PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Forgotten your Username/Password?

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 18th Dec 2012, 23:01   #41 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 69
In case a330pilotcanada's post wasn't sufficiently clear...or, in case I've missed the boat altogether, we've now seen the second such incident in as many weeks.

AvHerald's report of the latest - with reference to the first: Incident: Air Canada E170 at New York on Dec 9th 2012, descended below safe altitude

Perhaps the cause of the second is written on the bottom line of the first:
Quote:
The Canadian TSB reported the airline conducts an investigation into the occurrence.
gwillie is offline   Reply
Old 19th Dec 2012, 16:34   #42 (permalink)
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: East of the sun, West of the moon
Age: 67
Posts: 2,177
gwillie;

Re,
Quote:
"Perhaps the cause of the second is written on the bottom line of the first: Quote:
Quote:
The Canadian TSB reported the airline conducts an investigation into the occurrence. "
Internal Safety Investigations done by the airline are usually effective and is the way SMS works in Canada and, I suspect, the U.S. The regulator has oversight responsibilities of course, (assuming the necessary resources are in place...) but in this kind of an incident an internal investigation is reasonable and warranted. Sometimes FOQA data helps in such investigations depending upon the agreements with pilots' associations. Regardless, the airline's safety policy and culture is non-punitive so getting to the bottom of why this happened is only a matter of information-gathering and time.
PJ2 is offline   Reply
Old 19th Dec 2012, 23:00   #43 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 5,194
Quote:
The operator suspects there is a data problem in the navigation database for the non-precision approaches for LGA rwy 04.
And another, more serious problem: the SOPs did not catch that database error.

Also, no company-checking of database prior to use?
Capn Bloggs is offline   Reply
Old 20th Dec 2012, 00:51   #44 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Canada
Age: 64
Posts: 239
Good Evening Captain Bloggs:

Although retired the S.O.P. is to check that the data base is current ie 01-12-2012 to 31-12-2012. If not select the correct data base if roll over has happened.
In addition in the pre-descent check protocol not only calls for the approach briefing but confirmation that the data matches the approach plate, notams etc
I had a chuckle that previous poster brought up the old saw about metric visibility versus Imperial measurement. Short answer the approach plate visibility limits has to match what is on the ATIS reported visibility etc.
As I stated earlier wait for the investigation to be complete and someone will attach the official finding in a post as opposed to conjecture but I digress
a330pilotcanada is offline   Reply
Old 20th Dec 2012, 03:05   #45 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 5,194
What I was alluding to was procedures/techniques to spot when the aircraft, which is following the box, is going off the rails ie diving below the required profile between waypoints.

Re the company checking, I understand that some check the database before flight use using a checking program.

Is it conceivable that this sort of database error (if it is the problem) could occur on a RNP-AR/SAAAR approach where there is no way of checking the profile altitude/distance down the approach apart from perhaps total track miles to run (if it is displayed somewhere?).
Capn Bloggs is offline   Reply
Old 22nd Dec 2012, 05:37   #46 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: the Alamo battleground
Posts: 853
Post

Quote:
Is it conceivable that this sort of database error (if it is the problem) could occur on a RNP-AR/SAAAR approach where there is no way of checking the profile altitude/distance down the approach apart from perhaps total track miles to run (if it is displayed somewhere?).
I highly doubt it. There is a lot of double-checking going on with the FMS, GPS, eGPWS etc. behind the screen and any discrepancy should trigger a warning in the scratchpad resulting in an evasive maneuver. Not sure if there is any protection against a corrupt database. There might have been recent changes I am unaware of, since I have changed equipment earlier this year.

The VNAV function seems a little buggy: One problem my company encountered with the E190 was with company RNV-F visual approaches into LGA runway 31 and DCA RNV-F 19. Half the time the VNAV would not capture. I heard from some check airmen that Honeywell tries to blame it on Embraer and vice-versa, in other words, the same blame game software companies play.

I learned quickly to not rely on VNAV on this aircraft.

Last edited by Squawk7777; 22nd Dec 2012 at 05:42.
Squawk7777 is offline   Reply
Old 22nd Dec 2012, 15:15   #47 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 68
G/S Capture

Truth is the G/S was 'captured from above, all the restrictions & heights were checked on the computer against the Jepp Chart, ( as per SOP)......FYI, there has been a software glitch on the Embryo in this regard for awhile now. Once on the path, the A/C does not respect the crossing restrictions.....
jammers is offline   Reply
Old 22nd Dec 2012, 15:26   #48 (permalink)
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,540
Quote:
Once on the path, the A/C does not respect the crossing restrictions.....
- that seems bizarre! Surely the 'path' is constructed in the FMS from the crossing restrictions as 'hard points' so how can it not 'respect' them?
BOAC is online now   Reply
Reply
 
 
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 16:55.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network