Japan Air Lines nails pilots for 1 knot taxi speed.

[Kaptin M]

In their inhouse Flight Safety magazine the crew of JAL Flight 791 who hit a floodlight during taxi at Shanghai PuDong Internatinal Airport have been cited for "exceeded that of the Boeing suggestion (the Boeing operation standard for the taxi speed at turning is less than 10 knots), while the actual taxi speed at turning of the airplane was 11 knots."
1 knot faster. Are they be serious ?

Another factor cited: "The pilot, who conducted the taxi, didn't observe the obstacle around and the the marks on ground during his taxi to the gate, while the other crew members didn't also have good sense of the situational awareness and didn't alarm the obstacle around the airplane.".

Does anyone now believe that the companies will hang you for even a minor - make that trivial - deviation from the Ops manual whenever they feel like it.

ONE KNOT.....a JOKE isn't it!!

[Elliot Moose]

I'd believe it. The Japanese approach to aviation is totally unlike anywhere else in the world. This is a country where the comercial pilot flight test is two full days long, and where even the slightest deviation on a checkride can be cause for failure. Those folks are ready to hang anybody for poor performance.
At the same time, the performance that they are required to demonstrate is very carefully scripted, and Japanese crews can be very reluctant to do anything in training that is not specifically on the test. The result is that while they will know their stuff and know it well FOR THE TEST, they may have very poor skills in such areas as decision making, etc. It is a cultural thing in the end, and for the most part it seems to work for them. They have fewer big accidents than some of their neighbouring countries, and everybody knows the rules. If they want to analyse the fault to this level, then I'm not surprised. And yes, every pilot there would know that 10kt speed limit and would likely call out if it was exceeded.

------------------
Elliot Moose is on the Loose!

[Spoonbill]

If all they've got to pin on the pilots is one knot, it begs the question; how fast was the floodlight going at the time? Was it wearing a hi - vis vest? and was it displaying an amber flashing beacon? http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

------------------
It wasn't me.

[Flare armed]

Sounds like the local instructors in Korean Air, that recently scared a coupled of European captains away from the company with completely ridicules details during line training.

[PAXboy]

I concur - have you watched a Japanese train driver at work? Meticulous is one word....

Working to the book is great and fabulous and reduces incidents and accidents - until you meet the person/crew that is NOT working to the book!

------------------
A window seat on the sunny side of the aircraft, please!

[Avman]

So what! I got done by the local cops for being five kmph (that's about two knots isn't it) over the speed limit! Why should you guys get away with it in your aeroplanes?!!! :) ;)

[moschops]

Risking the wrath of pilots everywhere, I'm kind of with the regulators on this one.

I appreciate that this is only a minor transgression and I sympathise to an extent with the pilots.

But I remember being b*llocked for taxiing a Cessna a little faster than walking-pace during one of my first lessons, and for creeping up on a hold-line. My instructor said that an acceptance of small breaches when it doesn't really matter leads to big trouble when it does.

If you begin breaking rules -- however small -- you're gradually eroding the safety margin that's designed to stop you getting dead one day.

(Meekly climbs off soapbox)

[This message has been edited by moschops (edited 08 June 2001).]

[forget]

I don't see how anyone can come up with an accurate FORWARD speed in a tight taxiing turn. INS/IRS/GPS, they'll be baffled during the turn and until they again see some essentially ‘forward' movement. Any momentary inputs to FDR's, which is presumably what hung the crew, certainly won't be accurate to 10%. Seems to me the crew could fight this on a sound technical defense. Anybody disagree?

[Kaptin M]

And so who amongst us is going to be the FIRST to taxi in excess of his/her Company's OM, from now on?!

After all, exactly HOW MUCH time do you save by taxi-ing at, say 10-15 knots ABOVE the Ops Man max speed?...10 or 15 seconds, perhaps, on a l o n g taxi.

But....have an INCIDENT or ACCIDENT along the way, and the company will CRUCIFY you!

[18Wheeler]

Yes, it certainly does happen!
A good friend of mine who was a undergoing line training to be a 747 Captain with an airline that shall remain nameless, (and who was told that under no circumstances was he going to pass the line check no matter how well he did) failed one of his last rides becasue when he was taxying in he went up to 11kts on the ground speed indicator, and the limit was 10kts.
There was a couple of other rather silly things, but the point is that if 'they' feel like failing you then there's a multitude of ways. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

[Positive Climb]

I'm pretty sure it wouldn't stand up in a court of law - everyone of the 737's that I fly indicate a ground-speed of 1kt when sat on the stand with the air-bridge attached.



------------------
"After V1, we'll take the emergency into the air - You call 'Positive Climb' and I'll ask for the gear up. We'll climb away at between V2 and V2 + 25"

[Centaurus]

Moschops. Your instructor needs to mature a little. The term "taxy only at a fast walking pace" was coined back in the war years where students flew Tiger Moths with no brakes and only a tail skid. Then it was sound advice.

Cessnas and what-have-you, have hydraulic brakes and a partially steerable nosewheel which makes taxying more controllable, with commensurate sensible faster taxy speed.The operative word is "sensible". Mind you, the instructor makes more money from you if you taxy as slow as a Tiger Moth. Looks like you were truly taken for a ride in more ways than one.

[curmudgeon]

Anytime flying with JAL it always seems to me that there are two landings – the initial one, and then the next one about one second later. As it doesn’t seem to happen with other Japanese airlines, I wondered if it was part of the training?

PAXboy’s point about train drivers is also very true – a recent incident with a Bullett Train driver led to him being disciplined. He realised that he wasn’t wearing his cap as he drove the train, and as this was against regulations he propped open the dead man’s handle, and then went back several carriages to collect the cap. The train apparently went 1 or 2 miles in Tokyo with no-one in the cab. Let’s hope this doesn’t set a precedent for pilots to follow.

[Kaptin M]

Okay guys, this was a 747-200 - and we ALL know HOW accurate the ground speed readout is, on THIS particular series! (For those of you who are not (familiar), I would give it a plus or minus 50% rate of accuracy).

And, btw. I, nor no-one I know personally or otherwise, was involved in tnis incident/accident.

[maxalt]

But that's not the point mate, is it!

If the thing says 10kts (whether it's accurate or not) that's the limit, and if you go faster than 10kts when you hit something then it's your neck.

Of course, here in FR we rarely taxi over 10kts...and then only with permission. :)

[Kaptin M]

Precisely max - whatever the OM states, no matter how ridiculously SLOW it may seem to us, exceed that speed and you are violating your Company's procedures.

As a further aside to the JAL accident, the final (4th) "Safety Recommendation" to come out of this states "The Shanghai Pu Dong International Airport shall remove all the floodlights along the parking lots (in the area where the transgression occurred)." (But as maxalt pointed out, this is not the point of the posting.)

[Deadleg]

AVMAN, it's not a question of getting away with anything but rather one of common sense,
I assume you are'nt a pilot or you would know we don't have speedometers in our aircraft. In fact even if we did I doubt they would be accurate to 1 knot! End of lesson, you are the weakest link AVMAN-GOODBYE!!!

[smith]

Was the flight operated by an expat captain?

[dallas dude]

Obviously JAL won't be hiring any ex-Southwest pilots if 10kts is not to be exceeded (only kidding SWA)!

As most of us are paid by the minute, it's a pity 10 kts isn't a global standard.

Monitoring 10 kts would be tough, though. As one poster already noted we don't all have "speeometers" and, to the best of my knowledge, Halfords are unlikely to have anything suitable.

Seems more likely that JAL decided it was the Captain's fault and this was the easiest way to pin it on him/her.

dd

[Avman]

Oh for Christ's sake Deadleg what do you think the smilie and the wink was for??? And by the way, are you really a Captain??? If you had the intelligence to check my profile you would see that indeed I'm not a professional pilot. Yet, I bet I have more hours in the cockpit then you do. It was a little jokey jokey Mister Captain Sir (based on a fact regarding my speeding indiscretion).



[This message has been edited by Avman (edited 08 June 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Avman (edited 08 June 2001).]

[exraaf]

I work for JAL and have some inside information on this.

The crew involved were all Japanese. The Captain was a deputy chief pilot / instructor. He is an extremely nice guy in his early forties. Fortunately he only lost his management post. I heard that he is back as an instructor but I have to confirm it with the crew data base on JAL computer.

Basically whatever the consequences the crew had to face were minimal. All the crew was back in flying soon after the incident(Contrary to the popular beliefs JAL is very forgiving, even for expat crew for technical mishaps as long as no one is injured.)

I am too lazy to type whole incident report here. I am sure it is available somewhere in cyberspace. But the point I want to make is that "one knot excess speed" point is the last item on the analysis of the incident. (5 of 5)

The main factor is the crew mistook a guidance line to a parking stand for smaller aircrafts and blames the crew for lack of situational awareness. The copilot was doing the taxing.

The report also says " The airport authority didnot provide the information of the additional guidance line to the appropriate aeronautical information services unit and the air traffic service unit after the above lines were painted on the apron"

While there are number of things I think needs improving in JAL, I disagree with heading of this topic "Japan Air Lines nails pilots for 1 knot taxi speed"

PS : The INSs at JAL 747-200/-300 aircrafts are very well maintained. The errors are minimal even after a pacific crossing as I know from experience.

[Ignition Override]

Off the topic here, but as for training thoroughness in some countries: a guy I knew had a friend who flew 747s for a while in the US, maybe for many years. The US pilot gets a contract to work for either ANA or JAL. In ground school in Japan, included in the total training time which lasted up to a year, they even studied radio theory, as if they were training to be electronics engineers.

Anyway, is it possible that the class actually spent at least one full day on how to move the flap handle back and forth! (?)

Somebody tell me that these stories are only wild exaggerations, if not true. If they are true, then why does practical experience seem to have so little value in the eyes of the training/checking departments?

[smith]

F/O taxiing a 747-200?

[Sleeve Wing]

Just as an aside to a serious topic, would I be wrong in assuming that Aer Fungus's AOM
stipulates a MINIMUM OF 10 knots, particularly at LHR ?
Or perhaps its just the mud on their wellies !!
;) ;) Good luck, Mick.

[dallas dude]

Ignition Override

JAL isn't the only place where mind numbing class work is taught.

I sat in a classroom at the old City Poly (opposite the Tower of London) and watched Adair Butchins, the radio instructor with a degree in quantum physics (and occasional Barney Rubble stand-in), spend nearly 2hrs on the theoretical equations used in the Omega system, only to discover that his LAST SENTENCE was the ONLY THING I needed to know.

And the answer was 8800 or 13300 !

Talk about a waste of time....but that's the CAA syllabus for you (avoid simplicity at all costs).

dd

[QAVION]

"F/O taxiing a 747-200?"

Why do you ask, Mr Smith?

Q.

[Slasher]

The trouble is guys there is no excuse for a taxy acccident if you run into something. Running into something is an indication you either werent paying attention outside or taxying too fast for the set of circumstances at the time, or both. Even if you hit an object at 2 knots in heavy rain or fog your still in the poo because the finger-pointers will scream you should have stopped until it was safe to proceed, or get towed in. But if 10 knots is the limit in JAL then 10 knots it is. Go faster than that and its your neck. In my outfit its 15 knots on the faster IRS (737-300) or GPS (-200).

PS I agree with KM inferral. If 10 knots is deemed safe than 11 knots doesnt turn you into an uncontrolled bull-dozing juggernaut.

[Runway Rumble]

Remember my Chief pilot in the bad old days.
Quote; "There is no excuse for a taxying accident. DON"T BE IN ONE!! (gruff tone)

[alosaurus]

On some Jersey back roads the speed limit is 15 MP;I spoke to a cab driver the other day who was busted for 17 MPH!

[JJflyer]

See Mr Smith there is a tiller on the F/O side on the B747´s. And F/O could taxi if there only where cute little turns as rudder pedals have 7 deg of steering authority ( If this option has been fitted, mostly it has .

So the F/O can Taxi and I think this is a JAL SOP.

JJ

[Deadleg]

So AVMAN you find the prosecution of this crew ammusing? You are a funny guy!!!
Oh by the way I am a Captain, may I ask why your not if you are so experienced?

[TowerDog]

Ignition Overide:

Yup, most of those stories are probably true.
I did study the radio theory in Japan that you mentioned.
It was 10 days of intense memorization follow ed by written and oral testing.
Also fairly useless, I didn't learn anything that improved my skills in using the radios.

As for the one day class on moving the flap handle: Don't think so, it was bad, but not that extreme.

The training in Japan was a pain in the butt as the Japs turned up the pressure intentionally: You must study very hard, JCAB
check very difficult, very difficult...

Training for capts and f/os was about 7 months and f/es 9 months, but that was some years ago and may have changed now.



------------------
Men, this is no drill...

[In the slot]

Gents/Ladies
Seems like there's a little Jap-bashing ridicule here. Listen to EXRAAF who seems to be in the know, surely he must have the most accurate info?? We all know there are plenty of airlines who will pin ANY blame for ANYTHING on the operating crew and "covering your ass" isn't purely restricted to Asia.
As pointed out the CAA wastes as much time as any other authority on useless/outdated information so why ridicule the Japanese as much. At the end of the day, we all strive for safe professional operations and I fly into Japan quite often and find a very high level of operations there in every aspect of aviation, with the exception perhaps of the level of spoken English by ground crew and controllers. They may be picky in certain areas, but then they do also have generally a quite enviable safety record through the years. I'd certainly rather get on a Japanese operated aircraft than one operated by a large number of other countries!!
1kt SEEMS ridiculous, but then it also SEEMS as if it was not the sole reason cited, and that the punnishment was less than previously suggested.

[Avman]

No Dash-8 Captain DEADLEG it's no funnier than my being prosecuted for being 2 knots over the speed limit on a wide unpopulated road in a far less heavier machine than a B747. And I didn't cause an accident either!
And if you insist on wanting the last word lets carry this on privately. My e-mail is in my profile. Over and out!

[ironbutt57]

So Kaptin M...are you the "gladiator" of the japan-based airlines...whattasamattah...they turn you down?

[exraaf]

All the JAL 747s are equipped with nose wheel steering tiller on copilot side and they used to do all the taxiing when FO is the PF. But after the above incident in Shanghai, copilots are not allowed to taxi into the apron or the parking spot. Taxiing on straight taxiways and lining up for takeoff is still done.

As previously mentioned by others, JAL intial training is way too long. I only did a reactivation training (To fly the same type aircrafts with same engines as my previous airline) but it took 6 months. If it is a conversion, it can take 9-11 months. But once the training is over the life becomes very easy. I generally fly 60-70 longhaul hours, spend about 12-15 clear days at home. There are some guys based in Honolulu but commutes to work from UK ! They get a tailor made roster of about 20 days on 20 days off.

One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post. The 10 knot taxi speed is quoted on the incident report as the Boeing recomended speed for taxiing turns. 25 kts(dry) and 15 kts(wet) are the recomended speeds for straight taxi in JAL.

[Ignition Override]

In the Slot (and to others): as for intense theory, this is "preaching to the choir", and maybe there is some ridicule or just questioning on these topics, but I can never figure out why any country's (Amer, European, Asian...) agencies, airlines or military training squadrons have to include a large quantity of very abstract theory in any class for any rating, unless there are direct applications to cockpit operations. Test pilots out at Edwards AFB or NAS Oceana for "weapons systems" all seem to have an engineering degree (even an MS in Astrophysics!) for feedback to engineers, and as for airliners, Boeing/Airbus/Bombardier/Avro... test pilots do the transport testing for us.

Our manual mentions 4 or 20 joule ignition etc, but no "real world" check airman here would consider it necessary to find that, or radio theory important, or how much fuel enters the APU during its automatic start sequence etc, or how to design the clearway planes-those are for the maint. technicians and the FAA. Our takeoff numbers incorporate known conditions and MEL penalties (slat track doors missing or Anti-skid inop...).

We could analyse all of the theory during a much slower taxi to the runway and cause a further delay to an already-late flight to a hub, with anxious passengers sweating it, but as most of you understand, I doubt that our company prefers that. It seems to me that in a high-density two-person cockpit operation on medium or very short and very busy legs with weather extremes possible, the value of practical hours are preferrable to an obsessed focus on truly unrelated theory and embedded, "invisible" design. We must all balance various needs, changing situations and pressures, not just operate as microchip robots, whether on steam-gauge or the latest planes .

[This message has been edited by Ignition Override (edited 11 June 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Ignition Override (edited 11 June 2001).]

[whalecapt]

exraaf
Don't you realise this is a RUmour NEtwork and facts are not to be tolerated?

[Few Cloudy]

Erm - if you spend too much time looking at the GS readout, it is possible that you don't spend enough time looking out and that you could hit an edge light - Oh!