AF B772, GPWS averts CFIT

[Gianni57]

I'd like to know some opinion about this incident (post retrieved by www.avherald.com (http://www.avherald.com))

An Air France Boeing 777-200, registration F-GSPG performing flight AF-953 from Malabo (Equatorial Guinea) to Douala (Cameroon) with 37 people on board, was en route to Douala maintaining FL090 when the crew requested and was cleared to deviate north of the assigned route due to thunderstorms. Later, while turning right towards Douala the EGPWS of the aircraft issued a terrain warning and called "PULL UP!" which the crew complied with climbing the aircraft to FL130, where the EGPWS stopped the warnings. The aircraft subsequently continued for a safe landing in Douala.

The French BEA reported in their weekly bulletin that the occurrence was rated a serious incident, the French BEA is investigating the serious incident.

My note: MSA there is 15700 ft

[Skyjob]

Maybe loss of situational awareness being consumed (mentally) by the weather presented?

[hawkeye red]

It's Air France...what more do you need to know...

[MungoP]

Are we to believe that the crew of a European National Carrier operating one of the worlds most sophisticated a/c are found bumbling around in IMC with nothing to tell them what the MSA is in their area ? Are AF existing in in some sort of time-warp trapped in the 1950s ? What IS going on with their training division ?

[aterpster]

EGPWS has made more saves than we'll ever know about.

[GlobalNav]

Thank you and God's Blessings to Don Bateman and all his colleagues at Honeywell for developing GPWS.

[DirtyProp]

I'd like to know some opinion about this incident (post retrieved by www.avherald.com (http://www.avherald.com))

An Air France Boeing 777-200, registration F-GSPG performing flight AF-953 from Malabo (Equatorial Guinea) to Douala (Cameroon) with 37 people on board, was en route to Douala maintaining FL090 when the crew requested and was cleared to deviate north of the assigned route due to thunderstorms......

My note: MSA there is 15700 ft
Is this correct?
I find it quite strange. Am I the only one?

[readywhenreaching]

was also a story at jacdec.de (http://www.jacdec.de/2015/05/19/2015-05-02-air-france-boeing-777-200-pull-up-warning-near-mount-cameroon/)

[NigelOnDraft]

maintaining FL090 I
find it quite strange. Am I the only one? Out of interest, why?

[Hotel Tango]

My note: MSA there is 15700 ft

I am not a pilot, nor am I familiar with the area. However, looking at google maps I can see that it is a short hop and, depending on runways in use, the majority portion of the flight is over water. A visual approach on Douala's easterly runway from the direction of Malabo would not constitute a problem flying at FL090. The problem presumably arose from the wx deviation and a possible loss of situational awareness.

[DirtyProp]

A 777 maintaining 9000 ft where the MSA is almost 16000?
Not an airline pilot, so what am I missing here?
Is that the normal SID profile for that departure?

[SeenItAll]

I guess they were also helped by some probably awesome climb performance of a 777-200 with only 37 people aboard.

[Hotel Tango]

DirtyProp, check google maps. See for yourself. The MSA applies to certain areas around Douala, otherwise nothing could ever land!

[thcrozier]

It was almost a full moon that night. I wonder if they climbed into VMC and puckered up a little.

[Groucho]

"Out of interest, why?"

Probably, Nigel, for the same reason that many professional pilots find it odd too. I'm sure you know (or should know!) that flying below MSA IMC is only OK under radar or on a procedural cleared route where that level or above is acceptable. To then 'divert' off that route at FL90 without a **** clue where the hard stuff is is OK with you?

AF certainly know how to screw things up! Who are you with?

[RAT 5]

I think there is a subtle 'gotcha' waiting to trap the unwary. You fly around your regular routes and airfields and have a feeling for what's underneath you. Often, especially in B777, you will be at a major radar airfield. Thus you fly the magenta line & radar vectors and do not have an en-route chart or TMA chart to hand. You've briefed via the STAR chart, but now you debate off the STAR and are lost. It's a consequence of LNAV/MAP displays; and even more with paperless cockpits. OK the charts on on i-pads, but only of you lookout them. Complacency is going to be a killer, and trusting technology to save you is not a healthy attitude. Remember Air Inter at Strasbourg with the EGPWS disconnected. It would have save them, but the company had disconnected it.

[DirtyProp]

DirtyProp, check google maps. See for yourself. The MSA applies to certain areas around Douala, otherwise nothing could ever land!
Thank you, but I rather check the SID for that airport.
We use Jeppesen charts for flying, not google maps.

[JammedStab]

While I can't comment on this situation, I find is surprising how many pilots are quite happy to fly out of airports in high terrain with both ND's selected to weather instead of terrain......in the winter when there is no CB's for at least a thousand miles. There is a theory that the terrain display will show when there is a GPWS warning but at some locations, you may not be able to outclimb the mountains especially if an engine is lost. Some like to immediately level off after a problem in these areas as well(at least in the sim) while still headed for terrain.

Now in this case, there is almost certainly weather around but if you are at low altitude in the mountains, you may want to have one display on terrain or at least be checking the terrain once in a while on the other, especially if deviating off the safety of the airway MEA to get around weather.

[Naali]

Perhaps some cooling in the hat would be appropriate. GPWS will warn of gradients of terrain,with comparisons of closing speed. So a sudden change of direction may pick up the first impressions,until the computing element can decide the rate of gradual approachment to a perceived threat. It will give indications,based on it,s own programmed limits. It does not mean that pilots are not aware of,where they are. They simply record that GPWS warning came to us here. It,s a common practice to react in Gpws false warnings. Most common Practice is to do what it wants You to do,so i guess this was the case.You will be safe,then. (from the upper floors and eager reporters,too) I have had many of those,some for reminders,and most for just seeing the limits of the system. -and for pilots today, EGPWS is beyond my time in cockpits,so maybe someone would like to tell about that gadget,to ease also the minds of any interested,in here.

[GlobalNav]

@Naali quote in part "GPWS will warn of gradients of terrain,with comparisons of closing speed. So a sudden change of direction may pick up the first impressions,until the computing element can decide the rate of gradual approachment to a perceived threat. It will give indications,based on it,s own programmed limits. It does not mean that pilots are not aware of,where they are. They simply record that GPWS warning came to us here. It,s a common practice to react in Gpws false warnings. Most common Practice is to do what it wants You to do,so i guess this was the case.You will be safe,then. (from the upper floors and eager reporters,too) I have had many of those,some for reminders,and most for just seeing the limits of the system. -and for pilots today, EGPWS is beyond my time in cockpits,so maybe someone would like to tell about that gadget,to ease also the minds of any interested,in here."

There are many enhancements introduced by EGPWS compared to GPWS. Two key ones are that altimetry, terrain database and navigation position are combined to provide "predictive" alerts of threatening terrain ahead and a color-coded terrain awareness display that provides important situational information about the surrounding terrain with respect to altitude and location.

Those seeking information or unfamiliar with EGPWS might start here: https://aerospace.honeywell.com/en/products/safety-systems/enhanced-ground-proximity-warning-system?gclid=COGhzaKQ1sUCFQwPaQodKmAAdA&gclid=COGhzaKQ1sUCFQwPaQodKmAAdA

[Naali]

Ps. JammedStab I think that we had a good procedure of mostly having the different display on both. Seen couple of times how they can disagree at Tkof mode. The spare Horizon is not there for nothing...

[Hotel Tango]

Thank you, but I rather check the SID for that airport.

Not much of a pilot if you're using the SID for an arrival!

[NigelOnDraft]

Groucho "Out of interest, why?"

Probably, Nigel, for the same reason that many professional pilots find it odd too. I'm sure you know (or should know!) that flying below MSA IMC is only OK under radar or on a procedural cleared route where that level or above is acceptable. To then 'divert' off that route at FL90 without a **** clue where the hard stuff is is OK with you?The question was why they were "cruising" at FL90. My question was why is that determined to be "strange" and I asked why?

Yes - there are rules for flying below MSA, and I am not saying those rules were followed when they deviated. But that was not the question.

So I ask you, as a stated professional pilot, what cruising FL you would expect / choose / fly / could achieve in a widebody with a sector length of ~60NM?

And I also ask you, how and where has it been stated that the route, as planned, had an MSA of >FL90?

[pithblot]

Later, while turning right towards Douala the EGPWS of the aircraft issued a terrain warning and called "PULL UP!" which the crew complied with climbing the aircraft to FL130, where the EGPWS stopped the warnings. The aircraft subsequently continued for a safe landing in Douala.

The French BEA reported in their weekly bulletin that the occurrence was rated a serious incident, the French BEA is investigating the serious incident.

My note: MSA there is 15700 ft


Did the crew climb until the warnings stopped or until they made MSA? I read somewhere that EGPWS warnings stop by design before a safe level off can be achieved.

The French BEA would do us all a favour by ensuring that airline training departments and pilots take EGPWS warnings seriously by vigorously & correctly flying the escape manoeuvre - that is, climb until at least MSA.

Did the aircraft really make a "safe landing" or was it just dumb luck, or Providence, that there wasn't a CFIT as the disoriented crew levelled off below MSA?

[Right Way Up]

If EGPWS saved them, were they not looking at their ND.....or did they have not have the brightness turned up?

[ATC Watcher]

Shooting down people involved in accidents or incidents seems to have become the favorite passtime here.

If you know a bit the place you wil find that both airports are at sea level, the whole route is above sea. For a roughly 50 NM leg going easbound, FL90 is a good and correct level . No high MSA in there.

How about this ( speculation )
You take off , take course 060 and find a CB in the middle of the route, you are 3 in the cockpit , you look at the Wx radar , discuss it, and decide to go left. How long you wander left and why unoticed for so long is most probably the issue.
Because when you are clear of the Wx and decide to turn right back to DLA , bingo the EGPWS wakes you up and you find out there is Mt Cameroon in between.

Now a bit of pontification to the Non-pros here :
Because you are profesional you make a report of this to avoid others to make a similar mistake, and your airline, passes it on to the Investigation Board, which, because it is professional organisation publishes it so that other operators can learn from this and avoid it too.

Another possible scenario, Eastern 401 L-1011 in Everglades .

Every professional will read the report in a few months and the system will probably be a little safer as whole.

Throwing stones at people/airlines /countries will set us back 40 years, where nothing "embarassing" was ever reported.

So keep it cool guys, it is good to have reports like this.

[DirtyProp]

Not much of a pilot if you're using the SID for an arrival!
Yes, I was under the impression that the plane was departing and not arriving.
Better not fly with me...

[733driver]

Best post in a long time ATC Watcher. Thank you!

[Hotel Tango]

If you know a bit the place you wil find that both airports are at sea level, the whole route is above sea. For a roughly 50 NM leg going easbound, FL90 is a good and correct level . No high MSA in there

Correct, and which is what Nigel and myself were saying all along. As for the rest of your post ATC Watcher, you're bang on. Even though not a pilot myself I get frustrated by the idiotic reactions we often see here on this forum by people who PRETEND to be pilots and spout utter and absolute rubbish.

[Current Limiter]

Having previous experience in this part of the world, it is easy to see how this could happen. A 60nm sector in this aircraft will take about 15mins from wheels up to wheels down. If you add all of the flight deck procedures that need to be done to configure, you are a busy body. Now add to this unhelpful ATC, broken Nav Aids, and the worst weather you are likely to encounter anywhere in the world, the mixture becomes even more difficult. Bearing in mind, flying into a CB that extends up to 60,000ft will have the same effect as flying into Mt Cameroon, and with these airbourne mountains covering much of your sky, your attention may be drawn to the radar display at this point. I think for any pilot that has not experienced this area of operation should not be so critical of this crew. The installed system worked as designed - a disaster was averted - and we can all learn from this.

[misd-agin]

double post.

[misd-agin]

EGPWS is a back up system. Terrain awareness/altitude awareness is a basic of instrument flying. MEA/MOCA/MSA/Grid MORA. If you're not on a printed line (MEA/SID/STAR altitude restrictions) it's up to the crew to decide if MSA protection is provided(ie above MSA for the portion of the MSA circle that you're in). If MEA or MSA protection isn't guaranteed, and basic terrain awareness isn't available(terrain chart/minimum radar vectoring chart), then you need to operate above the grid MORA.


Yes, the system, because of the backup safety system, worked. It's not supposed to rely on the backup system. There's a reason why a EGPWS alert is usually a mandatory reporting event, because it's not supposed to happen in the first place.

[DJ77]

I remember a case where a 737 crew recieved a GPWS alert around FL100 during an approach in bad weathher in a mountainous region. They zoomed up to FL200+ until the alarm eventually silenced.
The investigation showed they where never close to terrain and attibuted the alarm to hail.

[Miraculix]

DJ77
In IMC you act on GPWS warning. When out of the warning condition, then you start analyzing. You don't have time to think that it might be wrong, because if it comes on and if it's wright, you're not where you think you are.

[misd-agin]

GPWS (pre EGPWS) -

After making a crossing restriction the midnight crew accelerated for a high speed climb. GPWS - Terr....Pull... Both radar altimeters flash to below 200' and just as quickly the radar altimeters go away. So the crew thinks they've got a maintenance write up.

That morning the FO starts looking at terrain maps ... "And that's when I started shaking..."

[Basil]

Best post in a long time ATC Watcher.
Seconded!
We always need to be reminded of other people's 'nearlys' :ooh:

[aterpster]

Misd:

GPWS (pre EGPWS) -

After making a crossing restriction the midnight crew accelerated for a high speed climb. GPWS - Terr....Pull... Both radar altimeters flash to below 200' and just as quickly the radar altimeters go away. So the crew thinks they've got a maintenance write up.

AAL 965, the 757 CFIT near Cali, Colombia, was also equipped with plain old GPWS. There was an informal consensus that had they retracted the spoilers immediately upon hearing the first "Whop! Whop! Pull Up!" put the throttles to the stops, while rotating, they may very well had cleared the ridge-line.

But, had that happened, it was problematic what their subsequent action would have been, for there was higher terrain to the left and straight-ahead. A climbing turn to the west would have worked, though.

That was the accident that resulted in EGPWS.

[DJ77]

@ Miraculix. You missed my point.

In this thread most posts (including the title) assume a priori that a CFIT has been averted close to Mt Cameroon. Very possibly it may be what happenned but, please, let's not anticipate and draw definitive and patronizing conclusions (as usual on R&N) before the real story is known.

[Miraculix]

DJ77

Sorry if I misunderstood you and yes you're right, lets not jump to any conclusions regarding the cause of the GPW that was reacted upon.

[aterpster]

I placed a graphic snippet from Sky Vector on one of the STARs. Note also the MSA note.

http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa214/aterpster/FKKD%20STAR_zpsgstmzkey.jpg

[DunePrune]

The Malabo departure feeds straight into the Douala arrival. Mt Cameroon is just outside the MSA circle of both airports, and is only obliquely referred to on the Douala chart. AF pilots fly world wide, and it is quite possible that neither pilot on the flight in question had any local knowledge.


Throw in some enormous thunderstorms with ATC that is among the world's worst and a small mistake suddenly becomes major. I feel for those pilots.


An excellent post, ATC Watcher.The snipers are just part of the background noise. As usual.

[de facto]

The chinese (SIM) love to vector you outside of the 25 NM range at an altitude below MSA to see your reaction...maybe should be practiced more,generally speaking of course:E

[aterpster]

DunePrune:

The Malabo departure feeds straight into the Douala arrival. Mt Cameroon is just outside the MSA circle of both airports, and is only obliquely referred to on the Douala chart. AF pilots fly world wide, and it is quite possible that neither pilot on the flight in question had any local knowledge.

Throw in some enormous thunderstorms with ATC that is among the world's worst and a small mistake suddenly becomes major. I feel for those pilots.

I too feel for the pilots. Perhaps a lesson to be learned by all flight operations management there are locales such as this one that need a special qualifications package and some tailored area charts with topography clearly shown.

The technology in most airliners is, in some respects, quite obsolete compared with the newer equipage sophisticated, newer business jets have. Such as topographical moving map on the MFD and synthetic vision (SV) on the PFD that is "talking" to the EGPSW.

But, the airlines will so equip only through attrition so tailored local area Jeppesen area charts would be in order.

Here is a snippet of what is apparently an aeronautical chart I found on the Internet:

http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa214/aterpster/MtCameroonMap_zpszzk9fk6n.jpg

[HamishMcBush]

Now on the BBC website, currently under the rather unusual title of

"Air France flight AF953 misses Cameroon Mountain"

Air France flight AF953 misses Cameroon mountain - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-32890312)

[Groucho]

In line with some of the thinking here, perhaps we should just praise the crew for 'missing' the mountain?

[Yo767]

It's all about situational awareness and choosing the lesser of the two threats: the cumulonimbus or the cumulogranite

[PEI_3721]

EGPWS has saved many lives, respect it and use it.
The terrain mode provides a strategic view of terrain; it’s not a map for navigating with, but an aid for planning and awareness.
The alerts and warnings must be followed – no deliberation or choice. EGPWS is a vital every-day device which warns of error, your error, someone else’s, or from within the wider operational situation.
Celebrate the ‘saves’ (http://www.icao.int/fsix/_Library%5CTAWS%20Saves%20plus%20add.pdf); learn from them.
Well done the crew, the operator, the system, … Don Bateman … another one for the book.

[twochai]

I think for any pilot that has not experienced this area of operation should not be so critical of this crew

Douala experiences 3,851mm of rain annually (151.6"). A point near Tiko airport (shown on the topo map immediately southeast of Mt. Cameroon) gets 10,300mm (405") per year!

On climbout from Tiko in a Twin Otter many, many years ago, I recall seeing a drop in T5 (Turbine Temp) of approximately 50 degrees Celsius, on both engines, caused by the firehose of water streaming in the intake!

Very intimidating indeed, but no excuse for loss of SA.

[Naali]

Non-Driver,You found the heart of information.

[twochai]

Of course. there was a precedent:

ASN Aircraft accident Douglas DC-6B F-BIAO Mt. Cameroon (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19630503-1)

The Air Afrique flight took off from Douala runway 12 at 13:16 GMT on an IFR flight plan to Lagos, cruising altitude 16500 feet. Last radio contact was with Kano at 13:25 when the crew estimated leaving the FIR around 13:38. Two minutes later the aircraft struck Mount Cameroon in a straight climb at 6500 feet (800m below the peak).

PROBABLE CAUSE: "The accident was caused by a lack of caution on the part of the pilot-in-command who deliberately selected a route which led the aircraft into a dangerous and even prohibited sector at too low an altitude. Also, he neglected his navigation and transferred to instrument flight when approaching the mountain range."

[JammedStab]

Bearing in mind, flying into a CB that extends up to 60,000ft will have the same effect as flying into Mt Cameroon,

I think for any pilot that has not experienced this area of operation should not be so critical of this crew.

If these are the only two options, I'll take the CB option, you can try your luck with the mountain.

Strange ideas from some.

[Naali]

For those unkown in these threads. Pilots are vulnerable to mistakes,as any one in a human world. And still persons,as in a human world.

[aterpster]

There are times when it is best to stay on the ground or once airborne and faced with a radar display full of horrible wx, to simply turn around and land at departure point.

Alas, the airlines are mission oriented so the poor crew would have been screwed either way.

The human-factors folks should really look at the "mission oriented" aspect of this near CFIT in terrible weather.

[golfyankeesierra]

They might have been focused on the WX radar a little too much, but that mountain certainly would have turned up solid red on that as well..

Anyway nobody goes to work to screw up like that, most probably there were other factors as well. Can't wait for the story behind it. Classic CRM training case in the making here..

[MungoP]

This has a ghostly resemblance to the AA crash on approach to Cali.. Out here in Afghanland due to a number of issues it's not uncommon to find oneself in an area of mountainous terrain and being vectored into IMC conditions below the MSA.. the natural reaction should always be.. "whatever else we do let's climb".. after all the crew didn't plan to be off-airways or below a safe MSA in IMC away from their selected route.. If you can't get visual, Get Safe. ..

[pithblot]

Mungo P exactly.

We are talking EGPWS here, not GPWS, and in IMC it doesn't matter where on this earth the event occurs (or at what Alt/FL) the response should always be the same. The "PULL UP" is not an Alert. It is an EGPWS Warning of excessive closure to terrain and requires immediate, aggressive, action to avoid a CFIT.

[woodja51]

Not saying this was a factor in this incident , but in several cases , the 250 below 10000 default in the FMS has caught folks out. For example, going into a high altitude airport ( eg Nairobi / Tehran ) , if you don't modify this slow down point , following a standard 3x profile may cause you to be still doing 320kts , at sub 5000 AGL as you transition thru F100. I see this aspect of the FMS as a HF weakness that has caught several pilots out in the past. There are other factors , but this default if not modified can catch folks out with terrain closure etc.

Ask Emirates how many they have had!

Now CSA is heading to Nairobi for example , I am waiting to see if the same thing happens there. And yes , I have mentioned this to those in power so it's not a case of sitting back and letting it happen, just wondering why the FMs can't reduce speed below 10000AGL as it has elevation input , or if the terrain GRID mora is > some value slow down based on that for example.

That way you would actively intervene to maintain speed in some cases , but at least would have to think about it.

And yes that's what pilots are supposed to do anyway with terrain- but they are also supposed to be able to fly aircraft away from stalls , upsets, speed loss , not into sea walls ...need I go on ?

[Capn Bloggs]

if you don't modify this slow down point , following a standard 3x profile may cause you to be still doing 320kts , at sub 5000 AGL as you transition thru F100.
So what happens if you clear the 250/10000ft into a sea level airport? Our FMS will still slow down normally to achieve the correct approach speeds, regardless of the initial descent speed.

[misd-agin]

Training guy trying to blame a hard landing on the crew exceeding 250kts below 10,000'. My response? "If that's true 90% of the landings in the Caribbean should be hard landings."

[Capn Bloggs]

Training guy trying to blame a hard landing on the crew exceeding 250kts below 10,000'
Sad, isn't it?

[misd-agin]

It is.

Do they sit awake at night trying to figure out how a fighter can land after exceeding 600 kts below 200'?

[gums]

In all fairness, we lite pukes have some neat stuff besides the EGPWS/GPWS

I always liked my terrain following radar mode and coupled with the projected map display with INS and a doppler backup. This was back in 1972 and you can guess what jet it was ( single seat, single engine).

The recent incident is the first one I have seen about a false warning. I guess there are many that are not reported of recorded.

[Capn Bloggs]

The recent incident is the first one I have seen about a false warning.
No suggestion it was false...

[golfyankeesierra]

There is some discussion about EGPWS but for the sake of completeness, there is a "caution terrain" call first, serving as a crude wakeup call.
Giving you a little bit more time to react.

[Squawk7777]

Ah Air France encore! Quelle surprise!!

AAL had one in ABQ recently. Happens more often than you think. I had one years ago in ROA. Last sector of the day (of five), fatigue, night, weather etc. got vectored too closely to a mountain.

With this AF flight, probably add ATC and other African-relevant issues.

It makes me wonder that mainly AF issues are commonly reported and dissected on this board. I find it hard to believe that other operators fly incident free. I wonder how freely BA, LH and others report compared to AF.

[slast]

I wonder how freely BA, LH and others report compared to AF
Don't know about others but back in the 1970s BAW was the first airline to institute voluntary incident reporting and use of FDR data for incidents rather than just accidents. After a few hiccups with over-zealous managers miss-using it, one of which nearly torpedoed the entire US ASRS scheme that was just about to start, it has been pretty comprehensive and effective. Not much happens that doesn't get known about and checked out.

[Squawk7777]

I am aware of the ASR reporting scheme in the UK, the question is, how public is this information? I had a tech issue on t/o when I worked contract in the UK (which triggered a MoR), but I was never able to access this incident.

[slast]

7777, as for public access to it, that I don't know - sorry.

[JammedStab]

I am aware of the ASR reporting scheme in the UK, the question is, how public is this information? I had a tech issue on t/o when I worked contract in the UK (which triggered a MoR), but I was never able to access this incident.

Depends on if the accident investigators look into it or CAA publishes it. More to do with the government.

[Squawk7777]

So I suppose the number of incidents happening at airline XYZ and making it or leaking :ouch: to a website like Aviation Herald is in government hands?

If so, that would be an interesting way to correct (or punish) a statistic.

[pax2908]

This is listed (published) in the Weekly Bulletin of the French BEA.

[ATC Watcher]

leaking to a website like Aviation Herald

Ax pax2908 said, today every reported incident involving a French registered aircraft, or occuring over French territories/waters is put on line weekly in a bulletin published by the BEA . Nobody leaks info the AvHerald or anybody else.

This transparncy does not exist ( yet or anymore) in many other Countries, most probably caused by some stupid news headlines that uninformed journalist deduct from reading those bulletins. These journalists have not yet realised that this is detrimental to safety as a whole.

Air France probably has more incident reports than other airlines because its pilots are very well protected with a very strong Pilot union that will ensure nobody will be undue penalised as a result of an incident report. This is also definitively not the case in all airlines .

[aterpster]

ATC Watcher:

These journalists have not yet realised that this is detrimental to safety as a whole.

I infer that you are implying that they will someday realize such reporting is detrimental to safety as a whole.

I don't think so. :*

[ATC Watcher]

aterpster :
such reporting is detrimental to safety as a whole.

Of course not, I meant reporting those events in the general media with the sensational headlines are detrimental, not the incident reporting scheme ..:rolleyes:
But you are right I realise my sentence could have been understood both ways, well I hope it is clear now, Thanks for pointing that up ..

[DunePrune]

I posted on this issue two weeks ago, wrote of local knowledge and was correctly shot down by olbie.

I would only add that I have been flying this route on and off for decades and have never seen the mountain owing to cloud cover and/or poor visibility. Until the other day. A rare CAVU event revealed Mt Cameroon in all her glory, and it came as a shock to realize just how close she is to the track between Malabo and Douala.

This is one of those places where the chart annotations do not convey the stark reality.

I still feel for those AF pilots.

Apologies to any feminists among the readers.

[cpt]

.....I even landed on it, I can testify it's a enough hard rocky ground up there !

[MileyCyrus]

I agree with you in theory...

But is this not just another installment in a troubled history (statistically speaking)?

[aterpster]

DunePrune:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would only add that I have been flying this route on and off for decades and have never seen the mountain owing to cloud cover and/or poor visibility. Until the other day. A rare CAVU event revealed Mt Cameroon in all her glory, and it came as a shock to realize just how close she is to the track between Malabo and Douala.

This is one of those places where the chart annotations do not convey the stark reality.

Some carriers share your concerns and pay Jeppesen to enhance their airway manual. Here is a snippet of a tailored "RNAV STAR Overview" for FKKD:

http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa214/aterpster/FKKD_zpsdra6yfzs.jpg