EK 26 on the Grass @ GLA

[GLAMM]

All,
EK26 currently on the grass near A1 holding point, been there for a while. All passengers currently disembarking onto buses. Other aircraft entering main runway via D and 180 at A1 for 23 take off. Apparently unable to be pushed from its current position ??

[sitigeltfel]

From BAA/GLA info site at 1542;

14:05 EK026 DUBAI TAXIED 1418
14:05 UL2026 DUBAI TAXIED 1418
14:25 BA1487 HEATHROW TAXIED 1427

Looks like a few others snarled up.

[chiglet]

Is it "possible" that EK026 and UL2026 is/are the same a/c?
watp,iktch

[pimpsqueak]

Yes
They are same aircraft. There is a small kink in the taxiway @ that point easy to misjudge it!
Easily done I suppose. (Nearly happened to me!)

[PWH]

We were held in the LANAK hold for 20 minuttes, finally we were cleared for the approach Rwy 23. First a/c (BA8726) to land after reopening rwy.

[F.C.C.]

On EK webpage it says that due to maintenace reasons pax will be flying tomorrow 19th Sep. I do not know if "maintenance reasons" is the true cause or simply that there´s no possible (nor reccommendable) way to say "plane on the grass".

[groundrat]

wot a day!apparently pilot of flight one of the fleet training captains(oops)!plane out of the grass at about half past eleven(2230z)and currently under tow to a stand after being unloaded and de-fuelled about 70 tonnes worth:uhoh:happened right at the end of the runway where all the spotters sit with their cameras and scanners so i'm sure there will be some good pics!:ok:

[anthonny]

After being at emirates for several years. I will not be surprised, this is just the beegining.. EK managament has their own mafia and they will keep this chekairman protected...There is a lot incompetency at EK as youcan see starting with the training department....

[GLAMM]

After seeing it in closer detail, EK26 appears to have taken B link then changed his mind to take A for departure. This left him a tight angle and the left set of main wheels appeared to run a few feet into the grass with the nose wheels at the far side of the taxiway just about to go onto the grass, effectively diagonally across the taxiway. Similar to cutting a corner in your car and bumping rear wheels on the curb but on a grander scale :=

[tbaylx]

So the guy taxi's into the grass by accident and he should be hanged? Jeez guys, wish i didn't make any errors, but it happens. No one is hurt, i'm sure some lessons wil be learned from it and we all move on. Hope people are less judgemental of you when you make your mistakes.

[Sheikh Your Bootie]

Of course these muppets above NEVER make errors :yuk::yuk:
Pictures for those who want 'em http://www.taxiwayalpha.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4309&pid=26914&st=0&#entry26914

SyB :zzz:

[jumbo1]

Anthonny and others...
Just for the record the person concerned is a very highly experienced pilot with decades of long haul experience and training for very highly regarded companies. Just remember the old adage - there but for the grace of ... go I.
Don't be so quick to judge and crucify. I have no vested interest here either way but I do not criticise others without the facts - even with the facts I am loathe to do so. It could so easily happen to any of us. It always amazes me how quick we pilots are to judge our fellow aviators and to point fingers.
Keep the blue side up fellas
Jumbo
" incomiiiing"
:}

[Hand Solo]

Rather embarassing! To be fair the 773 is a loooong aircraft and Glasgow doesn't have particularly wide taxiways. Doesn't take much to misjudge something like that.

[Freeway]

Feel really sorry for this chap and echo the sentiments of other who have said " there but for the grace of God....." etc.

[3Greens]

Just out of interest was it TCAS by any chance ??? :mad:

[Thylakoid]

Narrow taxiways, not prepared for these long airplanes. A few new pilots, particularly those with no or little experience in wide bodies (not the case here, I guess), sometimes miscalculate the turns. The camera is there to help you out, but **** happens.

[Thylakoid]

Not TCAS:), because he doesn't fly. Non-flying position with EK

[Barry McDougal]

After seeing it in closer detail, EK26 appears to have taken B link then changed his mind to take A for departure. This left him a tight angle and the left set of main wheels appeared to run a few feet into the grass with the nose wheels at the far side of the taxiway just about to go onto the grass, effectively diagonally across the taxiway. Similar to cutting a corner in your car and bumping rear wheels on the curb but on a grander scale
Not exactly true. The ek flight was lined up r/w 23,a/c close behind on approach. Ek then told to vacate and other a/c told to g/around. Ek vacated via b to return to the holding point a1 full length r/w 23,however the turn from b to a1 is >90 degrees and not suitable for a 777:(
Sympathy for the crew.

[southern duel]

Just out of interest wether the aircraft was actually defuelled.
The reason i ask is that at LHR weve had a few aircraft in the grass at one time or other and at no time have we had to defuel any of them even when fully loaded for Departure. All we offload is the pax, even the freight/baggage has stayed on.

Defuelling also takes a long time and would have amajor impact on any operation

Any thoughts/comments

[TURIN]

Defuelling also takes a long time and would have amajor impact on any operation
Ah but this is Glasgow.
The bouys will have the syphons out and the beastie drained dry in no time....:E

[betty swallox]

Barry,
just intrigued where you get your info..."not suitable for a B777"...do you have any basis for this. I'm sure a 777 can make a 90 deg turn, even if tight-ish. Looking at GoogleEarth, the taxiway looks more than wide enough. I know for a fact, ac as large as the 777 have been involved in such a manoeuvre without incident.
How are you qualified to make such a statement?

[White Knight]

Betty - "looks wide enough" from GoogleEarth is the single most stupid comment on this thread:ugh::ugh::{

To echo Jumbo1's sentiments "People in glass houses etc etc"

[betty swallox]

Ok. I looked at a TAP too. I'm not throwing stones, just wondering how Barry is qualified to make such a comment. That's all

[Just wondering]

>>I'm sure a 777 can make a 90 deg turn, even if tight-ish.<<

OK Betty - you work it out... how far ahead of the main wheels is the nose wheel and therefore how deep into the corner would the aircraft have to go to ensure the left mains stay off the grass.

I've had a look at it on google and it doesn't look doable. Turns greater than 90 degrees are particularly difficult. It's easy to say it doesn't look doable after the fact. When you can't see much from the flight deck it's easy to get into a tight spot in a wide (long) body. Even the cameras don't help that much.

[spannersatcx]

wouldn't the taxi cameras of helped or are they not that good?

[BHX86]

It may just be my computer, but the link posted on this thread doesnt seem to work. Can someone please post the correct link or any other links to photos of this incident.

Thanks

[betty swallox]

Hey, come on guys.
I'm not throwing stones, casting aspersions etc. I'm NOT having a go at the crew, for goodness sake. Heaven knows, I've been soooo close to the grass myself. Accidents/incidents happen.
All I'm saying is, I question why the above post stated so categorically that that link is not for such a jet.
I mentioned Goog Earth as most readers of these forums don't have the 5000 hours flying large ac I do, or the access to taxi charts etc, we all find it easy to get our hands on.
Please; I'm not meaning to offend, just asking why Barry was so adamant.
TVM

[Barry McDougal]

Betty

Barry,
just intrigued where you get your info..."not suitable for a B777"...do you have any basis for this. I'm sure a 777 can make a 90 deg turn, even if tight-ish.

With reference to my post,the turn is not suitable for a 777,it should have read from b to d1(which i think is the holding point full length,or is is a1).Anyway that's not the important point. If you operate in/out of gla, next time you taxi out to r/w 23,have a look at how tight the turn is. I may be wrong but camera or no camera,a 777 will not get past there without going onto the grass. A 777 can make a turn>90 deg,but it's not the point i'm trying to make. At a guess i would say this turn was in the region of 120 deg,combined with 'narrow' taxiways makes it very diificult at best.

[betty swallox]

I agree it is difficult. And I'm glad you clarified your original post. I was a tad confused by your statement.
I have flown out of Glasgow for 7 years; I know the taxiways well!
Anyway, I hope you understand my post; no mud-slinging at any agency intended.

[electricjetjock]

Barry McD / Just Wondering.

Having given Betty a hard time do you guys operate the 777-300? If not then ???????;)

I don't operate the 777-300 but the A340-600 and the cameras help just fine plus my company has surveyed airports that have "difficult" taxyways and we have special taxy charts. Perhaps EK need to do the same or perhaps they do and someone just made a mistake. At least he did not try to power out!!

[woodpecker]

Flew the BA 777's for five years and there is no way I would have attempted the turn even with the help of google earth.

Out of interest it would be interesting to establish why, having lined up he then had to leave the runway.

[Barry McDougal]

electricjetjock

Having given Betty a hard time do you guys operate the 777-300? If not then ???????

I can't see how i did,other's maybe but not me. In response to the second part of your statement,i haven't operated the 777-300.

my company has surveyed airports that have "difficult" taxyways and we have special taxy charts. Perhaps EK need to do the same

The turn the ek flight took is 'unusual' in that it is not a 'normal' turn for any a/c. What i mean by 'not a normal turn' is that one would only take it if vacating the runway and then turning back on the t/way to line up on r/w 23. It's very unlikely that this would be discussed in any form of briefing,perhaps it was,conjecture on my part. A basic layout of the taxiways for those not familiar with gla:

http://www.flyglasgowdirect.co.uk/info2.htm

At places like LHR, the controllers will not allow a/c to to use certain points to enter,vacate or hold short of the runway, as they deem them 'not suitable'

[Just wondering]

Electic Jet jock

Betty said << the taxiway looks more than wide enough. I know for a fact, ac as large as the 777 have been involved in such a manoeuvre without incident>> In my view incorrect and harsh

You said << someone just made a mistake>> exactly !!

To answer you - 16,000 hours - most on widebodies including the A340-600.. in the 777 situation the cameras don't help much.... once you have commited to a turn you're stuck if you don't have the room to go deep enough.

As for putting the wheels on the grass, the cameras (if they are working) work well on a sweeping turn but on a short radius > 90 turn you can be in trouble very quickly especially on narrow taxiways such as at small airports like Glasgow (not designed for widebodies) - the predicitve nature of the markers on the screen is pretty much lost when you pivot on the mains.

The 777 at Glasgow had his nosewheel very close to the grass, i.e. he couldn't go into the turn any deeper. Easy with no taxiway in front for the nosewheel to pivot the left bogey into the grass in an effort to get round.

As I say easy done with ATC requiring you to clear the runaway ASAP onto an unfamiliar taxiway.

[Wiley]

Betty, you sayI know for a fact, ac as large as the 777 have been involved in such a manoeuvre without incident.Debatable, in my opinion. The 777 you refer to may have been a -200, which is very different animal in real estate rquired to make a tight turn to a -300.

With the (wonderful) benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I don't think that turn would be do-able for a 777-300, and I'd be inclined to think it would be rather tight for a -200. However, that would not have been evident to the crew, who found themselves in a very unusual situation at an unfamiliar airport and following ATC instructions. I'm sure the view from the flight deck would not be nearly as clear as from Google Earth(!)

I've never flown with the captain myself, but from the dealings I've had with him, I'd have to agree with the other favourable comments I've read here. He strikes me as a throughly professional operator.

[TwinJock]

What was the reason for being asked by ATC to vacate the runway? Would have told ATC to "go away"!:= Me lined up, me go, me no vacate!

[Mad As A Mad Thing]

Well Twinjock, you might be lined up, and you might refuse to vacate (perfectly reasonable in this situation) but I doubt you'll be going anywhere til the inbound has gone around over the top of you and cleared the departure path.

[betty swallox]

Just Wondering, and Wiley.
Please understand, absoutely no fingers pointed at the crew. Please see my posts 28 and 30. My question was in response to Barry M. He answered me in post 29. Ta.
I know little about the 777. Wiley, I bow to your -200, -300 experience.
My clear intention was always stated as thus; I was SIMPLY asking where Barry got his info.
Hope that clears it up.
Thanks

[kevinwm]

Im not a proffessional Pilot, but Im a spotter/photographer based at Glasgow ,( those were my pictures linked in the thread) in all my years there I have never seen any thing bigger than a 757 coming off at link Bravo when landing 05 and I have never in my time at Glasgow seen anything bigger than a B757 being asked to when linned up on 23 to vacate at Bravo to re-enter at ALPHA

I stand to be corrected by the Pros , but I would take a guess that the earliest exit that a B777 could take to vacate 23 safely and reline up at 23 would be link Delta , I have seen B767 using Delta in the past though not quite sure if the B777 could make the turn there

I dont know if there were two landers in the seqeunce ,but it looks like the ATC were in a bit of a hurry to get B777 off and selcted Bravo to take him off , the Pilot tried but did'nt make it

Lesson learned by all

Have read in another forum that no aircraft bigger than a B757 will be allowed to turn at Bravo in the future

[nilcostoptionmyass]

so are EK the westernised company they make out to be or are the "management mafia" (presumably read 'UAE, indigenous population' training department ?) going to be out to save face and sack the crew ??

[Skipness One Echo]

A few years back in the same area, I seem to recall a 747 having to vacate at Delta ( Link4 as was ) as the controller was in no way considering allowing him off at Bravo. He had lined up and gotten an engine warning indicator and been unable to roll.

[Itswindyout]

Unless well hidden I can see no reference to the GLA incident on ME thread.

Also no high profile comments here in Dubai.

windy

[ruserious]

Unless well hidden I can see no reference to the GLA incident on ME thread
Think you might have to take yourself off to the CAA and get your eyes checked out :}
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=292703

[Shiny side down]

GLA Notams (seen in the last few days) now restrict Bravo to cat C aircraft.