Jetstar Chief Pilot gets the Axe
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 58
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar Chief Pilot gets the Axe
Well, that experiment is over. Back to normal programming and common sense?
Hello Tyrone.
Or are they going to HR searching for a candidate from the ship of fools?
Hello Tyrone.
Or are they going to HR searching for a candidate from the ship of fools?
Excuse my ignorance here, however was she pushed or did she jump? Would people that were there say there was anything good came from her time there besides leaving?
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Aus
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rostering – NO
Fatigue Management – NO
Engagement – NO
Expansion – NO
Management of the AOC – NO
It’s almost like she was a direct plant to run the place so incompetently that the AOC is lost.
Thank you, it looks like it will be a wonderful experience having her at the terminal looking after us then.😟
It's just the cultural resistance to all things Qantas
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not her fault - hugely undermined from within by Qantas haters. Ironically of course all aspects of JQ remain a sham business propped up by red tail money.
She didn't brown nose enough to the Ansett 1989 mafia that infest Jetstar and she also tried to break their insidious influence over A320 training / ops in particular.
The A320 training and culture is a throwback to Ansett 1980 - lots of little 'local' SOPs and procedures that aren't actually applicable to the current variant of the aircraft operated by the carrier.
Airbus would have a field day if they conducted an audit.
She didn't brown nose enough to the Ansett 1989 mafia that infest Jetstar and she also tried to break their insidious influence over A320 training / ops in particular.
The A320 training and culture is a throwback to Ansett 1980 - lots of little 'local' SOPs and procedures that aren't actually applicable to the current variant of the aircraft operated by the carrier.
Airbus would have a field day if they conducted an audit.
Last edited by mohikan; 28th Sep 2017 at 08:58.
Oh leaky boats again.
Planted by whom? Can you explain to the crowd who could appoint her to do such a thing. I doubt QF Flight ops have that power and I doubt management would want that. You guys are nuts. She's better off out of the asylum.
I get you guys might not have liked her. But get a grip. Nothing in that list is unique to JQ.
I give it 5 years.
Planted by whom? Can you explain to the crowd who could appoint her to do such a thing. I doubt QF Flight ops have that power and I doubt management would want that. You guys are nuts. She's better off out of the asylum.
I get you guys might not have liked her. But get a grip. Nothing in that list is unique to JQ.
I give it 5 years.
Engagement – NO
Expansion – NO
Expansion – NO
“A” previous regime was with a big stick & loved SOCs & attaching on an email was challenging all the time it seemed ‘folks’. The current one was a lot of nothing, apart from deck chairs being moved and people quitting. Rostering is still a lottery every month. Fatigue reports are still on the increase. Apathy is at an all time high, even with great profits. Imagine if they got someone in there who was respected after all these years. There’s plenty of great candidates internally, but cue the circus music, pass the pop corn and see how this one plays out.
The A320 training and culture is a throwback to Ansett 1980 - lots of little 'local' SOPs and procedures that aren't actually applicable to the current variant of the aircraft operated by the carrier.
Airbus would have a field day if they conducted an audit.
Airbus would have a field day if they conducted an audit.
I've worked for three Airbus operators, with seven different sets of SOPs, because Airbus is so bloody hopeless I don't know how they haven't gotten away with an audit.
Also, command pass rate at Ansett was in the high 90%'s. I work for a lunatic outfit now in Hong Kong where we had 0% for awhile and funnily enough, Ansett had a better flying/ airmanship standard in my opinion.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: 501 swanston st ymml
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not her fault - hugely undermined from within by Qantas haters. Ironically of course all aspects of JQ remain a sham business propped up by red tail money.
She didn't brown nose enough to the Ansett 1989 mafia that infest Jetstar and she also tried to break their insidious influence over A320 training / ops in particular.
The A320 training and culture is a throwback to Ansett 1980 - lots of little 'local' SOPs and procedures that aren't actually applicable to the current variant of the aircraft operated by the carrier.
Airbus would have a field day if they conducted an audit.
She didn't brown nose enough to the Ansett 1989 mafia that infest Jetstar and she also tried to break their insidious influence over A320 training / ops in particular.
The A320 training and culture is a throwback to Ansett 1980 - lots of little 'local' SOPs and procedures that aren't actually applicable to the current variant of the aircraft operated by the carrier.
Airbus would have a field day if they conducted an audit.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can tell a few stories about non-standard SOPs at JQ...
I joined JQ about a decade ago. New to AB but many many years on Boeings. Early line training taught the JQ go-around "double-tap" technique, where you briefly advance the thrust levers to TOGA and immediately pull them back. No documentation. No SOPs. No FCOM amendment. All word-of-mouth. I queried and remember saying that it was a set-up, bound to trap someone and at the very least, it should be documented and run by AB. Told to wind my neck in, quite abusive actually and treated like an idiot.
If I'd put in paperwork I'd have been a hero for predicting exactly what occurred in YMML six months later when a JQ aircraft went within 50'AGL during a mis-handled GA, where the very technique I was criticising failed for the exact reasons I gave. However it transpired that the paperwork for THAT incident was suppressed by JQ and not passed to CASA, so I have long comforted myself with the theory that if I had said anything at the time my efforts would have been similarly suppressed, as well as facing the possibility of becoming known as a trouble maker, and that being held against me when it came to command upgrade.
During command training while on a turn-around we had a minor maintenance issue, that I duly wrote up in the Tech Log, annotated with the correct MEL actions. This was allowed at outports with no maintenance support if the MEL only had "O" actions, and no "M" actions. A reasonable and sensible policy. However the Checker queried my actions because it would make us late. I had a copy of the turn-around sequence, where everything is mapped out and timed to the minute, to make turn-arounds 35 minutes. I pointed out that no where on this sequence allowed any time for maintenance actions, therefore if there is any Tech Log/maintenance duties we would automatically be late. His response: I should leave all Tech Log/maintenance/MEL actions to be done at the end of the day, after the last leg, and disregard the MEL on turn-arounds. He was smart enough not to put that in writing, but he wrote me up badly, especially highlighting how I could not "manage time during a turn-around".
Pressure to not follow CASA rules. On the MEL. From a checker. On command upgrade.
Again I should have put paperwork in, directly to CASA. At the very least this checker should have lost his quals as a checker, but as it appeared to be unofficial JQ policy the whole attitude of JQ needed adjusting. I needed the job and the upgrade, so I kept quiet.
A friend had a loss of hydraulics on take-off from Melbourne. Followed the ECAM. Second hydraulic system failed. Flew circuit, returned on the blue system (this is the tiny little third system -practically nothing on it - for those not familiar with AB). Called into office and bollocked. Why didn't you turn off the PTU* they asked? I followed the ECAM he said. Oh, but everyone KNOWS that's what you do with loss of fluid to prevent a double hydraulic failure, they said. He stood his ground, said he followed the ECAM**.
*(PTU might be a Boeing term, after so long I can't remember the AB name). It powers either of the two main hydraulic systems from the other main one. With loss of fluid in one system it seizes, causing a loss of hydraulics in both mains. There is an AB mod for it to automatically shut down, but JQ didn't purchase the mod. JQ ALSO did not amend their documentation so that pilots knew to do this manually. The end result: piss poor SOPs, pilot disciplined. JQ said it was all his fault. This was after he flew an exemplary double-hydraulic failure approach and landing (not trivial in an AB).
**(again, memory fails me. It MIGHT have been in the ECAM at the time, but buried way down the list. In AB, the first ECAM following a loss of hydraulics is that the gear won't retract, so they were dealing with that ECAM first (as per AB procedures), and the loss of hydraulics is later in the ECAM list, and possibly somewhere in there is the instruction to turn off the PTU***) ***or whatever the damn thing is called.
I learnt to not trust JQ SOPs. Nor management.
A while later, Adelaide base closed. Friend of mine there was told on Anzac Day (? or maybe just after) and he had ten days to start work in Darwin. Ten days to cancel his rental contract, lose his bond, find new accommodation, get his wife a new job and find schools for his kids. His description of the "help" given by JQ was astonishing, and too long for here. In the end he got tired of his questions being unanswered (I think he had to get a boat and a dog to Darwin, and wanted to know if that would be reimbursed) so he just billed JQ anyway. He said towards the end the liaison office didn't even bother to answer phone calls or emails.
A while after that, more Ansett pilots came back from the ME and I was told I had to go to Darwin. I said no, seniority meant blah blah. I was told how that wasn't fair to the Ansett pilots because they needed to back in Melbourne and told a sob story of how hard their life was. Basically I was told to shove it, I would not get the aircraft type I wanted (in seniority), the base I wanted (in seniority) nor the C+T upgrade I was trying for (based mainly on previous Boeing experience).
Put on a four sector flight. First sector a C+T in the right seat (not my check, they were short of FOs). We got a manual loadsheet. He had no idea how to check it, I had to teach him. We got airborne. He had no idea about ETOPs. Got to ToD and told to cross waypoint X at time blah. He couldn't figure that out either. In conversation he told me he joined in 1989, was originally a low hour bush pilot and if it wasn't for what went on then he'd never have gotten his career. I don't hold his choice against him, but he was clearly still a marginal pilot now, twenty years later. Obviously coasting. This was a C+T and I was being told I couldn't get that because Ansett pilots deserved it better.
Second sector: new FO. Had flown with this FO in the sim four weeks prior. He failed the sim - not by a little bit, but by a lot. He was well below standard. Sim instructor after much hemming and hawing said he would give a "conditional pass" (whatever that means) and would schedule the FO for some extra sim sessions to "catch up". So I asked the FO about the extra sim sessions. He never got them, nothing. I flew the entire way thinking that if anything happened I would be single pilot ops.
Landed. Spoke to a friend in the ME. Resigned from JQ. Had no job to go to at the time. Never regretted it, never looked back.
Got a nice letter from the Chief Pilot asking me why. I never replied to him but I should have, and I should've told him the above story. I had no rancour or bitterness, it was just that I didn't want to be part of a company that treated people this way, and had such a poor standard of C+T. I wish I'd been braver about standing up to regs being breached, but I know I would have risked my career and nothing would have changed. The CP wasn't bad, but he clearly couldn't change things. IIRC he left a little after me.
I fly in China now. Aircraft are better maintained, never a single thing wrong with them. All ops according to the manual. Any time I've seen a (very slight) deviation, all I have to do is pull out the FM or the MEL, and there is no problem. Everything is standard. Compared to JQ, it's a dream job, very easy to fly. No special procedures, nothing non-standard.
I joined JQ about a decade ago. New to AB but many many years on Boeings. Early line training taught the JQ go-around "double-tap" technique, where you briefly advance the thrust levers to TOGA and immediately pull them back. No documentation. No SOPs. No FCOM amendment. All word-of-mouth. I queried and remember saying that it was a set-up, bound to trap someone and at the very least, it should be documented and run by AB. Told to wind my neck in, quite abusive actually and treated like an idiot.
If I'd put in paperwork I'd have been a hero for predicting exactly what occurred in YMML six months later when a JQ aircraft went within 50'AGL during a mis-handled GA, where the very technique I was criticising failed for the exact reasons I gave. However it transpired that the paperwork for THAT incident was suppressed by JQ and not passed to CASA, so I have long comforted myself with the theory that if I had said anything at the time my efforts would have been similarly suppressed, as well as facing the possibility of becoming known as a trouble maker, and that being held against me when it came to command upgrade.
During command training while on a turn-around we had a minor maintenance issue, that I duly wrote up in the Tech Log, annotated with the correct MEL actions. This was allowed at outports with no maintenance support if the MEL only had "O" actions, and no "M" actions. A reasonable and sensible policy. However the Checker queried my actions because it would make us late. I had a copy of the turn-around sequence, where everything is mapped out and timed to the minute, to make turn-arounds 35 minutes. I pointed out that no where on this sequence allowed any time for maintenance actions, therefore if there is any Tech Log/maintenance duties we would automatically be late. His response: I should leave all Tech Log/maintenance/MEL actions to be done at the end of the day, after the last leg, and disregard the MEL on turn-arounds. He was smart enough not to put that in writing, but he wrote me up badly, especially highlighting how I could not "manage time during a turn-around".
Pressure to not follow CASA rules. On the MEL. From a checker. On command upgrade.
Again I should have put paperwork in, directly to CASA. At the very least this checker should have lost his quals as a checker, but as it appeared to be unofficial JQ policy the whole attitude of JQ needed adjusting. I needed the job and the upgrade, so I kept quiet.
A friend had a loss of hydraulics on take-off from Melbourne. Followed the ECAM. Second hydraulic system failed. Flew circuit, returned on the blue system (this is the tiny little third system -practically nothing on it - for those not familiar with AB). Called into office and bollocked. Why didn't you turn off the PTU* they asked? I followed the ECAM he said. Oh, but everyone KNOWS that's what you do with loss of fluid to prevent a double hydraulic failure, they said. He stood his ground, said he followed the ECAM**.
*(PTU might be a Boeing term, after so long I can't remember the AB name). It powers either of the two main hydraulic systems from the other main one. With loss of fluid in one system it seizes, causing a loss of hydraulics in both mains. There is an AB mod for it to automatically shut down, but JQ didn't purchase the mod. JQ ALSO did not amend their documentation so that pilots knew to do this manually. The end result: piss poor SOPs, pilot disciplined. JQ said it was all his fault. This was after he flew an exemplary double-hydraulic failure approach and landing (not trivial in an AB).
**(again, memory fails me. It MIGHT have been in the ECAM at the time, but buried way down the list. In AB, the first ECAM following a loss of hydraulics is that the gear won't retract, so they were dealing with that ECAM first (as per AB procedures), and the loss of hydraulics is later in the ECAM list, and possibly somewhere in there is the instruction to turn off the PTU***) ***or whatever the damn thing is called.
I learnt to not trust JQ SOPs. Nor management.
A while later, Adelaide base closed. Friend of mine there was told on Anzac Day (? or maybe just after) and he had ten days to start work in Darwin. Ten days to cancel his rental contract, lose his bond, find new accommodation, get his wife a new job and find schools for his kids. His description of the "help" given by JQ was astonishing, and too long for here. In the end he got tired of his questions being unanswered (I think he had to get a boat and a dog to Darwin, and wanted to know if that would be reimbursed) so he just billed JQ anyway. He said towards the end the liaison office didn't even bother to answer phone calls or emails.
A while after that, more Ansett pilots came back from the ME and I was told I had to go to Darwin. I said no, seniority meant blah blah. I was told how that wasn't fair to the Ansett pilots because they needed to back in Melbourne and told a sob story of how hard their life was. Basically I was told to shove it, I would not get the aircraft type I wanted (in seniority), the base I wanted (in seniority) nor the C+T upgrade I was trying for (based mainly on previous Boeing experience).
Put on a four sector flight. First sector a C+T in the right seat (not my check, they were short of FOs). We got a manual loadsheet. He had no idea how to check it, I had to teach him. We got airborne. He had no idea about ETOPs. Got to ToD and told to cross waypoint X at time blah. He couldn't figure that out either. In conversation he told me he joined in 1989, was originally a low hour bush pilot and if it wasn't for what went on then he'd never have gotten his career. I don't hold his choice against him, but he was clearly still a marginal pilot now, twenty years later. Obviously coasting. This was a C+T and I was being told I couldn't get that because Ansett pilots deserved it better.
Second sector: new FO. Had flown with this FO in the sim four weeks prior. He failed the sim - not by a little bit, but by a lot. He was well below standard. Sim instructor after much hemming and hawing said he would give a "conditional pass" (whatever that means) and would schedule the FO for some extra sim sessions to "catch up". So I asked the FO about the extra sim sessions. He never got them, nothing. I flew the entire way thinking that if anything happened I would be single pilot ops.
Landed. Spoke to a friend in the ME. Resigned from JQ. Had no job to go to at the time. Never regretted it, never looked back.
Got a nice letter from the Chief Pilot asking me why. I never replied to him but I should have, and I should've told him the above story. I had no rancour or bitterness, it was just that I didn't want to be part of a company that treated people this way, and had such a poor standard of C+T. I wish I'd been braver about standing up to regs being breached, but I know I would have risked my career and nothing would have changed. The CP wasn't bad, but he clearly couldn't change things. IIRC he left a little after me.
I fly in China now. Aircraft are better maintained, never a single thing wrong with them. All ops according to the manual. Any time I've seen a (very slight) deviation, all I have to do is pull out the FM or the MEL, and there is no problem. Everything is standard. Compared to JQ, it's a dream job, very easy to fly. No special procedures, nothing non-standard.
It is alleged here that Jetstar is are using non standard SOP's (not approved by Airbus). It also sounds like the flight operations management is seriously unstable. Where are you CASA?
I was almost going to say something nice about jetstar since SWMBO used FF points on a holiday flight that turned out to be not too bad, apart from the inexperienced and visibly anxious flight attendant in our part of the cabin.
I was almost going to say something nice about jetstar since SWMBO used FF points on a holiday flight that turned out to be not too bad, apart from the inexperienced and visibly anxious flight attendant in our part of the cabin.
Well I for one appreciate the time she has spent at Jetstar, the 'clicky' inner sanctum of Flight Ops Management that was in place when she arrived deserved to be blown apart and scattered to the far corners of the airline and that is what she did. There were a couple of good blokes that suffered as a consequence but it had to happen, the Check and Training system was a disgrace as was the safety system. Both are in a better position as a result of the restructure that Georgina led. I did wonder last month if she would be going soon as she made so many enemies in her time here that I think her position became untenable in the long run. I mean rumour at the time was that the 'surprise' CASA Audit from a couple of years ago was triggered by one of our so called self appointed 'respected' managers that had been shown the door. Hopefully we don't start to slip back to old ways.
Last edited by Ollie Onion; 28th Sep 2017 at 22:29. Reason: Error
FlareArmed:
You really must be dreaming and you need to wake up.
Obviously the heavy toxic pollution in China has caused you severe mental delusion as you really have your hand on it if you thinking flying in China is so much better than Australia.
Or maybe your original post was edited by a Chinese propaganda editor.
No doubt the money is better, but that might be the only good thing. The only reason they need to pay so much is to get people to work there and compensate them for all the Chinese bull****.
These threads say it all : http://www.pprune.org/south-asia-far...ighlight=china
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/f...lot-china.html
The book "Flying Upside down says it all"
http://www92.zippyshare.com/v/rRE4ARC2/file.html
Do you need me to quote some stories ?
Keep on dreaming mate
it's a dream job (China)
You really must be dreaming and you need to wake up.
Obviously the heavy toxic pollution in China has caused you severe mental delusion as you really have your hand on it if you thinking flying in China is so much better than Australia.
Or maybe your original post was edited by a Chinese propaganda editor.
No doubt the money is better, but that might be the only good thing. The only reason they need to pay so much is to get people to work there and compensate them for all the Chinese bull****.
These threads say it all : http://www.pprune.org/south-asia-far...ighlight=china
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/f...lot-china.html
The book "Flying Upside down says it all"
http://www92.zippyshare.com/v/rRE4ARC2/file.html
Do you need me to quote some stories ?
Keep on dreaming mate
Last edited by John Citizen; 29th Sep 2017 at 00:05.