Associated Press. He had obtained his instrument rating at the airport, and was attempting to enter a program for a commercial rating. The discrepancies were uncovered when the flight school compared his log book and billing records, and found that he had not actually made many of the flights he had logged. Falsifying a record such as a logbook can carry a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine not to exceed $250,000. But at the sentencing, U.S. District Court Judge John Jarvey agreed with defense attorneys that Al-Daous had committed fraud, but had not intended to put the public at risk, had no criminal history, never flew beyond his qualifications, and was remorseful for his actions. He is reportedly raising his three children while his wife completes her education. His airman privileges have been revoked, and he may not apply for a pilot certificate as a condition of his probation. FMI: www.faa.gov, www.ca8.uscourts.gov/iowa.htm -WATCH FOR THE PATTERNS, WATCH FOR THE WIRES- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 Dude didn't know the difference between falsifying and fudging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightsta1ker Posted August 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 Dude didn't know the difference between falsifying and fudging. Is there a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Pig Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) Am I the moral compass for the aviation industry? Not hardly. But geeeez people! 8 pages discussing what constitutes lying? I feel like Im reading the transcripts from the Clinton Lewinsky impeachment! Its pretty simple really: Lying + Lying= Not True. If you feel you can justify it thats on you. Some people have never been in a position where being trusted actually matters or been in a position where people actually counted on you in a real life or death situation. Heck, I see people everyday that view honesty as a roadblock, but God help you if you ever lie to them!!!If you need to get on an internet forum to figure out what constitutes honesty then you have bigger problems than worrying about whether or not PHI, Era or RLC is going to hire you next week 100hrs short of the minimums. News flash....Nobody owes you your dream. If it takes you 15 years to get your time, then sorry, thats how life is. It isnt fair. Im that guy, so I dont have any sympathy for somebody who cant wait until next years Vegas tour season. Some people have to work for it hard. Some, it falls in their laps because dad owned 5 Hueys and a 530F. Others work years scraping and clawing and then one day they run in to the right guy at the FBO counter and it makes it all worth it. Then there are others for whom it never pans out and in your golden years youll think back to those days when you really wanted to fly helicopters for a living. Not that I have any psychic ability but I can read between the lines. For a few of you posting on this topic its pretty obvious what you are attempting to do. Low time pilots trying to get a feel for what the industry and other pilots might see as "acceptable". You are looking for someone to tell you what you want to hear, "do what you have to do because I did and Im OK". And, reading through the posts, people have relayed stories where the standards were dropped for them, or people that were supposed to be the gate keepers looked the other way, and now its just a funny story because it didnt really matter. "Yeah, I lied but he said I could. And it never really mattered anyway my experience is way past that now. Those 20 night hours I lied about 2000hrs ago? Sheeesh, who cares Ill erase them now if its that big of a deal." Your looking for someone else to tell you where the line is because you cant figure it out for yourself.Yeah, who cares if you write in a couple hundred hours for a job that requires you to fly straight and level back and forth on the same route everyday. Youll build time and it will be behind you and next thing you know, youll have 3000hrs of AStar time and youll probably be a really good pilot. What happens when your lie gets put to the test and you end up with some long line job flying a 100' plasma line slinging (fill in the blank) off of a hillside up through oak trees out of a box canyon at 4500ft in July, with a tail wind, over a set of high tension power lines to a trailer 3 miles away? I say if your going to fudge, fudge something cool that will get people to buy you drinks. Write in an NVG endorsement and keep yourself current. After you have a couple hundred hours of real time it wont matter then. Oh wait, you wouldnt lie about being able to do that. Cuz that S--T gets people killed!!! Instead we talk about inflating what I know I can already do because nobody will notice that. Yeah, anyone can pencil in 200-300hrs of "Pattern work with Joe Smith" I know a pilot right now flying a sought after job who is a total fraud piece of crap and I know it and so do several others. Said pilot doesnt call me anymore nor would they probably even make eye contact with me if they saw me. If you want to be the person who runs for the bathroom to avoid people who know who you are then enjoy your time sitting in the stall pretending you're going potty while Im eating all the cookies at the front counter. You know, maybe Im just an insensitive a$$ because I am pretty fortunate in what I get to do day in and day out and if I want to master a skill I just jump in the helo and go train until I have it mastered. Not to mention I work with two other pilots who can freakin' fly circles around me. One who gets called in for missions that I wont be ready to do for a couple years at the earliest. A couple hundred hours ago I thought I was pretty good. I look back now and laugh. Now, the more I fly, and the more situations I get involved in, my "training needed" list just seems to get longer. I think its funny that nobody is talking about fudging in time that actually requires you to be able to perform a skill your lie wont back up. If your struggling morally with yourself, do yourself a favor. Stick to something that doesn't involve people relying on you to bring them home at night. Edited August 24, 2012 by Flying Pig 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 I just find it funny how rant oriented some responses are. Some people are just having fun with the topic. Other people are having fun taking all the fun out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Pig Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 I see young pilots asking serious questions about what they can or cant get away with. My mistake. Carry on with your fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 I just find it funny how rant oriented some responses are. Some people are just having fun with the topic. Other people are having fun taking all the fun out of it. Who exactly is having fun with this topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyb Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 I just find it funny how rant oriented some responses are. Some people are just having fun with the topic. Other people are having fun taking all the fun out of it. You one of those guys who act like an ass and then always fall back on "oh get over it I was only kidding"?I'm not saying you are, I don't know you but that's the way you're coming across.Dunno maybe I just have a hard time understanding your humor since I keep sensing sarcasm, maybe it's just me, maybe it isn't.People who rant feel like they have something to contribute, sometimes they do, sometimes they don't, but personally I prefer reading rants to short, and seemingly pointless comebacks which provide nothing more than weak wit.It's annoying and irritating, for me anyway. Sorry if I'm missing the points you're making, maybe they're too complex for me, doubt it but I don't mind giving you the benefit of the doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightsta1ker Posted August 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 I just find it funny how rant oriented some responses are. Some people are just having fun with the topic. Other people are having fun taking all the fun out of it. As the topic starter I can assure you it was not intended to be a "fun" topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) To the previous 4. If you don't enjoy the thread, or the responses, don't read it or ignore it. Give your sagest advice, and let the chips fall. Getting all upset as you seem to be isn't helping you or anyone else. Edited August 24, 2012 by aeroscout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 As the topic starter I can assure you it was not intended to be a "fun" topic. The road to perdition is lined with good intentions. Since you started the thread, you might have seen more than 1 lighthearted reply. Why don't you just state what your intention was when you started the topic, then your reason can be discussed. No need to become offended over some perceived slight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 To the previous 4. If you don't enjoy the thread, or the responses, don't read it or ignore it. Give your sagest advice, and let the chips fall. Getting all upset as you seem to be isn't helping you or anyone else. I enjoy reading the threads and the responses, just not yours. However, much to my dismay, I cannot ignore your responses because you acerbically respond to my replies so I simply replay in kind. And yes, I attempt to give my best advice based on my experience and do let the chips fall where they may. With that, since I'm expressing my opinion based on my experience, you have no standing where the chips fell and therefore, are respectfully not invited to respond. Lastly, to infer I get upset is twaddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 Acerbic. Whatever replies I have made to you that were acerbic to you, I apologize to you for. Now tell the truth, are you Driveby ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spike Posted August 24, 2012 Report Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) Acerbic. Whatever replies I have made to you that were acerbic to you, I apologize to you for. Now tell the truth, are you Driveby ? I'm down with acerbic fosho.... No, I'm not Driveby. Same-same, are you Butters? Edited August 24, 2012 by Spike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightsta1ker Posted August 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2012 Aeroscout, you seem to like posting just for the sake of reigniting a debate that has petered off. Perhaps you need a hobby? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 25, 2012 Report Share Posted August 25, 2012 I'm down with acerbic fosho.... No, I'm not Driveby. Same-same, are you Butters?No, I am not butters, when I became a member, I only vaguely remember reading a few of his posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 25, 2012 Report Share Posted August 25, 2012 Aeroscout, you seem to like posting just for the sake of reigniting a debate that has petered off. Perhaps you need a hobby?I probably could have not posted in reply to the "rant", but If you look at us or any group, you will find some more light hearted, I like to think I am, and some more shall we say, grumpy. If our target audience is some of the newcomers to our profession, I would like to think they would be heartened to know we aren't all sourpuss grumps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pilot#476398 Posted August 25, 2012 Report Share Posted August 25, 2012 Attempted To Get Commercial Rating Based On Inflated Hours A pilot who attempted to get his commercial rating without having flown the requisite number of hours to enter the program was sentenced to four years probation for falsifying his logbook. Fahad Nabeel Hussein Al-Daous, who holds joint U.S. and Saudi Arabian citizenship, pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FAA. The 33-year-old Iowa resident and stay-at-home father presented the falsified logbook to a pilot examiner at the Ottumwa, IA, airport in May of 2011, according to a report from the Associated Press. He had obtained his instrument rating at the airport, and was attempting to enter a program for a commercial rating. The discrepancies were uncovered when the flight school compared his log book and billing records, and found that he had not actually made many of the flights he had logged. I just can't help but see the humor in this one! Somebody should've bought this guy the book, "Cheating for Dummies"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightsta1ker Posted August 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2012 Aeroscout. I get you. But for the record, context and tone can easily be lost in a written forum. Keep this in mind the next time you are being sarcastic. Not everyone can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeroscout Posted August 25, 2012 Report Share Posted August 25, 2012 Aeroscout. I get you. But for the record, context and tone can easily be lost in a written forum. Keep this in mind the next time you are being sarcastic. Not everyone can tell.Not all sarcasm, some cynicism, some absurdity, some comedy, and some levity, at least I hope so. When it's time for seriousness, sometimes a "spoon full of sugar" is in order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts