Cathay disciplines pilots for `sporty' landing

[A-FLOOR]

I'm surprised no-one picked this one up yet, right from today's HK Standard.

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail_frame.cfm?articleid=50127&intcatid=1

Cathay disciplines pilots for `sporty' landing
Keith Wallis

Cathay Pacific Airways has disciplined the flight crew of a Boeing 747-400 passenger jet after what one insider said was a ``sporty'' approach to Hong Kong International Airport late last month.

The Civil Aviation Department confirmed that the captain and first officer ignored the advice of air traffic controllers.

As a result, the aircraft had to make a 60-degree turn just 500 feet above the choppy waters of the Pearl River estuary so that it could land safely on the airport's northern runway. Angelique Tam, Cathay Pacific manager of corporate communications, confirmed that an incident had taken place.

But following discussions with the airline's flight operations department and management, she repeatedly refused to give any further information about the incident or the action taken by the airline against the flight crew. She said: ``I don't want to go into details.''

Tam would only confirm that the pilot and first officer of Cathay Pacific's early morning flight CX904 from Manila had been disciplined following the incident on July 29.

One source said both had been demoted. Another said they had been sent for retraining.

``We had an inquiry before taking necessary internal action,'' Tam said. ``There was no danger to passengers. We take all necessary action to maintain our high standards of flying.''

The Civil Aviation Department, though, confirmed that both the department and Cathay Pacific have launched investigations into the botched approach into Hong Kong International Airport. It said the investigations would take about three months to complete.

The department said that as the aircraft passed west of the airport, ``air traffic control continually advised the pilots to turn left. However, they elected to turn right and this prevented them from completing a correct approach to the runway''.

As a result, ``the pilots misjudged the distance from the runway and had to do a tighter turn than normal to establish on the centreline of Runway 07L. They achieved this at approximately five miles from the runway and had descended to 500 feet''.

Industry insiders claimed that this prompted the aircraft's ground proximity warning system (GPWS) to sound. The GPWS warns pilots against flying into the ground.

But the department added: ``Information from the pilots, confirmed by the aircraft's flight data recorder, [shows] the GPWS was not activated.''

Civil aviation officials said there was little air traffic control could do and indicated the pilots were trying to avoid rough weather.

``Air traffic control may give some directions, but as the pilots had manoeuvred themselves into the position, albeit for weather avoidance, there was little that air traffic control could do.''

:ooh:

[Captain Airclues]

You haven't been concentrating A-FLOOR. It's already been and gone.

Airclues

[A-FLOOR]

Ah, drats.... never even bothered to look in that forum :*

[mr Q]

Is there any explanation why this topic on this forum was previously closed and removed ?? Threats of legal action ?? Self censorship ?? A quiet phonecall or message from CX or their legal advisers?? Other reasons ??
I find it somewhat ironic that, in respect of HK CX topics potentially adverse to the company or the image of the Company, fearless pprune has to wait till the topic is aired in either the HK Standard or the SCMP before allowing it to be aired on this forum.
I accept that the HK newspapers probably have better libel insurance cover and can publish or be damned but why the cover up on the 500' ,60 degree bank, 7 miles from the airport story ?
Be honest - in these days of self censorship in HK did someone try to gag pprune or did pprune volunteer the gag??
Can we assume that CX is not part of the witness protection scheme in HK and therefore not subject to reporting restrictions ???????????

[VR-HFX]

The original poster was advised to remove his/her post for his/her own good.

If this was removed then the whole thread disappears.

Conspiracy theory and nothing more.

[PPRuNe Pop]

Mr Q.

Your own assumptions and speculations. All of which, save one, is near the mark. Anyone who starts a thread can remove it, in which case the whole thread goes too.

[Schrodingers Cat]

But he didn't decide to remove it did he? The thread was locked by the moderator Blue Eagle before anyone could reply..........recently the Fragrant harbor forum has basically been a recruiting poster for CX, with opposing views 'imoderately moderated' out of the forums........BE wields his powers with all the restraint of CX management.........:*

PPRuNe has the greatest confidence in the moderation of the Far East Forum under Blue Eagle, someone who gives up his spare time to ensure that the forum exists in the first place. If a moderator chooses to engage in a debate, or use previous knowledge or experience to guide them when moderating, then so be it; there are times when some subjectivity has greater value than pure objectivity. The simple fact that some people cannot understand that fact merely underlines why they are not moderators, and Blue Eagle is.

Admin

[df1]

Bring back Kai Tak! That's what I called "sporty"!

[catchup]

<the aircraft had to make a 60-degree turn >

Does this really mean 60 degree of bank?

regards

[ajamieson]

The original poster was advised to remove his/her post for his/her own good.
Conspiracy theory and nothing more.
Er, no need for a theory really :hmm:

[BlueEagle]

"..........recently the Fragrant harbor forum has basically been a recruiting poster for CX, with opposing views 'imoderately moderated' out of the forums........BE wields his powers with all the restraint of CX management........."

In order that you shouldn't be accused of saying really stupid and inaccurate things, Schroedinger's Cat I'm sure you will appreciate the opportunity to justify your rather outrageous statement and produce numerous examples of "imoderately moderating"(sic) , particularly as you are one that has benefited greatly from the tolerance of the moderators in the Fragrant Harbour forum to wards many of your barbarous and abusive posts.

Along with many of my colleagues I have been the victim of loose talk from the unqualified and the original post in FH Forum was nothing more than that, loose talk. I elected to protect the crew concerned at least until the facts were made public, something that you might have appreciated had you been involved?

Most of your contributions to PPRuNe border on either offensive or pointless, to date you have been given the benefit of the doubt. If you have a problem with the quality of the moderation in the Fragrant Harbour forum then I suggest you take the opportunity of discussing it with PPRuNe Admin rather than making totally unsubstantiated accusations in the public arena.

[Farrell]

Well said BlueEagle

[mr Q]

Blue Eagle - Moderators should not only be objective but be seen to be objective and should not be seen to let their own personal experiences influence that objectivity. When as a moderator you put yourself forward as a "Victim" having already accused in the same post another ppruner in effect of being stupid you are in danger of losing or being perceived to have lost that objectivity.And then to suggest that that same individual continues to post only at the sufferance of FH moderators is absurd. And why the "sic" at the end of his soundbite quotation ?
Protect the crew from what ? The flight number was disclosed but no attempt was made in any posting to identify either directly or indirectly the flight crew involved. The removal of all threads did however benefit and protect Cathay Pacific Airways and I am sure that management there would have been very happy had this episode never reached the public domain. That it has reached the public domain and properly and rightly so is a tribute to the Hong Kong Standard and not pprune who would have apparently happily lived with the secret.

[Captain Airclues]

mrQ

I think that you are being rather unfair to PPRuNe admin. I am not refering to the thread on Fragrant Harbour, as BlueEagle has replied to this. However, the incident was revealed on PPRuNe (in R & N) on the 31st July, even identifying the date and the flight number. This thread was allowed to run for over two weeks. Eventually, when some of the facts about the incident were becoming known, I and another PPRuNer warned the original poster that he/she had given away far too much about themselves and could easily be recognised. As we were obviously both aware of the workings of CX cabin crew management we suggested that he/she delete the first post. As you know, this has the effect of deleting the entire thread.
As it now seems that it was a 60 degree turn rather than a 60 degree bank then perhaps BlueEagle was correct in locking the thread until the facts could be verified.
I believe that PPRuNe admin have acted responsibly in this matter.

Airclues

[Schrodingers Cat]

I have sent BE a personal message in response to his claims, one of the points is this:

Why should BE have locked the thread with the proviso 'until it appears in the papers'? OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!
With companies in HKG having advertising budgets of millions of dollars it is indeed a tribute to the Standard that it reports as much as it does, but isn't there a chance of a certain amount of self censorship? Pprune is an open forum, supposedly beholden to no-one, and bypasses this problem.
The FH forum was once the most vibrant on the site, read with immense enjoyment by aircrew members worldwide when it was moderated by Danny, and with fury by management in some quarters. The repeated use of the 'big stick' by BE has reduced it to a moribund forum of wannabees asking what the address is to write to in HKG for a job.
Moderation should be just that MODERATE!!!:*

[Mishandled]

It's Dannys site SC, and I'm sure if he didnt like the way it was moderated, he would do something about it. Wind your neck in. or go elsewhere.:rolleyes:

[lomapaseo]

It's Dannys site SC, and I'm sure if he didnt like the way it was moderated, he would do something about it. Wind your neck in. or go elsewhere.

I see nothing wrong with expressing an opinion on this subject. and only an arrogant individual would tell somebody to go elsewhere at this point .:uhoh:

[Just an other number]

I've got to go with the Cat and Mr Q
This is, I think, the first time I've posted anything even mildly contentious but, as an innocent member of the HK flying public, in the words of Private Eye,
'I think we should be told'
I was surprised to see fr8er's original post very heavily sat on by the moderator.
All traces of the mod's reply and shut down have now gone from pprune but it certainly gave the impression that the news was not fit for pprune unless it appeared in the SCMP.
What?
The South China, possibly aware of ...(fill in the blank)... chose not to publish anything.
And now we see that, following the Standard's report, it is acceptable to revive the topic in pprune.
Finally -
Perhaps I should report this post of mine to a moderator?
erm which?

[PPRuNe Pop]

OK. Just cool it guys.

If you don't like moderators per se, that is your problem. If you don't particularly like the way we moderate, that is also your problem. We spend countless hours moderating some highly contentious stuff, outrageous statements, possible libel, abuse and since Danny's edict on a abuse and swearing has been posted, that too.

What we don't need is those who think there is a written law or some stone that came from above, with the commandment that whosoever wishes to overstep the mark according to their rules may do so. That is called living in a world of their own. Please don't take the view that since you do not like something, we should and must do it YOUR way instead. Forget it - it ain't gonna happen. If you don't like the way PPRuNe is moderated or run then just leave and make your comments elsewhere.

The site belongs to Danny, he tells us the way the site should be run and moderated. We use discretion, of course, but we do not cow tow to anyone.

Your last post, Schrodingers Cat is just one such post that gets up people's noses and you I expect reckon that we should just let you mouth off without comment. Well we have, almost but don't push it, because I don't like your tone that's for sure.

Click back to Captain Airclue's post. A wise man who we all know and respect. But better yet he never ever gets irate. A lesson there somewhere I would say.

[Fester T Adams]

Click back to Captain Airclue's post. A wise man who we all know and respect. But better yet he never ever gets irate. A lesson there somewhere I would say.

Not only that but it was the most eloquent piece I've ever seen written on PPRuNe in a long time and with not one spelling mistake. :uhoh:

Things must be on the up. :ok:

[Ranger One]

Agreed... well said Capt. Airclues... mostly.

Look, this is a *rumour* network. All caveats about Dannys trainset, libel liabilities etc. apply of course, but still... is *every* thread concerning a rumoured incident to be locked until there's some 'official confirmation'?

And I would suggest that, whilst BE might well have had excellent reasons for locking the thread on the FH forum, referring (somewhat tongue in cheek, one hopes) to the SCMP could be construed as provocative. Is pprune a rumour & discussion site, or just a follower, a reporter of other peoples news?

And, whether it was 60 degrees of bank or turn is just a matter of degree (no pun intended); if a heavy was doing it 5 miles from the threshold at 500ft it's worthy of discussion. We could all benefit from from the who, how, where, and why. It sounds like a chain that could end in CFT risk in another scenario.

R1

[BlueEagle]

Yes indeed, the SCMP reference was tongue in cheek, it being a widely known rag in HKG that every one there can relate to.

There was never any idea that I might be aiding and abetting CX management, (bit paranoid that!), simply protecting the crew concerned from a public bashing before the facts were known. Something most of us would appreciate, a recent example was the tail strike that attracted so much attention long before any facts were known.

Having sent me a private message Scodingers Cat seems to have blocked receipt of such messages himself, possibly a computer glitch? As I have pointed out to him in an email the FH forum became very quiet after the "Replacement Workers" issue was resolved and SARS took a hold in HKG. As my moderation in the main FH forum is restricted to excluding personal abuse normally, (SC a well known offender) and deleting links to 'scab' lists I doubt very much if I am responsible for the forum becoming quiet. SC may well find Jet Blast more to his liking.

[HotDog]

Yes indeed, the SCMP reference was tongue in cheek, it being a widely known rag in HKG that every one there can relate to.

rag(n.) A newspaper, esp. One regarded as inferior or worthless.

I wonder how the South China Morning Post will react to this accolade?

I think I shall report this to the Moderator:suspect:

[cheklapsap]

Sorry Fester......

"kowtow", but eloquent all the same.

Cls

[Load Toad]

Just for information the SCMP was previously known as a quality newspaper but in recent years, due in part to some poor management is considered a bit of a 'rag'.
If SCMP don't like that they should know what to do about it.

[mr Q]

Your post has been completely removed. No idea who you are or what you are but you are obviously someone who thinks that you can ride roughshod over PPRuNe. Wrong!

Now you see what I mean about you thinking you have the right to free speech on PPRuNe. There is no such thing. Danny, and his mods, I being one of them, have the editorial rights and you have been shown a demonstration of that. That is what mods do.

Go play on another site where your pathetic self opinionated rubbish will be welcome. It isn't on here.

[Capt.KAOS]

Any views ?? Yeah, time to check my PM's.... :}

[Doors to Automatic]

Back to the incident - a 60 degree turn at 500ft does not sound any more hair-raising than, say a 37 degree turn at 200 feet (onto a heading of, say 130 degrees!). :p

[Golf Charlie Charlie]

<<
Back to the incident - a 60 degree turn at 500ft does not sound any more hair-raising than, say a 37 degree turn at 200 feet (onto a heading of, say 130 degrees!).
>>

Doesn't the Carnarsie approach into JFK's 13L and 13R entail a turn of about 50/60 degrees - at 500 feet or so ?

[Ranger One]

Golf Charlie Charlie:

Doesn't the Carnarsie approach into JFK's 13L and 13R entail a turn of about 50/60 degrees - at 500 feet or so ?

Indeed it does, but it's only around 2nm to run at that point... ummmm airnav, if I can find the bloody thing... ok here it is:

http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0408/00610VG13LR.PDF

That's the published approach.

I think you'll find the CX crew were nowhere near the published approach, and way below glideslope... 60 degrees at 500ft is hardly noteworthy - unless you're at 500ft a hell of a long way away from where you're supposed to be!

R1, tired.

[7FF]

Couln't think of a better qualified pilot to be flying that close to the water!
Up periscope.

[wingview]

I don't understand the hassle of CX... 60 degree turn, 500 ft, 5 mls out and no GPWS all to avoid weather... :confused:

[Traffic]

wingview

When is the last time you got a WHOOP WHOOP with the gear down?

[Chronic Snoozer]

well.....this one time I was with a lady of reputation, I dropped my gear and she went 'whoop whoop!'.

....or was it 'Whoopie!' ?