"Cathay disciplines pilots for "sporty" landing"(Merged).
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The management guys, well contrary to BusyB I have a great deal of sympathy for them. The amount of flying they get keeps them barely current and given the sophistication of our operation, well the PNF should keep a good eye on them. We all remember the gear flag and the push back incidents. From the perspective of the Company, both those guys had clearly demonstrated their loyalty and a little in return was only to be expected. It's a big picture thing BusyB and I have no problem with our system.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was on both occasions in no way a double standard. The treatment you receive following an indiscretion must surely be biased against your overall history. Surely even the pit bulls can see that. In my experience at CX, no one admits to the number of times they have had tea and bickies with the Boss followed by a letter on file. We are all squeaky clean aren't we?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hkg
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry shortly you really must sometimes take off those blinkers!
There is definitely one set of rules for them and another for us: requested trips, days off, leave, operating before and after leave and yes - disciplinary action.
There is definitely one set of rules for them and another for us: requested trips, days off, leave, operating before and after leave and yes - disciplinary action.
shortly…”The management guys, well contrary to BusyB I have a great deal of sympathy for them. The amount of flying they get keeps them barely current and given the sophistication of our operation, well the PNF should keep a good eye on them.”
Some posters, in spite of them claiming to be professional pilots, should not be allowed within 30.7 metres of a cockpit.
Management pilots must be either safe to operate or given remedial training. Public transport of paying passengers demands the highest standards that do not pander to fools.
Last edited by FlexibleResponse; 28th Aug 2004 at 00:31.
I am not Shortly by another name but suspect we are of the same vintage.
I envy you young blokes that still see only black & white. I suspect the grey will come with time.
The issue of management flying is a difficult one and the reason many have been there and then opted out.
My personal view is that we would be better served by filling the ranks with 55+ guys suitably qualified to manage. The flying job is not getting any easier in spite of the a/c and it certainly cannot be done safely by your average driver (90% of us) on a part time basis.
This is an issue facing every airline, including the ones you put your wife and kids on without a second thought.
You easily forget that we are still as good as it gets and that includes QF, BA and the rest of the bunch we too easily assume have worked through these issues better than we have.
I envy you young blokes that still see only black & white. I suspect the grey will come with time.
The issue of management flying is a difficult one and the reason many have been there and then opted out.
My personal view is that we would be better served by filling the ranks with 55+ guys suitably qualified to manage. The flying job is not getting any easier in spite of the a/c and it certainly cannot be done safely by your average driver (90% of us) on a part time basis.
This is an issue facing every airline, including the ones you put your wife and kids on without a second thought.
You easily forget that we are still as good as it gets and that includes QF, BA and the rest of the bunch we too easily assume have worked through these issues better than we have.
BusyB
Fair point.
What I was trying to say is that you can check someone out as meeting the min standards...then run them through some split duties and time zones what do you get...a plate of jello.
I can recall not too many years ago (well maybe it is is a lot of years ago now) turning into a plate of jello myself out the back of Lantau in the 1011with typhoon signal 3 up on my first sector in the company. Sweaty palms and everything went blank. I wasn't fired and was more than thankful for the man to my left who bought me a beer at the Aero Club and said the same thing had happened to him many years previous.
I was manged to a standard that ...on the day...I was not up to.
I agree with Shortly that we are all too quick to criticise our bretheren for being human when that is really the cement that keeps the whole thing together.
Fair point.
What I was trying to say is that you can check someone out as meeting the min standards...then run them through some split duties and time zones what do you get...a plate of jello.
I can recall not too many years ago (well maybe it is is a lot of years ago now) turning into a plate of jello myself out the back of Lantau in the 1011with typhoon signal 3 up on my first sector in the company. Sweaty palms and everything went blank. I wasn't fired and was more than thankful for the man to my left who bought me a beer at the Aero Club and said the same thing had happened to him many years previous.
I was manged to a standard that ...on the day...I was not up to.
I agree with Shortly that we are all too quick to criticise our bretheren for being human when that is really the cement that keeps the whole thing together.
VR-HFX,
I think you missed my point. Your example is of a type of CRM within a crew, my point is that managers (and Trainers) ARE managed like that now if they make a major error, line guys aren't.
I think you missed my point. Your example is of a type of CRM within a crew, my point is that managers (and Trainers) ARE managed like that now if they make a major error, line guys aren't.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm having a real problem supporting a crew that used extremely poor judgment in this case. I too agree with Shortly that we are too quick to criticize our brethren but there are screw-ups and then there are screw-ups.
I can understand a crew being fatigued and approaching the wrong runway, or getting in too tight and fast and going around. We can all screw-up and have to do it again but in this case they pressed and pressed to the point that could have resulted in the worst possible outcome.
We have been hammered in the past 12 months by Management and checkers to be stabilized and configured on approach at 1500'. Just how many more warnings must we have? I think they should start to fine crews that bust the limit and continue to land. It is a safety issue and crews are not taking it seriously.
I still see crews selecting gear down at 1700' and landing flaps at 1400-1500'. Why do they wait till the absolute minimum to configure? To save 50KG of fuel? Get real, it's stupidity. Some checkers are still debriefing a too conservative approach. A dinosaur I say, not up with the times and gentlemen the times have changed so change with it.
I feel the company was very generous to keep the Captain with the company. He was ultimately responsible for the F/O’s errors and should of directed is flying earlier than he did. The F/O showed that his judgment is flawed and should not upgrade now or in the near future.
IMHO
I can understand a crew being fatigued and approaching the wrong runway, or getting in too tight and fast and going around. We can all screw-up and have to do it again but in this case they pressed and pressed to the point that could have resulted in the worst possible outcome.
We have been hammered in the past 12 months by Management and checkers to be stabilized and configured on approach at 1500'. Just how many more warnings must we have? I think they should start to fine crews that bust the limit and continue to land. It is a safety issue and crews are not taking it seriously.
I still see crews selecting gear down at 1700' and landing flaps at 1400-1500'. Why do they wait till the absolute minimum to configure? To save 50KG of fuel? Get real, it's stupidity. Some checkers are still debriefing a too conservative approach. A dinosaur I say, not up with the times and gentlemen the times have changed so change with it.
I feel the company was very generous to keep the Captain with the company. He was ultimately responsible for the F/O’s errors and should of directed is flying earlier than he did. The F/O showed that his judgment is flawed and should not upgrade now or in the near future.
IMHO
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CPdude, with the kindest of intentions, could I caution you not to put your innermost thoughts to paper? We can all screw up as we are only human so severe criticism can and often does, come back to bite you. Cheers, HD.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: hong kong
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CRM and SOP
Have just revisited the Gulf Air GF072 accident report. Some interesting comments in the "analysis" section on CRM, adherence to SOPs and discussion on the inter connection and responsibility between so called pilot error and management and company responsibility.
I think it is well worth reading in the context of this CX thread. the URL is
http://www.bahrainairport.com/caa/gf072.html
I think it is well worth reading in the context of this CX thread. the URL is
http://www.bahrainairport.com/caa/gf072.html
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Hongkers
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most appear to be approaching this from a failure to meet the stabilised approach criteria point of view.
I would be more concerned about the non adherence to the Instument Approach Procedures for Runway 07 that indicate "NO CIRCLING" on the chart(s).
I read this to mean that if you stuff it up you have no alternative but to carry out the missed approach procedure and not just orbit where you feel like it, visual or not.
Sure, there's a lot of water out there and there ought to be some form of visual procedure in HK, but make that sort of error in more mountainous areas and you'll be picking bits of granite out of your teeth.
I would be more concerned about the non adherence to the Instument Approach Procedures for Runway 07 that indicate "NO CIRCLING" on the chart(s).
I read this to mean that if you stuff it up you have no alternative but to carry out the missed approach procedure and not just orbit where you feel like it, visual or not.
Sure, there's a lot of water out there and there ought to be some form of visual procedure in HK, but make that sort of error in more mountainous areas and you'll be picking bits of granite out of your teeth.
Last edited by bekolblockage; 23rd Sep 2004 at 14:54.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big difference between Circling and Visual approaches. A Visual may have a unique approach path and a circling may not. Far more restrictions imposed on the circling approach.
Autopilot disconnect without crew awareness in a dynamic (noisy) or high workload environment can occur with Airbus and Boeing types. Some basic work on this a while ago after another carrier had similar ballistic flight(s). Happens more often than anyone would like.
Can be set up in simulator but is not as subtle as in aircraft cases.
CWS/GPWS/FWC priorities indicate some issues with alerts to crews.
Human factors does include design...
Can be set up in simulator but is not as subtle as in aircraft cases.
CWS/GPWS/FWC priorities indicate some issues with alerts to crews.
Human factors does include design...
