Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Fragrant Harbour
Reload this Page >

RA and S/O did nothing?

Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

RA and S/O did nothing?

Old 26th Oct 2014, 08:02
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Out there
Posts: 291
SOPS

I don't think it would be much better with any airline!
Baywatcher is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 11:37
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 296
Breaking news: To be issued to all cx RQed pilots ($8.5 to be deducted from November salary)

Problem solved!


Last edited by wheels up; 27th Oct 2014 at 16:48.
wheels up is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 12:31
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 176
just perhaps. Should we not have a say in recruiting. That is pilots. At some stage a pilot should interview and assess the skills of new recruits. What is happening at the moment? Computer filtration, name, sex, nationality. Then a Human Resources person filtrating, followed by an ex sim instructor deciding not the skills but whether the candidate can perhaps be trained. You get what you aim for.
The FUB is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 14:04
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Lots of Different Places
Posts: 28
"That CX didn't terminate the individual involved is tacit admittance of a systemic failure".

CX has taken Military pilots, turbine captains or jet F/O's, and putting them though 10+ years of flying experience, training and checking.
And still they are failing their commands at rates above 50%.

This is blatant evidence of systematic failure within the training departments.
bridgeport is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 15:27
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Dark Side
Posts: 3
Perfect storm

Pardon the intrusion, but take a long, hard look at Engineering to see how much further along we are, as an organisation that places no value on knowledge and experience. The parallels with FOPS are there, as is the risk.

With an increasing reliance on engineering trainees, the breadth of engineering knowledge is diminishing at an unprecedented rate. We celebrate promotions and graduations by announcing what degree someone has, yet there is not even the blink of an eye, as one after the other, we lose engineers with many years of real world experience.

Experience and knowledge that will never be replaced.

Of course new talent is essential. But rather than build and develop a cosmopolitan team, we are developing a trainee-based department built down to a cost. And for developing, read 'at breakneck speed'. Add in the cultural shift, where debate is now dissent and challenging decisions marks you out as a troublemaker and we heading into very dangerous waters. As an organisation we are breeding compliance and I'm not talking about the regulatory kind.

As a senior manager said to me rather quietly recently 'There are very few people who really know wtf is going on anymore'.

Haddon-Cave? Don't make me laugh.

To borrow from an earlier post:
"The tragedy is we will be all standing around a smoking hole, peering in, management will be asking "How the hell did this happen?" while the line pilots [read: engineers] will all be saying "We told you so."

We have a perfect storm in the making.
rumncoke is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 17:26
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 296
"An engineer is a professional practitioner of engineering, concerned with applying scientific knowledge, mathematics, and ingenuity to develop solutions for technical, societal and commercial problems. Engineers design materials, structures, and systems while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety, and cost. The word engineer is derived from the Latin roots ingeniare ("to contrive, devise") and ingenium ("cleverness")."
wheels up is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 17:31
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Down South
Posts: 87
He meant "mechanic," a person who repairs and maintains machinery (airplanes) rather than "engineer."
ColonelAngus is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 22:56
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 514
Wheels Up

Have a bit of respect, you want it, give it to others.

ColonelAngus

You should know the difference in "our world" between Engineer and Mechanic!
iceman50 is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2014, 23:23
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the hold
Posts: 182
Iceman, i'll call my girlfriend, a qualified nurse, from now on "Doctor". To show some respect for her medical qualifications.
ByAirMail is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 00:10
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Down South
Posts: 87
Iceman, how is defining "engineer" disrespectful?

Down south in ColonelAngus land, a guy or a gal who works on airplanes is an A&P mechanic and his certificate states "Mechanic: Airframe Powerplant."

Engineers are electrical, mechanical, chemical, civil, environmental, aerospace, etc.

Those who are not in the know can be confused when an airframe mechanic in Hong Kong calls himself an engineer.
ColonelAngus is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 00:48
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 176
Well, we call SOs pilots, out of respect for their qualifications and training.
The FUB is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 01:51
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: nfa
Posts: 122
or maybe it's the uniform.


There used to be steps along the way. Private, Bush, Courier, Regional, Major Airline. An insider would associate an experience with a given level. Now we have "I'm a 777 pilot" and it means nothing.
bm330 is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 08:51
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: U.K.
Age: 71
Posts: 215
What's in a name?

ColonelAngus, you are correct, of course, by the same token iceman50 has a point.

One has to tread carefully in some parts of the world.

In South America, for example, there is quite a distinction between an "Engineer" and a "Mechanic", Use the wrong term and one might cause offence.

Similarly, in some parts of South America, they do not have "Captains" and "First Officers", they have "Pilots" and "Co-pilots". Using the wrong term in this instance doesn't tend to cause offence, only confusion.

Fortunately, I never came across a "Flight Engineer" during my visits to South America. That would have been really confusing.
FERetd is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 14:23
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: HK
Age: 45
Posts: 168
I spoke with a close friend of the SO involved and was told it was a TA not an RA. He did exactly what he was supposed to do.
bigbeerbelly is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 16:58
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 296
Wheels Up

Have a bit of respect, you want it, give it to others.
huh? - you don't get it, do you. Completely off topic I realise, but I have huge respect for proficient, qualified mechanics - but they are not engineers, by definition, or by qualification.

In the same way I have huge respect for nurses, but they cannot claim to be doctors...
wheels up is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 16:59
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 774
Beer Belly - even without your input, whether it be a joke or not, I always knew this was a bit of a fairy-tale. But of course, why let facts get in the way of a great CX BS story - and an opportunity to poopoo over the cadets again.

A quick look at OPS-A would tell you when an SO can be in the seat. And given that the other pilot would not be stupid enough (hopefully) to go for a toilet break until top of climb, then when did this supposedly non-actioned RA happen? During the cruise? If it happened up at FL370 (where sodall happens 99.9 percent of the time) don't you think we would have heard about it by now? and not via PPRuNe!

Lets get something straight. As well as operating LH flights as a CN/FO, a lot of us also commute on flights where an SO is present. We also send our loved ones on those flights too. Those flights are sometimes crewed with Two SOs! Now IF you are this concerned, then this isn't just a case of a Payrise, Contract Compliance, or 49 Pilots being sacked. We are talking about lives here. Where are the AOA motions to say NO to zero-timers? Why aren't there pilots outside CX City refusing to fly with zero-timers? Why aren't we going straight to strike action at what are supposedly unsafe practices?

Who cares what CX's retaliation towards us would be? Sacking, docking pay etc. We are talking about lives here. Therefore who even needs an AOA motion. Just turn up at CX city with a protest board and refuse to work if rostered with an SO. Who's going to do that?

Nah....Didn't think so.

Thanks for the gym work-out once again boys. Always nice to be a part of a fist-thumping chest-beating BS exercise.
betpump5 is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2014, 22:59
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 514
Wheels UP

What a well balanced person a chip on both shoulders.

You should know in our profession that there is a big difference between the "Mechanics" who help maintain our aircraft and who complete the pushback and the "Engineer' who signs the Tech Log for the work completed. Understand the terminology used in various "professions" and "countries" ( just for ColonelAngus, down south is NOT the world).

From the Oxford English Dictionary

a. Originally: a person who designs or builds engines or other machinery. Subsequently more generally: a person who uses specialized knowledge or skills to design, build, and maintain complicated equipment, systems, processes, etc.; an expert in or student of engineering. Freq. with distinguishing word.
From the later 18th cent. onwards mainly with reference to mechanical, chemical, electrical, and similar processes; later (chiefly with distinguishing word) also with reference to biological or technological systems.

chemical, electrical, genetic, mechanical, software, systems engineer, etc.: see the first element.

In this sense (but not in sense 3) the term may be applied to a person who operates and repairs equipment as well as to one responsible for its design and management.
iceman50 is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2014, 07:41
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Down South
Posts: 87
iceman, it's a stretch to compare one who operates and repairs to one who designs.

And, ask anyone who knows ColonelAngus. Down south is EVERYTHING!
ColonelAngus is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2014, 06:57
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK- A little bit of industrial China in every breath you take.
Posts: 518
I am pretty sure that their license says "licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer" so that is what they have every right to be called. What does your license say?

Back on topic please.

Betpump, a sad state of affairs when a non manager suggests that if we arent prepared to sacrifice our career over it, and our chosen lively hood, then it must be fine and dandy. Thanks for the historical glimpse at the industrial dark ages. Lets pray that mentality never pervades the industry. It exists as you have proven, but fortunately there are other ways to see improvements in something that is obviously wrong, and bordering on dangerous in this industry. Lets explore those avenues before we all throw our toys out of the cot and picketing out the front of swires head office as you suggest being the appropriate way forward. If you think someone with 80 hours total time is no issue, how low will you go? 40? 20? When does it become an issue?
Lowkoon is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2014, 15:57
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: England
Posts: 8
RA and S/O did nothing?

As a lowly rated 90 hour pilot studying for ATPL exams I think it's truly astonishing that the S/O sat there and simply ignored the RA. Comprehensive retraining is required at the least and I would suggest dismissal.

Surely it's simple enough to disengage the AP and respond to the instructions given. Most of the time they are shouted at you! Make manoeuvre, ensure threat is eliminated then get on the blower to atc to let them know what's going on. Final step is to apologise to the now very angry captain who has pissed on his trousers due to the RA and explain what you did and why.

Is that somewhere near correct?

I feel that most of this is being exasperated by MPL schemes and the bank of mum and dad paying for such courses.
Piper1987 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.