Boeing pilot 'sacked for Top Gun stunt'

[Corporal]

If true, this must be up there with the 707 barrel roll - something in the Seattle drinking water supply, perhaps?

Boeing pilot 'sacked for Top Gun stunt'

February 24, 2008 - 2:29PM


An expatriate pilot with Hong Kong's Cathay Pacific Airways has reportedly been fired for performing a Top Gun-style stunt in which he swooped metres over a runway in a new Boeing passenger jet.

Ian Wilkinson was piloting the Boeing 777-300ER on its maiden flight from the manufacturer's plant in Everett, Washington, when he turned around after take-off and swooped around 10 metres over the runway, the South China Sunday Morning Post reported.

Cathay Pacific chairman Chris Pratt was among the VIP passengers on board the plane when Wilkinson did his unauthorised fly-by of the Boeing factory on January 30, the newspaper said today.

Wilkinson was sacked over the incident at a disciplinary hearing last week, while a second, unidentified pilot, believed to be the co-pilot, has been suspended from training duties for six months, according to the Post.
Videos and photographs of the swoop have been posted on the internet and pilots' gossip forums, with some praising the stunt but others describing it as dangerous and poorly executed.

A Cathay Pacific spokeswoman told the newspaper that Wilkinson insisted the fly-by was "not dangerous" but said he had been sacked for not seeking approval for the manoeuvre.

The airline had a well-established approval process for such manoeuvres and had conducted them in the past at air shows but only "with proper approval in place", she said.
DPA

[xxMATTGxx]

Yeah I been reading this on Airiners.net, what you mean bu the 707? Anyway, pictures of it:

Also it wasn't a Boeing Pilot, it was a Chief Pilot from the actual airline "Cathay Pacific", Pictures of the so called stunt:

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paetd4.jpg

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paelb13t.jpg

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paelb16t.jpg

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paelb21t.jpg


Disciplinary action was taken against the captain (the 777 chief pilot) and the copilot of that flight. I don't want to go into it too much on a public forum as this is still open to a grievance procedure.

The complaint from what I understand come from the HK version of the FAA, HKCAD. Specific approval need to be obtained for such things from them, and the applicant needs to abide by any conditions stated on the approval.

At worst, the HKCAD could suspend the airline license that CX operates under, it is a very serious matter.

[Kenneth]

On airliners.net rumour has it the CEO was in the flight deck.

[xxMATTGxx]

Yes, according to local paper, Apple Daily, the pilot has been fired because it goes against CX's safety manual, and he has not received the approval from CX internal management. There were 80 important guests on board for that delivery flight and most guests were not particularly shocked or felt anything different. They thought it was part of the ceremony. Nobody complained. However, the pilot had received permission from PAE tower and ATC authority to conduct this low fly-by. The only reason why he is fired is because he did not receive permission from CX. The other pilot also received some form of disciplinary action. (The paper is actually biasing [hints] towards the point that CX only cares about such event when it involves the rich and famous... anyway, that discussion is not for this forum.)

I personally think it is not that big of a deal, and don't know if the event has escalated to the stage that the chief pilot has to be fired. Maybe disciplinary action such as suspension for six months is warranted, but firing him is a bit much. Anyway, CX is a very different company now and very intolerable to any kind of action departing from the manual or not following the company's hierarchy.

Carfield

PS. All these informations are based on a local Hong Kong paper, which is definitely not a direction aviation report.

More information from A.net, if anyone is wondering about it.

[L!nK..]

link to video looks interesting

[jesus]

Yeah I been reading this on Airiners.net, what you mean bu the 707? Anyway, pictures of it:

Also it wasn't a Boeing Pilot, it was a Chief Pilot from the actual airline "Cathay Pacific", Pictures of the so called stunt:

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paetd4.jpg

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paelb13t.jpg

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paelb16t.jpg

http://www.seattle-deliveries.com/a/0108/bkpf_300108paelb21t.jpgGreat pictures, what a crazy pilot!

[xxMATTGxx]

Great pictures, what a crazy pilot!

Not really, its very common they do such of things like this at the Boeing field on the delivery flights, but these crew were one of the hopeless ones and got fired for it, because they never got permission from the airline.

[---MAD---]

Hmm, I don't get what he did. Went up and down?

[xxMATTGxx]

Hmm, I don't get what he did. Went up and down?

He did a low fly past, which in reasons and without permission the pilots can get fired. The pilots had permission from the airports atc and all that but the guys back in the airlines country didn't like it and they did not have permission and all that so they got fired.

[warezkid3]

Went up, then stright down too fast, then pull himself up before he hit the floor

right? :S

[myke]

Anyone have a video link, sounds interesting and thats a fit plane but a stupid manoeuvure (sp?)

[xxMATTGxx]

Anyone have a video link, sounds interesting and thats a fit plane but a stupid manoeuvure (sp?)

Its not a stupid thing to do, its normal for delivery flights like i have said. Its called a ceremony, where the aircraft do a low fly by over the boeing field, where it was mostly likely made then flies off to its destination. This has happened many of times, just this once unfortunately the airline sacked the pilots for doing it.

[myke]

But if they've been told not to then it is stupid imo.

[xxMATTGxx]

But if they've been told not to then it is stupid imo.

Nooo, You don't see. They had permission to do it from the ATC right, they got to their destination the so called FAA in that country didn't like what they did and contacted the airline for them to do something or it may loose its license. But they sacked the flight crew who were in command of the aircraft at the time.

[Swearwolf]

if they had permission then why did they get sacked ? :s

[myke]

I understand now Matt, thanks :)!

[xxMATTGxx]

if they had permission then why did they get sacked ? :s

Federal Aviation Administration in Hong Kong, has a different name but you get the idea. The aircraft has an hong kong registration which if it breaks any laws even if its not the country they still can get done. So thats why they got fired.

Some of the above will be wrong, as i'm not sure how it works. But thats how it kinda worked and why.

[jesus]

Not really, its very common they do such of things like this at the Boeing field on the delivery flights, but these crew were one of the hopeless ones and got fired for it, because they never got permission from the airline.Thus making him 'crazy' as I previously mentioned.

[---MAD---]

He did a low fly past, which in reasons and without permission the pilots can get fired. The pilots had permission from the airports atc and all that but the guys back in the airlines country didn't like it and they did not have permission and all that so they got fired.
Ah I see. Not sure whether I agree or not with the firing as I don't know enough about how things like this work :P.

[cocaine]

daaaamn that was low

[xxMATTGxx]

Ah I see. Not sure whether I agree or not with the firing as I don't know enough about how things like this work :P.

1. No they shouldn't because it gave the airline some good media (if they didn't fire them) for a cool flybys on their new aircraft in a new paint.

2. Yes because they didn't get permission from the airline and was breaking their policy on flybys.

Its a hard one to be honest.

[jesus]

I'd go with number two because safety should come before advertisement.

The company obviously have their heads screwed on.

[xxMATTGxx]

I'd go with number two because safety should come before advertisement.

The company obviously have their heads screwed on.

At least the plane spotters liked it :P