Punctuality before safety: Chirp reports on a Low Cost Airline.
Thread Starter
Punctuality before safety: Chirp reports on Low Cost Airlines.
Anyone like to comment on which budget carrier this report refers to?
Inappropriate Interpersonal Relations
A human factors problem that I believe to be on the increase is a growing tendency observed primarily, with some of the ‘low cost’ airline operators, of flight crew reacting inappropriately to air traffic control clearances and instructions received.
These inappropriate reactions, perhaps more accurately described as inappropriate ‘behaviour’, usually take the form of overly-aggressive responses to what are perceived by flight crew as either unnecessary or unhelpful air traffic control instructions or clearances that are believed to inhibit the planned operation of the flight. Only on rare occasions do such reactions constitute a legitimate questioning of a clearance or instruction on the grounds of flight safety, something of which I would not only understand, but would entirely support on the basis of it being a valuable flight deck/ATC CRM/TRM interactive process.
Examples which have occurred recently include:
• Questioning on the R/T of the chosen traffic approach sequencing combined with an accusation that the aircraft in question was positioned ‘number two’ in the sequence because the crew were not UK nationals
• Failure to comply with assigned intermediate and final approach speeds prior to reaching 4 nm from touchdown (no adverse weather or unusual operating circumstances), resulting in a go-around by the aircraft involved
• Accusation that the Localiser Sensitive Area (LSA) was infringed during a Cat. 3 landing because of the observed position of the previous landed aircraft being allegedly within the LSA and a refusal by the flight crew involved to accept the explanation given, which confirmed that the LSA was not infringed and that the previous landed aircraft was holding in an approved position
• Frequent querying of the push-and-start order chosen by Ground Movement Control (usually, on the basis of Central Flow Management Unit-allocated Take Off times) and an aggressive attitude on the R/T when given the explanation by GMC, even when the tactical situation involves only aircraft of the same company.
• Accusation that the IRVR values passed by ATC during periods of shallow fog, are “dangerously inaccurate” (notwithstanding that the IRVR system is fully calibrated and flight checked, thereby meeting all CAA operating criteria)
• Failing to fully comply with arrival noise abatement procedures combined with a dismissive response when the error is (as required) drawn to the attention of the flight crews involved.
I would not wish to give the impression that anarchy has broken out or that this problem is occurring more often than not; at the present time, it remains the exception rather than the rule. However, it is occurring with increasing frequency and in my judgment, is due in part to the aggressively commercial ethos that exists within some airline companies and which probably translates into extreme pressure on the flight deck to achieve programmed sector flight times. In consequence, flight crew frustration with anything that interferes with their ability to maintain the schedule, clearly, will occur; this frustration will manifest itself in different ways depending on the flight crew involved.
If CHIRP is able to assist in resolving this developing situation before it reaches a level with the potential to compromise safety, it would be extremely helpful.
Most, if not all, major UK airports hold regular liaison meetings at which problems such as those described in this report can be discussed between Air Traffic Service and airline representatives. However, the effectiveness of these depends on regular participation by local operators.
As the reporter notes, the problems are infrequent. Raising awareness at this early stage might be helpful in reversing the trend.
A copy of this report has been forwarded to CAA (SRG).
Inappropriate Interpersonal Relations
A human factors problem that I believe to be on the increase is a growing tendency observed primarily, with some of the ‘low cost’ airline operators, of flight crew reacting inappropriately to air traffic control clearances and instructions received.
These inappropriate reactions, perhaps more accurately described as inappropriate ‘behaviour’, usually take the form of overly-aggressive responses to what are perceived by flight crew as either unnecessary or unhelpful air traffic control instructions or clearances that are believed to inhibit the planned operation of the flight. Only on rare occasions do such reactions constitute a legitimate questioning of a clearance or instruction on the grounds of flight safety, something of which I would not only understand, but would entirely support on the basis of it being a valuable flight deck/ATC CRM/TRM interactive process.
Examples which have occurred recently include:
• Questioning on the R/T of the chosen traffic approach sequencing combined with an accusation that the aircraft in question was positioned ‘number two’ in the sequence because the crew were not UK nationals
• Failure to comply with assigned intermediate and final approach speeds prior to reaching 4 nm from touchdown (no adverse weather or unusual operating circumstances), resulting in a go-around by the aircraft involved
• Accusation that the Localiser Sensitive Area (LSA) was infringed during a Cat. 3 landing because of the observed position of the previous landed aircraft being allegedly within the LSA and a refusal by the flight crew involved to accept the explanation given, which confirmed that the LSA was not infringed and that the previous landed aircraft was holding in an approved position
• Frequent querying of the push-and-start order chosen by Ground Movement Control (usually, on the basis of Central Flow Management Unit-allocated Take Off times) and an aggressive attitude on the R/T when given the explanation by GMC, even when the tactical situation involves only aircraft of the same company.
• Accusation that the IRVR values passed by ATC during periods of shallow fog, are “dangerously inaccurate” (notwithstanding that the IRVR system is fully calibrated and flight checked, thereby meeting all CAA operating criteria)
• Failing to fully comply with arrival noise abatement procedures combined with a dismissive response when the error is (as required) drawn to the attention of the flight crews involved.
I would not wish to give the impression that anarchy has broken out or that this problem is occurring more often than not; at the present time, it remains the exception rather than the rule. However, it is occurring with increasing frequency and in my judgment, is due in part to the aggressively commercial ethos that exists within some airline companies and which probably translates into extreme pressure on the flight deck to achieve programmed sector flight times. In consequence, flight crew frustration with anything that interferes with their ability to maintain the schedule, clearly, will occur; this frustration will manifest itself in different ways depending on the flight crew involved.
If CHIRP is able to assist in resolving this developing situation before it reaches a level with the potential to compromise safety, it would be extremely helpful.
Most, if not all, major UK airports hold regular liaison meetings at which problems such as those described in this report can be discussed between Air Traffic Service and airline representatives. However, the effectiveness of these depends on regular participation by local operators.
As the reporter notes, the problems are infrequent. Raising awareness at this early stage might be helpful in reversing the trend.
A copy of this report has been forwarded to CAA (SRG).
Last edited by Wig Wag; 4th May 2002 at 07:05.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wig Wag
Read it again. It does not refer to any specific airline at all.
I've been in aviation nearly 24 years now and the comments made could be easily levelled at any airline in the business from time to time.
observed primarily, with some of the ‘low cost’ airline operators
I've been in aviation nearly 24 years now and the comments made could be easily levelled at any airline in the business from time to time.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The post concludes:
'A copy of this report has been forwarded to CAA (SRG).'
Presumably the airlines concerned can be identified to the CAA and some enquiries made. Perceived management pressure on time keeping is an insiduous threat. This is NOT what the travelling public pay for.
I hope any line managers involved get firmly stamped on here.
'A copy of this report has been forwarded to CAA (SRG).'
Presumably the airlines concerned can be identified to the CAA and some enquiries made. Perceived management pressure on time keeping is an insiduous threat. This is NOT what the travelling public pay for.
I hope any line managers involved get firmly stamped on here.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: us
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtesy amongst pilots sharing the same freq is a time-honored tradition.As is courtesy to ATC.Perhaps its a sign of the times or the skies are too crowded.Low-cost airlines in the States dont suffer from the poor image that their European counterparts "appear" to do.Perhaps the Euro budget airlines deserve this image.Perhaps not.
I would say that from reading some of the posts on Ryanair and Easyjet,it might well be deserved.However,it would be foolish to believe that the pilots get politer when they fly for the majors.
I would say that from reading some of the posts on Ryanair and Easyjet,it might well be deserved.However,it would be foolish to believe that the pilots get politer when they fly for the majors.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: SE UK
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is probably caused by crews never having operated into either CDG, FRA, ZRH, or FCO where the preferential treatment given to the flag carriers is sometimes so obvious, that to not laugh would lead to ones early demise. Flying for a 'major' (I assume you mean BA or Midland) helps keep things in perspective when a slightly curious ATC instruction is issued at a UK airport.
I can only assume that once Ryaniar start flying to the city that is printed on the advert that their pilots will chill out when they are asked "to wait for the outbound midland to taxi behind."
As for the supposed contravention of speed requests by the 'no frills'. One hopes that this is being slower than requested due to operational constraints, but somehow I feel that the lack of Trend Analysis equipment that some carriers avoid paying for, suggest the opposite.
The day a low cost runs off the end, don't believe the b***sh*t that their PR dept issue. It'll be down to one of the offenders mentioned earlier.
I can only assume that once Ryaniar start flying to the city that is printed on the advert that their pilots will chill out when they are asked "to wait for the outbound midland to taxi behind."
As for the supposed contravention of speed requests by the 'no frills'. One hopes that this is being slower than requested due to operational constraints, but somehow I feel that the lack of Trend Analysis equipment that some carriers avoid paying for, suggest the opposite.
The day a low cost runs off the end, don't believe the b***sh*t that their PR dept issue. It'll be down to one of the offenders mentioned earlier.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chirp-Inappropriate Interpersonal Relations
Issue No 62 suggests that some of you inexperienced guys in the L&R seat with these cheap-to hire,cheap-to fire "low cost"carriers could do with a decent apprenticeship in the real world with some of us respectable scheduled carriers.
Wotcha say,or do you need an interpreter on pprune too?
Wotcha say,or do you need an interpreter on pprune too?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hereford, UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Issue No 62 suggests that some of you inexperienced guys in the L&R seat with these cheap-to hire,cheap-to fire "low cost"carriers could do with a decent apprenticeship in the real world with some of us respectable scheduled carriers.
Cheap to hire - British Airways pays thousands less to its pilots in their first 5 years with the company than do easyJet, Buzz or Go.
Cheap to fire - the last fired pilots from an established airline were the BA pilots who went on the beer with the Channel Four crew in Barcelona!!
decent apprenticeship in the real world - what? The real world inhabited by your 170hr cadets or the real world expoused by your "when I was on Tridents" skippers?!?
respectable sheduled carriers?!?! - the same ones who paid Branson millions in compensation for their smear tactics. The ones that caused the cabin crew to strike whilst they dreamt up the most costly set of now discarded tail fins ever seen in commercial aviation. The ones who built waterworld whislt creating Go which they sold just as it entered profit for a quarter of what it is worth only 9 months later?
As Neilson on The Simpsons would say - Ha ha!
Peter
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Merstham, Redhill
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno how many BA retirees go to the 'no frills' but I doubt you have many; too much like slave labour.
"...BA pays thousands less"... err, don't think so; maybe if you don't count the pension, the flying hour rate, the allowances and healthcare, not to mention a free confirmed first class seat for you and everyone on your list once a year anywhere on the BA network, you may be right. A first year FO on the Scarebus at LHR (if you are good at leggo it could be you!) takes home £3,400 and he gets roster stability, minimum 10 days off a month, six weeks holidays a year (plus three wrap days per 7 day block of holiday) and more importantly, has the leisure to do a walkround to make sure the aircraft is airworthy!!!!
That would be PILOT (singular!) and your information is flawed in the extreme as Virgin did the last lot of firing when things got tough whereas BA honoured many people's contracts who hadn't started pre 11/9.
Cadets.....no comment but 170hrs or no theirs is a baptism of fire as we have SESMA which records any gash goings on; believe me you learn quickly. Crusty Trident skippers may be boring sh!ts but they've forgotten more about airmanship than you or I will ever know in todays automated flightdeck.
The CEO who perpetrated all those idiotic moves is History. If you want to talk about underhand moves then the 'No Frills' are leagues ahead; too numerous to mention here.
So, Mr Skellen, next time you chose to launch a scathing attack on BA, try to get all your facts right, there's a good chap!
"...BA pays thousands less"... err, don't think so; maybe if you don't count the pension, the flying hour rate, the allowances and healthcare, not to mention a free confirmed first class seat for you and everyone on your list once a year anywhere on the BA network, you may be right. A first year FO on the Scarebus at LHR (if you are good at leggo it could be you!) takes home £3,400 and he gets roster stability, minimum 10 days off a month, six weeks holidays a year (plus three wrap days per 7 day block of holiday) and more importantly, has the leisure to do a walkround to make sure the aircraft is airworthy!!!!
That would be PILOT (singular!) and your information is flawed in the extreme as Virgin did the last lot of firing when things got tough whereas BA honoured many people's contracts who hadn't started pre 11/9.
Cadets.....no comment but 170hrs or no theirs is a baptism of fire as we have SESMA which records any gash goings on; believe me you learn quickly. Crusty Trident skippers may be boring sh!ts but they've forgotten more about airmanship than you or I will ever know in todays automated flightdeck.
The CEO who perpetrated all those idiotic moves is History. If you want to talk about underhand moves then the 'No Frills' are leagues ahead; too numerous to mention here.
So, Mr Skellen, next time you chose to launch a scathing attack on BA, try to get all your facts right, there's a good chap!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Secret Squirrel
Check you facts before putting finger to keyboard.
The number of ex BA -type skippers with the low-costs is significantly more than a few.
We also have good pension, sector pay and BUPA healthcare cover. Your pension arrangements are currently under some threat of change n'est pas?
I don't believe you do get a FREE, CONFIRMED, FIRST CLASS seat unless you position on duty do you? As we don't position that often - who cares?
So you've got SESMA fitted............ what does that prove?
Your quoted days off/wrap round days and holiday entitlement are exactly the same as those at EZY.
Don't understand your comment about the walkround at all. We also take that 'luxury' every flight - thank you.
How much cash has BA got in the bank then? - nuff said!
Check you facts before putting finger to keyboard.
The number of ex BA -type skippers with the low-costs is significantly more than a few.
We also have good pension, sector pay and BUPA healthcare cover. Your pension arrangements are currently under some threat of change n'est pas?
I don't believe you do get a FREE, CONFIRMED, FIRST CLASS seat unless you position on duty do you? As we don't position that often - who cares?
So you've got SESMA fitted............ what does that prove?
Your quoted days off/wrap round days and holiday entitlement are exactly the same as those at EZY.
Don't understand your comment about the walkround at all. We also take that 'luxury' every flight - thank you.
How much cash has BA got in the bank then? - nuff said!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact remains that the article refers to"some of the ‘low cost’ airline operators". Now to get back on thread, will someone dish the dirt. Name the names and the packdrill.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Far flung shores
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to fly at Go, and along the way I spent many a happy hour with blokes that used to be with BA, and I also spent many a happy hour with blokes that had come from all manner of other airlines - and to be honest I could not tell the difference, i.e. all seemed nice chaps, all operated the aircraft in a professional manner, and other than the run of the mill stuff that makes us all different, there really wasn't a lot between any of them.
I can also say that the ex-BA chaps I flew with at Go were as unlike the supposed 'BA Nigel' stereotype as could be imagined - smashing fellas ! ( as indeed were just about all of my colleagues at Go ).
I can also say that the ex-BA chaps I flew with at Go were as unlike the supposed 'BA Nigel' stereotype as could be imagined - smashing fellas ! ( as indeed were just about all of my colleagues at Go ).
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep,
Flew with a national carrier for 25 years before EZY and found the latter to be just as professional in the cockpit and engineering and training. Never saw behaviour as referred to in the report in three years with them. The odd non-pro could equally be found in the nat carrier world in my experience.
Flew with a national carrier for 25 years before EZY and found the latter to be just as professional in the cockpit and engineering and training. Never saw behaviour as referred to in the report in three years with them. The odd non-pro could equally be found in the nat carrier world in my experience.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Merstham, Redhill
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FLAPS ONE:
considering that about 300 skippers retire every year from BA I think that a dozen or so qualifies as a few.
OUR pension isn't under review, but anyone who joins now may not get on the final salary pension scheme, which is a shame but there you go. They'll have a fight on their hands if they try to change existing arrangements, I think! We had a pension scheme like yours at CFE; and I don't wish to sound pompous but this subject won't stand up to comparisons so let's drop it, shall we!
Oh yes we do get a FREE, CONFIRMED, FIRST CLASS TICKET anywhere on the BA network (Captains, which at present I am), it's just that CONFIRMED means that Bryan Ferry or Claudia Schiffer can decide at the last moment to displace you. Obviously you won't be displacing a pax paying £5,000 (quite right too!); but if that happens you get to go in Club and if that's full, well you can chose to rough it down the back or wait for the next one. However, if there's a spare seat in First, you get it, no questions asked!
If the low cost carriers had SESMA, you'd know what it proves. It actually takes the fun out of the job, I will admit. On the other hand, as far as the airline are concerned - and therefore us - it makes for a much safer operation. Our ears would have been tugged long before CHIRP ever got to comment on any trends.
I actually happen to think that EZY are a good airline on the whole, with a good business plan, as are GO. We all know which airline is the real culprit here but no-one has the legal muscle (or the balls - me included!) to venture a stab at naming names. The walkround remark was aimed at them...mainly.
Money in the bank? Well, at last count BA have stopped losing 2 mill a day now but in September they still had 900 mill. So if you do your sums up until the end of March you can come out with a figure, I'm sure. I believe that The Times this morning said EZY made 40 mill last year. Then, of course, you can take into account that BA own most of their aircraft. Their liabilities are great, granted, but there's still plenty of life left in BA yet, don't you worry.
Lastly, I notice that the comment about roster stability was conveniently ignored. Personally, that's important to me.
Listen, Flaps. BA is by no means the be-all and end-all of aviation jobs, I know. However, you can hardly blame us for coming to her defence when people continually slag her off using half truths and duff gen. Indeed, you could say the same, and I accept that .Yes BA has been guilty of underhand tactics in the past but presently it's the low costers who are. Indeed, one is under investigation by the ASA as we speak. So what do you say if we shake hands and agree to differ? See you down the BAR?
Regards SS
considering that about 300 skippers retire every year from BA I think that a dozen or so qualifies as a few.
OUR pension isn't under review, but anyone who joins now may not get on the final salary pension scheme, which is a shame but there you go. They'll have a fight on their hands if they try to change existing arrangements, I think! We had a pension scheme like yours at CFE; and I don't wish to sound pompous but this subject won't stand up to comparisons so let's drop it, shall we!
Oh yes we do get a FREE, CONFIRMED, FIRST CLASS TICKET anywhere on the BA network (Captains, which at present I am), it's just that CONFIRMED means that Bryan Ferry or Claudia Schiffer can decide at the last moment to displace you. Obviously you won't be displacing a pax paying £5,000 (quite right too!); but if that happens you get to go in Club and if that's full, well you can chose to rough it down the back or wait for the next one. However, if there's a spare seat in First, you get it, no questions asked!
If the low cost carriers had SESMA, you'd know what it proves. It actually takes the fun out of the job, I will admit. On the other hand, as far as the airline are concerned - and therefore us - it makes for a much safer operation. Our ears would have been tugged long before CHIRP ever got to comment on any trends.
I actually happen to think that EZY are a good airline on the whole, with a good business plan, as are GO. We all know which airline is the real culprit here but no-one has the legal muscle (or the balls - me included!) to venture a stab at naming names. The walkround remark was aimed at them...mainly.
Money in the bank? Well, at last count BA have stopped losing 2 mill a day now but in September they still had 900 mill. So if you do your sums up until the end of March you can come out with a figure, I'm sure. I believe that The Times this morning said EZY made 40 mill last year. Then, of course, you can take into account that BA own most of their aircraft. Their liabilities are great, granted, but there's still plenty of life left in BA yet, don't you worry.
Lastly, I notice that the comment about roster stability was conveniently ignored. Personally, that's important to me.
Listen, Flaps. BA is by no means the be-all and end-all of aviation jobs, I know. However, you can hardly blame us for coming to her defence when people continually slag her off using half truths and duff gen. Indeed, you could say the same, and I accept that .Yes BA has been guilty of underhand tactics in the past but presently it's the low costers who are. Indeed, one is under investigation by the ASA as we speak. So what do you say if we shake hands and agree to differ? See you down the BAR?
Regards SS
Last edited by Secret Squirrel; 4th May 2002 at 18:59.
