SIA pilots urged by union to boycott dinner

[deforce]

While I will not argue about the complexity of the modern aircraft, your argument does not explain why being more complex, there is now only 2 instead of 4 in the cockpit. It is not so much the complexity insomuch as the simplicity of flying a modern aircraft, thus removing the need of a flight engineer and a navigator.

As for the grandmother stories, of course during the flight, their eyes are always glancing on the instruments and out of the windows and making small adjustments pn the controls as it is on autopilot. Once in a while they might make some flight checks, and record some information. Why I know is because I flew a few times on the jumpseat in the cockpit.

Why 2 and not 4? Because of cost cutting measures. The computer alongst with technology such as the GPS and other ground based instruments help enable that flying a plane is more precise.

It's too small a space to try and explain the complexity of what it takes to fly the aircraft. Where pilots previously were stick-and-rudder inputs, whilst the engineer used to handle technical faults, pilots are now expected to fulfill that role. The population being more educated helps in that aspect.

I do agree that if all goes well, the task seems easy. But there's more to it than just that. Even as a stock trader looks at the stock market and does not trade, not trading in itself is a decision. And that decision requires knowledge and skill to work.

 

[ManBearPig62]

Note ALPA is not not I repeat asking for raising the Mandatory Retirement Age to 65 as per FAA and ICAO. The question is why ?

This whole business about retiring at 62 or 65 is irrelevant. If SIA is going to re-employ them at 62 under the legislation, then re-employ them at the same wage and not cut it by 8K, because they are doing the same job, with the same level of skill, under the same conditions.

It's that simple.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Man

I am a shareholder and I would hate to see SQ getting screwed by a bunch of smart ass pilots. Mandatory retirement age of 62 or 65 for airline pilots means basically that RETIREMENT and fucking off. In the US when a pilot is fucking retired he fucking retires and does not come back wether at 60 or 65/

The fact is rehiring a pilot wether at 60 62 65 is a favor and a nice to have from management not a given. If they do not like the conditions then they should just not work.


Locke

 

[Ramseth]

LockeLiberal is a "major" shareholder.

 

[eatshitndie]

I hope you do know what the autopilot does, and what the jobscope of the pilot is. However, judging from your comments, I would think not.

Military A/C do not seek permission to fly from place to place. They do so without regard for safety. It is precisely for safety that is why there are no pilots for drone A/C. Drones are normally sent for missions deemed too dangerous. If everything could be automated (and it most definitely can), then why have large A'C carriers with personnel onboard? Why not fill our airforce and navies with drone warriors. Fill our tanks with automated drivers. Matter of fact, it can't be done. It is not precise, it is not safe, and it is not economical.

who says flying commercial airliner with remote control or source-to-destination on autopilot is safe? i have argued exactly the opposite.

your reading comprehension is atrocious.

if you read carefully, i have said... "one caveat. the drones are still controlled by humans"...

which means today, there is no true source-to-destination end-to-end auto-pilot or robotic vehicle (space, air, land and sea) with its own personality and self-aware ai and that has zero human intervention involved. the auto-pilot feature on a commercial airliner exists only in mid-air at cruising speeds and still requires attention by a human pilot in cases of atmospheric changes/disturbances and/or approaching air space that is busy with traffic (apart from the usual taking off and landing).

however, ai programming has gotten so advanced that in the future, first vehicles to move from end to end on its own will be land vehicles first, followed by seacrafts, then subs, then aircraft. but those aircraft will not be used to carry civilian passengers. that future may be a hundred years away, and not immediate or near.

 

[libsg]

Human factors are the cause for most of the cause of the accidents. If you ask me, the ATC (air traffic controller) has a lot more responsibility than the pilot.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CRdfYgJm2Aw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

who says flying commercial airliner with remote control or source-to-destination on autopilot is safe? i have argued exactly the opposite.

your reading comprehension is atrocious.

if you read carefully, i have said... "one caveat. the drones are still controlled by humans"...

which means today, there is no true source-to-destination end-to-end auto-pilot or robotic vehicle (space, air, land and sea) with its own personality and self-aware ai and that has zero human intervention involved. the auto-pilot feature on a commercial airliner exists only in mid-air at cruising speeds and still requires attention by a human pilot in cases of atmospheric changes/disturbances and/or approaching air space that is busy with traffic (apart from the usual taking off and landing).

however, ai programming has gotten so advanced that in the future, first vehicles to move from end to end on its own will be land vehicles first, followed by seacrafts, then subs, then aircraft. but those aircraft will not be used to carry civilian passengers. that future may be a hundred years away, and not immediate or near.

 

[Narong Wongwan]

Sadly, that must have been years ago at the very least? Since 9/11 or rather bout a decade back, no one has been able to visit cockpits. If you have, either you are a staff working in the airline (which contradicts the very safety policies put in place), or have violated the law alongst with your friends.

I am very sure that I know what I am talking about. I work in one.

Back in the days, my kids would look forward to the tour of the cockpit whenever we were flying.
It would be the highlight of the flight for all kids onboard.

 

[kukubird58]

Why 2 and not 4? Because of cost cutting measures.
.

hahaha...in the Marine Industry, the reduction in crew manning is even more drastic...and yes the major driver is cost cutting.
Today's super tankers and container ships are operated with only a handful of crew.

 

[deforce]

Back in the days, my kids would look forward to the tour of the cockpit whenever we were flying.
It would be the highlight of the flight for all kids onboard.

U can try after the flight. Just let the crew know. Not really the best view on the ground, but that's the best at the moment.

 

[kukubird58]

I am very sure that I know what I am talking about. I work in one.

hahaha...yes I think you are working in aviation industry....just to satisfy my curiosity....are you a pilot?

 

[kukubird58]

however, ai programming has gotten so advanced that in the future, first vehicles to move from end to end on its own ......

hahaha...yes the days of fully autonomous unmanned vehicles (land, air, sea)may be decades away but many Countries have already started research & protoype development in this area.

 

[TracyTan866]

Sadly, that must have been years ago at the very least? Since 9/11 or rather bout a decade back, no one has been able to visit cockpits. If you have, either you are a staff working in the airline (which contradicts the very safety policies put in place), or have violated the law alongst with your friends.

I am very sure that I know what I am talking about. I work in one.

hahaha..thatn why i said you dun know enough of what you talked abt..

I am not a staff of the airline.

I visited the cockpit post 9/11

I was allowed into the cockpit ...how cld I violate the law when I got permission to go into the cockpit??

You may think you know a lot because u work in an airline...but you dun know all that happens

 

[Windsor]

hahaha...yes the days of fully autonomous unmanned vehicles (land, air, sea)may be decades away but many Countries have already started research & protoype development in this area.

One such research for a new Autopilot

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Lr8WXP9PItk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[deforce]

Nice humour Windsor.

@TracyTan866
I'm glad if you did visit the cockpit whilst inflight post 9/11. Yes. It still violates the law whether your 'friend' allowed you in. Your friend doesn't make the law, and neither do I. Neither of us can change it at whim for friends.
Nope. I don't know all that happens. Do you? I'm certainly not 'all knowing', but I do know what I have to and I know what pilots go through.

Enjoy the remainder of the weekend folks.

 

[eatshitndie]

hahaha..thatn why i said you dun know enough of what you talked abt..

I am not a staff of the airline.

I visited the cockpit post 9/11

I was allowed into the cockpit ...how cld I violate the law when I got permission to go into the cockpit??

You may think you know a lot because u work in an airline...but you dun know all that happens

he was factually wrong because not too long ago the ugly bum in the street with a golden voice was hired by a broadcast company to be a news commentator, and he took a flight for his new job. while on board and in flight, he was asked to go into the cockpit and spend time there... the whole experience was captured on video and broadcasted on youtube. faa and the airline did not say a word about it.

this chap has a problem with basic english comprehension, and if he works as a pilot as he claims, i worry...

 

[Windsor]

Your statement "because of cost cutting measures" is an understatement. You can do better than that I am sure, as any fool reading this can put 2 and 2 together. Like why not add productivity and efficiency in the equation.

"It's too small a space to try and explain the complexity of what it takes to fly the aircraft."

Precisely why pilots are highly trained personnel and rightly so, also enjoy high pay and perks. And let me add to the other part of your response that is pretty inadequate re-stock traders.

No doubt their job may appear simple from a layman's perspective, it takes a highly skilled professional to know how to fly such a complex machine. Now is that not better?

Why 2 and not 4? Because of cost cutting measures. The computer alongst with technology such as the GPS and other ground based instruments help enable that flying a plane is more precise.

It's too small a space to try and explain the complexity of what it takes to fly the aircraft. Where pilots previously were stick-and-rudder inputs, whilst the engineer used to handle technical faults, pilots are now expected to fulfill that role. The population being more educated helps in that aspect.

I do agree that if all goes well, the task seems easy. But there's more to it than just that. Even as a stock trader looks at the stock market and does not trade, not trading in itself is a decision. And that decision requires knowledge and skill to work.

 

[kukubird58]

I visited the cockpit post 9/11

I was allowed into the cockpit ...how cld I violate the law when I got permission to go into the cockpit??

hahaha...gugu, the pilots have no authority to give permission for you to go into the cockpit; especially post 911.......you can plead ignorance but the pilots are definitely breaking Regulations.

In the past, many pple have visited cockpits during flights because pple were less compliance with regulations.
I had the previledge only once long before 911.
Actally there was a case of a Russian passenger plane (long before 911) and the Captain let his family (wife, daughter, son) into the cockpit during mid-flight. The Captain let his son sat on his seat. His son accidentally disengaged the auto pilot and the aircraft went out of control and crashed.
This was shown in Discovery channel under Aircraft accidents investigation series.

 

[kukubird58]

.
Actally there was a case of a Russian passenger plane (long before 911) and the Captain let his family (wife, daughter, son) into the cockpit during mid-flight. The Captain let his son sat on his seat. His son accidentally disengaged the auto pilot and the aircraft went out of control and crashed.
This was shown in Discovery channel under Aircraft accidents investigation series.

pse refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_593

 

[blackreplica]

Dear Man

I am a shareholder and I would hate to see SQ getting screwed by a bunch of smart ass pilots. Mandatory retirement age of 62 or 65 for airline pilots means basically that RETIREMENT and fucking off. In the US when a pilot is fucking retired he fucking retires and does not come back wether at 60 or 65/

The fact is rehiring a pilot wether at 60 62 65 is a favor and a nice to have from management not a given. If they do not like the conditions then they should just not work.


Locke

Locke, I am going to explain this one last time. If you still don't get it, I am giving up

RETIREMENT age changes to 65 in 2012. Before 65, you are not retired, and after 65, pilots will 'fuck off' as you so aptly put it.

Despite this: SIA, insists on re-employment at 62 at a lower pay, up to age 65 which is the new retirement age. This despite the fact that post 2012, 62 has no relevance whatsoever to retirement: it has changed to 65!

Under the new rules, no one 'fucks off' before 65. SIA wants to get pilots to take a pay cut in the last 3 years before they are supposed to 'fuck off'. They call this re-employment. They cant call it retirement because the age to do so has gone up to 65. Re-employment is nothing more than an excuse to cut the wages of older pilots. Of course the union would have none of this nonsense.

Try not to get clouded by the fact that you are a shareholder. Given that fact, I can understand you position. But I have seen multiple instances in this thread where you miss the point completely. For example, you are unaware that a pilot's job scope remains undiminished to the day that he stops flying, that all health and performance requirements remain unchanged, and you do not understand the value of experience in aviation. Now you misunderstand the legislation set to take place in 2012. You feel strongly about this topic, with good reason, but you're going out of point too often, and confusing the issue

You just want to see the pilot's pay cut so SQ continues to make obscene profits, at the expense of the people who make the airline what it is today.

There is a limit to how far you can push this: When pilots start leaving and needing to be replaced by mercenary expats, at much higher salaries than locals, you can get ready for less dividends from your stock holdings.

If you think thats a good idea, i'd suggest buying shares in Cathay instead. Their pilots are mostly expats. And you will get far less in the way of dividends from them given the obscene salaries that their pilots get.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Black

Retirement age goes up next year. So why are the SQ pilots not fighting to raise the fucking mandatory retirement age in SQ to 65 in line with the ICAO and current FAA regulations ? Has SQ stated that they will not respect the new retirement age of 65 nationally ?

Thats not their fight and has never been the fight. WHAT they are fighting for is retirement at 62 with pay and privelage they have accrued according to seniority all the way till 62 and I as a shareholder think that is crap.

The issue is what happens past the mandatory SQ and state retirement age of 62. WHY not fight for it to be raised to 65 ? In the US airline pilots retire at 65 previously 60 and go take a lower paying commuter job and retire. If u think its unfair then argue raise the retirement age of 62 to 65. But heck even in the US an Uk there are mandatory retirement age requirements.



Locke