Cathay `risked passenger safety'

[andorra-airport]

Probably not very big news, but Cathay Pacific operated a flight with 2 instead of 3 pilots on board (9 hours + flight) :

A judicial review has opened into a pilots' union claims that the Civil Aviation Department breached safety guidelines by letting Cathay Pacific operate a flight with two instead of three pilots on board.

The Hong Kong Aircrew Officer's Association also accuses Cathay of risking passenger safety for commercial purposes.

Flight CX168 from Melbourne last February used an Airbus A338 - the same model as the Air France flight that crashed into the Atlantic on May 31.

High Court Judge Andrew Cheung Kui- nang was told that the duty period for pilots on board the flight departing Hong Kong at 21.20pm last February 27 was nine hours and 26 minutes.

Under CAD rules a relief pilot is required on all flights where a two-member cockpit crew will be on duty for more than nine hours.

more: http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_deta ... _year=2009

[sdbelgium]

Flight CX168 from Melbourne last February used an Airbus A338 - the same model as the Air France flight that crashed into the Atlantic on May 31.

1) This 'incident' is totally irrelevant to the Air France crash
2) There is no such thing as an 'Airbus A338'



I do, however, agree they should not have taken off. Instead rebook the pax or deadhead an additional flight crew member into Melbourne.

[TexasGuy]

This is pretty big news considering what just happened on the Continental Airlines flight from BRU-EWR.

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

What's the issue?
I tought 2 pilot it's more than enough!
Why than the hassle? A pilot and a co-pilot!
If there's a problem there's the co-pilot!
+ they can land on probably any airport in the neighboorhood within 3hours!
I don't see any problem.
Just too much pilot's waiting for work?
Maybe this is mean,and someone could say I'm jealous of not being a pilot!
Okay, I am!
But I don't see any problem of taking off with just 2 pilot's!
In these times of crisis..
If anyone see a problem, a reasonable one within the statiscs please give me the answer why not!
Maybe I can learn why!
Nice week-end!
CX-B

[HighInTheSky]

What's the issue?

If you make rules about flight duty times, rest times, min amount of flight or cabin crew on board, you have to stick to them. These are approved by authoroties, unions and company's.
9hrs + of flight one way is already quite a lot to do without an extra co pilot on board.
One can say that those 26 minutes more than 9hrs don't make a lot of difference, and i agree, BUT if we talk about 26 mins now, it will be 48 mins extra tomorrow en 3 hours extra next week...

So, conclusion to me is: let's all stick to the rules about these matters...

For me Cathay as well as the 2 pilots are to blame. I wouldn't have taken off without the extra pilot on board...

[cathay belgium]

Just about rules.. laws.. I don't know them!
I will not judge about people's jobs! But maybe the rules are a little bit too..
Just wondering...

But .. 'normal' jobs have 8 h of work, we already have a co-pilot in the cockpit for back-up!
What's the profit of a third pilot?
Is this a 'real'pilot of a student and if it's a real pilot oohh I got bored just for 20' and if it's a student,
what does it matters..
Just waste of money!
I don't think this is necessary!
If..then.. okay but taking statics.. 2 pilots dead in 1 flight is the same as a meteorite that..
Terrorism excluded but when you take this in your report 20 pilots are also not enough.

Hey,just wondering/toughts !
Don't shoot me, pilots/people.. just toughts !!!!
Give any response so I can make an opinion of it..

THX CX_B

[FlightMate]

other people work 8h, but not 8h from 10pm till 6am.

Here we talk about 9h + during the night, and then do a landing with hundreds of pax behind.

It all went alright this time, but imagine it can be a problem one day, and that day, how many would die?

[sean1982]

I totally agree flightmate.

CX-B if you would like to be a pilot you better start studying some air law

[Homo Aeroportus]

" But .. 'normal' jobs have 8 h of work, we already have a co-pilot in the cockpit for back-up! "

CX168 has a scheduled flight duration of 9h30.
This represents a part of the duty time. Actually the pilots will sign in well before the STD. One must also account for delayed departure, delay on arrival, diversion, ...
So a flight scheduled duration of 9h30 may well turn into more than 12 hours of duty, of which the last 15 minutes require your full attention and skills.

Anyhow if the rule there says 9h00 max, this is what it is.
You don't like the rule, fight it, complain about it, leave the company, but for as long as the rule is in place : apply it.

And just to remind of what fatigue can lead to, read the NTSB report on the AA crash at Little Rock. Pilot fatigue is cited as instrumental in the degraded performances of the crew.

That's what rules and regulations are for. Setting a limit that hopefully is safe enough. That there is a safety factor in it is most probably the case, .... most of the time.
The ETOPS limits have been stretched incredibly throughout the years, but they are based on factual evidence of reliability of an equipment.

I am not sure you can expect human beings to be trained to get "better" with time on fatigue effects.

My two cents.

[cathay belgium]

Hi,

Guys,
I wanted to discuss this...
I'm not apilot ,never gonna be one ,if I have a dream it's just gonna be a cessna!

But I like your opinions! ( and start getting them )!

1. human lives SHOULD always be number 1 question! ( in every occasion)
2. companies have to survive if it's OKAY and doing-ble with 2 pilots it should be this way,
BUT dare to fight unreasonable rules!
( 2 pilots = 16 h of work (2x8) with the knowings if in any case they can land..)
3. rules are rules,they are invented by serious people with knowings..
never let this be forgotten! ( or changed by economic reasons ,safety/lives first!!)

I know I give you opposite opinions, discuss it and..
CX-B

PS in a plane I will be for 90% (until now100%) be a passenger and so.. I also prefer 3 pilots but ..
I wouldn't be scared if there are just 2 pilots in the cockpit!
I once flew a A340-300 IB from CPT to MAD in a cockpit (before 9/11) ( flying time 10+) and there was just a pilot ( giving me instructions of flying the plane about 6hours (from kinshasa until landing in madrid ( my nicest experience so for!!)) and a co-pilot! .
I was sitting in the middle with a 5points belt,so where was the 3th pilot?
What's the advantage of having three pilots when he wasn't in the cockpit during the flight??
if there a problem I believe in the knowledge and experience of the co-pilot!
More is too much !
But rules have there reason for existance so I follow you pilot's.. if there are reasonble issues!

( PS I'm on YOUR side !! but I try to think about other solutions/events..)

[FlightMate]

Was your flight CPT-MAD during the day or during the night? Were there time zone changes?
I wouldn't mind doing a flight from 8h till 18h, but it another thing to do 20h to 6h.

Plus it all depends on the local CAA. Spanish are maybe more relax about their FT/DT than the hong-kong ones.

And it depends on the airline as well. People tend to think about cathay as a real safe airline, maybe not so from Iberia?

I know that if I can afford it, I would prefer to fly CX than any other airline. For service, but as well for the safety.
(I flew once with China Airlines, and after having read about all their previous crashes, I don't think I'll fly with them anymore)

Studies have shown that safety is far more increased with the addition of 1 or 2 cockpit crew, than by adding 1 or 2 extra days off before the flight.

[andorra-airport]

"Union loses court fight over third pilot"

A pilots' union has lost its legal battle against the Civil Aviation Department for allowing Cathay Pacific to operate a flight from Melbourne to Hong Kong with only two pilots instead of three.

In his judgment, High Court judge Andrew Cheung Kui-nang said the department has the discretionary powers to decide on the number of crew members that can be on board.

The Hong Kong Aircrew Officers' Association has accused Cathay of risking passenger safety for commercial purposes.

The flight involved was flight CX168, which was scheduled to fly overnight from Melbourne to Hong Kong on February 27, but one pilot fell ill.

According to the union, the operation manual calls for three pilots because the flight covers a long distance.