Peach aviation airbus almost lands in sea
Thread Starter
Peach aviation airbus almost lands in sea
Naha, Japan, Tuesday 29th April.
Airbus descends to 75 meters above water on approach to Naha airport ? Japan Today: Japan News and Discussion
Quote:
"NAHA — A Peach Airlines airbus mistakenly descended to 75 meters above the water on its approach to Naha airport in Okinawa, airline and transport ministry officials said Tuesday.
Flight 252, carrying 59 passengers and crew, had left Ishigaki and was due to land at Naha at around noon on Monday, Fuji TV reported. According to aviation officials, aircraft usually begin their descent into Naha from a point about five kilometers away. However, the Peach Airbus A320-200 began its descent 10 kilometers away and was only 75 meters above the water and still 7 kilometers from the airport before the pilot could regain control.
Nobody on the plane was injured, airline officials said.
A Peach spokesperson told media that the pilot, who is from Argentina, misunderstood air traffic control instructions. Peach said the pilot has been suspended, pending an investigation, Fuji reported.
Aviation officials said planes have a ground proximity warning system that sounds an alarm if an aircraft is too close to the ground, water or a mountain. During the Peach plane’s descent, it sounded twice as the captain regained control, Fuji reported.
Japan Today"
Airbus descends to 75 meters above water on approach to Naha airport ? Japan Today: Japan News and Discussion
Quote:
"NAHA — A Peach Airlines airbus mistakenly descended to 75 meters above the water on its approach to Naha airport in Okinawa, airline and transport ministry officials said Tuesday.
Flight 252, carrying 59 passengers and crew, had left Ishigaki and was due to land at Naha at around noon on Monday, Fuji TV reported. According to aviation officials, aircraft usually begin their descent into Naha from a point about five kilometers away. However, the Peach Airbus A320-200 began its descent 10 kilometers away and was only 75 meters above the water and still 7 kilometers from the airport before the pilot could regain control.
Nobody on the plane was injured, airline officials said.
A Peach spokesperson told media that the pilot, who is from Argentina, misunderstood air traffic control instructions. Peach said the pilot has been suspended, pending an investigation, Fuji reported.
Aviation officials said planes have a ground proximity warning system that sounds an alarm if an aircraft is too close to the ground, water or a mountain. During the Peach plane’s descent, it sounded twice as the captain regained control, Fuji reported.
Japan Today"
From the news report
Oh dear, did HAL and David have a disagreement on final? 
Or
Was that journalistic license? Did me mean "captain" when he wrote "pilot" there?
Or
Was the FO flying and the Captain took controls with the intention of staying dry?
75 meters ... about 240-250 feet ... low on final ... corrected the error before something bad happened. All dry. Good.
before the pilot could regain control.
Or
Was that journalistic license? Did me mean "captain" when he wrote "pilot" there?
During the Peach plane’s descent, it sounded twice as the captain regained control, Fuji reported.
Was the FO flying and the Captain took controls with the intention of staying dry?
75 meters ... about 240-250 feet ... low on final ... corrected the error before something bad happened. All dry. Good.
I agree that it isn't "good" flying, and it would not pass any check ride.
What is "good" is that the error was corrected and nobody got wet.
"Better" would have been correcting it sooner.
"Best" would to have been on the approach and not off of it.
"Bad" would have been going for that swim.
Unclear the way I presented that.
corrected the error before something bad happened. All dry. Good.
The good part is that plane stayed dry, nobody good hurt.
What is "good" is that the error was corrected and nobody got wet.
"Better" would have been correcting it sooner.
"Best" would to have been on the approach and not off of it.
"Bad" would have been going for that swim.
Unclear the way I presented that.
corrected the error before something bad happened. All dry. Good.
The good part is that plane stayed dry, nobody good hurt.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then there's the plane that got wet, although the people didn't. 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Domaine de la Romanee-Conti
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Pilot shortfall forces Peach Aviation to trim summer schedule | Airports & Routes content from ATWOnline
I don't know a lot about Peach but I do know that a very large percentage of contract pilots can't be bothered with Japan in general, with the stupendously high cost of living, superior and rigid attitudes of local trainers, astronaut medicals, and the ridiculous up-to-a-year-of-training that's required for a current type rated pilot to join a Japanese airline.
Japan could be a really great place to work, if only the JCAB would drag itself out of the 19th century, and the pay was actually proportionate to the cost of living - but until then, no thanks. I fear this incident and this pilot shortage might only be the first visible symptoms of a wider problem affecting Japanese aviation
I don't know a lot about Peach but I do know that a very large percentage of contract pilots can't be bothered with Japan in general, with the stupendously high cost of living, superior and rigid attitudes of local trainers, astronaut medicals, and the ridiculous up-to-a-year-of-training that's required for a current type rated pilot to join a Japanese airline.
Japan could be a really great place to work, if only the JCAB would drag itself out of the 19th century, and the pay was actually proportionate to the cost of living - but until then, no thanks. I fear this incident and this pilot shortage might only be the first visible symptoms of a wider problem affecting Japanese aviation
Also, being an airbus, the pilot(s) can never actually gain control.
I guess this would be the RNAV 18 approach which has you trucking in from about 8nm finals at 1000ft to 3nm for the descent due to the requirement to be below the Kadena AFB approach path. It has quite a few threats!
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 日本
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, it certainly has. Couple that with the most incompetent air traffic controllers in Japan and the place is seldom out of the incident books :roll eyes: Even at 0130, when the US Air Force are tucked up in bed, Naha insists on the procedure i.e. dragging it in at 1000' for half a lifetime.......but cannot land before 0130 due to noise abatement 
Having said all that, I can see no reason whatsoever why, having flown along at 1000', one would then begin descent at 6 miles. No amount of 'misunderstanding ATC' can cause you to think that the 3 times table has suddenly changed and it's a good idea to descend so soon. Crap airfield, crap ATC but an equally crap bit of flying and one that demonstrates a complete lack of SA on the part of the crew.
Having said all that, I can see no reason whatsoever why, having flown along at 1000', one would then begin descent at 6 miles. No amount of 'misunderstanding ATC' can cause you to think that the 3 times table has suddenly changed and it's a good idea to descend so soon. Crap airfield, crap ATC but an equally crap bit of flying and one that demonstrates a complete lack of SA on the part of the crew.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too, know little to nothing about Airbus aircraft, but the remark hits my type of Bus sarcasm.
I know that Capt Sullenburger asked for just a little more flare from his airbus glider just prior to touchdown to slow his rate of descent slightly. I also know that the software within the all-knowing Airbus flight computer/confusers, prohibited Sully from extracting a few more bits of lift energy from his wing, to prevent possible loss of lift in the near future......so instead of allowing Sully's practiced, gifted hand flying skills to perform a more gentle touchdown,a little more damage occurred than probably Sully would have generated with his asked for but denied pitch request.
I know it was a happy ending anyhow
Sure lots of unhappy ending over the years however in those supposed-to-be-pilot-proof Airbuses involving overwhelmed confused pilots whose trusty steeds have acted up with some provocation at times for sure
I know that Capt Sullenburger asked for just a little more flare from his airbus glider just prior to touchdown to slow his rate of descent slightly. I also know that the software within the all-knowing Airbus flight computer/confusers, prohibited Sully from extracting a few more bits of lift energy from his wing, to prevent possible loss of lift in the near future......so instead of allowing Sully's practiced, gifted hand flying skills to perform a more gentle touchdown,a little more damage occurred than probably Sully would have generated with his asked for but denied pitch request.
I know it was a happy ending anyhow
Sure lots of unhappy ending over the years however in those supposed-to-be-pilot-proof Airbuses involving overwhelmed confused pilots whose trusty steeds have acted up with some provocation at times for sure
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Göttingen
Age: 40
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SKS777FLYER, so you know "next to nothing about Airbus aircraft", but you still need to get your uninformed BS out into the public? Are you trolling? Got anything to say about this incident?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, just chiming in with the humerous (to me) sarcastic comment about pilot control of Airbus aircraft earlier in the thread.
Some more BS...... The TRE on a re-acceptance or such flightmonkeying with I think alpha floor or some such with maybe a 320 Bus and ending up in the water some time ago....something to do with automatic near or full nose up trim while airspeed decays.
Remembering Chief pilot Captain Asseline (spelling) and the hosing he got when going outside normal flight envelope with another 310 or 320. Something about elevator authority not allowed by computer in his (self induced) situation.....and of course the drama of the flight recorder alterations/ switching involved in the aftermath.
Just everyday normal aviation BS that I dreamed up about the Bus.....ladmittedly fine aircraft with some seriously quirky quirks
Some more BS...... The TRE on a re-acceptance or such flightmonkeying with I think alpha floor or some such with maybe a 320 Bus and ending up in the water some time ago....something to do with automatic near or full nose up trim while airspeed decays.
Remembering Chief pilot Captain Asseline (spelling) and the hosing he got when going outside normal flight envelope with another 310 or 320. Something about elevator authority not allowed by computer in his (self induced) situation.....and of course the drama of the flight recorder alterations/ switching involved in the aftermath.
Just everyday normal aviation BS that I dreamed up about the Bus.....ladmittedly fine aircraft with some seriously quirky quirks
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mistakes happens in flight decks , they did and they will. Only bean counters and uneducated people are thinking that the robots in seats 0A and 0B are bound to zero faults operation.
We, ( monkeys up front) have the best equipment of human race : an adaptative brain in case of immediate threat; even the most imbecile of human will to everything to survive in front of an unexpected danger. Therefore, when everything fails, our little reptilian brain just makes what is necessary to make us realize the situation; sometimes it is too late, sometimes it is a pass.
The "pilot" who ditched the plane in the river was the luckiest pilot of that period, all mistakes and bad judgment were made in 5 minutes, the worst CRM, the worst technical skills, but the best aircraft for ditching, and like what everybody remembers of a flight ( i.e. the landing), they made it.
As far as non precision approaches are concerned, some people here have to realize that , although GPS has a worldwide coverage, many countries do not have this type of approaches published, so it is not a WASS ILS like every time ; it is not even constant descent rates because of old PAN-OPS design criteria or even not PAN-OPS ( not mentioning TERPS).
As it was said above, they made a mistake, realized it, corrected it, and landed the plane..period. Now that an investigation needs to be made in order that this error will not happen again ( at least in this company) is the essence of commercial aviation nowadays. There is NO other industry that self improve itself so often, learning from it's own mistakes and on a routine basis.
For the Airbus FBW , talking about what was 20+ years ago and nowadays, is like making a comparison between an ATL crossing in a Constellation and a 777; but something lacks in the industry though : educated persons; and this shows in a blatant manner here on pprune; the moment of fame is very acute and the anonymity ( or sense of) is not helping; it is funny to see the behavior of the people IRL compared to the attitude on forums for example.
So next time you make a mistake ( would it be in the plane, your car, boat, street..whatever) and that you REALIZE it, just slip in the feet of the crew that did just what they are paid for, take the plane from A to B, and after B being reusable...
We, ( monkeys up front) have the best equipment of human race : an adaptative brain in case of immediate threat; even the most imbecile of human will to everything to survive in front of an unexpected danger. Therefore, when everything fails, our little reptilian brain just makes what is necessary to make us realize the situation; sometimes it is too late, sometimes it is a pass.
The "pilot" who ditched the plane in the river was the luckiest pilot of that period, all mistakes and bad judgment were made in 5 minutes, the worst CRM, the worst technical skills, but the best aircraft for ditching, and like what everybody remembers of a flight ( i.e. the landing), they made it.
As far as non precision approaches are concerned, some people here have to realize that , although GPS has a worldwide coverage, many countries do not have this type of approaches published, so it is not a WASS ILS like every time ; it is not even constant descent rates because of old PAN-OPS design criteria or even not PAN-OPS ( not mentioning TERPS).
As it was said above, they made a mistake, realized it, corrected it, and landed the plane..period. Now that an investigation needs to be made in order that this error will not happen again ( at least in this company) is the essence of commercial aviation nowadays. There is NO other industry that self improve itself so often, learning from it's own mistakes and on a routine basis.
For the Airbus FBW , talking about what was 20+ years ago and nowadays, is like making a comparison between an ATL crossing in a Constellation and a 777; but something lacks in the industry though : educated persons; and this shows in a blatant manner here on pprune; the moment of fame is very acute and the anonymity ( or sense of) is not helping; it is funny to see the behavior of the people IRL compared to the attitude on forums for example.
So next time you make a mistake ( would it be in the plane, your car, boat, street..whatever) and that you REALIZE it, just slip in the feet of the crew that did just what they are paid for, take the plane from A to B, and after B being reusable...
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CL300, could you please clarify your post? You refer to an airbus that lands in a river and say
..."all mistakes and bad judgement were made in 5 minutes, the worst CRM, the worst technical skills, but the best aircraft for ditching....and they made it."
Unless you are referring to another river landing that hasn't come to my attention, perhaps the above statement may lead to misunderstanding and you may wish to rephrase it???????
..."all mistakes and bad judgement were made in 5 minutes, the worst CRM, the worst technical skills, but the best aircraft for ditching....and they made it."
Unless you are referring to another river landing that hasn't come to my attention, perhaps the above statement may lead to misunderstanding and you may wish to rephrase it???????
I think you'll find that the incident referred to by SKS777FLYER is not the Hudson River ditching but the A320 lost over the Mediterranean on a test flight when the crew started doing things totally against the book.
The "pilot" who ditched the plane in the river was the luckiest pilot of that period, all mistakes and bad judgment were made in 5 minutes, the worst CRM, the worst technical skills, but the best aircraft for ditching, and like what everybody remembers of a flight ( i.e. the landing), they made it.
