EK / Seychelles near miss - 14 July '17

[4HolerPoler]

Happens easily -

SGXrwy1XMQg

Be careful out there.

[320goat]

Dead head back and pack your bags!!!!

The ME way.

Forget about what these so called management have stuck on their doors in the office about just culture etc. It's a joke out here.

[777-200LR]

320goat,

If that happens to someone in any Chinese carrier, Korean or even the Japanese ones, the results are the same.

[Flyboy_SG]

Back home, you will be grounded for months, for investigation,off the payroll . Best would have been to getaway without filing a report. Controller-pilot ego is not worth it.

[Old King Coal]

Whilst it might be considered a dirty word in many airlines these days, ffs, guys & gals there's this thing known as AIRMANSHIP !!!

There was certainly a mistake by ATC (for not picking up on the incorrect read back, by EK). That said, there was a lot of pertinent information being passed by ATC, though none of it was evidently picked up and / or acted upon by the EK crew (and / or the Seychelles crew... assuming that the latter were on frequency?)... and one would surmise, from their transmissions, that ATC were passing a big clue wrt opposite direction traffic (albeit EK were evidently not 'listening to' and / or interpreting upon that).

So perhaps instead of sitting there fat, dumb, and happy, try instead listening-up to what's going on around you (especially when climbing & descending), i.e. try forming your own 'mental radar' picture / 'Situational Awareness' of where other aircraft are and where they are going to / where they are cleared to, and TCAS - when used in 'tactical mode', assuming you have it? - can often help here too... none of it's exactly f'ing rocket science, is it ?!

[The Outlaw]

In the first instance, Seychelles uses CPDLC. I wonder why they weren't logged on?

And, The controller should have picked up the improperly read back altitude clearance. One would also question why the pilots of the Seychelles flight didn't question the incorrect level read back?

Situational awareness breakdown on all sides.

Were the crew given a ME send-off?

[Icarus2001]

Back home, you will be grounded for months, for investigation,off the payroll .

Not sure where HOME is for you but in Australia you would be stood down on normal pay. Mainly because a distracted pilot worrying about an incident should not be operating. The same goes for ATCOs I believe.

[innersole]

In the first instance, Seychelles uses CPDLC. I wonder why they weren't logged on?

Situational awareness breakdown on all sides.

I agree about situational awareness, this was on the descent into MRU, not Seychelles....:E

[MosEisley]

Wow, there is a lot of self righteousness being displayed here. He read back what he heard and ATC failed to pick up the read back, that is on them. Then the next transmission he stated ATC was partially unreadable, indicating possibly weak or unclear transmissions. ATC shares liability in our business and in this case failed to correct the read back. The beginning of the video says it's a combination of frequencies so it's more than likely the aircraft weren't on the same frequency and never heard each others clearances and the controller was on multiple frequencies which probably led to his inattention to the read back. Also, traffic information is often given for opposite direction aircraft that are sometimes up to 20 miles away laterally, so that isn't necessarily an immediate threat. Finally, TCAS is there to fill in these gaps and it only sounded like a TA from one aircraft so they probably weren't as close as it seems.

There was a breakdown in the ATC communication system but it was mitigated by the other systems in place and nothing happened. Bottom line, don't be so quick to judge based on a you tube clip and limited information. It could easily happen to any of you situationally aware airmen.

[777-200LR]

Mos,

Spot on 👍🏻. Though, there was still a chance the EK703 could have avoided this when ATC gave traffic information to Air SEZ about the EK703 descending to FL380. This was the last transmission before the separation became an issue, whether EK heard this or not is for the pay grades above ours to decide.

[lfbb]

Tell me more....:ugh:
With all do respect for the EK pilots but this printscreen is only intended to these two boys, not you all....

https://preview.ibb.co/m15VPa/Screen_Shot_2017_07_17_at_10_45_11.png (https://ibb.co/nRy6xv)
photo host sites (https://imgbb.com/)

[Jack330]

😂😂😂... And no, it's not on atc only, it's everyone responsibility to stay in the loop....

[LivingINtheDream]

I thought SA was restricted to checking the engine out altitude and pointing out some airports around you when you get to TOC or is that just technique, I can't remeber exactly.

[Capt Groper]

Whilst it might be considered a dirty word in many airlines these days, ffs, guys & gals there's this thing known as AIRMANSHIP !!!

There was certainly a mistake by ATC (for not picking up on the incorrect read back, by EK). That said, there was a lot of pertinent information being passed by ATC, though none of it was evidently picked up and / or acted upon by the EK crew (and / or the Seychelles crew... assuming that the latter were on frequency?)... and one would surmise, from their transmissions, that ATC were passing a big clue wrt opposite direction traffic (albeit EK were evidently not 'listening to' and / or interpreting upon that).

So perhaps instead of sitting there fat, dumb, and happy, try instead listening-up to what's going on around you (especially when climbing & descending), i.e. try forming your own 'mental radar' picture / 'Situational Awareness' of where other aircraft are and where they are going to / where they are cleared to, and TCAS - when used in 'tactical mode', assuming you have it? - can often help here too... none of it's exactly f'ing rocket science, is it ?!

I agree with the above but MRU CAA should sort out this threat. Poor ATC transmissions and only one inbound and outbound airway in non-radar airspace is a major threat. Separate airways for climbing and descending traffic would help!

[Jack330]

Many places in that area, including india and seychelles have similar two way airways, mru has no power to open another parallel airway by itself, it takes lots of time and I guess is a long burocratic pain in the xxx.
The truth is that, flying those super technology airplanes is easier than programming the washing machine add to this that we are on autopilot fron 200 ft to 200ft so instead of relaxing too much thinking about how to harass the cc at the resort, we should pay close attention to what is happening around us, especially in those area and most important during descent, taking full advantage of the automation that is there to increase our SA.

[Megaton]

Not sure about MRU airspace but there are plenty of FIRs where it's not ATC responsibility to double check a read back. Also, the EK had numerous opportunities to work out out that there was climbing traffic ahead. Their SA dropped despite the traffic info from ATC. And finally, and most damning, if radio was less than perfect what were they doing following an instruction if they were unsure.

[777-200LR]

Its not enough to just make a statement like "ATC is a threat today". How many times have you heard the guy sitting next to you say "we won't accept a clearance unless we are both happy we understand it" bla bla bla. How many actually do what they brief?

[glofish]

Not wanting to bash the guys, but i have a hard time reading some statements on here (or for that matter on the A/SFO incident).

We constantly highlight our responsibility for up to 600 souls, defending our salaries, the need for qualified colleagues, the importance of experience and training .......
We constantly point to the importance of human presence in cockpits, its specific superiority when it comes to interpretation, foresight, basically SA ......

therefore, when it comes to a severe incident we should not as fast, even with well meant assistance to fellow aviators, or because it could happen to us as well, point to other participants (ATC), or possible automatic back-ups (CPDLC, TCAS) or cry for additional automatics.

We are the finally responsible for safe flight and we are still well present in cockpits for a reason. Thus we have to assume responsibility!

There were enough possibilities to pick up the error in understanding the clearance. The easiest one was when hearing the clearance for the opposing aircraft to climb to FL370. The next by the apparently not observing the oncoming and conflicting TCAS symbol.

Simply these two omissions point to an irresponsible lack of SA. It will need a lot of investigating and convincing to change my two cents on this.

[donpizmeov]

He read back a clearance and wasn't challenged when he got it wrong. Who said he wasn't happy with it?
For descent into MRU the enroute controller CPDLCs to contact radar when ready for descent. At this point you are on the limit of VHF range. Some transmissions are good, some carrier wave only. So although you can hear all the transmissions on that YouTube clip, that does not mean the crew heard all of them. Who knows if the crew took action to avoid the conflict without asking them? The approaching traffic would have been displayed to a max of about 80 to 100nm away only when it was within 9000 feet of their ALT. Nothing abnormal about that until they leveled and the traffic kept climbing as it was cleared to.
Many holes in the safety net here. Lucky training and TCAS prevented something bad from happening.
No crew intentionally goes out of their way to cause an incident like this. But everyone can have a bad day.
Good learning points for everybody.

[fatbus]

Poor SA simple. The A stands for what? They were not aware of traffic approaching 2000 below and excepts a clearance thought oncoming traffic's level. Let's wait for the report.

[777-200LR]

Don,

You wouldn't ask yourself or speak out loud why ATC is "keeping" you from descending when the traffic he talks about is already above you? No alarm bells?

[MosEisley]

Disregard my last, you guys are perfect and awesome. All 5s all the time...

[donpizmeov]

777 I don't know what they heard nor what they did. How can I make any comment without knowing any of the details. All I have heard is that youtube clip, which does not fully represent what was heard on that flight deck.
I think there are enough muppets in the fleet office that jump to conclusions without me having to do so.

[pilotguy1222]

Poor SA by both crews and ATC. Regardless of what they could or could not hear from ATC, both crews clearly heard each others transmissions and both missed until it was almost too late.
What happened to the 3000' separation that they used to provide for the passing A/C's? What happened to the outbound radial the departing aircraft use to follow?

This is too similar to places like China, Russia, Spain, France, etc., speaking non-english to other aircraft because now I have no idea what THEY are doing.:mad:

[speedbirdhopeful1]

They're both removed from roster, so it made it its way to management one way or another..

[glofish]

I don't know what they heard nor what they did. How can I make any comment without knowing any of the details. All I have heard is that youtube clip, which does not fully represent what was heard on that flight deck

Don, you're certainly doing the honorable thing by wanting to wait for the full picture and only then act or speak. But isn't this exactly our problem? Aren't we operating daily in that uncertain mist without that aftermath clarity? Isn't that what we are constantly facing and trying to mitigate? Isn't that what we are in the cockpit for: Not waiting for clarity, but creating it?

I re-listened to the tape and, unfortunately, still get the impression of a lot of complacency, if not incompetence. No challenge, no reconfirmation. Even as the other aircraft reported avoiding action, which must have been on the frequency both aircraft were on, there was no query about anything. Our flight simply continued in silence.

Even if there are multiple frequencies, changes and two ACCs involved, there needs to be more attentiveness. That lonely blip that comes at us is trained so many times in the sim, with querying ATC etc. etc., which makes the silence in this incident quite worrying.

(Nothing to do with pretending to be awesome, sourpuss-mos)

[Icarus2001]

, both crews clearly heard each others transmissions and both missed until it was almost too late. Wow you must be a genius. How do you know what was HEARD on the flight deck of either aircraft?

[fliion]

I'm scratch my head every week when I read the ASRs - who are these guys "couldn't get level 400 so stayed at 380"

Then you come on here and you have widespread judgment on SA while non of you have the information on the 'situation'.

Such one dimensional conclusions - is baffling.

Maybe you are right but maybe...

They were dealing with a tech issue
Heard something on guard
Were on to Med link
Had a headset issue
Had a door buzzzer go off
Had a call from the back
Had static on their radio
Had the other guy in toilet with diarrhea

I mean I don't know

And neither do you !

What a fcukong emabarrasment we are...

[jack schidt]

Sorry to say it "fli" but the recording has pilot error written all over it.

Wrong read-back of cleared level.

Query from ATC as to passing current level and standby for further descent after passing the Air Seychelles at FL 370.

Didn't they see the TCAS inbound threat and wonder why the traffic was becoming a likely threat and not query it?

(It worries me in the transcript that Mauritius ATC was willing to "drop" the incident if Air Seychelles was).

Just a few observations from the crewroom bar here.

Stay safe, everyone is watching YOU!!

J

[BigGeordie]

ATC were probably prepared to drop it because they aren't blameless either- they missed the incorrect readback. As usual, it takes more than one hole in the cheese.

[JammedStab]

ATC were probably prepared to drop it because they aren't blameless either- they missed the incorrect readback. As usual, it takes more than one hole in the cheese.

Maybe that is why he asked what their readback altitude was. Then discovered that they didn't catch it.

[Wizofoz]

Fair play to the Seychelles crew, turning to avoid visually acquired traffic.

There are those who would insist on sitting and waiting for TCAS to instruct them to avoid the big aeroplane getting bigger in the windscreen, rather than be pro-active and take appropriate action.

[White Knight]

would insist on sitting and waiting for TCAS to instruct them to avoid the big aeroplane getting bigger in the windscreen, rather than be pro-active and take appropriate action.

Just like the realistic TCAS scenarios in the sim where we are told to fly straight at the other traffic heh?

[falconeasydriver]

Just like the realistic TCAS scenarios in the sim where we are told to fly straight at the other traffic heh?

No no cobber, back at Ansett we operated in such busy airspace mate you could neva tell which one you were avoidin maaate.
Reading between the lines, is the 380 so unsophisticated that this TCAS target wasn't viewable within 40nm or so?
Not the crews finest hour for sure, but as an observation it's another chicken returning home to roost with respect to training, threat analysis and worst of all situational awareness, I'm glad I'm long out of it now.

[The Outlaw]

Fair play to the Seychelles crew, turning to avoid visually acquired traffic.

There are those who would insist on sitting and waiting for TCAS to instruct them to avoid the big aeroplane getting bigger in the windscreen, rather than be pro-active and take appropriate action.

Wiz,

That is what the company has been beating out of crew for years...basic airmanship. I think you're 100% correct, I'll bet more than 80% would sit there and watch it come head on. What ever did pilots do before TCAS?

Its also most likely why it was only a TA (as heard in the recording) VS an RA which can be evidenced by the altitude data in the radar 24 data.

Fliion,

Not sure what your going on about and why... All of the excuses you posted are meaningless. What is clear from the evidence posted so far is that there were many mistakes made as a whole, both by crew and ATC not to mention a lack of SA. I'm sure there will be more facts come to light as the investigation progresses. Embarrassment? Re-read your post.

Just a few days after JA's letter too. Any guesses what changes will come to the OM-A?

[jack schidt]

Outlaw, sadly the changes that the future eventually holds will be removing the inevitable weak link that sits in the cockpit. The more mistakes that pilots make, the more the engineers and airlines are keen to remove us as a hole in the cheese.

Aviation to me appears to be regressing in safety as some pilots are tending to become increasingly more and more relaxed in their duties. I know I am going to watch for the inbound flak, but I am sorry to say that the standards of a lot of people I fly with these days is nothing too often that I am particularly proud to watch and applause.

J

[The Outlaw]

Outlaw, sadly the changes that the future eventually holds will be removing the inevitable weak link that sits in the cockpit. The more mistakes that pilots make, the more the engineers and airlines are keen to remove us as a hole in the cheese.

Aviation to me appears to be regressing in safety as some pilots are tending to become increasingly more and more relaxed in their duties. I know I am going to watch for the inbound flak, but I am sorry to say that the standards of a lot of people I fly with these days is nothing too often that I am particularly proud to watch and applause.

J

I can't say I disagree as a whole. 30+ years in the business has shown me a few things along the way.

Some pilots have a firm grasp on the non-esseentials, can recite the SOP at nauseam but can't calculate a descent in their heads or do basic math with regard to ZFW changes etc. It's become a "Book" industry as lawyers and managers alike want it all in a book so they can hang you with it when a mistake is made.

In my generation, newcomers went through a long period of "seasoning" before they could even consider a left seat, it was a result of the long times to command. Sitting beside some of these grumpy old bastards at the time was a pain in the backside but they taught us a lot of the good stuff that you just can't get from a book.

Its been my observation during the past 20 years that the casualties of the modern cockpit is airmanship, cockpit discipline, over reliance on automation and general experience.

There was a time when aircraft flew VOR radials out of and into airports, altimeters where less accurate, there was no TCAS and no websites with live ATC for everyone to listen to. This case might not have ever made it to any manager in the past but as was posted earlier, we operate in a glass bubble today. For all we know PPRUNE might have been management's first indication that this event happened!

However, they share in some of the blame in the decline as well. Higher monthly hours mean controlled rest in the flight deck which removes redundancy when operating with one pilot. The lack of a pilot union is another reduction in safety as there is no channeled input from the pilot group to share information in a unbiased manner.

[Icarus2001]

Aviation to me appears to be regressing in safety

Nice haughty bar conversation starter but the FACTS do not bear this out.

Aviation is getting safer every year.

https://www.icao.int/safety/iStars/Pages/Accident-Statistics.aspx

[The Outlaw]

Nice haughty bar conversation starter but the FACTS do not bear this out.

Aviation is getting safer every year.

https://www.icao.int/safety/iStars/Pages/Accident-Statistics.aspx

It seems to me that you may have mis-read the "FACTS".

At a glance, the accident rate has gone up since 2015 after riding a decreasing trend.

The accident rate has increased but the fatality rate has decreased.

[glofish]

Amen to Outlaw and Jack, same goes to Wiz and ....... yes, White Knight!

Question now is, how can this be fixed?

[SOPS]

Amen to Outlaw and Jack, same goes to Wiz and ....... yes, White Knight!

Question now is, how can this be fixed?

Having not posted here for a while, one of the answers is...remove the fear factor. And allow Pilots to use common sense. But I no longer think that is possible in certain airlines. And while this continues, things won't get better. Does anyone think that the crew in this latest incident will be treated with a 'just culture'?

[Monarch Man]

Great to see you SOPs, I'd have to concur with Don, Wiz et al regarding airmanship etc, it's part of the wider issue that can be traced back in part to the explosive growth of European locos and their cadet programmes. Far different to the old legacy programmes where cadets were taught on the job by experienced and capable trainers. Nowadays cadet programmes are still able to produce a standard product but they are flawed in the sense that a large number of second and third generation of airline pilots have no real world experience beyond a set of SOPs and operating manuals, throw into the mix that many of the trainers are mere facsimiles themselves of those cadet programmes and you have more potential for significant gaps in knowledge and the ability to show resilience.
Recently I asked a chap I was flying with if he would consider landing with no autobrake selected, he told me it was "outside SOPs" so he wouldn't consider it unless it was an emergency, I asked him about disconnecting the AP above 10k if it wasn't doing what you wanted it to do, again "outside of SOPs" so only in an emergency, I asked him how did he plan his descent, "VNAV" does it for me.
At every turn his answer was that automation and SOPs would solve his problems for him as well as protect him from fleet etc.
For me that is ostensibly the result of the policies and blame mindset that currently exists, it's also why people don't move thrust levers, why they don't anticipate and identify small problems before they become bigger ones and it's why people make preventable mistakes as they have neither the capacity or skills to have a plan B..C..or even D sometimes stored away for when the proverbial hits the fan.
In the case of what's currently happening, based on the available information the Air Seychelles crew displayed far more resilience than the EK crew.

[Praise Jebus]

Looking out the front and turning to avoid a collision is now "resilience"...?

[TwinJock]

Whilst it might be considered a dirty word in many airlines these days, ffs, guys & gals there's this thing known as AIRMANSHIP !!!

There was certainly a mistake by ATC (for not picking up on the incorrect read back, by EK). That said, there was a lot of pertinent information being passed by ATC, though none of it was evidently picked up and / or acted upon by the EK crew (and / or the Seychelles crew... assuming that the latter were on frequency?)... and one would surmise, from their transmissions, that ATC were passing a big clue wrt opposite direction traffic (albeit EK were evidently not 'listening to' and / or interpreting upon that).

So perhaps instead of sitting there fat, dumb, and happy, try instead listening-up to what's going on around you (especially when climbing & descending), i.e. try forming your own 'mental radar' picture / 'Situational Awareness' of where other aircraft are and where they are going to / where they are cleared to, and TCAS - when used in 'tactical mode', assuming you have it? - can often help here too... none of it's exactly f'ing rocket science, is it ?!


Hallelujah! At last a sensible post on this forum. How many times were clues passed by ATC, and ignored by EK crew. Airmanship, what airmanship...

[perthbound]

We have a large problem here at EK and that is a lack of maturity in terms of age and experience in both seats.
My remarks are not directed at this crew but the situation in general.
On the boeing side of the house it is rare to see a cpt with a seniority number of less than 400 and not an uncommon sight to see cpts with 410+ seniority numbers.

I see pilots sitting with their legs crossed and seat back in cruise and thus blocking the controls in the event of a TCAS RA or having a good chat with the FG1 on the jumpseat as I return from a bathroom break.

[MacSheikh]

Lots of talk about lack of SA, but... SA depends on your perception.

If you haven't picked up the error, your perception is that you have the correct information and your SA is based on that.

Yes, we'd like to think we'd all have picked up the incorrect read back or the opposite traffic clearance. But, no one here was there to know what was happening, what other threats were there.

Oh, to be as perfect as some here!

[jack schidt]

Lots of talk about lack of SA, but... SA depends on your perception.

Oh, to be as perfect as some here!


There does appear at times to be an air of overconfidence among some of our peer group. I know more than I could safely write about certain pilot personalities, let's just say that some feel more elevated and superior than others and aren't afraid to tell you so, despite their own failings.

It's not only a question about slipping standards but also the requirement for pilots to occupy cockpit seats no matter how inexperienced (globally) they may be. As has been said before, you can't buy junior pilots experience, neither in a cockpit seat or in life {maturity}, you can only earn them over time. In today's fast growing airlines, it really is not Safety > Commercial > Training, but is more like Commercial > Safety/Training.

What's seen as important? Get the job done, earn the revenue, recruit whoever is required to achieve the revenue. Sadly, aviation in the cockpit is far too much of the office flying the flight deck and too many decade only experienced pilots thinking that they deserve the Big Jet L/R seats because for them, it's all about me, myself and I.

Sad to say and again I stick my neck out on the block. People are asking how this should be rectified and a good start will be to slow down the loss of experience in certain airlines that are suffering experience shortages. It's not that experience is everything but there is value that can be passed down and those values appear to be disappearing faster year on year.


J

[fliion]

Lots of talk about lack of SA, but... SA depends on your perception.

If you haven't picked up the error, your perception is that you have the correct information and your SA is based on that.

Yes, we'd like to think we'd all have picked up the incorrect read back or the opposite traffic clearance. But, no one here was there to know what was happening, what other threats were there.

Oh, to be as perfect as some here!

Mac - we can only aspire.

What's disturbing is the assumption from the arm chair brigade above - that what we heard on YouTube is what was picked up by the Flt deck comm system on that 380 - even though no one here is privy to that CVR - or that they lacked airmanship & should have maneuvered without visual contact on a TA. Who knows whether they saw traffic? Air Sez maneuvered on a TA because they had visual (repeatedly stated in recording) and is part of the maneuver "if needed"

But the EK crew lacked airmanship from the posters above because...the said posters above - knew what that crew saw and heard that day!?

Look, the point is - they may well have FUBAR'd it completely & the Air Sez guys were spot on.

No one knows yet - so why not give our colleagues a little slack - because if it is their bad - they won't get much from the third floor who will hopefully gather ALL the facts before sentencing.

[ricfly744]

http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/ACAS_Bulletin_-_EUROCONTROL

Referring to the above several bulletins, it is not recommended to innitiate any avoidance maneuver based on visual or TA only information.
More is said about not trying to avoid a traffic by turning (horizontal avoidance)

Other more basic regulations are clear about avoiding a colision by turning to the R.

Based on one regulation, or it may be correct to say, recommendation, the R turn in this event, was incorrect. Based on the other, it was necessary and correct.

So I ask you.....what is correct, if this happened in Europe, and Eurocontrol ACAS recommended procedures not followed, the pilot who turned R would be penalized?

[Monarch Man]

ACAS Bulletins ACAS II | Eurocontrol (http://www.eurocontrol.int/acas)

Referring to the above several bulletins, it is not recommended to innitiate any avoidance maneuver based on visual or TA only information.
More is said about not trying to avoid a traffic by turning, horizontal avoidance.

And that in of itself is part of the problem, one size does not fit all, what is a practical and sensible procedure in hi density airspace is rather cumbersome and overly prescriptive in sparsely populated airspace where you might be lucky to see any other aircraft.
Quite frankly this kind of incident happens on a fairly regular basis in various parts of Africa and IMHO you would be an ass to wait until you got an RA before initiating any avoiding or mitigating action.....and yet there are many many flying around that would happily hang their hat on the eurocontrol guidance purely because it's written down and quantifiable, rather than being this nefarious and outright dangerous concept of airmanship.
It's the same kind of mindset that makes some happier to penertrate convective weather as they wait for a clearance rather than exercising sound judgement by avoiding the weather and filling out a bit of paperwork afterwards.
I know it's a bit of a drift from they subject matter here, but it's all part of the larger picture.

[ricfly744]

[QUOTE=
I see pilots sitting with their legs crossed and seat back in cruise and thus blocking the controls in the event of a TCAS RA or having a good chat with the FG1 on the jumpseat as I return from a bathroom break.[/QUOTE]

Totally agree, so it also happens in EK.... it happens to me with most FOs, they start a chat with the cabin crew, and some without the headset (NOP if alone). I often see them turning back facing the jumpseat when I return.

[CanadaKid]

ricfly744

Yes, similar experience on return from crew rest. I asked the F/O if he sat in the simulator the same way (sideways). My final comment was a reminder "the passengers sit in the back, alluding that he should consider which position he should occupy.

CK

[Eau de Boeing]

A very wise training captain once told me in EK if you need to go to the bathroom, then take the F/O with you as he will do less damage than if you leave him there!

Looks like mandatory headsets and Chinese lessons all round as operation knee jerk commences.

[g109]

A very wise training captain once told me in EK if you need to go to the bathroom, then take the F/O with you as he will do less damage than if you leave him there!

Looks like mandatory headsets and Chinese lessons all round as operation knee jerk commences.

That's a good one, I was thinking the same a few times!!!!!
Have to agree the amount of stupitidy whether intentional or not that one can observe here sometimes makes me speechless.
And what those idiots are good at is complaining, complaining complaining ....

[wizard1]

This incident is now front page news Daily Telegraph UK.
A bad pr week for EK and the UAE in general. WaPo article receiving additional verification.

[SilverSeated]

Appears in front page news in quite a few papers abroad now...in fact the Seychelles crew are been celebrated for taking avoiding action.

[The Outlaw]

Perhaps they will awaken on the top floors



...or they'll sack a few pilots because they were to blame and continue as before...

[Craggenmore]

This incident is now front page news Daily Telegraph UK.
A bad pr week for EK and the UAE in general. WaPo article receiving additional verification.

Yes. That's right Wizzy Wee!

The Torygraph are running it right next to this article. The effing irony!

Everything that happens to your body when you don't get enough sleep (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/everything-happens-body-dont-get-enough-sleep/)

[jack schidt]

We know what has happened from the media and AVHerald. Now it's time for the transparency test over the next week!

J

[MosEisley]

None of you sky gods have any idea what actually happened. You think the media has the whole and accurate picture? You don't know what could be heard on any frequency by any of the people involved or what was going on in either flight deck or in the ATC office. Why is it so easy for some of you to sit back and judge someone else after the fact despite not really knowing any of the details or facts? Shouldn't we all just wait to see what comes out of this at the end and learn something in the process.

[The Outlaw]

None of you sky gods have any idea what actually happened. You think the media has the whole and accurate picture? You don't know what could be heard on any frequency by any of the people involved or what was going on in either flight deck or in the ATC office. Why is it so easy for some of you to sit back and judge someone else after the fact despite not really knowing any of the details or facts? Shouldn't we all just wait to see what comes out of this at the end and learn something in the process.

Good grief Mos...

How much evidence do you need? The recording is enough. ATC cleared him to FL 380, he read back FL 360. MISTAKE #1

ATC did not challenge mistake #1...which brings us to MISTAKE #2.

There is tons of evidence where proper RT and radio discipline is paramount...think Tenerife.

Right, wrong or otherwise this is a subject VERY worth of discussion even on this site. If it changes just one pilot's radio discipline for the better then mission accomplished.


We are in a business that learns from the mistakes of others...sadly, sometimes that comes with a death toll. Anything we as pilots can do to learn without the loss of life or equipment is not only a benefit, but its our responsibility.

This was a FUK up... as professionals, lets do our best to ensure it doesn't happen again.

[Sober Lark]

Sounds like a failing at poor English skills - a language related miscommunication?

[jack schidt]

Sounds like a failing at poor English skills - a language related miscommunication?

I would say that it's poor listening "actively" skills and not properly processing/understanding/questioning what's being said is more likely the issue here.

I am led to understand that the pilots both possess their "own" versions of the English language, shouldn't be a factor in this case though.

J

[speedbirdhopeful1]

or having a good chat with the FG1 on the jumpseat as I return from a bathroom break.

Really? Is the other guy supposed to sit with hands on controls staring out the window telling the crew not to speak while over the ocean on CPDLC? Are you one of these guys who reads FMAs and states that the autopilot is engaged as part of his 'I'm going to the ****ter' brief?
Guessing your 'Perth' related name explains it

[MosEisley]

Outlaw,

My point is that any recording doesn't tell us what they actually heard in the flight deck. How readable was it? None of us know. What I do know from personal experience is that ATC quality southbound after Muscat is sketchy at best. Does 466601 ring a bell? I've been on frequency with another aircraft that couldn't hear ATC at all even though it was perfectly clear to me. Does that mean the other pilot lacked SA or basic airmanship? I think not. None of us know what they were able to hear. The recording is of the transmission, not the reception. That's my point. So let's stop pointing fingers like we have any idea what really happened to lead to this series of ultimately non events.

[Monarch Man]

Mos
My point is that any recording doesn't tell us what they actually heard in the flight deck. How readable was it? None of us know. What I do know from personal experience is that ATC quality southbound after Muscat is sketchy at best. Does 466601 ring a bell? I've been on frequency with another aircraft that couldn't hear ATC at all even though it was perfectly clear to me. Does that mean the other pilot lacked SA or basic airmanship? I think not. None of us know what they were able to hear. The recording is of the transmission, not the reception. That's my point. So let's stop pointing fingers like we have any idea what really happened to lead to this series of ultimately non events.

Having gone from front to back of this thread there's been very little in the way of finger pointing, and much more in the way of soul searching along the lines of "how could this have happened?"
I don't get your defensiveness, regardless of the circumstances we, yes we bear ultimate responsibility for our crew, our passengers and for 99% of the time our outcomes.
MRU along with half a hundred other 3rd world "destinations" are high threat environments, even on your worst day I'd expect and demand the best from my colleague regarding their SA and anticipation skills. TBH I thought, given the nature of this that it was a training flight or something similar, but it appears that it wasn't.
To summarise my thoughts I'll leave you with this thought, would the crew have been in the same frame of mind going into Lagos or perhaps Addis? for me personally, I'd like to think so, but based on the outcome, I'm far from sure.

[olster]

Classic swiss cheese with thankfully the final holes not aligned. I am sure in time honoured EK fashion the sole blame will be attached to the crew but there are other factors not least some seriously poor ATC. I am sure a reflection on EK crew fight hours and associated fatigue will not be part of the 'wash up'. Who hasn't made an error while seriously tired or fatigued? I have been in a similar type situation in the past due ATC cock up and ourselves and the intruding and opposite aircraft manoeuvred to avoid even with vertical separation. I didn't think then nor now that it was particularly heroic, just common sense.

[ricfly744]

Really? Is the other guy supposed to sit with hands on controls staring out the window telling the crew not to speak while over the ocean on CPDLC? Are you one of these guys who reads FMAs and states that the autopilot is engaged as part of his 'I'm going to the ****ter' brief?
Guessing your 'Perth' related name explains it

He may not be, what you say, like me, he is just a professional captain, that when leaving the FD, delegates full control, communications and flight management to the FO, and in respect to him, the FO must act professionally.
When you are the PIC, do whatever you want, sit sideways facing back the cabin crew and talk to them as much as you wish, you may even leave your seat and do more...but if not.....respect the one who is responsible and trusted you the airplane and all onboard.

And my name is Marques.....by the way!

[Airbubba]

Dead head back and pack your bags!!!!

Sadly that's pretty much standard for expats at non-union third world airlines. :(

The controller knows this and tries to get SEY054 to not report the incident.

Sounds like a failing at poor English skills - a language related miscommunication?

Language skills seem fine to me. It's normal to have several accents with international crews and destinations. However, as others have pointed out, we don't know if Emirates could hear the controller very well, he asked to have a couple of transmissions repeated.

[speedbirdhopeful1]

He may not be, what you say, like me, he is just a professional captain, that when leaving the FD, delegates full control, communications and flight management to the FO, and in respect to him, the FO must act professionally.
When you are the PIC, do whatever you want, sit sideways facing back the cabin crew and talk to them as much as you wish, you may even leave your seat and do more...but if not.....respect the one who is responsible and trusted you the airplane and all onboard.

And my name is Marques.....by the way!

The comment was made by perthbound that there was something wrong with returning to the flight deck and finding the FO 'having a good chat' with the FG1. I'm not sure what is wrong with this WHEN APPROPRIATE, especially in certain locations like oceanic. On the way to Perth I would most certainly not see the point in wearing a headset when you aren't talking to anyone and can easily have a chat with the crew. But in busy Europe, I have always worn a headset personally when it gets busy with both crew in the flight deck before they had to spoon feed us about lost comms. Likewise I prefer to face someone when I talk to them and can somehow manage to do that without removing myself from the seat and still being able to use the rudder pedals and am shockingly still able to be "trusted with all onboard" - even while wearing pyjamas, which I'm sure you'd also find shocking.
The guys going to MRU should have had major alarm bells ringing in a non radar environment with traffic cleared through your level. That isn't a time I'd be having a good chat with the FG1.. all common sense, something that seems to be totally lacking in EK.
Instead we have guys briefing that the autopilot is engaged before the go to the bathroom and briefing the runway width, PAPI angles into Dubai believing they are being safer/professional when in reality the other person is rolling their eyes and/or fast asleep.

[harry the cod]

Outlaw

We don't seem to agree on much these days but I do agree with your recent comments. There is a growing apathetic and complacent culture growing among our colleagues, however, I do not hold the Company entirely responsible. Huge strides have been made through recurrent classroom training and in the simulator to reinforce airmanship, big picture and basic professional standards. We have moved a long way forward from 7-10 years ago. Unfortunately, with the improvement in training has come a commensurate reduction in experience along with a general culture of relaxed indifference. Generational? Maybe, although I have flown with some super new guys who are very switched on. Unfortunately, the variation of standards is definitely growing.

Obsessive use of phones throughout all aspects of the flight, from briefing to hotel reception, spending all ULR flights in pyjamas, paperwork in climb, non standard R/T, not wearing uniform correctly, poor PA's. The list could go on. While some may see this as the ramblings of a typical grumpy old fart, I see it as an insidious decline in professional attitude. It is incumbent on all of us to maintain those standards and reinforce it to those intent on intentionally or unintentionally ignoring them.

It does not mean having to promote a dour and autocratic environment, far from it. It's for us to create and promote a relaxed yet professional work ethos that maintains minimum standards. That tone is set at the briefing and should continue throughout the flight. This airline has never been one to promote feedback yet this is the only way we can improve or be made aware of the things that we do wrong. It's also a way to reinforce the good we observe, not just the negative. It does take effort, and requires motivated and knowledgable crew to do so. 99% of the guys finish with a 'thank you' and hand shake regardless of the flights events. That's not enough.

If people are never told, they'll never learn. To achieve the goal of reaching and maintaining the high standards we strive for, surely we must all play a role in its facilitation.

Harry

[alwayzinit]

Had a quick scan of this thread, just wondering if the guys had headsets on on not, bearing in mind how quiet the Dugong's flight deck is compared to the Tractor?
Not having dig, however, it may be a factor in mishearing or missing RT calls.

[ricfly744]

[QUOTE=speedbirdhopeful1;9836988]I'm not sure what is wrong with this WHEN APPROPRIATE, especially in certain locations like oceanic.

Totally agree with you on this one.

Being reasonable and not exaggerating in anything is the way to be safer.

Now....so far, only one reply about my post related to the correct procedure for traffic avoidance:

Would you turn (not recommended by all ACAS procedures) or stay put and wait for the RA and then follow correct standard procedures?

[e1229]

Sorry, but I didn't see one consideration about this incident, and I'm curious about it:

Some posts mention the TCAS, and how it should have been followed or not, and if it should be followed at the first warning or not.

But hasn't at least one accident happened exactly because one aircraft followed the TCAS and the other didn't, in the Überlingen case [1] ?

I'm aware that only with the final report any conclusion can be draw, but anytime I see some incident where midair collision could have happened I remember that even TCAS isn't a miracle if not followed by both aircrafts.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_collision

[groundbum]

perhaps both this incident and the taxiway lineup by the landing Air Canada at SFO could be avoided by doing away with pilots and just having pilotless aircraft flown by computers that follow their ATC clearance?

just saying....

G

[BusAirDriver]

"e1229" - TCAS should not be followed until you have an RA. So strictly speaking the manoeuvre by SEY054 would have been a non-standard and surely not according to SOP.

TCAS should not be acted upon if it is just advisory, which happens quite often all over the world.

I think what some have said here earlier, we can not know what the various crew heard as readable / audible radio in their cockpits, so it's very judgemental of some to start talking about lack of SA and bad airmanship, when the transmissions we have access to now, might not have been audible for the 2 flight crews involved.

ATC by failing to catch the EK transmission of FL360, was the only one who we know "heard" the full picture. And was probably one of the main reasons he wanted to avoid making a report.

Now this issue with ATC not catching wrong readbacks from flight crews happens quite often, specially in environments where they love to chatter on the radio in their own local languages, such as France, Italy and Spain.

I have though noticed at least in Europe, that Radar control often have full view of your new assigned Flight Levels / Altitudes, after they have given you a clearance, and you have selected this on your FCU.
Can we assume that ATC in this instance did not have such equipment, that they could see what level the aircraft was climbing too?

I have in past heard corrections from Radar Control over the radio for both cleared levels and QNH settings selected.

[Trader]

When the windscreen fills with the enlarging image of an oncoming aircraft you correct! Who is to say that TCAS is working correctly etc etc. We don't know what they SEY crew saw but watching the RADAR plot is looks close enough to me. Yes, in Europe or other very busy airspace you might not react in the same manner but this was not Europe. The SEY crew obviously felt the situation warranted maneuvering.

To say we never react to a TA is ridiculous. We do not 'usually' maneuver based on it for all the reasons mentioned. The SEY crew saw a problem and, with perhaps the local knowledge that the airspace is not busy (hence no chance of multiple cascading RA's) and the local knowledge that ATC is not the best, reacted.

Much better than a midair and, later on as a ghost, trying to tell the world that SOP's or some other rule forbid you from reacting.

[Prober]

At any airfield where the inbound and outbound airway is shared, why not stipulate that, within a given radius, all flights will offset by, say, 1 mile right? (Or left, if you are that way inclined.)
Prober:ok:

[speedbirdhopeful1]

Harry, agree with some of what you say.

Do you have a reference as to why I can't fly in pyjamas? Also why we can't do paperwork in the climb above FL200? Again.. I personally don't, but when appropriate why not?

Apologies for the massive thread drift, but its amazing how one's choice of clothes in a locked room seems to affect your professionalism. One reason I love the freighter to be away from this kind of BS and wear a t-shirt for the whole flight.

[CaptainChipotle]

Wow. I must say, I feel privileged to have shared the sky so many years with all of you GODS.

I'm a mere mortal, and because of that I've made mistakes, luckily none that made the news or a message board full of you aviation deities.

If you've never made a mistake/got distracted in the FD, feel free to comment, if you're human like me, maybe wait until more info comes out because the lot of you are coming off extremely arrogant.

Keep your heads up and safe flying in "the land that forgot about airmanship"

CC

[MosEisley]

There was 14km separation. The windsceen didn't fill up, no one was in imminent danger, there were no heroes saving the day. Stop with the dramatics and hysteria. There were 2 planes that passed each other with 14km between them. Every RA is closer than this but it's not in the news. Someone made a video and posted it in the hopes that the public would react the way it has and you lot are worse than a bunch of ladies gossiping over tea. Did you ever consider that the video may have been produced by the same entities that are trying to bring EK down by any means possible? This is a non event, stop feeding the frenzy.

[Instant Hooligan]

Harry,

Agreed, huge strides have been made in the classroom and simulator for an improved experience. All sadly, completely outweighed, by draconian decisions about rosters and quality of life issues that affect pilots lives daily.

[Icarus2001]

This is a non event, I agree there is some hysteria here but an incorrect readback that was itself missed leading to a TA is not a "non event". In Australia it is reportable so by definition...

14km at 1667 kmh takes about 30 seconds.

900 knots closing speed is 1667 kmh

no one was in imminent danger, I disagree and so did the crew of at least one aircraft.

[Jack330]

It's funny how someone still only blame ATC ! Atc is sitting on a chair while we are flying the airplanes.
Of course he has his part of responsibility but at the end, we are the ones in charge of avoiding dangerous situations using all instruments we have, including our eyes, like the other airplane did, tcas and keeping our SA always alive.
We cannot only rely on others to pick up our mistakes.

[LivingINtheDream]

(Obsessive use of phones throughout all aspects of the flight, from briefing to hotel reception)

Ever thought that they're probably just sick of the sound your trumpet makes every time you blow into it and they're just looking to block you out.

You are right though it is a generational thing, your generation didn't have mobile phones and this generation does.

[glofish]

Sorry to all those contributors who think that we all should shut up and wait for any investigation results, unless being branded arrogant or flying gods etc.

I guess you have not listened to the tape correctly. Go back and listen to it from 00:40, where the clearance to FL380 (typo earlier, sorry) was issued and wrongly read back.
So far so good, this can happen. But from 01:00 to 01:51, there is very clear evidence of no sa, or whatever you want to call it. During these 50” both aircraft are contacted by the same controller in very short time and both precisely informed about a crossing traffic. The EK flight even acknowledges the traffic information (after a first non reading). At that time all the bells definitely should go off, when ATC informs you directly about a crossing traffic, with the precise time, and indication of the cleared level of the other aircraft, -> climbing to 370 and yourself you are cleared to descend to 360!!! Subsequently the Seychelles flight also gets the traffic information. They acknowledged as well, checked and intervened.

I leave it to anyone listening to the recording to choose with whom of those three you’d like to share the same dense flight environment. The ATC controller, Air Seychelles crew or our 380 crew? My choice is quickly made and I don’t need any investigator outlining to me what was heard or not heard on the air that night. We all know that investigations can be as biased as our own view of incidents. It seems pretty obvious here and that’s why I think that it is neither arrogant nor running to conclusion to state an opinion on here, at this time.

[MosEisley]

Check ICAO annex 11, section 3.7.3.1.2. It states "The controller shall listen to the read back to ascertain that the clearance or instruction has been correctly acknowledged by the flight crew and shall take immediate action to correct any discrepancies revealed by the read-back."

Pretty clear.

You assume they are all on the same frequency. The recording clearly states that it is a combination of several frequencies. Does anyone know for sure who was on which frequency? If so, please enlighten us with concrete proof. Otherwise, it looks like the controller missed the read back and that contributed to this 14km "close call."

[arketip]

I guess you have not listened to the tape correctly. Go back and listen to it from 00:40, where the clearance to FL360 was issued and wrongly read back.

I believe the clearance was to FL380, I think you did not listen well ;)

[glofish]

Mos, you are correct. The controller made this mistake, after the EK flight made their mistake in misreading the clearance.

He then gave extensive and precise traffic information to both aircraft. At that moment, the controller effectively corrected his mistake. EK acknowledged, but did not pick up the conflict, their mistake again.

Concerning being on the same frequency, if you listen to the recording attentively, it would seem that the indicators (voice, timeline) point very much to all three participants (controller, EK ,SEY) being on the same frequency, rather than the controller eventually speaking on two frequencies to two different aircraft crossing on the same airway.
But in all fairness, i cannot be sure, so you are correct again.

(arketip:typo! mine!)

[MosEisley]

Thanks glo, but one more thing...

Issuing traffic information does not correct the clearance. Nor does ATC telling them what he expected them to do, by that time it was too late. The controllers failure to immediately correct the read back contributed directly to the event from a legal standpoint. The ability to hear or understand another aircraft's clearance is not a legal responsibly. Is it good practice? Of course, we all try to do that. However, we all know that isn't always possible in places like China, Russia, Italy, and France where they don't even speak English to all aircraft. Therefore, the argument that they were somehow liable because they may or may not have heard a clearance given to another aircraft just doesn't hold water.

The question here is legal liability. I'm not talking about procedures and common practice, only legal responsibly.

[Capt Groper]

There are areas where Off Set is recommended / mandatory.
This surely is one region where. in climb and descent when there is conflicting traffic, offset R should be used.
Having flown this route many times I can say that ATC RT isn't ideal. There are zones of weak signal reception around TOD position inbound on this airway. Both Pilots and ATC have to repeat transmissions.
Also, with +30 yrs experience worldwide, I recommend treating any part of the world where ATC is non-radar equipped as non controlled airspace. Listen out and get a mental picture of traffic out bound and inbound.
Write down call signs, FL/Alt and ETAs etc.

[LivingINtheDream]

When I first read about this incident I too was very quick to place the whole blame on the ek crew. Sure they got the ball rolling but ultimately it is the ATC's responsability to provide separation in an IFR environment. I'm not sure if they have radar in that part of the world but if they do what the hell was the controller watching on his screen because it looks like he only had two blips on it. At no stage did he challenge or issue corrective instructions and that's probably because his english is not the required level and is limited to standard RT, anything out of the ordinary and the words just don't come quick enough. If there is no radar coverage he should have never placed the two aircraft that close to each other whilst both maneuvering for altitude, no matter how many traffic information reports he passed on. No surprise why his supervisor was keen to sweep it under the carpet and not report the incident.

As for maneuvering for the TA I'm not sure that would have worked in IMC or at night or another continent and there is no guarantee that the actions of the Air Sey crew avoided avoided a mid air collision. Someone said in an earlier post that the TCAS might not work and it's best to take evasive action as you see fit, that could possibly be the worst advice for any modern jet pilot, not to trust your instruments.

Unfortunatelly for the ek crew they will be judged in the office by professionals who always wear their uniform correctly on the flight deck during all phases of flight, never use their phones in public and consider that aviation was safer a century ago.

Sent from my Iphone

[Consol]

I agree there is some hysteria here but an incorrect readback that was itself missed leading to a TA is not a "non event". In Australia it is reportable so by definition...

A TA is reportable in Oz? Why can't they just be like the rest of the world and just report RAs? Ahhh....

[Eau de Boeing]

Cos it's more for your benefit than mine maaaaaate.

[Plazbot]

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2017C00084

The link above suggests that a TA is NOT reportable in OZ.

[eternity]

TA's are NOT reportable on Australia.

Back when I was flying there we had a **** load, never any paperwork required.

And for info...despite some of the ASR's we read, TA's are NOT reportable here in the desert either.


Eternity.

[Icarus2001]

Read my post again s l o w l y. I did not say TAs are reportable in Australia, they are not.

Once again communication issues, reading comprehension and intended message get in the way.

[harry the cod]

Speedbirdhopeful1

Pyjamas are provided for use during crew rest only. For the record, It clearly states so in the uniform handbook. The fact that the Company even has to mention it reflects the sad fact that there will always be a few individuals trying to interpret rules differently or push the boundaries. Does wearing your pj's reflect directly on ones flying abilities? Of course not, it makes cock all difference. However, it does send out a powerful message to both your colleague on the flight deck and the cabin crew. It's called professional standards. Do you sit there for 6 hours without a loo break or do you venture out in your pj's for a slash? Interesting to see what impression our first class passenger would have of his skipper wearing night attire. Just hope too that you never have a time critical emergency on board. Can't remember seeing in the QRH for 'crew to remove pyjamas and don uniform'. As long as you have the hat I guess that's good enough to take command and direct passengers during an evacuation or is the intention to quickly change while the evacuation's in full progress?

What's this got to do with the thread? Well, quite a lot. Stupid debates like this reflect a growing detachment and indifference to the job. A lassez faire, can't be bothered attitude. Why some individuals try to make things more complicated than they need to be is beyond me. Yes, we can do paperwork above FL200 but is it good airmanship? What's the hurry, you have all the cruise to do it. Is it not more important to monitor the aircraft? Most aircraft accidents are now attributed to loss of control, often caused by startle and incorrect recovery. Some of these accidents could have been easily avoided had the pilots been monitoring effectively, not just paying lip service to calls and procedures or intent on doing trivial tasks during a critical and important stage of the flights regime. Missing altimeter calls and ATC calls while doing paperwork is unacceptable. FFS, it's not as if we have that much to do in cruise anyway with the current generation of aircraft so is it really that difficult to sit on you hands for 20 minutes during climb and just monitor the friggin plane. Actively listening out for other traffic to enhance SA might be easier too if you are not heads down adding numbers!

You say you do not do this yourself. Great. But promoting high standards throughout sends a powerful message to those who, in five years from now, will be setting the professional tone and climate in the cockpit too.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Behaviour breeds behaviour.

Harry

Livinginthedream

Obviously hit a raw nerve about uniforms and phones. My apologies. You are absolutely correct in that phones should be made available throughout our sign on to sign off and you should be free to wear the uniform (the clue is in the name) how you like. My generation are just so old fashioned, it's embarrassing. Safe flying son.

[donpizmeov]

And we wonder why there are so many rules at this place and why they had to introduce an age limit for command.
Was told by a trainer recently that the new joiner on a training flight was connecting his gopro to the window during preflight. When asked why he stated he always flew with it recording. It would seem that SA and CDF are things of the past. Perhaps livinthedream can make an app explaining them?

[MosEisley]

So what we've parsed out is that...

Round dial grey beards are sky kings (we all knew that)

ATC has a responsibility to listen and understand as much as we do, good luck with that.

These young whippersnappers can't fly for s#it with all their iPros, goPhones and that damn rock and roll #pilotlife #livingthedream

Your are incapable of being professional in a comfy onesy

Seychelles pilots are g*ddamn heroes

Airbus is a far superior aircraft to Boeing, however...

Boeing pilots are clearly superior airmen (just ask them)

Aussies invented aviation and are still imparting their extensive knowledge base you each of us one sim at a time (oh I see sir, thank you for that delicious morsel of trivia, I'm a far better man and my life is richer for having known you)

If everyone would just read Fate is the Hunter, it would solve all the world's aviation woes.

Does that about cover everything in this thread?

;)

[donpizmeov]

Pretty much.

[Monarch Man]

Mos, you neglected to mention...

British pilots are better than Ozzie ones...
Every A380 pilot is short...and they practise saying Thsupa in the shower...
and lastly...I'm told, Harry wears his hat around spinneys...

[Kennytheking]

Monarch Man,

As a super pilot, I should be offended but that was pretty funny:ok:

Icarus2001,

In fairness to the other guys, I had to reread your post about TA's 3 times before I understood what you said.....and I am a level 6 native english speaker. If so many people misinterpret your message, you need to examine it. Remember that the sender also shares responsibility for receipt of a message. Wasn't that the root cause of this incident...........

[White Knight]

Every A380 pilot is short

Au contraire MM; although the company likes to think so with the ridiculously tiny bunks in the newer aircraft:rolleyes:

Harry. Have a beer and relax man! I'm amazed to hear that someone has actually looked at the 'Uniform Manual':p;)

[The Outlaw]

So what we've parsed out is that...

Round dial grey beards are sky kings (we all knew that)

ATC has a responsibility to listen and understand as much as we do, good luck with that.

These young whippersnappers can't fly for s#it with all their iPros, goPhones and that damn rock and roll #pilotlife #livingthedream

Your are incapable of being professional in a comfy onesy

Seychelles pilots are g*ddamn heroes

Airbus is a far superior aircraft to Boeing, however...

Boeing pilots are clearly superior airmen (just ask them)

Aussies invented aviation and are still imparting their extensive knowledge base you each of us one sim at a time (oh I see sir, thank you for that delicious morsel of trivia, I'm a far better man and my life is richer for having known you)

If everyone would just read Fate is the Hunter, it would solve all the world's aviation woes.

Does that about cover everything in this thread?

;)


Upping the dosage of your meds might be helpful!

[The Outlaw]

Au contraire MM; although the company likes to think so with the ridiculously tiny bunks in the newer aircraft:rolleyes:

Harry. Have a beer and relax man! I'm amazed to hear that someone has actually looked at the 'Uniform Manual':p;)

Damn...I thought it said "Unicorn Manual" Like so many of the other company manuals which don't exist for any real reason, like the Employee manual and that other equally elusive manual that contains the pay scales!

[The Outlaw]

Mos, you neglected to mention...

British pilots are better than Ozzie ones...
Every A380 pilot is short...and they practise saying Thsupa in the shower...
and lastly...I'm told, Harry wears his hat around spinneys...

MM,


AMF will give you a 3 on RT unless you pronounce it "Thoooper" There is a procedural upward tonal inflection starting at the second "o" which carries up to the "r" which is held for 1.5 seconds at 2 octaves above a "male" voice most probably found in San Francisco!


The correct procedure calls for the use of hair gel, an operation in Bangkok, and a keen interest in watching college wrestling.

[CaptainChipotle]

Sorry to all those contributors who think that we all should shut up and wait for any investigation results, unless being branded arrogant or flying gods etc.

I guess you have not listened to the tape correctly. Go back and listen to it from 00:40, where the clearance to FL380 (typo earlier, sorry) was issued and wrongly read back.
So far so good, this can happen. But from 01:00 to 01:51, there is very clear evidence of no sa, or whatever you want to call it. During these 50” both aircraft are contacted by the same controller in very short time and both precisely informed about a crossing traffic. The EK flight even acknowledges the traffic information (after a first non reading). At that time all the bells definitely should go off, when ATC informs you directly about a crossing traffic, with the precise time, and indication of the cleared level of the other aircraft, -> climbing to 370 and yourself you are cleared to descend to 360!!! Subsequently the Seychelles flight also gets the traffic information. They acknowledged as well, checked and intervened.

I leave it to anyone listening to the recording to choose with whom of those three you’d like to share the same dense flight environment. The ATC controller, Air Seychelles crew or our 380 crew? My choice is quickly made and I don’t need any investigator outlining to me what was heard or not heard on the air that night. We all know that investigations can be as biased as our own view of incidents. It seems pretty obvious here and that’s why I think that it is neither arrogant nor running to conclusion to state an opinion on here, at this time.

Thanks for proving my point, O' Devine fish.

Once was lost, but now I'm found.

Did you hear what the crew heard IN the FD? Or are you basing your (idiotic) opinion based on a tape?

All pilots must bow to your expertise. Where can I buy your book?

[Nimmer]

Really interesting read this, I am an ATCO, ex Dubai, currently Gatwick Approach.

My ATC perspective is controller error caused by a missed read back. Yep the passing of traffic information was good and should of enabled the crews to form a mental picture of the traffic situation and re-affirm their clearances. However that is not their job, unfortunately mistakes happen, and this is what this was.

Controllers leaning point, listen to read backs. Pilots learning point, try and be aware of the traffic picture, and if doubt question your clearance.

Am sure the ATCO will be beating himself up over this, in the end it was his error.

[Gunman returns]

There s a 777 skipper at EK who in a previous job flying for an Asian cargo operator had an emergency landing and precautionary disembarkation on the runway in Germany. All 4 pilots still in pyjamas. Initially charged with endangering the safety of the RFF as they didn't know who the flight crew were and also went into the aircraft to search for said flight crew. A consequence of this charge could have been having flying licences revoked in Europe and Asia.

I don't allow flying in Pj's on my flights. As Harry says it's unprofessional and you have no time to change in the event of a diversion

[MosEisley]

Thank you Nimmer, and we appreciate the work you guys do.

[Trader]

LivingInthedream - I never said the SEY crew should maneuver and assume that the TCAS was not functioning correctly. I do not know WHAT they saw but they did feel that maneuvering was the safest course of action. They know the airspace has very little traffic. They likely, like myself, may have NO trust in ANY air traffic unit in Africa. They felt the situation warranted action and followed it.

No they are not heroes. It appears they did what they felt they had to do. So good work.

[gearlever]

Pyjamas on the flight deck?
Not true, is it?

[speedbirdhopeful1]

There s a 777 skipper at EK who in a previous job flying for an Asian cargo operator had an emergency landing and precautionary disembarkation on the runway in Germany. All 4 pilots still in pyjamas. Initially charged with endangering the safety of the RFF as they didn't know who the flight crew were and also went into the aircraft to search for said flight crew. A consequence of this charge could have been having flying licences revoked in Europe and Asia.

I don't allow flying in Pj's on my flights. As Harry says it's unprofessional and you have no time to change in the event of a diversion

So I guess they charged the two guys in the bunk too for wearing them? Maybe that's why it says 'CREW' on ours? Most cargo operators change into civvies in the cruise.. I think I'll take my chances.

[BigGeordie]

Bit of thread creep going on here, but anyway....

For most ULR ops most of the time there is loads of time to get changed, have a cup of tea and read the papers during a diversion- for large parts of the routes a diversion can be measured in hours, even for a "land asap".

[Gunman returns]

not on my flights you won't speedbirdhopeful!

[harry the cod]

Events such as these are not uncommon. Reading the weekly ASR reports will reveal the frequency of such incidents.

Whilst good to generate healthy discussion on these forums, many are turning judge and jury without being in possession of all the pieces of the jigsaw. The fact that the EK crew have been removed from roster does not imply they're to blame for this event. It is normal for any crew involved in an incident such as this to be removed pending investigation. It's not a procedure unique to EK.

Thread drift? That wasn't the intention as many are missing the point regarding previous posts. Most of the discussions revolved around the event itself. My input was the possible deep rooted causal factor. It may or may not have been an issue in this case but if so, reflects a noticeable change in flight deck attitude within the last few years. It's not just one individual act that defines are professionalism, but a combination. What you do, what you wear, how you behave, that's entirely up to you. However, those actions have consequences. Whether we like it or not, we set the tone and are role models for the crew, both in front of and behind the door. You can't just decide on a daily basis how to behave. It's a mindset that sets your own professional compass and filters down to every other person on the crew. Contrary to previous comments, promoting high professional standards and being a nice guy to fly with are not mutually exclusive!

As for wearing the hat in Spinneys MM, you'll see me in Carrefour. Without a pay rise this year, Spinneys is banned!

Mos hit the nail on the head, I'll leave it there with this thread.

Harry

[Capt Groper]

I hope there's nobody as cruel as you to post audio that can be open to misreading/listening and resulting in a keelhaul for the crew concerned!!

Take a chill-pill Groper - I merely copied an article from a global news-site. I hardly see that me posting a thread on PP has resulted in the crew ending up in the brown.

[Basil]

Pyjamas on the flight deck?
Not true, is it?
Not whilst operating but I recollect a statuesque brunette young lady FO who, unable to sleep, sat cross legged on the jump seat for a little while wearing her 'Baby doll' pyjamas :ok:
We WERE in the cruise and remained fully task orientated throughout.

[speedbirdhopeful1]

This one is for Harry. Never mind PJ's, crew members at their stations in non uniform items and even doing the walk around! It's a miracle they even got off the ground.
https://youtu.be/l7sny3Z3KrM

[gearlever]

Not whilst operating but I recollect a statuesque brunette young lady FO who, unable to sleep, sat cross legged on the jump seat for a little while wearing her 'Baby doll' pyjamas :ok:
We WERE in the cruise and remained fully task orientated throughout.

Damn, I'm working for the wrong company......:ugh:

[sealear]

Well none of us were there so who knows what really happened...... my only comment is that the EK pilot wasn't exactly easy to understand. We aussie's always talk too fast and many people comment that we are difficult to understand. Especially in this part of the world, slowing down your radio calls is very important.

[brakedwell]

I trust he wasn't wearing baby doll pyjamas :E

[Basil]

Well none of us were there so who knows what really happened...... my only comment is that the EK pilot wasn't exactly easy to understand. We aussie's always talk too fast and many people comment that we are difficult to understand. Especially in this part of the world, slowing down your radio calls is very important.
Agreed. Recollect story of Texan listening to machine gun clearance delivery to previous aircraft and transmitting: "***** ready for clearance an' ah write as slow as ah talk.":ok:

[Yaw String]

..For the majority of us,listening to the video audio in post #1, it sounds an appalling lack of SA...plenty of clues,after the initial mistake...( which we all can,and do make)
When do we need to be giving our utmost attention to ATC..I would say,obviously at all times,but especially in climb and descent....
"They may have been distracted"!..huh..that is what the simulator is supposed to teach us...
To me this is about discipline...and,how not to operate...and I'm mister average,trying to improve...:eek:

And,lets not get on to the subject of the ever increasing omission of the words,"Flight Level"in climb and descent clearances,by both pilots and controllers.
I'm guessing that there is an ever increasing lack of imagination of what can go wrong,amongst us!..Frightening!

[brakedwell]

Perhaps complacency is an appropriate word.

[glofish]

brakedwell, Yawstring

Careful guys! You might run into the self appointed pprune police (who might refer again to what exactly pprune means).

Apparently we should never speculate on these pages (review meaning of rumour ....), we should never mention any opinion (apparently it's like something everyone has ...) before there has been a thorough investigation (that is certainly neither tainted nor vetted by the participating companies, manufacturers, authorities, thus extremely trustworthy ....), we should never point at an eventual mistake of any colleagues, because we don't know what was heard in the cockpit, but it is legitimate to incriminate ATC, because apparently we know exactly (through the same tape!) what the controller had heard .....

i know what some on here mean by that. It's Monday morning quarterbacking. And this is open to criticism, sure enough.
But that's all it is on these pages, or it would be a NTSB/FAA homepage (or any equivalent)!

Sure enough we can't trust tapes or other witnessing media 100%, but can we trust reports from involved agencies? I have once been involved with a serious incident a couple of years before and the report does not come close enough to the truth I had experienced. Even today there is still speculation about the incident, almost as vividly as the first day after, with similar dissenting contributions and a lot of voices trying to shut the others up for apparently not having the full picture. Who has?

We never have. But as long as these threads are rumours among professional pilots, we should be allowed to speculate, to have an opinion, to put it on here. You can always dissent, contradict and have another one, but as to today we are not in Turkey, Iran or North Korea. We are free to do so, otherwise close down this site.

I truly believe that we can learn in reading dissenting opinions if we don't just cry them down because we don't like them.

[CaptainChipotle]

"They may have been distracted"!..huh..that is what the simulator is supposed to teach us...
To me this is about discipline...and,how not to operate...

Another skygod in our midst!

Tell me, how art thou?

[donpizmeov]

Glofish, many years ago similar incidents occurred in the same airspace as where this event happened. It always occurred because the aircraft at top of descent was at the limit of VHF range. Sometimes what they thought they heard was not what was said. When being the departing aircraft I caught the error in the clearance, and asked ATC to confirm it. ATC never seemed to catch it, perhaps the same issue? Anyhow, a new procedure was introduced then that the departing aircraft would be given a radial to fly to his right of the airway, and the arriving aircraft kept on the airway (best not confuse due to poor radio right?). This gave both lateral and vertical separation. Worked a treat. But now the wheel has turned.

We can complain about ATC as they did not check the clearance read back by the crew. The air Seychelles Crew heard the wrong readback and said nothing. Who knows how much of the traffic information they heard. Perhaps only the lower when passing bit? Dunno as I wasn't there. But I do know this Crew and the air Seychelles Crew has flown around the world a few times before this and I haven't been reading about them before. It would seem the EK Crew flew the clearance they believed was theirs. TCAS wise the air Seychelles Crew had more warning as they were expecting the Ek Crew to stop at 380, the Ek Crew would have only noticed the other aircraft still climbing after they had already leveled (air Seychelles reported at 359 right?). Remember airbus TCAS can display 9000 feet above when in above (used in climb) and 9000 feet below when in below (used in descent). The 380 TCAS would have a range advantage 100nm instead of 40nm, but in this case that is mute as the climb above the expected 350 would have happened at a much closer range. The 380 was 2000 feet lower to where air Seychelles was expecting it to be. The 330 was just crossing the expected ALT at the same time.

No one is golden here. But the incident would not have happened if a tried and tested procedure was not abandoned and if ATC had done his job to correct a wrongly readback clearance. The fact it was not corrected by ATC helped confirm to the EK Crew they were flying the correct clearance. Which we armchair legends know they were not.

[CaptainChipotle]

What Don said.

[jack schidt]

Another member of the "Don" > good post society here. I think I will need to buy him a beer before too long as I'm agreeing too often with Don's point of view(s).

J

[glofish]

Don
Good post, I agree, compared to others …..

But I still have a bone or two to chew:

1. You state about ATC:

- ATC never seemed to catch it, perhaps the same issue?
- We can complain about ATC as they did not check the clearance read back by the crew.
- But the incident would not have happened if a tried and tested procedure was not abandoned and if ATC had done his job to correct a wrongly readback clearance

and about EK 703:

Who knows how much of the traffic information they heard

It so seems that our crew gets the benefit of the doubt of maybe having misunderstood a transmission. But do you give the same benefit to ATC?
Reading your statement it seems not.
Isn’t that a tad unfair towards the controller?

2. Let’s read the following transmissions:

- ATC: Emirates 703 expect lower after passing Seychelles 054, Airbus 332 climbing to FL370, passing time 1307, report sighting and passing
- EK 703: Emirates 703 roger.

EK acknowledges the traffic information with a “roger”, indicating to the controller that they have understood. There was no further clarification or other action. The traffic information however appears quite clear.
I can only think of two explanations:
Either they did not comprehend the traffic information, which would indicate a poor situational awareness, or they did not understand it and simply said “roger” to carry on, which would indicate a dangerous complacency (by the way, they never reported any sighting or passing).
Any uncertainty should have been clarified, any correct comprehension should have triggered a reconfirmation of the levels cleared.

You finally say:

No one is golden here

I agree, and I have never pretended that this would not happen to me or other Bruce’s!! But this should not prevent us to try to analyse the event objectively, for the sake of enhancing safety, even without a (most probably very, very late) final report.

[White Knight]

even without a (most probably very, very late) final report.

C,mon Glo. You saying that the Mauritian CAA (GCAA, DGCA, xxAA whatever it may be) will be slower than some agencies closer to our hub?

[glofish]

Yes, and in the mean time we're still waiting for anything from our 521 ......

[fliion]

So Glofish goes from making the assumption that a YouTube audio that we heard means they heard

Post 19:
"The easiest one was when HEARING the clearance for the opposing aircraft to climb to FL370. The next by the apparently not observing the oncoming and conflicting TCAS symbol."

They heard ? Really? As if he knows what they heard or saw.

"Simply these two omissions point to an irresponsible lack of SA. "

To now:

---
"Don
Good post, I agree, compared to others …..

Quote:
"No one is golden here
I agree, and I have never pretended that this would not happen to me or other Bruce’s!! But this should not prevent us to try to analyse the event objectively, for the sake of enhancing safety, even without a (most probably very, very late) final report."

---

Objectively! But apparently HE knows what they 'heard' because HE heard it on YouTube. So PC of him now from the opinionated bull shine he was spewing earlier.

And Jack shidt has gone from:

"I would say that it's poor listening "actively" skills and not properly processing/understanding/questioning what's being said is more likely the issue here."

To:

"I think I will need to buy him a beer before too long as I'm agreeing too often with Don's point of view(s)."

Don said:

"No one is golden here. But the incident would not have happened if a tried and tested procedure was not abandoned and if ATC had done his job to correct a wrongly readback clearance. The fact it was not corrected by ATC helped confirm to the EK Crew they were flying the correct clearance. Which we armchair legends know they were not."

---

Subtle boys - two course reversals advertised as straight in.

[MosEisley]

Funny how that happens...I'll never understand why pilots are so quick to judge and/or vilify other pilots when they should know better than anyone that the information from the public or media is suspect at best when it comes to aviation.

[donpizmeov]

Glofish, I don't think it is too hard on ATC. When the EK Crew get a transmission about the traffic they can't understand they say it's unreadable and asked for it again.
When the EK Crew read back the wrong level ATC says nothing. So if he didn't hear the read back he should have asked for a read back of a clearance. If he did hear it he should have corrected it. If he was unsure of what he heard he should have said so and asked them to say again. By not saying anything he confirmed to the crew their read back was correct.
All the time air Seychelles heard all of that and said nothing.

The traffic information call by ATC was at first unreadable by the crew. Remember edge of VHF range. They tell the controller this and ask him to say again. The controller does so, but at the same speed as the first Non readable transmission. You have been there I am sure. You listen in hard, make out what you can, look across at the other pilot who says “”lower after crossing” . Sounds reasonable and makes sense. You reply Roger. After all you read back your clearance and no-one corrected it right?

[glofish]

When the EK Crew read back the wrong level ATC says nothing

He might have understood 380, just as EK might have understood 360 before. Both might have fallen into the trap of "hearing" what they expected.
Bad reception on edge of VHF range goes both ways .....

So if he didn't hear the read back he should have asked for a read back of a clearance.

He might have heard it, but might thought he heard 380 .....

If he did hear it he should have corrected it.

He probably heard it and might have heard 380 if he did not ask for a correction .....

If he was unsure of what he heard he should have said so and asked them to say again.

He might have been sure having heard 380 ......

By not saying anything he confirmed to the crew their read back was correct.

Absolutely true. Could be "hearing" what he expected or complacency. I am not defending him, but at the same time not simply putting the whole blame on him. The benefit of the doubt should remain for both sides, as the doubt of complacency.

All the time air Seychelles heard all of that and said nothing

Again, VHF range, bad reception should be taken into account for them as well. At the time of the initial clearance ATC to EK, they might not have known on what airway EK flew, so could at that time not detect any conflict.

We are turning in circles, i know, and i am not easily and unilaterally putting blame on fellow pilots, please! I am however not ready to simply put it on ATC as well. There were sufficient clues for both sides to deconflict and they were not seized. Commanders are responsible for safe flights and controllers for separation. Both failed to do their job to some extent. 35+ years of world wide aviation and 10+ years in EK give me a certain picture though when listening to the tape and i stand by my opinion.

[donpizmeov]

But Glofish you used words like “irresponsible lack of SA” and incompetent” when referring to the EK Crew. But now you seem to understand that all is not black and white.

[Praise Jebus]

On the positive side Don he's displaying flexibility... The term "Roger" has no place in R/T, unless Roger is your buddy and you say hello

[donpizmeov]

Roger is nobodies buddy PJ. He is the guy who drinks your beer and throws up in your car.

[Icarus2001]

Sorry Praise Jebus, ROGER is still in the AIP in Australia as a useable term.

ROGER: I have received all of your last transmission (under NO circumstances to be used in reply to a question requiring READBACK or a direct answer in the affirmative or negative).

Source: Australian AIP GEN 3.4 - 20

[White Knight]

It was also part of UK R/T exam IIRC...

Roger Wilco!

However - where has the very annoying 'charlie charlie' come from?

[Praise Jebus]

No need to be sorry Icarus, Roger may well be in the AIPs but it is so misused I stick by my comment, it has no place in RT.

[donpizmeov]

Not sure whitey but I believe he can't surf.

[Praise Jebus]

Charlie x 2 is from maritime signals, the flags used to communicate stand for individual letters. In addition some flags have a single word meaning as well, it happens that the flag that means YES is the "C" flag or of course Charlie. (I'll mention TCAS, and SA to add relevance to this thread)

[fliion]

Can any of the Bus guys shed light on what these 380 headset/noise canceling ASR's are all about.

Specifically what is the issue?

[White Knight]

Can any of the Bus guys shed light on what these 380 headset/noise canceling ASR's are all about.

Specifically what is the issue?

Some aircraft have the noise cancelling headsets, and some don't. Personally I find that the readability of the non-noise cancelling to be way down on the proper noise cancelling models! Many ASRs have been filed but still the company can't find a few dirhams to get the decent headsets:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[White Knight]

Of course PJ; I didn't think of maritime flags. And I still use 'roger' to indicate that I've understood a message that doesn't pertain to a clearance or similar:ok:

[Craggenmore]

There's much rogering going on at EK

[Bus Driver Man]

No need to be sorry Icarus, Roger may well be in the AIPs but it is so misused I stick by my comment, it has no place in RT.
Not just in AIPs, but it's ICAO standard phraseology.

"Instructions transmitted are to be complied with and, in most cases, should be read back to reduce the chance of any ambiguity or misunderstanding, e.g. ‘G-ABCD, taxi to the apron via taxiway Charlie’. Chapter 2 specifies those instructions that are to be read back in full. However, if the instruction is short, clear and unambiguous, acknowledgment of the instruction using standard phraseology such as ‘Roger’ (I have received all your last transmission) or ‘Wilco’ (I understand your message and will comply with it) is preferred for the sake of brevity in the use of radiotelephony transmission time." - UK Radiotelephony Manual CAP 413

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413v21_6.pdf
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/115.pdf
https://contentzone.eurocontrol.int/phraseology/Default.aspx

So yes, "Roger" has a place in RT. As long as mandatory items are read back, it is not misused. ("Charlie, Charlie" however,... that's just nonsense, unless you sail a ship.)

Don't tell me that when ATC tells you: "Traffic, 10 o'clock, passing left to right, climbing to FL360, 1000 feet below you, Airbus 320", you read back the entire message?

[Praise Jebus]

Don't tell me that when ATC tells you: "Traffic, 10 o'clock, passing left to right, climbing to FL360, 1000 feet below you, Airbus 320", you read back the entire message?

I assume that's for me Bus man so no, I don't read back the entire message. I respond with my call sign to indicate I have heard and understood the message. Roger is a redundant statement . Sorry for the drift

[The Outlaw]

Not just in AIPs, but it's ICAO standard phraseology.

"Instructions transmitted are to be complied with and, in most cases, should be read back to reduce the chance of any ambiguity or misunderstanding, e.g. ‘G-ABCD, taxi to the apron via taxiway Charlie’. Chapter 2 specifies those instructions that are to be read back in full. However, if the instruction is short, clear and unambiguous, acknowledgment of the instruction using standard phraseology such as ‘Roger’ (I have received all your last transmission) or ‘Wilco’ (I understand your message and will comply with it) is preferred for the sake of brevity in the use of radiotelephony transmission time." - UK Radiotelephony Manual CAP 413

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP413v21_6.pdf
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/115.pdf
https://contentzone.eurocontrol.int/phraseology/Default.aspx

So yes, "Roger" has a place in RT. As long as mandatory items are read back, it is not misused. ("Charlie, Charlie" however,... that's just nonsense, unless you sail a ship.)

Don't tell me that when ATC tells you: "Traffic, 10 o'clock, passing left to right, climbing to FL360, 1000 feet below you, Airbus 320", you read back the entire message?

Some pilots who have no idea about radio telephony procedures or understanding of the ICAO accepted terms sadly.

Charlie Charlie is not such a term.

[aeropix]

Many ASRs have been filed but still the company can't find a few dirhams to get the decent headsets:rolleyes::rolleyes:

At the risk of thread drift, I'm curious why the A380 whose flight deck is known to be very quiet, require noise cancelling headsets and it seems to be an "Air Safety" event when one is not found,

Yet, on the famously noisy Tractor flight deck, there are rarely noice cancelling headsets, and yet there are never any ASR from the Boeing side for this matter.

Not trying to start a flame-war of A vs. B, I'm just honestly curious about this seemingly ironic matter, the quiet airplane gets the noise cancelling?

[my salami]

At the risk of thread drift, I'm curious why the A380 whose flight deck is known to be very quiet, require noise cancelling headsets and it seems to be an "Air Safety" event when one is not found,

Yet, on the famously noisy Tractor flight deck, there are rarely noice cancelling headsets, and yet there are never any ASR from the Boeing side for this matter.

Not trying to start a flame-war of A vs. B, I'm just honestly curious about this seemingly ironic matter, the quiet airplane gets the noise cancelling?

The majority of 777s have no interphone system fitted(somebody thought it was cool to fly around like John Wayne did with just one headset used to listen to ATC).
The Company should first find a few bucks to retrofit the whole fleet with hot mic feature.

[donpizmeov]

The problem is one pilot will have noise cancelling and the other won't. 380 ops are done on intercom. It isn't undoable but it isn't the way it was designed to be done. If the issue isn't raised it won't be fixed.

[Saltaire]

There is much more to this story and we've all been in this situation before. Let's not judge based on conjecture and some u tube video produced by someone with obvious ties to the Seychelles.

Thanks for the clarification Bus driver man. Good intel

Another threat drift: Can some of you guys, more specifically on the 777 move the mic a little further away from your mouth? Thanks - the rest of us trying to understand you.

[Jack330]

https://www.wired.com/2008/12/a380-is-so-quie/

[pilotguy1222]

Don't tell me that when ATC tells you: "Traffic, 10 o'clock, passing left to right, climbing to FL360, 1000 feet below you, Airbus 320", you read back the entire message?

"Emirates 703". Nothing more needed or required.



On climb-out with gear up and maximum climb power (no de-rate) the cockpit is about 80-82db. Noise cancelling headsets are not needed, especially when most wear it over one ear.

[JAARule]

Can some of you guys, more specifically on the 777 move the mic a little further away from your mouth?
The germophobes always pull those foam things off the mics. They seem to get full of particles etc.. you know, food, garlic, grease, snot, you name it and guys eventually peel them off, then the transmissions are distorted. Listen to the airwaves, EK R/T is renowned for it. Worst part is some of the guys actually make their PAs with the boom mike, don't seem to have heard of the handset.

The term "Roger" has no place in R/T, unless Roger is your buddy and you say hello
Then how will all the yanks answer yes/no questions?

[Reverserbucket]

So yes, "Roger" has a place in RT
Apparently EASA state that "Over and Out" is now standard phraseology, particularly on HF.
Then how will all the yanks answer yes/no questions?
Roger That :ok:

[ibelieveicanfly]

Affirm - yes
Roger- i copied your info as long as it is not an instruction(which is compulsory to read back)
Wilco- instruction and abbreviation for certain instructions where you will comply(QNH, rwy instr, FL etc is a different story)

Why only the germans do their readback to ATC by starting with their call signs,which is notmally at the end of the readback, and the rest of the world not?figure out.

Many guys now are just happy and readback when actually ATC cut the callsign or was cut off or wrong and similar call sign? Instead of just say again and/or clarify?