Saudi B777 Lands on Wrong LHR RWY?

[mutt]

I just got this in my email, can anyone add to it?

Now, most of us like to see a 777 from any angle, but spare a thought for the airport worker at Heathrow who saw one in his rear view mirror. The man was driving on the CLOSED runway (27R is currently being resurfaced) and saw the lights of the landing aircraft (we can presume he didn't stay around long enough to confirm its identity!). He had enough time to clear the runway before the Saudi Arabian Airlines 777, carrying 250 people, landed. The CAA has launched an investigation.

(This report is from ITN's teletext)

Thanks.

Mutt.

[This message has been edited by mutt (edited 15 June 2001).]

[Airbubba]

Nothing new for the Saudis (or Delta <g> ). A few years ago they landed a 747 at the wrong airport in Madras after repeated ATC warnings and flares. The runway was much shorter but they got it stopped, blew the tires etc.

All the seats and galleys were removed to limp the aircraft over to the real airport a few miles away...

[Invalid Delete]

I just heard it on the local radio on the way home.
Apparently the incident happened 3 weeks ago, although details are only just comming to light.

It happened whilst the vehicle was performing a runway inspection shortly before handing the runway back over to ATC after completing routine resurfacing work.
"The A/C landed about 1.5 miles behind the vehicle which carreered off the runway after spotting it in it's rear view mirror, avoiding a catastrophe" (local radio's words) "at aircraft landing speeds this is just seconds from disaster..." (they went on)
:rolleyes:

Must have given them a hell of a shock anyway. :) Lucky escape.
Cheers.

------------------
Invalid Delete Say "Late Pax : Off with their Heads !!!"
"....OK, well start with their bags then..."

[3db]

Must be old, 27R was in use at 14:00 on 15 June

[akerosid]

Just to clarify, Mutt, the story came from ITN (and the BBC) teletext services; the phraseology above is my own (on the 777 Yahoo Group)!

[Propellerhead]

Local radio were implying that it was a mix up between BAA and ATC. They were saying that there was a possible mix up with the handover from BAA to ATC.

Does anyone know whether the 777 was CLEARED to land on the wrong runway, or did the pilots mix up L and R? This obviously makes a big difference. Is there a preliminary report out, or just the usual press speculation?

[G-OODY]

I would be very interested to hear how the hell a jet can land on the wrong runway at one of the busiest airports in the world without any warnings or messages from ATC.

[Stratocaster]

The guy in the tower doesn't like Saudis (???)

;)

[innuendo]

Maybe the question should be asked again. Why use the same designation (09/27) for both runways. Why not 09/27 and 08/26 or whatever you like but using the same designation just makes it easier to get it wrong. I know that CYYZ at one time had enough incidents of mix ups that they saw fit to issue bulletins about it.

[pigboat]

Late fifties - early sixties, at CYUL a certain airline used to be known as Been Over At Cartierville. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/redface.gif

[This message has been edited by pigboat (edited 15 June 2001).]

[mutt]

Methinks that you are barking up the wrong tree. From my limited experience of jumpseating into LHR on these aircraft, there is NO WAY that an aircraft can end up approaching the wrong runway.

As for comments about the crews nationality, how do you know that it wasnt flown by a British expat?

Mutt. http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/FarSMutt.gif

[MFALK]

Shouldn't the Approach Monitoring Aid that ATC have at LHR tell them if we are a bit off the ILS/runway in use, let alone if we are on the wrong runway?!

[ATCO Two]

Much wild speculation, most of it way off track. There was an incident, it is the subject of an investigation, lessons have been learnt and procedures have been changed. Please wait for the final outcome. The identity of the airline involved is not a significant factor. Heathrow has come in for some bad publicity over the past few days; please try to put things in perspective. Last week we broke our daily movement record - 1353. The ATC Watches are working very hard under great duress to move the aircraft safely and expeditiously, but they are only human after all. Any incident is one too many, but serious incidents are few and far between. Please acknowledge that fact.

[Stratocaster]

Folks, this is serious...

We now have evidence that reports on eletromagnetic interference are not fairy tales. It's the onboard electronic Mecca-indicator that messed up the LOC demodulator !!!!

;)

[18-Wheeler]

So the pilots were following the RMI?
(Remote Mecca Indicator!) :) :)

------------------
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast

[Captain Windsock]

Don't blame Saudi. Although the report is probably months away it will probably say the aircraft was being flown as instructed.

[411A]

Indeed, don't blame the Saudi. In my twelve years there I found that at least half of the incidents were done by expats. For example, northbound in a TriStar over Cairo at FL310, the flight was told to reduce speed to cross METRU at ....UTC. The Captain (PF) decided the best way to do this was to extend flaps to 4 degrees (at M.86). Result: two slat sections went "missing" and four others were ah.....bent. The Captain: British expat!

[Nightrider]

Airbubba, wrong, there was not one single warning from Madras (Chennai) ATC at all. They requested a visual approach which was, against Indian law, granted and they "forgot"
to turn final into MAA...instead they continued straight ahead for the 1900 mtrs RWY...and no, not so many tyres blown...

[mutt]

Nightrider,

Almost correct, you need to add the bit about the missed approach, the wide visual circuit which ended up at the military airfield, the worlds shortest B747 landing and the fact that before the wheels hit the ground, they knew that they were in the wrong place!

You could also add the part about the pax sitting on the aircraft for 5 hours before they could get them off.

And before anyone asks, it didnt takeoff from the same runway.

As for the Captain, I believe that he was asked to "retire".

Mutt. http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/FarSMutt.gif

[Bono Vox]

ATCO Two, without wishing to prise any undue info out of you, is there any way the a/c can have been pointing at the wrong runway if not put there by the final director?

[3Greens]

Innuendo'

you can't go around renaming runways. they are alocated depending on what magnetic track they point to; ie 27R/L.

anyway this runway is only close at night' so if this a/c did land on a closed runway it must have been at night and i don't know of any Saudi flights that get into
LHR after 10pm.

[dallas dude]

3 greens,

You're misunderstanding INNUENDO'S suggestion (fact).

Here at DFW we have five parallel north/south runways.

Obviously, you can't have (say) 18 outside R, 18 inside R, 18C, 18 inside L and 18 outside L so the "west" runways are even numbers and the "east" side runways are odd. All have a magnetic alignment of 174/354 degrees.

Hence, from east to west (facing south) they're numbered 17L, 17C, 17R,
and, 18L, 18R.

From time to time, (nameless)airlines still do land on the wrong runways but it's usually when they've mistaken 17R for 17C.

Cheers,dd

[Tintin]

You guys should try CDG 26 L&R, 27L&R very confusing so I don't think it will make a differance because, in IMC condition or poor visibility and windy condition the only way to know if your going on the good RWY it's our ILS.
;-)

[innuendo]

Hello 3 Greens,
Runways have usualy been designated on their magnetic headings however I don't understand why they should be bound to the "degree" if a different number would reduce confusion be it on an ATIS or the line select key on a MCDU/FMS.
Paris CDG on my ILS charts shows all four runways 088/268 degrees so I think it makes sense to get some difference between them.
When they were a two runway terminal they were designated 08/26 and 09/27. I suppose that with the added extra parallels they had to use the left and right designators.
Incidentaly, I raised this point through my airline with regard to CYYZ after Transport Canada raised a bulletin about a significant number of right/left errors. Their response was "That's all very well but what are you going to do when a third runway is built?"
I dare say that IS a point but for the many terminals such as LHR why not give runways an individual identity?

[innuendo]

My apologies for possibly leaving the impression that it was my airline that objected to the point on the basis of a third parallel. It was Transport Canada that raised that objection. Avoiding the issue IMHO.

[sweeper]

pigboat
you must be as old as me...

[In the slot]

Surely the overriding questions in apportioning fault or a mistake in all this are.....
1/ Which runway was the aircraft CLEARED to land on?
2/ Which ILS was the aircraft CLEARED to intercept and was it correctly selected, tuned and identified in the FMC?

Reliable answers to those questions should speak volumes!!

regards

[Roadtrip]

Must be some sort of defect with the 777 fleet.

[Ignition Override]

Don't forgot Birmingham (BHM) Alabama-runway 5/23 was renamed 6/24, or vice versa! Atlanta, GA has 26, 27, 8, and 9. The authorities can rename anything that they want-it just causes new Jepp charts to be updated by thousands of pilots!

Maybe they fly Navy P-3s over at times in order to measure runway magnetic changes with the MAD boom ("the stinger"): the magnetic anomaly detector. Why not? The cold war is over...off topic, but therefore maybe we can bring some P-3s out of storage, and convert them back to Electras in order to fly auto parts to Detroit (KYIP), or exorbitantly-priced Airbus replacement parts, both overly thin metal and plastic, to the US.

[Haulin' Trash]

3Greens - depends what you call night time, but some Saudi flights arrive VERY early morning - before the closed runway had re opened??

[tired]

In the slot - spot on, about the only sensible comment on the whole thread!

[Captain Airclues]

The 777 landed on the runway that he had been cleared to land on by ATC. There was a problem with the communication between the BAA and ATC over whether the runway had been checked and cleared for use. The 'checker' vehicle was well beyond the normal turnoff point of a 777.

Airclues

[ATCO Two]

Thank you Airclues, you have correctly stated the facts. I have watched this thread with interest, with all its speculation, theories, prejudices, wrong assumptions and misplaced criticism. Very educational.

[Underdog]

Atco Two et al,

Don't let the childish remarks by some of our contibutors spoil your impression of us. I think the reason that people are making silly comments is that they know that this was really a 'non-event' in the big scheme of things.

Don't know what the weather was like, but, if 'checker' had been nearer to them they may well have spotted him and G/A'd. Just sounds like a simple cockup - OK we don't really want many of those but - 'Sh!t happens'

I find it remarkable that people can get their knickers in a twist over this - yet elsewhere in the world far more dangerous practices continue on a daily basis. How about being cleared to land whilst still no. 5 in traffic, most of whom you can't see and still not visual with the field? To my mind these daily events are far more dangerous than anything I've ever encountered at LHR.

You guys at LHR do a sterling job. I think everyone with worldwide experience would agree that you are the best in the world - along with the rest of the UK. The odd silly comment from the forum is just that - silly - I'm sure that anyone that has experienced your controlling is only jesting and shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Regards,

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif Underdog

[elandel]

Thank you underdog. Like ATCO 2 I was champing at the bit as well. This incident is being investigated of course so we all have to be a little careful. The facts will come out (probably when you've all forgotten about it!)

[411A]

Underdog--
LHR controllers,... "best in the world along with the rest of the UK..." you say? Well, I have flown worldwide and can positivly say that the LHR conrtollers are not the best, quite good yes, but certainly not the best.
Other locations come to mind that handle a mix of general aviation and aircarrier aircraft, and are more flexable.

[This message has been edited by 411A (edited 21 June 2001).]

[ATCO Two]

I actually don't think that Heathrow controllers are the best in the world either, but trust 411A to come up with yet another negative comment.

[divingduck]

411A.....

OK then, I just have to know...where IYHO is the best ATC found??

------------------
turn the plane! turn the plane!

[Stratocaster]

We'll never know where's the best ATC because it's just a highly subjective question... Everybody has a different answer.

There are a lot of very good ATC, LHR is just one of them.

[411A]

Divingduck--
Very subjective indeed but, IMHO (since you asked),
Europe: AMS
USA: LAX
Asia: HKG
S.America, there ain't any, it's all bad. Ditto Africa, except in South Africa.
Australia: SYD
In the LAX area for example, you have the highest concentration of general aviation aircraft in the world combined with five major aircarrier airports, and it works very well, everyday.

[divingduck]

411A and others
Thanks for that, I realize it is a subjective question, but that's the whole point of asking it.
I'm always interested to hear opinions on this matter.
I've always heard only praise for the guys/girls at LHR, a friend of mine flew in there recently and was very impressed.

Cheers

------------------
turn the plane! turn the plane!

[Avman]

411A, you forgot "Maastricht Control"!!! Shame on you :)

[dingducky]

guess it looked something like this :)


http://turbofan.bestaviationsites.com/images/review_mirror.jpg



------------------
A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.

[Airbubba]

>>Airbubba, wrong, there was not one single warning from Madras (Chennai) ATC at all.<<

Oh, really?

"...As we reported last week, the jumbo made a tire-scorching arrival on Tambaram's runway with 331 passengers and a crew of 17 on board. The pilot was supposed to fly into Meenambakkam, but continued his erroneous approach even after Indian officials fired red flares to warn the pilot against using the too-short runway."


http://www.avweb.com/newswire/news9724.html

[Max Angle]

411A

If you think AMS air traffic is best in Europe and better than LHR you either have a very stange idea of what "good ATC" is or have never been to either of them more than a few times. I operate out of LHR into AMS on a regular basis and they are not even in the same league. AMS air traffic seem to spend a lot of their time trying to mess you up with the most stupid radar vectoring I have ever come across. It is the only place I have, more than once, had to refuse a turn to the ILS because we were in an impossible position to fly an approach. Quite a few others I wish I had refused after only just getting stable in time to land. I have only operated around Europe. I am quite prepared to believe that there are ATC units as good as LHR in the world but there arent any in Europe and most certainly not in AMS.

[mutt]

Airbubba,

That Avweb article is full of inaccuracies, therefore I really wouldnt believe the part about the flares either.

Mutt :)

[411A]

MaxAngle---
Have been flying into LHR and AMS since 1976 and still consider AMS radar services much better, but hey, you are intitled to your opinion. Think you must be a "new" guy.
Avman---
I did indeed forget about Maastricht Control, one of the best in the business! Professional in every respect.

[This message has been edited by 411A (edited 23 June 2001).]

[Warped Factor]

411A,

We at LHR are always open to suggestions as to how we might improve our service.

Any constructive criticism?

WF.

[411A]

WarpedFactor---
No suggestions, I just happen to prefer the AMS "style". Purely a subjective preference.
You guys do a great job.
Suspect that some guys have a problem with AMS because they (AMS controllers) tend to turn aircraft just before the marker and this upsets the automatics. If the vis is 800 metres or more I usually hand fly the approach, so it does not present a problem.

[Airbubba]

>>That Avweb article is full of inaccuracies, therefore I really wouldnt believe the part about the flares either.<<

Yeah and we shouldn't believe any of this article either I suppose. I'm sure the Saudi papers had "reliable" coverage of this mistake on the part of Indian ATC.

"Saudi plane strays on to IAF base

A Saudi Arabian Airline Boeing 747 with 331 passengers and 17 crew members strayed from its flight path and landed at the Tambaram IAF station instead of the Chennai International Airport on Monday morning. The pilot ignored the "red signal'' cartridges fired by the IAF personnel to indicate that he was not to land there. Four tyres of the Boeing burst as it landed with a thud and the pilot jammed on the brakes to halt at the end of the secondary runway of the defence airfield at 6-44 a.m. None of the passengers or the crew was hurt. The flight was coming to Chennai from Riyadh and Dahran. Earlier, the Air Force radar controller had spotted the civilian aircraft and asked the air traffic controllers at the Chennai airport to direct it away from the restricted zone. The Chennai airport replied that there was a problem with its radar and that it would instruct the Saudi pilot suitably. The Saudi jet, however, reappeared over the IAF area at a height of about 2000 feet. It disappeared even as another message was conveyed to the Chennai airport by the IAF, only to come in again for a landing proper. The pilot, Capt. Khayyat, ignored the "red signal'' cartridges fired in the air to signal refusal of permission to land. The passengers complained later that it was a five-hour ordeal for them, trapped inside the plane in the summer heat."

http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/1997/06/03/thb01.htm#Story5

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

411A What do you mean yy "the marker"? Surely not the outer marker? I can't believe that many heavy-jet drivers would appreciate being turned on at that point!

[Avman]

Thank you 411A. Lots of "directs" for you now :) :)

[411A]

HEATHROW DIRECTOR--
They always ask, and then the intercept angle is twenty drgrees, no problem IF the aircraft is configured properly. AMS is very adaptable, IMHO. Others may disagree of course.
Still, LHR is quite OK.

[In the slot]

411A....
If you think that SYD ATC is the best in Australia, it MUST be because that's the only place you've flown into!!
I didn't know there was a BEST ATC centre in Australia. Don't you mean LEAST PEDANTIC???

[411A]

In the slot---
Have flown into Melbourne & Perth as well, SYD seems to work better, IMHO.

[Underdog]

Damn, I just can't resist it... I have tried, but....

SYD the best in Australia?
LAX the best in America?

Whilst, I might not disagree - the use of the word 'best' alongside these countries raises a smile. I appreciate that someone has to be 'the best' in any particular country - but SYD is on a par with 'Halfpenny Green' in the UK and LAX - doesn't merit comparison with LHR.

My opinion only, of course, and it's as humble as yours! :)

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif Underdog

(And I'm not going to mention anything about handflying v servicable automatics at 800m)

[411A]

Underdog---
Yes, and a good thing you didn't mention about hand flying with vis at 800 metres, that would indeed open up a WHOLE new can of worms.
If we look objectively at ATC services worldwide, i'm sure we could agree that these said services are "generally" not bad at all, except of course with the aforementioned African and South American regions.
To all ATC guys and gals.....thanks for the help!