A380 U turn on runway causes excursion [Archive]

JammedStab

22nd May 2015, 18:53

Incident: Emirates A388 at Warsaw on May 20th 2015, runway excursion on backtrack

"By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, May 20th 2015 18:13Z, last updated Wednesday, May 20th 2015 18:13Z

An Emirates Airbus A380-800, registration A6-EET performing flight EK-222 (dep May 19th) from Dallas Ft. Worth,TX (USA) to Dubai (United Arab Emirates), was enroute at FL350 about 130nm northnortheast of Warsaw (Poland) when a male passenger (55) suffered a stroke prompting the crew to divert to Warsaw where the aircraft landed safely on runway 33 about 30 minutes later. Due to construction work the aircraft could not vacate on the next taxiway but needed to turn around on the runway and backtrack to taxi to the apron, while turning around to backtrack the nose gear struck runway edge lights causing damage to one of the nose wheels. The ill passenger was taken to a hospital, the aircraft was unable to continue the flight.

A replacement Boeing 777-300 registration A6-EGU was dispatched to Warsaw, continued the flight as EK-222D and is estimated to reach Dubai with a delay of 11.5 hours.

The airline reported the aircraft faced a technical issue on the ground, the passengers disembarked and were taken to Dubai on a replacement aircraft."

The Outlaw

23rd May 2015, 06:43

My hopes for a speedy recovery for the passenger...and the crew, they are some good guys.

Lets hope the company puts a "our passengers mean everything" spin on the incident.

harry the cod

23rd May 2015, 08:38

Royston Vasey

Removed from roster is normal in an event like this when an aircraft leaves the paved surface or causes damage. It would be negligent on the Companies part not too until a full and objective investigation is undertaken.

As for the warnings however, that's where the Company often falls down. They can prove whether the 'Just' culture is reality or merely another bullet point for adorning the inside of EGHQ lifts.

Harry

falconeasydriver

23rd May 2015, 09:10

I hope the crew concerned are treated fairly and within the bounds of the "just culture"
Then again......:hmm::rolleyes:
I wonder if little T or AAR will decide that doing this on the vunderbus has damaged the "brand"
I wish the ill pax a speedy recovery.

anson harris

23rd May 2015, 09:54

I don't think it really matters whether the just culture is a reality or not. The perception amongst pilots is that it there isn't one and that's what drives their actions when things start going wrong. Hence: poor culture because the company is happy for the pilots to be fearful of reprisals. You can talk the talk all you like at CRM training, but nobody believes it, not even the trainers.

NWSRG

23rd May 2015, 09:58

As an amateur only, I ask this as a genuine question...

Would the crew have had information available to them on the construction work, and hence the likely need to turn and backtrack? I expect they would have had plates available for Warsaw, but could it be that they had an incomplete picture? Saying that, I'm assuming that runway width for any A380-ready airfield must be sufficient for such a turn?

glofish

23rd May 2015, 11:32

A runway is meant to stay on and a edge light not to be run over, be that with a regional jet or a 'Super', on a regular destination or a suitable alternate.

Mr Good Cat

23rd May 2015, 11:53

A runway is meant to stay on and a edge light not to be run over, be that with a regional jet or a 'Super', on a regular destination or a suitable alternate.

That sounds like a quote from the OM-A intended to save the face of accountable post-holders in the office. I know you don't mean for it to come across that way but it certainly sounds like a naive statement.

Until we know the full story (which we never will, by the way) then we don't know what factors were involved in them making the error. There are those that have, and those that will. Anyone who doesn't believe that scares me.

Accepting we're human goes a long way to trapping the errors, no? :ok:

glofish

23rd May 2015, 13:32

Cat

My comment was intended as a reply to NWSRG. If it sounds OM-A like or to save face of any faceless, i simply stated the obvious, i guess.

The prime task of a skipper is to get to destination safely. In this incident, they had to divert due to a sick passenger. Even under such circumstances the first priority was still to keep people and equipment safe, the second was to get the sick passenger to a hospital asap.
Now obviously they failed on both tasks, as most probably the incident delayed the transport to the hospital and the aircraft and some ground equipment were damaged.

As to how the 'just culture' will handle it, don't expect much of the faceless.

THRCLB

23rd May 2015, 22:10

The damge was found after they parked the aircraft on the gate ..it was a cut on the side of the tyre ....so The pax was offloaded in time ..my guess they didn't fully review the 180 proc ..henc the A/C needed more than 60m to make 180 turn...

The Zohan

24th May 2015, 01:52

I can see noone has been removed from Roster. Well done. It seems ( maybe I am wrong) the company is learning.

SP I don't know where you get your info from but they have both been moved from roster by fleet and they still are.
It appears though that it was the augmenting crew that did the landing.

tz

glofish

24th May 2015, 02:33

Don't get me wrong, i feel for the crew and fully understand the difficulty of diversions into unknown territory when exhausted. Been there, done that.
It is simply cute to see that this must suddenly be rocket science with a dugong involved and only its holy drivers can fully understand what heroic operation has been accomplished!

It's really a very small c@ck-up, but it is one.
So face it like men, or all the other less glorious airline bastards, and move on. :}

donpizmeov

24th May 2015, 02:45

Having a bad day glofish?

It's no harder to turn around than a 773. And we have had a few of them in the grass too. Sh@t happens.

The Zohan

24th May 2015, 03:35

It's no harder to turn around than a 773.

Come on Don, it's not the same thing as turning a 773 and above all we never get to practice it.
Have you ever had to turn one besides the sim?

tz

The Zohan

24th May 2015, 05:06

I'm with Don, it's a jet and a turn is a turn.

EWB do you fly dugongs? It takes 55 meters to do a 180° turn and the procedure is a page long. It requires full braking and power on the outboard engine and we never ever have the opportunity to practice if not in the sim.
I've been three years on the thing without ever having to do one.
It may fly like any other Airbus but on the ground it sucks.

tz

glofish

24th May 2015, 08:26

don

It's no harder to turn around than a 773. And we have had a few of them in the grass too. Sh@t happens.

Sure, some T7's and others kissed some grass, but none of them tried to excuse the blunder by boasting how 'difficult' his bird was for such a manoeuvre (citing big Z) :

It takes 55 meters to do a 180° turn and the procedure is a page long. It requires full braking and power on the outboard engine and we never ever have the opportunity to practice if not in the sim.
I've been three years on the thing without ever having to do one.
It may fly like any other Airbus but on the ground it sucks.

If you're not sure of mastering it, if it sucks on ground and you can't train a manoeuvre, why try it then?

ekwhistleblower

24th May 2015, 09:39

TZ, yes! Done 2 plus a couple on nodes. I have no issue with the crew making a mistake, it is tight as it is on any other aircraft. On previous types I have also only done a couple. The 380 sucks particularly when wet but that wasn't the point of my post so I'll get rid of it!

SlavePunishment

24th May 2015, 09:58

Thanks Zohan. You are correct.

The Zohan

24th May 2015, 10:56

If you're not sure of mastering it, if it sucks on ground and you can't train a manoeuvre, why try it then?

big G I'm just trying to cut the guys some slack, that's it.
obviously they screwed up, we wouldn't be here talking about it, but it's also obvious the 380 is not just like another jet and the lack of practice is an issue.

tz

Am NOT Sure

24th May 2015, 19:40

Jet is a jet and turn is a turn !

I have seen don and whistle make a 180 on the thing while taking a selfie .

Take a moment to contemplate what you are saying!

The procedure is longer than a page in the FCOM and training is required to retain proficiency

Humble yourselves

Bill Macgillivray

24th May 2015, 20:00

Surely the aim of the crew was to get the ill pax. to the nearest treatment center? Unfortunate that a tire was cut (Not the end of the world!) but the aim was surely achieved? Well done!!

donpizmeov

24th May 2015, 21:16

Am not sure. Take a moment and read what was written.

If they were a foot forward or aft of where they were nothing would have happened. Sh@t happens. The dudes were unlucky.

777boyo

25th May 2015, 04:01

A 180 in the 777 was the manoeuvre I looked forward to least of all. The end of 36 in MLE in a heavy (tankering) RR powered -300 on a dark night in monsoon rain and a strong westerly, or on one of the nodes at LHE (or was it PEW? Can't recall), could be demanding. Even worse with U/S GMC. Fortunately I managed many over the years with no incidents, but we should really feel for these guys in the WAW 380. There but for the grace of God etc etc

First time I did it in the aircraft was at MLE in exactly the conditions above and it definitely was not an enjoyable experience. Its a tribute to the boys (and girls) that there haven't been more excursions.

The training for these turns needs to be increased, and should be a compulsory part of every upgrade line-training course.

7B

olster

25th May 2015, 16:30

777 boyo you are spot on. Difficult to arrange a 180 turn in the real world but the manoeuvre should be more than a 'box - ticking' exercise which it is at the moment. 1 shot per trainee in the sim and off you go.

glofish

26th May 2015, 07:58

We are quick to ask for respect and renumeration for our jobs, especially now with the blatant slap in the face of the pay review.

This might seem strange in the eyes of amateurs, slf and office jerks when they have to read on these pages that EK pilots nearly wet themselves when performing 180s on runways or when they learn that cutting up tires that aog airliners is deemed by us as only "unlucky".

Were the Asiana guys only "unlucky" when missing the runway by a meager 50 feet or were they incompetent? Where is the limit in feet or luck?

Please, if we want a decent pay and respect, then stop posting such cr@p that can lead to huge misinterpretation for non pros! Passengers might get afraid to board dugongs, but most probably will first of all lose a lot of respect for us.

777boyo

26th May 2015, 09:46

Glofish.

The intent of my original post was to elicit some sympathy/empathy for the WAW guys.

However, I take your point about non pro readers, and as I'd not want to be responsible for any reduction in your respect levels or indeed for any adverse effects on your future pay raises, I've edited my post with a form of wording which I hope you'll find more to your liking.

Happy flying!

7B

TowerDog

26th May 2015, 11:30

Back in 1996 I was a brand spanking new skipper on the 747 classic.
Had all of 15 hours in the left seat.
Flew a charter from Jeddah to Split and had to do a 180.
Was a little too enthusiastic and got the right hand wing gear in the grass.
After the turn I looked over at the tire tracks in the grass: A pair of wheels had rolled over a runway light, with the light un-damaged as the wheels had rolled on either side of it. :ooh:

I turned left, should have turned right, bubble was on the right side.
Lesson learned, no damage, lucky day :cool:

JammedStab

26th May 2015, 17:08

kipper the dog

26th May 2015, 19:05

Been a while, but the bubble he's referring to is the bubble in the turn and slip indicator probably.
Not something the magenta line generation would know anything about!

TowerDog

26th May 2015, 19:48

Uh, no.
Not the bubble in the Turn and Slip Indiactor.:sad:

I was referring to the concrete turn button on the runway in Split.
I know, sloppy slang, lazy US pilots not using standardized phraseology.

CAYNINE

27th May 2015, 03:58

You idiots on the "the worlds most sophisticated aircraft" (not) have no idea about the big girl. Another load of stupid bullsh@t from you lot.
:ugh:

MR8

27th May 2015, 04:45

I'm with glo on this one. Yes a 180 is not the easiest thing to do in the super, but that is what we are paid to do. It is not the most difficult manoeuvre either, the procedure (technique) is clearly written in the FCOM and if followed, it is actually not difficult at all, just a bit scary because we hardly go them in real life.
But seriously, how can you complain about the lack of respect from management if you don't respect your own profession.. seems that too much exposure to EK turned a lot of us into little girls.
And no, I don't feel sorry for the guys involved. Either they didn't realise that a 180 would be involved, they didn't review the procedure (which is not complicated and long as some posters claim) which is also poor planning, or they just didn't execute it very well which is poor handling, but at no stage they were unlucky...

Chewthecrude

27th May 2015, 06:47

The WAW guys are still removed from roster. Permanently?

GoreTex

27th May 2015, 12:06

I am sure the office people want to sack them but this could be such bad press "EK Captain sacked after saving a life"

Our management pilots screwed up a zillion times but nothing has ever happened to anyone.

JammedStab

28th May 2015, 01:05

Been a while, but the bubble he's referring to is the bubble in the turn and slip indicator probably.
Not something the magenta line generation would know anything about!

They might know that it is not necessary for a 180 degree turn.

TowerDog

28th May 2015, 06:45

. They might know that it is not necessary for a 180 degree turn.

Mandatory for a 180 degree turn at some airports.

JammedStab

28th May 2015, 09:30

Mandatory for a 180 degree turn at some airports.
More detail would be great.

Thanks

TowerDog

28th May 2015, 11:19

.More detail would be great.

Thanks

Well, I thought it was pretty clear, but if still fuzzy:

One airport I fly to has a turn button before the end, the Jeppesen Pages states that using the turn button is requiered for the 767s, but not for 757s.
Company requirement rather than airport, but still required. :cool:

flydive1

28th May 2015, 13:56

Well, I thought it was pretty clear, but if still fuzzy:

One airport I fly to has a turn button before the end, the Jeppesen Pages states that using the turn button is requiered for the 767s, but not for 757s.
Company requirement rather than airport, but still required. :cool:

And what that has to do with the turns and slip bubble?

bone

28th May 2015, 14:43

Substitute turning pad or node for "bubble,button etc.." and it will make sense.
:cool:

flydive1

28th May 2015, 15:01

Yes, that is quite clear.

But Towerdog was replying to the turn and slip "diversion";)

TowerDog

28th May 2015, 22:11

. And what that has to do with the turns and slip bubble?

Not sure if you are a troll, or just a bit slow..?
Either way, go back and read the thread again.
If it still makes no sense, send me a Private Message and I will walk you through it.
All the best, and good luck.:sad:

flydive1

28th May 2015, 22:18

Not sure if you are a troll, or just a bit slow..?
Either way, go back and read the thread again.

Maybe you should read it again, and check what you are replying to.

Here I help you

Been a while, but the bubble he's referring to is the bubble in the turn and slip indicator probably.
Not something the magenta line generation would know anything about!

They might know that it is not necessary for a 180 degree turn.

Mandatory for a 180 degree turn at some airports.

You are welcome;)

TowerDog

28th May 2015, 22:26

.
You are welcome

Guess you missed it on purpose.:sad:
Try stepping away from Mom's computer, take up a hobby, or apply for work.
Good luck Tiger :cool:

flydive1

29th May 2015, 07:42

Yea, right. http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/images_hwu/smilies/icon_climb2.gif :rolleyes:

My hero;)

Rim-job

29th May 2015, 10:35

Hey you two,

Do you mind if we get back on topic? In the mean time, take your little spat out to the playground please. :ouch:

Next...

flydive1

29th May 2015, 10:45

Yes, you are correct.

And you take about the topic is....

Rim-job

29th May 2015, 11:21

Flydive,

First off, if you intend on adding input, speak proper english as you aren't making any sense.

Second off, why don't you grab a popsicle, buzz off and go play with your toys. You are wasting our time and highjacking an otherwise legitimate thread.

Now make off like a good little boy. :ok:

flydive1

29th May 2015, 11:30

Pot...kettle?

Man, even the spelling police, it is hard to have a bit of mental flexibility to see what it is?:rolleyes:

Anyway I leave you to your spelling and thread police work.

And of course to your important contributions to the thread topic:D

captainsmiffy

29th May 2015, 14:06

Rim-job......wot, like wot you is.....!!!

puff m'call

2nd Jun 2015, 11:03

Do many of you know the captain concerned? Doubt it.

I spoke with him about this whole thing and from reading this most of you have know idea what happened, what was involved or further more much of a clue about anything!

Suffice to say with the information presented to them at the time any one of you could, would have done the same, so don't judge unless you know the facts!

jack schidt

2nd Jun 2015, 12:58

Haven't spoken to the Capt, but I know him pretty well.

All of us would have done the same, great intentions during the diversion to do the right thing at all times. Apply professional SOP's throughout and he just got unlucky to be the one who clipped the light. Any of us could have been that person and I say that none of us here or in the company could say with certainty that we would have been guaranteed that this could not have happened to us.

Don't worry about brake temps if there is a turn off around 3000m along the runway to exit when on a diversion transit stopover (weight dependant). The thought of ever having to do a 180 turn in the beast will always be considered a threat by most from now on. 55m minimum distance required to test pilot turn it, GL at an unusual airfield doing a procedure that you probably did years ago during the transition.

J

Mr Good Cat

2nd Jun 2015, 13:40