CX256 Diversion to UAAA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Here ---> X
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX256 Diversion to UAAA
Yesterday's 256 (3 man crew) diverted to Almaty apparently due to a tragic medical issue with one of the pax.
Rumour is that the Skip elected to use full discretion (to within seconds) to make it back to HK...
Now, before we pick up the pitchforks and torches, any truth to this?
Rumour is that the Skip elected to use full discretion (to within seconds) to make it back to HK...
Now, before we pick up the pitchforks and torches, any truth to this?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Tracker:
16 Apr 2016
CX256 scheduled dept 1910z (actual 1925z)
Via ALA
17 Apr 2016
CX256 arrival HKG (1833 HKT) 1033z.
Not sure how accurate the data is, and what it means. But quite possibly under the circumstances we would all have done the same thing.
It is the company, and not the Captain who is to blame for making our job that much harder.
There are rules which are being skimmed for profit... Expectations that crew will go the extra mile in abnormal circumstances because that is what we do. It is an admirable quality, and it is being exploited by our management, when they know that we are already pushing up against limits. They are willing, all for the cost of a Second Officer, to put passengers and crew into tighter situations and increase risks for nothing more than a tiny reward which would be less than the cost of a few dollars per ticket (if that).
This situation has happened twice now within the trial. It is clearly indicative of how much extra the tiny expense of a Second Officer greatly increases the benefit for everyone.
16 Apr 2016
CX256 scheduled dept 1910z (actual 1925z)
Via ALA
17 Apr 2016
CX256 arrival HKG (1833 HKT) 1033z.
Not sure how accurate the data is, and what it means. But quite possibly under the circumstances we would all have done the same thing.
It is the company, and not the Captain who is to blame for making our job that much harder.
There are rules which are being skimmed for profit... Expectations that crew will go the extra mile in abnormal circumstances because that is what we do. It is an admirable quality, and it is being exploited by our management, when they know that we are already pushing up against limits. They are willing, all for the cost of a Second Officer, to put passengers and crew into tighter situations and increase risks for nothing more than a tiny reward which would be less than the cost of a few dollars per ticket (if that).
This situation has happened twice now within the trial. It is clearly indicative of how much extra the tiny expense of a Second Officer greatly increases the benefit for everyone.
Last edited by anotherbusdriver; 18th Apr 2016 at 06:00.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Here ---> X
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But quite possibly under the circumstances we would all have done the same thing.
There is a reason for CC:
We don't
go the extra mile in abnormal circumstances
it is being exploited by our management, when they know that we are already pushing up against limits
The message sent here is that CC is effectively not in force and that the company can easily get away with having imposed 3-man to Europe (the reason we are in CC in the first place) as they will now simply expect us to work 16 1/2 hour - 2 sector days with virtually no rest and much less of a squeak.
How would you like to be the burnt-out relief on a day like that?
And the more our own colleagues 'decide' that it is ok and perfectly safe to push the boundaries of human physiology with 300 unsuspecting pax in the back, the more the bonus-collectors will expect us to do so.
It is almost like we are deviating from normal, safe procedures by making these more hazardous conditions seem normal...
I think there's a term for that. It's on the tip of my tongue...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Asia
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
slam_click,
Can't wait to start hearing the excuses why "this time was different," why it was so important for them to get back to HK, how we weren't there so we don't know... blah blah blah.
I guess we should propose a motion for the aircrew to start using common sense to stop undermining the collective efforts of the AOA? Is that what you are suggesting?
Do you really feel that CX pilots need to be spoon fed every last rule regarding what they can or can't do to help out the cause? Or maybe they can use some common sense and suck it up and realize that CC is going to cause some inconveniences for everyone. That's life and that's what the company has forced us into doing.
But please, I'm looking forward to hearing their special case, and why this was appropriate.
Can't wait to start hearing the excuses why "this time was different," why it was so important for them to get back to HK, how we weren't there so we don't know... blah blah blah.
I guess we should propose a motion for the aircrew to start using common sense to stop undermining the collective efforts of the AOA? Is that what you are suggesting?
Do you really feel that CX pilots need to be spoon fed every last rule regarding what they can or can't do to help out the cause? Or maybe they can use some common sense and suck it up and realize that CC is going to cause some inconveniences for everyone. That's life and that's what the company has forced us into doing.
But please, I'm looking forward to hearing their special case, and why this was appropriate.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
slam_click,
Can't wait to start hearing the excuses why "this time was different," why it was so important for them to get back to HK, how we weren't there so we don't know... blah blah blah.
I guess we should propose a motion for the aircrew to start using common sense to stop undermining the collective efforts of the AOA? Is that what you are suggesting?
Do you really feel that CX pilots need to be spoon fed every last rule regarding what they can or can't do to help out the cause? Or maybe they can use some common sense and suck it up and realize that CC is going to cause some inconveniences for everyone. That's life and that's what the company has forced us into doing.
But please, I'm looking forward to hearing their special case, and why this was appropriate.
Can't wait to start hearing the excuses why "this time was different," why it was so important for them to get back to HK, how we weren't there so we don't know... blah blah blah.
I guess we should propose a motion for the aircrew to start using common sense to stop undermining the collective efforts of the AOA? Is that what you are suggesting?
Do you really feel that CX pilots need to be spoon fed every last rule regarding what they can or can't do to help out the cause? Or maybe they can use some common sense and suck it up and realize that CC is going to cause some inconveniences for everyone. That's life and that's what the company has forced us into doing.
But please, I'm looking forward to hearing their special case, and why this was appropriate.
Yes spend the night and trying to arrange plans for 300+ pax in UAAA with a dead baby on board because of cc which only stated we should not use cdr pre departure and cc should not affect the overall operational decisions once the show is on the road.... Real fking common sense there sweep the leg. I am sure if they were all phsiologically burnt alrdy they might decide otherwise. But if they have a plan at hand for a safe op back to hkg why the hell not?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Asia
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah even better, cyrex, land, keep the dead baby on board and keep going. Yeah, f*cking genius. Why didn't I think of that.
I'm sure the tech crew would have had to single handedly arrange accommodation for all the pax as well, you drama queen. Give it a rest.
Instead, let's go ahead, break the FTL limits either out of stupidity or ignorance and give yourself a pat on the back for completely undermining the rest of the AOA. "Gotta keep the show on the road" at all costs, well done, bravo.
I'm sure the tech crew would have had to single handedly arrange accommodation for all the pax as well, you drama queen. Give it a rest.
Instead, let's go ahead, break the FTL limits either out of stupidity or ignorance and give yourself a pat on the back for completely undermining the rest of the AOA. "Gotta keep the show on the road" at all costs, well done, bravo.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: somewhere
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What an absolute joke.
I can see it now too in the next fleet newsletter:
Dear Gus, I thought I'd never have to write to you, but now I have... The Saga of CX256...
...
And I'd like to end it by thanking my cockpit crew who were invaluable, the cabin crew, the ground staff, IOC, and the terrific people of Almaty... couldn't have done it without you...
It's like a warped, sick version of an Oscars acceptance speech.
Pathetic.
I can see it now too in the next fleet newsletter:
Dear Gus, I thought I'd never have to write to you, but now I have... The Saga of CX256...
...
And I'd like to end it by thanking my cockpit crew who were invaluable, the cabin crew, the ground staff, IOC, and the terrific people of Almaty... couldn't have done it without you...
It's like a warped, sick version of an Oscars acceptance speech.
Pathetic.
Please guys - Almaty is not some CTAF in the Australian Bush or in the Canadian Arctic; it is a major airport with several Western airlines on site.
Things can get done (and obviously did) as long as IOC pays the bills.
Things can get done (and obviously did) as long as IOC pays the bills.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Helping out on the 3rd floor
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey cyrex, what other rules would you break to keep "the show on the road" as you put it? I see your in the UK... enjoy your 3-man life sentence with your crap reasoning.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I unhappy that a 3-man crew extended to the absolute limits of FTL ? Yes. Ultimately, I am having a hard time focusing on this, in light of the fact that some poor woman had her dead child in her lap..... Sometimes context is important. And sometimes there are bigger problems in the world than our own. Right now I am terribly sad for the 'real' tragedy here, not the one we are concocting. I think the evidence to the company is that they have got lucky with two events, and the online outrage that has followed at least lets everyone know (management and other pilots) just how deeply we feel about this issue. Maybe say a small prayer for the mother...
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong K ong
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Continue- but why to VHHH FFS
A prayer for sure..
While u at it prey for 300 + pax & families
Etc that will one summer be at mercy of chronic fatigue..,
Divert in Beijing or BKK or whatever to get out of UAAA to a online port..
But HK, come on man... What the hell is the point you trying to prove putting everyone at risk. Total suppidy even out of CC this is very narrow minded thinking..
Abit like BT arriving on fumes everywhere he goes..
If it was my airline your such decision would be your second to last you make in such 'heroic' splendour.
While u at it prey for 300 + pax & families
Etc that will one summer be at mercy of chronic fatigue..,
Divert in Beijing or BKK or whatever to get out of UAAA to a online port..
But HK, come on man... What the hell is the point you trying to prove putting everyone at risk. Total suppidy even out of CC this is very narrow minded thinking..
Abit like BT arriving on fumes everywhere he goes..
If it was my airline your such decision would be your second to last you make in such 'heroic' splendour.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where You Aren't
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since the captain's photo shows 3 bars, maybe the captain is still a captain-on-probation. What would YOU do in this case if YOU were a captain-on-probation, huh?
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: H.K
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are the AFTLS and then you have Commanders discretion to try and get the A/C and pax to destination for cases like this. Under no circumstance are you suppose to exceed the commanders discretion limit especially in this case with 3 man crew. This is the law! Why wouldn't you stop in Zbaa and change crew? If this is a new Capt what would be the outcome if they were on their 3 or bar check during command course?? We all know the answer to that one!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At CX, no good deed goes unpunished.
But hey as you were helping out, unaware of any implications of AFTLs, wanting to get back to go home on days off, blissfully ignorant of the safety of the other crew and pax no doubt the CN will be suitably rewarded.
If the CN had insisted that they would not make HKG then IOC would have put a plan in motion to move the ac forward, somewhere, and have a replacement crew avail.
We are certainly putting passing muppets to operate as CNs now. Acceptable divergence and ignoring some limits, then all limits appears to be common practise.
But hey as you were helping out, unaware of any implications of AFTLs, wanting to get back to go home on days off, blissfully ignorant of the safety of the other crew and pax no doubt the CN will be suitably rewarded.
If the CN had insisted that they would not make HKG then IOC would have put a plan in motion to move the ac forward, somewhere, and have a replacement crew avail.
We are certainly putting passing muppets to operate as CNs now. Acceptable divergence and ignoring some limits, then all limits appears to be common practise.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: hong kong
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew a 3 man 256 sector ONCE !! I will never request another one . I cannot remember being that fatigued on any other trip . I even elected to auto land in good weather as a safety precaution.
What was this. crew thinking?
Add into the is the stress of a diversion, the medical emergency , the tragic loss of a passenger and all the accompanying emotional feelings . The additional paperwork required during the transit and it appears that electing to continue to HKG was a poor choices .
If the decision to extend to the max FTLs was the result of internalized pressure either real or perceived coming from the company ,then we have a serious situation growing.
Giving priority to commercial pressure, over what your common sense is telling you is the safest course of action to take, is deeply troubling . We have seen a number of very similar situations recently where the majority of us have looked at the reported facts . Shook our collective heads and asked the question Why would you do that ? What about safety of the passengers ?
I cannot see how the crew justified the extension with Beijing a very acceptable en route airport where a new crew could have been positioned to take over .
What is also troubling is the fact that there were 3 crew members . did all of them agree to the extension thinking that it was the safest course of action .
Of course the crews decision will never be questioned by the office because it benefited the company in this case BUT had something gone wrong all three would be looking for new jobs
What was this. crew thinking?
Add into the is the stress of a diversion, the medical emergency , the tragic loss of a passenger and all the accompanying emotional feelings . The additional paperwork required during the transit and it appears that electing to continue to HKG was a poor choices .
If the decision to extend to the max FTLs was the result of internalized pressure either real or perceived coming from the company ,then we have a serious situation growing.
Giving priority to commercial pressure, over what your common sense is telling you is the safest course of action to take, is deeply troubling . We have seen a number of very similar situations recently where the majority of us have looked at the reported facts . Shook our collective heads and asked the question Why would you do that ? What about safety of the passengers ?
I cannot see how the crew justified the extension with Beijing a very acceptable en route airport where a new crew could have been positioned to take over .
What is also troubling is the fact that there were 3 crew members . did all of them agree to the extension thinking that it was the safest course of action .
Of course the crews decision will never be questioned by the office because it benefited the company in this case BUT had something gone wrong all three would be looking for new jobs
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
had something gone wrong all three would be looking for new jobs
Negligence is very different from an honest mistake. Hard to claim honest mistake when the Commander's discretion form lays it all out clearly for the investigators.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done Anna! You know the pilot body all too well! You knew that prior to the introduction of 3 crew LRO, we would use safety and fatigue as an excuse to cover the real reason for us not wanting to do it, we're spoiled and lazy! You called our bluff very well as you have a poker face second to none. Deep down of course we were aware that we had been riding the gravy train with these 4 crew long haul flights, and of course we are aware that we are capable of much more than simply 3 crew LRO. 2 sectors 16hrs + FDP...no problem at all. We are after all merely button pushers and we can give you more, so long as you give us an opportunity for us to go through the motions of whinging before you implement a change. I am a proud modern Airline pilot!