Emirates 777 go around at LHR [Archive]

Flip Flop Flyer

14th Sep 2004, 21:43

There must be dozens, if not hundreds, of go-arounds at airports around the world every single day. Yet, only those happening in the UK and especially at Heathrow seems to make these pages.

I appreciate that the majority of readers/posters here are probably from the UK, but still, are the lives of the average Mr. Brown really that boring?

By the way, there's something missing in the initial report. Where is the pilot wrestling with the controls, aeroplane saved from imminent collision with a school for physcially handicapped children and the hero reporter from the Sun saving the bacon of all aboard and on the ground?

There should be a function here on proon that automatically deletes any posts with the word "go-around" in the header.

Sorry for wasting addtional band-width.

Frosty Hoar

14th Sep 2004, 22:20

"I cant hold it ...switching to manual....!!!"
Screamed senior flight commmander Bruce d'Ego to his terrified female co pilot as the plasma displays on his boeing 777 mk2 flashed orange and then red on approach to heathrow this evening. D'Ego, already stressed out by the superior flying abilities of his co pilot during a flapless approach the night before -- felt cold sweat running down his back - this one could be death or even tea with no biscuits.....

"I knew there was something wrong"said experienced air traveller FK Witt when I saw the cabin crew smash the glass and pull the abort handle,blowing up the dinghy in the aisle, and added that this would never have happened on big airways"

The 4000 ton jet liner descended to 400 ft over tower bridge before the face of the chief pilot appeared on D'egos left plasma CRM warning anunciator, mouthing the words "remember the course, THE COURSE Bruce" and triggering the reflex action that saved the day, engaging the go around rocket motors just before impact and ensuring an impressive impromptu air display over the M25, as witnessed by tim from Chalfont-

"It Looked great as it climbed and turned north in the setting sun"

ahh sorry about that.....

:oh:

swh

15th Sep 2004, 02:44

Frosty, nice one, which paper you with :ok:

puff m'call

15th Sep 2004, 05:58

Dhurrrrrrrrrrrrrr let me guess, 777-300 into LHR,

1. Crap ATC asking you to keep 160kts to 4D

2. Some dick sight seeing on the runway in front of you perhaps ?

Take your pick.

Both correct. :ok:

Nice one Frosty.

jettesen

15th Sep 2004, 06:24

FLIP FLOP FLYER, It's dicks like you on this forum site that should be banned! This is what this site is about after all. People have a genuine interest in aviation and when things happen , they post on here looking for an answer. If you can't cope with that, then i suggest you leave this site:mad:

Hay Ewe

15th Sep 2004, 06:27

Ha Ha Ha,

'ugg3r the thread title, thats the best humour I have had all week, thanks frosty hoar

loewy

15th Sep 2004, 06:39

Jettesen,

YOU ARE WRONG ... and right at the same time.

This SITE is indeed open and welcoming to people who have a genuine interest in aviation (...) and are looking for an answer" but this FORUM isn't. It's called "rumours and news" and - as you will surely agree - a perfectly executed go-around is neither a rumour or a piece of news worth a thread on this forum.

L

HAMMY

15th Sep 2004, 06:41

"crap ATC asking you to do 160kts to 4d"
Thanks for the vote of confidence.Our watch ask 773's what speed they would like to 4D,and we are happy to accomodate.
Oh and by the way if you wish to slow down before instructed to do so then ask its not a problem.Don't do what one UAE 773 did the other night and slow down without a word,it compromises the safety of the following aircraft(due vortex) who then need repositioning.

HEATHROW DIRECTOR

15th Sep 2004, 07:26

<<rap ATC asking you to keep 160kts to 4D>>

You utter, utter berk puff m'call.....

Roobarb

15th Sep 2004, 07:47

Our lives would be considerably more rewarding if more people thought that the things we do everyday are remarkable.

http://www.80scartoons.8k.com/roobarb10wee.gif

I’ll take on the opposition anyday. It’s my management I can’t beat!

dicksynormous

15th Sep 2004, 07:50

To you and I a go around might be a normal manuvere, as is 30 degree bank but to most people it isnt. Those of you having a go at the chap for asking (no matter how many times it is asked) just show your ignorance and lack of real experience for not allowing for this and being more gracious. You are not moderaters nor the site owner so dont worry about band width or forums.

This board is being swamped , not with curious people but quite obviously intolerant low time cpl/fatpl (as indicated by the arrogance common amongst such people) who are starting to believe their own sh1te.

Now as a pilot if a go around is such a normal thing why is an ASR required by most uk companies.

Would you be so hostile to a pax asking you something obvious.
Not on my watch matey.They pay your wages.

Be gracious and count yourself lucky that you are in the type of job where a go around is a regular thing

Capt Sly

15th Sep 2004, 08:04

puff m'call probably provided the most correct but politially uncorrect answer.

2 a/c - one turboprop and one 777 on finals. Both do 160kts to 4DME but the prop slows immediately to 110kts, and when the 777 passes 4DME eventually slows to 145kts. 2 a/c get close, and a fairly early g/a was called. Nice view of the belly of the 777!

The :mad: french turboprop obviously didn't read the plates on his way in as he then proceeded to cut me up on the taxiway. Little :mad:

BTW its always good ATC going into LHR, thanks guys.

holyflyer

15th Sep 2004, 08:04

Living in West Drayton I get to see many of the 27R go arounds. They happen frequently and for good operational reasons. But it has to be said last nights Emirates was a particularly impressive performance. A full 180 climbing turn with the plane flying eastbound overhead LATCC keeping well south of Northolt. I can only imagine there were ATC conflicts at Northolt as most go arounds seem to head towards BNN to rejoin the inbounds.

Well done to the crew for a nicely executed and professional go round and to ATC for a job well done.

itchy kitchin

15th Sep 2004, 08:16

I was just arriving at a pals in Osterley and heard the 777 spool up to TOGA which of course made me look up! Nice view. Almost as impressive as watching a 747 cleaning up.

...but my first thought was: "i bet this'll be on proon tomorrow!"

Cuillin

15th Sep 2004, 08:39

After 'puff m'calls' comments I am amazed he got anywhere near a pilot selection board let alone recruited by any respectable airline.

British ATC - the best in the world (particularly around London).

eal401

15th Sep 2004, 08:40

It's the usual "The public are scum, aren't we pilots Gods" crap that is busily eroding the value of the website.

Some unfortunate has had a genuine query and has now gone away thinking "What a bunch of stuck-up w*nkers pilots are*" and will spread the word.

*Which a select few prove not to be the case, thank God.

slingsby

15th Sep 2004, 12:53

Nothing to add to the above but from a very interesting view point on 301 yesterday at 1030, LH A300 struggled with the crosswind, floated long, touched down left side (clearly tyre smoke from nbrs 5/6) floated up again and initiated a go-around. The low flypast around the south was quite nice to watch as was his climb back to approach height. Now that was interesting, not news worthy but as I know several LH A300 drivers, a bit of baiting is going to go on.

earnest

15th Sep 2004, 13:01

Now as a pilot if a go around is such a normal thing why is an ASR required by most uk companies.
dicksynormous,

Which companies require an ASR after a go around and why?
Could you print a quick list, please?

davethelimey

15th Sep 2004, 13:02

Why is this still in rumours & news?

While we're asking pertinent questions, why was this is rumours & news ever?

Please someone, stop the madness and close the thread!

eal401

15th Sep 2004, 13:04

Oh look, now it's not. That'll keep the "Gods" happy.

crewrest

15th Sep 2004, 14:54

puff m'call

What on earth is wrong with 160 to 4dme? Too difficult for you huh?

I share HEATHROW DIRECTOR and others comments.

I also think this thread is a little trivial.

davethelimey

15th Sep 2004, 15:06

Could someone explain what 4dme means?

I think the thread is trivial unless it's in the Spotters Corner, and the spotters corner only.

After all, this is what the forum was designed for.

Joker's Wild

15th Sep 2004, 16:21

Just once, couldn't we provide an answer or offer some insight, without having to prove how clever we all think we are???

There are NO stupid questions, only REALLY stupid answers.

And by the way, does anybody happen to know what may have caused Emirates to go around?????

crewrest

15th Sep 2004, 16:27

When asked to maintain '160 to 4dme' means; please maintain 160 knots indicated airspeed until you are within 4 nautical miles of the touchdown point. Thereafter you are allowed to slow down to your final approach speed.

This allows ATC to control the flow into airports

Regards

davethelimey

15th Sep 2004, 16:29

lovely jubbly.

While we're at it, what is the landing speed for a 777 and how does it get down to that speed with just 4 miles to go?

Cheers.

UnderRadarControl

15th Sep 2004, 19:34

Puff M'call,

Please come and show us ATC's how to sequence... Maybe next time maybe 160IAS at 14d... Then you'll squeal too! You aren't the only plane out there....

URC

CRS

16th Sep 2004, 05:12

As an Ek 777 driver I must disagree with puff. London ATC are always very accomodating with speed for the -300.

Thank you to the London ATC gentlemen for the excellent service over the years.

Dubai could learn alot.

brgds

CRS

chalfontim

16th Sep 2004, 21:34

I love this website!!!

Based on the initial respones I got to my posting I thought the only thing left to do was attempt to get run over by an A320 the next time I visit Heathrow as I had clearly committed the most awful crime in wasting precious pilot's time with such a stupid question. But now I feel somewhat vlilified and would like to thank those who have offered some support.

I have learned one thing if nothing else throught this process - that there is a "Spectators" forum for posting such items - I hadn't appreciated this was the case.

I just hope those of you genuine pilots with absolutely no tolerence for people who make genuine mistakes don't ever fly me on mone of my regular trips to ORD / LAX as I suspect you are the most dangerous people in the sky.

davethelimey

17th Sep 2004, 09:08

Mate if you knew the number of people that posted "Why did XXX go around on XXX" questions in R&N forum you'd understand the level of vitriol.

BTW the description of the R&N forum is "Events that affect our jobs and lives as professional pilots" and a go-round at Heathrow just doesn't fit the bill.

Why someone's posts here might reflect the way they fly is beyond me and probably everyone else here and it might be a plan to refrain from making such comments in the future.

eal401

17th Sep 2004, 09:32

that there is a "Spectators" forum for posting
It's a pity some of the individuals on R&N don't point this out more quickly. However, that would take away the ego swell of being abusive to a "non-pilot" so you have to wait for the Mods to shift it.

Notso Fantastic

17th Sep 2004, 10:08

My God, don't you get a lot of squealing from these 'civilians' when they come to this board and post a daft query in the wrong section, then moan how they weren't to know, and it really wasn't such a daft query after all! (it was). It is convention to get to know a bulletin board before jumping in with both feet.
Chalfontim <But now I feel somewhat vlilified and would like to thank those who have offered some support.>

Indeed you are absolutely correct. Consider yourself well and truly villified!

Pontious

17th Sep 2004, 10:53

Chalfontim,
The reason could be anything but the two most common causes of Go Arounds are an aircraft landing ahead that is slow to clear the runway or an 'unstabilised approach'. That last reason sounds a lot more dramatic than it actually is so I'll try to explain.

Like most airlines, Emirates have set strict criteria for their crews to meet in terms of tracking, rate of descent,speed etc. when flying an approach. There are distinctive 'abandon' points which are at 1000' aal ,reducing to 500'aal the if you are visual with the intended runway and/or approach lighting, where you HAVE to be stabilised. If you are outside the parameters you have to discontinue the approach and Go Around. If you 'push it' the company's Flight Safety Department will want to have a 'chat' with you.

Trying to 'stabilise' a 300ton'ish beast from 160kias at 1200' aal to 140kias'ish at 1000' aal (i.e. less than a mile or 2 miles if you use the absolute min. of 500') is 'exciting' enough with a headwind but if there was none or even a tailwind(a la DXB) it can get fairly close. I hope this helps.:ok:

Gentle Climb

17th Sep 2004, 11:22

Notso

I agree that many people do post questions on the wrong forum. I also see that many of the pro's get really p..... off with 'what happened at wherever' type questions from Joe Public as it is (probably) boring and repetitive for you guy's for whom a go around is a practised for event and you will have done it many times. Joe doesn't get to see an aircraft event/non event so often and is therefore naturally interested in knowing more.
Whether you like it or not, your job and apparatus are very interesting to a great number of people. That is why questions are asked. If you were driving along the M25 and you witnessed a company 747 performing a go around, I find hard to believe that you would not be interested to know more detail. You have the facility to do this where you work, most others don't and therefore ask using this website which is probably the closest form of communication that many people will have with aviators.
I agree that the site was set up for professional pilots and that interested wannabees can be irksome to you. Maybe a new forum that is easily identified by those with questions of a'go around ' nature is the answer. I hope that you don't feel offended by my comment, and having seen several threads over the last few months suggesting that flying 'ain't what it used to be', please remember that people having a job that people are interested in is fantastic. It's when people aren't interested that status is ultimately reduced. Nobody EVER asks me about my floor sweeping technique!

davethelimey

17th Sep 2004, 11:24

A new forum for go arounds? Hmmm... we could call it something like spotter's corner...

We might be on to something here.

Captain Airclues

17th Sep 2004, 11:32

chalfontim

As Pontious states, the most common reason for a go-around at LHR is lack of separation with the previous aircraft. This can be for a variety of reasons such as the preceding aircraft just missing a turnoff and having to trundle down to the next one. However they can also be caused either by technical reason or because the aircraft that did the go-around was slow to reduce to the appraoch speed. As a pilot I am interested in finding out the reasons for go-arounds, especially if the reason was a technical one. Although they are not dangerous, they are a very high workload situation especially at the end of a long day with possible fuel considerations.
Several airlines, BA being one of them, require an ASR for all go-arounds. This is not because it is necessarily a safety issue but so that statistics can be compiled to try and prevent them in the future. I am glad that we are able to discuss them on PPRuNe as we are often able to learn something, such as the difficulty in slowing a 777-300.

Airclues

PPRuNe Pop

17th Sep 2004, 11:49

It's a pity some of the individuals on R&N don't point this out more quickly. However, that would take away the ego swell of being abusive to a "non-pilot" so you have to wait for the Mods to shift it.

Believe me it would get shifted very quickly if we happen to be on 'patrol' in that section at the appropriate moment. But its par for the course that we are not. But........I agree, people do post what is clearly a spotters question in R&N - which is Rumour and News. A go-around is neither.

For once I agree with Notso. He has made the point (in his own inimitable style!) and it should be noted.

Interesting point about the 773 Airclues!

Warped Factor

17th Sep 2004, 18:52

There was a notice to the approach controllers in Terminal Control a little while ago saying we should treat the "normal" approach speeds of the 777-300 (when being speed controlled by ATC) as 230, 190 and then 170 to 5.

I suspect some of my colleagues may have forgotten this and might need reminding. Maybe EK should have a word with TC Ops if they perceive a problem here, though hopefully more tactfully than whoever it was called us cr@p a page or two back :ouch:

Finally, Heathrow is the proverbial quart into the pint pot and missed approaches are a fact of life. They could of course be consigned to a rarity indeed, but that would mean landing rates routinely in the mid 30s instead of 40+ an hour.

WF.

andyb79

17th Sep 2004, 21:32

Just a thought so bear with me.

As has been pointed out previously, A go around is a perfectly normal procedure to pilots, Along with losing engines, High levels of bank etc. To the general public though these are as far from normal as you get. Joe Bloggs on the street doesnt understand the complexites of flying, Therefore thinks (understandably) that something is wrong when a go around is executed.

Since these 'go around' threads aint going to stop, Why not limit them to spectators balcony by putting a 'sticky' at the top of R&N.
In this, It could be explained that they are normal everyday occurences and nothing worthy of note. If they still wanted to ask about it, They would be directed to post in the appropriate section of the forum.

Just my 2cents.

Carry on.

yazman

17th Sep 2004, 21:39

Yep, I'll go for the sticky idea.

Q. Why did ........ go around at ........... on .................. ?
A. Because it was not safe to land off that approach.

About covers it, I'd say.

andyb79

17th Sep 2004, 21:43

Yep, I'll go for the sticky idea.

Q. Why did ........ go around at ........... on .................. ?
A. Because it was not safe to land off that approach.

About covers it, I'd say.

I was thinking something slightly more comprehensive than that ;)

Just remember that the better it is explained about the many and varied reasons for it to occur, The less threads will be started.

Laikim Liklik Susu

17th Sep 2004, 22:29

chalfontim,

I just hope those of you genuine pilots with absolutely no tolerence for people who make genuine mistakes don't ever fly me on mone of my regular trips to ORD / LAX as I suspect you are the most dangerous people in the sky.

Genuine pilots have ZERO TOLERANCE for mistakes, genuine or otherwise. We all make them, but have zero tolerance for them. The most dangerous people in the sky are those who tolerate mistakes.

If you find it more comforting to fly to ORD/LAX with pilots who find mistakes to be acceptable, I'm sure you'll find any number of airlines mentioned within these forums which will satisfy your wishes.

Notso Fantastic

18th Sep 2004, 17:51

Well said Sir! It takes a peculiar type of person who comes back slugging like this when it is pointed out they have made a mistake here. Yet again we have fatuous drivel about why one particular aeroplane in ten thousand that flew on that day made a go around- running to 3 pages, all because he didn't take time out to get to know the forum and read why not to ask before jumping in with both feet! Please let's kill it, and leave Chalfontim to fly with his mistake-prone airline to ORD/LAX

Omigawd- 4 pages! You must be very proud!

flt_lt_w_mitty

18th Sep 2004, 18:26

..........and of course helped to 4 pages by.....................

BRISTOLRE

19th Sep 2004, 22:11

I actually saw this and it looked specactular. First chance to comment as I have been away in Europe since this EK B773 went round.
I was on south side in cargo area at the time and lets say it climed away very steeply and slowly, unusual compared to normal 27R go-arounds. I did watch the spectacular move!
It did look odd.

windy1

22nd Sep 2004, 22:06

How about a new forum called "go arounds at LHR"

Then all those with an obsession for the subject can have a good time, and all those who find it nauseating can easily navigate around it.

Captain Airclues

23rd Sep 2004, 02:31

windy1

and all those who find it nauseating can easily navigate around it

You already have that facility. If you see the words 'go around' in the title then don't click on it.

Airclues

eal401

23rd Sep 2004, 08:43

If you see the words 'go around' in the title then don't click on it.
Unfortunately this would require a combination of common sense and intelligence. Plus the ability to survive the day without belittling someone.

Sadly, a number of individual's lives would be much emptier if your obvious suggestion was followed.