Cape Town SAA A346

[August2007]

Just got a phone call from a colleague of mine still at work (at FACT). Apparently an SAA 346 has its nosegear in the sand. I have no idea if it was taxxing in or out, but RWY 19/01 closed for the time being.

Anyone have any more / reliable info regarding this ?

[August2007]

It was SA333 FAJS-FACT. A340-200. Ran off the runway. Cranes should be there at 1800 Local.

[Jamex]

CT ATIS says runways closed. Apparently tyre pieces at FAJS indicate one or more blow outs during take-off. Yes runway is closed due to A340 with nosewheel stuck in sand at end of the runway in Capetown.

[springbok702]

the tyres was a problem they had yesterday, not sure which aircraft it was out of jhb so about 4 aircraft landed with full emergency crews in cape town.

[August2007]

I hope that there were no injuries. The press are going to have a field day with this one, especially when they (the press) cannot get their facts straight:ugh:

[AirwayBlocker]

Springbok702

the tyres was a problem they had yesterday, not sure which aircraft it was out of jhb so about 4 aircraft landed with full emergency crews in cape town.


I'm curious. You weren't referring to an Airbus with tyre problems out of JNB yesterday were you? Cause they have cockpit indications as to tyre pressures so they would have known exactly which tyres had blown, if any had.

[springbok702]

no apparently rubber was found on the runway at fajs yesterday but it was not know which aircraft it was from but they apparently worked out it was an aircraft on the way to cape town, so about 4 aircraft which arrived in cape town from jhb at around the same time had the emergency services waiting for them on arrival.

[boypilot]

If it was SA333, I believe this is the first flight for a LHR pairing. JNB-CPT-JNB, pax back to CPT today, LHR tomorrow.

Had a good one on the sms already.... "Apparently the 340 slipped on a Mango peel"!! :}

[AirwayBlocker]

I see this incident just made the news.

They're a bit slow today. Almost two hour to get it on the net.

[ddd]

One passenger phoned in and said that they landed perfectly and taxied to the end of the runway, and then, instead of turning left, it turned right and got stuck in the sand!
He says the captain was a woman! Maybe that explains it? :)

Any news on this?

[27Foxtrot]

Dunno about the sex of the PIC, but the voice was male, and he accepted the taxi instructions from the tower ATC.

Alpha taxiway is closed just north of the Apron, so anyone who misses Echo taxiway when Rwy 01 is in use has to vacate right onto 16 to cross from Lima to Echo for the ramp.

There are a couple of other routes, one being a 180 on the runway.

However the quickest and least time on the runway is right onto 16, right Lima, cross Rwy 01 and Echo to the ramp.

The PIC accepted a right turn onto 16 after missing Echo taxiway on the landing roll, and somehow put the nosewheel into the sand.

2 hours 25 minutes later, all was sorted out.

27F

[Goldfish Jack]

Well I just got back from FAJS after being stuck there for 4 hours or so due to the chaos.
Irrespective of what happened there needs to be some serious investigation and some serious ass kicked.
The fact is that the A346 landed and could not make E and had to get onto 34 to get into L and then cross runway 01 and then onto E into the apron. In the process the crew had to make a 150deg turn from 01 right into 34 - must be quite a thing in a A346. 27F a 180 on the runway is not an option with a A346 - maybe a B738 but not an airbus
This is due to ACSA closing taxiway A into the apron from the north. It is high time that someone/thing important had a good look at what ACSA is doing at FACT. They are over 6 months behind with their apron rehabilitation and as we enter the busy season they still have several gates that cannot be used. And they have allowed airlines to fly here, putting a premium on the avail gates. Now on top of this they close off one of the access's to the apron after they have just closed E for weeks. It really is a pathetic and tired effort from ACSA. They wait to the busy season to do the work.
Fact is that they should never have been allowed to close A taxiway until they had painted some lines on the runway so a/c could make the right turn.
The resulting chaos around the country was quite impressive to say the least. ACSA made no announcements @ FAJS and no-one knew what was going on - they did not endear themselves to the passengers there, that was for sure and ask me I was stuck in it all!!!
They have now given us the COMPLETION date for the new runway 18/36 which will be east of the main runway and go through the thr of 34 which will close that runway for good! It is going to be complete by the end of 2009 - we just wonder when they are going to start it. (Oh and I wonder what they are going to do to the helicopter customers - where they going to train when 34 aint there??)
Best statement of all this afternoon was the airport manager who wanted to know why a/c could not take off runway 19 from E!!!!!!!!!!!! The wind was 330/20 - does this a:mad:hole have any idea how an airport works and how a/c use runways? I still cannot believe after how ever many YEARS he has been at FACT, he has NEVER put foot in the tower complex and come and see how ATC works and the problems we have - which are compounded by the chaos around the apron at the moment.
I sympathise with the crew - had ACSA painted the lines at the runway intersection, this would not have happened - the crew had to guess where they were and they just slipped off the runway - I sincerely hope SAA take ACSA to task. And stop blaming the crew - the real cause of the incident is ACSA not doing their job properly.
One wonders if ACSA has a quality management system - if they did they would have identified this as a potential problem and addressed it before it is too late. But with a bunch of Wallies in charge of ACSA at FACT, what do you really expect? This also illustrates the urgent need to keep 16/34 open - one incident on the main runway and no one can move into and out of the Cape. We also need someone from ACSA that can make a decision - it was pathetic trying to get anyone there to make a decision.

[27Foxtrot]

Goldfish, I've seen '600's do 180's on the runway, suprised the hell out of me but the pilot insisted he could do it and he did. I've also seen them taxi from RWY 19 into Charlie taxiway with the cockpit already past the taxiway. I can't recall the angle, but it is over 120. The pilot accepted the turn so i don't see how anyone could blame the ATC.
Second joke for the day, if they couldn't tow it out like they did, the only other option was to get recovery gear from FAJS by FLYING it in...
What are the chances ACSA is putting in a nice large conduit for future expansion? Or are we going to sit exactly here in 2 years again.

[August2007]

Just to add some fuel to the fire. In the international check-in areas ACSA have come up with a brilliant idea of specific couters for specific airlines. The problem however is that they did not consult the airlines and there are clashes when TK/SA/VS check in in the afternoon on one bank of counters. LH uses the other bank and BA/SW use the other bank. There are about 6-7 counter that do not work which makes the problem even greater.

Specific counters for airlines can work with proper planning, but even in the AOC meetings, the airlines speak up but ACSA do nothing about it.

How many times have the doors in the two air bridges not worked and we have to hold the pax until ACSA resets the magetic doors so that they can be opened.

The staff parking is temporary (only 4 years:yuk: acording to ACSA), but have you seen the state of the staff parking, never mind the shuttle service.

ACSA will put the blame on the crew as they will not accept any responsibility for the airbus incident, just like they are not at fault in anything at the airport

[SortieIII]

I am with Goldfish on this one. FACT has a poor record of runway/taxiway serviceability. The constant closures, and backlog of work make it a hazardous place to operate into. Couple this with frequent navaid/lighting outages, and category downgrades, and you have a recipe for an incident.
I believe that the A346 (longer than A380 0r B744) is fairly difficult to manoeuvre. My sympathies lie with the crew.

[Goldfish Jack]

27 F
at least on charlie there are centre line guidance lines............
as to the 180deg turns - runway end must be wide enough and strong enough which FACT does not have.
Of course ACSA are blameless - the shambles in the Int building is another fine example.
A Assocation of
C completely
S stupid
A a:mad:holes

A Apoligising
C continiously
S south
A Africa

I also think that SAAPA/ALSA- SA should approach IFALPA to get them to BLACKLIST FACT - due to the constant WIP and the constant navaid downgrages and problems - it really is a construction site with its own runway and I would not like to take a A346 into FACT at the best of times - I certainly admire those pilots - never mind the poor discipline of the vehicle drivers on the apron that are often either taking pax/other vehicles/ a/c on or out!

[Oom Kaspaas]

I'm amazed. No snide remarks about SAA pilot skills. Accelerated command anyone.

[grgplanes]

I'm amazed nobody makes remarks about the fact that this happened on the first day without 747 in the SAA fleet...maybe the pilot was just trying to make a statement!!!

Btw, can anybody maybe help me with info regarding what flights were diverted to GRJ. I flew to JNB on Friday morning arriving just after 12:00, actually saw SA333 take-off from JNB...so wasn't in GRJ to see what flights diverted here.

[Vliegpop]

Woman make exceptional pilots, but it seems we still have a small problem with the driving :O !!

[dikkes]

A rehash of an old joke,

What's the difference between a female A340 captain and a soccer player?

At least a soccer player knows how to take corners!

:D

[ByAirMail]

We all knew that Affir. action. /prev disad / BEE etc. will have a price

[sbh684b]

Goldfish Jack, looks like your statement made the news in the newspapers.

5 November 2007: Cape Argus


Pilots blame Acsa for Cape Town runway mixup

The Airports Company of South Africa will not launch an investigation into the incident that grounded all flight operations in Cape Town for hours on Friday, despite assertions by pilots that the state-owned parastatal was to blame.

A South African Airways flight lodged its front wheels in soft sand while taxiing off the runaway, at Cape Town International on Friday. This caused Acsa to shut down the busy airport to incoming and outgoing flights for close to three hours.

The Cape Argus's sister newspaper, the Weekend Argus, reported on Sunday that a number of pilots had blamed Acsa for the incident.

Commenting on a website for professional pilots, they said there should have been painted lines on the runway to assist the pilot of flight SA333 from Johannesburg with her turn.

One pilot wrote on the website: "I sympathise with the crew. Had Acsa painted the lines at the runway intersection, this would not have happened. The real cause of the incident is Acsa not doing their job properly."

He added: "Irrespective of what happened there needs to be a serious investigation."

Deidre Hendricks, Acsa spokesperson, on Sunday said the airport management company would not be launching an investigation.

"Such occurrences do happen from time to time. Our focus on Friday was to ensure the resumption of airport operations. If you want details around the incident that happened you need to speak to SAA," Hendricks said.

Despite persistent questions from the Cape Argus around why Acsa did not see fit to launch an investigation into an incident that crippled South Africa's second major international airport, Hendricks refused to answer.

Robyn Chalmers, the SAA group head of corporate affairs, confirmed the airline would launch an investigation into Friday's incident.

"The safety of our passengers is paramount, so it is normal practice for SAA to investigate any incidents that may occur. SAA will investigate the cause of the incident the aircraft has also undergone a thorough inspection and no damage was found as a result of the incident," she said

[driver airframe]

The holes in the cheese are are lining up.....

[alexmcfire]

Pics can be found here, http://www.2oceansvibe.com/

[asianeagle]

Looking at the pictures, it was clearly an A346. Which means it has taxi cameras. TACS. Surely they would have used these or were they stolen?:}

Would have given them a clear view of where the nose wheel actually was, so I am not sure one could blame anybody other than the crew. If you see you cant make it stop and get a tow.

however having said that, if the airport was serviceable, it wouldnt have happened.

I remember once when a Sun Air DC9 went off the taxiway in FACT, the airways boys all got stuck in, turns out the DC9 pilot was ex SAA too. Time for taxy practise boys. (and girls!!:ok:)

[TwinJock]

If you look at the pics, it is obvious that this was purely pilot error! To immediately start blaming ACSA sounds like the first reaction of SAAPA.

We have to remember that we are constantly reminded on these forums that SAA drivers are superior to the rest of us and that is why they are paid so much more. The nosewheel of this aircraft did not just "slip" off the surface, it is miles into the grass!

Affirmative action, BEE, fast tracking, accelerated command - we are constantly reminded that a slip every now and then, whether it is an A346 of the runway or the Bokke losing a couple of games, is acceptable in the bigger scheme of things in SA. This is one of those slips - lets move on.

The captain of the A346, "Sandy T", lost her cool a while back when a ground engineer made a comment about woman drivers! Should have accepted it graciously!:=

[whodunnit2]

I'm not sure who is at fault here - like most accidents/incidents no one person or organisation is completely to blame.

What I will say is that taxiing an A346 is more difficult than you think. Taxiing an A346 around 120 degree turns without markings will not be much fun.

I have taxied the A346 around places like JFK and it doesn't matter how many cameras you have - it is very very easy to get it wrong.

I am curios though as to why they are so far off the pavement.

W2

[Alternate Law]

An incident was predicted, and an incident has occurred. The few calls made by the upper echelons to keep it all together really have to be taken to heart by all....

[reptile]

Check out the skid marks going off the runway....

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g37/konyagi/20071102.jpg

[CJ750]

There are a few remarks about the qualifications and or sex of the crew.Anybody have the *alls to give out names or is that a career limiting move:cool::cool::cool:.

[beechbum]

CJ750,
I think it would be unprofessional and unethical to name the crew involved in this incident. Why do you want to know? So you can roast them like everyone else when it comes to SAA pilots!
It ain't balls ...as you so call it...it would be down right stupidity!

[CJ750]

Why is it ok to refer to the crew by nickname or PDI or whatever is the flavour of the day but not by name. Is that not hypocritical.

I am not picking a fight and also i do not want to bash the crew concerned. I assume by the reply that you are a sensitive SAA driver.

[beechbum]

There's enough SAA bashing on these forums to last a life time so quite honestly until we know the facts lets leave the guilty party/ies out of the equation. Yes the Captain was a woman but so be it, it could have happened to any one.
And yes I'm SAA...sensitive....no...just ethical!
Sorry CJ750...it's just the way it is and should be left that way!
Ta!

[Goffel]

Well put Beechbum.
Who cares what their name was or whether it was a male/female and also which company it was.
The crew have their hands full trying to figure out what went wrong, whether it was them or the runway....so why publicly bash.
Remember, it can also happen to you and then you certainly dont want your name plastered around.

Goffel.

[ERASER]

I heard SAA Technical removed the "Cockpit Voice Recorder" and the last words on it "........if she wants to drive....let her drive.............." :p

E

[AAL]

Those were not the last words on the cvr - sounds more like (in afrikaans) "O Bok!" or something

[Wild Business]

What about the Co Pilot was he sitting with his finger up his :eek:

[Gyro Nut]

Shame. Bit embarrassing for the co-pilot's dad, who is quite prominent in the airshow scene.

I think the lesson to be learnt here is that A346's can't do 150 degree turns easily. The capt. flies quite well (for the woman bashers), but was fairly new on the A346. Heard from the grapefine that they (CAA/SAA?)want to have her licence stripped, which is a bit harsh I think...

[Romeo E.T.]

my question..does the A340 not have nose-wheel steering on the F/O side as well and if the "lady" was on the R/T then I would presume that she was PNF, thus the F/O was taxi-ing and it would also make sense for him/her to attempt the turn see-ing as the turn was on his/her/F/O's side...and thats were the "error" took place...although the "lady" still takes the ultimate resposibility as P1 be it PF or PNF.....any takers...if so then this should also silence all those "BEE" critics here.

[PPRuNe Towers]

A search on the R+N forum will show a very similar incident to Emirates about 6 weeks ago. Glasgow, UK.

They'll probably tell you SAA folks about it at the recruitment roadshow:ooh:;)

Rob

[grant_737]

Found these on the web.

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/grant_737/1-1.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/grant_737/2-1.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/grant_737/3-1.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j241/grant_737/6-1.jpg

[nugpot]

Just don't say where you got those pics Grant. Mention of THAT site gets you banned here. :E

[alexmcfire]

http://allafrica.com/stories/200711030082.html
The accident happened 2:40 PM.

[Shrike200]

Judge not lest ye be judged yourself....

Having said that, I know what would have happened to me, had I done something like this whilst working for my present boss. I'm quite sure I'd have been fired pretty quickly. All this, whilst earning minimum wage too!

Yeah, sure, an A346 is a challenge to operate. THATS WHY THOSE BOYS AND GIRLS EARN THE BIG BUCKS. You don't seriously think you can just come to work and collect money for showing up, having earned enough seniority to get high enough in the queue to pole one of those? Nope, they have to deliver. And in this case, they didn't. You can cry ACSA, taxi lines, whatever (all are no doubt contributing factors, sure). But at the end of the day, this incident occured at taxi speed, in day, VMC, on a dry runway. In other words, the crew had the choice of continuing or not - and if they couldn't stop, then they were going too fast for the situation.

What I say here, I would expect to be said of me had I done the same thing. As pilots, we are held to a high standard, and that's how it is. Barring mechanical failure of some kind, they drove themselves into this mess, nobody else. It serves as a reminder of the constant vigilance required from all of us. Operating in Africa just makes the requirements all the higher.

Again, I merely mention how I would expect to be judged after doing what has apparently happened here.

[Beta Light]

If these taxiways was NOTAM’ed then I think ACSA’s lawyers will had a easy way out of this one. As we all know the P.I.C. carry the can. Rightly or wrongly so. If you have ever dealt with insurance / lawyers they will ask lots of questions and the only answers you can give is yes or no.

[Cpt. Underpants]

This just in: Capt's new nickname...

"SANDY"

[ByAirMail]

I was the same era as Capt. "SANDY". I got rejected as I was not the "right profile" ( still don't know why they interviewed me as my skin colour and sex is obvious ). She got hired.
I taxi my company's B777-300's around the world in a safe manner, even in Mumbai, doing 180's on the short runway when RWY27 is closed for maintenance. At night and rainy, Very, very tight even in dry daylight..

One of my era applicants just returned a B737 that lost an engine, yip, fell of, safely to the airport in bad weather.
Maybe S.A.A. reap what they sowed.
O.K. Fluffy Fan, Beech bum and Jett Nut, shoot.....

[I.R.PIRATE]

Lemme help ByAirMail

Perhaps when you have an endless supply of bucks (yes you know from where) for maintenance, you dont need to rely too much on crew skills anymore.:E:E

[beechbum]

O.K. Fluffy Fan, Beech bum and Jett Nut, shoot
And the reason for that???????

[whodunnit2]

I have been curios as to why the nose wheel is so far off the tarmac and gave it some thought. Let me state ahead of time that I am not trying to be a smart ass and point fingers at anyone. I know that the whole thing could be a mechanical fault/computer malfunction and I will read the eventual report with much interest to discover the truth. I have flown the type and have seen the steering "do its own thing" on one occasion. I have also flown with other people that have had the same problem. This was a known problem at my company and I believe that the problem was sorted out.

I was thinking that had I been sitting in that unfortunate seat, the first thing that would probably happen as the nose slipped off the tar would be to increase the steering angle to get the machine back on the tar ASAP (It's human instinct to try and correct the problem first rather than stop and accept the mistake). With the nose at 70/80 degrees and very little/no grip on the dirt my guess is that the a/c continued in a straight line with the nose wheel turned until it dug itself in (or the brakes where applied).

I honestly hope for the crews sake that it was a problem with the aircraft but at the end of the day nobody was hurt and that's what really matters.

W2

[Oom Kaspaas]

Warlock 2000.

The one doing the taxiing doesn't have nuts. Maybe a kick in the p:mad:s

Apparently the full nickname is Sandy Tyson.

[sbh684b]

Oom Kaspaas (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=200868)

That was not very nice, this Captain of the flight are geting all the flack from everywhere. So stop all the crap till the investigation is over please. :=:=:=:=:=:=:=:=:=

[madherb]

The one doing the taxiing doesn't have nuts. Maybe a kick in the p:mad:sSpoken like the true "gentleman" you obviously are.

Your post shows a great deal of sensitivity. Obviously a lot of thought went into it.

One would hope you do not land up in the same situation yourself. Remember, "to err is human, to forgive, divine" and I'm sure you would like the same treatment some day............

An accident/incident is very seldom due to one action - normally a chain of events. Wait for the results of the investigation,

[congoman]

Not surprised at all that the nosewheel came to a rest so far off the pavement. The -600 needs a lot of angular momentum at the start of the turn as it loses energy very quickly due to the pivoting stresses on the main landing gear. Particularly the inboard and center gear. Remember they are double bogeys and the mainwheels are turning very slowly while the nosewheel is arcing around at a fair rate. If you don't start the turn with sufficient momentum and thrust the aircraft will stop midturn, requiring a large application of asymetric thrust to get her going again.
In this case the angular momentum looked fine - but the judgement of when to start the turn was obviously off. With the nosewheel 5 meters behind the pilots position and the mains 38 meters behind, the -600 can be a real bitch to taxi around tight corners. Very easy to misjudge particularly if you are new on type. Having to do 150 degree turns is also very rare.
Everyone makes mistakes - but unlike most other profesions, our shortcomings are very visible and very public.
Hard luck guys. :(

[sidestick driver]

What do you know about big Airbuses?:}:}:}
Just pulling your leg!

This is not an easy aeroplane to taxi around most airports. I notice now that we get more freedom at Heathrow from other aircraft when we start to taxi. We need the space and mustn't stop. The over steering is incredible and then you only just make the turn.

I find Delhi is also a catch with this aircraft, as the parking stripe is very short, so once you turn into the bay, there no forward distance to straighten up. Therefore the turn has to be correct 100%, when you decide to enter the bay. The camera's are great, but they don't help you when you make a sharp turn into the unknown, as you will loose your yellow stripe, as it is out of the field of vision of the camera.

To taxi this long machine well, takes time and experience I am still learning about it's dimensions each day I fly her.

[asianeagle]

With the nosewheel 5 meters behind the pilots position and the mains 38 meters behind, the -600 can be a real bitch to taxi around tight corners


Thats why you have a camera!


If you don't start the turn with sufficient momentum and thrust the aircraft will stop midturn, requiring a large application of asymetric thrust to get her going agai


Would have thought that since it was a short sector, the plane would be light and therefore would be wanting to run away with itself due excess power, (never thought I would say that about an Airbus). It would have meant taxying with feet on the brakes and an easy stop when you saw the lip of the tarmac approaching IN THE CAMERA!!!

Lets see what the investigation brings out :E

[congoman]

Asianeagle
Refer to SideStick Driver's observation about the camera's field of veiw when taking a tight turn.

[asianeagle]

Yes you are quite right the view is limited, but you have several fields of view, Nosewheel camera, Tail cam, windscreen and two pairs of eyes:eek:. You would surely have seen it coming. :sad:

[congoman]

Well if they had - it wouldn't have happened then, would it?
Unlikely they did it on purpose!
More likely just an unfortunate error. :bored:

[777Contrail]

It is a 150 degree turn on a non-existant taxi line with an aircraft known as one difficult to taxi.

Give them a break!

[SAASFO]

Sounds like the Captain turned the nosewheels all the way to the right whilst stationary and then applied to much power to start moving and the excess thrust caused the nosewheels to lose traction and that's why the aircraft ended up where it did.

Apparently the A340-600 needs forward movement before attempting a sharp turn.

[Oom Kaspaas]

Madherb.

I was just correcting a previous post. Sandy will never have nuts. Doesn't matter how hard she tries.

[Solid Rust Twotter]

We all shag the porcupine occasionally.


There but for the grace.....:ooh:

[alexmcfire]

Another A346 has tasted the dust, Iberia at Quito, no injuries this time either.
http://www.lahora.com.ec/frontEnd/main.php?idSeccion=641067

[TwinJock]

Nice one Oom Kaspaas - Sandy Tyson. Was this individual not involved in "slapping" some fellow crew member a while back?

Sound like she slipped pass the psychos, or are these not required anymore for command at SAA? :D

Everyone is whining how difficult it is to taxi one of these - horse s:mad:t. A Cessna 185 is difficult to taxi, but you are trained to do it safely! If you screw up the technique, then maybe you should not be flying the -600, let alone taxi it!!!

[Oom Kaspaas]

Yes. The "Tyson" comes from the slapping the cabin crew incident.

There has also been incidents of her shouting at the dispatchers, in front of all the other crews signing on, because the dispatcher doing her flight hadn't marked one of the flight plans as " Office Copy". :ugh:

[Booker]

Oom Kaspaas and all...

This is my first post and I have to tell you that, for an industry that is historically short in the female department, there sure are a lot of bitches!!!

Handbags at high noon gentlemen?

And that's coming from a man!

[Speed Managed]

This is not about the personality or the gender!

I have been flying this machine for 4 years.
My first impressions after my Toulouse conversion was "if you can taxi this thing you can fly it!"

Cut her some slack, this was going to happen, some place, some time! AND it's going to happen again!

[congoman]

Actually Twinjock - whith reference to your C185 analogy - one of the best aerobatic pilots in South Africa ground looped his taildragger awhile ago. So is he a s***t pilot now? Or did he simply make a mistake?
By your standard maybe he should stop flying.
Hope you'll be applying those same standards when next you screw up. :hmm:

[CJ750]

A GRAND OLD DUTCH NAVIGATOR :8 AT AVEX AIR TOLD ME MANY YEARS AGO

"THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAVE AND THERE ARE THOSE WHO ARE GOING TO"

It is easy to talk from this side but we were not in the cockpit or the control tower or i would hazard a guess and say many of the respondents have never taxied an A340-600, myself included. Maybe we should find out what happened instead of reacting to rumours.

[Booker]

Just to clear - I was trying to give the gal a break - the bitching was referring to the men on this forum.

Doesn't matter how you try and not make it about gender - for some or other reason there are people that just can't help but turn it into exactly that.

[Oom Kaspaas]

CJ750.

Ed was a good bugger. During nav he always spoke about the proverbial poesfontein.

Booker. its not about gender. She just has a kak attitude

[eish]

I lav it when you tawk forin

[REAL ORCA]

:}:}:}:ok:

[starcrest]

A delightful (and soooo common) sequence of little events:

1. RW01 active
2. Alpha taxyway closed
3. Echo missed
4. ATC in (bad) habit of referring to RW16 as RW34 (can only turn right onto 16)
5. Instant crew decision: turn right now or be towed back to dispersal
6. Aircraft mass light = understeer
7. Reverse thrusters still engaged
8. Crew try to assist turn with left engine thrust
9. Opposite happens
10. Camera not much use anyway, especially as no taxy lines on RW intersection to assist the planned arc
11. Screech, oops

Both crew need to be reprimanded for sure, but not fired -this was a genuine accident, one we can ALL learn from.

[SAASFO]

That is not the correct sequence of events, Starcrest. The Captain was the PF. The Captain applied too much power from a stationary turn with full nosewheel deflection and slid the front wheels off the taxiway. See the "skid" marks in a photo from an earlier post!! The Captain earns the big bucks because when something like this happens, the buck stops with him (her in this case).

[starcrest]

Thanks Saasfo, you have cleared up the wrong assumption that a fast taxy speed was part of the problem (that was simply my guess).

I did, however, have a good look at the skid marks when I was taxying by the next day. They start at the RW centre line and arc neatly into the dirt. Are you certain it was purely too much forward thrust that caused the problem?

[say what]

It's just oooo sooo to jump to conclusions ..... lets allow allow the folks in the grey suits with the thick specs and the measuring tapes to make their conclusive conclusions categorically confusiously .... obviously someone "slipped up" (or slipped off) a wee bit .... but hey..it happens in the best of families ... lets cut them some slack .....

:ok:

[SAASFO]

Not sure if SAA will release the final incident report but I am very sure of my facts.

[fluffyfan]

Lets just hope the Captain involved has the ball to say " I fu:mad:ed up" and with that we will all say....cool..it happens.

However if the blame game starts......Zero Respect, there was only one Captain on that flight deck.

[AirwayBlocker]

SAASFO you wrote:

That is not the correct sequence of events, Starcrest. The Captain was the PF. The Captain applied too much power from a stationary turn with full nosewheel deflection and slid the front wheels off the taxiway. See the "skid" marks in a photo from an earlier post!! The Captain earns the big bucks because when something like this happens, the buck stops with him (her in this case).


Then Starcrest replied:

I did, however, have a good look at the skid marks when I was taxying by the next day. They start at the RW centre line and arc neatly into the dirt. Are you certain it was purely too much forward thrust that caused the problem?

Now. Having seen what Starcrest wrote about the length of the skidmarks and having seen the photo's of how far and deep the nosegear plowed into the dirt I have to say that I found your account of things highly improbable. Thats a helluva long way to make a nosewheel skid after an application of power from a deadstop. If as you say the power was applied from a dead stop and given that the skidmarks start from the centerline I would say that the captain should have had more than ample time to realise the aircraft was not turning as required and react to that by simply applying the brakes.

I would suspect that things happened far more rapidly than what you suggest. The 600 has quite a bit of inertia. I cannot see how simply starting a turn from a deadstop would result in the aircraft leaving the tarmac. Unless the power applied was TOGA thrust.

How can you be so sure of the sequence of events? Did you speak to the crew involved or did you get your info secondhand?

[SAASFO]

How can you be so sure of the sequence of events? Did you speak to the crew involved or did you get your info secondhand?

Let's just say that I did not get the info secondhand, so the other option is ........

[starcrest]

Let's just say that I did not get the info secondhand, so the other option is ........ You were P2 or P3, maybe PPax?

I just reiterate that those skid marks definitely begin from the RW01 centre line. So I also find your stationary claim puzzling. If the airie was standing still what on earth would make the skipper use near TOGA thrust to get it moving?

Some key fact is missing??????

[fluffyfan]

I just reiterate that those skid marks definitely begin from the RW01 centre line.

The skid marks on the runway or on the Captains chair?

[Solid Rust Twotter]

Think they're still trying to surgically remove the seat cushion from the captain's bottom.:ooh: The report re the skidmarks on the cushion will be released when someone eventually manages to take a look at them.

[square leg]

Four scenarios spring to mind:

1. The tiller push-button was malfunctioning and the nosewheel did not respond due to incorrect imputs from the tiller (maybe the tiller thought it was disconnected because of an incorrect signal) -technical-

2. The tiller push-button was unintentionally depressed in the heat of the moment. -human-

3. Maybe the turn was made with too much speed and a slight distraction caused a lack a monitoring of the groundspeed and the nose wheels started skidding even though the tiller was turned. Speeds greater than 10 kts are too great for 90-180° turns (especially when wet). Even on a dry runway this causes slight skidding. -human-

4. What SAASFO says. -human-

It happens to the best and will happen again, maybe to you, maybe to me. Seeking blame doesn't assist in the matter, finding out why it happened will help us to avoid making the same mistake. Obviously there'll be consequences, but that's a different matter. Happy taxiing.

[SAASFO]

Starcrest and AirwayBlocker, how about a night on you at High Flyerz for everyone there if I am right when the report comes out, and on me if I am wrong?? :rolleyes:

As long as P and L promise to keep the loud and obnoxious music that seems to be turned up just as one is getting into a great mood, to a minimum for that night!!

[Lazy Pilot]

Accidents/incidents are always a CHAIN of events leading to a pile of poop.

Why did the FO not tell the captain that the ATIS, which he copied, advised taxiway A1 was closed (even after it was included in the after landing part of the briefing)? What part did he play in the confusion after landing when the ATC suddenly told them to turn right on RWY 16 while completing the landing roll? Would any of this have happened if the facts had been at the captain's disposal?

While no-one disputes that the captain carries the final responsibility, I think a bit of brown stuff may have attached itself to the FO too!!!

:cool:

[SortieIII]

Of course, lazy, you are assuming that SAASFO was the P2 on this flight?
Assumptions are always dangerous.:rolleyes:

[SortieIII]

Nice editing there, lazy, or should that be lady? I see that you have changed all references to SAASFO to FO.
I think a bit of brown stuff may have attached itself to the FO
Is this just wishful thinking?:confused:
Anyway, it is usually best to stick to the facts when unfortunate incidents happen.

[SAASFO]

Folks, I was not the FO on that flight. In fact, I am not even on that fleet. But my understanding is that the Captain is blaming the FO for not telling her that taxiway A1 was broadcast as closed on the ATIS. The FO assumed that A1 referred to the stand A1, but I agree that this should have been mentioned when he read her the ATIS. However, that is one aspect of the incident, and a very small aspect at that, but taking a handful of thrust and driving an A340-600 off the runway into the dirt is an entirely more serious aspect and one that will be very hard to justify.

[FuelFlow]

Did the Captain not read the Notams before departure? I`m pretty sure that if this was done during the Briefing, there would not have been any confusion as to the closure of A1:ugh::mad:
If there had been a P3 on this sector, the Captain would have been up to speed with the domestic Notams prior to the landing.:ok::ok:
And they want to reduce a P3`s salary !:=

[starcrest]

Folks, I was not the FO on that flight.

I am glad to hear that SAASFO, otherwise you would have been guilty of breaking the cardinal rule of CRM; bleating about fellow crew in public (and before the enquiry is done). That established, you seem very sure of the sequence of events, seems perhaps that either the P1, P2 or P3 confided in you. Let's scratch the P1 as I think perhaps you have an issue with the skipper, as your thread would indicate..

However, that is one aspect of the incident, and a very small aspect at that, but taking a handful of thrust and driving an A340-600 off the runway into the dirt is an entirely more serious aspect and one that will be very hard to justify.

That very small aspect you refer to is the FO muddling an ATIS message that clearly warns "Taxiway Alpha is closed" and interpreting it as "Parking Bay Alpha is closed" ??

The skipper, guilty of not remembering the Notam, may have been lulled into anticipating an easy exit onto 34 (only a 30 degree turn) added to which is a bad ATC bad habit of sometimes referring to 16 as 34.

An accident/incident investigation is like analysing vegetable soup, many little parts make up the whole. It seems, from armchair length anyway, that poor CRM may be one piece of the vegetable.

[Contract Dog]

could have been worse, check this out!

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1293784

Dog

[FS_Flyer]

What is happening with A 346's recently??

[I.R.PIRATE]

Anyone care to have this raging debate snuffed out by the CVR transcripts?:E:E

[AirwayBlocker]

Definitely!

Although having done some more enquiring I'm tending to believe that SAASFO has the closer version to the truth.

Apparently the aircraft did come to a stop before being powered off the runway onto (or should that be into) the dirt.

I won't begin to speculate as to why though. At least not until I've seen the transcripts. :E:}

[I.R.PIRATE]

As it contains some language unbecomming, I will first have to have it censored.:E:suspect:

[Jamex]

I.R.Pirate post away! If you really have the cvr transcripts then all speculation ends.:O

[starcrest]

Yeah, let's see the transcript so we can see whether it was a sequence of events, or a fit of pique, or both??

[Jamex]

Suitcaseman, agreed it was an accident. BUT, when an incident like this happens it raises a lot of unanswered questions and then I say post away! I know the relevant F/O and also know he is a more than capable pilot. When a Captain has the history this one seems to have then questions need to be asked. Apparently she was suspended for slapping a hostie, got into frequent, seemingly unreasonable arguments, with Flight Despatchers, had a go at a Technician for his joke regarding women drivers, blamed her F/O for the "mistake", etc. The basic foundation of a healthy psyche, according to the first handbook in studying psychology, is the ability to accept responsibility, and the consequences of, one's own actions! The question is, had you or I had this record and then screwed the pooch, would we still be employed? Would we have got through the psychometrics with this type of behaviour or personality disorder? Is the process of "fast tracking" certain races and sexes to satisfy political masters now biting SAA in the backside? Must people die before the obvious flaws are taken seriously? Just some questions to think about. Answer away!

[i-Robot]

Why was this kind of scrutiny and criticism not afforded to the drivers of the Emirates 777 who ended up in a very similar scenario not so long before the one you currently lambast, see the middle east threads.

Why was such scrutiny and criticism not given to the incident at SAA when a 742 scraped its tail on takeoff (with substantial damage) all at the hands of very senior pale and male pilots.

Lets be fair here guys...do we have all the facts. Or are we simply attacking the said individual because of her minority status?

[ALPHA FLOOR]

Nope, just attacking SAA and its Establishment!

[Vliegpop]

Very very well said, Jamex!! :ok:

[CJ750]

Slightly off track here but interesting anyway. Just shows everyone including the best can make a c:mad:k up. Has anyone seen the pictures if the Etihad A340 a few days before delivery hung over the engine run-up bay wall with the cockpit lying on the otherside.

[ARENDIII]

Anyone can :mad: it,I hope it is not me next.
Fly safe guys (that includes the girls)

[TwinJock]

Why was this kind of scrutiny and criticism not afforded to the drivers of the Emirates 777 who ended up in a very similar scenario not so long before the one you currently lambast, see the middle east threads.

Easy, they are not fast track, jumped up drivers who go around slapping others, shouting their mouths off, and they are not involved in all sorts of "incidents"

Why was such scrutiny and criticism not given to the incident at SAA when a 742 scraped its tail on takeoff (with substantial damage) all at the hands of very senior pale and male pilots.


See above answer!

[reptile]

Easy, they are not fast track, jumped up drivers who go around slapping others, shouting their mouths off, and they are not involved in all sorts of "incidents"

So it’s a personal vendetta then?

[Fullspeed]

http://carstenbauer.net/saa/

[Taxidriver009]

All the opinions and mud slinging with no happy ending?

What was the final result, if any, for us out there in the wild?

[divinehover]

I had the option of making turn-off in CPT yesterday but it would have required a very sharp turn close to the rwy/taxiway intersection. I thought of the above incident and chose to swallow my pride (with very hot brakes), take power and go off at the next exit. I like to think I learnt from someone elses mistake. Is this not the tradition of a very fine proffession?

[Bergie]

This incident proves that the flight deck is no place for arrogance & bad attitude's. As history has shown such behavior will more often than not leave you "in the dirt" so to speak. The problem with the current system is that it is problematic to purge bad apples when the rap sheet is not quite long enough.

[Taxidriver009]

Good to know someone benefitted from the incident. That is a good enough ending for me. The rest was probably sorted in-house and none of our business.
Cheers,
T