How low will you go?

[eyeinthesky]

A little bird tells me that there was nearly a repeat of the incident a few years ago when an US aircraft landed at Brussels instead of Frankfurt today. Another US airline was down at low level (around about 10000 ft) on the way into Amsterdam when he suddenly piped up requesting when he would be released for onward clearance to Frankfurt.

My question is this: At what point will you start to query an apparently ridiculously early descent such as this? To be at 10000 ft some 200 nm prior to your destination would seem excessive, even buy US standards. Whilst we obviously have a responsibility to ensure that the flight plan we have agrees with the one you have, to accept such strange instructions without question seems to me a little odd. Is there a difference in attitude to Controllers' instructions in the US versus the UK such that they are followed blindly irrespective of what you might expect? Certainly most UK airlines in UK airspace seem reluctant to descend below the ideal 'glide to land' profile unless forced.

Any comments?

[static]

Into AMS at FL100 you would be well into the STAR and it should be obvious to the pilots that ATC expects them to land at AMS. There just is no way that the pilots could still be thinking they were being routed to FRA. So, when ATC was wrong, the pilots should have corrected it at an earlier stage.

[LevelFive]

Being started down 200 miles before your optimum top of descent is not that unusual over here anymore. Letters of agreement between centers I’m told.

I’m just happy if I make it up to my planed cruise altitude these days. It’s not unusual to be capped 8,000 feet below planed cruise altitude.

Maybe there’s a reason for the difference in attitude to controllers here. Our controllers don’t send us to the wrong airports.

[SOPS]

From 390 down to 220, inbound AMS, this will normally happen about 250 miles out. I dont know why, but it does, everyday.

[DownIn3Green]

Could it have been AMS was the "enroute" alternate, and it took the crew until they were at FL100 before they got a "re-release" from their dispatch?

[eyeinthesky]

I understand the error was caused by a misinput of destination by Scottish when the flight came off the ocean. So the fault lies with ATC, it would seem. But the point of my post was not to apportion blame; rather to question how long it takes for the alarm bells to start ringing.

The remark about 390 to 220 250 miles before destination is surprising. Usual clearance is to FL230 by BLUFA or REDFA and this is to ensure you get below Maastricht UIR which overlies these points at FL250. BLUFA is some 70 nm before AMS and REDFA about 80 nm so it doesn't seem to tally with your experience, at least when coming from the West.

Whatever the cause of this error, it struck me that the pliots showed a singular lack of spatial awareness until very late in the process.

[Notso Fantastic]

EyeITS, in the States it is normal practice to be descended early, sometimes hundreds of miles from your destination, so US crews would find nothing strange in that. Their knowledge of European geography would be nowhere near that of a Europeans, so why should they really be aware that Frankfurt is not in the vicinity of AMS- is it so strange to expect ATC to be aware of where you are going?

[wallabie]

Yeah sure 3 green !!!!!!!!!
Could it be they saw Santa on his sled and got so surprised to see him that early in the season that they made it to AMS ? :D

[eyeinthesky]

Notso Fantastic: Maybe they do not have the same knowledge of Europe as us, and my knowledge of US geography is broad-brush only, but even taking what you say about US practices I would be very concerned if I was talking to New York Approach when I wanted to go to Washington!! After all, the point to which they were probably sent (SUGOL) is a holding fix for Amsterdam, and not on the en-route network as far as I know.

Yes it is not strange to expect ATC to know where you are going, but we only have the flight plan to go on and if, as appears to be the case this time, an error creeps in, it is up to you to tell us if it looks strange. Obviously the case I mentioned is not remarkable to US-based pilots, and that worries me a little!

As an aside, if US ATC forces you down to 10000 feet 200 nm out, no wonder some airlines are on the point of going under. The fuel bill must be huge! I can just imagine what our national airlines would say if they were told to fly at FL100 from London to Manchester or Edinburgh!!

[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: eyeinthesky ]

[Mooney]

eyeinthesky,

Some times we do!! Well FL190 to avoid all the high level congestion (crazy slot times!)

[Notso Fantastic]

EyeITS, you live in Hampshire too. Perhaps we ought to meet over a pint of Gales whilst I explain some of the differences in US operating practices! I see nothing wrong with what they did- they are probably as familiar with the geography over here as I am around Pittsburg/Philadelphia! I would not be surprised if the same thing happened to US over there! We all tend to rely on ATC knowing everything deep down!null

[Sick Squid]

I've got to second what Notso has stated so far. I can empathise with a US crew, familiar with the unfeasably early descents you experience into the likes of Philadelphia or Detroit continuing with such in Europe. Indeed our flight-plans for such destinations carry an excess fuel for that longer time at lower altitude, generally to transit busy airspace such as Washington or New York. The US crew's realisation would be gradual, and would be tempered by a "They can't be sending us there, can they?" feeling, which would delay the final query for a while; after all, European ATC, particularly in the area you refer to is generally excellent., so a degree of confirmation bias would enter in.

So, 10,000 feet is not so bad IMHO when you factor in the above. I bet the initial query from the crew was along the lines of "err, we are being vectored for Frankfurt, aren't we...?" which would indicate just such a dawning realisation.

Of course, those of us used to the European operation day in, day out, would sense something amiss, but hey! nobody was hurt, or seriously embarassed and we can debate the error here and perhaps mitigate a re-occurence. That is cool, and one of the real benefits of this forum.

£6

[ 22 November 2001: Message edited by: Sick Squid ]

[Flap40]

The 10,000ft is a red herring.

They would have been given the arrival routing (STAR), either BLUFA or TOPPA and the landing runway when handed over to AMS approaching FL230 in the descent.

There is no BLUFA or TOPPA arrival for FRA, nor do any of the runways at AMS and FRA have the same designators.

The error should have been picked up at FL230 not FL100.

The Americans may be very good in their own airspace (i'm sure I'd have problems over there) but they always sound way behind the ball (if they are listening out ;)) in Europe. The Asian carriers don't seem to suffer the same problems.

[Crusty Ol Cap'n]

EyeITS, assuming that all the respondents to your post are pilots then I find it very sad that you, the non pilot, are the only person asking the intelligent question. What hope for the future of this industry if these pilots, and their supporters, operate in such a slipshod manner as to be totally unaware of what is happening around them. :(

[Doctor Cruces]

Do some of these posts mean to imply that US pilots don't actually look at charts to see where they are going if it's strange territory??

In my experience, the Captain always checks things out when going into pastures new, even if just to see exactly where the new pasture is and what the approach is likely to be like.

The truth of the matter is that we are human and humans make mistakes that other humans may not notice until sometimes (tragically) it is too late.

Doc C.

[adamhenderson]

Flap40, it's only in the last few months that AMS have deemed it of interest to tell inbound crews the STAR and r/w in use. This story is from several years ago so it's unlikely any clues were provided from ATC.

I think the change was due to IATA giving AMS an offical "black mark" for keeping the r/w in use a secret from crews until touchdown. FRA was also on the list and has improved since this time last year. NCE remains as french as always ;).

757 Gti

[Algy]

I wrote about the Brussels incident (NWA DC-10, Oct 95) at the time: an extraordinary saga which ended with UK NATS refusing to discuss it on the grounds that the FAA (sic) was investigating it; the FAA saying it was nothing to do with them; and NWA disciplining the crew.

US ALPA later said NWA put a crew of instructors in a sim without telling them why, fed them the same ATC guidance as the flight had received, and the instructors duly landed at Brussels instead of Frankfurt again!

For reasons never revealed, NATS had unquestionably descended the flight early and at some stage the ATC records began showing BRU as the destination - so when it was handed over it was vectored to BRU.

Essentially the crew realised it had all gone horribly wrong and was basically lost, so they ultimately accepted the BRU landing as the safest option. The real embarrassment was that NWA was an early user of moving maps for pax - who all knew they were landing at BRU not FRA!

Two months later NWA gave the capt early retirement, fired the FO and suspended the FE.

I'd love to hear a more detailed account from anyone involved or who knows more. If you're out there why not get it off your chest, or drop me a line privately. Not for publication - just to tie up the lose ends out of curiosity.

[static]

757GTI,

The black star for AMS that you seem to be refering to, was handed out by IFALPA, not IATA and it was for the way the airport authorities in AMS decided which runway the pilots should use for landing. The emphasis was on noise-abatement, rather then flight-safety. This has changed now, and the pilots have the final say in which runway they use for landing, so the black star is gone.
As for letting you know rather late which runway you get for landing: this was indeed a problem in AMS, however, once you get there more often you will be able to tell from looking at the metar from your ACARS which runway you`ll get. And ATC will tell you right at your first contact with Amsterdam radar. By then you`re already below FL260. but that`s just because our country is rather small :)