KAL no longer allowed to do visual approaches!

[choyo]

I understand that a KAL B774 nearly speared in to the sea off Kansai recently whilst attempting a night visual approach in good weather. Same captain went for retraining and did the same thing in the sim...back on line. As a result KAL crews are not allowed to conduct visual approaches.

[Quod Boy]

When,is/are someone/some authority,going to ever to take action,on these events??

IF,and I state IF,the said Capt,repeated,the event in the sim,why oh why,is he still on line???

Im astonished,and if the fare paying public knew,what was going on................

So,we sit,and wait,for the next KAL,"event".Sounds like it wont be long.

Amazing.QB

[akerosid]

Amazing; how does one get to be a 744 captain (with no doubt a few thousand hours of military training before that) and not be able to make a visual approach? Of all the airports KE serves, KIX must be among the most straightforward, with top class navaids and PAPIs. Doesn't give one confidence about landing at other airports.

What happens in situations where autoland can't be used?

[Basil]

akerosid,
A visual approach is one in which the vertical and horizontal profiles are flown without reference to electronic aids such as ILS or VOR/DME although, especially in a big jet, it would always be wise to have some reference of distance to touchdown, esp at night. That's as opposed to an approach in which the profile is followed by reference to, e.g. an ILS which gives a continual 'on track'/'on profile' indication.
An autoland may or may not be executed following an instrument approach.
Going downwind visual at Kansai for RW24 in the dark, one is over water and loses sight of the runway so the a/c position and rate of descent requires close monitoring until the threshold comes into sight on the final turn.

[Kingfisher]

OK lets get this straight. ONE Captain cant do visual circuits properly so no-one is allowed to? Me thinks there is something else afoot

[innuendo]

Akerosid, I see by your profile you say you are a solicitor.
Can you tell me, are you also a pilot and have you actually done a night visual into Kansai, so that you feel you are in a position to comment that KIX "must be among the most straightforward" etc ???

[wonderbusdriver]

I´ve done it a few times in rhs A340 and lhs MD11 in real life in the dark.
The approach is as straight forward as a visual can be!

There´s nothing in the bay you can hit, no noise restricted areas or weird profiles.
All you have to do is hold the heading and altitude, take the time, make the turn, don´t let the nose drop etc., etc. - and have a guy/gal next to you watching the altitude and backing you up...

But it´s still possible to mess up any approach, which does after all happen to all of us.

Just gotta know when and how to abort.
If you don´t do the go-around because you´re gonna lose your face - THEN do you have a problem.

Just my 2 cents - have no idea what the KAL-folks did.

[Idunno]

Visual approaches.
Why do 'em?

Exactly what is the incentive to do a visual approah, at night, in a heavy jet? Is it to prove something? To save a few minutes? To save the lazy ATC'er having to vector you?
WTF???

I find that US ATC in particular (at certain airports e.g. BWI) almost INSIST on visual approaches. Into sun on hazy afternoons in particular!

BOLLOX!!

Cut this crap out.
Vectors to ILS please.
Thank you.

[411A]

Indeed, why do 'em.

The landing runway can usually be found at the end of a properly flown instrument approach...fact.

Visuals are fine for some (altho a few folks have landed at the wrong airport...fact), so normally in line flying, nearly always opted for the instrument approach...and easier on the co-pilot as well.

Let ATC work for you...not the other way around, especially at night.

[7FF]

The best visual approach to a runway is one that has an ILS.
Never declare visual, especially in the US.

[Fly3]

I agree wholeheartedly with the comments about "compulsory" visual approaches in the USA. Makes life very easy for ATC and dumps us groping around trying to remain in visual contact with the 5 ahead looking into the setting sun through the polution (eg LAX) And just try telling them that you are NOT visual!

[autoflight]

Doesn't it seem like a way to keep the captain on line without attaching the blame where it belongs? This is a case where cultural considerations take second place to safety.

[BusyB]

If the runway is not clearly visible it would be unprofessional to ask for or accept a visual when carrying passengers. However, if its cavok and clearly visible, it certainly would be good practice for a pilot to do a visual approach monitored by his crew. One day you won't have all the instrument aids serviceable and that practice will stand you in good stead.

[Stu Bigzorst]

411A,

Generally I agree with you, but I fly in to my home base up to 3 times a day. It is well defined, with a coastline and other good visual features. It is actually easier (and smoother for the pax) to just curve it in visually rather than take several vectors for a long protracted ILS. It certainly is easier when you do it very regularly!

But no way would I take a visual if I was uncertain about anything. For one, I can't be bothered with the extra effort.

[Ranger One]

Kingfisher:

OK lets get this straight. ONE Captain cant do visual circuits properly so no-one is allowed to?

One Captain screws-up - no problem.

One Captain screws-up, does it again in sim, and is sent straight back on line anyway - big *organisational* problem. IMHO.

R1

[Robert Vesco]

Completely agree with you Stu Bigzorst! Sometimes a visual can save a lot of time (and money) but unless there is no significant bennefit I think it´s a useless increase in workload. Nevertheless I think airline pilots should be able to perform a visual approach as it could be necessary in an extreme emergency situation.

[spekesoftly]

In the UK, there used to be 'An Approach Maintaining VMC and own Separation', but it was 'removed' some years ago. It was, if memory serves, only available at Pilot's request (ATC could not offer), during daylight hours and, as the title suggests, Pilots flying such approaches were responsible for their own separation from all other traffic. (As opposed to a 'Visual Approach', to which Standard IFR Separation still applies, albeit often achieved by ATC using 'Reduced separation in the vicinity of an Airfield'.)

Edit: I see that Robert Vesco has subsequently edited his post to remove the query that prompted my reply!

[Robert Vesco]

Hi Spekesoftly,

THX for your info. Did some searching and came up with the FAA definitions of visual (http://www.faa.gov/ATPubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0504.html#5-4-21) and contact (http://www.faa.gov/ATPubs/AIM/Chap5/aim0504.html#5-4-23) myself so I edited my post.

[Cpt CadetEntry Pilot]

All this talk about "You should never have to do one". A circling approach is a modified visual approach and is a necessity for many destinations not served by an ILS at every concievable end of each runway.

411A you really are in a different world fella! Then again, you must find all those autocoupled approaches you do onto (LR) runways give you a basis for such ridiculous, unrepresentative, opinionated twaddle.

I'm gonna have to stick you in my ignore list again..........

[seat 0A]

So, authority are they forbidden to do visual aproaches?
Is it an internal thing in teir OPS manual?
I can hardly believe that the Koren CAA has made this ruling.

[411A]

Gosh, sorry you feel that way, Cpt CadetEntry Pilot, but then again maybe your 'handle' says it all.:E

Strange that others (IDunno, for example) seems to have the same ideas.

Large heavy wide-body jet transports are best served by
instrument approaches, like it or not.

Just the way it is...autocoupled or not.

[autoflight]

Expat captain = terminate contract
Korean captain = obviously not his fault

[7FF]

Accepting a visual approach is hazardous especially in the US. The reasoning is not because I cannot see the runway nor unfamilarity. It burdens you with maintaining visual separation with other traffic and having the track miles to touchdown drastically reduced, sometimes increasing the workload considerably. Keeping visual separation at both LA & SF airports with parallel runway operations with VFR and IFR traffic that have widely differing approach speeds is not a challenge I need after flying all night. I stand by what I said in that never declare visual to ATC, at least not until you are fully established on the ILS.

[capt.cynical]

Any truth to the rumour that a "certain" airline tried to line up on the road bridge to the terminal in Kansai's early days??
:rolleyes:

[elektra]

Choyo, lighten up a bit on the anti-Asian stuff would you. We all know that “stuff” happens every day, in many places. Airlines have to learn from what happened. Do you, as a member of the PPrune family want to see every pilot who makes a mess-up immediately fired?

OK that’s the philosophy, now for the actual facts. I mention this because there’s almost no actual fact in your post. Other than that an event happened and as a result NIGHT visuals at KIX only are now out. And no pilot at KAL or anywhere else that I know of would fail the sim then be sent back to the line without further action. This isn’t even a daydream. It’s malicious and totally untrue.

And, for “real men” i.e. those with brains, not just balls, night visual approaches in heavy jets, specially with a bit of “black hole” effect thrown in, are just second best. As a few posters have commented, the runway is best found at the end of a well flown ILS. And, if the vectors are even reasonably good as they are at KIX, and and configuration management is OK, there’s precious little fuel/time lost compared to the enormously better safety margin.

Your profile says you’re back in Australia. If you’ve never made a mistake that you could kick yourself over, PM me and I’ll arrange for you to come back to Asia and tell us all your secret. You’ll be famous. Write a book and I’ll buy one.

[West Coast]

7FF says:

"Keeping visual separation at both LA & SF airports with parallel runway operations with VFR and IFR traffic that have widely differing approach speeds is not a challenge I need after flying all night. I stand by what I said in that never declare visual to ATC, at least not until you are fully established on the ILS"


And I must agree with him. How many times I have looked and seen a conga line of aircraft on final for both the North and South complexes at LAX and then try to figure out WHICH 737 I'm following. Nothing wrong with a visual approach in that I have no problem getting down and aligned and all that. The danger of a visual approach to a busy airport is losing the seperation services that come with the full blown instrument approach.

[choyo]

Elektra,
I'm not anti-asian, or anti any demographic group. However, with incidents, and from the word of one QA Captain very severe incidents, on the rise amongst the local pilots; are you one who also wishes to sweep them under the carpet.
I have no intention of writing a book, but I would like to see KAL wake up and see the big picture. There are too many departments where these incidents end up disappearing into.
It took a letter from Capt. G to instigate the wake up call, so it's not only I whom is concerned. Almost every expat Captain I know of is concerned.
Do you keep your shoes on for takeoff and landing when passengering with a local crew?

[Dan Winterland]

Visual approached at KIX are relatively common on 06 when approaching from the south. I gather it's done to keep you away from the city and stop your noise nuisance. Although it's a fairly straitforward approach in daylight, at night you are flying a right hand pattern probably joining downwind over the sea with no lights between you and the runway. (For those who don't know, KIX is built on recalimed land and is a bit like an aircraft carrier). Descending into a 'black hole' on a night visual circiut is a well known problem area (think Gulf Air A320 at BAH in the late 90s). If this is a problem, perhaps Air Traffic at KIX should be reviewing their procedures as well as KAL (hats off to them for being pro-active on safety BTW) before more lives are sacrificed for noise environmental reasons.

[choyo]

With all due respect we are pilots. A night visual approach is a procedure which all pilots should be able to accomplish. Keep the autopilot and autothrottle coupled until turning finals. A VNAV profile giving you a virtual glideslope can be constructed, and on right base at Kansai you always have the airport and runway lights in sight. A heavy aircraft such as a B747-400 is no different to any other aircraft from a flight deck perspective, just remember the inertia and momentum of the aircraft that's all. What's the big fuss about, I am no way an ace of the base but come on guys a night visual circuit when correctly briefed and with raw data back up is no big deal, just fly the aircraft. My criticism is why did this KAL captain allow himself to descend to 300 feet on base leg whilst still over the sea. It is not the fault of the procedure being too complicated it is a fault of lack of any kind of situational awareness. To then freeze on the controls when he realised his predicament is gross negligence. That is my beef, then to do it again in the simulator, and still be released to the line is criminal. Do you want yourself or your family to be his passenger, that is what you have to ask yourself.
Guys we're pilots flying sophisticated aircraft which we can make to sit up and beg, due to the wealth of information available.
I agree in the states it is a different ballgame, cleared for a visual approach and cleared to land removes the rquirement on ATC to be responsible for traffic seperation; something to be very cautious about but a different topic.

[catchup]

@Choyo

Good post! That's exactly what I think about visuals at night.

By the way, would you "deadheading" with KAL ?

regards

[Diabolo]

Don't forget the VDP :confused: :ouch:

[lead zeppelin]

Autoflight said

Expat captain = terminate contract
Korean captain = obviously not his fault

Where did any post state positively that this captain was Korean?

[autoflight]

lead zeppelin is challenged to show invalidity of the mathematics

[Kaptin M]

There is something that hasn't been said yet, that I feel SHOULD be said.
A visual circuit is a BASIC flying skill - the fact that was at night makes little difference to a pilot who has been checked out as a 747 (or any other aircraft) Captain.

As choyo statesKeep the autopilot and autothrottle coupled until turning finals. ....this is another basic, safe, aircraft/flight management skill that one would expect a B744 (or any other aircraft) Captain possessed.
I would add to this that regardless of it being a "visual", ALL available resources should be utilised, and that includes having at least one side - the PF's or the PNF's - display the ILS, to monitor tracking (vert & horiz) when approaching finals.

So wtf WAS the First Officer doing all this time?
Where was the back-up, the monitoring, the callouts?
I assume KA has a "500' - stabilised" call?
Did the F/O also not realise that at 500' the aircraft was NOT established in a position from which a SAFE landing was ASSURED??!!

Errors in judgement occur, but most airlines have many "checks and balances" built into their SOP's to catch them before they can bight back.
Is there a systemic problem in KAL that prevents these "checks and balances" from working as they should?

[lead zeppelin]

You haven't answered the question, Autoflight. I'll rephrase it for you so you can understand.

Did anyone in this thread say that this pilot was Korean?

[Maxrev]

I'm with Choyo and Kaptin M on this one.

If you can't handle a visual landing, which if I remember correctly is about lesson 5 of the PPL then you have no place in the seat of an airliner.

Yes I absolutely take on board the various issues of traffic and responsibility for seperation and erosion of safety margin versus a full instrument approach, but if I'm properly briefed, have a PNF who's got his or her brain in gear and the weather's good and the traffic's light then I'm happy to to take a visual. It keeps your senses sharp and one day when the ILS goes tits up you'll need those senses.

[cactusbusdrvr]

No one said what the nationality of the captain was. What the post implied was there are 2 different standards for pilots based on local or expat. As someone who has been there and knows people affected by that type of thinking I have to agree. There are 2 different standards.

Also, for those who will not fly a visual approach, don't ever try to get into DCA landing south expecting an instrument approach if its better than 3000 and 5. You'll either land on the wrong runway or fly into a prohibited area.

LAX I can sympathize with but you always have the option to extend downwind. You'll just get passed by me and all the SWA guys doing 210 to JETSA. In fact I would rather you do the full ILS. I've seen more than one Pacific Rim Carrier blow through the 24R localizer and wander over to the south complex when they failed to make a turn on a 10 mile final.

[choyo]

Yes both crew members were Korean. If it had been an expat captain then the f/o would have probably been shouting at him (though I hope that a western expat wouldn't put himself in that situation), but a local captain no way will he consider any mode of criticism or intervention.

[autoflight]

LZ should pay more attention to the mathematics rather than questioning the obvious.

[Maxiumus]

kingfisher -

Akerosid may be a solicitor, but if you have seen any other of his posts you will be humble enough to realise that you are in the presence of a man who is a supreme authority on all things aviation.

[lead zeppelin]

Thank you, Choyo! You answered my question in a clear professional manner.

Autoflight - you made a statement without any prior fact to back it up, and I simply wanted the facts to confirm what you are saying.

Now, Autoflight, as for expats not liking two standards in Korea, it is Korea - leave if you don't like it; it is their country.

[choyo]

I think all that needs to be said on this subject has been said. All I wanted to do was highlight the need for more situational awareness, and a need for KAL to understand that this needs to be taught/implanted in their pilots.
I have made several posts in the past about KAL and similar situations, but nothing seems to change. We try to pass on our ideas to the KAL pilots but they do not wish to know or take on this information.
It's not a case of trying to be one up on the locals; but a case of trying to be a part (if anonymously) of improving the safety of the airline by outing what is hushed up.
If we all at KAL could post the incidents which occur, maybe we can stop the next one from happening.
As I have said before this is not local/ethnic bashing but a desire to try and improve the safety of this airline through a third party. The result of which we would all benefit from.

[Aerostar6]

The reason controllers in the US want you to do visuals is that it keeps the movement rate up. There was a long article in AW&ST a couple of months ago about slot constraint into ORD. Amongst other interesting information were the published maximum movement rates under IFR and VFR conditions.

Basically when aircraft were doing visuals the movement rates were about 5% higher.

I still can't understand some peoples distrust of visuals into US airports. Sure, if you are going into LAX on parallel approaches on a hazy day, then no way. But on a gin clear day into BWI or PIT? Keep the A/P in until you have a full picture of where everyone is then go ahead. If it keeps the ATC workload low, we all benefit. (IMHO)

[autoflight]

lead zeppelin, this is a rumour network, not a law court.

[lead zeppelin]

Thanks for setting me straight, Autoflight.

I confused a 'rumour' network with an 'attack Korean culture' network.

[OneWorld22]

Looks like Harry Greenberg still has his work cut out at KAL. Why did he take this job? It must be infuriating.

[B737NG]

The Aicraft in question was a A360, VIS are not allowed in KIX, you can do them elsewhere. I dont want to say if you can do them.
seat 0A: you cannot immagine what the CASA insists in some cases. That is part of the culture and innovation in a lot of cases is blocked with the excuse safety. The land of morning calm.... the culture does not accept changes in any direction, only if ordered from the top. Who is top? The president, the chairman or God??.
Kaptin M: the F/O shouted 500 feet... stabilezed... sound like "still alive" sometimes....
The complete incident is sad at all. The higher management still does not accept the fact that there is still a problem to be solved. The saftey bonus got paid recently but there was a lot of luck involved and that can be used up one day.

NG

[autoflight]

lead zepplin is obviously one of the few who doesn't understand the following mathematics:
Expat captain = terminate contract
Korean captain = obviously not his fault

[lead zeppelin]

Lead Zeppelin is obviously one who doesn't make racial attacks.

[boofhead]

When (not if) they have their next accident, and perhaps lose some passengers, would it be appropriate to charge the FAA, British CAA and so on, as well as the several foreign managers working with Korean with criminal negligence, in that they allow this airline to continue to operate even though they know how bad it is? Whenever an accident is investigated, it always proves to be true that we only hear of a small percentage of the problems, and frankly what I read here is enough to make me wonder why anyone would want to see them being allowed to fly any international flights.

[Crossunder]

Not at all surprised this hapened to KAL. Check this one out:

http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/aviation/korean_audit.htm

Cheers.

[wealth]

Only a matter of time before all the holes line up!

When will KAL learn that their problem stems from recruiting national military pilots. The problem is rooted in the Korean culture of obeying commands from someone who is older, higher rank or with more experience, which is taught at an early age.
This culture is so ingrained that it conflicts with the safety culture that is needed on the flight deck. The F/O will do F/A to question the Capt. They have been trained in CRM but the Korean culture will dominate in dangerous situations. The CEO of KAL will never understand this because his korean and the majority of upper management.

[Golden Rivit]

Those controllers are not stupid! Once you accept that visual, you relieve that controller of the responsibility for seperation, So remember that when the F/A's are bouncing off the overhead, with the ensuing law suits.