Ryanair off piste at PIK (23 Dec 2009) [Archive]

Checkboard

23rd Dec 2009, 09:08

Perhaps they can add it to the collection:

Charleroi, Belgium, 19th November 2002 (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/74015-ryanair-runway-excursion.html)

Aarhus Airport, Denmark, 6th February 2006 (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/209853-ryan-air-off-runway-aar.html)
http://images.bm4.metropol.dk/205/205972/205972_normal.jpg

Ryanair's "secret" memo over approach safety, February 7, 2007 (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/travel/news/article1343517.ece)

Limoges airport France, March 21, 2008 (http://www.jetphotos.net/news/index.php?blog=1&title=ryanair-737-skids-off-of-runway-in-franc&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1)
http://www.jetphotos.net/news/media/userfiles/1577885712.jpg.400.jpg

Lodz airport, Poland, April 29, 2008 (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc3_1209598376)
http://images3.jetphotos.net/img/2/1/2/8/63969_1209500821_tb.jpg

Bird strike incident, Ciampino, 10th November, 2008 (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/350378-ryanair-incident-ciampino.html)

http://commenti.kataweb.it/commenti/multimedia/404765/2008/11/10/image/206930.jpg

and 12th April, 2009 Ryanair managed to miss the runway completely and land on the taxiway at Cagliari in Italy.

To misquote Oscar Wilde:

To miss one runway may be regarded as a misfortune... to miss six seems like carelessness. :rolleyes:

Man Flex 37.5

23rd Dec 2009, 09:11

Nail on the head checkboard!

Mungo Man

23rd Dec 2009, 09:13

Has PIK not got one of the longest runways used by scheduled traffic?

Declared landing distance available:
13 2743m
31 2987m
03 1829m
21 1829m

2987 meters is ok but LHR is about 4000m. 1829m is getting tight ish but thats how long Aberdeen, Leeds and Norwich.

Temet_Nosce

23rd Dec 2009, 09:19

http://www.ryanair.com/en/notices/gops/091223-FR772-Dublin_Glasgow-GB (http://www.ryanair.com/en/notices/gops/091223-FR772-Dublin_Glasgow-GB)

FR772 Dublin - Glasgow (Prestwick)

After a normal landing was completed and while taxiing from the runway the aircraft encountered ice and slid just off the runway onto the grass verge. Passengers disembarked normally and were bussed to the terminal. Ryanair engineers are at the aircraft, which appears to have suffered no damage and they are working with Glasgow (Prestwick) to return the aircraft to the stand area so that the runway can be reopened with minimum delay. Ryanair apologises for any disruption suffered by passengers as a result of this incident.

El Grifo

23rd Dec 2009, 09:24

Oh dear - is this due to the airport owners not taking due care and attention in keeping their taxi-way free from ice? Bet you O'Leary will think so...

Why, who do think could be held responsible, O'Leary :ugh:

Thad Jarvis

23rd Dec 2009, 09:28

It's all just part of the grand plan to get runways extended everywhere :hmm:

top jock

23rd Dec 2009, 09:31

They hit ice and went off, most of these all have something to do with weather. Thank God nobody is dead like alot of other airlines that something has happened with weather. So because you dont like Ryanair and MOL you hate their pilots. Look at what happened to AA last night, what happened to AF and EK over the last while. Grow up and step away from the Christmas booze people. Wait till something happens to you and i am sure it will be just down to the weather.

23rd Dec 2009, 09:36

So where is the aircraft? Off the end or 45 degrees off the end or off a taxiway? No mention of braking action on METARS - must be ok. Was this the first arrival of the day? Icy taxiways......... down to airport operator? Or were they too fast? FDR data will reveal all in due course.

Bad luck guys. Could happen to any one of us.

I remember a Britannia 767 (I think) sliding unceremoneoulsy into the grass whilst vacating BHX 15. The last 90 degree turn off had a reputation for being slippery when wet - and it was. Just a couple of knots too fast and laws of physics take over....

A4

Ranger 1

23rd Dec 2009, 09:40

Checkboard: I apologise in advance for going off thread a little but... I fail to see what relevance the Birdsrike last year in Ciampino has to do with the performance of Ryanair crew, and its Aircraft, in fact I believe in this instance(Ciampino) the crew were entitled to as much praise for their skills as the crew of the Hudson river incident. :ugh:

Checkboard

23rd Dec 2009, 09:44

I made no comment for or against the incident.

RYR-738-JOCKEY

23rd Dec 2009, 09:49

DITTO! And with more than 1000 flights per day of course something will happen eventually. This is a none event. However I think if the CAA would approve of the ICAO braking action system, this might not have happened.

lospilotos

23rd Dec 2009, 09:52

Well I guess that Checkboard started the whole off-topic thing.... and yes you did, when you misquoted Oscar Wilde....

Again, as the report on the Limoges incident is still to arrive, no one is to say that anyone was careless. First hand reports points to that runway conditions were far worse than reported and that the captain actually prevented a potentially deadlier version of the incident by cancelling reverse thrust (according to procedure) when the aircraft was about to leave the runway perpendicular to the centerline at a much higher speed.

TheBeak

23rd Dec 2009, 09:54

Ah no, Ryanair pilots are becoming like 'asylum seekers', women and the poor. Feeling persecuted against at every avenue. Get over it, you paid for your job - we know it, you know it, you probably wouldn't have been an airline pilot if you didn't do it.

And with more than 1000 flights per day of course something will happen eventually

Great attitude. So statiscally you're pilots are going to kill someone soon? But hey we should accept that so your company can keep on growing.

Helicopterfixerman

23rd Dec 2009, 10:03

"the captain actually prevented a potentially deadlier version of the incident by cancelling reverse thrust (according to procedure)"

So is it not more accurate to suggest that it was the procedure that prevented a "deadlier version of the incident". No?

This post not intended to offend or get any heckles up, and I have no axe to grind or otherwise towards Ryanair or it's crews.

Checkboard

23rd Dec 2009, 10:03

That quote was about the trend - not about any particular incident!

Beanbag

23rd Dec 2009, 10:08

Seems to me (as an outsider) that there's truth on both sides here. Yes, it could, and does, happen to anyone; but it does seem to me that we read about it happening to Ryanair more than most. Could be a bunch of reasons: number of flights, use of small airports, penchant for high taxi speeds, schadenfreude among the RYR haters on PPruNE, to name but a few. Take your pick.

(Posted partly to get rid of the "you haven't posted for a few weeks, why not stick your oar in somewhere" message when I sign on!)

stormin norman

23rd Dec 2009, 10:11

This is a none event.

If the writer of this is a Ryanair pilot then it speaks volumes about the airlines view on safety-any overun is a serious event.

lospilotos

23rd Dec 2009, 10:17

@Helicopterfixerman: I say potato you say potato... Sure, but you still need someone to execute the procedure..

@Checkboard: Not sure the events you list satisfies the critera to constitute a trend but I hear what you are saying...

mr_meatbomb

23rd Dec 2009, 10:22

Helicopterfixerman

23rd Dec 2009, 10:24

lospilotos - You do indeed, but if he was just implementing a procedure, surely he was just doing his job. No?

60009

23rd Dec 2009, 10:26

Thad Jarvis: It's all just part of the grand plan to get runways extended everywhereSo it would seem, but looks like the additional aircraft deployed to Prestwick might be filling a gap for a while first... :-

Glasgow Prestwick Airport_News (http://www.gpia.co.uk/general/newsItem.asp?NewsItemID=369)

Mr Angry from Purley

23rd Dec 2009, 10:27

:\PIK not exactly busiest airport in the world and i would be sure crew would be going dead slow and it just kept rolling. Had one at EMA a few years ago on A300 (not me personally)

Bad Robot

23rd Dec 2009, 10:29

It will be interesting to see what speed they were doing at the turn off.

BR.

maxred

23rd Dec 2009, 10:32

I have never seen a Rynair 73 go dead slow at Prestwick. Fast taxi appears the norm:} In fairness conditions appear bad so benefit of the doubt to the crew.

lospilotos

23rd Dec 2009, 10:32

@Mr_Meatbomb: To evacuate using slides always adds an extra risk of personal injury. There seems to have been no apparent danger to either passengers, crew nor aircraft, hence to reason to perform an emergency evacuation. After listening to an interview of one of the passengers, he described it as the a/c "coming to a shuttering stop" but he did not even realize they had gone off the runway....

@Heli...: I´m not saying the cpt was a hero, not at all like Captain Sullenberger of the famous "Hudson river" who was doing.... errrhhh... let's see, that right: his job....

Capt Ted Crilly

23rd Dec 2009, 10:32

not a bit worried ;)

we are big boys we can handle the pressure and the persecution :E

pls dont cry for us your tears are not wanted here.

on piste again,

was flying all last week through out europe and every destination (SWE/GER/POL/LAT) i went to was capable of providing breaking actions and keeping the runway clear from contamination during percipitation

why cant we,after 5 days of continous bad weather do the same in the uk.

does anybody know why coefficients or braking actions are not supplied in the uk? is it for litigation reasons?

thanks in advance to anyone who can give me the answer to that :ok:

TheBeak

23rd Dec 2009, 10:34

Too true to the above, have you seen them at Stansted? It's insane. To be fair to them though they do operate over 1000 flights a day so they are entitled to nearly kill some poeple at least once every few days.

Bealzebub

23rd Dec 2009, 10:35

Is an aircraft sliding off the taxi way onto grass considered a serious enough incident to evacuate passengers via the emergency slides and not the aircraft steps?

I would have thought that getting everyone off as quickly as possible would have been paramount?

No it isn't. An aircraft getting a wheel stuck in the mud is not grounds for risking the probability of injury of sending passengers down evacuation slides. They are reserved for those rare occaissions when there is a high follow on risk after an incident or accident. It is similar to you getting a wheel stuck in mud whilst turning your car into your driveway. An inconvenience, but not really grounds for leaping out of the drivers seat onto the lawn with your arms covering your head! It is a stuck aircraft, not a hand grenade that the pin has fallen out of.

TheBeak

23rd Dec 2009, 10:40

From a passenger:

Mr Paton said the plane came off the end of the runway "just at the corner where it starts to turn round".

Undue respect for the conditions would be my (un)fair assumption. Slow down to a stop if necessary. To be genuinely fair though, mistakes happen and the pilots certainly don't deserve to be in trouble, they will have learned from it and be all the safer as a consequence.

theredbarron

23rd Dec 2009, 10:48

As this is apparently a skid-off incident and not a mis-judged turn then surely the actions of the airport operator and ATC must come into question more than procedures in Ryanair. i.e. presumably air traffic either directed the aircraft to this taxiway, or allowed the captain his own discretion. In either case there is therefore a presumption that the taxiway was ice-free and safe to use.

I suspect that PIK's snow and ice clearance, and runway and taxiway inspection regime will come under scrutiny.

Bealzebub

23rd Dec 2009, 10:53

Would I be right in thinking it would cost money and time to replace the evacuation slides?
Yes, everything about an incident will cost time and money. However the slides are irrelevant unless I missed the part where the aircraft caught fire. It is stuck in the grassy area, why are you obsessing about the slides?

Telstar

23rd Dec 2009, 11:04

Let's put this one to bed once and for all.

Ryanair has a very sophisticated Operational Flight Data Monitoring (OFDM) system in place. This little box of tricks can see almost everything that happens during a flight and if a parameter is exceeded when you land the data is sent by a GSM sim card to mother. Taxi speeds are a very hot topic and you will get a letter for even a fractional breach. Taxi speeds allowed are 30kts on a straight taxiway, 15 kts on the apron, 10kts on a 90 degree turn and if backtracking an active (N.B active) runway 50kts. Those are for good braking action much lower limits exist if slippery conditions exist. I've seen letters sent to Captains for 32kts instead of 30kts and one persistant offender who was told he wouldn't be taxyng any Ryanair aircraft ever again if he didn't play by the rules.

Now.

Can we drop all this horse manure about Ryanair aircraft taxying too fast? It's just not true.

Capt Ted Crilly

23rd Dec 2009, 11:09

not to mention the 10kt and 5kt limits imposed under slippery and contaminated surfaces.:)

Red Paddy

23rd Dec 2009, 11:10

PIK earlier this week -a couple of observations. Slush contamination reported with no braking action available. All other open runways in the UK I saw were in much better condition. It was unusual to see a runway with such visible contamination and no ongoing snowfall at the time. That is to say that no further apparant action was being taken to deice the runway in between snow showers.

Sympathy to the crew and to all the idiots shooting their mouths off here, unless you have been there/done that, keeping said mouth shut is the best option.

lospilotos

23rd Dec 2009, 11:10

Not to forget 5 kts when doing turns in slippery conditions...

Bengerman

23rd Dec 2009, 11:21

Telstar, nice to see that Ryanair has a healthy, inclusive flight safety culture!

Telstar

23rd Dec 2009, 11:25

Ted and Los,

No sooner had I hit submit then I knew some sharp eyed young gun would point that out...:ok:

Of course one would have to be informed of a braking action in the first place, which those funny little people from the you-kay don't. Ho Hum.

Bengerman, What do you want? If you are exceeding the limitations you get asked nicely twice not to do it. If you do it a third time you get called for a chat with your base OFDM administrator. If you persist you are likely to get a spanking. Is that not entirely reasonable? How does your airline deal with such issues? Serious question. That presuming you are an airline spotter and not a spotty teenage spotter.

Torque Tonight

23rd Dec 2009, 11:27

We've been going around corners in the last few days at an absolute crawl, maybe 2-3 kts, with diffferential thust, and still the nosewheel has been skipping out. Some taxiways and aprons have been in a shocking condition. After finishing my last flight yesterday I went down the steps and promptly slipped on compacted snow and landed on my ar$e in a crumpled heap.

Emergency evacuation for an event like this - NO WAY. A dead cert way of turning a minor mishap with no injuries into an incident/accident with several injuries. If an aeroplane is on fire you'll risk a few broken limbs to save the lives of the majority of passengers, but why risk injuries when people can just use the steps in a calm, ordered and normal fashion.

benjamin.dordoigne

23rd Dec 2009, 11:27

Ryanair's "secret" memo over approach safety, February 7, 2007 (http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.timesonline.co.uk%2Ftol%2Ftravel%2Fnews %2Farticle1343517.ece)

I think that I will never fly with Ryan Scare!

Data Dad

23rd Dec 2009, 11:31

Capt Ted Crilly

does anybody know why coefficients or braking actions are not supplied in the uk? is it for litigation reasons?

I cannot give you a 'full' answer other than the UK CAA insist that friction measuring devices (mu-meter etc) with todays technology are unreliable in conditions of slush and wet snow. Most snow in the UK seems to fall into the 'Wet' category...

The instructions for UK Controllers are contained in the Manual of Air Traffic Service Part One (CAP493) and are quite clear in what we as controllers are allowed to do (my emboldening)

"In conditions of slush or thin deposits of wet snow, friction measuring devices can
produce inaccurate readings. The Snow and Ice Table below applies only in conditions of compacted snow or ice. Therefore, in conditions of slush, or uncompacted snow, no plain language estimates of braking action derived from those readings shall be passed to pilots. In this case, pilots shall be informed on the RTF that measurements of co-efficients of friction are unreliable in conditions of slush or thin deposits of wet snow and, consequently, braking action assessments are not available. For readings obtained under these conditions, the code number 99 shall be used in the SNOWTAM and METAR message."

Working as I do at what is one of the UK's snowiest airports (it's not known as the Ice-Station for nothing :ok:) I can add that in practice whenever the airport authority carry out friction tests in slush/wet snow they don't even tell US the figures recorded. We very much rely on pilot assessments which frankly vary considerably from one aircraft to the next.

We may not like it but our (ATCOs and Airport Operators) hands are tied by the CAA.

I suspect (all my own opinion of course) that the CAA are "worried" that a mu-meter run will produce figures that seem to be 'good' and the next aircraft goes sliding off the end and the lawyers get involved. Instead we have this 'system' that places the ball TOTALLY in the pilots court and if the crew decide its ok to land and then go off the end it will be the crew's fault and no-one elses.

Totally unsatisfactory imho

Safe Flying

DD

TOWTEAMBASE

23rd Dec 2009, 11:44

good job your punters were not standing at the time hey Mr O'leary, maybe now that idea will take a back seat

Capt Ted Crilly

23rd Dec 2009, 11:46

Thanks for that info DD much appreciated.

It does seem to be completely unacceptable from where I am sitting not to furnish the crew with the info on r/w state.

Thanks again chap,happy christmas.

benji,

the memo issued from the board was to advise the pilot group that if a flight is not stabilised by 500ft agl vmc or 1000ft agl imc that the crew were to execute a go-around with a no blame policy.

we did have a problem for a while with high energy approaches,so this is how we erradicated the problem.

Brookmans Park

23rd Dec 2009, 11:59

Two other FR "excursions" were at Charleroi(200) and E Mids

M609

23rd Dec 2009, 12:01

Therefore, in conditions of slush, or uncompacted snow, no plain language estimates of braking action derived from those readings shall be passed to pilots

The Mu meter is rubish in wet conditions, alle friction devices are. Norway outlawed the reporting of friction coefficient from all types of frition testers. Since last year the field maint dept. report to ATC using the Poor, poor-medium, medium etc scale. (1-5 scale) The guys doing the test can still use the friction tester, but have to apply common sense to the results, i.e do the numbers seem plausible, and then convert to the plain language "scale)

At Torp some years back the tester gave numbers in the mid 30s, even when the inspection vehicle had trouble keeping straight down the rwy. Aircraft ended up in the RESA. Slush and friction testers don´t mix.

In the same way they report worse than actual conditions on other occation, ex: Thin layer of dry snow on sanded ice. Friction tester spits out numbers in the low 20s. 737 reports BA med-good 2 minutes later.

A frition tester does not has the same properties as the tires of a 60T airliner.

The concept of not reporting anyting at all seems a bit "novel" :ugh:

Callsign Kilo

23rd Dec 2009, 12:02

Great attitude. So statiscally you're pilots are going to kill someone soon? But hey we should accept that so your company can keep on growing.

No Beak, not the case and you know it. Despite what your personal view of the company, its crew and its procedures may in fact be. I think the point that the original poster was making is that as capacity and frequency increase the possibity of incident/occurance also increases. However, as a direct result, the training and procedure that we are instructed to adhere to are there to protect us and reduce the potential for incident.

While any 'Ryanair jet off end of runway' type report will nearly always lead to the inevitable 'What were the two jokers at the front thinking of' type question we must also remember that not every incident/occurance is directly attributable to their actions. I will await to see the outcome of the report before I come to the conclusion that the Captain attempted to taxi with gusto on an iced over piece of tarmac.

Until that time I will be thankful that everyone onboard is OK and remain sympathetic to the crew involved. Operationally, the last few days have been difficult with the weather and conditions lending an unhelpful hand.

Happy Christmas

zerotohero

23rd Dec 2009, 12:12

I love how in that report they talk about the huge pressures of a 25min turnaround and how we break our necks to do it.

Personally I could not give a monkeys about 25mins, if the ground staff are good and manage it bonus, if they dont then I write a delay code on the v report and crack on with my day not giving it a second thought!

4greens!

23rd Dec 2009, 12:40

Especially as ground is highly likely to be frozen solid and uneven ,probably resulting in further injuries

Bearcat

23rd Dec 2009, 12:57

i wonder did they land deep...............??

LetsFlyAway

23rd Dec 2009, 13:04

Correct me if im wrong, however, there is some discussion about deploying the slides.

The slides were never deployed. Passengers disembarked via the stairs on the front of the aircraft.

"Passengers disembarked normally and were bussed to the terminal." quote from bbc.co.uk

Binder

23rd Dec 2009, 13:34

Sorry to disagree Telstar but having observed RYR over the years I can say that RYR do Taxi expeditiously when there is no apparent advantage to be gained.

Even taxiing onto stand at 'break neck' speed. Why oh Why?

However. If you are trying to turn on sheet ice it doesn't matter if you are ten knots or one knot.

There but for the Grace of God....

Safe flying.

Binder

off watch

23rd Dec 2009, 13:47

Actually chaps, I heard the braking action coefficients broadcast on the PIK ATIS, so they were available - & no, I'm not saying what they were, as it will only produce more dross from the anti-RYR & flight sim squads :*

runway watcher

23rd Dec 2009, 14:00

Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
Aircraft is now on move and appears to be off the grass and back on the taxyway. Good job all round. Old hands here were talking about the three days it took to dig out a VC-10 years ago.

FLYENG

23rd Dec 2009, 14:01

I was operating last night and remember R13 at PIK as snowtam deposits (item f) as the above, decode WETor water patches,WET or water patches and end third as ICE. We talked about only two thirds of the rwy being practically available, in the event of us having to go there.

SLF3b

23rd Dec 2009, 14:03

Ryanair does not have a public image that would allow it to survive a serious accident - the passengers would walk away in droves. As a matter of corporate survival, they have to take safety seriously - and I am sure they do. I can think of many reasons not to fly Ryanair - but concern about safety is not one of them.

Safety is not about how much you spend - it is about how you spend it. And I would guess they have a pretty good grip on that issue too.

HOMER SIMPSONS LOVECHILD

23rd Dec 2009, 14:08

Just drove past. Ac is about 45 degreees to rw with nose in the dirt and tail still just about encroaching onto threshold of RW13. Clearly in the process of clearing rw when physics took over.
Surely non connected but, half a mile further down road, standing shivering at a public bus stop looking a bit like Albanian refugees, a two stripe FO and a Hostie complete with cheap nasty looking bags and anoracks.:hmm:
An image of glamour and excitement that will no doubt inspire a whole new generation of sky gods!

smith

23rd Dec 2009, 14:33

World Air Images - EI-DHD (http://www.worldairimages.com/geek/mediagallery/media.php?f=0&sort=0&s=20091223055146990)

Latest picture here, looks like the a/c was carrying a lot of inertia to end up that far in?

allanmack

23rd Dec 2009, 14:34

"at a public bus stop looking a bit like Albanian refugees, a two stripe FO and a Hostie complete with cheap nasty looking bags and anoracks"

Ah the season of goodwill to all men (and women). The level of arrogance and inflated ego on this forum sometimes beggars belief. :=

Otto Throttle

23rd Dec 2009, 14:39

Latest picture here, looks like the a/c was carrying a lot of inertia to end up that far in?

Doubtful. Think how far your car skids when it hits ice, even at very low speeds, and then remember your car has a wheel at each corner, is designed for ground ops and weighs considerably less than 60 tons.

Jesus, did I just defend the Flying Circus???? :eek:

Pizza Express

23rd Dec 2009, 14:49

Come on The Real Slim Shady, tell us how FR's Training is so good, please please. They leave the tarmac so much these days they may as well fit skids!

Bally Heck

23rd Dec 2009, 14:52

Ryanair's safety culture is summed up in this quote:

"Michael O’Leary, the Ryanair chief executive, has responded to the incidents by issuing a memo to all pilots telling them that they will be demoted the first time they make a dangerous approach and sacked for a second offence."

O'Leary leading the way in embracing the new "blame culture".

I am not Ryanair basher. I think that the vast majority of the crews are competent and professional, but put under unfair pressure by their chief executive/management. The cause of this incident will be revealed in the fullness of time. For the present, as long as O'Leary or someone of his mindset is in charge of the airline, neither I nor my family will travel with them.

babemagnet

23rd Dec 2009, 14:57

That plane made an overrun if you see how far it is in the grass it had a very high speed!

doubtfire

23rd Dec 2009, 15:05

I landed at Stansted a few nights back after significant snow, runway shut, runway open, more snow and so on. Rolled to the end of runway 04 and vacated at about 2-3 knots gs in an inch of snow. After a 13 hour duty day I saw no need to save a couple more minutes and took what I considered due care and consideration with regards the conditions. No it wasn`t ice (nor nice), but if it had of been, I still doudt I`d of managed to slide a distance the length of the a/c onto the grass. Not at 2-3 knots and taking a racing line to avoid sharp corners. I`ve no axe to grind whichever the airline, but seeing the pictures of how far this a/c was of the runway/taxiway tells me.......far to much speed/energy. It`s not rocket science. If landing on a contaminated runway, feel free to let rabbits, snails etc overtake you when going round corners.

fireflybob

23rd Dec 2009, 15:15

No comment to make on this incident.

But remember reading in the recent past (might have been a post on Pprune) a comment from a pilot who had done many landings on slippery runways in large transport a/c. His advice was always bring the a/c to a complete halt on the runway before proceeding further. He adamant that if all a/c did this we wouldn't see the slide off at the end incidents as a/c vacate the runway.

Of course, we might not be too popular with ATC and following a/c if we did this on a regular basis.

Ivor Fynn

23rd Dec 2009, 15:24

I can't believe we haven't had comment/spin from Leo Hairy Camel or The Real Slim Shadey yet!

Ivor

40&80

23rd Dec 2009, 15:40

I would be interested to know if Ryan have recommended max taxi speeds for dry and different max taxi speed for wet and different max taxi speed for contamination...straight line and turns.

As an ex L1011 low vis pilot trained by BA way back in 1975/6... we were thouroughly trained on when to use various taxi speeds and to know the speed limitations...the First Officer and Flight engineer were required to positively monitor the captains taxi speed v the taxi chart and call any deviations by observing a fitted cockpit ground speed monitor during taxi...apart from their other duties...20kts/9knots and 3kts and avoid 120degree turns off the runway remain burned in what remains of my brain.

captplaystation

23rd Dec 2009, 15:44

Yes they do.

Isn't it astonishing . . . not, that Ryanair falling off a taxiway generates so far 5 pages, whereas an actual CRASH in Jamaica by the same aircraft type is now running at only 3 pages.
Go figure.

whatdoesthisbuttondo

23rd Dec 2009, 15:57

captplatstation I think it's because ryanair are regarded as 'being a bit dodgy' and American Airlines probably aren't.

People unfortunately still associate all this race to the bottom of the industry terms and conditions and service with safety and thus when ryanair have any kind of event like this people love to shout "I told you so".

If Ryanair wasn't such a shonky outfit to work for then I'm sure people wouldn't make such a big deal about it.

The other reason of course is that this is a U.K. based website and the accident happened in the U.K.

OntimeexceptACARS

23rd Dec 2009, 15:59

When I last worked with RYR, as part of ground crew, I did once overhear the priceless ATC transmission : "Ryanair xxx, you are now clear to hurtle on to stand 1A". Made me snigger....

The old -200 series could regularly be heard shutting down no.1 engine at approximately 2 stands from the final parking position, with enough kinetic energy to make it on to stand and still have some 'bounce' in the nosewheel oleo as it came to a stop. Not scientific evidence of fast taxiing, but we all know what they were/are like. :}

Golf Charlie Charlie

23rd Dec 2009, 16:22

Despite the number of thread pages, I thought it was telling that the American incident has had slightly more views than the Ryanair incident (as I write). Sorry for the off-topic.

Cloud Bunny

23rd Dec 2009, 16:27

but we all know what they were/are like.

What we were/are like is bloody professional and damn good at our jobs. If you could see some of the places we have to plonk down 60tonnes of jet in conditions far worse than anything the UK has seen this last few days then you might change your utterly pathetic and inaccurate opinion. I take personal offence to that comment. Every day I go to work it's with the same atttitude and that is to assure the safety and security of everyone on board my aeroplane and if that means being 10, 20, 30 mintutes late I couldn't give a toss.
We have a strict set of SOPs and procedures that we all (aside from a few - that even the great and glorious BA have) stick to.
I am sick and tired of the utter ****e that is banded around this bloody website from prats who know :mad: all about what it is like to operate a jet airliner and the potential traps and pitfalls that wait around the corner for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US IN EVERY SINGLE AIRLINE. Okay so today we've had a mishap, could have happened to anyone but I'm very glad ours turned out the way it did in comparison to what occured to AA in the Carribean this morning. But hey - they work for a legacy carrier so what ever the outcome of that investigation they should be paraded as heros and spit on the likes of us plebs that work for Ryanair.:mad::mad::mad:

Teddy Robinson

23rd Dec 2009, 16:29

That was no gentle slide off the edge of the icy tarmac ... it crossed and bedded into to a considerable distance of outfield.

Whilst I doubt that a crew would willingly make that kind of excursion, surely the underlying culture has to come under examination ?

Statements from the CEO : you will be fired if you do what has been revealed in a report.

Subplot : people are scared of being fired by not turning up for work after their son has died, ( and has an incident).

Presumably and anecdotally that "culture" extends well beyond the immediate incidents referred to.

I witnessed another incident recently with an FR aircraft leaving the departure end of a 3355 m runway at a height of less than 50 feet with what sounded like a very late selection of TOGA ... intersections E and F confused in the rush perhaps ?

That one appears nowhere but my whole crew saw it.

whatdoesthisbuttondo

23rd Dec 2009, 16:58

I don't know why all these 'other airline' pilots are making disparaging comments about ryanair, when there is clearly nothing at all dodgy about them, to be sure, to be sure.

All these off runway excursions they have are NOTHING to do with ryanair in any way whatsoever and could happen to anyone!

Teddy Robinson

23rd Dec 2009, 17:11

who is not under undue commercial pressure every moment of their working lives...

Everyone who is in da biz has it, but most have the facility to :

A) switch it off, because today is not a normal day.

or

B) Tell em :mad: off because today is a very abnormal day.

Consider Pavlov and his dog perhaps ?

Basic airmanship countermands company dogma in conditions which demand it, if one is programmed any other way, one may find oneself on the grass with no good explanation to offer the people who state that they will support you.

Then the buck stops with a very sudden jolt.

Wacked

23rd Dec 2009, 17:16

3800hr Line training captains teaching 250hr co-pilots who become 3800hr line training captains. The experience drain in ryanair continues. When you couple this to fatigue and pressure it's only a matter of time before the worst happens. The only thing saving them is a very good set of SOP's.

Bearcat

23rd Dec 2009, 17:21

from perusal of the pic supplied like a previous poster said, it just did'nt slide off the taxiway.....lot of inertia there.

A worthy competitor for a ploughing competition.

Flap 5

23rd Dec 2009, 17:28

Runway length at Prestwick is 9,800 feet. Plenty to slow up in for a 737, even with an icy runway. The crew were trying to turn off the runway while going too fast.

I had a similar situation in an A330. Tried to turn off a runway at the fast turnoff in heavy rain. Turned the nose wheel steering at low speed but the aircraft kept straight ahead. I slowed down to an absolute crawl and carefully turned off at the end of the runway. Simples.

CommandB

23rd Dec 2009, 18:18

Whats it like to never make mistakes...?

If this was any other carrier you'd all be saying what a great job the pilots did as noone was hurt - as previous "incidents" have shown.
You all make me laugh, making assumptions about Ryanair and their crew.
Just because a Captain has 3800 hours, does not make him less able to make a sound decision compared to someone of 10,000 hours. Every scenario is different.
At the end of the day we are all the same - we are professional airline pilots, we've all done the same training (give or take a few changes over the years) - so the fact we have Ryanair printed on the side of our a/c and you dont, doesnt make us somehow worse than you or make you infaliable to making a wrong decision. If we started flying for BA or someother "respected" airline, does that mean we automatically become better pilots, no of course not. So why some of you b!tch and moan about how bad we are, when you dont even know 1/8 of the workforce let alone all of us, is quite frankly showing your naievity.
The sooner some of you get off your high horse and realise you are nothing special, the better. :ugh:

TheRedVonBaron

23rd Dec 2009, 18:22

Just thought I would post a message I saw on celtic FC fan website of a person who claims to have been a passenger on the flight. I have only edited the foul language and sexist remarks. Interesting perspective if its authentic, which I cannot vouch for.

"I was on that plane today. Fame at last !!

Wasn't all that bad.
Dunno if it was the ice, the pilot making a ***k up (XXXXX XXXXX XXX ), or a combination of both.

The runway was like a ***king ice rink, or at least the bit we skidded at.
We landed at some speed and just didn't really slow down until a ***king mile up the runway.

The XXXX in the hot seat tried to turn round the corner at the top of the runway at a ridiculous speed and it was into the field from there... Either that or it was a saftey move she tried because if she had just went straight on we would have ended up on the A77!

The ryanair statment about it already being under control and taxiing in is a load of ***h. Seemed ***king all over the place from the minute we touched down.

How the ***k can a plane be allowed to land on a runway akin to an icerink at however many hundred miles an hour is the scary bit!"

JW411

23rd Dec 2009, 18:24

As a matter of idle curiousity, the MS Simulator drivers, general hysterics and FR haters might care to read a reply that I recently made on:

Questions
UK Airfields in Snow
Posting #8

It really doesn't matter how long a runway is once you are on the ground, with the brakes full on and full reverse selected if the braking action is nil and ATC have failed to promulgate this vital piece of information.

I was lucky.

Although the cockpit was over the grass, the nosewheel was still on the black bit.

It was an experience that I would not like to repeat.

cleo

23rd Dec 2009, 18:33

Hmmm - if they were heading for the A77 they had a bigger problem than anyone realised as the road at the end of RWY31 is the A79! The A77 is at the RWY31 undershoot.
If the reporter's geography is as accurate as his assessment of the braking action how credible is he?:suspect:
On a more serious note it could have been a lot worse. No-one was injured and I'm sure all agencies concerned will learn something from the incident.

TheRedVonBaron

23rd Dec 2009, 18:43

If the reporter's geography is as accurate as his assessment of the braking action how credible is he?

As I said, I cant vouch for the guy. Easy enough to mix up road names. I do it myself from time to time despite getting an A in geography :E

My personal opinion of the incident is that there is someone to blame. That person will be found out when an investigation is concluded on the incident. Until that point, we shouldnt make wild speculation.

q1W2e3R4t5

23rd Dec 2009, 18:45

The investigation will provide the factors that allowed this to happen.

I have landed at PIK for the last two days and have to say its a disgrace that it was allowed to operate.

On the first day it could maybe have been forgiven for snow and ice clearing in progress but to return today and find runways and taxi ways still covered in compacted snow/ice is a joke. They seemed quite happy to keep operating with these conditions. It was hard to even stand on the apron without falling over. In the same days i've flown into london, which experienced the same levels of snowfall and all runways and taxiways were clear, deiced and maintained.

I feel the airport has alot to answer for regarding this incident, but the crew will more than likely take the hit. If you had a collision in your car and the police were involved, no matter what the speed limit for the road is, it's driving at a speed to suit the conditions that is the factor.

A lesson for everyone at this busy time of year to slow down whether it be aircraft or car. Have a safe happy Christmas.

Say Mach Number

23rd Dec 2009, 19:24

American Airlines less dodgy than Ryanair. Jurys out on that one;

AA A300 New York
AA B757 Cali
etc etc etc

Teddy Robinson

23rd Dec 2009, 19:30

Nah .. Christmas-tides are not he order of the day here. Why and how is the order: if WE deal with these conditions, and somehow fail to fall off the runway/taxiway perhaps it is because we can exercise professional judgment, why should we sit back and ignore a culture that prefers to call people contractors ... nothing to do with the company of course.

OntimeexceptACARS

23rd Dec 2009, 19:30

Cloud Bunny

You need to lighten up a little. At no time did I suggest FR drivers were less than professional. They taxi faster, more often than other drivers. FACT. We know there are bonuses to be made. Don't insult the rest of us. And if I really thought they were dangerous/unprofessional, or anything else you are alluding to, I wouldn't have stood anywhere near the head of stand. I thought a little light humour wasn't too big an issue, though I recognise other circumstances make things very very challenging during landing.

Sorry if I offended you, it wasn't the intention.

OTEA

Say Mach Number

23rd Dec 2009, 20:01

Bonuses to be had! I wish.... No pay rise 3rd year running.....

HOMER SIMPSONS LOVECHILD

23rd Dec 2009, 20:22

For the benefit of "Alanmac" and anyone else who found my remark about the FR crew standing around the bus stop looking like "Albanian refugees" arrogant.
As a lad I remember seeing the Pan Am Atlantic Barons coming out of the limo at PIK having hotaced at Turnberry Hotel (where the staff knew them by name)As they strolled out to their 707's I recal thinking they looked pretty cool .(I was just a lad!) I was merely highlighting the difference to todays scene.
If that's arrogance so be it, but I feel it's more a sad reflection of how times have changed for the Airline Pilot.
Clear enough?

Lazy skip

23rd Dec 2009, 20:47

Where does Panam overnight nowadays?

old-timer

23rd Dec 2009, 20:58

:ok:saves on landing fees ? - I'll take the grass please,

seriously though, glad it was no worse than airframe damage & they all got out ok:ok:

Teddy Robinson

23rd Dec 2009, 22:42

perhaps that explains the 3500 + meter @ 50 feet thing ! they just got runway 13 & 31 confused ! poor lambs ....

Talk this one into the ground guys and girls ... see my previous !

If the management of this airline thinks they can " sustain a major hull loss" as they claim .. the culture is going the right way to achieve it.

mercurydancer

23rd Dec 2009, 22:48

I know this is sticking my head above the parapet but here goes..

I do fly Ryanair and found them to be a responsible airline regarding safety. Booking a flight with them is like being mugged and check-in is an abysmal experience but regards to flight safety I have no problem.

There were some posts referrring to landing parameters and the various interviews without coffee which may result from those parameters being exceeded. This leads to the question that are the parameters set at such a close limit to normal practice that an inconsequential breach is acted upon or are the parameters set that unless something exceptional is happening then those parameters should not be breached?

MD

Teddy Robinson

23rd Dec 2009, 22:58

or not reported unless there is an accident ?

Checkboard

24th Dec 2009, 01:24

To echo above and reiterate what I said before, PIK was in the worst condition of any UK runway I have operated into in the last week. By a long shot.

If you haven't been there in the last week keep your opinions to yourselves. And that includes MS Flight Sim.
So PIK management will be in real trouble when the ASR you filed makes its way through the system, and the "Poor" braking report you gave the tower will be on the tapes. Problem solved! :ok:

clicker

24th Dec 2009, 06:19

Perhaps one of you good folk can clear my mind over one small thing I'm puzzled over.

If the aircraft has slipped on the taxiway then would not the braking action figures, published or otherwise, be irelevant. So far however I seen some reports saying this is a runway overshoot and others say it's a taxiway incident

If the taxiways were not kept to the same standard as the runway then its not a surprise that this incident has happened. (Don't suppose we can call it Murphys law nowadays?)

D O Guerrero

24th Dec 2009, 08:19

Landed at PIK yesterday, a few hours after the incident. 10mm of slush on the runway. Taxiway deposits were the worst I've ever seen. Autobrake max and full reverse had us off 31 by Kilo. Lack of braking action info was indeed frustrating and the snowtam didn't really help much either.
Unlike some of the people who put the word "fact" at the end of sentences, usually in caps, that is actual fact... I can understand entirely why the crew concerned may have felt the conditions were better than they were.

flap15

24th Dec 2009, 09:54

turbine100

24th Dec 2009, 10:12

no other major reports in the press of other operators aircraft skidding off on landing or turning off in the UK during this recent snow / ice except Ryanair.

Would the UK CAA do anything to the operator or the airport?

Telstar

24th Dec 2009, 10:12

Ryanairs approach to risk is questionable.

No, it isn't.

The rules are very clear on this, we require a minimum of 30m to be cleared. If what you claim is true, then the crew were either ignorant of company rules or felt they didn't apply to them. There would have been no case to answer for had they stayed put, as I did at another airport this week.

D O Guerrero

24th Dec 2009, 10:33

Turbine - it depends who is found to be at fault during the investigation. You're right that no other operators seem to have had any similar incidents this week, but then that is no reason whatsoever to assume that any one party is to blame. Perhaps you should just keep quiet until some facts are established?
I'd also echo Telstars comments - we are specifically not allowed to land or takeoff if the cleared width is less than 30m. I would be very surprised to find that RYR aircraft were using a runway with 23m cleared width. If it is true, then 3 Captains in the space of 2 hours decided to disregard company SOPs. In my experience, that sounds unlikely. If it did happen, they are likely to face some serious questions without the benefit of tea or biscuits, as no doubt Flap15 will have raised a Chirp on the subject.

RTR

24th Dec 2009, 10:59

I suppose one must accept that lessons will be learned - an oft said cliché but oft ignored. From experience I have always been 'surprised' at FR's taxi speeds (I won't offer an estimate) but IMHO it is generally too fast.

ONE scenario, it would be fair to state, is that speed was involved as was taxiway condition followed by a slide.

Will lessons be learned? If it happens again = NO - on the other hand?

flap15

24th Dec 2009, 11:00

Good point I have a blank Chirp and will drop it in the post.

suasdaguna

24th Dec 2009, 11:14

lets call a spade a shovel here......excessive taxi speeds in freezing temps, with ice covered taxi ways, contaminated rwys etc will award anyone an automatic entry into an off piste event.

I was in the same neck of the woods yesterday, it was treacherous but so is all of europe and we crawled around......no drama.....jezuz the thoughts of heading up to giggistown for a friendly de brief with the boss is the stuff of horror movies.

Flightmech

24th Dec 2009, 11:25

Flaps15,

Ryanairs approach to risk is not questionable. I landed in an MD-11 in SNN early Monday morning. Shortly afterwards a NOTAM was issued that the braking action was poor to nil. An OMNI DC-10 diverted to DUB. Eventually the braking action became good and the MD-11 departed. A few hours later, I paxed back to STN on Ryanair. We boarded and sat on the aircraft doors closed for an hour and a half because the braking action was once again below limits. Eventually there was some cloud cover, the temp rose and after several runway treatments we departed along with many others when the numbers became good. We were the second one out I believe after an EI A320 to LHR.

F14

24th Dec 2009, 11:28

EMA was not contaminated, just slippery outside of 23m. The Easyjet guys didn't want to go,it's their call. Ryanair operate to many serious cold weather destinations. Crews are trained to take off and land on slippery and/or contimated surfaces.

If the runway is slippery from 23-46 metres and you have the figures you can go. QED.

This not passing BA is crimnal, UK CAA need to be taken to task.

korrol

24th Dec 2009, 11:38

No doubt whatever happened here will be established in due course. However I just wonder about the preservation of evidence in this and other incidents.

For example I am still puzzled by the reports of the Ryanair daytime flight from Niederrhain to Ciampino airport in September 2005. This is the one where the Polish PF was newly-bereaved and the PNF was was relatively inexperienced. They failed to land in a thunderstorm at Ciampino and eventually touched down at Pescaro.

Here,the Irish Times reported- The pilots " failed to preserve the flight’s records in the aircraft’s black boxes as required by Ryanair regulation".
Is that possible?

D O Guerrero

24th Dec 2009, 11:39

Thought there might be more to it... Thanks f14.

The Real Slim Shady

24th Dec 2009, 13:56

At EMA on the 21st(?) only 23m of runway width had been cleared. Two Easyjet aircraft waited 2 hours for a minimum of 30m to be cleared however two Ryanair's departed and one landed before this operation had been completed. Now the AOC may be different but the laws of physics do not differenciate. I would be most interested to hear the Captains justification for departing from a contaminated runway. Ryanairs approach to risk is questionable.

Until you know all the facts I suggest you keep your loud mouth unsubstantiated opinions to yourself.

Ryanair crews undertake specific approved narrow runway training and operate under a different authority to easyjet.

Furthermore, I didn't notice anyone question the Norwegian Shuttle 737NG Captaan about his decision NOT to deice in freezing rain at SXF last week when everyone else, Ryanair included, was deicing.

Ryanair's approach to risk is that we took a 1 hour delay to deice because we have a clean wing policy.

Checkboard

24th Dec 2009, 14:09

Ryanair's approach to risk is that we took a 1 hour delay to deice because we have a clean wing policy.

Many (not all) operators ban operations completely in freezing rain, Slim :hmm:

Furthermore, I didn't notice anyone question the Norwegian Shuttle 737NG Captaan about his decision NOT to deice

Can't seem to find the thread about that one! Can't comment if I can't find it! :hmm:

Aldente

24th Dec 2009, 16:18

Slim, you might want to check Ryanair's Winter Ops Manual , which states "minimum cleared width is 30 metres for take off and landing"

special training for narrow runway operations is for operations to destinations such as Memmingen and nothing to do with winter ops. Ryanair aircraft cannot take off or land on less than 30 metres cleared width regardless of what training they had.

Tsk tsk , you should know that - hardly future BC material is it ?

nicolai

24th Dec 2009, 16:35

The pilots " failed to preserve the flight’s records in the aircraft’s black boxes as required by Ryanair regulation".
Is that possible?

The final report (http://www.aaiu.ie/upload/general/11712-ANSV_EIDAV-0.PDF) says (page 11) Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) data was not available for the investigation because the ANSV was informed of the event only after a few months from its occurrence. The information regarding the phase of the flight under investigation had been overwritten during the subsequent operational activity of the aircraft concerned. After landing at Pescara, the crew did not disconnect the CVR power supply, as prescribed in the operator’s procedures, by pulling the relevant circuit breaker.

Not the first time, won't be the last time... especially not for crew with other things on their minds like this poor guy.

The Real Slim Shady

24th Dec 2009, 17:13

Aldente

Did I mention any minimum?

All I said was that FR crews are narrow runway trained: you may wish to note the comments earlier about 30m cleared width etc.

The small, but inescapable training issue is, regardless of the 30M rule, FR crews have SPECIFIC narrow runway training ergo, it isn't such a huge deal for us as it might be for the Orange brigade.

zerotohero

24th Dec 2009, 17:20

Polax52

I refer you to my previos post about time pressures and all that,, where are they? I dont have any in my mind from MOL when doing the operation, if it happens on time fantastic, but if it does not then who cares? I put a note about it and go home, never been called at home to ask why there was a delay? they dont need to, its in black and white, normally late fueling or slow boarding or slot or de-iceing,,,,,,,,, where are these MOL time pressures?

the day I am told to speed things up and risk safty is the day I hang up my Ryanair boots, as would be with (hopefully) all our pilots, no one tells me what to do in there, its there train set but when I am operating it I do there SOP's to the point of safty, outside the SOP's is airmanship and not cowboyness

I want to go home, dont care if its late as long as I get there.

tarnish26

24th Dec 2009, 17:57

I understand the duty runway at the time was 13 but as the norm with RYR coming from the south they elected to use 31....saves on air and taxi time........I also hear that the braking action at the stop end was reported as being poor.....also unusual if landing 31 not to be able to take the link off before the end.......OK well I guess one day the truth will come out but at the end of the day no one was hurt........well not yet anyway!!! a few weeks in O'learys salt mines should sort the problem for the poor sods involved!

c220cdi

24th Dec 2009, 18:25

Flap 15 you have demonstreted by your post very poor knowledge of boeing 737 flight crew training manual as boeing do not specify a minimum runway with. I hope you a not a boeing pilot. But hey maybe you are right and boeing are wrong. You have also demonstrated poor knowledge of eu ops regarding aoc's. As a matter of fact i hope you are not a airline pilot. So in the future dont make posts when you have no idea what wou are talking about. Let he without sin cast the first stone. This kind of incident can and do happen to any one of us.

Bearcat

24th Dec 2009, 23:34

I'm suprised Leo has not indulged us at this stage, that case of vintage Château Pétrus I sent him obviously has done the trick....happy xmas to one and all.

Bear

Checkboard

25th Dec 2009, 11:38

FR crews have SPECIFIC narrow runway training ergo, it isn't such a huge deal for us as it might be for the Orange brigade.

.. and to be fair, it seems to be working - FR haven't gone off the sides of any runways. :D

It's just the ends they have trouble with. :p

Of course, very rare to see the Orange brigade have trouble with either!

Alycidon

25th Dec 2009, 11:48

Didn't Orange slither off the TWY in AMS and clout a lamp post a few years back?

Checkboard

25th Dec 2009, 13:22

Indeed, and a very embarrassing taxi accident it was too. Lessons learnt all around and, even though it happened seven years ago those lessons are still being taught - the accident and its investigation appear in the current easyJet winter brief.

irishpilot1990

25th Dec 2009, 14:07

Guys, what do the statistics say? How many fatalities or injuries since 1985? Let the statistics do the talking not the ryr bashing know it alls. The IAA is the authority that monitors Ryr and they are regarded as one of the strictest safety conscious authorities on the globe.

RED WINGS

25th Dec 2009, 14:08

Oh Slim!!:= Now I know for sure your a flight simmer!!!
Either that or suicidal!

Hmm good will to all men though today :}

TALLOWAY

25th Dec 2009, 14:12

The IAA is the authority that monitors Ryr and they are regarded as one of the strictest safety conscious authorities on the globe.

Shouldn't comedy posts be in Jet Blast ? :p

Checkboard

25th Dec 2009, 16:15

Easy nose dived and came within about 5000ft of smashing into ground over Norwich.
Again, to be fair, you aren't actually referring to a scheduled easy flight there - you are referring to a test flight without passengers. Not quite the same, as that test flight involved deliberately turning off major systems in order to check second and third order safety backups. :=

AND the flight was recovered, and concluded successfully! :D

pilot999

25th Dec 2009, 16:23

yeh read the report. rolled 90 degrees to unload the aircraft, 100 knot over speed , rediculous plummet towards the ground, hardly your average test flight,RESULT = one very over stressed plane,

Quote "AND the flight was recovered, and concluded successfully!" onLY towards a POINT, THE PLANE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PUT IN IN THE FIRST PLACE.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Checkboard

25th Dec 2009, 16:28

ri·dic·u·lous: \rə-ˈdi-kyə-ləs\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin ridiculosus (from ridiculum jest, from neuter of ridiculus) or ridiculus, literally, laughable, from ridēre to laugh
I don't think anyone was laughing, mate. :bored:

The aircraft wasn't over-stressed. It underwent an over-speed inspection, no faults found (due to some very skilled handling), and ferried to the purchaser.

TALLOWAY

25th Dec 2009, 16:32

talloway...you tell us the stats then of how many fatalities have occured on ryr flights due to poor safety practices? 63 million people carried in last 12 months.
no fatal accident or serious injury.that sound right?
people say ryr cut corners for maintence etc. jan this year easy jet maintence proved how good it was.Easy nose dived and came within about 5000ft of smashing into ground over Norwich.

Your attention to what is written seems on a par with the incompetence of the IAA.

I never mentioned Ryanair or their safety record. I was referring to your statement about the IAA.

Do you really think that the success of Ryanair is down to the IAA ? That without such a 'robust' regulator, there would be lots of smoking holes in the ground ? They are a joke. A toothless tiger who are more akin to ostriches than striped big cats.

Seen many IAA guys out in the field in Europe checking up on Irish registered jets, the vast majority of which which are not actually based in the country ? Me neither.

Even Ryanair regularly bash them :rolleyes:

hec7or

25th Dec 2009, 17:52

70 tonne airplane and reliant robin chassis design won't give you a lot of grip at Gambon says Jezza.

irishpilot1990

25th Dec 2009, 19:04

never said it was down to the iaa...my point was if ryr were so keen on being cheap with regard to standards and maintence etc they wouldnt be based in ireland under an irish flag.....they are hugely keen on safety.As i said before...they can not afford with their business model to have an accident.

@ checkboard: no pax were on board, does that make it okay???what about the hole in the ground it was seconds from creating?!?!if that was a ryr aircraft god knows we would all have heard about it from guys on here....the fact of the matter is the mistake was made and that aircaft was within seconds of an accident!:\

blackred1443

25th Dec 2009, 19:22

As for ryr safety, how about the ciampino incident where the skipper was back at work a few days after his sons death, the knock incident, the cork incident. MOL bregging about how ryr can afford to lose 2 hulls.The ezy jet incident at norwich was a test flight. All company have had close shaves, but any company that engages in contract pilots to the extent ryr do is clearly asking for trouble

Irishpilot how long have you been working with ryr as a pilot?, how many airlines have you worked for?just trying to gauge what level of experience you have when forming your opinions

Checkboard

25th Dec 2009, 19:25

@ irishpilot * sigh * :zzz:

The reason I added the information I did, wasn't for you - it was for those who read this so that they understand your post could lead them to incorrect assumptions. :rolleyes:

Is it important that no passengers were on board on a test flight? You really want me to answer that? :hmm:

"seconds of an accident"?? Not very good at calculating rates of descent then? :hmm: Not very good at telling the truth, either?

DCA09WA023 (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20090112X35356&ntsbno=DCA09WA023&akey=1)

The aircraft was recovered without damage, the height loss was simply due to the pilot flying the aircraft out of the dive - the fact that it wasn't damaged is due to this. The dive recovery was nowhere near 5000 feet.

One day you will work for an another airline, and perhaps realise how much you need to raise your standards.

Merry Christmas ;)

in my last airline

25th Dec 2009, 19:37

It wasn't EZ maintenance doing the Southend job. The flying skills and reaction of the PIC was excellent. The cockup was down to the fact that on the previous manual reversion flight no entry was made in tech log regarding the trim inputs. The PIC gave a verbal handover to engineer and engineer put the wrong correction into the rods. That was the beginning of Swiss cheese model. The Pic was right to roll to a high bank angle as it helped balance out the g loading. Pilot999 I think you are bashing for the sake of bashing, know the facts first.

blackred1443

25th Dec 2009, 19:42

Im guessing from irishpilots posts,he has never flown for an airline and the 1990 might the year of his birth:E

Serious gaps in his knowledge, a wannabe pay to fly zero to hero for 33k im guessing

BarbiesBoyfriend

25th Dec 2009, 23:32

If Ryanair ever drop one, it's over for them.

Everyone thinks they're dodgy, but until it happens they get the benefit of the doubt.

Drop one...................:hmm:

Pizza Express

26th Dec 2009, 09:43

Slim

Its Funny how the "Orange Brigade" manage to stay on the tarmac these days. Why is that please tell me why? I think it is the case that this is a big deal for the "Pikey Brigade".

throw a dyce

26th Dec 2009, 11:32

OK I'm an ATCO and PPL.I flew with FR in a 732,when there was a large bang and thump right under my seat.I looked out the window,and there was a large oil leak pissing down the left hand side cowling of number 2.
I immediately rang for the cabin crew,and when the chief one arrived,she had a quick glance out the window,and stated ''Eh there all supposed to do that''.
I was stunned as she walked off and started handing out the pot noodles again.Kegworth?
I spoke to an engineer friend who asked if it was grounded.I had no idea but it might have spoiled the 20 min turn round.Needless to say I am very wary of travelling with them,and I'm not surprised they slid off one of the longest runways in the UK.:uhoh:

captplaystation

26th Dec 2009, 12:28

Wasn't there a warning from Danny many threads ago to stop making unjustified libellous accusations about Ryanair lest their solicitors become involved.
Speaking on behalf of circa 2000 flight deck crew, the great majority of whom do a professional job day in day out, I think it is time someone gave those solicitors a call.
These accusations of inherent "gashness" are not even remotely justified or in the slightest bit amusing.
Every company has a smattering of bad apples, with 2000 pilots, there will understandably be a few more than you would find in a company with say 100, percentage wise I have found most companies the same, believe it or not.
If you look at the sheer number of sectors operated daily, and the somewhat "marginal" facilities at some of the destinations served, it is rather difficult to compare Ryanairs record unfavourably with other companies, unless you are voicing some personal agenda.
If these unwarranted accusations don't stop, I will personally stick my oar in and stir up the sh1te in the White House . . . . Oh and BTW if you are looking for an ulterior motive to this stand I am taking, you obviously don't know who I am, I have no longer any axe to grind in that respect.
I am merely sick fed up with unwarranted slanderous accusations concerning my previous PROFESSIONAL colleagues' abilities and standard of operation.

RED WINGS

26th Dec 2009, 14:15

Ahh the Ryanair way threaten and conquer!

Captain play station, I cant believe all are bad apples. But i am guessing most people on here are simply just voicing there observations.

I think most professional pilots would be very shocked and concerned to hear an alegedly Ryan air pilot on this forum saying he de-iced then departed in FZRA!!!

fireflybob

26th Dec 2009, 14:33

Two ways of getting the tallest building in town:-

a) Build your own, or

b) Knock somebody else's building down.

Nuff sed?

D O Guerrero

26th Dec 2009, 23:48

Can someone please put this thread out of its misery? It's... just... awful.

whatdoesthisbuttondo

27th Dec 2009, 07:22

Classic ryanair.

The employees don't like people recounting their hellish experiences of their awful company so they threaten legal action.

It doesn't really matter, everyone knows what ryanair are like, they only exist because they are the cheapest and they are only the cheapest because their employees work the hardest for the least in return.

Why does anyone work there? I suppose it must be a 'I couldn't get a job anywhere else' thing. It's a shame really as when these pilots eventually can't put up with it anymore the Ts and Cs in the proper airlines will have had to decrease as they try and compete with ryanair's bottom of the industry wage bills.

The thing is all these ryanair pilots will be the ones complaining when having to work 900 hours at 65 with no real pension to look forward to. Just don't come on here complaining about it.

NOT ORANGE

27th Dec 2009, 07:46

I think that there is a trend of accidents and incidents here and that the IAA ought to be looking in to what is going wrong..... oh no they can't he retired last year!

Nicholas49

27th Dec 2009, 08:07

'whatdoesthisbuttondo' said

"The employees don't like people recounting their hellish experiences of their awful company so they threaten legal action."I don't know who you work for, is it BA? Or is it one of the other angelic airlines that never have an accident? Let me think, they were BA pilots who overrun the runway in Miami with the former prime minister on board, weren't they? Gosh, not such a dissimiliar incident was it, but ever so funny you didn't mention it!) And presumably you are making that statement knowing captplaystation's experience level? You're not just making that comment for the sake of it? Because it really is such a platitude.

Barbies Boyfriend: you said 'drop one' Sorry, could you just clarify for me, are you actually hoping for an accident with a 737-800 that potentially kills 200 people (presumably with your wife on board) in order to prove your point that 'this is what it takes'. Please do tell me if I've misunderstood you.

pilot999

27th Dec 2009, 08:33

QUOTE "It wasn't EZ maintenance doing the Southend job. The flying skills and reaction of the PIC was excellent. The cockup was down to the fact that on the previous manual reversion flight no entry was made in tech log regarding the trim inputs. The PIC gave a verbal handover to engineer and engineer put the wrong correction into the rods. That was the beginning of Swiss cheese model. The Pic was right to roll to a high bank angle as it helped balance out the g loading. Pilot999 I think you are bashing for the sake of bashing, know the facts first."

So the previous EZ pilot did a test flight, did not fill in the correct paperwork, a verbal handover , Not how i was trained in the RAF and civil world how to do test flights, The handover is more important than the flying.

As to how to unload the aircraft, that is not the correct way. It was very unconventional, unbriefed , and incorrect as stated in the AAIB report. I will not quote the report ,but read it yourself, check the vertical and forward speed and roll out height.

Basil

27th Dec 2009, 08:33

Nicholas49, re BA @ Miami:
the pilot could not see the lights leading to the taxiway

"The captain believed the lighting on the taxiway was not sufficient to guide him and an airport vehicle was requested to realign the plane,"

“The aircraft was towed onto a taxiway, at which time it proceeded under its own power to the gate.” An inspection revealed no damage to the aircraft or its tires and it subsequently departed on its scheduled return flight to London.

”The taxiway requires a kind of a hard turn; it’s tricky“ the FAA’s Laura Brown said.
"It landed safely on the runway. It slowed down. It was going at taxiway speed and they just missed a turn," she said.

"The prime minister and his family are staying with Robin Gibb, the former Bee Gees star, who has a $10m [£5.1m] house here in Miami Beach," he said.

Downing Street confirmed Mr Blair was on his winter holidays but said it never commented on specific arrangements.

Minor incident due ineffective lighting highlights PM accepting favours

captplaystation

27th Dec 2009, 09:05

whatdoesthisbuttondo,

I didn't come on this thread as you eluded, to defend the constant erosion of T's &Cs imposed upon my ex colleagues, nor to trumpet the "wonderful" customer care and transparent fare structure the passengers sign up to.

My appearance is simply to lambast the one-sided slating of a body of pilots that in totality are the same as any other airline you can care to mention. For the greater part consciencious professionals, with the odd numpty mixed in . . . . I think it is sad that fellow "professionals" are so quick to jump in with "I remember when they Bla Bla Bla".
Every company has it's cock-ups, the more sectors flown per day, statistically = more cock ups. If the 203/210 aircraft whatever it is today, sat all day on the ground I bet none of this would happen Eh ?
I am sure there were no incidents to speak of on the 25th

Strangely enough, not everyone in Ryanair is there by default, and unable to find another job. The workforce comprises bods from almost any previous company you can name.
Home every night, days off fixed till the next millenium & 38 bases are the good points. There are others too, along with many bad, as you & everyone else are only too fully aware.

Borealis

27th Dec 2009, 15:34

This discussion cracks me up! I can't believe the amount of people that hate RYR so much that it takes away all reason and common sense! To be clear; I am a RYR pilot, but I am no fan of the company, and the way it deals with it's staff and the amount of bullying that's going on. But the fact that some idiots here blame the company for what happened in PIK is unbelievable! It could have happened to anyone of us! In fact it happens all the time, an aircraft broke in two the same day, but nobody blamed that company. :mad: hypocrits!

CaptainSandL

29th Dec 2009, 17:39

There is some serious thread creep going on here, so I apologise in advance to the moderators for joining in but there are some factual inaccuracies which should be corrected. If the Mods wish to move this reply to the thread on the EZY event please feel free, but at least here it is in the context of the previous posts.

It is probably well known that I have an interest in this subject, my posting history will verify that, but bear in mind that mine is just one view of the event.

The AAIB special bulletin on this event contained several factual inaccuracies. Furthermore it was not circulated to the interested parties in advance of publication due to what can best be described as “political circumstances”. This is a pity as the errors could have been removed. I understand that they will be revisited before publication of the final report. Note the footnote on page 1 of the special report which states that “This information is published to inform the aviation industry and the public of the general circumstances of accidents and must necessarily be regarded as tentative and subject to alteration or correction if additional evidence becomes available.”

The inaccuracies were in the second paragraph of the Engineering Investigation as follows:

“Following the flight, the commander verbally requested that this be addressed during the subsequent maintenance input,” – No he did not. He discussed the test results in the debrief with the maintenance personnel, but it is not the commanders place to request any work to be done, only to report the test results and highlight anything unusual, which he did.

“but elected not to enter it in the tech log, as the level of stabiliser trim required during the test had been within limits.” – Correct, and this is standard practice because if it is within limits it is not a defect. That is what limits are there for.

“The absence of a formal post‑flight debrief” – There was a post flight debrief with all interested parties, what constitutes formal or informal is subjective. We know that the debrief was effective because the engineering tech rep demonstrated his understanding by writing down the correct details in his daily log.

“and formal written record” – Not true. The original test flight schedule with the test results was left with the engineers.

“resulted in the balance tabs, attached to the elevators of the aircraft, being adjusted in the opposite sense to that identified as necessary by the flight test.” – The balance tabs were adjusted in the opposite sense but the reason was a breakdown in communications between the various stages of engineering downstream of the debrief. We should expect more of this in the final report.

Pilot999,
Re your description of the commanders recovery manoeuvre being “unconventional, unbriefed , and incorrect”. It was unconventional as regular UA’s go, but it was the manoeuvre taught him by a very high ranking TP for this particular situation, remember that the controls must be released before the hydraulics could be restored. It was also briefed to the F/O before the flight, albeit with a lot of other briefing info as you would expect. As for incorrect, perhaps yes, but it was exactly what he was trained to do and if other actions had been conducted it would have worked like a charm. Again, expect more in the final report.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, don’t jump to conclusions whilst you only have part of the information. We must trust the AAIB to do their job and publish the definitive facts – then it will be fair game to voice an opinion on the many aspects of this event.

S&L

Chesty Morgan

3rd Jan 2010, 18:11

FR crews have SPECIFIC narrow runway training

What?

- Land in the middle.
- Follow the white and the yellow lines.

Really? How long is the course?!

zerotohero

4th Jan 2010, 17:01

how about also visule changes and all that feeling higher than normal and limitations on crosswinds because less wiggle room!

jesus, we can all dumb things down to sound smart.

Chesty Morgan

4th Jan 2010, 17:33

ZtH,

Would you require specific wide runway training if you were to land at, for instance, Filton?

Your arguments apply to both, except the crosswind limits I suppose but do you get specific reduced crosswind limit training too?:E

You may think that following centreline markings is dumbing things down but I'd rather be dumb than the latest winner of the Prestwick stage of the Scottish Rally.

zerotohero

4th Jan 2010, 19:25

MY POINT IS EXTRA TRAINING should never be shouted down as a waste of time!

if the safety dept say they recon there is a threat to the operation and some extra sim time is a good idea to reduce the threat then no one should make a joke of this.

agree or disagree but i will never turn upto any safty training and sit there thinking this is a waste of time, better to listen and use the time to add any usefull points.

Chesty Morgan

4th Jan 2010, 19:39

Nobody is shouting except you dear chap.

Now if you can furnish us with some of the specifics of your narrow runway training maybe I can stop giggling to myself and take it more seriously.

You never know I might learn something that could maybe possibly one day save a life.

zerotohero

4th Jan 2010, 20:22

i was not shouting,, i had just logged into crewdock which requires caps lock on,,, turned it off after i noticed, but too lazy to hit delete.

in the long run though that would have saved the hassle writing this! doh!

fyi i have not had the training.

HundredPercentPlease

4th Jan 2010, 22:18

Did I mention any minimum?

All I said was that FR crews are narrow runway trained: you may wish to note the comments earlier about 30m cleared width etc.

The small, but inescapable training issue is, regardless of the 30M rule, FR crews have SPECIFIC narrow runway training ergo, it isn't such a huge deal for us as it might be for the Orange brigade.

:confused:

eJ Capts are also narrow runway trained for the 30m destinations we operate to (which I think are a bit shorter than your 30m destinations).

The difference is, our training and culture are such that we do not break the rules and endanger our passengers, whereas Ryanair allegedly do.

If the 23m report is true, then FR are a lethal disgrace.

pilot999

5th Jan 2010, 09:34

Yes, but this is PPrune, not a lot on here is true!!!!!! :D

Alexander de Meerkat

6th Jan 2010, 09:27

Just to clarify the situation at easyJet for 'The Real Slim Shady' regarding narrow runway operations. A 'narrow runway' is anything between 30m an 45m - anything less than 30m is not allowed by us or anyone else. In the last Airbus sim cycle, every single easyJet Airbus captain underwent narrow runway training and are thereby qualified. Since then a handful of Airbus captains have been retrained from the 737 and are not therefore qualified, but the overwhelming majority are. Narrow runways are not a 'big deal' at easyJet but do require special training, which has been provided. All very straightforward and a bit of a non-event, but an event which must be properly trained-for and carried-out nonetheless. I hope that helps clear up Ny misunderstanding.

Right Way Up

6th Jan 2010, 10:07

Is a runway that is cleared to a wet condition to 23m, and then the outside 22m wet snow depth 10mm a narrow runway? Or is it a runway which you can assume full contamination and depart with relevant performance?

RED WINGS

6th Jan 2010, 17:37

I wonder if Slim realises your supposed to land on the long thin bit, Not the huge wide but very short bit?? :}

go around flaps15

6th Jan 2010, 19:15

hilarious :rolleyes:

The Real Slim Shady

6th Jan 2010, 20:16

That ain't a problem in a bona jet :p

Whippersnapper

7th Jan 2010, 06:02

It seems to me that most of the RYR bashing comes from EZY pilots and cabin crew. I have done five years for each, as have many RYR pilots, and all of us agree that wile RYR has its issues, it's a better run and safer organisation than our former employer. We don't fly around on a thimble of fuel. We don't have fatigue inducing or unstable rosters. We have more days off. We rarely have any defects on an aircraft at all, deferred or otherwise. The training is of a similar standard but there is more of it, and commanders are not selected for their sycophancy or company politics. Those, though, are company issues , not issues attributable to the pilots.

That much said, I was always highly impressed by the high average standard of EZY's cabin crew (the best standard I have seen in my four airlines) and their pan-crew CRM (sadly, like elsewhere, it stops at the aircraft door).

So, can we stop the company slagging? They both have their issues, but the pilots at RYR and EZY are of a very similar calibre and both have to deal with some unpleasant company politics. We no different from eachother.

Wingswinger

7th Jan 2010, 07:02

We don't fly around on a thimble of fuel.
Neither do easyJet pilots

We don't have fatigue inducing or unstable rosters.
Surely a matter of opinion - everyone's different.

We have more days off.
Do you? Are you sure? I'm at work on 190 days per year on a full-time contract. That's 175 days off including leave.

We rarely have any defects on an aircraft at all, deferred or otherwise.
Neither does easyJet. The new CFM engined 319/320s which I fly are the most reliable aircraft I have flown in 40 years in the cockpit.

The training is of a similar standard but there is more of it.
You do more than two two-day simulator checks, a line check and an SEP day per year do you? That's more than BA as well.

Commanders are not selected for their sycophancy or company politics.
Neither are they at easyJet.

Just my tuppence.

WS

Touch'n'oops

8th Jan 2010, 10:30

I bat for neither of the aforementioned airlines!

BUT, I certainly won't fly the one that frequently keeps testing the 737s unpaved strip abilities. You know who you are.

I suggest you buy the right kit from Boeing before you're next foray off road!
Unpaved Strip Kit (http://www.b737.org.uk/unpavedstripkit.htm)

captjns

8th Jan 2010, 10:57

So Touch'n'oops where is this hostility coming from?

zerotohero

8th Jan 2010, 16:19

Touch n opps

Nice find! lol

That did put a smile on my face!

Brakes to Park

8th Jan 2010, 19:06

Whippersnapper I'd keep my head down if I were you and quit making inane comparisons. You are one of he guys who was so hacked off at EZY that you resigned on the basis of a job offer from an airline that never ever got off the ground (NOW) (or was it THEN) and JP made it clear to you and all of your fellow deluded compatriots that you would never be welcome back at EZY so you ended up with the Harps. Not exactly there through choice are you?

Quality Time

9th Jan 2010, 03:18

Brakes to Park

easy was so sh1t that I would have gone to Now even if I could have predicted the future. JP was a fantastic boss though, so selfless.

Still things are better now. Balpa sorted the mess. Why all these cancellations though? Rumours of Crewing problems........ at such a prestigeous Airline?

When's the strike ballot? I just know you will all stand together and be strong like you have in the past.

BTW I gave up left seat 767 to join Ryanair by choice and haven't regretted it for a minute.

Come on BtP ..........LETS FLY!!! :8

PIK3141

21st Jan 2010, 18:01

They follow the lead car, and I've yet to see one overtake it. If you can't post sense, I suggest you don't post at all.

BALLSOUT

21st Jan 2010, 22:09

AYRMAN. Ryanair have set speed limits for all phases of taxying. If you do actually see a particular aircraft taxying dangerously you should contact the company. If your claims are correct they would deal with the crew concerned imediatley. However, as all ryanair aircraft are fitted with monitoring equipment that check and report directly to the company if the crew exceed certain parimiters, I think you may be wrong.

racedo

21st Jan 2010, 23:13

Ballsout

Someone has a gripe with FR so don't expect a report to be made.

apron alpha

23rd Jan 2010, 17:23

iv never seen the ryanairs overtake the ops vehicles entering alpha.

apron alpha

24th Jan 2010, 13:50

think calling us clowns is a bit over the top.:= stands 5,9 follow ops for parking, 1a,1,2,3,4 follow the agnes system and follow the lead in lines. im pretty close to the action and dnt remember seeing the ryanairs cutting across the stands to park up

apron alpha

24th Jan 2010, 22:20

your right about a few things at pik, il give you that, but the caa are up just as much as any other airport, and know doubt faults are found, but theres always a time scale to rectify the problems. you could go to other airports and find problems! better to get behind and support your local airport 350 people work there and it brings millions of pounds to the local economy.

ManaAdaSystem

24th Jan 2010, 23:16

f/spninx

25th Jan 2010, 07:22

Brakes to Park
your quote

"You are one of he guys who was so hacked off at EZY that you resigned on the basis of a job offer from an airline that never ever got off the ground (NOW) (or was it THEN) and JP made it clear to you and all of your fellow deluded compatriots that you would never be welcome back at EZY so you ended up with the Harps. Not exactly there through choice are you?"

Brakes to Park The most senior pilot to resign from EZY, in the NOW debacle was in fact the base captain of Luton at the time AL. He was also involved in A lot of the startup/recruitment at NOW.
Guess where he is NOW (excuse the pun)
Working for easyjet.
So your statement is incorrect.

SyllogismCheck

14th Oct 2010, 19:48

Report from October 2010 AAIB Bulletin
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Boeing%20737-800,%20EI-DHD%2010-10.pdf

El Grifo

14th Oct 2010, 19:59

Dunno if I actually mentioned, but I was actually on that flight.

No great drama really, just a bit skiddy at the end of the runway.

Cabin crew were excellent.No panic whatsoever.

There they all were at the bottom of the steps, selling us tickets for the bus to the terminal :}

PLovett

14th Oct 2010, 22:42

In the report it says that reverse thrust was "selected" at 60 knots. Should that have read "cancelled"? :confused:

15th Oct 2010, 07:10

I too thought that was odd. Reverse is more effective at high speed and when landing on a runway with questionable braking action it should be your first port of call to actually start slowing down. Of course reverse thrust on contaminated surfaces can also present directional control problems.

What I though particularly alarming was that after application of manual brakes at 42knots the aircraft then "slid" for 30 seconds only reducing to 24knots before vacating the end. In my book that's practically nil braking action.

It shows that even if you've killed most of your inertia in the initial part of the landing roll it can still go horribly wrong very quickly.

A4

Teddy Robinson

15th Oct 2010, 21:26

Just goes to show, even if you do everything by the book, there is always another hole in the cheese.

pattern_is_full

16th Oct 2010, 18:50

On the particular incident, I can see how this crew got snookered into waiting a bit long to begin stopping (You have to go to that last taxiway anyway, RV thrust may impart its own direction control problems, etc.)

On a technical note, if the ATIS was reporting the opposite RWY in use, is it possible that TO thrust from previous departures on 13 has polished or "zambonied" the area around the numbers to a higher slickness than the rest of the surface?

lospilotos

17th Oct 2010, 07:23

Yes, it´s a typo, reverse thrust was cancelled at 60 knots. The training that is mentioned at the end of the report includes demonstrating the difference in time it takes to accuire full reverse thrust when the thrust reversers have been stowed compared to if just reduced to idle. Can´t remember the exact figure but in the region of 12 seconds longer. A pretty long time when you are ice skating down the runway and the green stuff at the end is approaching.

Also interesting to read that the crew gets "kudos" for pulling the CVR. I guess the threatening letter that came out a while back "do it or you are fired" had some effect...

PJ2

17th Oct 2010, 16:10

In reading the report, I empathize with the crew. (Are such conditions frequent at Prestwick/Glasgow, etc?) Pulling the CVR breaker was the right thing to do.

Canadian winters do occasionally provide skating rinks for runways and one never knows which section of the runway will be the most entertaining, even with good runway condition reports and urea or sand treatments.

While the current SOP is to select only idle reverse in order to save fuel and maintenance costs, a handful of reverse early in the landing roll and held, as Davies says, "until the engines object", (keeping in mind that high reverse at low speeds can swiftly reduce visibility to zero on snow- covered surfaces), with medium autobraking for evenness of application and a groundspeed of dead-slow, (< 5kts) as early as possible commensurate with directional control, can be required to keep the aircraft on the paved surface.

Obviously, in poor conditions, crosswind limits are very low.

Even then braking action can actually be nil, especially at the end of the runway where the surface underneath the light coating of innocent snow can be more slippery than the landing surface just used. Ten knots of groundspeed can be too much; also, the aircraft can "sail" with the wind should there be any, while taxiing or maneuvering on the ramp, especially if weather-cocked and presenting the entire fuselage to the wind. Tail-mounted engines in high-reverse settings could act as a drag-chute and pull the a/c downwind, so again, one had to be careful.

There was an excellent two-day "Winter Ops Conference" put on by the Air Canada Pilots Association last year around this time in which these issues, among many, including the Canadian CRFI, (Canadian Runway Friction Index (http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/commerce-circulars-ac0164-1657.htm)- pronounced 'surfee'), were discussed.

PJ2

JW411

17th Oct 2010, 17:16

I landed on 31R at Kennedy one crystal clear CAVU night (DC-10). I couldn't understand why the DC-8 ahead of me had had to make a go around. The weather was so nice but cold.

When my F/O (he was driving) hit the brakes, there was absolutely no result. We stayed in reverse until we were moving no more. The cockpit was just over the grass at the end but we were just able to turn off the runway.

Having changed to "Point 9", we were told to take a left on the Outer etc. etc.

We slid past the Outer still in full reverse and made it on to the Inner.

I complained bitterly and was told by "Point 9" that the last five aircraft hadn't made the Outer either. When I suggested that they stopped everything moving for a while and got some grit out there, I was almost treated like a heretic.

The reason that every second aircraft was going around (like the DC-8 ahead of me) was due to the fact that the aeroplane that was already on the runway couldn't get off fast enough.

I have also very, very nearly gone off the end in Germany from a CAT II approach in heavy snow. The preceding aircraft (a B727) landed with no problems around 10 minutes ahead of me, but by the time I got there, the braking action had gone to "nil".

So, it only takes minutes for runway conditions to change.

By the way, there is actually no such thing as "nil" braking action but that is a totally different topic. (The figures produced are usually based on a BA of 0.05).

PJ2

17th Oct 2010, 18:22

JW411;

"...like a heretic."....Kennedy ATC is like that. We were behind Eastern 66 when he went in short of 22L, after a number of go-arounds and urgent requests to change runways. They did....:ugh:
By the way, there is actually no such thing as "nil" braking action but that is a totally different topic. (The figures produced are usually based on a BA of 0.05).Yes, I've heard that and understand - it shuts the airport down...but if an airplane will continue to move under idle thrust and the only way to stop it, (providing there isn't a 10kt+ wind) is to shut one, both or all down, regardless of the term, there isn't any braking action...;) - yep, another topic!

PJ2

rubik101

18th Oct 2010, 05:24

Another Urban Myth, bonuses to be made. If only!

A long time ago, when avaition was still a proffesion, and not a job, and pilots didn't rubbish one another because of the airline they worked for, no more than they do for the colour of their skin in this day and age, British Airways very kindly produced a monthly digest, a summary, of all the incident reports for the previous month and published them to all who wished to subscribe. Most of the newer operators of various types, the B737 being one of the most popular at the time, were given the benefit of the vast accumulated knowledge gained from the British Airways fountain.

The booklet ran to several pages, BA having maybe 80 or 90 of the type at that time. Faults, delays, incidents, MEL queries, even accidents were all published for the greater good of the industry. Sadly, this is no longer the case. Secrecy and corporate responsibility steer our behaivour in this litiginous age. Publicity from these incidents, when seen by the general public, make for bad publicity, hence, they are published no more.

I mention this only in light of the fact that Ryanair, which the vast majority of proffesional pilots who actually know what they are talking about, are considered to be in the forefront of pilot and cabin crew training (they do so much of it!) and have procedures equally as good if not better than the industry standard SOP's.

Ryaniar now operate over 250 B737-800 all over Europe, more than the total BA fleet. If Ryanair were to produce a booklet similar to BAs it would be ridiculed and derided at every opportunity both here and in the press, so what has changed? Is it any wonder that any incident in this age of instant news, Twitter, i-phones, Blackberrys etc. that all and every mishap is reported as a major accident?

To those of you who are of the opinion that Ryaniar is a whack job with flakey pilots and retarded engineering staff, I would ask you in all honesty; when you are made redundant and the only airline to offer you employment at your local airport is Ryanair, will you say no to £95k a year and queue for your £5k of benefits?

Perspective is only real if you open your eyes and look at all aspects of the situation. Some onlookers here seem to be looking at Ryanair from every angle but the corrct one, face on. They see optional extras as rip-offs, on line check-in as a scam, free seating as abattoir-like and 20 minute turn-arounds as simply unacheivable so they must be unsafe etc.etc. when most if not all these things will become the norm in the furure. It might not be what you would like in an ideal world but this is reality, and sliding off the runway at taxi speed on the ice is a real life event that happens to everyone, or could be!

If such an event occurs in your future flying carreer, I trust you will come back here and apologise. But hey, stupid of me to think such an event would ever happen to you!

Cough

19th Oct 2010, 07:36

Just a side show from the CAA... From this NOTAL (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_asd_NOTAL201009.pdf) about winter operations on runways...Para 6

CAA policy is that Continuous Friction Measuring Equipment (CFME) should not be used where snow/slush conditions are present, as readings on wet snow and slush are unreliable from existing equipment; there is no correlation between CFME readings and aircraft braking performance. Compacted snow and ice can be assessed for a level of grip and aircraft flight manuals contain performance computations that use such readings. To date, no evidence has been presented that these conditions were encountered last winter, and they are rarely experienced in the United Kingdom. Therefore, the focus of attention should be on wet or loose contamination, which should include assessment and reporting followed by, where possible, clearance of contaminants and return to service.

So clearly there was no ice on the runway at PIK.... CAA... Aghhh