I do not have the manuals to hand, but on the 747 2/3/400 do vaguely recall something in one of them about 'Extended over water operations are not recommended with gear extended'. It's about ditching with the gear down I believe. I had an occasion on a 747 when unable to retract, and had a good distance to go over water, so had to look it up. Quite what 'Extended' over water means is of course open to debate.
There must be more to that story. Why would he refuse to fly if the MEL says it's good to go. Do we know both sides or do we only have that fishy AI press statement ?
Since when do beancounters decide if an aircraft is safe or not?
Has anyone thought about possible icing conditions? I've had to do many a ferry flight stiff leg and the stipulation on our aircraft is that icing conditions are avoided. Extended gear adds drag, iced up extended gear would be like putting out the boards. Additionally, I highly doubt that the manufacturer has charts for specific fuel consumption with gear extended and iced up.
There are issues, quite apart from the valid points mentioned here (and entirely non-technical) that could be playing a significant part in the captain's intial decision not to fly and his obvious ongoing refusal.
If I go ointo more detail someone will call me nasty names, though I'm sure some of you will get my gist.
Why would he refuse to fly if the MEL says it's good to go
How about because the MEL allows the captain to accept a defect, it does not require him/her to do so.
The MEL does not gauruntee it's safe, because it does not (can not) possibly cater for all the possible combinations of circumstances. Aircraft I've flown have usually had some legal weasil wording to that effect anyway.
So we exercise judgement, that's why they pay us the big bucks.
Most of the time the MEL provides us with the operational flexibility we need, but sometimes it's just one more slice of swiss cheese with the hole lined up.
I doubt whether icing was a factor at this time of the year at the level that he would be operating at. However water can be a problem if the brake units are exposed for long periods. After a normal landing, the gear has only been exposed for a short period, and any water is dissipated by the heat of braking. However, at this time of the year there can be some big storms around Mumbai and so the gear might be exposed for long periods.
I carried out a base training detail on a wet runway at Prestwick a few years ago. We had to cut short the detail due to water ingestion into the Brake Limiters (no brake heating during touch-and-goes). The Air India captain would have known that the Mumbai runway can be very wet during the monsoon and would not have wanted to land with any brake problems.
The alterntes for Mumbai are a long way away. Chennai is the usual alternate, over the other side of India. A diversion would have had to be carried out with the gear down. We don't know what the Mumbai and Chennai weather was at the time.
We also don't know what other faults that there were with the aircraft and what had caused the gear not to come up.
If one flight had already been completed and then a long engineering investigation taken place, there were probably flight duty limit aspects, especially with a slow, and long, flight plan.
I'm sure that the captain made a professional decision based on the known facts.
Dave
PS. The freezing level over the entire route is usually about FL170 in June. With dynamic heating you would not expect ice buildup on the gear below FL200.
Last edited by Captain Airclues : 25th June 2009 at 00:05.
Reason: add freezing level info
The MEL does not gauruntee it's safe, because it does not (can not) possibly cater for all the possible combinations of circumstances. Aircraft I've flown have usually had some legal weasil wording to that effect anyway.
May I dispute such interpretation? MEL is considered to be safe, and you even can carry SLF on such flight...if it so I will not fly in any aircraft that is MEL!
Saudi to India is a LONG flight. No, it may not be a transpacific leg but hey, it's still a good distance. If there are any clouds or precip and it's in the flight levels, these are icing conditions. I wouldn't trust a weather report from most countries overflown on this particular flight to correctly tell me the weather over my route of flight. I don't know about the Boeing but the mighty mighty CRJ stipulates NO icing with the gear MEL'd down and locked for whatever reason. We weren't there and yet we're judging a professional aviator??? Sounds like the news media. Sorry to offend anyone on this site but it seems that microsoft flight sim experts and 500 hour Cessna drivers are spouting off about topics way above their pay scale and experience level in order to feel like a hot shot. With the extra fuel burned with the drag of that gear, I almost bet it would've been cheaper to get contract mx to fix the problem in Saudi. Let's be real pilots here and do what we should've been doing in the first place, blame management for stupid decisions!
To answer your question a little bit not to point anything to this particular incicent is that even if the MEL tells you its legal you could always rethink this depending on
for example : Other MEL items already listed in TLB, Ie some other systems already inoperative, Weather conditions on route like for this example I know that on many other types flying with gear down in icing conditions is not allowed. Destination rwy and condition of that etc etc. The list could be long. At the end of the day when the commander makes a summary of all problems they are likely to face ,Like MEL items and other condition he/she could easily have the feeling that this is not safe for some reason, and are therfore have the legal right to say NO to flight. Thats one of the things what the commander is suppose to do before all flights.To ensure its safe when all things at summary
I wouldn't trust a weather report from most countries overflown on this particular flight to correctly tell me the weather over my route of flight.
and then go on to say:
Quote:
Sorry to offend anyone on this site but it seems that microsoft flight sim experts and 500 hour Cessna drivers are spouting off about topics way above their pay scale and experience level in order to feel like a hot shot.
Well it seems to me and I am sure other who are familiar with those countries and that route that, just maybe, you fit into the flight sim and 500 hour category? When were you last employed in and regularly flying Middle Eastern and Indian routes?
Nope, haven't flown heavy iron from Saudi to India in possible icing conditions with gear locked down. Perhaps you can start a contract pilot business specializing in ferrying aircraft with mx problems that an experienced captain refuses. I couldn't help but notice that when I suggesting that some people may be inappropriately chastising and criticizing a professional pilot due to the fact that they do not fly tranport category aircraft, I may have hit a nerve. You may or may not fall into this category. I don't really care until people challenge captains' authority and judgement, especially when they don't know what the circumstances are, or in fact are not really professional pilots themselves. Yes, I fly jets. No, I don't care if you believe me. I won't lose sleep over it. I would like to hit you up for a job though. Any flying job that gives you enough spare time to have over 1,200 posts to your credit sounds like it may be right up my alley. I'm an expert at Flightsim and critiquing other aviators from the sidelines when I don't know the entire story. I'm mastering slow flight in a Cessna and have six stripes and 24k plated ray bans. The six stripes indicate I am type rated on the 172, a check airman and all around bad ass. I'd love to chat more but I'm going to the bar after this landing into Hong Kong on my laptop.
if you're not an Air India Captain likely to be faced with the same dilemma - who cares ? and if you are, PPRuNe isn't going to be a bit of help, it's between you and your boss.
I was once an 'Observer' at an Air India accident investigation in the Bombay High Court, the presence of foreign "experts" and Press made not one jot of difference, and why should it, it's their train set.
the problem here is that we are hearing only one side of the story, who knows what exactly were the conditions and problems that were present at the time of the planned flight.
Linear Mode
