Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Reputation of Aussie pilots overseas

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Reputation of Aussie pilots overseas

Old 10th Feb 2018, 14:17
  #101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,462
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
Is it because Australians actually follow the rules?

I’m all for looking at the big picture stuff, but at some point the little things need to come into it as well. After all, we’re professionals aren’t we? Isn’t the attitude of “that’s close enough” for amateurs? If you’re good enough with the big picture stuff a true professional will continue to perfect the little things.

“Captain we really need to make that height requirement on the STAR”
“Relax sunny boy, they’re a guide”
Meanwhile you just missed it by 500ft and there’s now a loss of separation with a departing aircraft, but it’s ok, the big picture stuff is that he knows up from down

Call me an Austronaut, but at least I won’t have to be answering the phone calls from the chief pilot when I was being a little pedantic.
morno is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 19:22
  #102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,425
Received 205 Likes on 68 Posts
The problem is Morno that as a Check Captain I always have found that someone who is overly pedantic actually lowers the whole operation and reduces CRM and I am not talking about height constraints s etc. but more along the lines of one pilot just tying to ‘oneup’ the other with displays of totally irrelevant and pointless knowledge.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 20:09
  #103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree Ollie. We have a fondness for 'rules', I don't know why this is but we do know that rules and regulations do not make you safer. Blind adherence is worse. Even knowing this my company continues to spew out regulation like parliament. In the end it is a lawyers picnic, a lot of people who can't see the wood for the trees and an industry disappearing no more safely up its own arse.
ernestkgann is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 20:44
  #104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Keg, I was holding prior to a landing at YSSY a few years ago when a QF -400 landed prior to curfew on 34L as they are approved to do. Unfortunately they were heavyish and there was a significant tailwind. They evacuated at the gate with reported brake fires although the pilots walked off the aeroplane rather then go down the slides. How did the BA crew go?
ernestkgann is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 21:57
  #105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ernestkgann
Keg, I was holding prior to a landing at YSSY a few years ago when a QF -400 landed prior to curfew on 34L as they are approved to do. Unfortunately they were heavyish and there was a significant tailwind. They evacuated at the gate with reported brake fires although the pilots walked off the aeroplane rather then go down the slides. How did the BA crew go?
I would be very surprised if this actually happened. Sounds like a made up story to me.
virgindriver is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 22:26
  #106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would be very surprised if this actually happened. Sounds like a made up story to me.
No, it's real. Boeing 747-438, VH-OJU Sydney Aerodrome, NSW 2 July 2003

The factual information about the sequence of events from touchdown to runway exit makes interesting reading.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 22:49
  #107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Virgin driver did you miss the bit where I said I was there?
ernestkgann is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 23:02
  #108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 2,462
Received 290 Likes on 112 Posts
Originally Posted by Ollie Onion
The problem is Morno that as a Check Captain I always have found that someone who is overly pedantic actually lowers the whole operation and reduces CRM and I am not talking about height constraints s etc. but more along the lines of one pilot just tying to ‘oneup’ the other with displays of totally irrelevant and pointless knowledge.
Ollie I do agree with what you’re saying. The way I approach it is if it’s safe, and within the realms of the rules and SOP’s, then I don’t care how the other bloke/blokette flies their leg. I won’t try to ‘oneup’ anyone. But as soon as they start pushing those boundaries and disregarding pretty basic rules or boundaries, then I’ll happily speak up and won’t hesitate to make sure it’s corrected. Just like I expect them to if it’s me flying.

Like I said earlier, at the end of the day, I just want to go home to my family and not have to answer any phone calls from the chief pilot.
morno is offline  
Old 10th Feb 2018, 23:16
  #109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,425
Received 205 Likes on 68 Posts
Morno, totally agree.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 00:13
  #110 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,583
Received 11 Likes on 2 Posts
Question

Originally Posted by ernestkgann
Virgin driver did you miss the bit where I said I was there?
Did you miss the bit where I said the BA crew reported to ATC they could accept more than the certified downwind limit of the aeroplane?

There is no evidence of the QF crew doing the same in the event you’ve posted. If I understand that event correctly the TTFs were consistently less downwind than the certified limit or what the P charts would have said they could accept. ATC had not reported tailwind in excess of the aircraft limit.

That’s very different circumstances to the situation I’m talking about where for a number of hours previously the TTFs reported the tailwind consistently more than the certified limit and with the last TTF prior to top of descent still recording a tailwind of 18 knots.

Originally Posted by ernestkgann
Keg, I was holding prior to a landing at YSSY a few years ago when a QF -400 landed prior to curfew on 34L as they are approved to do. Unfortunately they were heavyish and there was a significant tailwind. They evacuated at the gate with reported brake fires although the pilots walked off the aeroplane rather then go down the slides. How did the BA crew go?
Did you miss the bit in the report where the F/O broke his collar bone going down the slide? Was that comment about the pilots designed to impugne their reputation?

Did you miss the bit in the report where the brake fire was as a result of excess grease on the axle and probably wouldn’t have occurred if it hadn’t been there?

Is the point you’re making that because the BA crew I referred to didn’t have a brake fire and evacuate that it’s ok to land with tailwind exceeding the certified limits?‪

We checked the 34L tailwind consistently until we landed 16R at 0600. Tailwind never decreased below 17 knots.

In short, I’ll take a a crew having to evacuate at terminal due brake fire as a result of excessive grease on an axle in front of a crew landing outside certified limits every day of the week. One is as a result of a crew applying certified limits correctly and dealing with events as they happened. The other is a prang waiting to happen. In what other cases are they prepared to ignore limits? Minimas? Crosswind limits? Stable approach limits? Heights?

So I’m not sure of the relevance of the incident that you relate to the one I’m talking about but the more I think about your comments the more I appreciate my airline.

Last edited by Keg; 11th Feb 2018 at 00:38.
Keg is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 00:44
  #111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Hear hear Keg.
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 01:46
  #112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, let me get this right, Keg.

To start with you claim the BA aircraft was about 1:45 ahead of schedule. I've done that route more times than I care to mention and have never been more than 5 minutes before the curfew. That time has, of course, been rectified by slowing down or ATC vectors to arrive after the curfew. Your suggestion is more than 'quite early' and makes me suspicious of your story.

You then base most of your maligning on the basis of forecasts and only refer to the actual winds once (in a disparaging way).

"We can take a knot or two more than that" is clearly totally unacceptable......IF it happened.

You then tell us that ATC reported a downwind component of 15 knots i.e. NOT out of limits. Your claim that they "played the game" is entire supposition and only serves to insult the professionalism of ATC AND the BA crew. If ATC tell me the tailwind is 15 knots then I'm going to believe what they're telling me and I don't assume they're making it up in order that I can get in.

IF the BA crew later reported the tailwind was 22 knots on landing then that, too, is unacceptable and they should have gone around. However, your claims on timing and the 'guess' that ATC were feeding them a line makes me suspect the rest of your story. However, even if it is all true, then I can guarantee this was truly a 'rogue' crew and does not reflect the standards of the airline or the rest of their colleagues. I do not know of ANYONE who would exceed the limitations, outside of an emergency situation that couldn't avoid doing so, and it is certainly not endemic of the BA culture. The same cannot be said of "we know better than everyone" attitude that exists in a good number of Australian pilots both at home and overseas and the subject of this thread.
Pontius is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 02:37
  #113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,192
Received 27 Likes on 15 Posts
5am precurfew arrival is pretty normal.
maggot is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 02:54
  #114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 605
Received 13 Likes on 3 Posts
Pontius,

ATC play the game all the time.

I have been on approach in LA where they gave the preceeding aircraft the vis and cleared them to land to which they responded that they needed something better than reported otherwise they were off to vegas, ATC came right back with a revised vis that was what they needed.

Similarly in Sydney doing night freight in a jet atc queried the max downwind we could accept. As we approached the departure intersection, the downwind was exactly the max we could accept. A coincidence possibly but convenient nonetheless. Have had the same situation occur in LA at night on departure in relation to the downwind.
Snakecharma is online now  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 04:13
  #115 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,583
Received 11 Likes on 2 Posts
OK Pontious. Let's play.

Originally Posted by Pontius
So, let me get this right, Keg.

To start with you claim the BA aircraft was about 1:45 ahead of schedule. I've done that route more times than I care to mention and have never been more than 5 minutes before the curfew. That time has, of course, been rectified by slowing down or ATC vectors to arrive after the curfew. Your suggestion is more than 'quite early' and makes me suspicious of your story.
Nope. They were about 10 ahead of schedule. They were permitted to land before the 0600 curfew. I think Sked blox is 0515 for the arrival I'm talking about. Our ETA ex DXB was 0415 but a half hour delay meant we could adjust speed enroute pretty easily to ensure we weren't going to land before 0500 as is permitted for SYD winter ops. Unfortunately the tailwind was never less than our 15 knot certified limit let alone the 9-11 performance limit as we burned off fuel in the holding pattern..... except for the landing clearance given to the BA crew.

But it appears you're calling me a liar off the basis of me saying a BA aircraft was arriving in SYD at 0500 in May? Really?

Originally Posted by Pontius
You then base most of your maligning on the basis of forecasts and only refer to the actual winds once (in a disparaging way).
Did you read my follow up post? Every TTF I looked at in the preceding 4-5 hours was in excess of 15 knots tailwind.

Originally Posted by Pontius

"We can take a knot or two more than that" is clearly totally unacceptable......IF it happened.
Calling me a liar? Again? Suggesting I made it up? I can probably look up the crew list and find three others who will back me home on that one. Heck, not sure how long ATC keeps it's tapes but I've still got the date in my log book.

Originally Posted by Pontius

You then tell us that ATC reported a downwind component of 15 knots i.e. NOT out of limits. Your claim that they "played the game" is entire supposition and only serves to insult the professionalism of ATC AND the BA crew. If ATC tell me the tailwind is 15 knots then I'm going to believe what they're telling me and I don't assume they're making it up in order that I can get in.
Yep. It is a supposition about ATC. I've been around long enough to see TEMPO TS disappear off a critical TTF for a period of 30 minutes to facilitate the arrival of someone on skint fuel (unless the TS was directly over the airfield at the time). Like Snakecharma I've heard of viz and wind and cloud base be adjusted by Aussie and other ATC units to conveniently match a limit or permit an approach. BKN003 becomes BKN004 as the latter doesn't require an alternate, etc.

I'm actually quite happy to insult the professionalism of that BA crew on that approach. I know what I heard.

Originally Posted by Pontius
IF the BA crew later reported the tailwind was 22 knots on landing then that, too, is unacceptable and they should have gone around. However, your claims on timing and the 'guess' that ATC were feeding them a line makes me suspect the rest of your story.
All I can say is that ATC told us that BA15 reported the downwind as 22 knots 'approaching the flare'.

Originally Posted by Pontius
However, even if it is all true, then I can guarantee this was truly a 'rogue' crew and does not reflect the standards of the airline or the rest of their colleagues. I do not know of ANYONE who would exceed the limitations, outside of an emergency situation that couldn't avoid doing so, and it is certainly not endemic of the BA culture. The same cannot be said of "we know better than everyone" attitude that exists in a good number of Australian pilots both at home and overseas and the subject of this thread.
For the record I didn't suggest all BA crews were the same. I just reminded myself after hearing this BA crew did this that I was glad I worked for the mob I do.

I note though that you infer again here that I'm telling porkies. Perhaps you should have just said 'liar, liar, pants on fire' and be done with it.

Interestingly I'm not sure we've had a thread about the pains in the backside poms can be. I flew with a bunch of them in my early days in Qantas. Complete dills. Luckily I'm smart enough to know that it's just individuals and not tar en entire demographic with the same brush just because of the actions of a few clowns.

Last edited by Keg; 11th Feb 2018 at 04:27.
Keg is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 04:18
  #116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 4,281
Received 162 Likes on 83 Posts
Tower reported the tailwind as 15kts. BA landed. What's the fuss about?
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 04:48
  #117 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,583
Received 11 Likes on 2 Posts
Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more.

You don't reckon it's an issue when an airline reports they can accept more than the aircraft's certified limit Fathom?
Keg is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 05:13
  #118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,425
Received 205 Likes on 68 Posts
Keg, you say the wind never dropped below 17kts on the RWY but ATC said the tailwind was 15kts? The BA crew said it was 22kts approaching the flare, it may have been less on the ground? I know at our airline we are allowed to take the ATC wind as the definitive source for judging tailwind components. So all in all a BA Aircraft said their limit was 15 kts, ATC confirmed the tailwind was 15kts and they landed.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 05:57
  #119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ernestkgann
Virgin driver did you miss the bit where I said I was there?
I take back what I said- got Dash 400 on my mind...
virgindriver is offline  
Old 11th Feb 2018, 06:42
  #120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Surely the answer to the QF744 brake fire incident was to use full reverse thrust at that touchdown speed, when retardation is most effective. Blind adherence to noise abatement idle thrust requirements don’t come before safety. It’s called airmanship.
Better stop safely and perhaps get a rude note from the Airport Authority.
cessnapete is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.