EK207 Jfk
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: just around the corner
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too all the naysayers
Man I wish you all would go away
You are not only helpful but rather disrespectful.
Piss off and go back and fly your C172
Further moderator delete my post but however I'm tired of this all. If you feel if needs to be controlled so be it.
But I will not stand for this idiotic behavior.
Man I wish you all would go away
You are not only helpful but rather disrespectful.
Piss off and go back and fly your C172
Further moderator delete my post but however I'm tired of this all. If you feel if needs to be controlled so be it.
But I will not stand for this idiotic behavior.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: FL370
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe they guys were not up to the job? Maybe the guys in Moscow were not up to the job? Maybe the EK 777 that crashed had a captain who should not have been in the cockpit in the first place?
I was at the holding in DUS when EK landed a 380. Eeeh, EK xxx, runway vacated? EK xxx, you are supposed to call ground by yourself, but contact them on 121.xxx. So, after flying for 6-7 hours, none of the pilots had bothered to read up on the airport procedures.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: on earth
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sealer , I was with you until the last bit " honestly who gives a rats "
One of the problem we face is this kind of attitude in our profession , less and less pride of a job well done and pride for our work...
One of the problem we face is this kind of attitude in our profession , less and less pride of a job well done and pride for our work...
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sky
Age: 31
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing that completely baffles me is so called professional pilots saying a VOR/Circling approach would be dangerous??? It's a standard procedure easy to be flown...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
less and less pride of a job well done and pride for our work...
While everyone agrees the guys on DME, BOM, DOH and JFK did not come to work to mess up, the same cannot be said about coming to work and whinning to the guy next to you nor the cabin crew round the back. The old adage of Attitude determines your Altitude and "I dont give a rats"; is the very reason these issues are not going away. Point the finger the company's way, but in the end, we are the professionals.
What happened in DOH?
Attitude is the problem? Blame the pilot!
Attitude is the problem? Blame the pilot!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Attitude is the problem? Blame the pilot!
What happened in DOH
"I dont give a rats" is not a problem on your flightdeck? I'm not singling anyone out here because we have all come to work with some sort of discontent in some shape or form over the past few years. Although when my FO asks me am I happy here because I haven't drained him or her of whatever positivity they woke up with coming to work, then yes attitude has a big part to play.
G/S lost during the approach, VMC, they decided to wait till the PAPIs went from 4 reds to 2 whites/2 reds and continued and landed. Are you telling me the company is to blame for that?
G/S lost during the approach, VMC, they decided to wait till the PAPIs went from 4 reds to 2 whites/2 reds and continued and landed. Are you telling me the company is to blame for that?
What was an event about the doh thing you described? Genuine question, I don’t know anything about it
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bullsh!t! You can disagree with how the company run things and still be a professional. You can bitch and moan about the company till the cows come home and still be a professional.
To claim that it is pilot attitudes that have caused all these incidents and an accident is bloody ridiculous.
The sheer number that have been occurring lately is a result of a number of factors. EK has not, in any way, taken responsibility or proposed any methods in dealing with this other than to offer harassing emails. The fact that we lost TWO VP's and replaced them with the current one who's reputation and inability precedes him is telling.
There has NEVER been any leadership in this company. Starting at the the very top with TC (with his once a year missive to the employees) down to fleet.
If there is a lack of professionalism at EK it sits in management and not, with the very odd exception, the pilot body.
To claim that it is pilot attitudes that have caused all these incidents and an accident is bloody ridiculous.
The sheer number that have been occurring lately is a result of a number of factors. EK has not, in any way, taken responsibility or proposed any methods in dealing with this other than to offer harassing emails. The fact that we lost TWO VP's and replaced them with the current one who's reputation and inability precedes him is telling.
There has NEVER been any leadership in this company. Starting at the the very top with TC (with his once a year missive to the employees) down to fleet.
If there is a lack of professionalism at EK it sits in management and not, with the very odd exception, the pilot body.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: usa
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’ll add to what Trader said
It is NOT the AUGs ‘duty’ to monitor any part of the approach in a way that will result in punitive measures in the event of a screw up.
Because as far as the GCAA are concerned - those augmenters are NOT on duty per the ACARS duty report and subsequent calculations for max duty limits per year.
This is a total croc of shyte. The luxury of having a colleague there to assist is just that and the Co punishing guys who are wiped out at that stage is a disgrace.
Yes the OMA lists responsibilities but to hold those guys to same standard is so beautifully characteristic of the flawed approach to Man mgt here - that it, well, speaks for itself.
No EPT mount is provided for CM3/4 and thus may not be used in the flight deck (OMA 8.1.13 a. 4.)
No pilot with near vision problems is required by EK Medical Services to view screens from 2+/- meters away at night.
At no point have EK pilots been been trained to PM from CM3 (you can’t even see from CM4). Trainers on the other hand are.
Stop pandering to the ever widening net of those to blame that has been perfected here by mgt.
It’s the Operating Crews responsibility - period.
Otherwise can we please have no notice Line checks conducted from CM4 observing CM3 observing CM1+2 - after we have had the eye monitoring feedback from sim in the CM3 position- all the while making it known to the GCAA - THAT THESE PILOTS ARE TECHNICALLY NOT ON DUTY!
One other point - if any of you guys augmenting find yourself in a JFK situation- IMMEDIATELY write a fatigue report.
It is NOT the AUGs ‘duty’ to monitor any part of the approach in a way that will result in punitive measures in the event of a screw up.
Because as far as the GCAA are concerned - those augmenters are NOT on duty per the ACARS duty report and subsequent calculations for max duty limits per year.
This is a total croc of shyte. The luxury of having a colleague there to assist is just that and the Co punishing guys who are wiped out at that stage is a disgrace.
Yes the OMA lists responsibilities but to hold those guys to same standard is so beautifully characteristic of the flawed approach to Man mgt here - that it, well, speaks for itself.
No EPT mount is provided for CM3/4 and thus may not be used in the flight deck (OMA 8.1.13 a. 4.)
No pilot with near vision problems is required by EK Medical Services to view screens from 2+/- meters away at night.
At no point have EK pilots been been trained to PM from CM3 (you can’t even see from CM4). Trainers on the other hand are.
Stop pandering to the ever widening net of those to blame that has been perfected here by mgt.
It’s the Operating Crews responsibility - period.
Otherwise can we please have no notice Line checks conducted from CM4 observing CM3 observing CM1+2 - after we have had the eye monitoring feedback from sim in the CM3 position- all the while making it known to the GCAA - THAT THESE PILOTS ARE TECHNICALLY NOT ON DUTY!
One other point - if any of you guys augmenting find yourself in a JFK situation- IMMEDIATELY write a fatigue report.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bullsh!t! You can disagree with how the company run things and still be a professional. You can bitch and moan about the company till the cows come home and still be a professional.
You must be one of those the FOs and CC talk about all the time; "I want to bitch and moan my way from the briefing room till the parking brake is set at the other end and still demand respect from all those I rub it off on".
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: South of North
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
777-200LR - I think you are missing the point. In almost every incident/accident the pilot has played a role (the guy at 400', disregarding policy and any basic airmanship is an extreme example). But so the does the company and they have failed miserably on their part. A pilot can screw up and get fired yet management takes no responsibility for their part.
Lets look at the 'lets no do anything that gets us into the office' quote. Not one I use but what that pilot is basically saying is lets fly safely!
I also don't know many who 'bitch from checkin to ckeck out'. The best part of our job is when the doors close and we head out. Dealing with our inept management in another story.
But one thing I think we will agree on is that professional maturity is incredibly important and I agree, with some pilots, it is lacking. But it is a small minority.
Lets look at the 'lets no do anything that gets us into the office' quote. Not one I use but what that pilot is basically saying is lets fly safely!
I also don't know many who 'bitch from checkin to ckeck out'. The best part of our job is when the doors close and we head out. Dealing with our inept management in another story.
But one thing I think we will agree on is that professional maturity is incredibly important and I agree, with some pilots, it is lacking. But it is a small minority.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best part of our job is when the doors close and we head out
Make one thing sure, I don't disagree that the company has not manned up to taking responsibility for certain events, I only point several fingers at ourselves because apparently we once went to school for this and we have become our very own worst enemies.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Red Star
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’ll add to what Trader said
It is NOT the AUGs ‘duty’ to monitor any part of the approach in a way that will result in punitive measures in the event of a screw up.
Because as far as the GCAA are concerned - those augmenters are NOT on duty per the ACARS duty report and subsequent calculations for max duty limits per year.
This is a total croc of shyte. The luxury of having a colleague there to assist is just that and the Co punishing guys who are wiped out at that stage is a disgrace.
Yes the OMA lists responsibilities but to hold those guys to same standard is so beautifully characteristic of the flawed approach to Man mgt here - that it, well, speaks for itself.
No EPT mount is provided for CM3/4 and thus may not be used in the flight deck (OMA 8.1.13 a. 4.)
No pilot with near vision problems is required by EK Medical Services to view screens from 2+/- meters away at night.
At no point have EK pilots been been trained to PM from CM3 (you can’t even see from CM4). Trainers on the other hand are.
Stop pandering to the ever widening net of those to blame that has been perfected here by mgt.
It’s the Operating Crews responsibility - period.
Otherwise can we please have no notice Line checks conducted from CM4 observing CM3 observing CM1+2 - after we have had the eye monitoring feedback from sim in the CM3 position- all the while making it known to the GCAA - THAT THESE PILOTS ARE TECHNICALLY NOT ON DUTY!
One other point - if any of you guys augmenting find yourself in a JFK situation- IMMEDIATELY write a fatigue report.
It is NOT the AUGs ‘duty’ to monitor any part of the approach in a way that will result in punitive measures in the event of a screw up.
Because as far as the GCAA are concerned - those augmenters are NOT on duty per the ACARS duty report and subsequent calculations for max duty limits per year.
This is a total croc of shyte. The luxury of having a colleague there to assist is just that and the Co punishing guys who are wiped out at that stage is a disgrace.
Yes the OMA lists responsibilities but to hold those guys to same standard is so beautifully characteristic of the flawed approach to Man mgt here - that it, well, speaks for itself.
No EPT mount is provided for CM3/4 and thus may not be used in the flight deck (OMA 8.1.13 a. 4.)
No pilot with near vision problems is required by EK Medical Services to view screens from 2+/- meters away at night.
At no point have EK pilots been been trained to PM from CM3 (you can’t even see from CM4). Trainers on the other hand are.
Stop pandering to the ever widening net of those to blame that has been perfected here by mgt.
It’s the Operating Crews responsibility - period.
Otherwise can we please have no notice Line checks conducted from CM4 observing CM3 observing CM1+2 - after we have had the eye monitoring feedback from sim in the CM3 position- all the while making it known to the GCAA - THAT THESE PILOTS ARE TECHNICALLY NOT ON DUTY!
One other point - if any of you guys augmenting find yourself in a JFK situation- IMMEDIATELY write a fatigue report.
I have been #3 or #4 myself, many times. I could choose to sleep, read a book, or act as an extra set of eyes in the cockpit. In that position my mental capacity was very high. Not occupied with radio, check lists, procedures or flying.
The capacity to just look out the window and say a word or two if I had to look up to see the runway. Never happened to me, though.
I am comparing these two incidents with the Asiana SFO accident. Those pilots were praised as heroes when they got home. The rest of us know what they did. Or failed to do. They were along for the ride and crashed because they did not understand the aircraft and failed to take control when things went bad.
Is it easy to accept this because it was a Korean airline with asian pilots?
Are we more inclined to blame everything else when something very similar happens with an EK aircraft? Because of what? Caucasian pilots, maybe? The standard is supposed to be higher? Why?
We all know Emirates have lowered the requirements got get a job. Several times. By doing so, the standard of EK pilots have been lowered. Less hours. Less experience.
And, in any airline there are average pilots, very good pilots, and some who are below average. Get the wrong combination in the cockpit and things can get interesting.
I am not saying the EK pilots are to blame, but you can’t say they are not. They put the aircraft in that position. Nobody else.
Where I am now, an incident like this would be investigated. The pilots would normally get som extra training. Everybody else would get the benefits of the investigation and the knowhow of how to avoid something like this in the future.
We know the Emirates way, and it is dead wrong. You can’t scare your pilots to be safe. You can’t beat them to make them safe. You can’t fire them to make them safe.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: In the State of Perpetual Confusion
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we can all agree that there appears to be a trend here. The incidents (that I'm aware of at least and that are under discussion) are really too similar to say otherwise. If there is a trend, then the cause(s) must be organizational. Is it training, culture, recruitment, morale, equipment, procedures etc. or some combination? The thing is; if it's more than one pilot/incident, it's not a factor of some rogue pilot going out there and screwing up in a vacuum and it's not going to be fixed by disciplining the individuals involved in the incidents. The levers of ALL of those potential "root causes" are pulled by the management of the airline and unless the "root cause" is lax checking standards (which I highly doubt), simply "turning up the heat" isn't going to do a damn thing.
It's ironic that EK management is so quick pat themselves on the back when things go well yet they absolutely refuse to accept any responsibility when things go wrong - and I'm talking about the very top management! Can't have it both ways.
To be honest, I've been gone quite a while and I'm surprised that it's taken this long to come to this.
It's ironic that EK management is so quick pat themselves on the back when things go well yet they absolutely refuse to accept any responsibility when things go wrong - and I'm talking about the very top management! Can't have it both ways.
To be honest, I've been gone quite a while and I'm surprised that it's taken this long to come to this.
Last edited by Gillegan; 16th Dec 2017 at 14:29. Reason: Punctuation
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Formerly resident of Knoteatingham
Posts: 957
Received 116 Likes
on
57 Posts
Turning up the heat
Turning up the heat will change things.
It will make them worse.
It will make them worse.