Roy Hudd

are you really a sanctimonious t:mad::mad:t, or is that just the persona you display on this forum?

What makes you think I know so little about it? FYI I do understand what authorisation means - although not a pilot and never have been one, I have in a previous profession flown for the military. Pilots are not the only ones that fly.

I had to sign for aircraft that I and my pilot took out, and also countersign the authorisation sheets for the sorties. Also, as a secondary duty I had a lot do do with the organisation of airshows that were put on at some of the bases I served at... I think you will find that authorisation is a very big part of this process - no doubt you already know - it just may surprise you that other people understand these things as well.

As it happens, in this instance we are not talking about the authorisation with reference to competency or display lines or anything else - we are talking about what the employer expects from its employees.

So thanks for the clue, but it's not needed... why don't you climb back into your Ivory Tower, you can show your face again when you have the balls and the humility to realise that authorisation and company SOPs are not solely the domain of someone who has pilots wings.

Whether I agree or disagree that the fun has been taken out of so many things in life has bugger all relevance to this, the pilot signs out the aircraft and in doing so agrees to operate it IAW company SOPS.

If the safety of the aircraft is in danger (or believed to be), then the pilot has every right to do what he or she wishes to regain the safe operation... that's what the training and pay is for.

If the pilot decides to do something outside of company SOPs, just for the hell of it, then that company is within its rights to discipline him or her.

Whether the punishment fits the 'crime' is another argument altogether - I personally would say he has been harshly done by, especially given his experience and seniority, but that is by the by.

777 flyby
 

Fantastic photo

Good Job Cathay pilots.
Great Pictures.

:D Great photos and beautiful aircraft, but I do believe he broke several FAR's by making this pass, hope the FAA doesn't see this. :E

Mergers, outsourcing, castrated ALPAS, fully configured one zero miles out, big brother FOMS, it is a whole new world. Call it professionalism or nanny like, flying is no longer fun. I can't blame Capt IW for letting go the urge.

But just like getting commat to join the mile high club, we have to pay the consequenses.

Great photos. :D

Dreamland,
it was reported that the tower gave permission,...I don't count this as aerobatic or risky---and I know the FARs and rules for air shows/ aerobatics/ formation flying---landing gear inspections happen at times---and when they are asking for a such a check---they probably don't want to land immediately!

---also anyone ever see some of the Circling minima published :eek:
in a circling approach the aircraft is in a much more vulnerable configuration.

any 30hr student should be able to do a clean flyby---and any 2000hr+
line pilot should be able to do so in a jet

and I think D.P. Davies could have pulled it off too:}

Have to say, I'm not overly qualified to comment still being about 3 weeks from my very own CPL, but I'd be interested to see CX's criteria for performing fly-bys, perhaps this captain thought he was well qualified to perform such a stunt (not a big fan of that word) being the chief pilot of the fleet, thus, I would have suspected, the person who would usually provide authorisation of such displays anyway?

Anyone care to shed light on who their company demands authorisation from for such flying?

Then again, if it was defined in SOPs that he needed further approval, he did rather leave himself open to a fairly hard clamp down...still, one hell of a way to go, you have to say!

With a 777 type and management experience, I'd be surprised if he's still unemployed by now.....

If such low level fly pasts are common, as several have mentioned, then why was permission not automatically sought beforehand to execute such a manoeuvre if the conditions were right, especially departing Paine field?

Surely the executives at Boeing, Cathay Pacific and possibly the Hong Kong CAA must have realised that such a manoeuvre would sooner or later have ended up in the public domain? There is bound to be someone with a camera, possibly a Boeing worker taking a picture of the aircraft he/she worked on; an aviation spotter located nearby with a long lens; or official press photographers from the local media or Boeing’s own public relations department.

Had all this been thought out beforehand this flypast could have been passed off as an officially approved; Cathay Pacific could have made excellent use of some spectacular pictures; and Jo Public would have been none the wiser.

As it is, being an aviation ‘incident’, it has made world headlines and, generally speaking, negative ones at that. Of course those within the industry, particularly the pilots, can argue the pros and cons of the safety aspect. However, it should never be forgotten, generally speaking, Jo Public still regards flying with some degree of apprehension and in many ways it is still, somewhat illogically, perceived as being more dangerous than other forms of transport.

I write this in the context of having been closely involved in a Fear of Flying Course for thirteen years and continuing to deal with nervous passengers. It always saddens me that, with the exception of some specialist journalists in trade magazines, most aviation incidents, major or minor, get badly written up in the daily broadsheets and tabloid papers by ill informed reporters and usually with lurid headlines which only serve to make the already nervous even more nervous than they are.

Captain IW
 

Well done, Ian. Sorry you got caught out by weak senior management who have previously turned a blind eye to the many low fly-by's done by CX on departure from Boeing.

(Involved in two of them myself).

I enjoyed being part of your recruitment, initial, then, command training, and know you for a sensible, competent aviator.

Good luck with your next career move.

Yours aye,

Greywings

I do not profess to know the rules, but I think Cathay have missed a trick here. Those pictures (especially the pic on page 1) are marketing gold and could have been used to enhance the image of the company.

Just my take on it.

However safe or however experienced, the pilot was a t--t. The world has moved on, he is not Douglas Bader

Who incidentally (as you probably know) managed to write off an aeroplane and lose his legs whilst showing off and performing an unauthorised, unrehearsed and unplanned fly-by (with an added barrel roll for good effect!).

I just hope that this wasn't verbally authorised for example and then the Captain concerned is now being made a scape-goat. Otherwise, serves him right. As somebody has already pointed out.... "safety, safety, safety". I don't think such stupidly low fly-by's quite fall into this remit.

I see Pprune has joined the nanny state.
Glad I,m at the end of my career.
Streuth guys/gals we used to do low passes to scare the dogs of the rwys, nobody crashed.:rolleyes: He was the boss for peets sake!

I have imposed a social rule...................if you want to come to the party, booze-cruise, BBQ, boat-trip, picnic or whatever - you've GOT to leave your photo-phone and digital camera behind.

Everyone else sits around saying the social life downroute isn't like it used to be.

Mine is !

For God's sake, he is (was) the 777 Fleet Manager, with umpteen hours on this and similar types, who probably practised this many times in the simulator. The official Boeing pictures are superb, the fly-by was clearly fully in control.
This was a day or so after the LHR 777 crash, and I happen to know for a fact that he was expressing his confidence in the 777 to Boeing.
There are airliner fly-bys at air displays - this was another one. His mistake was that he didn't give himself written permission beforehand.

CX management should hang their heads in shame at their over reaction to this piece of excellent flying. It was quite safe and was good publicity for their airline. Instead CX have shot themselves in the leg, foot whatever. When will this stupidity end?

To all those apologists and hero worshippers of IW, are all the pax onboard aware of his intention of doing such a flypast. Did they agree to participate in it? Had there been a mishap ( don't tell me a great pilot in CX like him can execute such a flypast without mishap, you say...what about the A320 and A330 prangs years ago? ) what will be the insurance cover be like since it was not authorised by the company and HKCAD? Had any of the pax updated their wills prior to this flypast?

Innocent people onboard and on the ground should not be at risk to satisfy the whims of an overrated skygod on an ego trip to impress his bosses or others ever willing to watch such cheap thrills. If you like stunts, go to an airshow!

In my experience, fleet managers and chief pilots make the most dangerous captains. They think they can get away with everything and think that hopping onto the sim and practising endlessly, they are immuned to murphy's law.

IMHO, the punishment was overboard but that DOES NOT to excuse his stupidity and ego trip.

Seems that the fly-by departure is routine for a new delivery and encouraged by Boeing flight crews and the Boeing community.

Come on Boeing - have your ATC call it "our standard departure".

How does Airbus farewell a new one?

And are the rest of you Cathay pilots whimps? Don't stand for that type of treatment to one of your respected seniors.

I'm with you HOTDOG
 

I'm with you HOTDOG flew with Ian a lot in the good old days great guy,should have had that tattoo from "Billy twothumbs" in S'pore Ian, all the best.