Boy, it's noisy in here!
It's been a little while but if that's true then it's a fairly recent change. The standard Airbus checklist had an after takeoff checklist for many years.
While the A320 has no "you're flying with the gear down, stupid" warning, there is a warning for excessive airspeed with the gear down. I believe it is triggered at 290 kts, so if that warning was never triggered, they never attempted to fly at such a speed, which is not a normal A320 profile.
While the A320 has no "you're flying with the gear down, stupid" warning, there is a warning for excessive airspeed with the gear down. I believe it is triggered at 290 kts, so if that warning was never triggered, they never attempted to fly at such a speed, which is not a normal A320 profile.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Around the world.
Age: 42
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A320 Airbus SOP checklist AFAIK:
After Takeoff / Climb
LDG GEAR......UP
FLAPS...........RETRACTED
PACKS..........ON
-------------------------
BARO REF......___ SET (BOTH)
After Takeoff / Climb
LDG GEAR......UP
FLAPS...........RETRACTED
PACKS..........ON
-------------------------
BARO REF......___ SET (BOTH)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Actually, on the FR24 speed and altitude graph you can see that they struggled to slightly above 240 (looks like FL245) and then went down to FL240 for the remainder of the cruise to Nagpur.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
The normal VLE is 280/M0.67
The gear down ferry VMO/MMO is 235/M0.60 (activated by a switch in the avionics bay)
With this switch selected you will then get the FLT L/G DOWN memo displayed.
I cannot find any cruise performance figures for above FL290 for any weight.
As well as the FCOM limit disappearing the flight level caution note in the QRH (and FCOM) emergency descent procedure where it says you could lower the L/G has also gone.
The gear down ferry VMO/MMO is 235/M0.60 (activated by a switch in the avionics bay)
With this switch selected you will then get the FLT L/G DOWN memo displayed.
I cannot find any cruise performance figures for above FL290 for any weight.
As well as the FCOM limit disappearing the flight level caution note in the QRH (and FCOM) emergency descent procedure where it says you could lower the L/G has also gone.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: In my own little world
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
If you go to the fuel penalty factors table for all gears extended it refers to PRO SPO 25-10 which is Flight with gear down. There it says that for a failure of the retraction system (whether mechanical or cerebral - my entry) then the limits of that section apply. At FL240 fuel flow from the planning tables appears to be in the order of 1600-1800kg/hr per side depending on weight. This with an indicated speed of 210 for a TAS of 302.
While I do not wish to comment on this specific incident, as I don't have the facts, it does remind me of two incidents that I had which are examples of the errors to which humans are vulnerable, be they of male, female or indeterminate gender:
1: Citation II. Two crew public transport. Levelled at FL330 and wondered why the airspeed was slower than expected. Eventually discovered that the flaps were still at the take-off setting.
2: B737-300. Public transport. I forgot to call for gear up after take-off. When discovered a few minutes later, the F/O retracted the gear, but then later inadvertently placed the lever through 'OFF' to 'DOWN'. Led to a few choice remarks about 'strange noises' in the cabin from the Flight Attendants!
1: Citation II. Two crew public transport. Levelled at FL330 and wondered why the airspeed was slower than expected. Eventually discovered that the flaps were still at the take-off setting.
2: B737-300. Public transport. I forgot to call for gear up after take-off. When discovered a few minutes later, the F/O retracted the gear, but then later inadvertently placed the lever through 'OFF' to 'DOWN'. Led to a few choice remarks about 'strange noises' in the cabin from the Flight Attendants!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An article about the same event here :
Fuel crisis: Wheels down, Air India flies into mid-air fuel crisis | Mumbai News - Times of India
They do not mention the female gender
Fuel crisis: Wheels down, Air India flies into mid-air fuel crisis | Mumbai News - Times of India
They do not mention the female gender
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not a pilot s forgive me for asking but ... if they are monitoring the fuel levels then how fr away from that 'display' is the gear indicator? My point being how possible is it to NOT see one if you are looking at the other? According to the reports they only noticed the gear was still down on approach, but if they already knew they were on low fuel how likely if the displays are close together is it that they wouldn't have seen the gear indicator?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Doncaster
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you gl ! So in essence they're next to each other which to me at least indicates that if you are seeing at fl240 that you are low enough to divert it'd be hard to miss any gear down indication. So only spotting it on approach seems even more unlikely,
About 10 years ago I was handling a flight departing belonging to a certain ME airline.
It had arrived from the ME and was supposed to depart KUL to CGK (shuttle with same crew). They had a problem with the landing gear not retracting but elected to continue to CGK as they had uplifted fuel for the return leg as well ex-KUL so the higher burn was still OK.
MCC picked this up and instructed them to divert to SIN instead where facilities like aircraft jacks etc would be available.
My point is that once you are up in the air.. you have to land somewhere and landing at an airport where facilities are better would be preferable to getting stuck somewhere without facilities. In the above example, CGK would not have had jacks and parts for this aircraft type and the AOG could potentially be weeks.
I could imagine the scenario here where the PIC was instructed to continue to Mumbai but when fuel became an issue they had to divert. The resulting fallout could be a case of the pilots being sacrificed to save HQ's 'face'.
It had arrived from the ME and was supposed to depart KUL to CGK (shuttle with same crew). They had a problem with the landing gear not retracting but elected to continue to CGK as they had uplifted fuel for the return leg as well ex-KUL so the higher burn was still OK.
MCC picked this up and instructed them to divert to SIN instead where facilities like aircraft jacks etc would be available.
My point is that once you are up in the air.. you have to land somewhere and landing at an airport where facilities are better would be preferable to getting stuck somewhere without facilities. In the above example, CGK would not have had jacks and parts for this aircraft type and the AOG could potentially be weeks.
I could imagine the scenario here where the PIC was instructed to continue to Mumbai but when fuel became an issue they had to divert. The resulting fallout could be a case of the pilots being sacrificed to save HQ's 'face'.