KA 330 Penang

[Avinthenews]

Stuck there for last 3 days?

[alohajec]

Heard it from a fellow KA pilot. 3-pt landing registered nearly 3G's (prob not that high). Saw photos of rivets popped on engine/wing pylon. Got photos from a colleague who parked next to it and had a closer look. Apparently skipper sent back immediately to HK to explain. All this is hearsay but I'm sure the facts can be corroborated in due time.

Aloha.

[Ali Sadikin]

Heard it from a fellow KA pilot. 3-pt landing registered nearly 3G's (prob not that high). Saw photos of rivets popped on engine/wing pylon. Got photos from a colleague who parked next to it and had a closer look. Apparently skipper sent back immediately to HK to explain. All this is hearsay but I'm sure the facts can be corroborated in due time.

Aloha.
Favourite sky God question-is the skipper expat or local?

[OpTest]

Believe it was a three point landing that was closer to 2G. Either way its not flying anytime soon.

[alohajec]

Dunno about that but heard the F/O was PF.

Aloha.

[geh065]

Landing gear change I heard.

[Flying Clog]

I don't know how much experience, or what the background of the FO was, but I can hazard a guess... :E

Only a matter of time before this sort of thing starts happening across the road. :ugh:

[Karunch]

The true cost of an Mpl becomes apparant?

[Yonosoy Marinero]

Here's the AVHerald report:

Accident: Dragon A333 at Penang on Sep 16th 2015, hard landing (http://avherald.com/h?article=48c9f93e&opt=0)

B-HLK, 23 years old, is one of the oldest A330s around. In fact, it was the second A330 prototype.
Not worth the repairs. Chances are it will end up as a Kwey Teow restaurant near the airport now.

RIP, Lima Kilo...

[Trafalgar]

Heard that a 777-200 is grounded in Narita with perhaps terminal fatigue damage. Apparently a two-foot crack in a wing? Anyone with any facts? What led to the damage?

[CCA]

A330 was 2.8G I'm told.

[Shot Nancy]

MPL on A330?
Don't think so.

[Samba Anaconda]

Just under 2.9 G . The real issue of course was the landing weight. Airbus are still investigating. Expect to be ferry fly to hk and gear replaced at the least.

FO is female, HK chinese.
Capt is Expat, senior guy

FO did landing. They got huge sink rate as possibly manual flying with thrust idlearound 100 feet. Capt tried to recover but the thing hit nosewheel first.

Fate of both crew TBD. Previous history would sugest displinary action for the Capt, and the FO to return to line, scott free.

Suspect the money saved on hiring this young lady has gone the way of the dodo.

Over the land of the morning calm, I had an expat f/o with thousands of hours. Same thing with him as PF high sink rate below 100feet RA; he disregarded my order to go around. I took over, ToGAed, firewalled the thrust levers and climbed away. We did touched down with a slight thud before climbing away. Long debrief but No.1 claimed that he was too focussed on aiming for the spot.

I guessed this lady f/o had less experience, so it can happen to an f/o with more than the required command hours. Skippers can no longer afford be macho and take their eyes off the ball during f/o's landing anymore.:\

[ACMS]

We have never been able to relax whilst letting any FO land an Airbus.......

On the mighty 777 I could assist as required at anytime, not on the plastic fantastic...:eek:

That and throttles that don't move......

Absolute genius Airbus, really...:D

[Frogman1484]

ACMS...that is exactly what the Asiana pilots were thinking in San Fran :ok:

[HeartyMeatballs]

Yes and Southwest and LGA too. I bet those were glad of the mechanically linked yokes. But, I seem to recall the nose wheel ended up in the avionics bay, no?

[Karunch]

So does that make a first for KA- an MPL induced hull loss? Creative accounting may even show it as a profitable exercise.

[ACMS]

In that case both Pilots were out to lunch and nothing was going to fix that......

[777300ER]

I guessed this lady f/o had less experience, so it can happen to an f/o with more than the required command hours. Skippers can no longer afford be macho and take their eyes off the ball during f/o's landing anymore.

The hardest landing I've ever witnessed occurred when I was in the right seat with a fairly senior Captain flying (or not flying for that last 100ft). Just saying...

[JammedStab]

The hardest landing I've ever witnessed occurred when I was in the right seat with a fairly senior Captain flying (or not flying for that last 100ft). Just saying...

Mine was with the chief pilot on type. Couldn't see the instruments momentarily. Second worst unstable approach after a screwed up instrument approach was with a different chief pilot on a different type. The former chief pilot on that type had the worst.

Anyways....back to subject.

[Brown Nose]

Guessing your still in the right seat?

[Steve the Pirate]

We have never been able to relax whilst letting any FO land an Airbus.......


Is that a bad thing? The inference is that, because you could "assist as required at any time", you were more relaxed on the "mighty 777". The ability to physically intervene during an approach and landing should not be the deciding factor in one's alertness level during approach and landing. I would argue that if you were more relaxed on the "mighty 777" given the argument above then the chances of you having a landing incident were higher than on the "plastic fantastic".

STP

[Flying Clog]

STP is bang on.

It's the same reason I don't like travelling in cars fitted with airbags or ABS... I find that the operator is more likely to drive recklessly and therefore increase your chances of having a prang :}

Keep drinking the airbus Kool Aid, it's yummy!

[ACMS]

Whatever floats your boat, in 12+ years left seat I've so far never had to seriously intervene during the FO landing but I'm still keeping a pretty close eye on what he/she is doing as best I can and ready to takeover as needed.

It's just that on the 777 or indeed any conventional yoke back driven type I have the ability to assist with inputs as required as they happen without fear of dual input or canceling his input and making it 10 x worse.... You don't have that direct quick instinctive ability on the bus and are basically at the mercy of the other Pilot below 100'.

Anyway I can't say that I've heard of too many events on a Boeing requiring Landing Gear changes.......on the bus.....:ugh:

[mockingjay]

No aircraft is perfect. The 737 has a poor history when it comes to the integrity of the landing gear and many have collapsed causing, or leading to structural damage of the aircraft. Then you have the wrinkly 767s that have gone through heavy landings. Maybe you don't hear about them changing gears as it's the actual aircraft they end up changing. Also, loss of control incidents over the last decade were significantly higher for Boeing vs Airbus. Point being in mater what you fly, keeping alter and vigilant at ALL stages of the flight is vital.

[Metro man]

I remember an F/O flaring too low and then snatching back on the side stick. In a light aircraft you will probably get away with it but when the main wheels are half way down the cabin it actually drives them on even harder, as I explained to him afterwards.

That time I did take over as survival instincts, honed from having done ab initio instruction in a previous life kicked in.

[hkgyyzhkg]

According to Avhearld, the aircraft had a hard landing on its second touch down after the initial bounce. I would say, its hard enough to intervene in such a short time, and its even harder for the captain to see what the FO is doing with his side stick.

[anotherbusdriver]

Mods,

There is absolutely no legitimate reason why anybody should post the sex, race, colour or religion of the person involved in this incident.

MPL rumour is enough. Highlighting anything else is irrelevant and illegal.

Thank you.

[HeartyMeatballs]

I wouldn't read too much into the AvHerald post. Even the editor of the site has had numerous incidents whereby they have had to challenge those posting on the site. I wouldn't be surprised if this was rubbish. Why would the captain open the FD door if they were crying?!?!

[positionalpor]

Perhaps we don't employ the right pilots.
Carry on with the gay bar style narrative whilst I sip a good red

[Stone_cold]

A little sensitive and perhaps defensive aren't we anotherbus ? While all you mentioned may be irrelevant , it certainly is not illegal to mention the gender , race , religion nor colour . For some MPL may also be irrelevant when all is said and done .

As for the article HM , one comment seems to suggest that the Captain was observed from the terminal, not from the FD , along with an observation of the tyres and was qualified with " I thought " .

[betpump5]

Anotherbusdriver,

Many here will disagree with you on your statement. It has EVERYTHING to do with the incident. If you don't know why, I suggest you grab yourself a coffee, a pack of 100wg biscuits and read The Fragrant Harbour and archives for the last 5 years. Admittedly, also have a pinch of salt with you at the same time.

Let me illustrate to you what the public have a right to know as a paying passenger:

Case point - I'm on the jump seat of a 777ER. The Captain is a local guy, recently made a Captain. The FO passed his QL few weeks previous. (non HK but came via the ab-initio route).

What are the Recent Experience levels? Captain would have done 12-18 sectors per year as an FO in his last 5-8 years before the handful of sectors during the Command upgrade. FO during his 8 months of line flying between the JFO upgrade and the QL was lucky enough to get a sector every 2 months.

Total Experience level on the Flight deck in the last 5 years between the two pilots? 100 odd sectors. Just what you need going into MNL on the VOR, 130/20G35!

[Steve the Pirate]

Total Experience level on the Flight deck in the last 5 years between the two pilots? 100 odd sectors. Just what you need going into MNL on the VOR, 130/20G35!

Presumably you survived the approach in question? Despite the apparent lack of experience on the flight deck in question, how did they do?

STP

[betpump5]

Presumably you survived the approach in question? Despite the apparent lack of experience on the flight deck in question, how did they do?

STP

They did absolutely fine my friend. Textbook. 5s for the Cn 4s for the FO. Both even had their hat.

But you know as well as I do what the point of the thread is. Any more silly questions?

[Shutterbug]

@Betpump

You're a true inspiration to us all Betpump. Really. Your selfless heroism and dedication to the welfare of the flying public and the boundless courage with which you heroically hurl yourself into the raging fires on this anonymous internet forum, throwing yourself on hand grenades left and right. I'm all choked up.

You sir, have The Right Stuff. All that selfless sacrifice purely for the betterment of aviation safety. Heroic. Usually when I read an incident or accident report my gut instinct is to wonder "there but for the grace of god," but then again I lack the tens of thousands of hours hurtling X-1s to the edge of the stratosphere or chasing nasty Huns over the skies of Europe. I salute you sir. You're an inspiration to aviators everywhere.

But you know as well as I do what the point of the thread is.

Yes we do. Yes we do. *wink wink*

:D:D:D

The deadliest aviation disaster in history lands squarely on the shoulders of KLMs chief training officer who was reportedly one of the most experienced and "respected" pilots at KLM at the time.

Any more silly questions?

[anotherbusdriver]

The sex of the first officer, who allegedly is the person being pointed at, has nothing to do with it. Neither has race or religion.

If you start pointing fingers at people who are in a tiny minority (less than 2% I would guess), you are doing it to either abuse the data privacy laws; or trying to make a point that certain demographics are of a lesser calibre based purely on their sex, colour, race or religion - this is in fact illegal. It highlights your personal bias, and discrimination you feel towards that demographic. Especially when it has absolutely nothing to do with what happened.

And to be perfectly clear, I am calling you a sexist.

I am not disputing your arguments about experience levels, sectors available, or your argument regarding prior training/ experience before KA. My comment is about the fact that there is no need, except to be malicious, that you have highlighted and continue to point out the sex of this particular pilot, when there is no operational difference between a male or a female of similar backgrounds in any case.

[HIALS]

Touche. I agree entirely.

[Steve the Pirate]

They did absolutely fine my friend. Textbook. 5s for the Cn 4s for the FO. Both even had their hat.

But you know as well as I do what the point of the thread is. Any more silly questions?

I thought the thread was about the 330 hard landing but it seems to have morphed into slagging off MPL and low experience pilots. However, as you yourself have confirmed in the statement above, in adverse conditions pilots who you deemed to have low or limited experience did a good job - textbook in fact.

One silly question if I may; why did you raise the point in the first place if the approach and landing you witnessed was a non-event?

STP

[Stone_cold]

It is not an allegation if the statement that the PF was a female , if true . Not sure if anyone suggested that this was contributory . If she was PF , then fact . Never illegal ! If one alludes to this fact as a cause then maybe you have an argument .
Perhaps you consider it to be a cause ??
Along the same vein , any assumption prior to the results of the investigation are rumour , including MPL , but this is okay with you . Guess you get to pick and choose what is bigoted !!

A female was a member of the crew .Fact . So was a man .Fact . Maybe asexual aliens were flying !!
Nothing illegal or sexist here , get a life and put your political correctness in the bin .

[Just Do It]

anotherbusdriver

It seems the TV news stations haven't received your memo on political correctness! They do a great job verbally describing someone's appearance, sex, religion and mental state. Additionally if the verbal or written word hasn't helped your prejudice they will provide supportive video or failing that get a sketch artist involved.

[betpump5]

One silly question if I may; why did you raise the point in the first place if the approach and landing you witnessed was a non-event?

STP

For the same reason a letter was written by C&T to the DFO even though an accident hasn't happened...yet.

[Milking a mouse]

Don't dismiss the valid point made by airbusdriver to the bin because of political correctness fatigue. It's not. He's obviously frustrated with the loathsome habit of pilots to assign poor landings, global warming and the Greek debt crisis to females, locals & MPL's. Heaven forbid should any poor soul hit all three in the trifecta!

I'm sick of people jumping onto the "it's cos she's a she/local/whatever" bandwagon. And of course if HE'S not, he just had a bad day! "Could happen to anyone". :O

Look at a recent thread about Kenny Chiang. The very same people that moan that locals can't fly, locals have no passion for aviation etc immediately cut this guy down. For flipping an aircraft ass over tit more times in a day than you've landed in a year! Who cares if Daddy's got coin and funded his passion. He's out there, doing it.

When's the last time you've slapped USD$10k down on the table to fly for FUN! For the challenge. For the reward. No, doing is not your thing. Going out and achieving doesn't float your boat. Getting calluses on thumb & forefinger from knob fiddling is your lot. You prefer the drull monotony that is airline flying. To mock from the arrogant cocoon that is your repetitive, high speed, high tonnage, sheetmetal-working Groundhog Day. Wine glass in hand, the flicker of your friends on pprune on your computer screen, illuminating the room.

The sooner you arrogant, sexist, homophobic, racist pricks die out the better. Perhaps then the professional could be put into 'professionalism' with regard to our industry. Putting an end to the ill-informed, lay the boot in, devour your own drivel that has filled this thread. (Not an MPL, not a write off, no popped rivets, no damage whatsoever other than a G & attitude that exceeded design limitations and necessitates a new set of legs btw).

Show me an Airbus CM1 that doesn't acknowledge the vulnerability of being PNF with only reactive cues to make takeover decisions by and I'll eat my hat.

[betpump5]

Airbus CM1?

Congratulations- you've learned the new procedures.

Goes hand-in-hand I suppose.

[Just Do It]

Mouse Milker

no damage whatsoever other than a G & attitude that exceeded design limitations and necessitates a new set of legs btw).

Well I'm glad you know the difference!

[Yonosoy Marinero]

Funny how many are eager to point out the gender and race of the drivers, but not the weather conditions...

They were s#!t, and it was raining frogs and snakes when they landed.

Landing 1045Z:

WMKP 161100Z 31007G17KT 4000 -TSRA FEW008 FEW017CB SCT023 OVC250 23/21 Q1006 TEMPO 5000 -TSRA

WMKP 161030Z 21006KT 5000 HZ FEW010 BKN140 BKN270 28/24 Q1006 TEMPO 5000 RA

Oh, and CX made the news again:
Incident: Cathay A343 at Auckland on Sep 19th 2015, rejected takeoff twice due to engine problem (http://avherald.com/h?article=48cb873e&opt=0)

Can't be good for publicity.

[Gnadenburg]

The sex of the first officer, who allegedly is the person being pointed at, has nothing to do with it. Neither has race or religion.

If you start pointing fingers at people who are in a tiny minority (less than 2% I would guess), you are doing it to either abuse the data privacy laws; or trying to make a point that certain demographics are of a lesser calibre based purely on their sex, colour, race or religion - this is in fact illegal. It highlights your personal bias, and discrimination you feel towards that demographic. Especially when it has absolutely nothing to do with what happened.

And to be perfectly clear, I am calling you a sexist.

I am not disputing your arguments about experience levels, sectors available, or your argument regarding prior training/ experience before KA. My comment is about the fact that there is no need, except to be malicious, that you have highlighted and continue to point out the sex of this particular pilot, when there is no operational difference between a male or a female of similar backgrounds in any case.

Totally concur.

And it contributes to the race to the bottom as the System is defended by hollow professionals caught in a simple rant instead of presenting and delivering the deficiencies at play. Which granted, is not easy.

[cpdude]

I heard she was Irish too.:}

[anotherbusdriver]

point made

[Trafalgar]

Anotherbusdriver is correct. The ONLY discuss-able fact is the experience level. Any other metric is irrelevant. Let's not score an 'own goal' with this. Remember who the real enemy is.

[Stone_cold]

I also said it is irrelevant!

You said it was illegal ! I dispute your posit that it is illegal .
MPL rumour is enough. Highlighting anything else is irrelevant and illegal.*
. Seems to suggest that the MPL rumour is relevant , but perhaps it is my lack of education

Irrelevant or not , it is not illegal to say it was a female flying . Perhaps we should say it was a wholly owned subsidiary of Cathay Pacific aircraft !! Is that illegal also ?

It was a female flying as PF that crash landed the ship. Public Fact .

It is a free rumour network . You don't get to decide what is relevant or not , you do have your opinion and so do I .
You seem to have a part time career in law ..defame ..guess you would have to identify yourself , wouldn't you ? Or will Airbusdriver bring on the suit ? You display an intolerance towards and decry views which differ from what you would choose to discuss and attempt to control their freedom to discuss facts which are in the public domain . Check out the definition , apparently I am not as educated as you are . I also said that I guess you get to choose what is bigoted ? So I will speak SLOWLY here also . The view that MPL rumour is enough and anything else is irrelevant, IS a bigoted view !

I love the internet though ..history is a b***h .

http://www.pprune.org/fragrant-harbour/555714-tired-sad-2.html#post8851389

Post 29 , guess you know for a fact here that with ref to Air Asia , inexperience ( extremely inexperienced f/o at the controls) was a factor and it was a handling accident , way back on Feb 3 , with the final report still pending .

So to get back to the thread .
1) PF was female .
2) PM was male (Capt)
3) Dragonair A330
4) Owned subsidiary of Cathay Pacific.
5) 2.8+ G 'landing' .
6) Aircraft grounded pending...??
7) Airport - PEN

Not suggesting any cause , just shooting the breeze .

[Midnight Rambler]

Maybe a stupid question but............. why, given the experience level of the genderless, faceless, agnostic PF in the right seat did the (presumably) more experienced PM in the left seat - you know, the one who signed for the jet - give the landing away or, more to the point NOT give the landing away in those conditions?

[Steve the Pirate]

For the same reason a letter was written by C&T to the DFO even though an accident hasn't happened...yet.

OK, I understand the sentiment but don't you see the flaw in the argument you've presented? You alluded to being uncomfortable on the jumpseat during an approach into an airport in challenging conditions, flown by a crew with low or limited experience. You then used this illustration to support a position which, when queried, was found to be baseless. You yourself stated that the crew did a good job.

Now had you said that it was a shambles or you felt unsafe then, albeit on a rumour forum, your argument might have had more credibility. As it stands, your post rather defeated your own argument in that in an attempt to highlight the experience level in the flight deck (and presumably your position that lots of experience = good pilot and low experience = bad pilot) all you did was illustrate the ability of the crew, which in turn will be seen by some to reflect the standards maintained by the airline.

Thanks for reminding me to have a pinch of salt ready with the biscuits.

STP

[etrang]

anotherbusdriver,

you are quite wrong. I hope your knowledge of aviation is greater than your "knowledge" of the law.

[halas]

As soon as anyone f#cks up, the first question in an expat community is: "where are they from?"

halas

[SloppyJoe]

Taxi drivers, spent their whole working life driving a car. Sorry but political correctness aside, race does play a role. Black people can run short and long distances better, white people can swim better, asians play badminton better. It should not preclude employment, but it is not irrelevant.

[spleener]

I think we all understand that the experience level may possibly have been a contributing factor. When the hard facts are released, we can make more enlightened reasoning.
In the meantime, the Boeing vs Airbus dogma being thrown about is about as relevant as the boorish racial comments.
With over a decade of JFO training on both aircraft types [ie more than 10 yrs on each] I can say both have their particular challenges. As an example, while the takeover decision is more aircraft trajectory driven on the Airbus, the actual takeover of control has always - in my experience - been much cleaner and defined. Simple as pushing a button.
As a footnote, the technique of 'assisting' another pilot on the controls without a positive takeover is potentially hazardous. Techniques such as this are shunned by all professional training organisations.

[anotherbusdriver]

Somebody has clearly abused the data privacy laws to gain knowledge of the crew involved. Then published that knowledge on a public forum. Whether actual names are used, or whether you name by a process of elimination, it matters not.

How would you feel if the author wrote: "western, male Capt with green hair from Antarctica"?

Or do you think the abuse is OK as long as it is general, and who decides where the line is drawn?

Not feeding the trolls, just sick of the ugliness of the secret glee some people get from seeing others (Chines, gays, women, whatever...) fail.

[Lowkoon]

Not sure about data privacy laws, maybe they just looked at the roster? Freely available for anyone in the company to browse through.

No damage found according to one of the bosses in an email to everyone. Great news, hope to see the jet and the crew back on line soon.

Those weather conditions (on the metar) are within FO limits, its not like CX, we mostly do one for one sector wise, in fact you will attract heat from above if you don't.

We are paid and hopefully trained to operate these jets to the limits printed on the box, that weather (and we have only seen the metar, not the the actual wx on the FDR at the time of touchdown...) if the weather was the same as the metar, it was nowhere near the limits of the jet, or the crew.

Might be a case of "there but for the grace of god" gents. Sometimes pays to wait for the video ref to view the tapes before blowing the whistle.

[Gnadenburg]

Might be a case of "there but for the grace of god" gents.

You must be well-connected or just a coincidence. Variations of this proverbial saying seem to be doing the rounds unofficially.

[Lowkoon]

Go with coincidence Gnadenburg, not even close to being "connected" just a line driver.

I do however have a lot of respect for the captain involved, and know that if it caught him out, it certainly would have caught out the majority of us.

I also don't want a hull loss on our books, and can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would get a "kick" out of one of us bending one, regardless of who was the unfortunate soul who was flying at the time.

[OpTest]

What I want to know is does anyone here have proof that the FO messed up or were the conditions in most part to blame?

[OpTest]

Thank for replying to my simply question with a long winded and condescending answer. You sir need to take a chill pill and remove that plug out of where the sun doesn't shine...

Now back to the reasoning for my question, I believe some people do have all the facts and do partake in the forums.. However fact or not every pilot (experienced or not) will make a mistake, its just human nature.

[cyrex]

Milking a mouse

Fine example you got there naming a person who is so enthusiactic in his recreational flying he has been suspended by his company after he was caught faking a sickness so he can attend his competitions👍🏻

[mrfox]

As soon as anyone f#cks up, the first question in an expat community is: "where are they from?"
The first question in a white expat community usually.
Most likely Australians or English.

[Samba Anaconda]

The first question in a white expat community usually.
Most likely Australians or English.

See this thread:

http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/568437-jetstar-sydney-stuff-up.html

[Ali Sadikin]

So quiet about Samba's post.

Toxic?

[cxorcist]

No, just tiresome. Either you can fly or you can't. Most of us don't care what race, sex, or nationality you are. Be that as it may, inexperienced pilots tend to struggle more, obviously. Since many of our zero-hour hero "pilots" (yes, spikey hair) are Chinese, this might lead some to racial conclusions. The truth is that inexperienced pilots have no place operating widebody (or narrowbody for that matter) airliners. Unfortunately, our managers don't care or are not brave enough to speak out against this practice which has killed many thousands in Asian airliners in the past. CX/KA is sure to follow suit if the current trajectory isn't altered. Expats will wither on the vine and CX/KA will be no different from other airlines in the region. If you are comfortable with that, fill your boots!!!

[Frogman1484]

OMG. What is happening to me...for the first time ever I have to agree with cxorcist! :confused :uhoh:

[Flying Clog]

100% agree with cxorcist :D

[Kid Dynamite]

What the cXORCIST said!!!
Enough with the BS...

[KABOY]

The truth is that inexperienced pilots have no place operating widebody (or narrowbody for that matter) airliners.

The problem with this statement is Boeing and Airbus disagree.

They have created these aircraft with all these 'protections' that they are selling them to airlines on the premise that anyone can fly them.

Just ask Tony Fernandes, driving low cost pilot employment to a new low......

[Avinthenews]

So is a cadet & or minimum hours employment scheme tied to a seniority system slave labor....

Discuss.

When you have the relevant experience to move on, will you? When you have to join the bottom pay scale of a new seniority list.

[spleener]

KABOY,
Purlease.!!!..:O
Let's not get into a boeing vs airbus quagmire. They both have their own specific challenges. Examples of mode confusion, pwr vs attitude mismanagement can - easily - be found for both types.

[Foxdeux]

I don't want to sound like a bitter wannabe cadet but I went for the interview last year and didn't get past 1b. I started training for my PPL in high school with about 100hrs, went to a top University for economics (irrelevant but still should be considered), I've had an internship working for the largest aviation oil and gas company in the world, I volunteer with the air cadets and teach ground school. I genuinely have a passion for aviation. They took someone who was studying to be an accountant. :mad:

[joblow]

Kaboy

Quote:

The problem with this statement is Boeing and Airbus disagree.

They have created these aircraft with all these 'protections' that they are selling them to airlines on the premise that anyone can fly them.

Unfortunately I can show you a number of hull losses that contradict the statement above ...inexperience will get you every time .
But the way inexperienced pilots ,like doctors , learn is by operational exposure guided by a more experienced crew members

[ACMS]

Fox-----one piece of advice my friend. Never give up, if you want it bad enough you'll find a way. :ok:

[LandIT]

Fox....... Another piece of advice.

Both of you seem to have been studying to "be" something rather irrelevant/different to a commercial airline pilot.

I assume both of you in fact now want to "be" something different than what your credentials indicate and your current activities show. It is not uncommon to experience this change of heart after your university studies have begun.

My opinion is that "they" portrayed their passion and focus in what they really wanted to do, THIS time, a bit better than you did. My advice is for you to show your passion and focus at your next interview. Don't be afraid to admit your studies are not taking you where your heart is and that in effect you've changed your mind.

After all, the world needs many thousands of pilots in the next decade according to both manufacturers. There must be a place for YOU! :ok:

[propaganda]

Do KA actively encourage their junior co's / cadets to disconnect the AP and manually fly from ToD - traffic environment permitting of course. As an ex trainer on the BUS my company actively encouraged their trainers to let the cadets manually fly.
I have seen a real reluctance over recent years for pilots to disconnect the AP and fly the jet. I know what the Boeing and Airbus lawyers say, but an over reliance on system automation will erode further the very limited skill base of a cadet pilot.

[cxorcist]

In over a decade at CX, I have never hand flown from ToD. I can't speak for Dragon Air. I can count on one hand the number of times I have seen anyone at CX hand fly to ToC. I have never done it. Boring and tedious comes to mind. That said, over 99% of all landings are manual, as they should be unless weather or fatigue is a factor.

[betpump5]

My past posts hopefully show my disgust for anything the company does. Even if it is something good (which is rare) I still try to put a negative spin on it.

For example, Dan mentions Non-Jeopardy sim. My response would be "Non Jeopardy in Cathay? Yeah whatever mate. Where you been hiding for the past 15 years?"

However, if the N5 is to be axed, I can have nothing against that- I find them to be the most irrelevant exercises in modern day airline flying. Complete waste of money and infinitely worse, a total waste of my time.

Unless someone out there has had to do a FD off Takeoff into a 60degree bank turn just to prove to themselves that back pressure is needed.

[ACMS]

Yes I really need visual approach practice at 2 am body clock time........:mad:

[rsb]

You do not meet RVSM requirements while hand flying therefore one would hope no one operates an aircraft in manual flight while in RVSM airspace except under an emergency situation.

[Gnadenburg]

You do not meet RVSM requirements while hand flying therefore one would hope no one operates an aircraft in manual flight while in RVSM airspace except under an emergency situation.

The way it works in HKG you're descended out of RVSM airspace not long after the FIR boundary.

A hand flown, high speed descent, is of considerable training advantage, providing a muscle memory for aircraft handling which is considerably different to the 30 seconds of flight per sector, most pilots do at VAPP. It also helps with speed brake panache, understanding the inertia and pitch moments, hopefully relative to a little pax comfort. And of course, for A320 drivers, when you're left high and dry by ATC, the full application of speed brake is only available with AP off.

The culture of over-speeding in HKG was a shock to many new arrivals with Airbus experience. There were legendary, serial offenders and the eventual solution that ended up in the manuals was the approach to overspeed and overspeed. Basically and comically a "managed" overspeed whereas a few hand flown descents and looking at your AH if in a managed descent mode would avert an overspeed long before it was threatening. And no, HKG airlines do not fly the aircraft hard and fast, so having worked for airlines that did, and over speeding was unheard of, the culture and technique here was inappropriate.

So, to answer propaganda's question on HF descents and raw data flying, the system is not terribly supportive with unrealistic operational restrictions that present a negative training exposure. So the fear the system has for pilots hand flying on the line is manifesting itself into a wider reluctance to enable First Officers to practice their hand flying.

Some will say that's what the sim is for but they are not the same as aircraft handling in real time. Apart from small IRS track errors and convective turbulence which often trouble a cadet, the aviation exposure of an MPL is low and there is a genuine fear with hand flying a real aeroplane that needs to be overcome. Coupled with an aversion by many line captains to expose their operation to training 150 hour pilots in big jets and you have a crisis that is not well understood by leadership.

Anyways, not relevant here and I'll let it drift back to a CX thread.

[JY9024]

Flew with a newly checked out MPL some time ago over a couple of days and noticed that the AP was on at 200ft and off at 500 on approach. Asked why he is reluctant to hand fly and he just stated "To Hard" and he gets adequate practice in the simulator.

Different generation I guess.

JY.

[ACMS]

Too hard hand flying an Airbus???? It's basically flying itself anyway!!!

[Shot Nancy]

Heard a story some time back about an ex-USMC Top Gun instructor flying the A320 in Oz who would turn everything off at 10000'. Everything - FDs, autopilot and autothrust. No matter what the weather. All approaches was exceptionally flown.
When asked if he flew like that on a line check he said that he did. When asked what did the check captain say he replied "Not a f@#$k'n thing".

[kinteafrokunta]

Heard a story some time back about an ex-USMC Top Gun instructor flying the A320 in Oz who would turn everything off at 10000'. Everything - FDs, autopilot and autothrust. No matter what the weather. All approaches was exceptionally flown.
When asked if he flew like that on a line check he said that he did. When asked what did the check captain say he replied "Not a f@#$k'n thing".


Hey, ex-usmc top gun instructor...feeling better now?

Semper Fi !:ok:

[MrCrawford]

Sorry for bringing up an old thread:

Just read an interesting post in regards to the different opportunities between KA and CX.

What are the Recent Experience levels? Captain would have done 12-18 sectors per year as an FO in his last 5-8 years before the handful of sectors during the Command upgrade. FO during his 8 months of line flying between the JFO upgrade and the QL was lucky enough to get a sector every 2 months. 18 sectors per year as an FO in CX, is completed in just over a month in KA. A recent ATPL "cadet" with 1500 hours (1300 Jet time), with a landing every 2 hours (650, with 50% of those done by captain), would have done 325 landings. Sure maybe 10 of those were hard (firm) landings, but there are still 315 standard landings. The long debate whether MPL/Ab initio cadets can "fly" the plane shouldn't be a mystery. Each time you hear a western accent on 121.6 after vacating a runway, it's highly likely a "cadet" just landed the aircraft.

EDIT: Yes, I am a cadet product.
Edit 2: misused "hard" for firm landings.

[JY9024]

A, WTF are you talking about??

B, read A.

You are saying that it is ok to do 1 hard landing in every 10!!!

God help us...

[MrCrawford]

I stand corrected. Should have said firm and within operational limits instead of "hard".

Edit: 10 in 315 is around 3 in 100.

I can assure you ASRs and QAR indicate a small amount of actual hard landings.


A, WTF are you talking about??

B, read A.

You are saying that it is ok to do 1 hard landing in every 10!!!

God help us...

[RRAAMJET]

Hey Crash-bandicoot, "firm and within operational limits" on 3% of landings on a widebody is still unacceptable. Shows where we are headed with experience levels worldwide on WB, and management "well, it'll have to do, won't it?".

In this case, Capt placed in unenviable situation...personally, I would not have placed these conditions in FO's lap with (her) experience level, a decision made before ToD briefing...Penang + cb's.

CX had 15kt Max x-wind for FO when I was there decades ago. Dragon same?

[MrCrawford]

Hey Crash-bandicoot, "firm and within operational limits" on 3% of landings on a widebody is still unacceptable. Shows where we are headed with experience levels worldwide on WB, and management "well, it'll have to do, won't it?".

In this case, Capt placed in unenviable situation...personally, I would not have placed these conditions in FO's lap with (her) experience level, a decision made before ToD briefing...Penang + cb's.

CX had 15kt Max x-wind for FO when I was there decades ago. Dragon same?

20kt. Firm landings...do you consider the autoland firm? Every half year we practice autoland and every time I am reminded that is an Airbus (320) definition of a landing which I consider firm.

I believe we all have different opinions on what is firm and what is hard.

Crash was a great game Btw.

Cheers

[Gnadenburg]

The auto-land is safer and smoother at touchdown than a cadet for the first year or so. :}

As it should be I suppose but Mr Crawford eat some humble pie.

[JY9024]

Crawford, the fact that you think that a firm landing is acceptable makes me want to never give a landing to a cadet again...

It's about time you realised that this job is not all about you. It's about the captain who is responsible for your actions. And that aside, where's the pride in your so called career??

I feel for the FO in this event. A great operator who will have a great career in KA, and that's because that person feels responsible for what happened and will strive to ensure it never happens again, in other words, realises that it's not acceptable to accept a "firm" landing as normal.

[positionalpor]

hope not to drift too much but we have a certain demographic group who is quite nervous when they operate.
At times ridiculous.....

[LongTimeInCX]

certain demographic group
Is that your Management pilots?
Or do you mean cadets, poms, Amhericuns, Asians, Aussies, Kiwis or who?
Sorry if I missed the subtlety of the inference, but I am intrigued...

[anotherbusdriver]

5 pages of rubbish and the aircraft didn't even need a gear change apparently. Not like the recent little CX 2.2G landing.... Oops. I don't think it was a cadet landing this time.

[asianeagle]

Oops. I don't think it was a cadet landing this time.

most JFO's doing base training are cadets these days but, more to the point, WTF were they thinking doing base training in those conditions???

No wonder a lot of the landings are crap, they never got a fair change to bed down the basics :ugh:

[Rumpelforeskin]

I think it is more a reflection on the BTC rather than the guy doing training.