BA1478 LHR-GLA 21-01
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA1478 LHR-GLA 21-01
Just had a rather odd experience. The original plane for this flight was changed out due to fog at GLA - as far as I know that's normally an A320, which I understand are perfectly capable of an ILR landing in fog. The next odd thing was that on approach, we were asked to turn OFF all phones (not flight mode) as they would potentially affect an ILR landing. Sounds like BS to me?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite possibly the crew or the aircraft were temporarily unable to carry out Low Viz Procedures, (Cat2/3 ILS and auto landings), the crew may have been out of date, the aircraft may have had a technical problem, by changing aircraft , with a different crew, they were able to overcome this. Just a possibility.
That is procedure at most UK carriers if not all. In fact AFAIK it is a CAA regulation that became procedure when the use of PED's was permitted a few years ago. Remember, until a few years ago all electronic devices had to be switched off for take off and landing.
One thing to remember is that crews don't just make up procedures and that what you are being asked to do is not BS.
Trust the professionals.
One thing to remember is that crews don't just make up procedures and that what you are being asked to do is not BS.
Trust the professionals.
TBH I'm not sure what an " ILR landing " is, but anyway:
Not always - If the aircraft was swapped out " for fog" then one strong possibility is the original airframe may have had a temporary minor defect which downgraded it's autoland/all weather operations capability. It happens on all types from time to time to time.
As for PEDs - due to risk of interference with the aircraft systems that you really do need to be working without any risk of compromise on an autoland it's a requirement at BA and other operators that they are turned off for low vis approaches - hence the announcement.
At the end of it all it sounds like you got to your destination safely...........
The original plane for this flight was changed out due to fog at GLA - as far as I know that's normally an A320, which I understand are perfectly capable of an ILR landing in fog.
As for PEDs - due to risk of interference with the aircraft systems that you really do need to be working without any risk of compromise on an autoland it's a requirement at BA and other operators that they are turned off for low vis approaches - hence the announcement.
At the end of it all it sounds like you got to your destination safely...........
Last edited by wiggy; 22nd Jan 2017 at 08:58.
I fly the A320, and have done quite a lot of auto lands this winter so far.
I'm amazed by the fact that we frequently have to do an additional PA to reinforce the PEDS message. People seem happy to risk a successful automatic landing just so they can fiddle with their iPhone or receive a text a couple of minutes early.....
Our minima for many of these landings are 75m visibility and NO visual references. Not the time to be risking some kind of interference from the cabin.
DH
I'm amazed by the fact that we frequently have to do an additional PA to reinforce the PEDS message. People seem happy to risk a successful automatic landing just so they can fiddle with their iPhone or receive a text a couple of minutes early.....
Our minima for many of these landings are 75m visibility and NO visual references. Not the time to be risking some kind of interference from the cabin.
DH
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Birmingham - UK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had a low vis announcement on a Flybe 175 in to AMS on 18/01 due to freezing fog. I was right at the back and overheard the CC get the call from the front to make the announcement, quite interesting but she fluffed it a bit reading from the card as she mentioned she hadn't made one before.
The approach itself was fun and couldn't see anything until 2-3 seconds before touchdown. The fog itself caused a few headaches though, 1.5 hrs waiting on the tarmac at BHX for clearance, 47 minutes flying and then another 20 mins taxiing in from the Polderbaan, seemed to take forever
The approach itself was fun and couldn't see anything until 2-3 seconds before touchdown. The fog itself caused a few headaches though, 1.5 hrs waiting on the tarmac at BHX for clearance, 47 minutes flying and then another 20 mins taxiing in from the Polderbaan, seemed to take forever
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Double Hydco
Do you think passengers listen to let alone respond to PA's? The only way to get most people in the cabin to comply is with physical intervention by the CC and even then there can be resistance, especially where PED's and personal headphones are concerned. Remember, we live in a world where personal connectivity is seemingly as important as the air we breath these days, and not only amongst the younger generation.
I watched a passenger last week argue with a purser over whether she was using a tablet (hand held electronic device but with detachable keyboard) or a laptop (which would have to be stowed for takeoff and landing). Watch the number of passengers (and often those in premium cabins) who unbuckle and stand up as soon as the aircraft has come to a standstill but before the seat belt signs are extinguished, despite being told to remain seated until the signs are off. A quick tap on the brakes used to do the trick but these days, even though the pax are not compliant, it's not worth the risk of litigation.
Do you think passengers listen to let alone respond to PA's? The only way to get most people in the cabin to comply is with physical intervention by the CC and even then there can be resistance, especially where PED's and personal headphones are concerned. Remember, we live in a world where personal connectivity is seemingly as important as the air we breath these days, and not only amongst the younger generation.
I watched a passenger last week argue with a purser over whether she was using a tablet (hand held electronic device but with detachable keyboard) or a laptop (which would have to be stowed for takeoff and landing). Watch the number of passengers (and often those in premium cabins) who unbuckle and stand up as soon as the aircraft has come to a standstill but before the seat belt signs are extinguished, despite being told to remain seated until the signs are off. A quick tap on the brakes used to do the trick but these days, even though the pax are not compliant, it's not worth the risk of litigation.
No, not really.
Just passing on my personal viewpoint, since the OP clearly thought he was being fead BS at the whim of the crew. That's why we're often asked (by the cabin crew) to do an additional PA from the FD.
Just passing on my personal viewpoint, since the OP clearly thought he was being fead BS at the whim of the crew. That's why we're often asked (by the cabin crew) to do an additional PA from the FD.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was on a LHR DUB flight last year and the Captain PA'd that he would need all PEDs completely powered down for an Autoland and that the CC would be coming through before top of descent to reinforce that message.
Worked a treat as far as I could see (as did the aircraft systems, ground installation and crew training so thanks to BA, Airbus and Dublin Airport!)
Worked a treat as far as I could see (as did the aircraft systems, ground installation and crew training so thanks to BA, Airbus and Dublin Airport!)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.britishairways.com/cms/gl...oard_Dec14.pdf
Scroll down to; Are there any times when I can't use my handheld devices?
Scroll down to; Are there any times when I can't use my handheld devices?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"BA SOPs require all mobile phones and PEDs must be turned off for CAT III approaches."
For takeoffs as well when low vis procedures are in effect.
Several years ago into EWR in good weather we had a straight forward 40 degree intercept onto the ILS. The autopilot made a complete mess of it with several 35 degree bank angles to the left and to the right before it finally established. I have no doubt this was electrical interference and most probably came from a PED on board.
For takeoffs as well when low vis procedures are in effect.
Several years ago into EWR in good weather we had a straight forward 40 degree intercept onto the ILS. The autopilot made a complete mess of it with several 35 degree bank angles to the left and to the right before it finally established. I have no doubt this was electrical interference and most probably came from a PED on board.
