The safety record of other airlines!?
Well I have a friend who it so happens has worked for CX, QF, EK and is now doing contract for Asiana. He spent 2 years at CX, almost 5 years in QF, 6 years in EK and has done almost a year on contract for Asiana. His take on all this....CX had/has the highest safety margins. The arrogance level at QF has the potential to take them to a major hull loss...they got a wake up call in BKK and another potential ditching in Perth and yet another engine pod scrape a couple of years back. My friend says EK isn't bad but it may be starting to slip as they are having trouble getting enough pilots so the standards will have to come down. Asiana....well it is obvious in the fact they have to get foreign captains! Enough said about them. And talk to the 49ers that flew with China Airlines...those stories will keep you awake at night!
So to answer the question about CX pass rate...I think this airline has a very high standard. I personally don't feel that I have to keep an eagle eye out on the FO when flying. My friend said he saw some pretty hairy stuff in QF by quite senior guys(admittedly he was with the geriatrics on the 400). It seems the CX culture is to ensure any single pilot can operate the whole mission. Other airlines seem to RELY on the fact that their are 2 or more pilots up there!
So maybe the question is, is the CX pass standard providing too high a safety margin given new aircraft technologies, ATC, TCAS, EGPWS etc. Maybe we are being overly cautious and testing to a paradigm of aviation difficulty that no longer exists? A simple analogy...BMW/Mercs have great safety in the case of a crash...but if you don't crash, a Hyundai or Daewoo will do just as well at a fraction of the cost! So to continue the analogy...maybe their are too many airbags in CX??????