is a strong competitor os SQ
, so according to AC
, there is a possibility that a SQ
pilot report it to the media.”
Oh please, I was actually thought it was just a joke when CXCPA said something about the SQ
pilot report to the media thing. Being a strong competitor not necessarily mean them against CX
in everything, so every customer services complaint received are also from SQ
“Dangerous don't mean accident happen! just like overspeeding is dangerous, but don't mean accident happen! It is stupid to say it is safe because of no accident happen.”
Under what professional qualification that you can support yourself to say it is dangerous? Is that what all we know now about flight CX906 is equivalent to overspeeding a car?
“The government start to investigate this action before the complaint received, so is it really safe?? The answer is very simple”
It was at least not a normal landing as others. I am sure there is a mechanism of how the civil aviation department as well as CX
report or investigate incidents under certain circumstances and that incident under the current system, hence need to be investigated or being reported by the pilots. But if you think whenever being reported or investigated is equal to unsafe, then please sorry again, you are just overly simplifying what was happened.
”Nowadays, memorising is not useful to deal with HKCEE/HKAL. Please take a look of current HKCEE/HKAL papers.”
I sit for the year 2000 AL
and 98 HKCEE exams, what you see from the past papers were, if u looked at the last 5 years past paper, chances are 95% of questions that u will see in the exam were already in the past papers, and that’s not memorizing? And I am still yet to see a marking scheme of any AL
subject are instructed as giving a free hand to marker of any answer they see.
”Remember, everyone, even the most intelligent people, makes mistakes.”
You know what? That ‘s probably the only statement that I agreed, at least for the latter part for you