Give your head a shake
 

Do you really think, after all of the bad PR around the world (CNN, BBC, OZ ,CBC ETC) that CX could back down. You are dreaming, and at any rate he doesn't deserve it given what he did. I know 49 that should be back long before he is.

"Think the dismisal was unfair??" Lets see, he took a 200million dollar airplane, with 60 people filled with fuel, and for reasons know only to himself and without any FOPs official approval flew so low that one flinch on the controls , say a bird hitting the windscreen, and they were a fire ball. Yea, a judge is going to say it was unfair to dismiss him for this...riiiight. See above ref 49 for unfair.
Imagine the lawsuit if he had flinched, cartwheeling it into the boeing hangers destroying a production line or two.
The other examples of low passes that are on this thread differ greatly. Generally they all were approved, and not done with unknowing passangers, nor full of fuel with a new airplane on a commercial flight. All delivery flights are in fact commercial flights.
It was an unfortunate incident that has been delt with. We have hashed it out plenty. Time we move on.. and no low flying

Here, here, let's move on!

But The Mail on Sunday has learned that Mr Pratt and Cathay Pacific's director of engineering Christopher Gibbs were both in jump seats behind the captain.

Two first officers were also standing unharnessed inside the flight deck as Wilkinson circled after take-off to descend with landing gear raised to fly 28ft above the Boeing plane-maker's Seattle airport, the airline has admitted.

Neither Mr Pratt nor Mr Gibbs, who is also British, complained about the pilot's manoeuvre. It was questioned only when Cathay Pacific officials saw pictures of the stunt five days later.

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/...n_page_id=1770

This only became 'news' when IW was sacked.
Up to then it doing the rounds on youtube, and only of interest to aviation buffs.
As soon as IWs dismissal was announced it because CP sacked for Top Gun stunt etc.

On the front page of the Sunday Morning Post today it has suddenly become newsworthy again because of the ED and Chairman sitting in the jumpseats.

Classic case of bad PR management.

777 flypass
 

If this is the sort of behavior we can expect at CX from a CX CP god help
us all at KA.

Still available for viewing here
 

Stick around - you ain't seen anything yet. Enjoy your rapid command course.

:}

Now that the episode has become famous/infamous.... what is the likelihood of the regulatory authorities ( HK or US depending on jurisdiction) taking criminal proceedings or regulatory action against CX or individuals (or both) on safety endangerment violations notwithstanding that it was not a revenue flight???

Mr Q it depends on what outcome CX wants from this. Sacking and demoting two pilots who had moderately good standing amongst the pilot workforce, (49ers star chamber excepted) plays into the hands of personnel department, ruled over by Catbert who it is rumoured despises pilots. And remember it was he who was quoted as saying, when a DFO defended the recruitment process, that "I will be the one who decides who is hired or fired in this airline."

Anything that can denigrate the pilot workforce is grist to the personnel mill. To show that they can sack a pilot manager shows that they can overrule any moderation attempt that was applied from Flight Operations. To quote the phrase, the British hang their Captains from their own yard arm, "Pour encourage les autres."

Denigration and depressive control of the pilots is especially important in the next few months as management will need to dismiss the current AOA negotiations and impose a new conditions of service.

That Corporate Safety instigated the investigation in the first place is extremely worrying, and may affect the accuracy of the data that they receive over the next few years. By their actions on this incident they have shown perhaps that they are not the impartial safety team that they have always claimed to be. They have shown that they may have a political agenda.

We operate in Hong Kong. Live with it. If the board of CX want CAD to investigate and hang the guy, they will encourage them to do so. If they do not want it so, they will spin it to their advantage.

Most people assume that FAA investigations of Boeing aircraft are under the control of Boeing. If they do not want an investigation, it will not happen. It is unlikely that Boeing want this to go further, so it should be assumed that after a few more college shootings this story will drop to the spike.

FWIW

Non Pilot managers
 

The director Engineering et al are not pilots. They would have put there trust in the senior pilot at the controls....Just like we put our trust in the engineer that fixes the planes we fly. There is an assumption that the person will do the job the right way and not deliberatly (carelessly) put one at risk. Basically you don't know what you don't know.) So why would they complain, it was like a circus ride to them..great fun, untill the car comes off the track.

Lets move on
 

Well said cxflyer.
It's done, nothing here is going to "de-polarize" the opinions and also, nothing here will change the outcome.
Lets leave the man be, I say.

Moosp,

I think you will find that Corporate safety became involved after a complaint or a question was raised as to the safety of the operation. Is that not the function of the Safety Department? If CAD/FAA were to ask questions would not the first one be what is the result of your company's safety/flight ops department investigation? If the aircraft is operated outside of SOPs that is the function of a safety investigation or at least one of flight ops.

Yes we all think it looks great and most of us will admit to having done the same at some stage in our careers but do you think if we had been found out the outcome would have been any different. Maybe not the sack but certainly disciplanary action would have been taken by every employer that I have worked for.

I think the real question that should be asked is what happened on the previous five delivery flights and if this hadn't happened where would the next delivery flight have ended, at the end of the runway perhaps?

Quit the theatrics will ya.................. ended at the end of the runway.:hmm:

2 flybys done by the 777-300ER on DELIVERY flights by very experienced senior Check Captains. BIG BLOODY DEAL. They were not in any danger, it may have ben a bit too low in the last one but they were not in danger of a fireball.

IW should have gotten them approved by higher up, that's the issue here.

Just give it a rest.

Karma - What Goes Around, Comes Around
 

To: Mr. Bloggs, Buttie Box, and others, Bravo!

To: ACMS, and Volare, Wake Up!

To quote ACMS we should feel pity for IW because his How quickly we forget the 49ers; those talented and experienced CX pilots who were sacked for no good reason. IW has rightly been sacked for a outrageous display of poor judgement and ego.

Volare Cantare take off your rose tinted glasses and look at the real world.
You refer to IW's cowboy actions as In fact it was anything but that, being a well planned action and certainly not a momentary lapse of reason.

You bemoan the loss of Well, as far as CX is concerned, all that died with the advent of the 49ers.

You request that we Have you failed to notice that CX actually has some rather talented FEMALE pilots as well? Your misogynistic rantings only serve to further discredit your opinions.

You claim that it is Ha! Would that be like the respect that IW showed to the 49ers when he so blithely decided their fate?

In all of this what is glaringly obvious is the exposure (yet again - for those who may still harbour any doubts) of NR's character. Nothing like leading by example, eh?

I repeat; What goes around, comes around. In the end we all reap what we sow.

From Moosp:
Under the James Reason model of a "Just Safety Culture," the company should forgive unintentional errors that are disclosed freely in the interest of collecting data to prevent reccurences. However, it should not tolerate blatant and wilful violations of procedures and regulations, or cover ups. I don't see how the safety department's actions in this case runs counter to industry best practices. (I just hope they've given the Chairman a briefing on leading by example...!)

Aviation history is littered with crashes that could have been prevented by someone noticing someone's increased appetite for ego-stroking and risk taking. A few are discussed in this excellent book:

http://www.amazon.com/Flight-Discipl.../dp/0070343713

From Avweb today

Fired Pilot's Boss In Cockpit During Fly-By
As we reported last week, Ian Wilkinson, a senior Cathay Pacific captain, was fired three weeks after he did a high-speed, low-level pass over a Seattle-area airport in a new Boeing 777 he was delivering from the factory. It wasn’t the stunt that got him fired, it was the fact that he didn’t have permission to perform the fly-by, something the airline occasionally allows for airshows. But a story in Sunday’s Asian World News, reprinted by The Earth Times, raises the question of just how much authority Wilkinson needed, since the chairman of the airline, Christopher Pratt, was in a cockpit jumpseat for the whole performance. The airline confirmed that fact but said Pratt, who runs one of the biggest airlines in Asia, couldn’t be expected to know that the stunt wasn’t “authorized,” "The chairman is not an aviator and he was fully aware that the captain was in full command of the flight," an unidentified spokeswoman said. "There was no request or suggestion from anyone in Cathay Pacific for the fly-by to take place. The decision was entirely that of the captain in command." The spokeswoman also denied that Wilkinson’s firing had more to do with the publicity surrounding the stunt, which was featured on YouTube, than company protocol. “The YouTube video only confirmed what was already becoming known. The internal investigation was well underway prior to the video appearing online,” she claimed. However, an unidentified source reportedly told a German magazine that it was felt the incident “makes our airline look like a bunch of cowboys.” Wilkinson was paid three months’ severance and keeps his company pension. He has not been available for comment. His maid reportedly told the newspaper he’s on holiday in Thailand.

When IW joined CX, retirement age was 55. When dismissed, he was already into "bonus" time, with reference to his joining CoS. Having joined circa '84, he has a P fund that most of us can only dream of. Especially given that he was long term management and always HK based. He has seen the best years CX has had to offer, remuneration wise. The housing allowance and property market have also been more than kind to him.

A screeching halt? Not compared to a pilot in his 20/30's with a family, mortgage etc, that has fallen foul of the CX machine.(49er's inc)

Do I feel sorry for him? No. He knew what he was doing. Now he just has to live with it. If nothing else, it is probably the most publicised last flight of any pilot in CX history.

Lots Wife
...maybe you should take a good look at that yourself???

Sorry the "lads" reference upset you of course that was meant inclusive of the "ladetts", your political correctness is laughable when it stands beside such an attitude of revenge and bitterness. Just because I do not agree with "burn him at the stakes" witch hunt attitude that you pride yourself in does not in any way mean I condone any of the events of past. Read what I said instead of jumping on the old reactive bandwagons.

Your reaction to what judge as rose tinted glasses is exactly the kind of thing that happens in this industry when anyone begins to voice a different approach rather then the war like environment that is getting no on anywhere. Im big enough to take that criticism and any others. Im not big enough though to live a life of hatred and resentment. We cannot change the past. We should not forget it but we need to e careful not to become the very thing we claim to "hate" so much.

Calling me a misogynist...don't make me laugh! Making mountains out of molehills seems to be a speciality? When I use the word 'lads" it includes both... just like some people use the word "mate" so VERY loosely ;)

In my opinion half problems we face are because there are not enough women involved...what woman, wife, mother for example would have come up with the 49'ers plan?

http://www.king5.com/video/featured-...d=221537&shu=1
Enjoy! To our bonus!