Cover up?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sai Kungah
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cover up?
Why does the thread on the B777 in JFK keep disapearing?
God knows the mistakes of the Airbus there received a good airing;
From what I have heard this was so close to a disaster that it's not funny.
OMG! I think I can hear someone at the front door.....
God knows the mistakes of the Airbus there received a good airing;
From what I have heard this was so close to a disaster that it's not funny.
OMG! I think I can hear someone at the front door.....
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The STC involved was very experienced on the 777 and NY op's
There is only 1 reason for this incident , starts with Fatigue and ends in Fatigue .
CAD and FAA take note , we are humans not robots .
There is only 1 reason for this incident , starts with Fatigue and ends in Fatigue .
CAD and FAA take note , we are humans not robots .
.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As much as I love the latest rumour and gossip, there are some things which should not be discussed on an open forum. Once the media gets wind of a story, C*#^TS like the one over at the SCMP publish complete BS not unlike the article regarding the recent -400 engine failure enroute to AMS.
I don't think it's in any of our best interests to have our company slandered in such a public way. The media feeds on fear and the flying public have no idea how things work up front. Stories like the recent one only serve to scare the flying public and make CX look bad.
I don't know about you but at this point I just want our company to do well so that we can all benefit. Save the gossip for the flight deck!
I don't think it's in any of our best interests to have our company slandered in such a public way. The media feeds on fear and the flying public have no idea how things work up front. Stories like the recent one only serve to scare the flying public and make CX look bad.
I don't know about you but at this point I just want our company to do well so that we can all benefit. Save the gossip for the flight deck!
I agree Flaps, but regarding these incidents, if it was a 'line shagger' doing the screwing up with the STC's involved sitting on the jump seat, you'd never hear the end of it.
A negligent walk-around by a management pilot some years ago leading to takeoff with a gear pin still in place comes to mind... 'if it had been anyone else I would have fired them'.
A negligent walk-around by a management pilot some years ago leading to takeoff with a gear pin still in place comes to mind... 'if it had been anyone else I would have fired them'.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 68
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I can stick my oar in, CX safety reputation speaks for itself. I do wonder at some of the "spin" when reading official announcements compared to the detail one can get from researching this kind of source (I am a transport consultant if that helps, not a journo).
Anyway, to the point, heli-dip in the harbour the other day followed similar accident on taxi in Qatar a while ago (tail fell off). No-one seems to know the cause (plenty of spec of course including from Peter rent-a-mouth Lok ex CAD) but I do wonder about the decision to let the fleet go back in action.
Anyway, to the point, heli-dip in the harbour the other day followed similar accident on taxi in Qatar a while ago (tail fell off). No-one seems to know the cause (plenty of spec of course including from Peter rent-a-mouth Lok ex CAD) but I do wonder about the decision to let the fleet go back in action.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cathay flight aborted New York landing
Crew made 'some procedural and technique errors' on approach to JFK Airport
by John Carney, South China Morning Post Jul 25, 2010
An investigation is under way after a Cathay Pacific (SEHK: 0293) flight from Hong Kong had to abort a landing approach at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport.
Flight CX840, which was under the command of a senior training captain at the end of a 16-hour flight, got into difficulties as it tried to land on May 31 with 305 passengers and crew on board.
Cathay aircrew general manager and director-designate of flight operations, Captain Richard Hall, said the crew of the Boeing 777 had made "some procedural and technique errors" and had to conduct a "go-around" - the industry term for when an aircraft aborts a landing, circles around and then comes in to land again.
At no time were the passengers or crew in any danger, he said.
"When the crew recognised that they had not met the company's stabilised approach criteria, they appropriately discontinued the approach in a regularly trained manoeuvre called a go-around," Hall said.
An industry insider who is aware of the incident says the number of time zones through which a long flight passes, and a crew's irregular sleep during the rest periods on a flight, can lead to fatigue among long-haul pilots.
"The fact that pilots face their toughest challenges at the end of a flight during the approach and landing phase heightens the dangers involved," the insider said.
"Bad weather, air traffic congestion or complicated local flight paths all add to the stress. It's an exacting test of a pilot's physical and mental resolve, just at a time when their physical and mental resources are at their lowest. That the air traffic around JFK Airport is notoriously congested makes life even more difficult for pilots who are arriving after long-haul flights."
Hall said Cathay has "stringent safety standards for approaches" and denied fatigue had anything to do with the incident, saying that both the operating and relief crews on CX840 took turns to rest in the aircraft bunks as required by the company's flight time limitations scheme (FTL).
"The FTL is designed to avoid fatigue. The FTL is approved by the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department, and is in line with industry-best practice," he said. "The scheme addresses all fatigue-related matters, such as maximum duty times as well as mandatory rest periods between long-haul flights, maximum number of flying hours et cetera."
Hall also defended the decision not to make a public announcement about the incident afterwards, saying: "The approach and landing proceeded as normal after the go-around and the flight landed on time, and at no time was there any danger to passengers or crew."
Cathay Pacific emphasised that it had an "open and honest" reporting culture. The crew immediately reported the incident to its corporate safety department. The matter was also reported to the Civil Aviation Department (CAD) in line with regulatory requirements.
The incident was the subject of chatter among the Hong Kong's airline fraternity. On the Professional Pilots Rumour Network website, one thread is headed: "Why does the thread on the B777 in JFK keep disappearing?"
One blogger wrote: "God knows the mistakes of the Airbus [sic] there received a good airing; from what I have heard this was so close to a disaster that it's not funny."
Another wrote: "The senior training captain involved was very experienced on the 777. There is only one reason for this incident, it starts with fatigue and ends in fatigue. CAD and the FAA [US Federal Aviation Administration] take note. We are humans not robots."
Crew made 'some procedural and technique errors' on approach to JFK Airport
by John Carney, South China Morning Post Jul 25, 2010
An investigation is under way after a Cathay Pacific (SEHK: 0293) flight from Hong Kong had to abort a landing approach at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport.
Flight CX840, which was under the command of a senior training captain at the end of a 16-hour flight, got into difficulties as it tried to land on May 31 with 305 passengers and crew on board.
Cathay aircrew general manager and director-designate of flight operations, Captain Richard Hall, said the crew of the Boeing 777 had made "some procedural and technique errors" and had to conduct a "go-around" - the industry term for when an aircraft aborts a landing, circles around and then comes in to land again.
At no time were the passengers or crew in any danger, he said.
"When the crew recognised that they had not met the company's stabilised approach criteria, they appropriately discontinued the approach in a regularly trained manoeuvre called a go-around," Hall said.
An industry insider who is aware of the incident says the number of time zones through which a long flight passes, and a crew's irregular sleep during the rest periods on a flight, can lead to fatigue among long-haul pilots.
"The fact that pilots face their toughest challenges at the end of a flight during the approach and landing phase heightens the dangers involved," the insider said.
"Bad weather, air traffic congestion or complicated local flight paths all add to the stress. It's an exacting test of a pilot's physical and mental resolve, just at a time when their physical and mental resources are at their lowest. That the air traffic around JFK Airport is notoriously congested makes life even more difficult for pilots who are arriving after long-haul flights."
Hall said Cathay has "stringent safety standards for approaches" and denied fatigue had anything to do with the incident, saying that both the operating and relief crews on CX840 took turns to rest in the aircraft bunks as required by the company's flight time limitations scheme (FTL).
"The FTL is designed to avoid fatigue. The FTL is approved by the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department, and is in line with industry-best practice," he said. "The scheme addresses all fatigue-related matters, such as maximum duty times as well as mandatory rest periods between long-haul flights, maximum number of flying hours et cetera."
Hall also defended the decision not to make a public announcement about the incident afterwards, saying: "The approach and landing proceeded as normal after the go-around and the flight landed on time, and at no time was there any danger to passengers or crew."
Cathay Pacific emphasised that it had an "open and honest" reporting culture. The crew immediately reported the incident to its corporate safety department. The matter was also reported to the Civil Aviation Department (CAD) in line with regulatory requirements.
The incident was the subject of chatter among the Hong Kong's airline fraternity. On the Professional Pilots Rumour Network website, one thread is headed: "Why does the thread on the B777 in JFK keep disappearing?"
One blogger wrote: "God knows the mistakes of the Airbus [sic] there received a good airing; from what I have heard this was so close to a disaster that it's not funny."
Another wrote: "The senior training captain involved was very experienced on the 777. There is only one reason for this incident, it starts with fatigue and ends in fatigue. CAD and the FAA [US Federal Aviation Administration] take note. We are humans not robots."
Is it normal practice to investigate all Go Arounds at CX ?
We used to have to fill out a form if we did one but this requirement was removed as is any requirement to report a go around to management as it was thought it might encourage people to 'press on' when they should have thrown an approach away.
I thought that was a good idea.
We used to have to fill out a form if we did one but this requirement was removed as is any requirement to report a go around to management as it was thought it might encourage people to 'press on' when they should have thrown an approach away.
I thought that was a good idea.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: India
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cover up?
Well, double standards and absolute hippocrisy! Had it been AI, Jet or any other Asian airline crew there will no no end to put downs, aspersions and innuendoes. Fatigue...........all long haul pilots suffer from it. 16 hours duty time will definitely permit a long period of inflight rest. Sure, they made mistakes and errors, but the empathies offered here are just too sweet!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes..... Because they had their crew rest, and no doubt slept soundly at the right body clock time for the duration of it, that FATIGUE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
For Farks Sake! Hopefully one day the message will getthrough, but what will it take.....!
For Farks Sake! Hopefully one day the message will getthrough, but what will it take.....!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FTL is designed to avoid fatigue. The FTL is approved by the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department, and is in line with industry-best practice...
...The scheme addresses all fatigue-related matters, such as maximum duty times as well as mandatory rest periods between long-haul flights, maximum number of flying hours et cetera
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sector C
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumour control is there has been another similar event at JFK since May, that would make it 2 in 3 months. That would be more than what the 744 and 346 combined had in the previous 3 years operating into JFK.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australasia
Age: 67
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Amritsar bloke was just griping that quick excuses were made for this very experienced STC, yada, yada, yada and if he was some subcontinent or oriental guy the swords would have been out skewering the lack of skills blah blah. Sad but true as always...................duck, incoming.........
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: hong kong
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anyone got any more info on the ex senior 744 stc who has apparently pulled the same trick not so long after the first.....yeejus ! apparently it was pretty similar a full dogs breakfast of mistakes. I guess if your an stc your going to be ok , anybody else a straight demotion !