Merged: Tiger Tales
DrPepz,
Perhaps it has a lot to do with the distinctly Singaporean "Kiasu" mentality.
"That blokes got something that might be better than what I've got ... I'll have to get one too"
I don't understand why SQ needs to jump onto this LCC bandwagon.
"That blokes got something that might be better than what I've got ... I'll have to get one too"
Tiger are in such a mess they do not know what they are doing. They even refer to Crawford Rix as the CEO of Tiger - Australia in their press release. He was the Managing Director, not the CEO.
Whispers abound that Tony Davis is not acceptable to CASA as a long term post holder, just 90 days from when (if) they recommence flying to enable Tiger to find someone acceptable. The same applies to the Director of Flight Operations Capt Tim Berry.
Watch this space !
Whispers abound that Tony Davis is not acceptable to CASA as a long term post holder, just 90 days from when (if) they recommence flying to enable Tiger to find someone acceptable. The same applies to the Director of Flight Operations Capt Tim Berry.
Watch this space !
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About time CASA had a good long look at Tim Berry's mate Petteford's little operation at Moorabbin.
Question: is Collecting drained fuel and eventually putting it back into the tanks of aircraft legal??
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Question: is Collecting drained fuel and eventually putting it back into the tanks of aircraft legal??
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it true Tiger pilots have a "can be moved to SIN at anytime" type clause in their contract?
If so, will/have any of them been told to pack thier bags and take an aircraft to SIN for next months roster?
Can't see the owners being too happy about resources parked when they could be used elsewhere. Maintanence issues not withstanding etc etc.
If so, will/have any of them been told to pack thier bags and take an aircraft to SIN for next months roster?
Can't see the owners being too happy about resources parked when they could be used elsewhere. Maintanence issues not withstanding etc etc.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AFAIK, the registration can be cancelled at any time, so if they wanted to put a Singapore (for example) rego on the aircraft, then as long as the relevant CAAS requirements were complied with, then that's the end of it.
Moderator
The restriction is on the AOC, not the aircraft. So, looking at the earlier post regarding flying the aircraft out of the country, that ought not to be an insurmountably difficult exercise, I shouldn't have thought.
Interestingly, the preliminary ATSB investigation report into the MEL incident, just to hand at this site indicates that, while the crew misread the paper plate, the FMS database contained an incorrect level to which they subsequently descended.
Doesn't excuse the error, but alters the complexion somewhat, I would have thought ?
Interestingly, the preliminary ATSB investigation report into the MEL incident, just to hand at this site indicates that, while the crew misread the paper plate, the FMS database contained an incorrect level to which they subsequently descended.
Doesn't excuse the error, but alters the complexion somewhat, I would have thought ?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SE Asia
Age: 39
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the airline was completely grounded...so how can they fly ? perhaps special permission for ferry flight without pax on board? although they are talking about maintenance issues as one of the safety reasons for the grounding...hmmm
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tiger Palm
Tim berry the tiger 'chief pilot' and Petteford are old mates from British Midland and are members of the Oxford old boys network.
Petteford did a short sabbatical at British midland some time ago. Actually it is the only airline flying he has done despite purporting to be a atpl licensed pilot with both A320 and 757 type ratings!!
Did you not notice during the senate enquiry how berry was endorsing the use of low hour cadets as though his life depended on it despite his employer, Tiger, whom he was suppose to be representing not having the same mandate?
More to follow
The kelpie
Tim berry the tiger 'chief pilot' and Petteford are old mates from British Midland and are members of the Oxford old boys network.
Petteford did a short sabbatical at British midland some time ago. Actually it is the only airline flying he has done despite purporting to be a atpl licensed pilot with both A320 and 757 type ratings!!
Did you not notice during the senate enquiry how berry was endorsing the use of low hour cadets as though his life depended on it despite his employer, Tiger, whom he was suppose to be representing not having the same mandate?
More to follow
The kelpie
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly, the preliminary ATSB investigation report into the MEL incident, just to hand at this site indicates that, while the crew misread the paper plate, the FMS database contained an incorrect level to which they subsequently descended.
Doesn't excuse the error, but alters the complexion somewhat, I would have thought ?
Doesn't excuse the error, but alters the complexion somewhat, I would have thought ?
Basic stuff I would have thought, but then lately I am constantly surprised at what some of my F/O's think is acceptable & at their poor level of knowledge. I have seen it with captains as well. For example, I have had an F/O who thought it was acceptable, when given a hold, to hold until minimum fuel & then declare an emergency, rather than holding until minimum divert fuel & then divert. i recently had an F/O who didn't know what 'becoming' meant in a TAF & another one who was totally unconcerned with busting an altitude restriction by 200' & became mildly annoyed when I insisted he get the aircraft down to the required altitude.
I have had an F/O say nothing while I have briefed the after landing taxi route from the reciprocal runway because I had an incorrect mindset. It wasn't till I reviewed the chart again a little later that I realized that what I had done. It really ticks me off when F/O's pickup, but don't correct my errors. And I mean all of them. Just thinking 'I know what he means" is not good enough. The other guy may not have just said it wrong, but may genuinely have it wrong. In that vein, I also get really ticked when I correct an error made by the F/O & he gets annoyed with me as if it is something personal.
Maybe a lot of pilots these days have actually become 'bus drivers' & 'near enough is good enough' & 'who cares anyway' is actually the norm now. If that is the case, it is somewhat disappointing. This is a serious business & it can bite you so fast on occasions, you will wonder what happened. A little professionalism & self discipline goes a long way.
Last edited by Oakape; 7th Jul 2011 at 04:52.
Bottums Up
Oakape,
I agree with much of what you have written immediately above. I disagree to some extent with your characterising of the Captain as just disregarding the published level.
I don't know who was flying or the circumstances. Just like you described briefing the wrong taxi path because of a false mind set which you picked up - not your co-pilot, it is entirely possible that the crew missed the discrepancy because of whatever their mindset at the time, and when it became obvious as the aircraft was level at 2500', the PF without realising the error not identified back in the cruise, made an assumption that they were cleared and down they went. After all s/he probably had a V-Nav indicator saying go down, and the MCDU indicated that they should be lower.
IMHO it is the systemic problems that lead to this, and the subsequent event, that need investigation rather than simply blaming the last piece of holey cheese. I say this in the knowledge that it could also have been a simple cockup.
I witness on a routine basis, people briefing approaches as they were taught in the sim. Sadly this method leads to the FMS/MCDU coding not being properly checked. Why were they taught this in the sim? Simple. It saved time given the inordinate number of approaches flown during an endorsement course, and reduced somewhat the time wasted on mouth magic. A negative aspect to this training, is that many seem to have lost the ability, or insight as to the need, to brief an approach in the sequence it will be flown, as opposed to just reading across the top of the Jeppesen/Airservices Approach Plate.
I agree with much of what you have written immediately above. I disagree to some extent with your characterising of the Captain as just disregarding the published level.
I don't know who was flying or the circumstances. Just like you described briefing the wrong taxi path because of a false mind set which you picked up - not your co-pilot, it is entirely possible that the crew missed the discrepancy because of whatever their mindset at the time, and when it became obvious as the aircraft was level at 2500', the PF without realising the error not identified back in the cruise, made an assumption that they were cleared and down they went. After all s/he probably had a V-Nav indicator saying go down, and the MCDU indicated that they should be lower.
IMHO it is the systemic problems that lead to this, and the subsequent event, that need investigation rather than simply blaming the last piece of holey cheese. I say this in the knowledge that it could also have been a simple cockup.
I witness on a routine basis, people briefing approaches as they were taught in the sim. Sadly this method leads to the FMS/MCDU coding not being properly checked. Why were they taught this in the sim? Simple. It saved time given the inordinate number of approaches flown during an endorsement course, and reduced somewhat the time wasted on mouth magic. A negative aspect to this training, is that many seem to have lost the ability, or insight as to the need, to brief an approach in the sequence it will be flown, as opposed to just reading across the top of the Jeppesen/Airservices Approach Plate.
Moderator
I have to concur.
I learnt to fly with an instructor who wielded a rolled up newspaper as an aid to directing trainee attention. On course we all learned very quickly and first soloed with not many hours in the book.
My airline introduction and experience was in the days when we were expected to talk the talk and walk the walk and woebetide the guys who didn't.
Summed up succinctly as a relatively new jet F/O when the captain with whom I was flying picked me up on whatever it was that I had done incorrectly. When I observed "You don't miss much" his simple response was "I'm not allowed to".
That stayed with me thereafter as one of those Golden Rule we acquire along the way.
I learnt to fly with an instructor who wielded a rolled up newspaper as an aid to directing trainee attention. On course we all learned very quickly and first soloed with not many hours in the book.
My airline introduction and experience was in the days when we were expected to talk the talk and walk the walk and woebetide the guys who didn't.
Summed up succinctly as a relatively new jet F/O when the captain with whom I was flying picked me up on whatever it was that I had done incorrectly. When I observed "You don't miss much" his simple response was "I'm not allowed to".
That stayed with me thereafter as one of those Golden Rule we acquire along the way.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly the ARBEY star often and as yet have never seen a reason to set or fly less than 2500' at that stage either. The chart is 2500T and the database is +3000 at EPP.
If somebody starts talking expected taxi routes to me (when we're both familiar with the a/d), my eyes glaze over as well. Half the time it changes anyway
. The less you say the more likely you are to be heard.
There is too much emphasis getting the right words into the CVR these days.
If somebody starts talking expected taxi routes to me (when we're both familiar with the a/d), my eyes glaze over as well. Half the time it changes anyway
. The less you say the more likely you are to be heard.There is too much emphasis getting the right words into the CVR these days.
Bottums Up
Waren,
There may not be any need to be lower but the pertinent part of the ATSB report is: (my bolding)
So to some degree they were suckered by, for whatever reason, not picking up said discrepancy. There may be no reason for not picking it up, or there may be extenuating circumstances. It's sad that the crew are judged & found guilty before the trial has heard all the evidence.
There may not be any need to be lower but the pertinent part of the ATSB report is: (my bolding)
The flight crew did not notice that the documented arrival procedure had a lowest descent altitude of 2,500 ft, while the data from the FGMS’s navigational database that was displayed on the MCDU had a lowest descent altitude of 2,000 ft.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Claret, the prelim report (link in John's post) staes that the captain was the PF & gives description of his actions. While I concede that I wasn't there & don't know what was going through his mind, the report is a little damning.
That being said, correct use of the altitude selector on whatever panel you have in your aircraft (MCP in theBoeing) & adequate cross-checking of selections by the PM is one of the fundamental building blocks of safe operations. If that is was taken seriously in this case, the captain would not have just changed the setting because it disagreed with the altitude in the MCDU. He would have addressed the discrepancy by discussing the situation with the F/O & confirming the cleared altitude with ATC. Maybe I am being too harsh, but simply changing the altitude, as indicated in the report, is inexcusable.
I agree that a lot of problems are generated by the 'gotchas' of systemic failures & constant study & improvement in this area is essential. However, one must recognize that they will always exist & try to develop traps for these issues in order to prevent them leading to an incident or accident.
Professionalism is a mindset & although it can be developed by outside influences, it has to start with a commitment to excellence by the individual from the very beginning.
The sim example you give highlights the situation. We are all aware that sim exercises are very task focused & time limited. The normal briefing techniques & FMC or MCDU cross-checking are glossed over or completely ignored to save time. However, one should have the insight to realize that this does not mean that we can do the same on the line. Application of professional discipline should ensure that the procedure is performed to a high standard in the reality of line operations. The same would apply to highly repetitive actions such as actioning normal checklists on a multi sector day. It is easy to call 'down - 3 greens' without positively checking for 3 greens when you have done it a thousand times & it is 'always' 3 greens.
waren9, i agree with you regarding the briefing of taxi routes. In fact, most of the time it is negative reinforcement as you don't know what route you will get &/or don't get what you expect. If I had my way I would never brief it unless there were specific traps to be aware of on a possible taxi route such as hotspots or notamed works. Unfortunately my current company expects it as part of their SOP's & therefore I comply.
That being said, correct use of the altitude selector on whatever panel you have in your aircraft (MCP in theBoeing) & adequate cross-checking of selections by the PM is one of the fundamental building blocks of safe operations. If that is was taken seriously in this case, the captain would not have just changed the setting because it disagreed with the altitude in the MCDU. He would have addressed the discrepancy by discussing the situation with the F/O & confirming the cleared altitude with ATC. Maybe I am being too harsh, but simply changing the altitude, as indicated in the report, is inexcusable.
I agree that a lot of problems are generated by the 'gotchas' of systemic failures & constant study & improvement in this area is essential. However, one must recognize that they will always exist & try to develop traps for these issues in order to prevent them leading to an incident or accident.
Professionalism is a mindset & although it can be developed by outside influences, it has to start with a commitment to excellence by the individual from the very beginning.
The sim example you give highlights the situation. We are all aware that sim exercises are very task focused & time limited. The normal briefing techniques & FMC or MCDU cross-checking are glossed over or completely ignored to save time. However, one should have the insight to realize that this does not mean that we can do the same on the line. Application of professional discipline should ensure that the procedure is performed to a high standard in the reality of line operations. The same would apply to highly repetitive actions such as actioning normal checklists on a multi sector day. It is easy to call 'down - 3 greens' without positively checking for 3 greens when you have done it a thousand times & it is 'always' 3 greens.
waren9, i agree with you regarding the briefing of taxi routes. In fact, most of the time it is negative reinforcement as you don't know what route you will get &/or don't get what you expect. If I had my way I would never brief it unless there were specific traps to be aware of on a possible taxi route such as hotspots or notamed works. Unfortunately my current company expects it as part of their SOP's & therefore I comply.
Last edited by Oakape; 7th Jul 2011 at 08:13.
This was the latest comment on the
item on the news.com.au website. The 'stupid rule' comment had me ROFLMAO.
CASA to extend Tiger Airways suspension as CEO Crawford Rix resigns
Outraged of Australia Posted at 12:03 PM Today
This is focused at the poorer people in Australia. They would never ground QANTAS because they are business travellers. I have just spoken to CASA and they have admitted this is no where near the worst event in commercial aviation in Australia. It is the first time a commercial airline has been grounded by CASA. Register your complaint to CASA on [email protected] or 131 757. Register your complaint to the Labour Government on (02) 6120 0800 or Transport Minister on (02) 6277 7680. The people bagging Tiger have never flown Tiger and are rich. The people who use Tiger know how great they are. To all you rich Liberals supporters, please know that all domestic airfares with QANTAS and Virgin will rise about 50 percent if Tiger were to pull out of Australia. CASA also admitted it is their discretion that ultimately decides if a airline is grounded - it has nothing to do with rules and regulations. I would rather be in a plane flying below some height which is still safe (it was just a stupid rule) rather than be in a plane that has its engines blowing up every second month. I can't remember hearing about a Tiger plane having safety issues or blowing up while flying.
This is focused at the poorer people in Australia. They would never ground QANTAS because they are business travellers. I have just spoken to CASA and they have admitted this is no where near the worst event in commercial aviation in Australia. It is the first time a commercial airline has been grounded by CASA. Register your complaint to CASA on [email protected] or 131 757. Register your complaint to the Labour Government on (02) 6120 0800 or Transport Minister on (02) 6277 7680. The people bagging Tiger have never flown Tiger and are rich. The people who use Tiger know how great they are. To all you rich Liberals supporters, please know that all domestic airfares with QANTAS and Virgin will rise about 50 percent if Tiger were to pull out of Australia. CASA also admitted it is their discretion that ultimately decides if a airline is grounded - it has nothing to do with rules and regulations. I would rather be in a plane flying below some height which is still safe (it was just a stupid rule) rather than be in a plane that has its engines blowing up every second month. I can't remember hearing about a Tiger plane having safety issues or blowing up while flying.