Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book a few years ago (Blink) with a chapter on KAL
and how a Delta captain stopped the string of controlled flight into terrain
accidents, by demanding that only English be spoken from the moment of
stepping into an aircraft. This was to remove the cultural kowtowing of
junior pilots to their seniors that had caused the string of CFT crashes. 

 

I'll bet culture stopped one pilot doing his job of calling out airspeed on
final in the Asiana crash in SFO. They reached a point of high drag,
approaching stall speed, well under approach slope and an inability to lower
the nose to recover as power increased - have a look at the Sabre video.

 

 

Keep your loved ones OFF of the two Korean airlines! I thought they had
"fixed this", they HAVE NOT!

 

I have friends who flew cargo for KAL after Pan Am collapsed. When I asked
one of them (B-747 captain) if he was still, "flying solo", he replied, "No,
I'm flying with saboteurs!!" The cargo pilots also fly passenger flights.

 

Bill S.

P.S. I respect what this guy has to say, but I disagree, vehemently, with
what he said about today's fighter pilots. That's BS. I know from personal
long experience.

 

Low-down on Korean pilots-Worse than you thought

 

ALL--FROM AN OLD FRIEND WHO WAS AN INSTRUCTOR/CHECK PILOT WITH TWA-MAIN
MESSAGE FROM AN AN INSTRUCTOR WHO WORKED WITH KOREAN AIRLINE
TRAINEES...CHILLING !!

 

Try this: it is a GOOD thing the 777 tail hit the dike.

If just ten feet lower; likely all would have been killed.

If just ten feet higher; likely outcome was full power, nose high and right
at full stall speed. 777 would have Sabre Danced (remember the F-100 Sabre
Dance crash?) across airfield and crashed in a fire ball. Might even have
crashed into terminal and killed hundreds.

 

F100 Sabre Dance video 52 seconds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZL0x-gEDM8

 

 

 

You may have seen this already. An old Navy buddy who was a line instructor
for United Airlines sent it to me. This will leave you grinding your teeth
and resolving NEVER to fly on an Asian airline. Damn!

 

Subject: Low-down on Korean pilots

After I retired from UAL as a Standards Captain on the -400, I got a job as
a simulator instructor working for Alteon (a Boeing subsidiary) at Asiana.
When I first got there, I was shocked and surprised by the lack of basic
piloting skills shown by most of the pilots. It is not a normal situation
with normal progression from new hire, right seat, left seat taking a decade
or two. One big difference is that ex-Military pilots are given
super-seniority and progress to the left seat much faster. Compared to the
US, they also upgrade fairly rapidly because of the phenomenal growth by all
Asian air carriers. By the way, after about six months at Asiana, I was
moved over to KAL and found them to be identical. The only difference was
the color of the uniforms and airplanes. I worked in Korea for 5 long years
and although I found most of the people to be very pleasant, it's a
minefield of a work environment ... for them and for us expats.

 

One of the first things I learned was that the pilots kept a web-site and
reported on every training session. I don't think this was officially
sanctioned by the company, but after one or two simulator periods, a
database was building on me (and everyone else) that told them exactly how I
ran the sessions, what to expect on checks, and what to look out for. For
example; I used to open an aft cargo door at 100 knots to get them to
initiate an RTO and I would brief them on it during the briefing. This was
on the B-737 NG and many of the captains were coming off the 777 or B744 and
they were used to the Master Caution System being inhibited at 80 kts. Well,
for the first few days after I started that, EVERYONE rejected the takeoff.
Then, all of a sudden they all "got it" and continued the takeoff (in
accordance with their manuals). The word had gotten out. I figured it was an
overall PLUS for the training program.

 

We expat instructors were forced upon them after the amount of fatal
accidents (most of the them totally avoidable) over a decade began to be
noticed by the outside world. They were basically given an ultimatum by the
FAA, Transport Canada, and the EU to totally rebuild and rethink their
training program or face being banned from the skies all over the world.
They hired Boeing and Airbus to staff the training centers. KAL has one
center and Asiana has another. When I was there (2003-2008) we had about 60
expats conducting training KAL and about 40 at Asiana. Most instructors were
from the USA, Canada, Australia, or New Zealand with a few stuffed in from
Europe and Asia. Boeing also operated training centers in Singapore and
China so they did hire some instructors from there.

 

This solution has only been partially successful but still faces ingrained
resistance from the Koreans. I lost track of the number of highly qualified
instructors I worked with who were fired because they tried to enforce
"normal" standards of performance. By normal standards, I would include
being able to master basic tasks like successfully shoot a visual approach
with 10 kt crosswind and the weather CAVOK. I am not kidding when I tell you
that requiring them to shoot a visual approach struck fear in their hearts
... with good reason. Like this Asiana crew, it didnt' compute that you
needed to be a 1000' AGL at 3 miles and your sink rate should be 600-800
Ft/Min. But, after 5 years, they finally nailed me. I still had to sign my
name to their training and sometimes if I just couldn't pass someone on a
check, I had no choice but to fail them. I usually busted about 3-5 crews a
year and the resistance against me built. I finally failed an extremely
incompetent crew and it turned out he was the a high-ranking captain who was
the Chief Line Check pilot on the fleet I was teaching on. I found out on my
next monthly trip home that KAL was not going to renew my Visa. The crew I
failed was given another check and continued a fly while talking about how
unfair Captain Brown was.

 

Any of you Boeing glass-cockpit guys will know what I mean when I describe
these events. I gave them a VOR approach with an 15 mile arc from the IAF.
By the way, KAL dictated the profiles for all sessions and we just
administered them. He requested two turns in holding at the IAF to get set
up for the approach. When he finally got his nerve up, he requested "Radar
Vectors" to final. He could have just said he was ready for the approach and
I would have cleared him to the IAF and then "Cleared for the approach" and
he could have selected "Exit Hold" and been on his way. He was already in
LNAV/VNAV PATH. So, I gave him vectors to final with a 30 degree intercept.
Of course, he failed to "Extend the FAF" and he couldn't understand why it
would not intercept the LNAV magenta line when he punched LNAV and VNAV. He
made three approaches and missed approaches before he figured out that his
active waypoint was "Hold at XYZ." Every time he punched LNAV, it would try
to go back to the IAF ... just like it was supposed to do. Since it was a
check, I was not allowed (by their own rules) to offer him any help. That
was just one of about half dozen major errors I documented in his UNSAT
paperwork. He also failed to put in ANY aileron on takeoff with a 30-knot
direct crosswind (again, the weather was dictated by KAL).

 

This Asiana SFO accident makes me sick and while I am surprised there are
not more, I expect that there will be many more of the same type accidents
in the future unless some drastic steps are taken. They are already required
to hire a certain percentage of expats to try to ingrain more flying
expertise in them, but more likely, they will eventually be fired too. One
of the best trainees I ever had was a Korean/American (he grew up and went
to school in the USA) who flew C-141's in the USAF. When he got out, he
moved back to Korea and got hired by KAL. I met him when I gave him some
training and a check on the B-737 and of course, he breezed through the
training. I give him annual PCs for a few years and he was always a good
pilot. Then, he got involved with trying to start a pilots union and when
they tired to enforce some sort of duty rigs on international flights, he
was fired after being arrested and JAILED!

 

The Koreans are very very bright and smart so I was puzzled by their
inability to fly an airplane well. They would show up on Day 1 of training
(an hour before the scheduled briefing time, in a 3-piece suit, and shined
shoes) with the entire contents of the FCOM and Flight Manual totally
memorized. But, putting that information to actual use was many times
impossible. Crosswind landings are also an unsolvable puzzle for most of
them. I never did figure it out completely, but I think I did uncover a few
clues. Here is my best guess. First off, their educational system emphasizes
ROTE memorization from the first day of school as little kids. As you know,
that is the lowest form of learning and they act like robots. They are also
taught to NEVER challenge authority and in spite of the flight training
heavily emphasizing CRM/CLR, it still exists either on the surface or very
subtly. You just can't change 3000 years of culture.

 

The other thing that I think plays an important role is the fact that there
is virtually NO civil aircraft flying in Korea. It's actually illegal to own
a Cessna-152 and just go learn to fly. Ultra-lights and Powered Hang Gliders
are Ok. I guess they don't trust the people to not start WW III by flying 35
miles north of Inchon into North Korea. But, they don't get the kids who
grew up flying (and thinking for themselves) and hanging around airports.
They do recruit some kids from college and send then to the US or Australia
and get them their tickets. Generally, I had better experience with them
than with the ex-Military pilots. This was a surprise to me as I spent years
as a Naval Aviator flying fighters after getting my private in light
airplanes. I would get experienced F-4, F-5, F-15, and F-16 pilots who were
actually terrible pilots if they had to hand fly the airplane. What a shock!


Finally, I'll get off my box and talk about the total flight hours they
claim. I do accept that there are a few talented and free-thinking pilots
that I met and trained in Korea. Some are still in contact and I consider
them friends. They were a joy! But, they were few and far between and
certainly not the norm.

 

Actually, this is a worldwide problem involving automation and the
auto-flight concept. Take one of these new first officers that got his
ratings in the US or Australia and came to KAL or Asiana with 225 flight
hours. After takeoff, in accordance with their SOP, he calls for the
autopilot to be engaged at 250' after takeoff. How much actual flight time
is that? Hardly one minute. Then he might fly for hours on the autopilot and
finally disengage it (MAYBE?) below 800' after the gear was down, flaps
extended and on airspeed (autothrottle). Then he might bring it in to land.
Again, how much real "flight time" or real experience did he get. Minutes!
Of course, on the 777 or 747, it's the same only they get more inflated
logbooks.

 

So, when I hear that a 10,000 hour Korean captain was vectored in for a
17-mile final and cleared for a visual approach in CAVOK weather, it raises
the hair on the back of my neck.

 

 

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Reply via email to