Can you actually do a Visual Approach with confidence?
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Stratford upon Avon
Age: 76
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ye gods! Is this where we are only 10 years into the retirement mission. What happened to a "real" manual approach i.e. no A/P, no A/T, no F/D, Raw data only, as long as the weather was limits plus 1000'? This was not the dark ages, unless the 747 400 was the dark ages. Managers need to remember that if they think safety is expensive, just try having an accident. Oh they just did! I despair.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A raw data ILS approach was also part of every PC!
It was the standard expected of every pilot.
We've gone from that to the multi-crew "commercial" pilot license.
Sadly, safety cannot be a number one priority if we're not prepared to spend money to strive for that goal; the standard is not what it once was.
Can you whistle the tune "I can fly"?
It was the standard expected of every pilot.
We've gone from that to the multi-crew "commercial" pilot license.
Sadly, safety cannot be a number one priority if we're not prepared to spend money to strive for that goal; the standard is not what it once was.
Can you whistle the tune "I can fly"?
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: MOON
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Swire (Cathay/Dragon) don't seem to care about safety.
Pedantic bull**** and sitting up straight to do a PA, absolutely.. but safety? Nah.. we'll just make adverts of older trained expats and not show young cadets with no experience or hand flying skills.
Personally, I think we'll have a accident within 5-10 years.. once the current experience leaves, its going to be a **** show. CX has been living on reputation too long.
We have a ****ty cabin product, poor safety culture and we charge more than the competition.. its a matter of time.
Pedantic bull**** and sitting up straight to do a PA, absolutely.. but safety? Nah.. we'll just make adverts of older trained expats and not show young cadets with no experience or hand flying skills.
Personally, I think we'll have a accident within 5-10 years.. once the current experience leaves, its going to be a **** show. CX has been living on reputation too long.
We have a ****ty cabin product, poor safety culture and we charge more than the competition.. its a matter of time.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Here
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pushing back while Captain takes a pee.
Telling Captain to wait while playing Candy Crush when asked to do the refuelling paperwork.
Yelling out "STOP" on the takeoff roll. When asked WHY???? "I forgot my passport"....
That's what we're dealing with folks..........
Telling Captain to wait while playing Candy Crush when asked to do the refuelling paperwork.
Yelling out "STOP" on the takeoff roll. When asked WHY???? "I forgot my passport"....
That's what we're dealing with folks..........
Join Date: May 2013
Location: have I forgotten or am I lost?
Age: 71
Posts: 1,126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what you are dealing with is much more than the cockpit.
there are rapidly converging technologies out there that will not be kind to pilots.
airbus are steaming along with automated aircraft systems. these lead to more fuel efficient flying.
the americans are combatting guerilla war with remotely piloted drones operated via satellite links.
there are two companies in australia that are running entire remote mining operations, involving haul packs, trains and plant via remote telemetry from city control centres.
there is a good chance that when these technologies are all sorted out, if you guys remain, then you will not even be in the cockpit.
already there is comment that the F35 will be the last manned fighter.
picture a world where the airbus autonomously flies the distance monitored by satellite from a central company site. then hands over to a ground controller in the outsourced local airport who via telemetry makes the approach which he has done a thousand times before.
guys you may be the last of the mohicians. just do the best you can and enjoy the ride and its perks while you can. the technologies arent going to stop converging.
there are rapidly converging technologies out there that will not be kind to pilots.
airbus are steaming along with automated aircraft systems. these lead to more fuel efficient flying.
the americans are combatting guerilla war with remotely piloted drones operated via satellite links.
there are two companies in australia that are running entire remote mining operations, involving haul packs, trains and plant via remote telemetry from city control centres.
there is a good chance that when these technologies are all sorted out, if you guys remain, then you will not even be in the cockpit.
already there is comment that the F35 will be the last manned fighter.
picture a world where the airbus autonomously flies the distance monitored by satellite from a central company site. then hands over to a ground controller in the outsourced local airport who via telemetry makes the approach which he has done a thousand times before.
guys you may be the last of the mohicians. just do the best you can and enjoy the ride and its perks while you can. the technologies arent going to stop converging.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: I don't really hate them...I just miss flight attendants.
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I fly a visual approach without crashing? I sure as f*uck hope so. The mysterious FLASH OF LIGHT at 500' be damned, there is no excuse that justifies the performance of that OZ flight crew.
Children of magenta is a great video. Thanks for posting it.
Children of magenta is a great video. Thanks for posting it.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Earth
Age: 32
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this inexperienced hiring of zero time - 200hrs Cadet's started after the "Great Recession," and Cathay started hiring purely Cadets, no balance, all to save money, and offering no realistic housing allowance for the REAL commitment, and required experience to handle abnormal "unwritten" procedures, where real "hands on" flying experience will likely ensure a safe outcome, vs the accidents we are witnessing today. From AF447, to Lion Air, to Cargo Fire Crashes / LONG LONG Diversions... it all comes down to who has actually been in a role of "hands on flying" and dealt with the fact their own life was really at threat if they didn't make the right decision. Few with experience, have joined CX without such stories. Today, we have rich kids as S/O's, some with severe attitudes, unwilling to show respect, take information, have the "real" motivation to grow, and it's simply shocking. It's no fault of CX directly, but that of the Regulators of aviation, continuing to be push-overs, and reducing qualification requirements, putting high profile and normal citizens lives at risk. Now we'll rely on managers, managers that filter information from training files, rather than REAL LINE FLIGHT OPERATIONS, to dictate who are their excellent, average, and poor operators. Politics are a huge issue, as the CX grading system for the PC (checking), and the RT (checking called training) are subject to a textbook business issues called "Emotional Management," regardless that they score us based on performance. It's simply a mess. From a legal perspective; a check/training system with ability and legal integrity would follow a simple write up of complete and satisfactory, recording any additional "practice" to get up to standards, rather than documenting EVERYTHING for the court of law, when a CX accident inevitably happens. Does the legal department not account for the accessible information on ERAS stating the performance issues of the flight crew in simulators? Why on this earth would a public, never mind, a private company, so arrogantly display their perfectionist / egotistical attitudes, which is EMOTIONAL management towards pilots they deem as satisfactory to a "Industry Standard" by giving them a "3" with comments running on about weakness. From a legal perspective, this seems completely insane. Again, legally, like cargo fines, onshoring, etc, CX will find themselves in a conundrum, with accountability at stake. Someone will get fired, lawsuits will occur, then MAYBE it will be followed by change. But in the meantime, why in the hell are the HKCAD authorizing ZERO time pilots at the controls of jets with upwards of 3-400 passengers, to be ALONE at the controls (toilet breaks, etc) with NO TYPE rating? These Cadets not only have no or minimal experience, they DO NOT get a FULL SIMULATOR and AIRCRAFT course at Cathay. They are trained to a minimal standard, which is FAR FAR too low, compared to that of the rest of the world's high regarded airlines. As a passenger, it's critical to understand the the training standards and recruitment of an airline, and perhaps these idiots handing out airline awards should finally factor in experience for such. It appears CX has reduced themselves to the likes of O'Learly, the CEO of Ryan Air, but even Ryan Air pay accordingly, and ensure experienced crew are at the controls. The real issue is the turn over of the board of directors at CX, too many, too often. What we need is a Buffet style of "long term commitment - with the board's personal assets being substantial in CX stock, to ensure integrity, and long term responsibility - not falling victim to "annual results" and moving up the ranks of Swire. This goes for all big companies. But in conclusion, Cathay went from cherry picking the top pilots (from a back ground perspective) to hiring those showing the "keenness" to learn, but the IQ and ability to fly an airplane, never mind decision making, especially on THEIR OWN, has never been factored into their grey matter, and a big issue is ahead. For those that worry of the longevity of their careers as pilots at CX, it's JUST a job, FOR NOW. Don't take anything personally, and standby for reductions in your contract if you happen to be a B-Scaler entitled to full housing. I sure hope management finally write a proper commitment to the index they follow along with the 25-year term as promised, but I doubt this will occur. I forecast a fixed rate for B-Scalers to 15years, then local terms, or go away. Airlines continue to reduce and reduce, and the purchasing power for a pilot in HK on a HK airline salary is sadly a very very low middle income life.
who's teaching us?
Folks,
look at the guy in the Video, look at the guys heading up your training organisation, what do they have in common?
they are all in there 50's. They all used to fly "real aeroplanes", they are all heroes of hand flying and lament the fact that all young pilots are reliant on automation.
who taught us this automation reliance? they did!! (at least the guy in the video apologises for it)
Then they develop totally unrealistic, negative training SIM profiles to bring back these skills. All this is done without looking at the day to day operation, SOP's, fatigue levels, airports, traffic flows etc, and say we all need to "take the opportunity to keep our skills up".
All this achieves is to tick a box and pat themselves on the back while still saying we are all hopeless and don't realise how good we have it.
Back in our day on the 727, Classic, DC-10 blah blah blah.
look at the guy in the Video, look at the guys heading up your training organisation, what do they have in common?
they are all in there 50's. They all used to fly "real aeroplanes", they are all heroes of hand flying and lament the fact that all young pilots are reliant on automation.
who taught us this automation reliance? they did!! (at least the guy in the video apologises for it)
Then they develop totally unrealistic, negative training SIM profiles to bring back these skills. All this is done without looking at the day to day operation, SOP's, fatigue levels, airports, traffic flows etc, and say we all need to "take the opportunity to keep our skills up".
All this achieves is to tick a box and pat themselves on the back while still saying we are all hopeless and don't realise how good we have it.
Back in our day on the 727, Classic, DC-10 blah blah blah.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The real issue is the turn over of the board of directors at CX, too many, too often" - Maid Day
I wouldn't agree, the CX senior management (compared to most places) all have 25 years plus with CX or Swire. I would say that the problem is not enough outsiders to give a different view of things.
I wouldn't agree, the CX senior management (compared to most places) all have 25 years plus with CX or Swire. I would say that the problem is not enough outsiders to give a different view of things.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maid..very well written post..succinct to the tee!! The Board roll overs occur at a different level of effectiveness than we are led to believe. Their exposure to Flight Ops and control in that theatre is tenuous to say the least..until..UNTIL there is an event, incident or accident. Then and only then will they forensically scrutinise everything pertinent to the crew, their training and their stewardship from management...and that's where the rubbish of ERAS and the marking system comes into its own..a system of exoneration for the so called pilot managers. Sadly, the weight of emphasis in this area has displaced what sensible training should actually be, where it should have gone and what shape it should be in now..which is, to say the least..poor.
Nothing, absolutely NOTHING can replace good quality training..alas, the rhetoric from the 3rd floor followers will change little...
Nothing, absolutely NOTHING can replace good quality training..alas, the rhetoric from the 3rd floor followers will change little...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Automation vs Manual flight
It's all well and good to say "my manual skills are good" or "automation would have saved me", or any combination between the two levels of manual vs automation.
The fact is that we all fly electric jets these days. With automation, a higher average level of safety has been achieved. However, the disclaimer of "if you are ever unsure of what the automation is doing then you MUST revert to manual flight" is never more applicable than now.
For example, was it automation that caused the SFO crash, or manual flight? I propose that it was both. Manual flight with autothrottle. How many 777 pilots out there know that if you are in FLCH or TOGA with HOLD annunciated then you won't get Autothrottle wakeup below MMS? (Check your FCOM 1). What if these guys were in these modes, were concentrating on the profile and relying on autothrottle to control speed. But it wasn't. The rest is history.
My point is that sh.t can happen when using any system of reliance. It behoves any modern pilot to keep up a good scan under all circumstances. NEVER put full reliance on any system of automation. This increases piloting proficiency, and makes manoeuvres such as a visual approach a doddle.
The fact is that we all fly electric jets these days. With automation, a higher average level of safety has been achieved. However, the disclaimer of "if you are ever unsure of what the automation is doing then you MUST revert to manual flight" is never more applicable than now.
For example, was it automation that caused the SFO crash, or manual flight? I propose that it was both. Manual flight with autothrottle. How many 777 pilots out there know that if you are in FLCH or TOGA with HOLD annunciated then you won't get Autothrottle wakeup below MMS? (Check your FCOM 1). What if these guys were in these modes, were concentrating on the profile and relying on autothrottle to control speed. But it wasn't. The rest is history.
My point is that sh.t can happen when using any system of reliance. It behoves any modern pilot to keep up a good scan under all circumstances. NEVER put full reliance on any system of automation. This increases piloting proficiency, and makes manoeuvres such as a visual approach a doddle.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's what I think is part of the problem today: Pilots should not graduate from flight school and go directly into the cruise pilot roll of a large passenger jet.
They should first be exposed to the right seat of a smaller flight deck appropriate to their skill level until they acquire the requisite skill to move up. Start with a smaller size plane, fly thousands of sectors, and work their way up the ladder. Doing so will allow them to develop appropriate skills that they can fall back on when exposed to larger aircraft where they just don't get the opportunity as inexperienced pilots to flex their newly acquired wings. This is time proven and, incidentally, what is expected in every other field of endeavor. It's only common sense.
We all know why airline management has chosen the current path and it has little or nothing to do with the more prudent approach to developing a solid and well rounded pilot.
The idea of the "multi crew license" is a case in point. No other profession is actively involved in this downward cycle of diluting the exposure and training of those who chose to enter their field. No amount of simulator exposure will do to the sphincter what real flying can.
They should first be exposed to the right seat of a smaller flight deck appropriate to their skill level until they acquire the requisite skill to move up. Start with a smaller size plane, fly thousands of sectors, and work their way up the ladder. Doing so will allow them to develop appropriate skills that they can fall back on when exposed to larger aircraft where they just don't get the opportunity as inexperienced pilots to flex their newly acquired wings. This is time proven and, incidentally, what is expected in every other field of endeavor. It's only common sense.
We all know why airline management has chosen the current path and it has little or nothing to do with the more prudent approach to developing a solid and well rounded pilot.
The idea of the "multi crew license" is a case in point. No other profession is actively involved in this downward cycle of diluting the exposure and training of those who chose to enter their field. No amount of simulator exposure will do to the sphincter what real flying can.
Last edited by raven11; 15th Jul 2013 at 09:21.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't get that arguement. Why is OK to be inexperienced in charge of a 19 seat aircraft, but not 300? Any such cut-off is going to be arbitary, whether it is 300 hours or 1500 hours
No evidence (I believe) that airlines with ab-initio programmes are less safe than airlines that only recruit pilots with x thousand hours elsewhere.
No evidence (I believe) that airlines with ab-initio programmes are less safe than airlines that only recruit pilots with x thousand hours elsewhere.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why the bashing of cadet pilots when the guy at the controls of flight 214 had 10,000 hours 
Show me one cadet pilot at CX that is now a Captain that doesn't deserve to be in the left seat. The system works! Yes the training culture at CX needs a complete overhaul, I agree, but it's been proven over and over that with training and experience a cadet will be just as proficient and competent as someone who has come from a smaller airline or the military.
There is a reason why there was a need for high level automation in the first place. Because of the monumental f^%k ups caused by highly experienced crews in the early years of jet aviation. No one is immune, have a look at the biggest blunders at CX. Majority were by senior check and training Captains.
So I don't believe this baloney about being magically gifted because you flew Dash-8s, F-18s, Caribous, etc....decades ago. Nor do I think that disconnecting the autopilot at TD and flying the FDs to a landing does much to your manual flying skills.
Flying self guided visual approaches from different directions with everything turned off to build up the all important visual cues is a start. But I am afraid in the world of commercial aviation it is not very realistic.
Show me one cadet pilot at CX that is now a Captain that doesn't deserve to be in the left seat. The system works! Yes the training culture at CX needs a complete overhaul, I agree, but it's been proven over and over that with training and experience a cadet will be just as proficient and competent as someone who has come from a smaller airline or the military.
There is a reason why there was a need for high level automation in the first place. Because of the monumental f^%k ups caused by highly experienced crews in the early years of jet aviation. No one is immune, have a look at the biggest blunders at CX. Majority were by senior check and training Captains.
So I don't believe this baloney about being magically gifted because you flew Dash-8s, F-18s, Caribous, etc....decades ago. Nor do I think that disconnecting the autopilot at TD and flying the FDs to a landing does much to your manual flying skills.
Flying self guided visual approaches from different directions with everything turned off to build up the all important visual cues is a start. But I am afraid in the world of commercial aviation it is not very realistic.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Show me one cadet pilot at CX that is now a Captain that doesn't deserve to be in the left seat
Flying self guided visual approaches from different directions with everything turned off to build up the all important visual cues is a start. But I am afraid in the world of commercial aviation it is not very realistic.