CX 777 Flyby CP sacked
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But The Mail on Sunday has learned that Mr Pratt and Cathay Pacific's director of engineering Christopher Gibbs were both in jump seats behind the captain.
Two first officers were also standing unharnessed inside the flight deck as Wilkinson circled after take-off to descend with landing gear raised to fly 28ft above the Boeing plane-maker's Seattle airport, the airline has admitted.
Neither Mr Pratt nor Mr Gibbs, who is also British, complained about the pilot's manoeuvre. It was questioned only when Cathay Pacific officials saw pictures of the stunt five days later.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/...n_page_id=1770
Two first officers were also standing unharnessed inside the flight deck as Wilkinson circled after take-off to descend with landing gear raised to fly 28ft above the Boeing plane-maker's Seattle airport, the airline has admitted.
Neither Mr Pratt nor Mr Gibbs, who is also British, complained about the pilot's manoeuvre. It was questioned only when Cathay Pacific officials saw pictures of the stunt five days later.
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/...n_page_id=1770
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere out there...
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This only became 'news' when IW was sacked.
Up to then it doing the rounds on youtube, and only of interest to aviation buffs.
As soon as IWs dismissal was announced it because CP sacked for Top Gun stunt etc.
On the front page of the Sunday Morning Post today it has suddenly become newsworthy again because of the ED and Chairman sitting in the jumpseats.
Classic case of bad PR management.
Up to then it doing the rounds on youtube, and only of interest to aviation buffs.
As soon as IWs dismissal was announced it because CP sacked for Top Gun stunt etc.
On the front page of the Sunday Morning Post today it has suddenly become newsworthy again because of the ED and Chairman sitting in the jumpseats.
Classic case of bad PR management.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New Zealand
Age: 64
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
getting legal
It may be blatant hypocrisy by Cathay, but the problem for the CP is that Cathay have gone ahead and done the dirty deed. So he's no longer in mediation: he's before the local court. My understanding is that the test is the same in most countries with an English legal heritage (ie, HK, USA, Canada, India, South Africa, Australia/NZ): Was dismissal an option that was available to a reasonable employer?
777 flypass
Join Date: May 2007
Location: GOC
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2003
Location: hong kong
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that the episode has become famous/infamous.... what is the likelihood of the regulatory authorities ( HK or US depending on jurisdiction) taking criminal proceedings or regulatory action against CX or individuals (or both) on safety endangerment violations notwithstanding that it was not a revenue flight???
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Q it depends on what outcome CX wants from this. Sacking and demoting two pilots who had moderately good standing amongst the pilot workforce, (49ers star chamber excepted) plays into the hands of personnel department, ruled over by Catbert who it is rumoured despises pilots. And remember it was he who was quoted as saying, when a DFO defended the recruitment process, that "I will be the one who decides who is hired or fired in this airline."
Anything that can denigrate the pilot workforce is grist to the personnel mill. To show that they can sack a pilot manager shows that they can overrule any moderation attempt that was applied from Flight Operations. To quote the phrase, the British hang their Captains from their own yard arm, "Pour encourage les autres."
Denigration and depressive control of the pilots is especially important in the next few months as management will need to dismiss the current AOA negotiations and impose a new conditions of service.
That Corporate Safety instigated the investigation in the first place is extremely worrying, and may affect the accuracy of the data that they receive over the next few years. By their actions on this incident they have shown perhaps that they are not the impartial safety team that they have always claimed to be. They have shown that they may have a political agenda.
We operate in Hong Kong. Live with it. If the board of CX want CAD to investigate and hang the guy, they will encourage them to do so. If they do not want it so, they will spin it to their advantage.
Most people assume that FAA investigations of Boeing aircraft are under the control of Boeing. If they do not want an investigation, it will not happen. It is unlikely that Boeing want this to go further, so it should be assumed that after a few more college shootings this story will drop to the spike.
FWIW
Anything that can denigrate the pilot workforce is grist to the personnel mill. To show that they can sack a pilot manager shows that they can overrule any moderation attempt that was applied from Flight Operations. To quote the phrase, the British hang their Captains from their own yard arm, "Pour encourage les autres."
Denigration and depressive control of the pilots is especially important in the next few months as management will need to dismiss the current AOA negotiations and impose a new conditions of service.
That Corporate Safety instigated the investigation in the first place is extremely worrying, and may affect the accuracy of the data that they receive over the next few years. By their actions on this incident they have shown perhaps that they are not the impartial safety team that they have always claimed to be. They have shown that they may have a political agenda.
We operate in Hong Kong. Live with it. If the board of CX want CAD to investigate and hang the guy, they will encourage them to do so. If they do not want it so, they will spin it to their advantage.
Most people assume that FAA investigations of Boeing aircraft are under the control of Boeing. If they do not want an investigation, it will not happen. It is unlikely that Boeing want this to go further, so it should be assumed that after a few more college shootings this story will drop to the spike.
FWIW
Last edited by moosp; 2nd Mar 2008 at 21:27.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Coast N.A.
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non Pilot managers
The director Engineering et al are not pilots. They would have put there trust in the senior pilot at the controls....Just like we put our trust in the engineer that fixes the planes we fly. There is an assumption that the person will do the job the right way and not deliberatly (carelessly) put one at risk. Basically you don't know what you don't know.) So why would they complain, it was like a circus ride to them..great fun, untill the car comes off the track.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets move on
Well said cxflyer.
It's done, nothing here is going to "de-polarize" the opinions and also, nothing here will change the outcome.
Lets leave the man be, I say.
It's done, nothing here is going to "de-polarize" the opinions and also, nothing here will change the outcome.
Lets leave the man be, I say.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: the world
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moosp,
I think you will find that Corporate safety became involved after a complaint or a question was raised as to the safety of the operation. Is that not the function of the Safety Department? If CAD/FAA were to ask questions would not the first one be what is the result of your company's safety/flight ops department investigation? If the aircraft is operated outside of SOPs that is the function of a safety investigation or at least one of flight ops.
Yes we all think it looks great and most of us will admit to having done the same at some stage in our careers but do you think if we had been found out the outcome would have been any different. Maybe not the sack but certainly disciplanary action would have been taken by every employer that I have worked for.
I think the real question that should be asked is what happened on the previous five delivery flights and if this hadn't happened where would the next delivery flight have ended, at the end of the runway perhaps?
I think you will find that Corporate safety became involved after a complaint or a question was raised as to the safety of the operation. Is that not the function of the Safety Department? If CAD/FAA were to ask questions would not the first one be what is the result of your company's safety/flight ops department investigation? If the aircraft is operated outside of SOPs that is the function of a safety investigation or at least one of flight ops.
Yes we all think it looks great and most of us will admit to having done the same at some stage in our careers but do you think if we had been found out the outcome would have been any different. Maybe not the sack but certainly disciplanary action would have been taken by every employer that I have worked for.
I think the real question that should be asked is what happened on the previous five delivery flights and if this hadn't happened where would the next delivery flight have ended, at the end of the runway perhaps?
I think the real question that should be asked is what happened on the previous five delivery flights and if this hadn't happened where would the next delivery flight have ended, at the end of the runway perhaps?
2 flybys done by the 777-300ER on DELIVERY flights by very experienced senior Check Captains. BIG BLOODY DEAL. They were not in any danger, it may have ben a bit too low in the last one but they were not in danger of a fireball.
IW should have gotten them approved by higher up, that's the issue here.
Just give it a rest.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Looking back on Sodom
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Karma - What Goes Around, Comes Around
To: Mr. Bloggs, Buttie Box, and others, Bravo!
To: ACMS, and Volare, Wake Up!
To quote ACMS we should feel pity for IW because his
How quickly we forget the 49ers; those talented and experienced CX pilots who were sacked for no good reason. IW has rightly been sacked for a outrageous display of poor judgement and ego.
Volare Cantare take off your rose tinted glasses and look at the real world.
You refer to IW's cowboy actions as
In fact it was anything but that, being a well planned action and certainly not a momentary lapse of reason.
You bemoan the loss of
Well, as far as CX is concerned, all that died with the advent of the 49ers.
You request that we
Have you failed to notice that CX actually has some rather talented FEMALE pilots as well? Your misogynistic rantings only serve to further discredit your opinions.
You claim that it is
Ha! Would that be like the respect that IW showed to the 49ers when he so blithely decided their fate?
In all of this what is glaringly obvious is the exposure (yet again - for those who may still harbour any doubts) of NR's character. Nothing like leading by example, eh?
I repeat; What goes around, comes around. In the end we all reap what we sow.
To: ACMS, and Volare, Wake Up!
To quote ACMS we should feel pity for IW because his
career has come to a screeching holt
Volare Cantare take off your rose tinted glasses and look at the real world.
You refer to IW's cowboy actions as
an error of judgement
You bemoan the loss of
dignity, camaraderie, and self respect as a profession
You request that we
leave him be lads
You claim that it is
difficult to demand respect from management when we show little respect for each other
In all of this what is glaringly obvious is the exposure (yet again - for those who may still harbour any doubts) of NR's character. Nothing like leading by example, eh?
I repeat; What goes around, comes around. In the end we all reap what we sow.
Last edited by Lot's Wife; 3rd Mar 2008 at 02:26. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Heart of Asia
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Moosp:
Under the James Reason model of a "Just Safety Culture," the company should forgive unintentional errors that are disclosed freely in the interest of collecting data to prevent reccurences. However, it should not tolerate blatant and wilful violations of procedures and regulations, or cover ups. I don't see how the safety department's actions in this case runs counter to industry best practices. (I just hope they've given the Chairman a briefing on leading by example...!)
Aviation history is littered with crashes that could have been prevented by someone noticing someone's increased appetite for ego-stroking and risk taking. A few are discussed in this excellent book:
http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Discipl.../dp/0070343713
That Corporate Safety instigated the investigation in the first place is extremely worrying, and may affect the accuracy of the data that they receive over the next few years. By their actions on this incident they have shown perhaps that they are not the impartial safety team that they have always claimed to be. They have shown that they may have a political agenda.
Aviation history is littered with crashes that could have been prevented by someone noticing someone's increased appetite for ego-stroking and risk taking. A few are discussed in this excellent book:
http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Discipl.../dp/0070343713
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Avweb today
Fired Pilot's Boss In Cockpit During Fly-By
As we reported last week, Ian Wilkinson, a senior Cathay Pacific captain, was fired three weeks after he did a high-speed, low-level pass over a Seattle-area airport in a new Boeing 777 he was delivering from the factory. It wasn’t the stunt that got him fired, it was the fact that he didn’t have permission to perform the fly-by, something the airline occasionally allows for airshows. But a story in Sunday’s Asian World News, reprinted by The Earth Times, raises the question of just how much authority Wilkinson needed, since the chairman of the airline, Christopher Pratt, was in a cockpit jumpseat for the whole performance. The airline confirmed that fact but said Pratt, who runs one of the biggest airlines in Asia, couldn’t be expected to know that the stunt wasn’t “authorized,” "The chairman is not an aviator and he was fully aware that the captain was in full command of the flight," an unidentified spokeswoman said. "There was no request or suggestion from anyone in Cathay Pacific for the fly-by to take place. The decision was entirely that of the captain in command." The spokeswoman also denied that Wilkinson’s firing had more to do with the publicity surrounding the stunt, which was featured on YouTube, than company protocol. “The YouTube video only confirmed what was already becoming known. The internal investigation was well underway prior to the video appearing online,” she claimed. However, an unidentified source reportedly told a German magazine that it was felt the incident “makes our airline look like a bunch of cowboys.” Wilkinson was paid three months’ severance and keeps his company pension. He has not been available for comment. His maid reportedly told the newspaper he’s on holiday in Thailand.
Fired Pilot's Boss In Cockpit During Fly-By
As we reported last week, Ian Wilkinson, a senior Cathay Pacific captain, was fired three weeks after he did a high-speed, low-level pass over a Seattle-area airport in a new Boeing 777 he was delivering from the factory. It wasn’t the stunt that got him fired, it was the fact that he didn’t have permission to perform the fly-by, something the airline occasionally allows for airshows. But a story in Sunday’s Asian World News, reprinted by The Earth Times, raises the question of just how much authority Wilkinson needed, since the chairman of the airline, Christopher Pratt, was in a cockpit jumpseat for the whole performance. The airline confirmed that fact but said Pratt, who runs one of the biggest airlines in Asia, couldn’t be expected to know that the stunt wasn’t “authorized,” "The chairman is not an aviator and he was fully aware that the captain was in full command of the flight," an unidentified spokeswoman said. "There was no request or suggestion from anyone in Cathay Pacific for the fly-by to take place. The decision was entirely that of the captain in command." The spokeswoman also denied that Wilkinson’s firing had more to do with the publicity surrounding the stunt, which was featured on YouTube, than company protocol. “The YouTube video only confirmed what was already becoming known. The internal investigation was well underway prior to the video appearing online,” she claimed. However, an unidentified source reportedly told a German magazine that it was felt the incident “makes our airline look like a bunch of cowboys.” Wilkinson was paid three months’ severance and keeps his company pension. He has not been available for comment. His maid reportedly told the newspaper he’s on holiday in Thailand.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: global
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
career has come to a screeching holt
A screeching halt? Not compared to a pilot in his 20/30's with a family, mortgage etc, that has fallen foul of the CX machine.(49er's inc)
Do I feel sorry for him? No. He knew what he was doing. Now he just has to live with it. If nothing else, it is probably the most publicised last flight of any pilot in CX history.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: HK
Age: 66
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots Wife
...maybe you should take a good look at that yourself???
Sorry the "lads" reference upset you of course that was meant inclusive of the "ladetts", your political correctness is laughable when it stands beside such an attitude of revenge and bitterness. Just because I do not agree with "burn him at the stakes" witch hunt attitude that you pride yourself in does not in any way mean I condone any of the events of past. Read what I said instead of jumping on the old reactive bandwagons.
Your reaction to what judge as rose tinted glasses is exactly the kind of thing that happens in this industry when anyone begins to voice a different approach rather then the war like environment that is getting no on anywhere. Im big enough to take that criticism and any others. Im not big enough though to live a life of hatred and resentment. We cannot change the past. We should not forget it but we need to e careful not to become the very thing we claim to "hate" so much.
Calling me a misogynist...don't make me laugh! Making mountains out of molehills seems to be a speciality? When I use the word 'lads" it includes both... just like some people use the word "mate" so VERY loosely
In my opinion half problems we face are because there are not enough women involved...what woman, wife, mother for example would have come up with the 49'ers plan?
I repeat; What goes around, comes around. In the end we all reap what we sow
Sorry the "lads" reference upset you of course that was meant inclusive of the "ladetts", your political correctness is laughable when it stands beside such an attitude of revenge and bitterness. Just because I do not agree with "burn him at the stakes" witch hunt attitude that you pride yourself in does not in any way mean I condone any of the events of past. Read what I said instead of jumping on the old reactive bandwagons.
Your reaction to what judge as rose tinted glasses is exactly the kind of thing that happens in this industry when anyone begins to voice a different approach rather then the war like environment that is getting no on anywhere. Im big enough to take that criticism and any others. Im not big enough though to live a life of hatred and resentment. We cannot change the past. We should not forget it but we need to e careful not to become the very thing we claim to "hate" so much.
Calling me a misogynist...don't make me laugh! Making mountains out of molehills seems to be a speciality? When I use the word 'lads" it includes both... just like some people use the word "mate" so VERY loosely
In my opinion half problems we face are because there are not enough women involved...what woman, wife, mother for example would have come up with the 49'ers plan?
Last edited by volarecantare; 4th Mar 2008 at 16:11.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Rayong
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.king5.com/video/featured-...d=221537&shu=1
Enjoy! To our bonus!
Enjoy! To our bonus!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Looking back on Sodom
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to volarecantare
Where is all that in my post? Life is just too short and these are such negative emotions. Perhaps you are reading too much into my post, or is your knee-jerk reaction a result of a guilty conscience?
'Witch-hunt attitude'? Are you sure that you are reading my post? I standby my original statement that IW's actions were those of a cowboy, exhibiting an outrageous display of ego and blatant risk taking. He received just punishment for his actions. No more, no less.
I don't for one minute advocate victims seeking revenge for past actions or misdeeds. In this case I merely state that often, over the course of time, karma catches up with the wrong-doers for us.
I agree that 'the war like environment' is getting our pilot community nowhere. But surely this infighting is exactly what CX planned when they set us off down this path so many years ago.....they are the only ones benefiting from this situation. But how can we move on when so many of us seem to have hidden (self-serving) agendas? We desperately need to move forward, but as to how that can happen.......I just don't know. What do you see as the way out of all this?
At the risk of splitting hairs....'lad' is not interchangeable with 'mate'. Lad can only ever be masculine. Mate is defined as companion or fellow worker.
Attitude of 'revenge and bitterness', 'hatred' & 'resentment'?
'Witch-hunt attitude'? Are you sure that you are reading my post? I standby my original statement that IW's actions were those of a cowboy, exhibiting an outrageous display of ego and blatant risk taking. He received just punishment for his actions. No more, no less.
I don't for one minute advocate victims seeking revenge for past actions or misdeeds. In this case I merely state that often, over the course of time, karma catches up with the wrong-doers for us.
I agree that 'the war like environment' is getting our pilot community nowhere. But surely this infighting is exactly what CX planned when they set us off down this path so many years ago.....they are the only ones benefiting from this situation. But how can we move on when so many of us seem to have hidden (self-serving) agendas? We desperately need to move forward, but as to how that can happen.......I just don't know. What do you see as the way out of all this?
At the risk of splitting hairs....'lad' is not interchangeable with 'mate'. Lad can only ever be masculine. Mate is defined as companion or fellow worker.
Last edited by Lot's Wife; 4th Mar 2008 at 22:17. Reason: spelling