Cape Town SAA A346
 

Just got a phone call from a colleague of mine still at work (at FACT). Apparently an SAA 346 has its nosegear in the sand. I have no idea if it was taxxing in or out, but RWY 19/01 closed for the time being.

Anyone have any more / reliable info regarding this ?

It was SA333 FAJS-FACT. A340-200. Ran off the runway. Cranes should be there at 1800 Local.

CT ATIS says runways closed. Apparently tyre pieces at FAJS indicate one or more blow outs during take-off. Yes runway is closed due to A340 with nosewheel stuck in sand at end of the runway in Capetown.

the tyres was a problem they had yesterday, not sure which aircraft it was out of jhb so about 4 aircraft landed with full emergency crews in cape town.

I hope that there were no injuries. The press are going to have a field day with this one, especially when they (the press) cannot get their facts straight:ugh:

Springbok702

I'm curious. You weren't referring to an Airbus with tyre problems out of JNB yesterday were you? Cause they have cockpit indications as to tyre pressures so they would have known exactly which tyres had blown, if any had.

no apparently rubber was found on the runway at fajs yesterday but it was not know which aircraft it was from but they apparently worked out it was an aircraft on the way to cape town, so about 4 aircraft which arrived in cape town from jhb at around the same time had the emergency services waiting for them on arrival.

If it was SA333, I believe this is the first flight for a LHR pairing. JNB-CPT-JNB, pax back to CPT today, LHR tomorrow.

Had a good one on the sms already.... "Apparently the 340 slipped on a Mango peel"!! :}

I see this incident just made the news.

They're a bit slow today. Almost two hour to get it on the net.

One passenger phoned in and said that they landed perfectly and taxied to the end of the runway, and then, instead of turning left, it turned right and got stuck in the sand!
He says the captain was a woman! Maybe that explains it? :)

Any news on this?

Dunno about the sex of the PIC, but the voice was male, and he accepted the taxi instructions from the tower ATC.

Alpha taxiway is closed just north of the Apron, so anyone who misses Echo taxiway when Rwy 01 is in use has to vacate right onto 16 to cross from Lima to Echo for the ramp.

There are a couple of other routes, one being a 180 on the runway.

However the quickest and least time on the runway is right onto 16, right Lima, cross Rwy 01 and Echo to the ramp.

The PIC accepted a right turn onto 16 after missing Echo taxiway on the landing roll, and somehow put the nosewheel into the sand.

2 hours 25 minutes later, all was sorted out.

27F

Well I just got back from FAJS after being stuck there for 4 hours or so due to the chaos.
Irrespective of what happened there needs to be some serious investigation and some serious ass kicked.
The fact is that the A346 landed and could not make E and had to get onto 34 to get into L and then cross runway 01 and then onto E into the apron. In the process the crew had to make a 150deg turn from 01 right into 34 - must be quite a thing in a A346. 27F a 180 on the runway is not an option with a A346 - maybe a B738 but not an airbus
This is due to ACSA closing taxiway A into the apron from the north. It is high time that someone/thing important had a good look at what ACSA is doing at FACT. They are over 6 months behind with their apron rehabilitation and as we enter the busy season they still have several gates that cannot be used. And they have allowed airlines to fly here, putting a premium on the avail gates. Now on top of this they close off one of the access's to the apron after they have just closed E for weeks. It really is a pathetic and tired effort from ACSA. They wait to the busy season to do the work.
Fact is that they should never have been allowed to close A taxiway until they had painted some lines on the runway so a/c could make the right turn.
The resulting chaos around the country was quite impressive to say the least. ACSA made no announcements @ FAJS and no-one knew what was going on - they did not endear themselves to the passengers there, that was for sure and ask me I was stuck in it all!!!
They have now given us the COMPLETION date for the new runway 18/36 which will be east of the main runway and go through the thr of 34 which will close that runway for good! It is going to be complete by the end of 2009 - we just wonder when they are going to start it. (Oh and I wonder what they are going to do to the helicopter customers - where they going to train when 34 aint there??)
Best statement of all this afternoon was the airport manager who wanted to know why a/c could not take off runway 19 from E!!!!!!!!!!!! The wind was 330/20 - does this a:mad:hole have any idea how an airport works and how a/c use runways? I still cannot believe after how ever many YEARS he has been at FACT, he has NEVER put foot in the tower complex and come and see how ATC works and the problems we have - which are compounded by the chaos around the apron at the moment.
I sympathise with the crew - had ACSA painted the lines at the runway intersection, this would not have happened - the crew had to guess where they were and they just slipped off the runway - I sincerely hope SAA take ACSA to task. And stop blaming the crew - the real cause of the incident is ACSA not doing their job properly.
One wonders if ACSA has a quality management system - if they did they would have identified this as a potential problem and addressed it before it is too late. But with a bunch of Wallies in charge of ACSA at FACT, what do you really expect? This also illustrates the urgent need to keep 16/34 open - one incident on the main runway and no one can move into and out of the Cape. We also need someone from ACSA that can make a decision - it was pathetic trying to get anyone there to make a decision.

Goldfish, I've seen '600's do 180's on the runway, suprised the hell out of me but the pilot insisted he could do it and he did. I've also seen them taxi from RWY 19 into Charlie taxiway with the cockpit already past the taxiway. I can't recall the angle, but it is over 120. The pilot accepted the turn so i don't see how anyone could blame the ATC.
Second joke for the day, if they couldn't tow it out like they did, the only other option was to get recovery gear from FAJS by FLYING it in...
What are the chances ACSA is putting in a nice large conduit for future expansion? Or are we going to sit exactly here in 2 years again.

Just to add some fuel to the fire. In the international check-in areas ACSA have come up with a brilliant idea of specific couters for specific airlines. The problem however is that they did not consult the airlines and there are clashes when TK/SA/VS check in in the afternoon on one bank of counters. LH uses the other bank and BA/SW use the other bank. There are about 6-7 counter that do not work which makes the problem even greater.

Specific counters for airlines can work with proper planning, but even in the AOC meetings, the airlines speak up but ACSA do nothing about it.

How many times have the doors in the two air bridges not worked and we have to hold the pax until ACSA resets the magetic doors so that they can be opened.

The staff parking is temporary (only 4 years:yuk: acording to ACSA), but have you seen the state of the staff parking, never mind the shuttle service.

ACSA will put the blame on the crew as they will not accept any responsibility for the airbus incident, just like they are not at fault in anything at the airport

I am with Goldfish on this one. FACT has a poor record of runway/taxiway serviceability. The constant closures, and backlog of work make it a hazardous place to operate into. Couple this with frequent navaid/lighting outages, and category downgrades, and you have a recipe for an incident.
I believe that the A346 (longer than A380 0r B744) is fairly difficult to manoeuvre. My sympathies lie with the crew.

27 F
at least on charlie there are centre line guidance lines............
as to the 180deg turns - runway end must be wide enough and strong enough which FACT does not have.
Of course ACSA are blameless - the shambles in the Int building is another fine example.
A Assocation of
C completely
S stupid
A a:mad:holes

A Apoligising
C continiously
S south
A Africa

I also think that SAAPA/ALSA- SA should approach IFALPA to get them to BLACKLIST FACT - due to the constant WIP and the constant navaid downgrages and problems - it really is a construction site with its own runway and I would not like to take a A346 into FACT at the best of times - I certainly admire those pilots - never mind the poor discipline of the vehicle drivers on the apron that are often either taking pax/other vehicles/ a/c on or out!

I'm amazed. No snide remarks about SAA pilot skills. Accelerated command anyone.

I'm amazed nobody makes remarks about the fact that this happened on the first day without 747 in the SAA fleet...maybe the pilot was just trying to make a statement!!!

Btw, can anybody maybe help me with info regarding what flights were diverted to GRJ. I flew to JNB on Friday morning arriving just after 12:00, actually saw SA333 take-off from JNB...so wasn't in GRJ to see what flights diverted here.

Woman make exceptional pilots, but it seems we still have a small problem with the driving :O !!

A rehash of an old joke,

What's the difference between a female A340 captain and a soccer player?

At least a soccer player knows how to take corners!

:D

We all knew that Affir. action. /prev disad / BEE etc. will have a price

Goldfish Jack, looks like your statement made the news in the newspapers.

5 November 2007: Cape Argus


Pilots blame Acsa for Cape Town runway mixup

The Airports Company of South Africa will not launch an investigation into the incident that grounded all flight operations in Cape Town for hours on Friday, despite assertions by pilots that the state-owned parastatal was to blame.

A South African Airways flight lodged its front wheels in soft sand while taxiing off the runaway, at Cape Town International on Friday. This caused Acsa to shut down the busy airport to incoming and outgoing flights for close to three hours.

The Cape Argus's sister newspaper, the Weekend Argus, reported on Sunday that a number of pilots had blamed Acsa for the incident.

Commenting on a website for professional pilots, they said there should have been painted lines on the runway to assist the pilot of flight SA333 from Johannesburg with her turn.

One pilot wrote on the website: "I sympathise with the crew. Had Acsa painted the lines at the runway intersection, this would not have happened. The real cause of the incident is Acsa not doing their job properly."

He added: "Irrespective of what happened there needs to be a serious investigation."

Deidre Hendricks, Acsa spokesperson, on Sunday said the airport management company would not be launching an investigation.

"Such occurrences do happen from time to time. Our focus on Friday was to ensure the resumption of airport operations. If you want details around the incident that happened you need to speak to SAA," Hendricks said.

Despite persistent questions from the Cape Argus around why Acsa did not see fit to launch an investigation into an incident that crippled South Africa's second major international airport, Hendricks refused to answer.

Robyn Chalmers, the SAA group head of corporate affairs, confirmed the airline would launch an investigation into Friday's incident.

"The safety of our passengers is paramount, so it is normal practice for SAA to investigate any incidents that may occur. SAA will investigate the cause of the incident the aircraft has also undergone a thorough inspection and no damage was found as a result of the incident," she said

The holes in the cheese are are lining up.....

Pics can be found here, http://www.2oceansvibe.com/

Looking at the pictures, it was clearly an A346. Which means it has taxi cameras. TACS. Surely they would have used these or were they stolen?:}

Would have given them a clear view of where the nose wheel actually was, so I am not sure one could blame anybody other than the crew. If you see you cant make it stop and get a tow.

however having said that, if the airport was serviceable, it wouldnt have happened.

I remember once when a Sun Air DC9 went off the taxiway in FACT, the airways boys all got stuck in, turns out the DC9 pilot was ex SAA too. Time for taxy practise boys. (and girls!!:ok:)

If you look at the pics, it is obvious that this was purely pilot error! To immediately start blaming ACSA sounds like the first reaction of SAAPA.

We have to remember that we are constantly reminded on these forums that SAA drivers are superior to the rest of us and that is why they are paid so much more. The nosewheel of this aircraft did not just "slip" off the surface, it is miles into the grass!

Affirmative action, BEE, fast tracking, accelerated command - we are constantly reminded that a slip every now and then, whether it is an A346 of the runway or the Bokke losing a couple of games, is acceptable in the bigger scheme of things in SA. This is one of those slips - lets move on.

The captain of the A346, "Sandy T", lost her cool a while back when a ground engineer made a comment about woman drivers! Should have accepted it graciously!:=

I'm not sure who is at fault here - like most accidents/incidents no one person or organisation is completely to blame.

What I will say is that taxiing an A346 is more difficult than you think. Taxiing an A346 around 120 degree turns without markings will not be much fun.

I have taxied the A346 around places like JFK and it doesn't matter how many cameras you have - it is very very easy to get it wrong.

I am curios though as to why they are so far off the pavement.

W2

An incident was predicted, and an incident has occurred. The few calls made by the upper echelons to keep it all together really have to be taken to heart by all....

Check out the skid marks going off the runway....

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g3...i/20071102.jpg

There are a few remarks about the qualifications and or sex of the crew.Anybody have the *alls to give out names or is that a career limiting move:cool::cool::cool:.

CJ750,
I think it would be unprofessional and unethical to name the crew involved in this incident. Why do you want to know? So you can roast them like everyone else when it comes to SAA pilots!
It ain't balls ...as you so call it...it would be down right stupidity!

Beechbum
 

Why is it ok to refer to the crew by nickname or PDI or whatever is the flavour of the day but not by name. Is that not hypocritical.

I am not picking a fight and also i do not want to bash the crew concerned. I assume by the reply that you are a sensitive SAA driver.

There's enough SAA bashing on these forums to last a life time so quite honestly until we know the facts lets leave the guilty party/ies out of the equation. Yes the Captain was a woman but so be it, it could have happened to any one.
And yes I'm SAA...sensitive....no...just ethical!
Sorry CJ750...it's just the way it is and should be left that way!
Ta!

Well put Beechbum.
Who cares what their name was or whether it was a male/female and also which company it was.
The crew have their hands full trying to figure out what went wrong, whether it was them or the runway....so why publicly bash.
Remember, it can also happen to you and then you certainly dont want your name plastered around.

Goffel.

I heard SAA Technical removed the "Cockpit Voice Recorder" and the last words on it "........if she wants to drive....let her drive.............." :p

E

Those were not the last words on the cvr - sounds more like (in afrikaans) "O Bok!" or something

What about the Co Pilot was he sitting with his finger up his :eek:

Shame. Bit embarrassing for the co-pilot's dad, who is quite prominent in the airshow scene.

I think the lesson to be learnt here is that A346's can't do 150 degree turns easily. The capt. flies quite well (for the woman bashers), but was fairly new on the A346. Heard from the grapefine that they (CAA/SAA?)want to have her licence stripped, which is a bit harsh I think...

my question..does the A340 not have nose-wheel steering on the F/O side as well and if the "lady" was on the R/T then I would presume that she was PNF, thus the F/O was taxi-ing and it would also make sense for him/her to attempt the turn see-ing as the turn was on his/her/F/O's side...and thats were the "error" took place...although the "lady" still takes the ultimate resposibility as P1 be it PF or PNF.....any takers...if so then this should also silence all those "BEE" critics here.

A search on the R+N forum will show a very similar incident to Emirates about 6 weeks ago. Glasgow, UK.

They'll probably tell you SAA folks about it at the recruitment roadshow:ooh:;)

Rob