CX finally joins the 21st Century!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX finally joins the 21st Century!
So I hear that as of 1st December they are finally able to do takeoffs with Packs On in the Airbus fleet!....
Old fart management in the past making flying aircraft more difficult than it should be!...WHY??
Because we used to in the Tristar ole chap!...
Old fart management in the past making flying aircraft more difficult than it should be!...WHY??
Because we used to in the Tristar ole chap!...
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Packs On - Packs Off
What is so difficult about introducing aircon packs after take-off? Surely you guys can handle that little extra action if required.
Let nothing be said against the queen of the skys - the mighty tristar!!!!
However, if I haven't consumed too many red vinos, in the early days we in fact did packs on take-offs in the A330. I vaguely recall that the packs off take-off procedure was done to increase egt margins and/or to align with the A340-200/300 procedures. Airbus MFF was somewhat in its infancy.
Regarding the difficulty of the task, was it "packs 1'" or "flaps 1"?
Perhaps someone else can recall better how things were done last century? Cheers!
However, if I haven't consumed too many red vinos, in the early days we in fact did packs on take-offs in the A330. I vaguely recall that the packs off take-off procedure was done to increase egt margins and/or to align with the A340-200/300 procedures. Airbus MFF was somewhat in its infancy.
Regarding the difficulty of the task, was it "packs 1'" or "flaps 1"?
Perhaps someone else can recall better how things were done last century? Cheers!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just happened to be sitting in the office when "flaps" came about.
Manager 1: Is it flap or flaps
Manager 2: (Who walks over to a cockpit picture of the Airbus on the wall)
It says FLAPS on the picture so it's flaps.
So by that rational it should be FLAP on the Boeings
Manager 1: Is it flap or flaps
Manager 2: (Who walks over to a cockpit picture of the Airbus on the wall)
It says FLAPS on the picture so it's flaps.
So by that rational it should be FLAP on the Boeings
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So by that rational it should be FLAP on the Boeings
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well KA is about to join the 20th century being forced fed CX SOPs with FCOM being pushed away.
I have never seen such antiquated, irrelevant SOPS in my entire career. They will not work on high workload, short haul operations into China. Where your support pilot is often a cadet-second officer who won't yet have the experience to prioritize irrelevant, nuisance SOPs.
Many pilots at KA have thousands of incident free hours on Airbus! It should be a big bloody red flag that an outsider at KA is having so many incidents yet hardly flies at all- and multiple flap over speeds are ASR events BTW!!!!!!!
Rant over. Fly safe KA.
I have never seen such antiquated, irrelevant SOPS in my entire career. They will not work on high workload, short haul operations into China. Where your support pilot is often a cadet-second officer who won't yet have the experience to prioritize irrelevant, nuisance SOPs.
Many pilots at KA have thousands of incident free hours on Airbus! It should be a big bloody red flag that an outsider at KA is having so many incidents yet hardly flies at all- and multiple flap over speeds are ASR events BTW!!!!!!!
Rant over. Fly safe KA.
Could any ex-AN Airbus pilots comment on why they went down the strictly Airbus/FCOM road in the latter years of Airbus operations in Ansett.
My understanding is that if an accident/incident occurred, b/c they were not following strict Airbus procedures then they did not have a Legal leg to stand on if trying to go back to Airbus over any legal claim.
If this is the case, where does this place KA (and also CX) operations as they are moving away from FCOM procedures to next year adopting CX's own company SOP's. Will it place KA in the same boat as AN were b4?
Thks.
b.
My understanding is that if an accident/incident occurred, b/c they were not following strict Airbus procedures then they did not have a Legal leg to stand on if trying to go back to Airbus over any legal claim.
If this is the case, where does this place KA (and also CX) operations as they are moving away from FCOM procedures to next year adopting CX's own company SOP's. Will it place KA in the same boat as AN were b4?
Thks.
b.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe in the next century they might let the navaids autotune! but as said earlier, "thats how we did it 50 years ago".
I've even come across some guys who have a problem with there being no ADF in the aircraft.
WP
I've even come across some guys who have a problem with there being no ADF in the aircraft.
WP
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just love the calls every 5000'. Pricelessly stupid and outdated. But hey, it stood the test of time didnt it.
Boocs, the AN move to FCOM occured because Aus, like most of the western world, has a robust legal system that punishes non compliance and attempts to force companies to maintain a modicum of duty of care.
KA lives and breaths in HKG where, yes, there is a legal system. But its main driving force is to grease the wheels of business more than provide operational oversight.
Boocs, the AN move to FCOM occured because Aus, like most of the western world, has a robust legal system that punishes non compliance and attempts to force companies to maintain a modicum of duty of care.
KA lives and breaths in HKG where, yes, there is a legal system. But its main driving force is to grease the wheels of business more than provide operational oversight.
ANQRKA,
Thanks 4 yr response. So in your "legal opinion" how does this leave KA if they do not follow strict FCOM procedures and an accident/incident occurs. Would it be unfair of Airbus to say "Hey you're not following what we tell you to do, so Go away!!"
How long ago was the jammed flap/slat incident?
b.
Thanks 4 yr response. So in your "legal opinion" how does this leave KA if they do not follow strict FCOM procedures and an accident/incident occurs. Would it be unfair of Airbus to say "Hey you're not following what we tell you to do, so Go away!!"
How long ago was the jammed flap/slat incident?
b.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone know why we have to put our charts away now ? Is this a Cathay SOP ?
It was an appreciated professional courtesy to have the charts left out. It would buy you 30 useful seconds on slick turnaround times on busy multiple sector short haul days. As well as saving wear and tear- our charts are now a mess.
I am starting to think the CX culture sux more than their antiquated SOPs.
We have been told Cathay is a thinking pilots airline with SOPs to match. Yet, in monthly newsletters from our exchange pilot ( yes I am one of the few who read them ) he bangs on about what amounts to idiosyncrasies on how to run the flight deck. Concentrate on your own flying sunshine!
It was an appreciated professional courtesy to have the charts left out. It would buy you 30 useful seconds on slick turnaround times on busy multiple sector short haul days. As well as saving wear and tear- our charts are now a mess.
I am starting to think the CX culture sux more than their antiquated SOPs.
We have been told Cathay is a thinking pilots airline with SOPs to match. Yet, in monthly newsletters from our exchange pilot ( yes I am one of the few who read them ) he bangs on about what amounts to idiosyncrasies on how to run the flight deck. Concentrate on your own flying sunshine!
Last edited by And Then; 12th Dec 2008 at 05:39.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Tie Pay
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"We have been told Cathay is a thinking pilots airline with SOPs to match."
Oh dear. You are way off the mark.
As an ex CX driver from many years ago, I can tell you it is the least progressive of the 5 airlines I have flown for, including my namesakes outfit.
Granted, I left CX years ago - maybe things have improved - but I doubt it.
Old fashioned crap pushed by twits who have never left the green pond to take a look at the outside world.
Oh dear. You are way off the mark.
As an ex CX driver from many years ago, I can tell you it is the least progressive of the 5 airlines I have flown for, including my namesakes outfit.
Granted, I left CX years ago - maybe things have improved - but I doubt it.
Old fashioned crap pushed by twits who have never left the green pond to take a look at the outside world.
..not what the company wants..is the the simple answer
and BTW...on the Tristar...it wasn't packs on...it was sponge packs in..to stop all the black grunge from dripping on the punters.
and BTW...on the Tristar...it wasn't packs on...it was sponge packs in..to stop all the black grunge from dripping on the punters.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX is no thinking pilot's airline.
It's an airline driven by a training system led by out-of-date ex RAF/RAAF types who have (mostly) never worked for any other airline except CX. It's not their fault - it's just that all they know is CX.
It's a C&T system completely focused on the inane at the expense of the BIG picture. One stuck in the 50's whilst pretending to be at the forefront of modern airline operations. Sure, over the last few decades CX may have been at the front, but there are now plenty of airlines doing it easier, faster and safer without any need for pedantics.
I'd be willing to put money on the fact that people who have recently joined CX from other airlines would rank CX's C&T system, particularly the culture, near the bottom of their experience pile. It'd be interesting to see an AoA poll on the topic
It's an airline driven by a training system led by out-of-date ex RAF/RAAF types who have (mostly) never worked for any other airline except CX. It's not their fault - it's just that all they know is CX.
It's a C&T system completely focused on the inane at the expense of the BIG picture. One stuck in the 50's whilst pretending to be at the forefront of modern airline operations. Sure, over the last few decades CX may have been at the front, but there are now plenty of airlines doing it easier, faster and safer without any need for pedantics.
I'd be willing to put money on the fact that people who have recently joined CX from other airlines would rank CX's C&T system, particularly the culture, near the bottom of their experience pile. It'd be interesting to see an AoA poll on the topic
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Packs On - the Truth
Why let a few untruths get in the way of facts. If you remember the reason we did Packs Off takeoffs was a Rolls Royce Trent 700 design fault that required the Bird Mouth to to be redesigned and replaced.
Airbus offered two options until CX and KA fleets were modified - do Packs Off or a high powered engine on a regular basis prior to takeoff. I am sure the passengers would have enjoyed sitting at the end of the runway doing high powered engine runs.
Lets make this a sensible and balanced forum for real discussion and not the ranting and ravings of a few people.
Airbus offered two options until CX and KA fleets were modified - do Packs Off or a high powered engine on a regular basis prior to takeoff. I am sure the passengers would have enjoyed sitting at the end of the runway doing high powered engine runs.
Lets make this a sensible and balanced forum for real discussion and not the ranting and ravings of a few people.