"You gotta be kidding me" - Dragon Air Pilot
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: KRui
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess this is a place for discussion and there's freedom of speech here...that's why some of u guys are enjoying joking and even playing drama here, and it's no big deal indeed.
But no matter what expectation the KA had..be it high speed and straight in, or delay and holding ( I bet no one really wants this including those who issue the clearance), saying such a comment on freq. was just unbelievable! ... from a professional?!
And, the lower one is usually number one in sequence?? Where does this concept come from? No wonder why the formula doesn't work...
Having a look, both OZ and KA checked in HK at the same time and the required spacing was achieved by only speed control, without any vector -- this created the LEAST workload for OVERALL traffic as well as to ATC...really, no kidding.
But no matter what expectation the KA had..be it high speed and straight in, or delay and holding ( I bet no one really wants this including those who issue the clearance), saying such a comment on freq. was just unbelievable! ... from a professional?!
And, the lower one is usually number one in sequence?? Where does this concept come from? No wonder why the formula doesn't work...
Having a look, both OZ and KA checked in HK at the same time and the required spacing was achieved by only speed control, without any vector -- this created the LEAST workload for OVERALL traffic as well as to ATC...really, no kidding.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: MOON
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well sorry Dan,
But I'm sick of all this whinging.
We make things too hard.
Just go fly
Don't create stupid CX procedures, don't whine to ATC,
Don't narc on other guys.
When I arrived it was the long sleeved Brits
I was warned about. Years on, they were the best
guys. Just did the job.
That's beyond the ex Ansett lot, and other rule based Aussies that have
turned up in HK
But I'm sick of all this whinging.
We make things too hard.
Just go fly
Don't create stupid CX procedures, don't whine to ATC,
Don't narc on other guys.
When I arrived it was the long sleeved Brits
I was warned about. Years on, they were the best
guys. Just did the job.
That's beyond the ex Ansett lot, and other rule based Aussies that have
turned up in HK
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kowloon
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Synchrinise..
It was a tragic accident and there but for the grace of God ....
Whilst I am not a god in the stick and rudder department, I will forever make fun of those "pilots" who could not fly a visual approach, in a serviceable aircraft on a fine day.
Well - let's all listen to the tiger. Sensible, level headed person.
( By the way, my phone call was OBVIOUSLY to HKG and not to China.)
( By the way, my phone call was OBVIOUSLY to HKG and not to China.)
Last edited by Arfur Dent; 21st Jun 2014 at 23:25.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
works terminal sectors
had happened to be sitting next to the controller involved and overheard the initial verbal exchanges.
what really surprised me was that after an ATC instruction was issued to the pilot involved, there was definitely no readback of the clearance, and instead, a snide (or careless) remark was made on a frequency that was monitored by aircraft from at least three other airlines...not to mention there were a few other dragonairs in the air at that time.
i can definitely understand the need for pilots to verify an illogical clearance sometimes issued by ATC , for example a turn in the wrong direction (for i have been guilty of a few times myself...not very proudly). but to openly challenge an instruction that is so plainly part of a sequencing plan that was already in motion when both aircraft initially checked-in, just really highlights the unprofessionalism involved that day.
what i would like to understand is that, would the initial descent clearance to FL300 given to the dragon have been misconstrued as a clue to it being sequenced first? that may have explained his utter disbelief when he subsequently received a speed reduction? (we are all imperfect and we are all just trying to be better at what we do)
Secondly, what is the general take among pilots regarding such remarks on the frequency shared by many other airlines? would a silent controller after the remarks imply to other pilots that it is ok for them to make similar remarks to ATC in the future if the circumstances allow them to? and what if ATC were to make similar remarks to pilots instead, for example, "you really need to go back to school for that readback" or "captain, do you even have a map?'
i work all sectors of terminal, and believe me, i would very much love it if pilots were to call up after landing to verify or enquire why i did what i did. i will even enjoy it more if we can do it over a beer and a barbe
ta
what really surprised me was that after an ATC instruction was issued to the pilot involved, there was definitely no readback of the clearance, and instead, a snide (or careless) remark was made on a frequency that was monitored by aircraft from at least three other airlines...not to mention there were a few other dragonairs in the air at that time.
i can definitely understand the need for pilots to verify an illogical clearance sometimes issued by ATC , for example a turn in the wrong direction (for i have been guilty of a few times myself...not very proudly). but to openly challenge an instruction that is so plainly part of a sequencing plan that was already in motion when both aircraft initially checked-in, just really highlights the unprofessionalism involved that day.
what i would like to understand is that, would the initial descent clearance to FL300 given to the dragon have been misconstrued as a clue to it being sequenced first? that may have explained his utter disbelief when he subsequently received a speed reduction? (we are all imperfect and we are all just trying to be better at what we do)
Secondly, what is the general take among pilots regarding such remarks on the frequency shared by many other airlines? would a silent controller after the remarks imply to other pilots that it is ok for them to make similar remarks to ATC in the future if the circumstances allow them to? and what if ATC were to make similar remarks to pilots instead, for example, "you really need to go back to school for that readback" or "captain, do you even have a map?'
i work all sectors of terminal, and believe me, i would very much love it if pilots were to call up after landing to verify or enquire why i did what i did. i will even enjoy it more if we can do it over a beer and a barbe
ta
I totally agree with the Dragonair pilot's comment! Surprised ATC didn't say descend to FL230 within ten miles and reduce speed to 250 kts.
But it's usually not ATC's fault, it's some folks not doing as they're asked.
Boeings might be slightly faster but there are three airlines in particular who routinely fly in from Dotmi at 230-250kts on descent, even when asked to maintain high speed. So invariably you end up doing 'S' turns behind them because dopey in front isn't comfortable flying at normal profile speeds.
Come the revolution, when I'm appointed head of HKG ATC I'm going to make a little area where I send those slow-pokes to linger at 250 kts while the those capable of operating normally zip on in with priority.
Then I'll make 'em do visual approaches.
Then I'll laugh as the second slow poke has to go around because the first guy has come to a full stop whilst trying to call Ground frequency, with his tail still protruding back into the runway.
Sorry, long day at the office.
But it's usually not ATC's fault, it's some folks not doing as they're asked.
Boeings might be slightly faster but there are three airlines in particular who routinely fly in from Dotmi at 230-250kts on descent, even when asked to maintain high speed. So invariably you end up doing 'S' turns behind them because dopey in front isn't comfortable flying at normal profile speeds.
Come the revolution, when I'm appointed head of HKG ATC I'm going to make a little area where I send those slow-pokes to linger at 250 kts while the those capable of operating normally zip on in with priority.
Then I'll make 'em do visual approaches.
Then I'll laugh as the second slow poke has to go around because the first guy has come to a full stop whilst trying to call Ground frequency, with his tail still protruding back into the runway.
Sorry, long day at the office.
Hi bhead,
On the face of it, I agree, it looks like rather an unprofessional outburst.
A very professional way to deal with it would have been to have the crew call ATC on arrival. I've done this a number of times over the years when ATC have erred, had a chat to a supervisor and asked them if they want any paperwork, which they seem to want to invariably avoid. Now, I'm all for a Utopian reporting culture, but sometimes I believe a reporting culture is enhanced when parties can sort out minor issues themselves without resorting to a dobbing culture. This just sees everyone on edge.
I had an incident myself once, called ATC, had a chat and told them what had happened and thankfully they didn't want any paperwork either. It was so minor but I wasn't in the mood to be lambasted by our Monday morning quarterbacks who can be rather disengaged from the realities of line flying.
Most Dragonair pilots should be able to execute a high speed descent that should extend the separation. Perhaps being a local carrier it could be procedural? It is very frustrating being put as number two to an aircraft you know will slow up early because they either can't fly jets very well or get paid by the minute! Just the other day I offered to maintain 340kts until 5 miles from River and this seemed to clear the separation issues quite convincingly.
So yep, I think we'd all rather deal with each other on minor issues over the phone. It's all so cordial and I think builds a better environment. Dragonair seems to sack a lot of pilots and something like this can be blown way out of all proportions. I'm not an apologist for this outburst, I just know there are better ways of dealing with this than what you've indicated.
On the face of it, I agree, it looks like rather an unprofessional outburst.
A very professional way to deal with it would have been to have the crew call ATC on arrival. I've done this a number of times over the years when ATC have erred, had a chat to a supervisor and asked them if they want any paperwork, which they seem to want to invariably avoid. Now, I'm all for a Utopian reporting culture, but sometimes I believe a reporting culture is enhanced when parties can sort out minor issues themselves without resorting to a dobbing culture. This just sees everyone on edge.
I had an incident myself once, called ATC, had a chat and told them what had happened and thankfully they didn't want any paperwork either. It was so minor but I wasn't in the mood to be lambasted by our Monday morning quarterbacks who can be rather disengaged from the realities of line flying.
Most Dragonair pilots should be able to execute a high speed descent that should extend the separation. Perhaps being a local carrier it could be procedural? It is very frustrating being put as number two to an aircraft you know will slow up early because they either can't fly jets very well or get paid by the minute! Just the other day I offered to maintain 340kts until 5 miles from River and this seemed to clear the separation issues quite convincingly.
So yep, I think we'd all rather deal with each other on minor issues over the phone. It's all so cordial and I think builds a better environment. Dragonair seems to sack a lot of pilots and something like this can be blown way out of all proportions. I'm not an apologist for this outburst, I just know there are better ways of dealing with this than what you've indicated.
You sent us an exchange chief pilot pilot once and he said stuff like that all the time. I thought he was joking and I admired his comedy routine. 
I sit in a 5 mile trail behind you guys within 30 miles of the airport and you are 5000' lower on TCAS. What are you doing down there? We get hammered on fuel efficiencies so what's with your SOP of being thousands of feet below profile?
I sit in a 5 mile trail behind you guys within 30 miles of the airport and you are 5000' lower on TCAS. What are you doing down there? We get hammered on fuel efficiencies so what's with your SOP of being thousands of feet below profile?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
for f**ksakes, we are not professionals 
the professionals retired long ago
we are simply whinny, spoilt brats, that are God's gift to aviation with a great sense of entitlement, so get use to it
the professionals retired long ago
we are simply whinny, spoilt brats, that are God's gift to aviation with a great sense of entitlement, so get use to it
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: hongkers
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gnad
Go Easy on the CX boys. You probably did more take offs and landings in the last year than many of the Long Haulers will do in their career with CX. When you are not as current you have to be conservative. You don't want to mess up the one landing you get this month.
Whilst I don't condone the KA pilots comments I can appreciate it. China is one hell of a frustrating place to fly in, so you kind of hope for good treatment back at your home port. This last week has seen China slip back to it's massive delays best. The closest I have come to being on time this week is 1 1/2 hours late. It's mostly weather related, but honestly the weather is not that bad. A few lines of CBs. The US and Europe would have minimal delays for the same weather.
ATC in China could really benefit from having exchanges overseas to see how real ATC is done. Being forced to leave your nice comfortably cruising altitude at 2500 ft/min to sit in the clouds at 18000 ft still 300nm from your destination does get a bit tiring. As far as I can see the only reason is because there is no coordination between sectors.
The thing is, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. So you can either get all steamed up or lie back and think of England. It just depends on your personality.
Whilst I don't condone the KA pilots comments I can appreciate it. China is one hell of a frustrating place to fly in, so you kind of hope for good treatment back at your home port. This last week has seen China slip back to it's massive delays best. The closest I have come to being on time this week is 1 1/2 hours late. It's mostly weather related, but honestly the weather is not that bad. A few lines of CBs. The US and Europe would have minimal delays for the same weather.
ATC in China could really benefit from having exchanges overseas to see how real ATC is done. Being forced to leave your nice comfortably cruising altitude at 2500 ft/min to sit in the clouds at 18000 ft still 300nm from your destination does get a bit tiring. As far as I can see the only reason is because there is no coordination between sectors.
The thing is, there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. So you can either get all steamed up or lie back and think of England. It just depends on your personality.
FWIW :
It doesn't help to think about overtime whilst being delayed in China as most airlines pay o/t on stick hours, so 2 hours delay amounts to diddly squat financially.
As for the higher aircraft having a better TAS (assuming not a great difference in VMO/MMO) then I guess it's back to school for me, here I thought that most jets best TAS is around FL280
It doesn't help to think about overtime whilst being delayed in China as most airlines pay o/t on stick hours, so 2 hours delay amounts to diddly squat financially.
As for the higher aircraft having a better TAS (assuming not a great difference in VMO/MMO) then I guess it's back to school for me, here I thought that most jets best TAS is around FL280
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: World
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
giggerty, although as Cx pilots we have many shortcomings, I can assure you that descending below anything other than a Vnav profile is not one of them. Just like you, in Hk we go down when told and not second earlier, not sure where you get you're sh-t from.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Chards, there's more than one way to 'go down' and not all of them involve getting to your lower level asap. Nobody here said flying in China was difficult. It's been said it's f&^(ing frustrating. There's a big difference.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: hongkers
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Chards.
Didn't mean to offend. Was really just having a dig at molakai for the dumb comment. I have absolutely no doubt that CX crew are as professional as KA.
I have flown with several carriers and KA is probably the toughest standards wise. Talking to CX drivers I'm sure it's the same there. I really don't believe there is a great deal of difference, even if you don't do the sectors we do.
Didn't mean to offend. Was really just having a dig at molakai for the dumb comment. I have absolutely no doubt that CX crew are as professional as KA.
I have flown with several carriers and KA is probably the toughest standards wise. Talking to CX drivers I'm sure it's the same there. I really don't believe there is a great deal of difference, even if you don't do the sectors we do.
Sort your own side out. What's with the weirdness and chip in the banter?
Moving on…. A phone call would be better in sorting issues like this out and a procedural high speed descent would be helpful too for KA. Especially the 320.
Also, it wouldn't hurt be if controllers were aware of descent profiles and the fact that many airlines seem to be guilty of descending well below profile and configuring early for whatever reason including the blind following of an FMGC profile. TAS differentials can exacerbate separation- it's not uncommon to be in trail with aircraft 5000ft + lower and I've seen one carrier whose name I won't mention ( due banter sensitivities ) being right at the lower extreme of TCAS criterion.
Moving on…. A phone call would be better in sorting issues like this out and a procedural high speed descent would be helpful too for KA. Especially the 320.
Also, it wouldn't hurt be if controllers were aware of descent profiles and the fact that many airlines seem to be guilty of descending well below profile and configuring early for whatever reason including the blind following of an FMGC profile. TAS differentials can exacerbate separation- it's not uncommon to be in trail with aircraft 5000ft + lower and I've seen one carrier whose name I won't mention ( due banter sensitivities ) being right at the lower extreme of TCAS criterion.