Air India Capt suspended.

[marchino61]

An Indian news site tells a different story - the captain refused to ferry the empty aircraft back to Mumbai, saying it was unsafe:

AI issues notice to its pilot - Express India (http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/AI-issues-notice-to-its-pilot/477433/)

[weido_salt]

Silly boy.

I assume he lands with the gear down, observing the various limitations. Is that is so unsafe?

So why not empty ferry fly it, with the gear down, observing the limitations?

[remoak]

It's a no-brainer. It is either authorised by the FM/Ops Manual and therefore legal, or it isn't. If it is, and the captain chose not to do it, he is either wise or silly depending on why he thought it "dangerous".

In any case, gear-down ferries are normally done without pax.

[powerstall]

well if he didn't have enough fuel, ( with pax and cargo) everybody would've done the same thing rather than ditching the jumbo over the indian ocean.. but if the orders we're to re-land and ferry the jumbo dropping of the pax and cargo ( carrying more xtra fuel and MEL limitations ) that would've been a helluva different story. :E

[CR2]

My former airline did a gear down ferry from DXB to Europe on a 742F many years ago; I happened to be in the Ops office at the time and heard the Chief Pilot discuss the flight at length with the operating Capt, offering advice and going through all the limitations. Believe it had to stay under FL200 and max 270KIAS (IIRC). Fuel stop in IST; took all day but it was necessary mx-wise to get the aircraft home.

[Nickdj]

First post :)

Limitations for the 744 landing gear:
Max speed:
Gear retraction 270kts/M.82
Gear extension 270kts/M.82
Gear extended and locked 320kts/M.82

Cant really find anything about flying to destination with gear down at this point.

cheers Nick

[ironbutt57]

Good to see the final authority rests with the Commander..retraining..sure..this??:ugh:

[kotakota]

QRH Perf will cover Gear Down Ferry planning.
Route can be slightly altered to fly along Iran and Pakistan coastlines if there IS an overwater restriction .
Did one once across South China Sea in a 737 -300 . Fuel burn remarkably as predicted , max alt about FL 220 ,not a good idea to carry pax -noise in the cabin is deafening !!

[GE90115BL2]

From the CX 777 FCOM 2 reference Gear Down flights
Type Of Aircraft Operation
Limitations are unchanged except that flight over water is limited to within 50 miles from
land.

[weido_salt]

Agreed. However I think this (http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/AI-issues-notice-to-its-pilot/477433/) story is closer to the truth.

[spannerz20]

For a gear down dispatch and for that matter a fifth engine ferry there are two switches located in the MEC which when selected reduce the Vmo.

[ECAM_Actions]

Sounds like the Captain refused to ferry it empty despite it otherwise being legal etc...

I can't see the difference between that and just refusing to fly. Sounds like he deserved it.

ECAM Actions.

[parabellum]

RUH to Mumbai , in a B747-400, at LRC should take no more than about six hours and if empty would have the capacity to carry up to twelve hours worth of fuel, various limitations permitting. In an empty aircraft at 270kts and FL220 fuel consumption should not be excessive. Gear down ferry flights in the B744 are not considered a problem. A few numbers, all engines operating, trip distance 2000 miles, nil wind, fuel required for long range cruise approx 80 tons.

Maybe there is more to this than we are being told?

[HAWK21M]

The M.E.L. gives the right to an AME to refuse to release an aircraft for service or a Pilot to refuse the Aircraft if it is considered unsave to do so even though the defect can be carried forward under M.E.L.
The problem here is was the snag unsafe.

Gear extend ferry is not abnormal.
I wonder what was the exact cause of the LG malfunction though.

regds
MEL.

[JW411]

There simply has to be more in this than meets the eye. A "Gear Down Ferry" is really not a difficult exercise provided that the MEL/CDL allows such a procedure.

From the flight crew point of view it is quite an interesting exercise (which I have done) and the main consideration is quite simply being able to get enough fuel on board to complete the exercise.

Apart from that, there is going to be a little bit more vibration than normal and the flight is going to take place at a much lower altitude than normal.

To get things into perspective, you could fly the DC-10 with the gear down at 300 knots (IAS).

I think Air India politics are heavily involved in this story.

[cesarnc]

There simply has to be more in this than meets the eye.

Maybe the problem wasn't to take off and fly, but to land at the other end... They didn't say anything about the nature of the technical problem...

My 2c

[Old Fella]

Cesarnc has hit the nail on the head, we were not there, we do not know the whole story. Fuel to continue would likely have been the first consideration of the Captain. Let's face it, the Captain elected to return and no doubt evaluate the situation on the ground. Having done so fuel would no longer have been his concern, however something made him refuse to ferry the aircraft "gear down" to Mumbai. Mach .82 max would not have been a concern.

[cesarnc]

In the few times I (as a passenger) was grounded in the last minute by "techincal problems" I thanked God they grounded a potencial problematic aircraft, while the other passengers shouted and screamed and threatened law suits.

I learned that the hard way: I flew in an aircraft that happened to crash 1 week later with 99 people on board. Fokker 100, reverse opened during the roll, short runway, "minor" techincal problem detected on the previous day.

[condorbaaz]

does not the MEL(in the preface) rest the final decision to accept, on the operating captain/ invoking engineer?

If so, then afraid the guy was legal...

[Fragman88]

I do not have the manuals to hand, but on the 747 2/3/400 do vaguely recall something in one of them about 'Extended over water operations are not recommended with gear extended'. It's about ditching with the gear down I believe. I had an occasion on a 747 when unable to retract, and had a good distance to go over water, so had to look it up. Quite what 'Extended' over water means is of course open to debate.
:cool:

[MaxBlow]

There must be more to that story. Why would he refuse to fly if the MEL says it's good to go. Do we know both sides or do we only have that fishy AI press statement ?

Since when do beancounters decide if an aircraft is safe or not?

:=

[slamer.]

At last..... some of you are talking like professionals

[4runner]

Has anyone thought about possible icing conditions? I've had to do many a ferry flight stiff leg and the stipulation on our aircraft is that icing conditions are avoided. Extended gear adds drag, iced up extended gear would be like putting out the boards. Additionally, I highly doubt that the manufacturer has charts for specific fuel consumption with gear extended and iced up.

[trimotor]

There are issues, quite apart from the valid points mentioned here (and entirely non-technical) that could be playing a significant part in the captain's intial decision not to fly and his obvious ongoing refusal.

If I go ointo more detail someone will call me nasty names, though I'm sure some of you will get my gist.

TM

[hetfield]

@4runner

Indeed!

There has also been a discussion about that here, but all post are removed as well as my initial post (I've started this thread).

Don't know why.

[Capt Pit Bull]

Why would he refuse to fly if the MEL says it's good to go

How about because the MEL allows the captain to accept a defect, it does not require him/her to do so.

The MEL does not gauruntee it's safe, because it does not (can not) possibly cater for all the possible combinations of circumstances. Aircraft I've flown have usually had some legal weasil wording to that effect anyway.

So we exercise judgement, that's why they pay us the big bucks.

Most of the time the MEL provides us with the operational flexibility we need, but sometimes it's just one more slice of swiss cheese with the hole lined up.

pb

[Captain Airclues]

4runner

I doubt whether icing was a factor at this time of the year at the level that he would be operating at. However water can be a problem if the brake units are exposed for long periods. After a normal landing, the gear has only been exposed for a short period, and any water is dissipated by the heat of braking. However, at this time of the year there can be some big storms around Mumbai and so the gear might be exposed for long periods.
I carried out a base training detail on a wet runway at Prestwick a few years ago. We had to cut short the detail due to water ingestion into the Brake Limiters (no brake heating during touch-and-goes). The Air India captain would have known that the Mumbai runway can be very wet during the monsoon and would not have wanted to land with any brake problems.
The alterntes for Mumbai are a long way away. Chennai is the usual alternate, over the other side of India. A diversion would have had to be carried out with the gear down. We don't know what the Mumbai and Chennai weather was at the time.
We also don't know what other faults that there were with the aircraft and what had caused the gear not to come up.
If one flight had already been completed and then a long engineering investigation taken place, there were probably flight duty limit aspects, especially with a slow, and long, flight plan.
I'm sure that the captain made a professional decision based on the known facts.

Dave

PS. The freezing level over the entire route is usually about FL170 in June. With dynamic heating you would not expect ice buildup on the gear below FL200.

[FrequentSLF]

The MEL does not gauruntee it's safe, because it does not (can not) possibly cater for all the possible combinations of circumstances. Aircraft I've flown have usually had some legal weasil wording to that effect anyway.

May I dispute such interpretation? MEL is considered to be safe, and you even can carry SLF on such flight...if it so I will not fly in any aircraft that is MEL!

FSLF

[4runner]

Saudi to India is a LONG flight. No, it may not be a transpacific leg but hey, it's still a good distance. If there are any clouds or precip and it's in the flight levels, these are icing conditions. I wouldn't trust a weather report from most countries overflown on this particular flight to correctly tell me the weather over my route of flight. I don't know about the Boeing but the mighty mighty CRJ stipulates NO icing with the gear MEL'd down and locked for whatever reason. We weren't there and yet we're judging a professional aviator??? Sounds like the news media. Sorry to offend anyone on this site but it seems that microsoft flight sim experts and 500 hour Cessna drivers are spouting off about topics way above their pay scale and experience level in order to feel like a hot shot. With the extra fuel burned with the drag of that gear, I almost bet it would've been cheaper to get contract mx to fix the problem in Saudi. Let's be real pilots here and do what we should've been doing in the first place, blame management for stupid decisions!

[Capt Pit Bull]

May I dispute such interpretation?

You can if you want, but contradiction doesn't make an arguement.

Are you SLF then, as your handle suggests?

pb

[Dysag]

Sounds like a case of the third world 5-stripes mega ego.

[FrequentSLF]

Capt Pit Bull

Yes I am a SLF, and I would like to know why
The MEL does not gauruntee it's safe, because it does not (can not) possibly cater for all the possible combinations of circumstances.

such statement was made.
In my understanding MEL does not prejudice safety of flight.

Call me stupid SLF, but instead of making useless post give me an answer

[wings1011]

To answer your question a little bit not to point anything to this particular incicent is that even if the MEL tells you its legal you could always rethink this depending on
for example : Other MEL items already listed in TLB, Ie some other systems already inoperative, Weather conditions on route like for this example I know that on many other types flying with gear down in icing conditions is not allowed. Destination rwy and condition of that etc etc. The list could be long. At the end of the day when the commander makes a summary of all problems they are likely to face ,Like MEL items and other condition he/she could easily have the feeling that this is not safe for some reason, and are therfore have the legal right to say NO to flight. Thats one of the things what the commander is suppose to do before all flights.To ensure its safe when all things at summary

I hope I could lightend up some of your thoughts

Regards

Wings1011

[parabellum]

You first of all say:


I wouldn't trust a weather report from most countries overflown on this particular flight to correctly tell me the weather over my route of flight.


and then go on to say:


Sorry to offend anyone on this site but it seems that microsoft flight sim experts and 500 hour Cessna drivers are spouting off about topics way above their pay scale and experience level in order to feel like a hot shot.


Well it seems to me and I am sure other who are familiar with those countries and that route that, just maybe, you fit into the flight sim and 500 hour category? When were you last employed in and regularly flying Middle Eastern and Indian routes?

[4runner]

Nope, haven't flown heavy iron from Saudi to India in possible icing conditions with gear locked down. Perhaps you can start a contract pilot business specializing in ferrying aircraft with mx problems that an experienced captain refuses. I couldn't help but notice that when I suggesting that some people may be inappropriately chastising and criticizing a professional pilot due to the fact that they do not fly tranport category aircraft, I may have hit a nerve. You may or may not fall into this category. I don't really care until people challenge captains' authority and judgement, especially when they don't know what the circumstances are, or in fact are not really professional pilots themselves. Yes, I fly jets. No, I don't care if you believe me. I won't lose sleep over it. I would like to hit you up for a job though. Any flying job that gives you enough spare time to have over 1,200 posts to your credit sounds like it may be right up my alley. I'm an expert at Flightsim and critiquing other aviators from the sidelines when I don't know the entire story. I'm mastering slow flight in a Cessna and have six stripes and 24k plated ray bans. The six stripes indicate I am type rated on the 172, a check airman and all around bad ass. I'd love to chat more but I'm going to the bar after this landing into Hong Kong on my laptop.

[ExSp33db1rd]

Why is everyone wasting time on this ?

if you're not an Air India Captain likely to be faced with the same dilemma - who cares ? and if you are, PPRuNe isn't going to be a bit of help, it's between you and your boss.

I was once an 'Observer' at an Air India accident investigation in the Bombay High Court, the presence of foreign "experts" and Press made not one jot of difference, and why should it, it's their train set.

Goodnight.

[powerstall]

the problem here is that we are hearing only one side of the story, who knows what exactly were the conditions and problems that were present at the time of the planned flight. :confused:

[moossvs]

Saudi to India is a LONG flight. No, it may not be a transpacific leg but hey, it's still a good distance....
Well, the distance between RUH and BOM is about 1500 NM, if you can classify it as LONG. Should take about 3h 30 mins at the most.

[wings1011]

1500 NM with gear down must take considerable longer than 3h 30 min. im not familiar exactly in what speed the 747 can fly with gear down but I guess its not far from 250kts I guess ? (like on types I know). I also would think that the max alt is limited ? maybe to FL250 ? easy math then would be much longer flt time. Or am I wrong ?

Regards

Wings1011

[parabellum]

The numbers I quoted in post #15 are taken from the Ops manual, Vol 3 for the B744. I worked on a trip distance of 2000miles rather than 1500, as I guessed he would be avoiding over water as much as possible. Flight time around 6 hours.

[CR2]

Wings1011... Go back to page 1 AND READ THE THREAD! Its all there and only 3 pages. :hmm:

[mcsweep]

The 747-4 has Gear Down Performance tables in the QRH. There is no mention of a 50 mile limit for Gear Down Ops. Airlines can purchase Gear Down dispatch option from Boeing and fly PAX in that configuration. There is a way to switch the PFD airspeed barber pole to show the max gear speed/mach as the max airspeed.

[TOFFAIR]

I think there should be more information to criticize the captain, who knows what problems else might have been on that aircraft... I personally wouldnt be keen to make 1500NM gear down over water, considering OEI, or decompression, or encountering severe wheater (other than icing!). Maybe the reason somehow something private. It's interesting only few question the attitude of the airline, and as mentioned, it wouldnt change anything anyway. BTW, does anybody know if it was an expat?

[rdr]

there is a 50 nm routing req from any land mass at all times.
climb performance is a problem (less than 1000 feet a min up to 10,000, then about 500 ft a min up to fl 200, for most suitably powered a/c) so terrain a big factor.
noise, is pretty loud.
and she sinks like a brick on the descent.
270-280 kts at 20000 will roughly double the flt time.
did one, surabaya-sin on a 310. circled round the field thrice to gain alt. due to the central javan range of mountains. and southern sumatra.
it does take preparation as it is not something you just jump into the seat and go.
:ok::ok:

[autoflight]

There are times when the captain is required to make decisions that are unpopular with the airline. Some of the reasons may appear trivial, but if the decisions are made in good faith there should be no significant action taken.

If the Operation Director or other management staff are so intent on taking away such decisions from the captain, they should fly all the flights.

There are some captain decisions that traditionally suffer little or no management interference, like go-arounds and weather avoidance. Where management feel, correctly or not, that the captain is disrespectful of them or unconcerned about profit and disruption, they are more inclined to interfere severely in those areas.

Pilot retaining his authority to accept MEL items or not, is an area where I have seen airlines more inclined to try to deny the captain his considered choice. Finally, the public statement avoids mention of the captain's multiple considerations.

The process is more difficult in some cultures, with a foreign contract captain or if the co-pilot decides that MEL acceptance is not sufficiently safe.

Often the acceptance decision is reasonably clear cut, and even in the face of company pressure, there is little lasting action. The more difficult situation is where a decision is counter to normally accepted practice.

In spite of the difficulties, the captain is bound to make the most correct decision without fear or favour.