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

Boeing C&T screw up

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.

Boeing C&T screw up

Old 12th Aug 2018, 07:47
  #21 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: uk
Posts: 0
Farman Biplane
They are spent forces. Sad little men grasping at their last chance for power or so they think. Sad really. Actually pathetic.
unitedabx is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2018, 10:43
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 521
It sounds as though some of you need to resit your Aviation Law exams as you appear to not understand rules regarding your licence. Just the usual bile and pontification about which you know little.
iceman50 is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2018, 21:05
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 45
Posts: 997
Iceman, what part of Australia are you from?
SloppyJoe is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 03:24
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 148
Originally Posted by letsfly75 View Post
I donít understand what a medical has to do with a sim check?
So he could be completely blind and deaf and therefore not have a medical but still have a Licence and youíd be happy with him checking you in the sim?
morningcoffee is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 03:30
  #25 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,099
Originally Posted by Liam Gallagher View Post
I'll bite.... If they hold valid licences why are they limited to only "flying" the sim?
Over 65 cannot fly international, no domestic flying except for the sim.
swh is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 06:33
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Fair point swh,

Putting this together and if I have this correct, it seems these checkers have to be licenced and hold a valid Class 1 medical. But isn't there a requirement to be current, as in 3 TOs and Ldgs in 90 days?

I guess HKCAD felt being current in the same job/role/environment (on any aircraft?) as those you are licensing is not important. I wonder over which course of the "fizzy lunch" that decision was made.......
Liam Gallagher is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 07:37
  #27 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: uk
Posts: 0
Missing the point.

This error happened and is being covered up because the individual is "one of the brotherhood". Anyone else and they would have been out on their ear. That's the news.
unitedabx is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 11:54
  #28 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,099
Originally Posted by Liam Gallagher View Post
But isn't there a requirement to be current, as in 3 TOs and Ldgs in 90 days?
No requirement for that to be in an aircraft, even line pilots get their currency back in the sim.
swh is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 12:50
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
swh,

I understand that people get their currency back in the sim. That's necessary. There's no other way and it's industry standard.

However, the aircraft/instrument rating is entirely different as it is essentially a "peer review". No disrespect, but these people are not our "peers". Two points;

1. How can they assess us when they no longer do our job?
2. Unlike the currency issue, there is an alternative and that is only use checkers that are current.... Like other airlines do (and like we used to).

unitedabx,

I think we all get it. However, a few us want to treat others as we wish to be treated. I make mistakes and I would hope that genuine mistakes would be treated as "learning points" rather than "termination points". Isn't that the philosphy which made aviation as safe as it is today?
Liam Gallagher is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 19:06
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 323
Do other states allow Sim instructors (ex pilots) to certify current pilots? Perhaps these states would like to know?
Avinthenews is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2018, 22:55
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 521
Liam

It is essentially NOT a peer review. They work not just for the company whilst conducting the check but the HKCAD. There are "checkers and trainers" like this in many states. They also have to complete the PC and RT just like you, but without any practice/currency in the real aircraft.
iceman50 is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2018, 04:32
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 43
What a bizarre cockup. There are so many ways this could have been handled better. perhaps instead of Accenture playing around with asiamiles and teh blockchain, they could have looked at how these renewals are digitally signed and how and when those signing certificates expire / get revoked?
YeahNahYeah is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2018, 05:52
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 143
Originally Posted by iceman50 View Post

It is YOUR licence make sure it is valid, don't rely on anyone else, YOU will carry the resulting mess. Cathay does not own your licence.
So Iceman is this checker carrying the resulting mess? Is he paying the millions that has been pissed away on this screw up? No, he isn't. Just being swept under the rug in classic third floor fashion.
Dilbert68 is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2018, 09:47
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 343
Pity the checker didn't follow YOUR advice Iceman
Threethirty is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2018, 14:29
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 662
It would appear that certain posts highlight a lack of understanding into the qualifications required to check and / or instruct in the simulator. Basically one can be a SFI / SFE ad infinitum subject to certain conditions dependant on the specific role. The animus directed at certain retired members of the star chamber are a different matter. Personally I hope that they rot for their disgraceful and disgusting participation in the 49ers debacle. However, it is possible and quite legitimate to check / train into late old age if the will is there.
olster is online now  
Old 14th Aug 2018, 16:47
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
However, it is possible and quite legitimate to check / train into late old age if the will is there.
And the ego trip...
betpump5 is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2018, 05:42
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 6
Typical. Hereís a serious issue of checker / trainer as well as the airline completely failing in his & its duties, which apart from the legal concerns also has serious cost ramifications, yet most people are more concerned with pecker-measuring about who knows the regs better. Throw in some nationality bashing for good measure too. Ignore the real issues here & bring out the tape measure!

The regs are what they are. End of. How & why this occurred as well as with respect to the current industrial climate should be the topic?! For me itís another case of administrative & beautocratic blunders lining up like the proverbial Swiss cheese theory, yet you all prefer to argue about brand of Swiss cheese in your sandwiches & who knows best.
piccadillysquared is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2018, 07:47
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 601
Originally Posted by piccadillysquared View Post
Typical. Hereís a serious issue of checker / trainer as well as the airline completely failing in his & its duties, which apart from the legal concerns also has serious cost ramifications, yet most people are more concerned with pecker-measuring about who knows the regs better. Throw in some nationality bashing for good measure too. Ignore the real issues here & bring out the tape measure!

The regs are what they are. End of. How & why this occurred as well as with respect to the current industrial climate should be the topic?! For me itís another case of administrative & beautocratic blunders lining up like the proverbial Swiss cheese theory, yet you all prefer to argue about brand of Swiss cheese in your sandwiches & who knows best.
Are you really surprised by the meandering of this discussion? As you yourself said in your second post, you stayed away from this forum for many years but although you refrained from posting, I assume you perused the pages occasionally?

My best guess as to why this particular situation came about is that SSIs may not have the same page on Crew Direct that operating pilots have, which highlights recency requirements and licence validity. I standby to be corrected on this as it's speculation on my part. Whatever the case may be, it was both an individual and systemic error that allowed this situation to occur. Perhaps in future, it should be mandated that all candidates check the licence validity of the examiner, to minimise the chance of recurrence? Additionally, perhaps we should all be encouraged to put reminders in our calendars as to when our licence expires? As iceman50 states quite correctly, it is our licence.

STP
Steve the Pirate is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2018, 07:54
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 662
Er, knowing what the regs are is key to this issue. Administrative blunders are a direct result of not knowing or ignoring the regs. The devil is in the detail and if the implication that knowing the detail is somehow willy waving then the point has been spectacularly missed. If the by product of anal introspection is avoiding cock ups then that is surely a good thing, regardless of Austronaut jibes etc.
olster is online now  
Old 15th Aug 2018, 13:54
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 6
Steve - yes. Can't deny having a look here every now and then. Frustration got the better of me after too many years. Since too many moons ago achieving a CPL onwards and before electronic calendars, updates, & reminders I can not for the life of me fathom how any "professional" airman could allow the backbone of their livelihood lapse. There's self regulating and professional discipline as well as the airline's own fail-safe protocols and built-in protections, I'd assume (and we know what assumption makes of us all too often, obviously!). The fact that in this case both of these failed is troubling and to me the issue here.

Olster - true. Knowing the regs is vitally important. Healthy debate is always a good thing. It's the d!ck measuring that is the sad part, in my opinion.
piccadillysquared 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.