Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Cathay Management Captain fails to remove gear pin!

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Cathay Management Captain fails to remove gear pin!

Old 14th Aug 2001, 14:52
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Riga, LATVIA
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

The Captain has a final responsibility for the aircraft condition before and during the flight anyway.
Nothing is bad that he is flying still, just he was not so lucky that day...may be his salary should depend on his mistake(which is not a distress).
5 APU's captain is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 16:36
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

My Dear Colleagues,

I am sure it has been said before but I will say it again.

How many times have you done your walk around with all manner of pins in and pannels open?

It is a fact of life that you often have to be back in your seat long before maintenance action is complete and that you have to rely on a 'verbal' from the ground engineer that all is buttoned up.

An aside to the 'eng' like 'You will make sure the pins are removed from the MLG and make sure those panels are secure, won't you' will not usually cause any offence.

If he tells you to go forth and multiply then at least he has received the message.

ES
Edmund Spencer is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 17:14
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Englands newest City
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

It is definately the responsability of the Flight Deck to ensure the landing gear pins have been removed. On the BAe146 the pins are stowed in a box with a window behind the left seat and it is part of the check list to ensure that the pins are there and visible. No pins no departure!!!
rover2701 is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 17:19
  #24 (permalink)  
Mistrust in Management
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 973
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

M.Mouse,

When you talk of "rather less fuel than was prudent", just how much was indicated in the tanks then as the A/C was flying over Hounslow? I know the answer but I will leave it for you to educate our readers.

Yes you are correct in saying that the management pilot left the airline shortly afterwards. M. Mouse, perhaps you are in a position to know if he was sacked or not, I am not as no public statement was made by B.A. management on the matter. I am told that the gentleman concerned receives a full B.A. pension based upon his management salary. If a line pilot were to be involved in what may be perceived as an act of criminal negligence could he expect to receive the same treatment?

I'll try not to be disingenuous so I will make it clear that what we are talking about here is double standards.

I would not be baying for anybody's blood in the light of such an error, (there but for the grace of god etc) were it not that CX have sacked 52 people in an attempt to head off an industrial dispute.

CX management has not apparently acted illegally as the law stands in HKG, but they have in my opinion acted immorally. CX are partners in BA's one-world alliance, I for one feel nothing but shame to be associated with an airline that acts in such a way.

Still, what future I wonder for an airline that is managed in such an incompetent fashion?


Regards
Exeng
exeng is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 17:50
  #25 (permalink)  

Evertonian
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Posts: 12,471
Received 98 Likes on 56 Posts
Question

So what is the average procedure for regular crew that have missed something like this? I assume from most of the posts that it's dismissal?

I think one of the major concerns here is that if CX are in a position where they are forced to utilise "under experienced(recent)" crew, then this is a serious safety issue.

Like 'em or loathe 'em, the management pilots must be under extreme pressure from above and this must reflect in their performance at some point. I know that won't elicit much sympathy, nor was it intended to, but I can't help but wonder if any regulatory bodies are monitoring what's actually going on there?
Buster Hyman is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 17:58
  #26 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Post

exeng

I do not know how much fuel was in the tanks and really it is irrelevant. The Captain concerned lost his job whether he was dismissed or resigned before being dismissed is not the point. He was management, he made an error of judgement, call it what you will, and paid the price. No double standards there that I can see.

I stand to be corrected but I don't think the manner of leaving a company alters pension entitlement. If you left as a Captain then I would not expect you to receive a pension based on a First Officers salary.

I agree with the gist of the rest of your post and agree that the CX situation is a disgrace.

Rover2701

Lets hope your engineers don't use their own pins then!
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 19:01
  #27 (permalink)  
Tool Time
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Back in the GOD, it turned out that after the Captain's external inspection was completed, the ground ENG decided to check the hydraulics. The hydraulic bay service door now lies at the bottom of Hawke's Bay.
 
Old 14th Aug 2001, 20:55
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Antonio,Texas,USA
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Hey guys there is no doubt that the PIC is the one untimately responsible.Yes he should have noticed the red flag, but no way anyone should be canned for an oversite on this nature. Maybe a written reprimand in his permanent record, but a terminating offense I think not.
I really think this thread is getting off track with the comments about tire pressure , stick to the checklist you cannot go wrong.

[ 14 August 2001: Message edited by: Dragonspet ]
Dragonspet is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 21:02
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: france
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Smile

We all make mistakes; sounds like the ground engineers were asleep!
Tex Murphy is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 22:36
  #30 (permalink)  
jtr
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: .
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

To clarify a few things.

It is CX policy to ensure all gear pins are removed from gear legs during the walk around, unless there is a reason for them to be in there e.g. tyre change.

The only pin that should remain in is the nose wheel steering disconnect pin, which is the pin sighted after pushback.

The particular Captain, who had conducted the pre flight inspection is #2 to the Director of Flight Operations i.e. #2 on the CX pecking order of pilots. No demotion of any apparent form was bestowed upon him. The only inkling of an occurence, was a notice to crew, detailing how vigilant one should be during a pre flight, especially when its rainy, and windy, and dark, when gear pins can get wrapped around the leg. (It was daylight, dry, and the atis was something like 6 knots)

The point I believe my bus driving colleague is trying to make, is that if it had been any of us plebs who had doen this, then the punishment would have been a little more suited to the crime. In CX performing these kind of atrocities will usually get you a demotion of some kind. e.g. Training Captain demoted to Line Captain etc. Or as in the case of our recently re-instated ex-captain now f/o, a major demotion (for a genuine roster changemis read)
There should be one rule for all in this game
jtr is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2001, 23:25
  #31 (permalink)  
Mistrust in Management
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 973
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

M.Mouse,

You have made your point well and I accept that the management pilot did then pay the price of his 'error of judgement'.

Sometimes the price paid is different. Look if you will please at the recent dismissal of Captain Stewart Clapson (R.I.P.) After the outcome of the industrial tribunal I believe he was to be re-instated as an F/O, which is the position he would have retired in were it not for his untimely death. Without dragging up all the old details again, I believe he was treated somewhat more harshly than the previously mentioned management Captain. These cases are rare but nevertheless significant. How do you think I would fare if one day I decided to continue a flight illegally, ignoring the advice of the rest of my crew, and place the lives of everybody on board as well as those on the ground in jeopardy? Could I expect to retire immediately on my full pension?

Having said all that I believe that BA management has a fairly good record when compared to that of some other airlines. I am pleased that you believe the CX situation is a disgrace. The current situation in CX is dire, as it is also in KAL.

Incidentally, I was under the impression that if the circumstances leading to a staff members dismissal were serious enough then that persons pension could be reduced by the amount that BA had contributed.

The very best to all of you in CX, particularly those pilots who have been dismissed.


Regards
Exeng
exeng is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2001, 00:29
  #32 (permalink)  
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Global village
Age: 55
Posts: 3,025
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Post

As exeng has alluded to, in his previous post, under NORMAL circumstances, ia NORMAL company, a dereliction of the Captain's duty - such as that of which the Captain under discussion in this thread is guilty - would be addressed in an appropriate manner. Undoubtedly it would be highlighted somehow, probably through the usual company publication wrt walkarounds, perhaps by an over emphasis on the importance of checking the location of the stowd pins, at everyone's next line check.

However, Cathay Pacific, under its current management is NOT a NORMAL company. The management are not behaving in a RATIONAL manner, and recently RETRENCHED 49 pilots because they had "lost the Company's confidence". However, it would appear quite acceptable to this same IRRATIONAL management, to maintain the employ of a management pilot who has proven that he is certainly below the standard required by ALL other operators - including those in G.A.

It smacks of self-serving authoritarianism running amok, and is a clear indicator to outside observers that the pilots' claims of a corrupt, bullying management are based on fact, and NOT perceived!
Kaptin M is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2001, 01:58
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Englands newest City
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

M.Mouse maybe I didnt make myself clear. It is the responsability of the flight deck to ensure that the pins have been extracted from the landing gear. The pins on the aircraft are only to be used on that aircraft. However it is the crews responsability to check on the walkround they have been removed and to do a physical check when returned to the flight deck.
rover2701 is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2001, 02:33
  #34 (permalink)  
Chris
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

jtr's post (above) is spot on. Here's a quote from today's South China Morning Post:

A Cathay Pacific manager who last week demoted a pilot for misreading his roster was recently involved in an incident over landing gear - but received only an informal verbal admonishment.

The airline yesterday confirmed that general manager, flying, Captain Rick Fry, had failed to notice before flying a plane that a pin fastening the gear in the down position had not been removed.
Even the pro-CX press in Hong Kong are calling it a double standard (the headline reads "Double standard denied over manager's flying error").

In the other Hong Kong English newspaper, the iMail, they said:

[A union spokesman said:]"Let me put it this way, it is safe, provided the engine doesn't fail, and that cannot be predicted,'' ... Mr Tyler [CX spokesmen] disagreed, saying that even if one of the engines had failed, there would still be enough thrust so that the "aircraft still could have taken off and operated satisfactorily''.
So, there you have it. Engine failure after take-off with the landing gear down is safe, according to CX, so therefore this manager pilot did nothing wrong. One wonders at the flying standards in management ranks revealed by this remark.
 
Old 15th Aug 2001, 05:15
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Perth WA
Age: 70
Posts: 135
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Kaptin M - you seem to have an awful lot to say over CX and you don't even work in Hong Kong. Who is feeding you your mixed bag of info?
Separate point but was the pilot in question on this thread the captain of the 777?
bonajet is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2001, 11:45
  #36 (permalink)  
Tool Time
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Must tell the flight deck to check gear pins. Save me doing it.
 
Old 15th Aug 2001, 12:05
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Talking

Stop Start old son.

On these new fangled wizz machines you can check the tyre pressures from the comfort of the cockpit. It is selectable on EICAS along with brake temps.

Regards pins, in the company I work for there is only one set per ship, and it is the commanders responsibility to ensure that they are safely stowed in their allotted position in the cockpit prior to start. Such is a checklist item.

"I said CHEER UP stupid"
grange.guzzler is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2001, 12:27
  #38 (permalink)  
The Reverend
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

The Convair 880 and 990 had an amber warning light on the flight engineer's annunciator panel, which would illuminate if any undercarriage pins were inserted. Beats me why today's hi tech aeroplanes lack this very simple alert system.
HotDog is offline  
Old 15th Aug 2001, 12:27
  #39 (permalink)  
The Guvnor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

As I said on another thread, there's two sides to every story and I find it extremely hard to believe that David Turnbull and the rest of the CX management team would simply wake up one morning and say "right, let's fire 52 guys ... just because we can!" - especially after investing so much money in them over the years; and in particular when CX is short of crews!

People only get fired for good reasons ... so what's the CX management view with these guys?

I also find it mildly amsusing - if somewhat sad - that apparently CX crews expect to have things the way they were in the 70s and 80s. Wake up and smell the coffee, people - this is the 21st Century and if you think you've got it bad, try a stint at SQ, KE or BR!
 
Old 15th Aug 2001, 13:14
  #40 (permalink)  
Tool Time
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

The are never two sides to every story.
When it seems there may be, you can be assured there is only one.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.