SCMP - Flight did not require a third pilot, aviation body tells court
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: HKG
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SCMP - Flight did not require a third pilot, aviation body tells court
Flight did not require a third pilot, aviation body tells court
Joyce Man
Updated on Jun 16, 2009 A Cathay Pacific flight that a pilots' union has claimed was short-staffed was certified to fly with only two pilots and did not require a backup crew member, the director general of the Civil Aviation Department stated yesterday.
The director general, represented by Anthony Ismail, was responding to a summons at the Court of First Instance brought by the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers' Association.
The union accused the department of breaching aviation rules that determine the number of crew that should be on a flight.
One pilot rostered for the Melbourne to Hong Kong flight on February 27 last year fell ill, so two pilots made the flight instead of the three usually required. According to department policy, if two pilots are scheduled to fly for more than eight hours from 2am to 5.59am, according to the time of origin, the airline must provide a third crew member.
The department waived the requirement at Cathay's request. The trip lasted eight hours and 36 minutes, and the pilots were on duty for nine hours and 26 minutes, the court heard.
Mr Ismail argued that even if one pilot was suddenly incapacitated the flight would have no problems because the aircraft was designed to operate with two crew members. He also noted that a computer flight plan was to be used.
In Europe two pilots could fly for more than eight hours and there had never been a worldwide ban on two pilots operating flights for even 10 hours at night, he said.
The captain and the first officer who piloted the Cathay flight had rested for three and six days, respectively, before the flight, he said.
Mr Ismail argued that the rules were merely department policy, not legislation, and hence did not have the force of law.
Earlier, John Scott, representing the union, said that while the Cathay flight had arrived safely, it did so with a lower margin of safety. A third crew member could allow the others to rest and monitor takeoff and landing.
The union was seeking clarification on whether the department had acted improperly.
The union has noted that other crew were available but Cathay did not call them to replace the ill pilot.
Joyce Man
Updated on Jun 16, 2009 A Cathay Pacific flight that a pilots' union has claimed was short-staffed was certified to fly with only two pilots and did not require a backup crew member, the director general of the Civil Aviation Department stated yesterday.
The director general, represented by Anthony Ismail, was responding to a summons at the Court of First Instance brought by the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers' Association.
The union accused the department of breaching aviation rules that determine the number of crew that should be on a flight.
One pilot rostered for the Melbourne to Hong Kong flight on February 27 last year fell ill, so two pilots made the flight instead of the three usually required. According to department policy, if two pilots are scheduled to fly for more than eight hours from 2am to 5.59am, according to the time of origin, the airline must provide a third crew member.
The department waived the requirement at Cathay's request. The trip lasted eight hours and 36 minutes, and the pilots were on duty for nine hours and 26 minutes, the court heard.
Mr Ismail argued that even if one pilot was suddenly incapacitated the flight would have no problems because the aircraft was designed to operate with two crew members. He also noted that a computer flight plan was to be used.
In Europe two pilots could fly for more than eight hours and there had never been a worldwide ban on two pilots operating flights for even 10 hours at night, he said.
The captain and the first officer who piloted the Cathay flight had rested for three and six days, respectively, before the flight, he said.
Mr Ismail argued that the rules were merely department policy, not legislation, and hence did not have the force of law.
Earlier, John Scott, representing the union, said that while the Cathay flight had arrived safely, it did so with a lower margin of safety. A third crew member could allow the others to rest and monitor takeoff and landing.
The union was seeking clarification on whether the department had acted improperly.
The union has noted that other crew were available but Cathay did not call them to replace the ill pilot.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: OneDegSouth
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Mr Ismail argued that the rules[flight time limitations] were merely department policy, not legislation, and hence did not have the force of law. "
I think this statement is outrageous. In other words - what we have written is subject to change without warning. We may change our policy when, where and how we choose without any oversight or review.
I think this statement is outrageous. In other words - what we have written is subject to change without warning. We may change our policy when, where and how we choose without any oversight or review.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lion rock bottom
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typical CAD arrogance. Goes hand in hand with the Company's....
At a time when civil aviation authorities in many developed countries are taking an inquisitive look at flight time limitations and the conscequences of fatigue on safety, it's refreshing to see that the HKCAD and their good buddies CX are kickin' it old school...
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Gate 69
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Ismail argued that even if one pilot was suddenly incapacitated the flight would have no problems because the aircraft was designed to operate with two crew members.
So just how far will they adjust their "policy" when asked? Perhaps two crew back from LHR? YVR? JFK???
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who is this guy?
The director general, represented by Anthony Ismail, was responding to a summons at the Court of First Instance brought by the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers' Association.
Mr Ismail argued that even if one pilot was suddenly incapacitated the flight would have no problems because the aircraft was designed to operate with two crew members. He also noted that a computer flight plan was to be used.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The department waived the requirement at Cathay's request.
In this particular case it would appear that this was a one-off scenario, so quite frankly I fail to see the problem.
The question then remains...is this done in other countries and with their respective regulatory authorities (one-off)?
Yup, been known to happen, a time or three.
NB>
If involved in this sort of scenario, the Commander had better be sure he /she has written authorization...IE: CYA.
AOA...again.
At least...peanuts were not involved.
Again.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: VHHH
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot Dies Mid Flight
A pilot on a Continental Airlines plane died in mid-flight, leaving two co-pilots to land the plane safely in New York.
Continental flight 61 from Brussels landed at Newark Liberty International Airport, according to Continental's website.
Passengers weren't told of the pilot's death in flight. During the flight, an announcement was made asking if any doctors were aboard and several passengers approached the cockpit.
"The captain of Continental flight 61, which was en route from Brussels to Newark, died in flight, apparently of natural causes," Continental said in a statement.
"The crew on this flight included an additional relief pilot who took the place of the deceased pilot. The flight continued safely with two pilots at the controls," it said.
The plane was a Boeing 777 with 247 passengers on board. As a precaution, the airport's emergency crews were sent to meet the plane.
The pilot, 60, was based in Newark and had worked for Continental for 32 years, the airline said. Continental has one flight daily between Brussels and Newark.
In 2007, another Continental pilot died at the controls after becoming ill during a flight from Houston to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. It landed safely with a co-pilot at the controls after being diverted to McAllen-Miller International Airport.
- Reuters
Continental flight 61 from Brussels landed at Newark Liberty International Airport, according to Continental's website.
Passengers weren't told of the pilot's death in flight. During the flight, an announcement was made asking if any doctors were aboard and several passengers approached the cockpit.
"The captain of Continental flight 61, which was en route from Brussels to Newark, died in flight, apparently of natural causes," Continental said in a statement.
"The crew on this flight included an additional relief pilot who took the place of the deceased pilot. The flight continued safely with two pilots at the controls," it said.
The plane was a Boeing 777 with 247 passengers on board. As a precaution, the airport's emergency crews were sent to meet the plane.
The pilot, 60, was based in Newark and had worked for Continental for 32 years, the airline said. Continental has one flight daily between Brussels and Newark.
In 2007, another Continental pilot died at the controls after becoming ill during a flight from Houston to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. It landed safely with a co-pilot at the controls after being diverted to McAllen-Miller International Airport.
- Reuters
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: HONG KONG
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SCMP - Flight did not require a third pilot, aviation body tells court
And, the court turned it aside, finding otherwise.
(Apparently)
(Apparently)
But what is apparently true is that the CAD FOI who [authorised the flight and who was in court was wearing a CX badge on his suit lapel.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CokeZero, hopefully the judge will make the same link. If pilots are the flight safety goalkeepers and you lose one through incapacitation, do you really want your other one to be so knackered he can barely keep his eyes open?
FTLs are there to increase the safety margin and if you're going to have them, you also need independent, legally responsible oversight.
Yes the flight may have been legal in Europe, but it would also have been legal in Africa. Who's rules are we following, or are we setting out the rules to cover our own set of circumstances here in CX, based in Hong Kong? I would suggest that if we have rules governing our operations here then we need to stick to them, and not have the option to telephone our mate at the regulators to rubber stamp any changes when the rules seem inconvenient
FTLs are there to increase the safety margin and if you're going to have them, you also need independent, legally responsible oversight.
Yes the flight may have been legal in Europe, but it would also have been legal in Africa. Who's rules are we following, or are we setting out the rules to cover our own set of circumstances here in CX, based in Hong Kong? I would suggest that if we have rules governing our operations here then we need to stick to them, and not have the option to telephone our mate at the regulators to rubber stamp any changes when the rules seem inconvenient
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly...
Right on, Anthracx. All this about other places, other times are irrelevant. We have flight time limitations in HKG made by the CAD. If they are just going to waive them because they are commercially inconvenient, why have them in the first place? Over 8 hours in the seat with no rest is way too much, especially when you start in the middle of the night. The rule is there for a reason, and I don't think it is so it can be waived when there is a crewing problem.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The captain of Continental flight 61, which was en route from Brussels to Newark, died in flight, apparently of natural causes," Continental said in a statement.
You've all pondered, how you would like to go. At home in bed with your family, or eating a big steak dinner, or maybe even having sex in Thailand.
Can you imagine if your last moments of your life are spent on the cockpit floor of a Cathay wide-body, staring at two teenage Chinese cabin crew trying to figure out the english phrase for "gweylo on floor not breathing", speaking through a swine-flu mask with a medlink doctor from central Texas that doesn't speak a word of Ching-lish?
Really puts into perspective this whole age 65 thing...
Somethings are just not worth it. 