[LINK] Fwd: The Asiana SF accident

[Jan Whitaker]

>Further details on some of the underlying issues with Asiana 
>Airlines.  This is from an American airline pilot who spent some 
>time in Korea as a Sim Instructor:
>
>
>After I retired from XXX as a Standards Captain on the (747) 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, its 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 dont 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 at 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 a 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 at 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 couldnt 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 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 to fly while talking about how 
>unfair Captain Xxxx 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 a 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 couldnt 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-141s 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 tried 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 cant 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 them 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.


Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
blog: http://janwhitaker.com/jansblog/
business: http://www.janwhitaker.com

Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or 
sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
~Madeline L'Engle, writer

_ __________________ _