CX 777 Flyby CP sacked
 

Anyone seen or heard of a "Salute" on youtube?

I love a good flyby like the rest of us....................but I can't say I think that one was too cleaver. A bit low and slow.

Glad they didn't have an engine failure then.

I hear some on the 3rd floor aren't too impressed by it, I can see why.

thoughts?????

"I love a good flyby like the rest of us....................but I can't say I think that one was too cleaver. A bit low and slow."

...Actually you just proved that you don't. Fly-bys at higher altitudes are lame.

"Glad they didn't have an engine failure then."

...Would have been a non event. They looked clean and most likely where quite light. I'm sure the GE-90 would have had no problems dealing with it, especially being that the engines ARE BRAND NEW. I would much rather have an engine failure when clean than in the landing configuration. Would you say the same if they had just done a regular ol' touch and go?? :ugh:

"I hear some on the 3rd floor aren't too impressed by it, I can see why."

...Ah, when is the last time that anything the 3rd floor was impressed with was good? You are talking about the people who write our manuals and set company policy now. Surely you don't seem to imply that they have good judgment and aviation know-how? :ugh:

"thoughts?????"

...yeah, but I don't want my post to be edited and it really isn't worth it. :mad:

From the pics that were at the end of a weekly update, its F1 or 5 (LE and a little TE flap).

I'm not on the 777.

Ahh ??
 

Does CX have a policy on low fly-by's? I am not a pilot but it seems to me that this is not the usual thing for a large transport aircraft to do. I recall CX 330 and I think 744, performing at Avalon and Farnborough some time ago though.

Damn, this is a fun place to work...:{

Excellent! Nicely done boys. :D

It was done by the 777 CP with no practice beforehand.
Flap was at 15 and he was doing 200 kts

he got down to 50' on the Rad Alt.

3 rd floor test Pilot's ( yes the real test Pilot's ) not impressed at his off the cuff fly by at 330 tonnes with quite a few people on board.

If it was at 260 kts clean at 100' I would have been happier.

Still, it looks good.

So having set the standard .... I guess that all delivery flights are now authorised to do the same? :8

Quality, great fly by.:D

Read FAA!! They will see this and if they did not approve it there will be questions. No gear down means airshow. Better have authority, especially in such a high profile vehicle.
Nuff sayd!!!

Well with fuel so expensive these days that must have been CFP and use the Contingency ....... not!

Must do that on the next flight under Other...........+5T flyby. Do you think anyone would notice??:ok:

Flaps up and Flat out would have been better, perhaps a bit higher to avoid trigering the FDAP as well.......:ok:
Here's an example,
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photoga..._departure.wmv

Fuel? Its FREE because Boeing should handover the aircraft with full fuel in the tanks. It is part of S & P agreement.

As an outsider, I take it that the flyby was well rehearsed and practiced in a simulator beforehand(and at least authorised at management level)? Potentially, that was a very risky manoeuvre. Had it been an 'off the cuff' flyby, I too would be concerned as a fleet manager - particularly if it had other than essential crew on board.

Personally, I believe that was too low. I agree with the comment that 100' would have been more appropriate and 99% as effective.

Aviatorguy, it was the fleet manager who did it.

Thank God is wasn't off the cuff!!! Otherwise they'd be flying Rubber Dog **** outta Hong Kong........:cool:

what if our world collided with mars...
what if all the crew had heart attacks...
what if, what if, what if,what if, what if...
blah blah blah.....

get a life you analytical , questioning
diagnostic robots - inject some good
old reality and sense of being into your
lives....

beautiful fly-by from a well respected
chief. would you see that from other
heads? I don't think so....