Korean Pilot Evaluation

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

All true - my father in law was a 37 Stds Capt., worked as a contractor after he retired. He worked with Russians, many he said were "very good, others shouldn't be flying a kite!"
 
Waiting 90 seconds after standstill before calling for evacuation seems a tad tardy to me ...... but .... regardless of how this turns out, the Ladies in the crew apparently were on the ball and disciplined. The chief stew has been referred to as the Sully Sullenberger of stewardesses ... :)

MM
 
That kinda makes me realise what is going on here.

To crash a modern jet liner with no malfunctions in good weather dont sit right.
 
That was an interesting article. The comment about crew resource management (CRM) is spot on. My wife asked me right after the crash, "wouldn't the other pilot say something?". Maybe. Maybe not. CRM became a really big deal in the 1980s. While the concept is an old one, it became a huge issue when Asia bloomed as a world destination and economic hotspot. Many Asian country's cultures frown upon questioning authority. It soon became clear in post accident/incident investigations involving Asian flightcrews, that there was a trend in contributing factors that involved the flight engineers (in older models) or pilot not flying from voicing discrepancies in piloted trajectory or ignored airplane status and system anomalies. The CRM concept was reinforced at a UN ICAO level to help change this culture and regain the benefits of flightcrew cross-checking instruments, airplane status and flight planning. This was a big push internationally. That article implies that they have a way to go to remove such culture.
 
What I was thinking was KAL 007.

This guy was saying the KAL 007 was very possible because the crews were simply not up to it.
 
You guys think their Air Force is as bad? The article mentioned that Air Force vets got super seniority and that the pilots were bad, so that probably reflects something right?
 
Perhaps. Think Saudi Arabia. Latest technology and likely a paper tiger compared to technology vs capability. :dontknow:

Personally, I'd bet India with Su-27s vs Saudi with F-15S. But that is just an armchair assessment.
 
Unlike the US, military pilots from countries like S Korea or India rarely go on to work for an airline after their military careers are over. Most of their Commercial pilots come from civilian ranks and are trained in the west (mainly in the US)
 
Last edited:
One would think that an airline pilot should be able to fly a visual approach on a reasonably clear day; that the cockpit crew of the Asiana could not, I think, points to some serious defects in their training regime and possibly South Korea's pilot qualification standards.
 
One would think that an airline pilot should be able to fly a visual approach on a reasonably clear day; that the cockpit crew of the Asiana could not, I think, points to some serious defects in their training regime and possibly South Korea's pilot qualification standards.
It wasn't that they couldn't do it, they didn't do it at the critical time. I know that these pilots probably shot several approaches both instrument and VFR in a full-movement certified sim prior to this flight and they probably went through an array of emergency procedures including engine outs and go-arounds. Flight Safety has locations in Hong Kong and Tokyo and they specialize in airline sim and re-currency training.

I also know that south Korea's Commercial and ATP qualifications probably mirror ours. It would not surprise me if that entire flight crew was trained in the US.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back