CFP
 

Dragonair have just started to use CFP Flightplans from CX. While the information on them seems very accurate the presentation and design seems very unstructured.
What do our colleagues at CX think about the CFPs ?

Thats only 1 certain Captain and we all know he was an abused child!

You infidel, how dare you, say such a thing. :}

Been with it so long now can't remember what to compare it to, you're probably right though.

Pop into CX and mention your concerns, they will be only too happy to listen. :rolleyes:

Are you using the Ramp and Land corrections now or sticking with a KA system?

(An infidel (literally, "one without faith"). More generally, an infidel is one who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle).

Wow, I never thought I would see the day when I missed the RODOS flight plans…

What a mess – poor presentation and organization of essential data, no use of fonts or headings, boxes to be filled all over the place and lots of useless info more suited to a long haul B707 operation rather than for FMS equipped aircraft operating regionally.

I must admit I am a bit surprised since with all their resources I expected a lot better from our big brother across the road. What other rubbish are they going to foist upon us?

This seems to be a recurring problem in CX, in all aspects not just F-PLNs, "training" is another. CXs only input to what the rest of the worlds airlines are doing is through direct entry F/Os on the freighter and the recent CX-KA tie up, unless CX is willing to accept some constructive criticism, which IMHO it's not, nothing will change. This is the "Cathay way".

Of the six different systems I've used in my career, I always thought RODOS was the worst. Until now!

I concur !
 

It also helps to put your concerns in writing. An email to GMF (general manager flying) and CC 'd to GMA (General Manager Aircrew ) is the most effective way. Make sure to spell your name correctly so that there is no confusion when it comes to awarding praise later !!


Cheers

FG

FG
very funny....I sign things like that as Colin Pearce!!!!

KA life
I don't know any better as I have only ever been in CX. But I am curious as to what is good/bad about our CFPs. If you can suggest improvements do so with Line Ops not who FG suggested! They are non political and will actually listen...honest!

Making suggestions as to how to improve it is way beyond my current position on the learning curve. The problem for most is trying to digest it on the fly, so to speak!!

The implementation process was something like being told one month out that we would change. Two weeks out, a copy of the layout with little explanitory details was emailed to all, coupled with "selected" flts being given copies of new and old plans. Come the 1st Jan, Bingo, new flt planning room rearrangement (deckchairs on Titanics?), new cathay dispatch staff, new flight plan, off you go boys, don't forget to fill in all the required boxes!!!

As change management goes, this was the most abysmal i've seen. Some parts of the fuel build up are changes to, or not covered in our Vol 8 fuel policy.

I have no problems with change, Rodos was a simplistic joke, but the way this change was done shot a ****e load of holes in a large block of swiss cheese.

(Sorry if this is dupicated, blame the undersea cable thingie)

gyro
fair enough. So are you saying it was the process of change/implementation rather than the actual CFPs?

If it makes you feel any better I have seen minimal errors in my time at CX. I think Line Ops do a good job....early on there was a lot more second guessing by crew on fuel decisions. Now it is all pretty straight forward.
An email/phone call to Manager Line Ops(Neil Philips?) might be good....just tell him that KA guys don't get the 'new' CFP....and in the words of Pauline Hanson, "Please explain"!

Head on up
 

Silber:

Agree the short haul is a bit over done. I once got a bad mark ( two out of five, also referred to as LCC standard), on a check because I did not completely fill in the fuel log on a Manilla leg !!

The other thing about BBS airlines is there is no such thing as ground school. Even your intro course is done on your own in the CBT room or at home. So in line with that ,it would appear that here at Big Brush Stroke airlines (BBS), we expect you to go to BBS 's manual library on the 2nd floor flight training centre and sign out a copy of Vol 2 pt 2 and teach yourself the new CFP and fuel policy. Hey don't worry if you don't completely understand it, many on line are in the same boat. If you can asnswer the line check questions though you are good to go !!

Just remember at dispatch it is " don't want the sector, don't need the sector, flight plan fuel !"

Carry on....

FG

NC. Others may have different concerns, but for me it is the management of change that dictates the continuing level of safety within an organisation. The Flight plan/Notam/wx briefing is really the backbone of most flt preparation. As such, if any large scale changes occur in the presentation of this information, equally large efforts should be made to ensuring a comprehensive education structure accompanies it. This applies both individually and organizationally.
For most drivers, the first time they saw one of these plans "live", was when they reported for duty on Jan 1. Now if you're setting of on a longish flt, there will be time to digest some of the details/structure of the plan and how it fits into the real world, as you go. If however, you are off to XMN, KWL, HAK which have flt times of 45-50mins, anything less than reasonable familiarity would have made it an impediment. Not a desirable outcome.
Thats history now though. The new plan seems superbly accurate compared to the old, and unstapling the pages and rearranging a little, limits some of the shuffling. In time, we will all become more comfortable with the detail and people will wonder what all the fuss was about. But that should never be taken as vindication for token efforts in the lead up.
Cheers

That's all this small brain needs is...another change!

What we have works...we understand it...even though it may not be the best!:ok:

[QUOTE= What other rubbish are they going to foist upon us?[/QUOTE]
Only our Pilots!!

Post by FG
""Agree the short haul is a bit over done. I once got a bad mark ( two out of five, also referred to as LCC standard), on a check because I did not completely fill in the fuel log on a Manilla leg !!
The other thing about BBS airlines is there is no such thing as ground school. Even your intro course is done on your own in the CBT room or at home. So in line with that ,it would appear that here at Big Brush Stroke airlines (BBS), we expect you to go to BBS 's manual library on the 2nd floor flight training centre and sign out a copy of Vol 2 pt 2 and teach yourself the new CFP and fuel policy. Hey don't worry if you don't completely understand it, many on line are in the same boat. If you can asnswer the line check questions though you are good to go !!
Just remember at dispatch it is " don't want the sector, don't need the sector, flight plan fuel !"
Carry on....
FG"":rolleyes: :rolleyes:

As usual a little bit of "the truth" totally hidden in a rant. Never had an an FLN??:hmm: Thought you were a big boy now and able to Command an Aircraft when given the chance however, you now seem unable to learn some information on your own or through the courses and FTW's (Flying Training Workshops for you FG).

As for the KA Guys and Galls it sounds as though it was not introduced very well and that is your major problem!!

This from someone who can't even figure out the "QUOTE" function. :)


You thought that was a rant.......

There have been many times when I have been told by a C+T about some procedure, or convention or SOP and the C+T has got it wrong. We are talking some major misunderstandings. Not that they do not get it right most of the time, as do we the trainee. However, if the system is so good why are these errors happening ? Why then are Command candidates and FOs quietly having to listen when they know the info to be incorrect (or at least off target) ? That is because the education is being done on line checks by way of checking rather than training. It is because once a checker is given a green light he then goes about his merry job getting progressively more individualistic with regard to SOPs etc the longer he is in the position. Longevity is not the sole cause, brand new checkers with, what I would call lowish command experience in the company, have been coming out with some doosies as well. There is no regular input from these C+T s to the training machine and therefore the errors are allowed to continue. Most airlines have a yearly ground school and training session. We have yearly checks.

FG

FG :rolleyes: :8

Some of us have a life and you don't half talk a load of Bollards. Is this you building up your excuses now so that you can blame the system and all these totally bad Check and Trainers. :suspect:

Isnt it so typical of the Dragonair system, that their poor employees are fishing around asking questions on the bloody internet, rather than getting the necessary information from their own sources? Yes the introduction of the new (to us) CPF was a total disgrace, guess the man in charge was too busy thinking about his future promotion, to be too concerned about a thorough briefing to the troops. Nice shirt and keep the iron handy least you crease that tie, eh?

Yes the CPF is an antiquated piece of work, written by some aero geek in his naffin bedroom, playing on his sinclair computer for some jumped up little nerd to go and play with it on his micro bloody soft flt sim. A tragedy, but at least someone has to say it as it is. Pathetic, really.

Gent's. How does the fuel page work on the Flt Plan? Plenty of different ideas. No clarification from upstairs. Most haven't flown since well before JAN 1. ;)

Try working out the fuel page when tankering. The term "Cannot laah" comes to mind.......