Talk:Aircrew

Article Purpose?

Considering that article was started on 18 November 2004 it needs a huge amount of work. Not only does it have no sources, but it is badly written, sounds like a personal essay and presents opinions that do not conform to any known references. For instance in the Canadian military pilots, navigators and flight engineers are classified as "aircrew" (i.e. essential to the operation of the aircraft) but flight attendants are "flight crew". In Canadian civil aviation there is no such thing as "aircrew" (ref CARs definitions and Aeronautics Act definitions). I have no idea if any country defines anyone as "aircrew" and this article doesn't clear that up. There is also the problem that the article title "aircrew member" is poor grammar and should be simply "aircrew". Incidentally Aircrew redirects to Aircrew member.

I would like to propose that this article should be changed into a simple list that sends the reader to Aviator, Flight attendant etc. - Ahunt (talk) 17:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Concur. We might also want to move it to Aircrew as the mostly likely search term. - BillCJ (talk) 17:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I would agree with that too. - Ahunt (talk) 17:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree too. Both suggestions are eminently sensible! --TraceyR (talk) 18:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

It looks like that is everyone who has worked on this article since April. Let's give it a bit of time for anyone else to chime in and then, if there are no objections, proceed on this consensus. - Ahunt (talk) 18:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have made the changes discussed and agreed upon above. Because both pages (aircrew and aircrew member) already existed I have copied the talk page contents here for continuity. If anyone thinks that isn't the best way to do it, please feel free to change it!

Please do add more aircrew trade links to the article, if you can think of any. - Ahunt (talk) 12:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I added A Combat Systems Officer Link to represent all of us NAVs, EWOs, and WSOs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.174.176.216 (talk) 20:39, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! - Ahunt (talk) 14:41, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Military

What about the completely different aircrew of a military, including military search-and-rescue, helicopter?
☺ Dick Kimball (talk) 15:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

That seems to be somewhat covered as Rescue swimmer, etc. - Ahunt (talk) 16:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Second officer

I would like to discuss the role of second officer as noted in the Aircrew section. Second officers in Australia are very junior and while in that third (or fourth ) have no authority to manipulate thrust levers. Additionally they are not engineers they are simply relief pilots who occupy a control seat when the PIC or FO leave for a rest. They are trained pilots but no authorised to occupy a control seat for takeoff or landing.

I would think a more accurate description would be similar to: Second officer's are relief pilots for the operating crew and also are tasked by the PIC for some administrative tasks during, before and after flight.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigstevensit (talk • contribs) 00:52, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Changing existing information that is cited to references requires citing a new source. - Ahunt (talk) 00:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I can only supply some airline websites. http://jobsatcathaypacific.com/cadetpilots/being-a-second-officer.php, https://www.pilotcareercentre.com/Pilot-Life-Story-Blog/42/B727+Second+Officer, QANTAS airlines in Australia shows that 2nd officers are pilots only: http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/careers-pilot-qfdirect/global/en. The other Australian airline that uses second officers is Virgin and the position is a pilot position: https://www.flightdeckconsulting.com/jobs/virgin-australia-second-officer/. Older aircraft before the 80's needed a flight engineer and sometimes this role was called a second officer. In all Australian airlines these aircraft no longer exist and the second officer role is a pilot with limited authority. I note that Cathay and Air New Zealand also have removed flight engineers. My experience is only with QANTAS. B744, A380 and A330 have second officers for long haul flights requiring crew rest. The role is to support the other two, monitor and replace crew during rest periods. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigstevensit (talk • contribs) 01:46, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for finding those! https://www.pilotcareercentre.com/Pilot-Life-Story-Blog/42/B727+Second+Officer is WP:SPS so not usable, http://www.qantas.com.au/travel/airlines/careers-pilot-qfdirect/global/en#qantas-direct-entry-minimum-criteria and https://www.flightdeckconsulting.com/jobs/virgin-australia-second-officer/ are reliable sources, but neither describes the job performed, so not very useful. http://jobsatcathaypacific.com/cadetpilots/being-a-second-officer.php is a relaible source and does describe the job, so let me use that to add some text to the article and you can see what you think. - Ahunt (talk) 17:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thats Great. Thank you for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigstevensit (talk • contribs) 09:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aircrew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160216141854/http://lawofficermagazine.com/article/tactics-and-weapons/tactical-flight-officer to http://lawofficermagazine.com/article/tactics-and-weapons/tactical-flight-officer

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)