Results of investigation of FR plane leaving taxiway: Nov 2002

[Coconuts]

I normally avoid starting threads in this part of the forum since I'm not a pilot but I have to say this small editorial in the paper today so grabbed my attention I just couldn't resist it . Furthermore as one of the female persuasion I'm dangerously leaving myself open to the Captain Ed's of this forum who share similar views to him about those of the female persuasion who dare to intrude in the hallowed confines of the cockpit unless they are FA's. :rolleyes:

But hell here goes:

The story concerned an FR plane carrying 128 pax on November 20th, 2002. It was flown from Dublin, leaving at 10:10am, by its 21 year old male FO & after landing normally at Charleroi at 11:40am control was handed over to the 42 year old female captain. After leaving the runway the plane's nosewheel & right main landing gear prompted ended up in the grass. No-one was injured & the pax disembarked normally but the airport was closed for two hours after the incident.

An investigation was carried out by the AAIU; the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit after consultation with the Belgian authorities. The results were that the captain had not attained a safe taxi speed when she attempted to vacate the runway. "The late use of an inappropriate braking technique, that failed to achieve a safe taxi speed, led to the uncontrolled departure of the aircraft from the taxiway on to the grassy area", the investigation concluded.

Absolutely classic & since I travel frequently enough with FR it wouldn't exactly inspire me with confidence. Was this not a very basic error, can someone please explain to me how it could happen to someone at her level. I mean what does it say about the level of training at FR of people who have the fate of hundreds of peoples lives entrusted into their care & the fate of muti million pound aircraft.

I wonder what happened to the career of the lady captain in question, no doubt MOL bawled her out for one? I mean I've noticed the eh hard landings when travelling with FR but careering off the taxiway after leaving the runway, even that's a new one on me. :D

Coco

[waspie]

I believe that the proper rules are that you are not allowed to taxi an aircraft faster that 30 knots. Although this aircraft was leaving the runway, the taxiways leading aircraft from the runway may not have been the wider type of taxiways for 'fast exit' from the runway. Not only this, but I have HEARD, and I say again, HEARD, that Ryanair and some other low cost carriers tell their pilots to taxi faster to cut fuel usage. And for those of you who say that taxiing faster uses up more fuel due to the increased speed, youre wrong!!!! Advance the power to a stronger position, then let the aircraft idle on power whilst the speed gradually slows, instead of keeping it at a constant rate. That is what I have heard though, so I dont want anyone saying im some Ryanair hater etc, although I am, it is only that which I have heard!!!!!

[Flexable]

Many high speed taxiway to exit the active runway are design to max speed of 50kts WET... (CYYZ) are usually 45 degrees turn

[NigelOnDraft]

Before various posters dig themselves into deeper holes than they are already, they might actually like to read the report before making further comment and personal judgements:

http://www.aaiu.ie/upload/general/4757-0.pdf

NoD

[waspie]

I take it you are referring to me NoD, but why do you say I have dug myself a hole???? I have already said that it was just my opinion and I was only saying what I have heard, not what is fact. It may or may not be fact! I dont know, I just go by what commercial airline pilots tell me, and normally they tell the truth. (I hope!!)
By the way, the link doesnt seem to work on my computer.

[Compass Call]

Link doesn't work for me either!:hmm:


CC

[B737NG]

No limt in figueres by law but the PIC has to choose a safe
taxi speed where the aircraft can be safe stopped at all times.
High speed taxiways are designed usualy for appx. 60 kts.
The "30 kts" or 20, 15,10 and whatever are number from the
operator.He instructs the crews to taxi the AC not faster
then that speed. If the pilot taxi`s faster then he violates the
company rules and set standart. The AOC is issued on the base
of the FOM and if any numbers are mentoined there then the
pilots better keep that speed because if they are faster then
there is a point to "hang" them and nail them down on this
exeedence. The topic is complexer as I am able to describe here
short before my departure. If You have more questions I come
back again.
By the way I know the Captain "CC" well from my days in FR
and the way the LCC is handling the crews and what they tell
them "off" the records.

NG

[Rocco in Budapest]

From this thread I have gathered that none of the respondants have ever been to or know nothing about the airport in question, Neither have they taxied an airplane. So please keep your ignorant comments to a minimum.

[B737NG]

It was Charloi. To discuss the issue is one thing, to keep the
privacy of the people involved is another. Switch on the brain
first and then make an output. How about that ??
I taxi since 1996 when I got my command, the last plane I
taxied in was 30 Minutes ago an I took it over from the F/O
after he did the flight and proceedure is that the PIC taxi the
AC from the rollout to the gate. Anything else Rocco ???

NG

[NigelOnDraft]

Link works fine for me...

Anyone making any comments about taxi speed having anything to do with this incident I suggest you read the report. If you cannot make the link work, please read the URL and enage brain about getting onto the site. You obbiously need a PDF reader... It took me ~2mins to find the report given the thread's inital post to find it...

NoD

[Wing Commander Fowler]

Nigel - the link works fine but initially I was with the clan who doubted..... I navigated there via aaiu site and got the same blank page BUT since the aaiu warned it took 190 secs to download I went off, made a cuppa and came back to see the appropriate information thanks. So there you go lads, if you don't have broadband then be patient cos Nigel's dun ya proud.....

'snot in Gibberish though so some of ya may still be frustrated hehe! :E

[mcdhu]

I'm fed up with people pontificating about safe taxi speeds! It all depends on the circumstances pertaining at the time. For example, on clearing 26L at Lgw onto 26R/08L on a nice day, what's wrong with 30+ kts - after all, we do 160kts on it when it is in use as a runway? As for going round corners, 10kts is a good 'ballpark' speed, but not all corners are the same in terms of radius and surface conditions vary, as do traffic conditions etc.

My point is, don't sit in judgement unless you were there on the day!

Rant over - back to the Sunday papers.
Cheers,
mcdhu

[Coconuts]

Yes I was having the same problems myself even though I've Acrobat Reader

Go onto site www.aaiu.ie & click on the link 'reports', you'll find the accident report listed there. As Commander Fowler says it does take a while for it to download, so be patient & keep oneself otherwise engaged, but atleast it downloads which I couldn't say for the link here.

Thanks Nigel :ok:

Coco

[JW411]

Coconuts:

"I mean I've noticed the eh hard landings when travelling with FR......"

You freely admit that you are not a pilot so I think a little bit of education is in order here. A great mass of the travelling public still have this idea that a really smooth landing is the perfect end to a flight and a great indication of professionalism.

We all try to do a smooth landing when the runway is dry but it is much more important to put the aeroplane on the ground at the right spot and if the landing is a bit firm, then so be it. If you don't put it on the ground at the right spot it might prove difficult to stop. For every second a pilot holds off trying to do a greaser of a landing, about 500 ft of runway disappears behind him/her and this is not good!

Now we look at the case of a wet runway; we are all taught in this case to TRY to do a firm landing. This is in order for the wheels to make firm contact with the runway surface. Doing a smooth landing could allow a wedge of water to build up between the runway and the wheels (which have yet to turn) and this could result in aquaplaning which is not a lot of fun either!

So please bear in mind that smooth landings are not always desirable. I don't think Ryanair do any more firm landings than any other operator. Certainly if you were flying with me and I was landing on a critical runway then you would do well to bring a tube of TCP with you. The undercarriage is a damned sight stronger than you are!

[Coconuts]

A great mass of the travelling public still have this idea that a really smooth landing is the perfect end to a flight and a great indication of professionalism.
Thank You JW411

What can you expect anyway, I was jumpseating on a Boeing 737 once, when landing the FO put the plane down so gently the captain remarked

"I thought we were still on air"

Gave me a giggle anyway. ;)

Ah no seriously I found that very informative, even though I was aware a soft landing doesn't always constitute a good landing & vice versa its good to learn the technicalities of it, FR certainly do some false teeth knocker outers though. :}

I still wonder about some of the rumours I've heard about FR (this incident hasn't helped) though or are they just a case of sour grapes with no basis. Many here are aware of my admiration for MOL & FR but if I thought they were cutting corners on safety & training of their pilots my attitude might change as would my decision to fly with them. Saving a few quid ain't worth risking my life for. I am not interested in unprovable, unbackable innuendo though.

Regards

Coco

[Say Mach Number]

I hate to spoil a good story for the scaremongerers out there but have been in Ryanair five years and have never been told or had pressure to taxi fast.

Its very simple and in black and white: 30kts straight line and 10kts round corners and these are maximums.

We always hear the bad never the good well just for once lets have a bit of good.

The Chief Pilot has just sent a memo out congratulating the crews. He had just received the track keeping stats from Manchester Airport for January and we had achieved 100% accuracy on all SIDs. Even more impressive most of those flights were on the -200. I should know I used to fly it.

[PPRuNe Radar]

As previously stated, this was an accident not related to a taxying speed.

The Captain appears not to have complied with the braking guidance/instruction contained in the Boeing Manual.

Bet MOL wasn't pleased ... or maybe he was hoping for an insurance write off to help retire another -200 ?? ;)

[NigelOnDraft]

As previously stated, this was an accident not related to a taxying speedI hate to be picky, but this was not an accident by any stretch of the imagination: Aircraft Accident An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight and all such persons have disembarked, and in which any person suffers death or serious injury, or in which the aircraft receives substantial damage Nil injuries, nil damage even, a little cleaning to the wheels was all....

NoD

[PPRuNe Radar]

I agree NoD ... just an incident ... so I wonder why the full formal report ??

Or maybe they don't get much practice at doing them in Ireland (which is no bad thing !!) and take the chance while they can ??

[NigelOnDraft]

I agree NoD ... just an incident ... so I wonder why the full formal report ?? I wondered the same. But, then the Brits 767 (BHX), VS A340 (LHR), and other nil damage / injuries "taxiway/runway excursions" made the AAIB monthly summaries.

Before anyone jumps up and down, I hasten to add the VS A340, unlike the other 2, seems to have had nil crew "factors" (just usual BAA complete ignorance of its responsibilities where they don't involve shops).

NoD

[unwiseowl]

For those of you unable to open the link -


Causes:

The late use of an inappropriate braking technique, that failed to achieve a safe taxi speed, led to the uncontrolled departure of the aircraft from the taxiway onto the grassy area.

[Civil Servant]

Tell me if I'm wrong, but weren't there a few threads in the past about this very thing, fast turnoffs from the runway, coming down taxiways after hi-speed turnoffs with the buckets still deployed and lots of power on etc etc. And were the complainants not slated by the FR advocates saying this was a perfectly safe practice?. Was it not said that there was an accident waiting to happen? Well, OK, in this instance an incident.

[Fat Boy Sim]

It is not just an 'Incident' but a 'Serious Incident' which requires notification to the AIB. Check your own Ops manual which should define reasons, or go to AIB site.

[PPRuNe Radar]

Semantics I know but I assume the 'Serious Incident' criteria which fits best would be:

- Take-off or landing incidents, such as undershooting, overrunning or running off the sides of runways.

The AAIU report clearly states that the aircraft left the paved TAXIWAY area, not the runway.

At the end of the day though, the report has been published, there are lessons to be learned, and there was no loss of life or injury. Which is the important stuff.

[737]

Is it normal practice during an investigation to allow the operator to check whether the aircraft was servicable?

The captain claimed that the brakes didn't work as expected but the investigators have accepted the result of Ryanairs investigation of the brake system.

[cools]

I read the original newspaper report quoted at the top of this thread and was intrigued by the sexism inherent in the writing. Young male competent etc etc lands the aircraft then lets the woman merely taxi it and she can't do that right. What did the age or sex of either crew member have to do with the incident??

[Pom Pax]

Can't resist it, what does JW411 fly? The space shuttle?
88 ft/sec = 60 m.p.h.
500 ft/sec = 341 m.p.h. = 296 knots

[Coconuts]

Aha cools

That part wasn't the original newspaper report, it was just me expressing my sentiments, comes as a welcome relief to see no-one here has misbehaved themselves & jumped on the sexist bandwagon. :ok:

I see 'cools' that you're a new member but once upon a time there was an retired American TWA pilot of Irish descent who used to post here who made 'sexism in aviation' his trademark. This thread would have been long ago hijacked by comments such as "there's no place for female pilots, nature has determined their role as the bringing up of children, they should be behind the kitchen sink where they belong etc etc" or "I knew a female pilot who wrote off an aircraft when landing it in a crosswind, that was the end of her career" etc etc. Thankfully it appears from the responses there are not many of his ilk on this forum, what a pleasant relief :O

Their ages & gender were stated both in the newspaper report & in the results of the formal investigation by the Irish Aviation Authority, just stating the facts, tis public knowledge. Nor did I say young 'competent' male flew the aircraft & female merely taxied it (that's ridiculous) if you had read the article correctly, presumably there was a good reason why the control of the aircraft had to be handed over to the captain at this stage, the pilots here would be better able to answer that question but there is no doubt you misconstrued that part of the post, since it was just stating the facts after all. :rolleyes:

Regards

Coco

[Shinawill]

It seems to me that uve just hijacked your own thread. Saved anyone else saying the above comments.

Something doesnt add up!!

[cools]

Begging to differ Coco but both the Irish Independent and the Sunday Tribune carried the line that the male 21 year old had flown the plane from Dublin and "after landing safely" handed the aircraft over to the 42 year old female to taxi.(The fact that she is the only one with a steering tiller escaped them!)

The actual Incident Investigation report is probably a bit too pragmatic for the average newspaper reporter. Unless I am misreading same it says that if you elect not to use autobrake (and in the circumstances of the incident as per procedures at the time you are totally within your right to do so) then you should ,if you find yourself running out of runway slam on and let the braking system do its job. If you pump the breaks in the belief that this will enhance brake performance you are acting under an illusion.

Any discussion in this thread about fast turn offs etc seems inappropriate as the actual incident relates to failing to stop the aircraft rather than trying to taxi it too fast.

Expediting to clear the the runway for the following traffic seems to have been a factor in this incident. Thankfully for all it was resolved by a bit of gardening and a few new wheels.

[JW411]

Pom Pax:

You are of course absolutely right. What I should have said was that holding off for a couple of seconds would waste around 500 feet of runway assuming a Vref of about 140 knots.

It was careless of me but I think the point was made nevertheless.

[bailey]

My view is, no damage, no injuries.......then well done crew. If you weren't there, then don't pass judgement.

Aside that, how can a 21 year old have 600 hours on type when you have to be 21 just to hold the F/Atpl? He must have been damn close to his 22nd birthday!!

It was good goind to have TR and line training done all within the same year he qualified to hold the ATPL.

Bailey

[FlyingForFun]

you have to be 21 just to hold the F/AtplYou do? I thought it was 18 (for a CPL), and 21 for a (full) ATPL?

FFF
-------------

[bailey]

Yes I stand corrected......you can hold the f/atpl at 18. It is the ATPL full that is 21.

Sorry!

Bailey

[brownstar]

i do despair at comments such as Waspie's

Ryanair donot tell there pilots to taxi faster to save fuel.
i know i have risen to the bait ,but the facts are the facts, not what you have' heard' Waspie. You certainly have not ' heard' that comment from anyone in the company.

waspie - an appology for your comment please!

[PPRuNe Towers]

Do you really mean that brownstar?

Either you know that things that aren't written down can become rock solid company culture or you are in your first job.

PPRuNe has a 'collective' memory covering operations since the second world war. Speed control both on the ground and in the air is a feature of discussion concerning FR since they were flying Rombac 1-11's and consistently failing to find the correct airport at Liverpool.

Rob

[brownstar]

yes i do mean it.

As someone who has been with this company a long , long time i can tell you that pilots ARENOT asked, or expected to taxi quickly to save fuel. The speeds that are recommended are 25 kt max in a straight line ( subject to safety considerations, narrow taxi areas, proximity to the apron, LVP's,etc), 15kt on the apron, 10 kt in a turn.

high speed exits have there own speed limits based on specific airport factors.

What i do object to is someone saying that they 'heard' that the pilots are requested to taxi fast to save fuel. It simply is not true.

I still expect an apology.

[Coconuts]

cools

Sorry I didn't get the full jist of what you were trying to get at first time, I'll try to make myself clearer

The newspaper article did not state

Young male competent or the woman merely taxi it
You're making this stuff up as you go along & inadvertently falling into the gender trap yourself.

I'm sure if we were to look back, most newspapers articles regarding aviation incidents/accidents state the gender & age of the pilots as a matter of course & general interest. Should we just because she was a woman give her special treatment & cover up the fact here that it was while the aircraft was under her control that the incident occurred, wouldn't that be inherent sexism in itself.

I doubt any intelligent newspaper reader would underestimate the enormous skill, experience & intelligence it takes to be given command of a jet, or devalue the 'chain of command' in a cockpit no matter what gender the pilots are & would not have misconstrued the article in the way that you believe. However I understand where you're coming from & I've no doubt the wording of the article did generate a snigger or two from the male chauvinistic underachievers in our society but that's their problem.

Regards

Coco

[waspie]

Brownstar, I respect your opinion, but you have failed to notice that we are in the "Rumours & news" forum. What I posted was what someone else had said, and only I have first hand knowledge of hearing what he said, therefore to all of you it is a rumour. So no, I will not apologise for my post. I heard that comment from a very good friend of mine, who was (until retiring not long ago) the Fleet manager at a good airline and was also a pilot (retired from that too, but only a month ago). I also said in my post, and I made it sooooo bl$$dy obvious that I had only heard it and that I didnt want people to go by what I had said as I had only heard it. I tried to make it obvious, but I knew people who rush in and post a reply critisizing my post before they finished reading it and discovering that I had said not to go by what I had said as it may not be true, but as this is a rumour forum I thought that it was ok to post it. So, Brownstar, im sorry, but you can take my apology and stick it up your ****. No offence intended there Brownstar though, you have a very valid point, but I have already explained why I posted it TWICE now! SO PLEASE EVERYONE, REMEMBER, THIS FORUM IS RUMOURS, THERE ARE MILLIONS OF RUMOURS EVERYWHERE, DONT BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR. There have been rumours about FR joining up with Easyjet, BA going bust in two weeks time...... Most of it is rubbish!

[brownstar]

waspie.

I feel from the stength of your response that i have maybe done you an injustice.
i have therefore read through your two posts again and have concluded that you shouldn't have realy included your 'Not only that but, i have heard' comment.
this brings to mind an image of les dawson in drag as a washerwoman gossiping over the fence to her/his neighbour.

i don't feel that this was a helpful or constructive comment to include. Like Andrew Gilligan, you should check your source.

i would like to think that constructive comment would be a better use of the forum.