PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Part II: Air Canada, too low on...
View Single Post
Old 15th Dec 2012, 16:42
  #7 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 72
Posts: 2,416
bubbers,

In any approach there is a "path" component and a height vs. distance component. We all know the formula that checks altitude against distance, and many who fly (I'm retired) have a glass map that shows the runway.

Why do crews (in general...we don't know yet what happened here), sometimes slavishly follow the glideslope indication and bust the FAF altitude and even minimums? Seen it in the data due to a stuck GS indication...near CFIT.

Avoiding the hindsight bias trap, what makes sense to a crew such that they continue a descent below the altitude-vs-distance checks, and why does it make sense at the time?
PJ2 is online now