40% of Pakistani pilots hold fake flying licenses: Aviation Minister
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: expat
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something that our industry might take as pause for thought is that if such a large percentage of Pakistani pilots have not taken/passed the required training then what does that say about the usefulness or essential nature of that training?
40% of a nation's pilots is a statistically significant number but despite Pakinstans poor accident record by Western standards I wonder if the rate is anywhere near as high as might be expected given that figure.
On the acceptance of the figure of 40% how then is the accident rate so low given that almost half their pilots are not properly vetted?
Could it be that the vast scope and depth of Western training actually doesn't make all that much difference? That given time anyone with a modicum of ability and either a sharp pencil or a large wallet will get familiar enough to make a decent fist of it? I have come across one ot two pilots in Eu who conform to that description who have seemed quite reasonable pilots, except in pressurised circumstances.
40% of a nation's pilots is a statistically significant number but despite Pakinstans poor accident record by Western standards I wonder if the rate is anywhere near as high as might be expected given that figure.
On the acceptance of the figure of 40% how then is the accident rate so low given that almost half their pilots are not properly vetted?
Could it be that the vast scope and depth of Western training actually doesn't make all that much difference? That given time anyone with a modicum of ability and either a sharp pencil or a large wallet will get familiar enough to make a decent fist of it? I have come across one ot two pilots in Eu who conform to that description who have seemed quite reasonable pilots, except in pressurised circumstances.
The obvious opposing argument is that having a system of background information and theory with the associated hoops to jump through builds a feeling of exclusiveness and accomplishment. This status and the perceived time investment modifies the individuals behaviour towards conservatism because it's an achievement you don't easily throw away. The apparent low difference in accident rates needs proper statistical analysis but I think there's some dilution due to the size of the relative markets, globalised aviation standards and the actual extent of "fake" (how fake - a little or a lot?) credentials muddies the waters somewhat.
Last edited by HPSOV L; 27th Jun 2020 at 22:35.
This accident may not be purely the result of fake license even with gunuine license similar crashes have happened. And an individual here and there may beat the system in any country. But the ability of such large number of people to get licenses, get selected in airlines, successfully go through their training programs and transition from right to left and subsequently become trainers themselves shows the rot is very deep. It's not just professionally mediocre but the criminal minds eventually take over power centres of Unions etc. and make it impossible to change the system. That is very frightening.
I blame some of it on pay-to-fly schemes, whereby a candidate stumps up big bucks and expects a qualification at the end of it. We see this problem in our universities also, where pay-for-a-qualification schemes are the very financial lifeblood of these institutions.
Then we have subtle pressure applied on airline check pilots. The attitude is often that the candidate or the airline (or both) have invested a lot of money in training, so let them through the final simulator check on the basis that they will get solid consolidation during line training to address any deficiencies. But that does not always happen, as the exigencies of the roster cause short cuts to be taken, boxes to be ticked etc in order to get them out on line as soon as possible.
And, forgers or fakers do come up with some most innovative tricks. Only a few years ago I did a type rating on a guy who claimed that he had been a B747 Captain with British Airways. To put it mildly he was not very good, but foolishly (with the benefit of hindsight), I passed him out to commence line training. Reports back indicated that he could not taxi, which aroused suspicion that he had never operated a steering tiller. Further investigation by the airline revealed that he had never had a command at BA. His employment was terminated.
Six months later he reappeared at the simulator centre on another airline's type rating course, where reports from his instructor indicated that he was rather clueless, given his licence already had the aircraft type on it (different type). A photo copy of his licence not only showed the type rating I had legitimately issued, but his 'new' type issued some time previously, and somehow he was now an instructor and examiner on the type I had issued! Good work to achieve instructor and examiner on a complex aeroplane with scarcely any time on type and within six months. His licence was issued by a respected regulator known to be quite strict in processing paperwork and did not appear to have been a conversion of a foreign licence. I'd love to know how he did it.
Needless to say, now, at the slightest indication of a standards problem, my candidates don't get the benefit of doubt; they fail and are required to undergo further training before I will re-check them. Of course that does not guarantee that they won't go elsewhere for a check.
As for the Pakistani problem - ICAO should immediately down-grade the whole country to restrict them to domestic operations until such time as the regulator and airline receive a complete overhaul and rigorous audit. ICAO can not interfere in internal aviation matters, but their mandate does enable them to stop dodgy operations flying across borders.
Is ICAO treading softly-softly with certain countries in name of political correctness? Another possibility?
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 28th Jun 2020 at 03:54.
UK
One of my hamble mates played golf with a retired senior manager whom we had both flown with, a bit of a bully boy. He had claimed he had been flying for a European carrier in command past retirement age, when challanged he gave a knowing wink. His past history would suggest it was true.
Another instructor of mine who went into the authority would claim he fly spits which was challanged as it wasnt true.
Then we could mention P45 hours which were used to upgrade to a senior licence prematurely. (Parker 45 pen).
Another instructor of mine who went into the authority would claim he fly spits which was challanged as it wasnt true.
Then we could mention P45 hours which were used to upgrade to a senior licence prematurely. (Parker 45 pen).
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: NAT-HLA
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing new here, things like this also happening in Euroland: former management captain at WZZ, now happy as pig in sh*t with RYR claiming previously employed by both Luftwaffe on Tornados and in China flying A340s with hours in his logbook looking rather suspicious when compared with his age. Many tried to challenge him but it seemed that he is untouchable for some reason or another. Sad.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many of the 'doctors' are Doctors of Ayuvedic Medicine, which is rightly not recognised here as it is up there with homeopathy
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think another important aspect is that those who flaunt one rule (I can fake my licence, for example) are predisposed to breaking any of the other "rules".
Surely now the insurers are formally aware of this situation they will apply pressure for the authorities and the airlines to get this sorted?
I recall a large airline carrier in about the 1980s (Korean?) that had a run of accidents which, shall we say, should not have happened. The insurance companies refused to insure them unless action was taken. Experienced expat training captains were employed in their training department and they laid the law down and said airline had no more accidents.
Surely now the insurers are formally aware of this situation they will apply pressure for the authorities and the airlines to get this sorted?
I recall a large airline carrier in about the 1980s (Korean?) that had a run of accidents which, shall we say, should not have happened. The insurance companies refused to insure them unless action was taken. Experienced expat training captains were employed in their training department and they laid the law down and said airline had no more accidents.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: uk
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Authorities worldwide, ICAO and all of us in the industry have known about this for years but nothing has ever been done. It took a recent crash and 97 lost lives to highlight the problem. PIA should be grounded immediately until a satisfactory explanation been provided and their system rectified. EASA, FAA, ICAO should act now.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Watford
Age: 69
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7 Pakistani pilots & 56 engineers fired by Kuwait.
https://www.amevoice.com/blog/1211/f...TDLHg.facebook
https://www.amevoice.com/blog/1211/f...TDLHg.facebook
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Watford
Age: 69
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a B1 ground engineer on the UK contractor circuit who we suspected was using his father's licence.He never lasted long in any one job because he was totally useless.I heard on the grapevine that the feds eventually nailed him.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Having read this thread and considered the background to the whole issue of qualifcations and their validity I have come to two conclusions:
1. We must stop faking of licences and qualifications. By that I mean the photo-shopping of an existing "piece of paper" to show a different name, qualification, experience or whatever.
2. We must ensure that issuers of qualifications and licences are diligent in assessing the applicants and approving them. They must ensure that the identity of the prson being tested is actually that of the applicant.
Fortunately technology is now sufficiently advanced and cost-effective to help us significantly improve the authenticity of qualifications in point 1 above.
1. Instead of carrying a piece of paper or booklet with a photo at best for identification we can now use fingerprint technology - it's widely available and in use on mobile phones.
2. We can enable a direct link between the checker (new employer) and the issuer of the licence via the internet and a secure database. This will confirm that the licence is valid (today), when it might expire and be completely up-to-date with any endorsements or disqualifications that might not have made it to the paper-based system.
Dealing with my second point leads to the Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? quote - Who guards the guardians?
In practice this will be policed by failure. Employers can require that the licence issuer warranties the licence's validity - if there is a problem resulting in loss (of life, property or image) the employer can sue.
Licencing bodies with poor records will attract higher insurance premiums or perhaps even be banned, leading to a gradual improvement of standards. Good companies will only want to emply staff or contractors with licences issued by reputable authorities.
It's not perfect but, having read the comments in this thread, it also needs the employer to carefully check the applicant's background. Why would they not want to do that, particularly with anything safety related?
Unfortunately it will take accidents where people are killed and law suits traced back to employers and licence issuers before some employers care.
1. We must stop faking of licences and qualifications. By that I mean the photo-shopping of an existing "piece of paper" to show a different name, qualification, experience or whatever.
2. We must ensure that issuers of qualifications and licences are diligent in assessing the applicants and approving them. They must ensure that the identity of the prson being tested is actually that of the applicant.
Fortunately technology is now sufficiently advanced and cost-effective to help us significantly improve the authenticity of qualifications in point 1 above.
1. Instead of carrying a piece of paper or booklet with a photo at best for identification we can now use fingerprint technology - it's widely available and in use on mobile phones.
2. We can enable a direct link between the checker (new employer) and the issuer of the licence via the internet and a secure database. This will confirm that the licence is valid (today), when it might expire and be completely up-to-date with any endorsements or disqualifications that might not have made it to the paper-based system.
Dealing with my second point leads to the Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? quote - Who guards the guardians?
In practice this will be policed by failure. Employers can require that the licence issuer warranties the licence's validity - if there is a problem resulting in loss (of life, property or image) the employer can sue.
Licencing bodies with poor records will attract higher insurance premiums or perhaps even be banned, leading to a gradual improvement of standards. Good companies will only want to emply staff or contractors with licences issued by reputable authorities.
It's not perfect but, having read the comments in this thread, it also needs the employer to carefully check the applicant's background. Why would they not want to do that, particularly with anything safety related?
Unfortunately it will take accidents where people are killed and law suits traced back to employers and licence issuers before some employers care.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 678
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ICAO Matters - or does it??
(SLF, progressing in aviation law, following thread(s) re: 8303)…
With a few years' worth now of observing what activities ICAO actually does and how it actually conducts those activities, from a pretty close vantage point both organizationally and geographically, two observations relevant to these revelations are worth noting (neither of them very pedantic).
ICAO is of course driven in a top-down manner, and in order to keep its fuel tanks full of Consensus, it defines and then almost defies what amount to slogans . . . in this context, "No Country Left Behind." Pray tell, where is the international civilian aviation community going, in the first place, and why would anybody who knows how to tell the (proverbial) pointy end of the airplane apart from the, let's say, lav "Occupied" door indicator, believe that ICAO knows either the destination we're trying to reach, how to get there, or what to do if something goes awry along the way?
Lest this appear as too harsh, I'll admit I have sometimes gawked in a kind of disbelief of wonder at the palatial building in Montreal where World Aviation has its Most Important Office, but being impressed by the sheer history of the items in the ICAO Museum does not signify organizational effectiveness. This all having been said, certainly there are top-flight technical people in the Organization, especially in and around the ANC (Air Navigation Commission). But they don't decide policy initiatives, obviously, and aren't the mainstay of the all-important Consensus.
As well, there is a disconnect between the way ICAO has succeeded, and where the international civil aviation sector, globally, exists and operates today. If someone knows how to draw a line of separation and demarcation that can, and will, keep what happens (in this instance) in Pakistan's domestic air transport sector from influencing its place and function in the international realm, I hope they will articulate it. Yes international flights can be banned - that's looking from the outside into the Country Not Supposed to Be Left Behind. I'm suggesting, looking from inside that Country, oops I mean Member State, outward, where is the dividing line between stuff that goes wrong but does not matter much to the international sector, and otherwise?
As a cheap shot, I'll add that maybe the post-Second World War overall diplomatic and commercial context which gave rise to ICAO by and through the Convention in Chicago of 1944, is past due time for a basic overhaul. I have as much affinity as the next person for a nice conference-producing organization which also does first-rate technical work and thus provides infrastructure support as well as nice destinations around the world for civil servants and governments to get together and expense-account-network. Still, if FAA and other Member States' CAAs are truly regulatory bodies, and if ICAO is supposed to be only quasi-regulatory at most, somebody ought to plug the bucket before the quasi tank goes dry.
With a few years' worth now of observing what activities ICAO actually does and how it actually conducts those activities, from a pretty close vantage point both organizationally and geographically, two observations relevant to these revelations are worth noting (neither of them very pedantic).
ICAO is of course driven in a top-down manner, and in order to keep its fuel tanks full of Consensus, it defines and then almost defies what amount to slogans . . . in this context, "No Country Left Behind." Pray tell, where is the international civilian aviation community going, in the first place, and why would anybody who knows how to tell the (proverbial) pointy end of the airplane apart from the, let's say, lav "Occupied" door indicator, believe that ICAO knows either the destination we're trying to reach, how to get there, or what to do if something goes awry along the way?
Lest this appear as too harsh, I'll admit I have sometimes gawked in a kind of disbelief of wonder at the palatial building in Montreal where World Aviation has its Most Important Office, but being impressed by the sheer history of the items in the ICAO Museum does not signify organizational effectiveness. This all having been said, certainly there are top-flight technical people in the Organization, especially in and around the ANC (Air Navigation Commission). But they don't decide policy initiatives, obviously, and aren't the mainstay of the all-important Consensus.
As well, there is a disconnect between the way ICAO has succeeded, and where the international civil aviation sector, globally, exists and operates today. If someone knows how to draw a line of separation and demarcation that can, and will, keep what happens (in this instance) in Pakistan's domestic air transport sector from influencing its place and function in the international realm, I hope they will articulate it. Yes international flights can be banned - that's looking from the outside into the Country Not Supposed to Be Left Behind. I'm suggesting, looking from inside that Country, oops I mean Member State, outward, where is the dividing line between stuff that goes wrong but does not matter much to the international sector, and otherwise?
As a cheap shot, I'll add that maybe the post-Second World War overall diplomatic and commercial context which gave rise to ICAO by and through the Convention in Chicago of 1944, is past due time for a basic overhaul. I have as much affinity as the next person for a nice conference-producing organization which also does first-rate technical work and thus provides infrastructure support as well as nice destinations around the world for civil servants and governments to get together and expense-account-network. Still, if FAA and other Member States' CAAs are truly regulatory bodies, and if ICAO is supposed to be only quasi-regulatory at most, somebody ought to plug the bucket before the quasi tank goes dry.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: uk
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WillowRun 6-3
With my former employer, the regulator had handed over almost total discretion to that company's management team. FTL's, dispensations, licensing, proficiency testing was all in-house and self certified. Even the IRE/TRE's were self appointed and regulated. Of course the relevant fees were paid to the authority but this kind of in-house marking only leads to disaster. Look at the Boeing 737 Max and FAA situation. Regulatory Authorities MUST be independent.
With my former employer, the regulator had handed over almost total discretion to that company's management team. FTL's, dispensations, licensing, proficiency testing was all in-house and self certified. Even the IRE/TRE's were self appointed and regulated. Of course the relevant fees were paid to the authority but this kind of in-house marking only leads to disaster. Look at the Boeing 737 Max and FAA situation. Regulatory Authorities MUST be independent.
The issue of fake licenses is much worse in the Maritime Industry. Things are getting better only because the Insurance Industry has become the de facto regulator. They are refusing to insure some high value cargos unless the ships officers hold competency documents issued from an approved list of countries, which are almost all in the Western Hemisphere.
The difference is that except for China and Russia there are no equivalents to “flag carrier’s”. Shipping companies are businesses and they can’t survive in a very competitive market if they can’t get insurance, or at least get it at a reasonable rate.
The demise of flag carrier’s is being accelerated by the pandemic. Airlines operating on a purely competitive basis can’t afford Parker pen pilots, and the company leasing them the airplane have an interest in competent aircrew, so I think this problem will slowly resolve itself due to action by the insurance companies and leasors, while the regulators watch from the sidelines as usual
The difference is that except for China and Russia there are no equivalents to “flag carrier’s”. Shipping companies are businesses and they can’t survive in a very competitive market if they can’t get insurance, or at least get it at a reasonable rate.
The demise of flag carrier’s is being accelerated by the pandemic. Airlines operating on a purely competitive basis can’t afford Parker pen pilots, and the company leasing them the airplane have an interest in competent aircrew, so I think this problem will slowly resolve itself due to action by the insurance companies and leasors, while the regulators watch from the sidelines as usual
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: World's Largest Sandpit
Age: 66
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But the Maritime Industry is Doing Something About It
Big Pistons Forever
When I was flying skydivers back in the early 90s, one of my predecessors at the drop zone I was working at was reputed to have operated for many years on a faked photocopy of a UK licence. He was a damned fine airplane flyer to all accounts and seemed to be the real deal. I couldn't make the flying career pay and was enticed back into the ship-driving business.
I've been involved the last few months in a project to use Blockchain Technology to secure Seafarer Certifications and make the faking of certificates very, very difficult. It's simple to do. The Philippines has a system just about to go live - it would be live now but for the pandemic. A company called Navozyme is leading that and I've been working with them on our project. We're taking it a bit further in that we are looking to use the same technology and processes to verify and validate Seatime as well as certificates. It's a little easier with Seatime as our voyages are longer and so many fewer entries to verify - but the point I make is that the technology exists. In fact, IMO (international Maritime Organisation) has been pushing for e-Certificates since early 2016 and issued guidelines for their use back then.
If anyone is interested simply google Navozyme Certificate Authentication Program. They also have a link on there with simple simulation of what happens if someone attempts to alter an existing certificate - which seems to be the method of choice for most. Google Navozyme Cert Fraud Simulator and follow the instructions.
Our current targeted regulator is the UK MCA who have been mostly supportive. However, I've been discussing this with a number of other regulators. One senior official at an Eastern EU Maritime Authority expressed a worry that we would be hard pressed to make it work in his country "If we force this on the Marine Offices, how will the officials there be able to supplement their income as they do now"!
When I was flying skydivers back in the early 90s, one of my predecessors at the drop zone I was working at was reputed to have operated for many years on a faked photocopy of a UK licence. He was a damned fine airplane flyer to all accounts and seemed to be the real deal. I couldn't make the flying career pay and was enticed back into the ship-driving business.
I've been involved the last few months in a project to use Blockchain Technology to secure Seafarer Certifications and make the faking of certificates very, very difficult. It's simple to do. The Philippines has a system just about to go live - it would be live now but for the pandemic. A company called Navozyme is leading that and I've been working with them on our project. We're taking it a bit further in that we are looking to use the same technology and processes to verify and validate Seatime as well as certificates. It's a little easier with Seatime as our voyages are longer and so many fewer entries to verify - but the point I make is that the technology exists. In fact, IMO (international Maritime Organisation) has been pushing for e-Certificates since early 2016 and issued guidelines for their use back then.
If anyone is interested simply google Navozyme Certificate Authentication Program. They also have a link on there with simple simulation of what happens if someone attempts to alter an existing certificate - which seems to be the method of choice for most. Google Navozyme Cert Fraud Simulator and follow the instructions.
Our current targeted regulator is the UK MCA who have been mostly supportive. However, I've been discussing this with a number of other regulators. One senior official at an Eastern EU Maritime Authority expressed a worry that we would be hard pressed to make it work in his country "If we force this on the Marine Offices, how will the officials there be able to supplement their income as they do now"!
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Belgium
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmm without wanting to be racist I avoid airlines in India, Indonesia and Pakistan for this exact reason.... Have seen to much stuff that has been faked. When I worked in Dubai I found it irritating that I had to send all my information from my schools and have it validated in the UK with the Embassy etc. But then working there I realized that they must have learned the hard way that the papers they received from people in those countries was not worth the paper it was printed on 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope no one here still believes these licenses are "fake"?
They are not forgeries, it's a case of 1 or more exams either sat by someone else or cheated on (answers provided). Funny the CAA knows who they are (or is it, since they know who bribed them?). Standard mode of operation outside the Western world.
They are not forgeries, it's a case of 1 or more exams either sat by someone else or cheated on (answers provided). Funny the CAA knows who they are (or is it, since they know who bribed them?). Standard mode of operation outside the Western world.
