SCMP, letters to Ed, today

[The Professor]

"you probably don't know much about airline aviation then"

Probably a lot more than you think and I suspect a lot more than you.

I am genuinely interested to know what makes a CX pilot "more capable" than most others. Perhaps you could provide some evidence that goes beyond the simplistic non answer such as the one you just gave in the absence of a genuine opinion.

[Apple Tree Yard]

Professor, why don't you run along and play with your superior academic credentials? The one thing I learnt many years ago is that it is pointless and futile to argue my worth with someone who is not involved in my profession, and does not work for this airline. Having worked for other carriers, it is easy to understand why CX has a 'better' product as far as the operational side of things is concerned. I, and i'm sure most of my colleagues, have better things to do than justify our worth to you. You can feel free to denigrate or devalue us all you wish. You of course do so from a position of ignorance.

[hongkongfooey]

Thanks for your recent message concerning Cecilie Gamst Berg.


Dear xyz,
As I understand the matter, Ms. Gamst Berg made the comments you object to on a personal blog which has no connection to Radio 3 or RTHK. On our station she is employed solely to give a weekly lesson in Cantonese.
Please note also that she is in no way 'given a platform' on RTHK.

Given this, I have to inform you that we have no intention of acting against Ms. Gamst Berg.

Regards

Hugh Chiverton
Head, RTHK Radio 3

So RTHK is happy to employ people who engage in slanderous and racist views on a public forum ?? How would CX react if one of us started a similar rant ( BLOG ) and they received complaints, I wonder if they would be quite so flippant about it
So typical of this place

[quadspeed]

CX is a small airline that flies few sectors compared to shorthaul airlines in North America and Europe.

The bloke actually has a point, whether we like it or not.

We may (think we) hold the highest standards when it comes to the academics of long-haul, but we've got no proficiency in handling. That's just a fact of life; 3 sims and 12 landings a year (for the majority of our career) give no rise to claims of "capable sets of hands."

It goes without saying that operators like CX needs to hire experienced pilots who can overcome the lack of proficiency by relying on previous experience. The longer you've been with Cathay, the less proficient you become. That, I'm afraid, is the truth.

It was once said that "a superior airman uses his superior knowledge to avoid getting into situations when he's required to use his superior skill". For the average CX pilot, due to the very nature of his operation, the latter part of the statement does not entirely hold true. However, in my humble opinion, the former most certainly does.

[Frogman1484]

Quadspeed, you are talking absolute Cr@p!!! In the last year I have flown +850 hours , mostly short to medium haul. I did an average of 10 landings a month (+20 sectors per month). In the last 3 years alone I have flown in at least 7 Typhoons. I've had to do more +25Kts crosswind landing than I can recall, and you are calling me "Non Proficient in handling" .

Maybe you should change your quote to "a superior airman uses his superior knowledge to know when to shut up!"

[turnandburn]

//////////

[The Professor]

"....not involved in my profession"

It appears you draw comfort from the misguided belief that I am not part of your profession and therefore have no credibility in my argument. Your simplistic assumption being that I don't agree with your very narrow ill informed point of view therefore I must be an outsider.

If this belief ensures that you sleep soundly at night then I will not waste my time arguing the contrary.

".....CX has a 'better' product as far as the operational side of things is concerned."

And this little gem is where the fun starts. What exactly is the "product" to which you refer? Would you care to explain how achieving a rating of "better" is determined? Who determines this?

I look forward to your response. It should be interesting.

[freightdog188]

you just offered to shut up, my dear professor, but then just couldn't help it, could you?

[quadspeed]

Frogman..

So you're the most proficient pilot in Cathay, congratulations! Fair enough, but you certainly don't speak for the vast majority of our pilots.

Hours mean crap, and you know it. I flew 800 last year; 750 of them during cruise. It usually works the other way around; more sectors, less total hours. Are you really making the argument that 20 sectors a month is a lot compared to short-haul carriers? I've got mates doing 5-6 sectors a day; multiplied by 15 days a month. They're proficient.

As for all the talk of typhoons, the fact is we don't land when the winds exceed our aircraft limits, just like the rest of the world. The typhoon may be blowing 180kts out there, but you're not in it, are you? Any pilot flying around in North America or Europe gets magnitudes more experience operating in high winds and gusty conditions. It's called winter.

Now, to complete the rebutall; No, I wasn't calling you "non-proficient in handling." I was calling the average CX pilot "non-proficient in handling." You realize the difference, right? Which makes your personal example miss the point. Completely.

And no, I'm not gonna change my quote.

As for cadets, turnandburn, that's another issue all together. Most western airlines start their cadets on regional fleets to build handling skills; Cathay doesn't. If someone could argue how, starting with 200hours someone becomes more proficient by flying 6 four hour sims a year, then I'm all ears. I just don't see it.

[The Professor]

Freightdog,

Its much more comfortable when those with differing points of view simply remain silent, isnt it. An ignorant point of view is easy to maintain and requires very little thought.

However I digress. The intention of my previous post was to point out that I would not engage in debate about whether I am involved in your profession or not. I do apologize if I did not make myself clear. I will ensure my future posts are written in such a manner that you can understand them.

[iLuvPX]

Great post Quadspeed

[The Wraith]

The Professor...

Your pomposity is of almost biblical proportions. Your friends must all fall at your feet in awe of your immense intellect and bearing, and you must be an absolute JOY to live with.

You could aim your disdain at any serious profession be it legal, medical etc, but for some reason you choose ours. Whether you are, in fact, part of the aviation sector or not, and I suspect not, means nothing. You have an axe to grind and you do it here. I personally have a problem with saying Cathay pilots are better than any other particular group of pilots, there but for the grace of god etc, but I would happily put my family on any Cathay flight and certainly when I am in the back for a change I am not busy second guessing the guys up front.

I'm not really interested in entering a slanging match with you because frankly I am too busy flying beautiful Boeing 777s around the region and farther afield in the company of other great guys and gals. I suspect that maybe you would like to do so too and perhaps that is your axe. But, it would be nice not to have to read your ill informed, confrontational and self congratulatory drivel on a predominently pilots and engineers forum.

Of course, it takes all sorts to make the world, yes, even people like you. And as the great Mr T famously says, "I pity da fool!"

The Wraith.

[treboryelk]

if the professor was a Brit, this would smack of being chopped at biggin hill

[hongkongfooey]

the fact is we don't land when the winds exceed our aircraft limits, just like the rest of the world

Not quite true Quad, the " superior " pilots at HKA regularly exceed the limitations of the a/c, they are after all only " demonstrated " limits

[The Professor]

And then along comes The Wraith barking up the same tree as Apple Tree Yard.

“You could aim your disdain at any serious profession be it legal, medical….”

I suspect so. But this is not a legal or medical rumor website and I have had no involvement in either of those industries.

“You have an axe to grind…….”

This is a very lazy yet common technique used by people to refute an argument when they are not imaginative enough to engage in genuine debate. You have an axe to grind/you are not one of us/you are a communist. Simplistic nonsense.

“I suspect that maybe you would like to do so too…..”

No, my days of nodding off in the seat on yet another pacific crossing are long gone. I couldn’t imagine anything more uninspiring that staring at a PFD for 18 hours.

I still await some genuine discussion about CX pilots and what makes them “more capable” than most others. Or is it much easier to float the idea without actually backing it up?

[proud]

Well said

That was very well said Quadspeed. I enjoyed your post.

[Dynasty Trash Hauler]

I flew for CX and left almost 20 years ago. Cant say they stand out as being a bad operation at all but no where near as "the best" as some of them think they are. A lot of managers back then thought the airline was the cats whiskers. Maybe they are now but it was a real cx trait back then that many (limies) simply thought the airline was cutting edge when it was far from it. A dangerous attitude to foster I reckon. I left and returned to a US domestic airline where ops were light years ahead of CX.

just my 2 cents worth.

[Apple Tree Yard]

Professor, you just don't seem to get it do you? We're not interested in wasting our time in a debate with you. Your opinion is of no value, as you don't work in our particular enviornment. I find it curious that you seem so obsessed with attempting to establish something that is of no consequence. If you wish to think that we are 'average', feel free to live with that opinion. What YOU think is really of no consequence.

[Apple Tree Yard]

Dynasty...I come from the US domestic/intl carriers. CX is light years ahead of their ops. A few examples: altimetry procedures, approach procedures, standardisation, overall requirement to maintain high skill levels, operations in varied and numerous difficult ATC enviornments...etc, etc. Happy to debate you with specifics...anytime.

[404 Titan]

The Professor

You said:

I still await some genuine discussion about CX pilots and what makes them “more capable” than most others. Or is it much easier to float the idea without actually backing it up?

That's not what was said at all. The original quote was:

I put it to Mr Sanderson that, if he were to be on an aircraft with a serious malfunction, he would be hard pressed to find a more capable set of hands with which to entrust his safety than a Cathay Pacific pilot.

The point being made by the poster of this statement and is being lost by most including yourself is we aren’t trying to say we are any better than most proficient airlines elsewhere. All is being said is that we are up there with them. As proof of this point our last LOSA audit has stated we are proficient in our operation especially when you consider the diverse high threat environment we operate in e.g. weather, terrain and ATC.