Cathay pilot 'sacked for Top Gun stunt'
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sacking
Thanks HD. Seems essentially we are on the same team. As for the comment of Mavrik1, it seems you may have been rejected by CPA at some time.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this "not a dispaly pilot " etc etc is a load of tosh. It was a fly by not an aerobatic dispaly. Yes there was risk, but not as much as the pr1ck who let his junior fo nearly wipe out an airbus in germany.
It is usualy rattled out by the ex raf fast jet boys so far up their own and the CAA backsides they think they have the monopoly on being competant.
He broke the company rules thats it. He doesnt need to have singlehandedly sunk the belgrano or built his own spitfire to achieve that.
It is usualy rattled out by the ex raf fast jet boys so far up their own and the CAA backsides they think they have the monopoly on being competant.
He broke the company rules thats it. He doesnt need to have singlehandedly sunk the belgrano or built his own spitfire to achieve that.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: home
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New challenges ahead
I am unsure of Mr. Wilkinson's exact age, but if he wants to continue flying after having seen this side of aviation, I am sure he'll have no issues finding a new job.
There's a great demand for experienced captains in many parts of the world, and I am sure as long as he says in the interview that he's learnt his lesson, I see no reason why any airline would not hire him. He sounds quite senior and should be in cockpit sooner rather than later (should he so want).
An isolated flyby (likely with vocal permission from management) does not mean the pilot is reckless during sceduled flights operations as well. I wish him luck, as a passenger I'd have no qualms flying with him as captain.
I also feel that although CX reaction sounds harsh, they are fundamentally doing the right thing. Airlines need to take a very uncompromising stand in any such incident because this sends a message to all pilots in the organization. Given how much effort and expense is employed in making sure that no incidents take place, any step out of the ordinary or mundane needs to be addressed in an uncompromising manner to protect the company in future.
I do not hold the other people in the cockpit responsible, they weren't in command. And I am sure they have all learnt their lessons too.
There's a great demand for experienced captains in many parts of the world, and I am sure as long as he says in the interview that he's learnt his lesson, I see no reason why any airline would not hire him. He sounds quite senior and should be in cockpit sooner rather than later (should he so want).
An isolated flyby (likely with vocal permission from management) does not mean the pilot is reckless during sceduled flights operations as well. I wish him luck, as a passenger I'd have no qualms flying with him as captain.
I also feel that although CX reaction sounds harsh, they are fundamentally doing the right thing. Airlines need to take a very uncompromising stand in any such incident because this sends a message to all pilots in the organization. Given how much effort and expense is employed in making sure that no incidents take place, any step out of the ordinary or mundane needs to be addressed in an uncompromising manner to protect the company in future.
I do not hold the other people in the cockpit responsible, they weren't in command. And I am sure they have all learnt their lessons too.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some have and some haven't seen the point of this fly-by. It might be summed up in one word - tradition! A thank you to all the workers to let them see the results of their endeavours. It's been done for years and years. If that is not tradition what is?
The management of CX, whoever they are, are foolish to give themselves the privilege of an OTT re-action. It is time, if indeed they have the balls, to say to IW 'OK, we got it wrong, now we know what was really meant by it.'
But have they the balls? I rather doubt it somehow.
The management of CX, whoever they are, are foolish to give themselves the privilege of an OTT re-action. It is time, if indeed they have the balls, to say to IW 'OK, we got it wrong, now we know what was really meant by it.'
But have they the balls? I rather doubt it somehow.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
at least one post out of 15 pages that mentions environmental effect....apparently 106$ a baril isn't enough yet...but who cares!!!
its not the topic...i can entertain myself flying visuals trying to save 2-300kg on every approach but some apparently don't think that way...
its not the topic...i can entertain myself flying visuals trying to save 2-300kg on every approach but some apparently don't think that way...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Middle East
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a stunt if the gear is down. added (Hotdog) 
I think this guy's career with Cathay is over now. The lawyers will make sure of it. If not in a lower capacity. I have no objection to what he did. But of course the agreement prior with Cathay (not the dude he was drinking with last night) would have saved his a$@e.
Good luck to him. Lots of jobs for experienced people out there.
Congrats on one of the best videos on the net.
(ok hamburgh has taken your limelight now)
I think this guy's career with Cathay is over now. The lawyers will make sure of it. If not in a lower capacity. I have no objection to what he did. But of course the agreement prior with Cathay (not the dude he was drinking with last night) would have saved his a$@e.
Good luck to him. Lots of jobs for experienced people out there.
Congrats on one of the best videos on the net.
(ok hamburgh has taken your limelight now)
Last edited by Cam32; 7th Mar 2008 at 20:28. Reason: Had to read back, popular thread. Found it....HD
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also feel that although CX reaction sounds harsh, they are fundamentally doing the right thing. Airlines need to take a very uncompromising stand in any such incident because this sends a message to all pilots in the organization. Given how much effort and expense is employed in making sure that no incidents take place, any step out of the ordinary or mundane needs to be addressed in an uncompromising manner to protect the company in future.
If CX management came to the conclusion that he had broken the rules not obtaining prior permission for the fly-by they could have dealt with it in a different manner e.g. suspending him from fleet chief position or imposing another similar penalty giving a clear message to CX pilots for the future.
But sacking a high senior pilot like him was nothing but satisfying press and public, and that’s cheap! And for sure it is no means to strengthen corporate identity of employees.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It wasn't the press or public CX had to please, it was the Hong Kong CAD, if CX had taken lesser action it would have been seen by the CAD as giving them the finger after their intervention.
I doubt there will be any lawyers involved either. I have been told by an employee that in CX, if you are sacked, they are only obliged to pay you that part of the provident fund that you paid in but if you agree to go quietly then you get the lot.
I doubt there will be any lawyers involved either. I have been told by an employee that in CX, if you are sacked, they are only obliged to pay you that part of the provident fund that you paid in but if you agree to go quietly then you get the lot.
1/ CX 3337 requested a flyby, it was approved by the Tower.
2/ CX 3337 flew lower than the "normal" flyby at Everett and the Tower controllers had a poo in their pants and filed a complaint.
3/ The FAA complained to Boeing.
4/ Boeing complained to Cathay.
...................Corporate Safety Dept investigation.
IW sacked.
Now we wait for the appeal process.
2/ CX 3337 flew lower than the "normal" flyby at Everett and the Tower controllers had a poo in their pants and filed a complaint.
3/ The FAA complained to Boeing.
4/ Boeing complained to Cathay.
...................Corporate Safety Dept investigation.
IW sacked.
Now we wait for the appeal process.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The primary mistake made by the pilot was to have made the "fly-by" with the gear retracted. If he had extended the gear the event would most likely have gone without comment, not unlike a missed approach made at airports all over the globe on a daily basis."
The validity of this point, made by others too, escapes me.
Regardless of the safe/unsafe aspects of this case, how is the novelty/excitement attending taking delivery of a new aircraft to be conveyed/displayed in demonstration of just another missed approach recovery? Other than preventing an inadvertent pod scrape, what's the gear going to do in these circumstances? Norralot of excitement in watching the thing lumbering past at Vmca+5 I wouldn't have thought.
The validity of this point, made by others too, escapes me.
Regardless of the safe/unsafe aspects of this case, how is the novelty/excitement attending taking delivery of a new aircraft to be conveyed/displayed in demonstration of just another missed approach recovery? Other than preventing an inadvertent pod scrape, what's the gear going to do in these circumstances? Norralot of excitement in watching the thing lumbering past at Vmca+5 I wouldn't have thought.
no i guess not.
But if he'd done a normal approach at flap 30 followed by a nice GENTLE go-around ( slow rotation to climb att ) down the runway at 60 feet or so followed by a steepish climb cleaning up it would have achieved 2 things:
1/ a flyby of sorts, quite low and loud. nice
2/ within Company SOP's, not triggering any FDAP and not requiring approval.
So i can see this point as valid.
But if he'd done a normal approach at flap 30 followed by a nice GENTLE go-around ( slow rotation to climb att ) down the runway at 60 feet or so followed by a steepish climb cleaning up it would have achieved 2 things:
1/ a flyby of sorts, quite low and loud. nice
2/ within Company SOP's, not triggering any FDAP and not requiring approval.
So i can see this point as valid.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite so, ACMS, but this sort of thing is regularly observed from Spotters' Corner and, frankly, is no big deal.
We're not talking Concord here. The V-bombers were wonderful at this type of display but with respect, I think it would be awfully tame done by a Triple Seven. Where's the joy? The excitement?
Perhaps I'm just too old. I saw Capt. Wilkinson's manoeuvre performed by the Comet after a record-breaking trip to Australia in, I think, 1953. Even if Pprune had been about then, nobody would have posted (at least, not negatively) as it was seen by everyone as an act of celebration at a time when we still had some accomplishments to celebrate. No Milt, we don't need any hands on stuff anymore. Time has passed us by.
Time for my Horlicks . .
We're not talking Concord here. The V-bombers were wonderful at this type of display but with respect, I think it would be awfully tame done by a Triple Seven. Where's the joy? The excitement?
Perhaps I'm just too old. I saw Capt. Wilkinson's manoeuvre performed by the Comet after a record-breaking trip to Australia in, I think, 1953. Even if Pprune had been about then, nobody would have posted (at least, not negatively) as it was seen by everyone as an act of celebration at a time when we still had some accomplishments to celebrate. No Milt, we don't need any hands on stuff anymore. Time has passed us by.
Time for my Horlicks . .
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gsora
Permanently grounded?
So says a guy who was a mil techie on Shackletons 30 years ago, then got a motorglider ticket and a couple of months ago didn't understand ETOPS.
He was showing off with pax aboard, got what he deserved, should be permanently grounded.
So says a guy who was a mil techie on Shackletons 30 years ago, then got a motorglider ticket and a couple of months ago didn't understand ETOPS.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts