KA A320 does unfavorable diversion
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: hong kong
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rodney rule,
"I hope you are not a Captain, because if I was in the back of the sim and you chose to avoid a perfectly suitable airport to go somewhere much further away, just because you had not been there before, you would get a big fat fail."
I am a Captain and TIRE. What has happened to the culture among too many of our 'pilots'? Schadenfreuden, besserwissers unt übermenschen! Ein mal ist kein mal, but...!!
"I hope you are not a Captain, because if I was in the back of the sim and you chose to avoid a perfectly suitable airport to go somewhere much further away, just because you had not been there before, you would get a big fat fail."
I am a Captain and TIRE. What has happened to the culture among too many of our 'pilots'? Schadenfreuden, besserwissers unt übermenschen! Ein mal ist kein mal, but...!!
Last edited by tsimbeit; 1st Sep 2016 at 13:12.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DSOTM
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a difference between making an unsafe decision or a safe decision that may not, taking all other factors in consideration, be the most optimal decision.
Failing a simulator for making a safe decision that isn't the most optimal decision? I don't buy it.
Failing a simulator for making a safe decision that isn't the most optimal decision? I don't buy it.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^exactly. Again, I'm unfamiliar with Hong Kong CAA policy but if it's like the UK then if you fail you, as a candidate, cannot appeal the result of the sim, but you can appeal the conduct of the TRE if you have good cause. The attitude of Rodney rude (interesting prune moniker) leads me to suspect he isn't a TRE at all. And if he is is suspect he is more bullish on the keyboard than he is at work. At least I would hope so.
Manila is not a particularly demanding airport, though it can get quite busy around the time of night he would have arrived. A320 arrivals often get runway 13 which is 1759m long however I'm pretty sure the landing distance calculations would have required the main 06/24 runway which is 3410m.
There are a considerable number of A320s based in or operating to Manila so maintenance for this type wouldn't be a problem like it would be for a B787.
There is plenty of hotel accommodation available in Manila, and it's under two hours from Hong Kong, making recovery a lot easier.
In the circumstances, Manila would have been my preferred choice as a better and closer option. Failures of one system puts extra strain on those remaining and may bring out problems which were quite happily lying dormant whilst the work was being shared around. A subsequent failure of the Yellow hydraulic system would result in a major downgrade as the remaining Blue system is basically an emergency back up. There are numerous pages of procedures and checklists to wade through in this case.
I would need a very good reason to disregard the advice of the chief pilot and not go to Manila in this situation.
There are a considerable number of A320s based in or operating to Manila so maintenance for this type wouldn't be a problem like it would be for a B787.
There is plenty of hotel accommodation available in Manila, and it's under two hours from Hong Kong, making recovery a lot easier.
In the circumstances, Manila would have been my preferred choice as a better and closer option. Failures of one system puts extra strain on those remaining and may bring out problems which were quite happily lying dormant whilst the work was being shared around. A subsequent failure of the Yellow hydraulic system would result in a major downgrade as the remaining Blue system is basically an emergency back up. There are numerous pages of procedures and checklists to wade through in this case.
I would need a very good reason to disregard the advice of the chief pilot and not go to Manila in this situation.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure, Manila was the closest suitable, however it's manila, you will probably be number 15 in queue anyway even if u declare an emergency to the idiot controllers there. The Captain in this scenario made a command decision and carried it out without any further issue or breaking any laws. Hats off to him and Shame on the OP and his racist tirade.
3 Greens - you strongly suspect I am not a TRE. You suspect wrongly - I am a 320 TRE/TRI. Though I do not do it any more.
el commandante - You are absolutely correct in observing a strong arrogance against pilots with less experience. Mate I don't care if he is Asian, Icelandic or a greyhound - I criticise the decision.
Ok, maybe failing the sim was a harsh call. BUT it would be a harsh debrief point. And my emphasis would be on his decision making abilities/processes.
Greens, you say your understanding is the tech fault was not a land asap at an alternate. Therefore isn't it clear that the flight should have continued to HK?????????? YES, the aircraft landed safely - but THAT alone does NOT make it a good decision. A landing in HK would have been just as safe, the pax are where they want to go, the aircraft is at a maintenance base, no extra fuel is burnt etc etc etc.
Don't tell me in one breath that the aircraft was not in an unsafe state and did not need to go to Manilla, and then in the next breath try to tell me that KK was an acceptable decision when that "safe to fly aircraft" could have continued on to HK.
el commandante - You are absolutely correct in observing a strong arrogance against pilots with less experience. Mate I don't care if he is Asian, Icelandic or a greyhound - I criticise the decision.
Ok, maybe failing the sim was a harsh call. BUT it would be a harsh debrief point. And my emphasis would be on his decision making abilities/processes.
Greens, you say your understanding is the tech fault was not a land asap at an alternate. Therefore isn't it clear that the flight should have continued to HK?????????? YES, the aircraft landed safely - but THAT alone does NOT make it a good decision. A landing in HK would have been just as safe, the pax are where they want to go, the aircraft is at a maintenance base, no extra fuel is burnt etc etc etc.
Don't tell me in one breath that the aircraft was not in an unsafe state and did not need to go to Manilla, and then in the next breath try to tell me that KK was an acceptable decision when that "safe to fly aircraft" could have continued on to HK.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, I was under the assumption that this was a Land At The Nearest Suitable Airport item and that was the reason to believe that MNL was the place to go.
Now it appears that perhaps it is not stated to do so.
Obviously I am not an Airbus guy.
Lets skip the discussion on who the captain was and discuss what should be done when this malfunction occurs.
Next
Now it appears that perhaps it is not stated to do so.
Obviously I am not an Airbus guy.
Lets skip the discussion on who the captain was and discuss what should be done when this malfunction occurs.
Next
