KA, anyone listening?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK- A little bit of industrial China in every breath you take.
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KA, anyone listening?
Ok, Im worried, I want to reply to Australia2's comments about the 'boatshed', but rather than hijack another CX thread, i thought it was worth a thread of its own.
A2, as you rightly point out, experienced pilots aren't exactly flooding through the doors, and absolutely, a command pass in KA in 18 months is a big ask. With the recently announced command course tweak, lets see what transpires. I would expect a similar failure rate, regardless of where CT5 falls, the ST's arent going to take them any less lightly. I can understand where a candidate has been in the system 10 years and never slipped up, a known quantity slips up on the day, give him another crack, absolutely. What about a guy who has done a total of 2 PC's? Would he benefit from more training or another check? We all know the answer to that.
Obviously the zero % pass rate finally sunk in to someone, probably the accountant. "Its just driving a minibus around china" after all right? I can hear the arguments now, "there are plenty of people around China doing it, and they aren't having accidents, so make the course easier and get them on line earlier! Our risk models show we can bend one or two jets and still get a bonus, so make it happen!"
I dont envy the decision makers, getting heat from the Panda holding the purse strings to make it 'easier and faster', at a time when they need to be beefing up the 'training component' to support the new direct entry guys blasting off into China with poorly maintained, very old aircraft, to many unmanned ports, (ie no engineering support what so ever) and at a time when the engineering back here in HK has fallen to a point where safety events associated with the new company are being 'normalised', (ie reports dropping off, but nothing improving, its just the way we do it here now) and they give this new 18 month commander an FO with total time of less than a couple of hundred hours, (maybe the equivalent of 3 rosters total time), "there you go son, don't bend it, oh, and remember the demerit point system, we will sack the next guy who... (insert trainers hot topic here... goes off coms, tilts the radar up a bit, says "clear left" instead of 'left side', deviates around weather without a clearance and squawking 7700, 'lets' the FO slam it in, or doesn't give away sectors, to save his ass from being sacked for letting the FO slam it in).
Isn't anyone else just the slightest bit concerned about this combination of factors? Anyone? I genuinely fear the consequences of being right on this one.
The real gorilla in the room is this, why is it 18 months to command? With no, read zero plan, no new projected growth or fleet increase or new destinations or new slots or or or... Anyone? Yes, recent fleet letter says they will start to review the fleet. It takes 6 months to get an ex CX airframe in the system, how long is the order list at scarebus? 5 years? Imagine what the 320s and 321s will be like after 5 years of CASEL 'maintenance.' And the CEO thinks our greatest need is new paint, and a third runway. I'm inspired.
A2, as you rightly point out, experienced pilots aren't exactly flooding through the doors, and absolutely, a command pass in KA in 18 months is a big ask. With the recently announced command course tweak, lets see what transpires. I would expect a similar failure rate, regardless of where CT5 falls, the ST's arent going to take them any less lightly. I can understand where a candidate has been in the system 10 years and never slipped up, a known quantity slips up on the day, give him another crack, absolutely. What about a guy who has done a total of 2 PC's? Would he benefit from more training or another check? We all know the answer to that.
Obviously the zero % pass rate finally sunk in to someone, probably the accountant. "Its just driving a minibus around china" after all right? I can hear the arguments now, "there are plenty of people around China doing it, and they aren't having accidents, so make the course easier and get them on line earlier! Our risk models show we can bend one or two jets and still get a bonus, so make it happen!"
I dont envy the decision makers, getting heat from the Panda holding the purse strings to make it 'easier and faster', at a time when they need to be beefing up the 'training component' to support the new direct entry guys blasting off into China with poorly maintained, very old aircraft, to many unmanned ports, (ie no engineering support what so ever) and at a time when the engineering back here in HK has fallen to a point where safety events associated with the new company are being 'normalised', (ie reports dropping off, but nothing improving, its just the way we do it here now) and they give this new 18 month commander an FO with total time of less than a couple of hundred hours, (maybe the equivalent of 3 rosters total time), "there you go son, don't bend it, oh, and remember the demerit point system, we will sack the next guy who... (insert trainers hot topic here... goes off coms, tilts the radar up a bit, says "clear left" instead of 'left side', deviates around weather without a clearance and squawking 7700, 'lets' the FO slam it in, or doesn't give away sectors, to save his ass from being sacked for letting the FO slam it in).
Isn't anyone else just the slightest bit concerned about this combination of factors? Anyone? I genuinely fear the consequences of being right on this one.
The real gorilla in the room is this, why is it 18 months to command? With no, read zero plan, no new projected growth or fleet increase or new destinations or new slots or or or... Anyone? Yes, recent fleet letter says they will start to review the fleet. It takes 6 months to get an ex CX airframe in the system, how long is the order list at scarebus? 5 years? Imagine what the 320s and 321s will be like after 5 years of CASEL 'maintenance.' And the CEO thinks our greatest need is new paint, and a third runway. I'm inspired.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: hongkers
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interesting point is that we have a vast number of experienced FOs who could theoretically step up for command. Except they're not. The question is "Why not?" Could it be the negligible amount of training given in the command course and the excessively high failure rate (100% this year, can that be true??) has intimidated them to the point of not even applying. No one likes to fail, so when it's almost guaranteed then no one is volunteering.
Really, they want you to be command standard before the course begins. KA's philosophy has always been the command course gave the candidate 3 months to prove they were a captain ( or not as the case is at the moment) rather than 3 months of training. ( you're not supposed to ask questions in the command course as it shows weakness) That's why previously when the pass rate went down they didn't increase the training, they instead made the pre command assessment even harder. This got the failures out of the way earlier apparently. Then back to the sin bin for a year before you're allowed another go. Unfortunately this way of thinking is proving counter productive. We will have to wait and see what the outcome is with the revised command course. It appears to be a step in the right direction.
Lowkoon you seem to be under the impression that there is a "plan" for KA. To be honest l believe most CX management are only vaguely aware we exist. Whilst CX is struggling with the intro of new aircraft and routes, KA has " no expansion, no new routes and no new aircraft planned for the foreseeable future". The only reason that a narrow body replacement is being looked at is that ours are reaching end of life. We have zero aircraft on order. KA has the same number of aircraft as when CX bought us 10 years ago. Whilst our competitors have expanded exponentially. That doesn't sound like a grand strategic plan. Even the last 320s that arrived were all grabbed last minute from wherever they could get them. Sure, we are getting a new paint job and new ties, but a plan?? Not so sure. I'm happy to be proved wrong here.
It appears we are only of interest to CX at the moment as a possible way to get around the AOAs training ban. When that's resolved it'll be back to ops normal
Really, they want you to be command standard before the course begins. KA's philosophy has always been the command course gave the candidate 3 months to prove they were a captain ( or not as the case is at the moment) rather than 3 months of training. ( you're not supposed to ask questions in the command course as it shows weakness) That's why previously when the pass rate went down they didn't increase the training, they instead made the pre command assessment even harder. This got the failures out of the way earlier apparently. Then back to the sin bin for a year before you're allowed another go. Unfortunately this way of thinking is proving counter productive. We will have to wait and see what the outcome is with the revised command course. It appears to be a step in the right direction.
Lowkoon you seem to be under the impression that there is a "plan" for KA. To be honest l believe most CX management are only vaguely aware we exist. Whilst CX is struggling with the intro of new aircraft and routes, KA has " no expansion, no new routes and no new aircraft planned for the foreseeable future". The only reason that a narrow body replacement is being looked at is that ours are reaching end of life. We have zero aircraft on order. KA has the same number of aircraft as when CX bought us 10 years ago. Whilst our competitors have expanded exponentially. That doesn't sound like a grand strategic plan. Even the last 320s that arrived were all grabbed last minute from wherever they could get them. Sure, we are getting a new paint job and new ties, but a plan?? Not so sure. I'm happy to be proved wrong here.
It appears we are only of interest to CX at the moment as a possible way to get around the AOAs training ban. When that's resolved it'll be back to ops normal
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK- A little bit of industrial China in every breath you take.
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like any group i guess, the FOs have made a choice, whether they chose to avoid it on advice from an ST who was being honest with them, through to those who have had their confidence smashed, through to guys who chose for lifestyle reasons, and want to commute, or those that hate the 320 and its shoddy maintenance and the NASA checkers on a non existent GA route support system. At the end of the day, it is their choice, and they really don't number that many when the company wants to pass 4 a month! We would chew through the lifestyle FOs pretty quickly I would be surprised if there was more than a dozen?
Please don't misunderstand my post to think that I assume there is a plan, we waited an entire decade for a new paint job. It is sad, the company has serious potential, great staff but it is a rudderless ship. If we do have a rudder, they neglected to tell anyone where the damn thing is, and who is allowed to touch it.
Please don't misunderstand my post to think that I assume there is a plan, we waited an entire decade for a new paint job. It is sad, the company has serious potential, great staff but it is a rudderless ship. If we do have a rudder, they neglected to tell anyone where the damn thing is, and who is allowed to touch it.
the NASA checkers
With apologies to the many good guys…… but do show your ilk and stamp out the bureaucrats. It's not hard, just ask them to fly the jet.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowkoon,
An excellent well thought out post , raising important issues . The problem is that it's a hostile environment that we operate in so you can't afford to give a student looking at a command the benefit of the doubt
But again why don't we train more and check a bit less , I'm sure that there are some very talented guys out there
Alternatively raise the retirement age another year or two to give those coming up some more time to consolidate
Standing by for incoming
An excellent well thought out post , raising important issues . The problem is that it's a hostile environment that we operate in so you can't afford to give a student looking at a command the benefit of the doubt
But again why don't we train more and check a bit less , I'm sure that there are some very talented guys out there
Alternatively raise the retirement age another year or two to give those coming up some more time to consolidate
Standing by for incoming
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: hongkers
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It used to be hostile. Back when ATC standards were dodgy with even dodgyer (?) English, no radar, qfe, NPAs, no deicing etc. now though I'm not so sure. ATC has improved up to a tolerable if not international standard and it's pretty much ILS to ILS. Sure flying in China is as frustrating AF and there is minimal support from the company at outports, but it's not that bad. The only hostility is from the pax when we get a 5 hrs delay to Wuhan for no good reason. ( They should write to their local member and complain. )
Ive said this before and it was met with a fair bit of derision by our CX colleagues. It's crazy we employ DEFOs here with the aim of making them captains in 18 months when there are a huge pool of FOs at CX. I know it's not everyone's cup of tea to bash around China in a 320, but some might like the idea. If you were faced with the prospect of another 10 years in the right seat to get a 330 command or jump now to a 320 command I know what I'd do. The extra $30K a month can't be sniffed at either. (It seems though the only reason I'm suggesting this is because I want to fly a 777 for 15 hours through the night and take 5 years off my life with chronic fatigue).
Ive said this before and it was met with a fair bit of derision by our CX colleagues. It's crazy we employ DEFOs here with the aim of making them captains in 18 months when there are a huge pool of FOs at CX. I know it's not everyone's cup of tea to bash around China in a 320, but some might like the idea. If you were faced with the prospect of another 10 years in the right seat to get a 330 command or jump now to a 320 command I know what I'd do. The extra $30K a month can't be sniffed at either. (It seems though the only reason I'm suggesting this is because I want to fly a 777 for 15 hours through the night and take 5 years off my life with chronic fatigue).
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DSOTM
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that it's a hostile environment that we operate in so you can't afford to give a student looking at a command the benefit of the doubt.
This job is not that hard, some are just more talented at complicating it than others. Kumbaya la!
Last edited by drfaust; 20th Jul 2016 at 18:16.
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Tung chung
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good for the gods
I'm an Australian pilot and had the pleasure of being checked by ex Ansett top guns for several years. (Ansett was so good by the way!)
I have worked at several airlines as have most other pilots at dragon, and I have without a doubt noticed that the same mob of ex Ansett Sky Gods, and the mentality is definately alive and well here!(Ansett was so awesome!)
My logic is that digger did the maths and found that 95% of command failures occurred with the candidates that achieved a PCA score of less than 3.4, so in the last few years we have only put candidates through that have achieved a score of greater than 3.4, which by maths should result in only 5% failing.
So why is the failure rate at 100% this year, and only 3 of the last 11 candidates passed in total.(maybe it is because all the candidates are not ex Ansett, after all, Ansett was awesome you know)
When I started, two managers on my first day of induction were bragging to me that they started there command courses after five months! This is back when China was a challenge!
Maybe, just maybe, you might have a better chance at passing if you have friends in the training department or flew at Ansett! (it was such a good airline)
I have worked at several airlines as have most other pilots at dragon, and I have without a doubt noticed that the same mob of ex Ansett Sky Gods, and the mentality is definately alive and well here!(Ansett was so awesome!)
My logic is that digger did the maths and found that 95% of command failures occurred with the candidates that achieved a PCA score of less than 3.4, so in the last few years we have only put candidates through that have achieved a score of greater than 3.4, which by maths should result in only 5% failing.
So why is the failure rate at 100% this year, and only 3 of the last 11 candidates passed in total.(maybe it is because all the candidates are not ex Ansett, after all, Ansett was awesome you know)
When I started, two managers on my first day of induction were bragging to me that they started there command courses after five months! This is back when China was a challenge!
Maybe, just maybe, you might have a better chance at passing if you have friends in the training department or flew at Ansett! (it was such a good airline)
Anotherday has summed up a finally realized commercial necessity that will present an accountability for training that we haven't really seen in HKG among legacy mindsets.
So your competitor has a 100% pass rate and you fluctuate from 60% to 0% ? Local legacy training programs on paper, are thorough and expensive, compared to the competitors. Your competitors training costs are more in control which must be getting hard to justify?
Another conundrum that may not have been realized yet is the command course is viewed with terror by many who'd prefer to now look elsewhere. Some say the Standard contract is not worth the stress and times are good enough to move to airlines elsewhere with higher command pass rates. More waste after investing heavily into First Officer training.
One of the saddest events I've witnessed in aviation, was a thankfully now retired manager, who measured the success of "his" command training course by the high failure rate. He honestly felt our training the envy of industry. It was delusional and hard to stomach and I'm of the belief it has left us well behind the power curve with a lack of creativity, accountability and industry best practices for training. I hope the limitations of that legacy realized by the possible disciples of the reign.
Dumbing down of command training is not in the interests of an incumbent . You never want to make yourself easily replaceable in this industry. So standards must remain high. Conversely, I don't think its in our interests to have a program that is so damaging in its delivery that it leaves colleagues traumatized or people leaving, so we train for attrition and failure, and have little room to train for eventual expansion.
The only way forward is with creativity and initiative. Be interesting to watch.
So your competitor has a 100% pass rate and you fluctuate from 60% to 0% ? Local legacy training programs on paper, are thorough and expensive, compared to the competitors. Your competitors training costs are more in control which must be getting hard to justify?
Another conundrum that may not have been realized yet is the command course is viewed with terror by many who'd prefer to now look elsewhere. Some say the Standard contract is not worth the stress and times are good enough to move to airlines elsewhere with higher command pass rates. More waste after investing heavily into First Officer training.
One of the saddest events I've witnessed in aviation, was a thankfully now retired manager, who measured the success of "his" command training course by the high failure rate. He honestly felt our training the envy of industry. It was delusional and hard to stomach and I'm of the belief it has left us well behind the power curve with a lack of creativity, accountability and industry best practices for training. I hope the limitations of that legacy realized by the possible disciples of the reign.
Dumbing down of command training is not in the interests of an incumbent . You never want to make yourself easily replaceable in this industry. So standards must remain high. Conversely, I don't think its in our interests to have a program that is so damaging in its delivery that it leaves colleagues traumatized or people leaving, so we train for attrition and failure, and have little room to train for eventual expansion.
The only way forward is with creativity and initiative. Be interesting to watch.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK- A little bit of industrial China in every breath you take.
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anotherday, an interesting comment, and agreed, there of course is a financial element to everything. Agreed. I guess we need to keep in mind KA has and will continue to charge a premium over mainland carriers as they are perceived to be safer, and in fact we have a lot of premium customers who believe it and pay the premium because of it. The company has a responsibility after creating that perception to at least direct some of that extra income to training and training assets don't you think? We see the opposite.
The FMGC training equipment we have is run by windows 95. Rather than update it, they have decommissioned it. Sad but true. 500 pilots and we share 2 QRHs to study from. We clearly aren't "overspending" on training assets.
The FMGC training equipment we have is run by windows 95. Rather than update it, they have decommissioned it. Sad but true. 500 pilots and we share 2 QRHs to study from. We clearly aren't "overspending" on training assets.
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: America
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will be very disappointed if our brothers and sisters over at "Red" take part in the GMFs letter today. Training our crews while we are in contract compliance will be a slap right in the faces of every pilot at "Green". Please don't do it.
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: America
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That too needs to be rejected then and trainers and checkers at BOTH places need to quit. The sooner the better. We really need to stop this in it's tracks like right now! A call for a strike will get their attention I bet.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK- A little bit of industrial China in every breath you take.
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vis, KA dont have the capacity to train your guys. See the decision to train two, (yes only two) JFOs for exactly what it was. An impotent warning shot to AOA. Ka trainers will be snowed under training our own direct entry FOs that are in the interview selection pipeline now. I am pretty sure KA guys wont resign their positions to support CX contract compliance. We don't see a lot of solidarity extended from over the road to support us with our industrial issues, so to expect red team trainers to resign en mass probably isn't going to happen any time soon. Green team will probably need to lead by example on this one. We both know the trainers and checkers at CX wont be resigning. They would have to get new business cards printed!
KA doesn't need its trainers to quit, we need them to train KA guys to pass KA command courses and get KA moving forward again. Im not management or a trainer, but i know I work for a potentially great airline that is being hobbled by its distracted owners - and that is the biggest problem KA has.
Our guys may be forced to train a few JFOs to land a 330. Don't make the mistake of thinking that will solve CXs significant training back log. KA dont have the capacity or the resources to do what you fear. There are already 500 of us lined up to read 2 QRHs. You are pretty safely protected from the "KA training machine" rolling into town to save CX management from its current woes.
KA doesn't need its trainers to quit, we need them to train KA guys to pass KA command courses and get KA moving forward again. Im not management or a trainer, but i know I work for a potentially great airline that is being hobbled by its distracted owners - and that is the biggest problem KA has.
Our guys may be forced to train a few JFOs to land a 330. Don't make the mistake of thinking that will solve CXs significant training back log. KA dont have the capacity or the resources to do what you fear. There are already 500 of us lined up to read 2 QRHs. You are pretty safely protected from the "KA training machine" rolling into town to save CX management from its current woes.