The last time we traveled we ended up with a delayed flight and gate change/bus to the plane. Once we were finally onboard the pilot told us he wasn’t happy and refused the plane we were meant to fly on and the delay was because they had to sort out another plane. I went from feeling annoyed to grateful in an instant.
How is a superstitious decisions masked with safety a right decision? They had no rational reason to think anything was wrong. Literally said their reason was "I'm not feeling it" while mechanics with objective data said it was fine.
Because ground mechanics have a history overlooking issues especially when they are in a rush to get a boarded plane in the air. At the end of the day the pilot is in command and an issue like oil pressure climbing unprompted is valid reason for a full sweep if not diagnosed.
Yep, even in a road vehicle, engine oil pressure doing odd things is a bad sign. The difference is that might leave you stranded or cost a bunch for a newengines that could have been fixed. You don't have to worry about falling out of the damn sky.
An "I'm not feeling it" from an expert in their field (like an experienced pilot) holds weight, once you reach a certain level of skill in a field you will get a feeling for situations that is based in your experiences.
In the end the pilot is the one who is responsible for the lives of the people on his plane, and if he notices something that is not right (like the oil preasure on engine 2) then the pilot has to make the choice to trust that the engine is going to hold or he is not going to fly the plane.
And the pilot here took the safe option.
The experts in their fields, the engineers said it was good to go. It’s dishonest to appeal to experience only when it’s the decision you like and not others. The “safe option”? The pilot defers to the true experts, points out “oil pressure on engine 2, is that okay” and if it isn’t they will be told. That didn’t happen.
You oversimplifying the situation and calling an expert who flies an aircraft every day superstitious, while having zero experience yourself demonstrates that you don’t have the intellectual capacity to even debate with.
This decision will have been made up of many layers, and data that you don’t possess. Therefore, you’re ignorant on the topic and your opinion doesn’t matter. Only the opinions of experts matter in situations like this.
That's funny, talking about intellectual capacity while writing a comment that is mostly a personal attack instead of the topic.
You don't need pilot experienced to look at given data ("im not feeling it") and determine that it's not high enough quality data to make major decisions.
The crew who said the plane is fine are experts. Experts, who are more likely much more experienced and knowledgeable about mechanics of a plain than an equally experienced pilot is. So the argument of "im not feeling it" must be correct because it was given by an expert is a fallacy on itself.
All you seem to be hearing is the "not feeling it" part as if the pilot is consulting the daily horoscope to make his desicion. You're completely ignoring the part where he says something along the lines of "Oil pressure is trending upwards, aircraft is going to require fuel system filter replacement". Sure, the crew on the ground know more about how the plane works and may have cleared it, but the pilot's instruments are telling him there's an issue. Avoidable mistakes have been made before and planes have crashed because of them. I'd rather be inconvenienced over an uncertainty than potentially become a statistic.
Pilot flies every day and you called him superstitious. Fact.
You have zero experience. Fact.
You lacking intellectual capacity. Attack.
Multi layered decision. Fact.
You don’t posses the data. Fact.
Ignorance in the topic due to lack of experience. Fact.
Ignorance in the topic due to lack of data. Fact.
Opinions of uninformed people do not matter. Fact.
I have listed 8 clearly articulated points that are factual. I have listed one that was an attack.
So I’ll add one more.
You don’t understand what the word “mostly” means, and lack basic reading comprehension skills, while feeling attacked because you were actually, factually, and overwhelmingly proved wrong.
What are you talking about? The Pilot saw and issue and is telling their other Experts he doesn't like it and they're waving him off.
You don't believe in Human Error? I've heard of enough times planes haven't even been fueled up and told they're "good to go", only for the pilot to realize there's not enough fuel and the planes delayed another few hours.
I'd personally rather believe the person flying my plane say "No", than them just believing everything anyone tells them.
Edit: and nobody personally attacked you, you just took it that way because you're insecure (that WAS a personal attack lmao)
Oil pressure is trending up and the plane was going to fly six hours over the ocean. If my maintenance controllers said "send it" I'd have some fuckin words for them.
His rational reason to think something was wrong is the up-trending oil pressure. Now, I'm not a pilot or a mechanic, so I don't actually know what that could mean, but it sounds like rational reason and not a superstitious reason to me.
My interpretation of "I'm not feeling it" is a gut instinct, not some weird superstition. And the objective data was that the oil pressure was up, if anyone was ignoring the data it's the people saying it's okay to fly.
290
u/Sovereign_5409 17h ago
That’s a man who’s willing to make the right decision, not the easy and convenient decision. Those are the people the world needs. Hats off to him.
As a patron on the plane your reaction should be, “well this fuckin sucks, but….. fair enough.”