PDA

View Full Version : BA f/o just made a rookie mistake


CAP A330
7th Dec 2017, 00:10
Just flew on a BA B767. Empty flight, max 60 people. Had to go around due to pilot 'unable to slow down the aircraft' (words of the crew over tannoy). I had my suspicions that the final stage of flaps wasn't engaging proprerly. Anayway, pilot decides to pull back before increasing the power. I honestly thought that was it. We were going to stall and fall out of the sky. Even on the second attempt it didn't seem like the flaps were all the way down, despite them trying. It was a very sketchy landing. Poor showing from BA

wiggy
7th Dec 2017, 00:22
Just flew on a BA B767. Empty flight, max 60 people. Had to go around due to pilot 'unable to slow down the aircraft' (words of the crew over tannoy). I had my suspicions that the final stage of flaps wasn't engaging proprerly. Anayway, pilot decides to pull back before increasing the power. I honestly thought that was it. We were going to stall and fall out of the sky. Even on the second attempt it didn't seem like the flaps were all the way down, despite them trying. It was a very sketchy landing. Poor showing from BA

Into LHR by any chance? If so in your experience how easy do you find it complying with the 160 to 4 requirement but then being fully stable at 1000 feet AAL, especially on a light (nearly empty) aircraft? What do you think?

Interested to know who the crew were who used the “tannoy” flight crew or cabin crew? And also fascinated as to how exactly you judged the flap position from the passenger cabin...were you by any chance looking at the Whitcomb body indexers..they can be misaligned and be quite misleading"......(edited belatedly to add a ;) for careful readers)

B2N2
7th Dec 2017, 00:29
How do flaps “not engage properly”.
And an un-stabilized approach is exactky that. And if company procedures mandate you go-around if your not stabilized by a certain altitude the prundent thing to do is...guess again...go around.
I don’t see why you need to be hacking a professional crew over this.
I’m surprised you didnt ask the lead FA for a quick chat with the flight crew to inform them of the errors of their ways.

Consol
7th Dec 2017, 00:42
Great that you had such insights CAP, you should have given the crew a firm talking to and perhaps some helpful tips on how to land and 'engage' the 767 flap system and never to stall. Given that you previously posted about remote controlled aircraft (model aircraft in my day) as quoted below you clearly have the knowledge.

Thanks for the suggestions. But I was thinking something more 'technical'. As an example, I have tested a new wing design on an rc plane that greatly reduces the take off speed and distance needed. I have yet to run the numbers or work out the practically of the wing, but it would be titled something along the lines of 'Redesign of Bush aircraft wing for STOL'.

wiggy
7th Dec 2017, 00:50
(Edited)

In the interests of being slightly gentler on the OP please allow me a go-around from my first response, here's a second attempt .....:)

At BA if you are not stabilised at 1000 feet AAL then it is a mandatory go-around except in fairly exceptional circumstances. If you don’t it’s a tea and biscuits interview without the tea and biscuits...at some airports with speed requirements until close in, e.g LHRs “160 to 4” or the general American “160 as long as you can Bud” that can lead to some agressive speed reduction late in on the approach and late landing flap selection in order to get it all hanging and spooled up by the gate...if it was LHR then FWIW even with over 30,000 hours plus on the flight deck we had fun and games a few days ago on a lightweight triple trying to be both diligent on the 160 to 4 and then hitting the 1000 foot gate when there was a slight tailwind.

If the OP was a passenger I’d advise them to cut the crew some slack, and would hope that when he left the aircraft he thanked them for keeping him (or her) safe....

B2N2
7th Dec 2017, 00:51
Not to mention your post from the 8th Oct 2016

I feel like when I start working in a few years' time,

Which leads me to believe you’re an early teenager at most with an interest in aviation but no insight.

megan
7th Dec 2017, 05:38
B2N2, but he's an A330 CAPtain. :rolleyes:

West Coast
7th Dec 2017, 05:43
Or he’s a wind up and found some takers.

WhatsaLizad?
7th Dec 2017, 05:55
Airspeed, Flap and AOA indicators tend at seat 32A to be deferred maintenance items much of the time.


Did you have the crew check the logbook or make an entry for the inoperative items?

cavortingcheetah
7th Dec 2017, 06:53
So the guy is a youngster full of pep and vinegar. Surely that's just the sort of enthusiast you want on this forum in order to keep new blood flowing. Does it matter that the operational ability of a flight crew is brought up by a poster on these pages? Does it matter that the rookie mistake could have been questioned in a more subtly diplomatic manner.
Platinum bars have been put out I suppose, a great sin but not nearly as great a one as would be the case were the op a real A 330 Captain. So, on the basis of logical research and deduction, let the kid have his neck, point out the error of his ways to him but don’t toast the poor commentator, he might be the aviation correspondent for the Guardian.

Trossie
7th Dec 2017, 07:03
cavorting, would you honestly expect the aviation correspondent for Guardian to know as much about aviation that the OP has demonstrated?

(The kid probably is an A330 Captain... on his playstation in his bedroom!)

wiggy
7th Dec 2017, 07:13
Does it matter that the operational ability of a flight crew is brought up by a poster on these pages

It’s not the question, it’s the attitude..If the poster started by entitling thread “BA go around”, had asked “ had a go around on a 767 today, apparently something to do us being fast...can anyone shed some light on it”? I’m sure the response would have been different...

But he didn’t. On the basis of obviously zero insight and pretty much zero knowledge he went in both feet first with the headline that one of the crew had f***ked up...I’d suggest he’s not blazing a trail for the young and energetic, he’s simply being ignorant and deserves a lot of the responses he got.

cavortingcheetah
7th Dec 2017, 07:27
Well, as I said, the matter could have been raised in a more subtle manner but I then I remembered that this was Jet Blast, not perhaps the most appropriate page for a BA take down anyway and so became more benign in attitude.
Either way, the kid is getting good value out of his post.

vapilot2004
7th Dec 2017, 09:05
According to the information you have shared, the aircraft was light, apparently there was an un-stabilized approach, they went around and planted it on the second try. Twas a good outcome with no drama, except in the retelling, perhaps.

Anayway, pilot decides to pull back before increasing the power. I honestly thought that was it.

Procedure and engine lag will have the aircraft pitching up well before the engines have responded to throttle commands and since the aircraft was light, power need not have been maximum thrust.

Sorted?

TangoAlphad
7th Dec 2017, 10:45
I strongly suggest that if you one day get an airline interview try work this example into it. They will love it. CRM or some other competency based question but aye, either way guarantee to ensure the correct outcome for your interview.

RAT 5
7th Dec 2017, 10:58
..we had fun and games a few days ago on a lightweight triple trying to be both diligent on the 160 to 4 and then hitting the 1000 foot gate when there was a slight tailwind.

Is it time to adopt the "when the rules make life too difficult, change the rules." philosophy? i.e. allow 500-1000' gate on clear VMC days, like many others. :) I managed that in B767 days, but are B777 & B747's etc more difficult?

Evanelpus
7th Dec 2017, 11:05
Just flew on a BA B767. Empty flight, max 60 people. Had to go around due to pilot 'unable to slow down the aircraft' (words of the crew over tannoy). I had my suspicions that the final stage of flaps wasn't engaging proprerly. Anayway, pilot decides to pull back before increasing the power. I honestly thought that was it. We were going to stall and fall out of the sky. Even on the second attempt it didn't seem like the flaps were all the way down, despite them trying. It was a very sketchy landing. Poor showing from BA

Are you a reporter for the Daily Fail by any chance?

akindofmagic
7th Dec 2017, 11:12
I'd be interested to know how you know that it was the FO who was flying.

wiggy
7th Dec 2017, 11:14
Is it time to adopt the "when the rules make life too difficult, change the rules." philosophy? i.e. allow 500-1000' gate on clear VMC days,

We moved away from the soft gate at 1000/hard gate at 500 rule a while back, though there's still some wriggle room....usual caveat that I don't write the rules etc ...

but are B777 & B747's etc more difficult?

Not sure about the 747 under the current LHR regime (Time based separation), IMHO the 777-200 is OK, even at light weights, but you do have to be ready and willing with the speedbrake at 4 DME and not buy into the old school "stick of shame" carp...you need it, possibly all of it, if there's not a lot of headwind/a knot or two of tailwind...... I guess that might feel "odd" to some down the back, but it's nothing to write home about.......

Sallyann1234
7th Dec 2017, 11:59
CAP A330
You posted in the wrong forum here, you won't be taken seriously on JB.

I suggest you go the Rumours and News forum, so that your experience on that flight can inform the operational pilots who congregate there.

I am sure they will be very grateful for your valuable advice, so they can avoid such a dangerous situation happening again. :ok: :}

funfly
7th Dec 2017, 13:53
but he hasn’t come back has he?
Some youngster having a windup methinks.

CAP A330
7th Dec 2017, 15:05
I'd be interested to know how you know that it was the FO who was flying.

She informed us before take off she'd have the 'pleasure' of flying us to LHR, as is standard. As someone studying for the PPL it was even worse than my landings. It was truly terrible.

PDR1
7th Dec 2017, 15:16
As someone studying for the PPL it was even worse than my landings. It was truly terrible.

A word of advice - you might observe the first law of holes*.

PDR

* if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging...

ShyTorque
7th Dec 2017, 15:22
When the flying gets difficult, It's always a good idea to blame the co-pilot..... ;)

B2N2
7th Dec 2017, 15:39
CAP330, you just shot yourself in the foot with this one.
Admit it, get over it and forget you’ve ever made this post.
Get on with your studies and training and consider your foot-in-mouth disease cured. Thanks to Dr Pprune
Carry on.....

( slap to the back of the head)

wiggy
7th Dec 2017, 15:51
A330...


So as I understand it:

BA Co-pilot ( or in your words “rookie f/o”) makes PA at start of sector saying they are doing the sector/doing the flying.....as a result of this PA you seem pretty intent on blaming the “rookie f/o” for mishandling the first approach and the subsequent go around.

Those knowledgable of BA SOPs will see where I am going with this - I’ll simply say would you like to reconsider your opinion? Because trust me that hole you are digging is starting to look mighty big, and unless you reconsider you are going to need a bigger spade...

OTOH a reply of “Ooops, Given my knowledge base and lack of experience I really didn’t understand” would be perfectly understandable and would be perfectly acceptable.........your choice.......

back to Boeing
7th Dec 2017, 16:09
The following comes to mind with reference to the OP

Better to Remain Silent and Be Thought a Fool than to Speak and Remove All Doubt

akindofmagic
7th Dec 2017, 16:27
CAP A330 If-and it's a huge if assuming you don't significantly modify your attitude- you ever make it into a flying job, you will look back on your posts and cringe.

Lonewolf_50
7th Dec 2017, 17:12
Sallyann, that was just naughty.


Chuckled, I did.

VP959
7th Dec 2017, 18:17
The OPs initial post, now we know he's a PPL stude, just illustrates how very dangerous a little bit of knowledge is.

He's no awareness of energy management, as it isn't a significant issue with a light aircraft.

He's no awareness of airport and operator regs that demand that certain criteria have to be met in order to continue an approach.

He's no awareness of pitch change with thrust, again because with the majority of light aircraft it's a barely noticeable effect.

He's no awareness of how mass and momentum make a massive difference to the way large and heavy aircraft behave.

I remember the first time I was given control of a Nimrod MR2 for half an hour or so, as a jolly. The thing felt like a slug in terms of handling, as all I'd ever flown before were light aircraft and gliders. The best bit was when the guy in the left seat asked if I'd like to try a stall and recovery, with him giving clear instructions and just shadowing the controls in case I cocked up spectacularly (we were at around 30,000ft out over the North Atlantic somewhere, so well away from anyone else). I pulled off the power and the speed very slowly bled off, with me trying to keep us flying without letting a wing drop.

We stalled pretty much wings level and I lost over 1000ft during the recovery, despite following the stall recovery instructions I was given to the letter, something I was told was pretty normal for the type from that altitude. The stall itself was totally unlike that at low altitude in a light aircraft or glider, we just seemed to descend vertically, with a really sluggish response to applying power and virtually no elevator authority initially, at least that I could detect.

Someone used to flying a light aircraft wouldn't have a clue that there could be such a massive difference in behaviour between a heavy and light aircraft, and I'm absolutely certain that the PIC of that Nimrod was trying to gently and helpfully illustrate some of those differences to me by that exercise. One thing it did teach me was to never, ever, assume that knowledge and experience you've acquired on one aircraft type will apply equally to another.

Jack D
7th Dec 2017, 18:41
Goodness me chaps .. this isn’t very good at all, buck up !

gingernut
7th Dec 2017, 19:04
Completely off thread, but recently caught a flight from Cardiff to Newcastle. (The ticket said "Flybe but the plane said "Eastern")

I asked the very pleasant lady at the gate where the aircraft was, and she pointed to a little farty thing WITH PROPELLORS ON some distance below my eye line.

I did point out to the stewardess that it was unlikely this thing would ever make it to he place where she was born.

After some remarks about "why I ya canny lad" and all that, I took my seat (after bumping my head). She moved me to "balance the weight" (I think she may have possibly been having a laugh.)

Anyway, she askedif I'd like a drink. I ordered a cheeky red, pulled out my wallet, only to be told it was a free bar.

"Tell the captain to take his time" I told her.

Bottom line, they looked after me well, although I did feel it was a bit ambitous calling the thing a "Jet" stream :-)

Thanks chaps.

CAP A330
7th Dec 2017, 20:40
A330...


So as I understand it:

BA Co-pilot ( or in your words “rookie f/o”) makes PA at start of sector saying they are doing the sector/doing the flying.....as a result of this PA you seem pretty intent on blaming the “rookie f/o” for mishandling the first approach and the subsequent go around.

Those knowledgable of BA SOPs will see where I am going with this - I’ll simply say would you like to reconsider your opinion? Because trust me that hole you are digging is starting to look mighty big, and unless you reconsider you are going to need a bigger spade...

OTOH a reply of “Ooops, Given my knowledge base and lack of experience I really didn’t understand” would be perfectly understandable and would be perfectly acceptable.........your choice.......

Well even after touch down the f/o very sheepishly apologised for the first go around (we were 15mins early before then) and then the go around meant we touched down on time. I wouldn't be surprised if the cap took control after the cock up that was the first approach. Are you saying f/o's aren't allowed to approach in Ba?

TangoAlphad
7th Dec 2017, 20:53
Oh FFS they never learn..

G-CPTN
7th Dec 2017, 21:02
At least the OP has the right attitude to be a Captain - if he ever makes it beyond FO.
(He knows that he is right . . . - and will not be persuaded otherwise.)

Contact Approach
7th Dec 2017, 21:40
I was on the same flight it was truly horrifying! My life flashed before my eyes; absolute TERROR as the plane PLUNGED sort of stuff. I'm still shaking typing this.........

back to Boeing
7th Dec 2017, 22:05
On the one hand I want to put him out of his misery. Nah. Screw it. I'm getting on the popcorn and seeing what other pearls of wisdom he comes out with. Every day's a school day after all.

akindofmagic
7th Dec 2017, 22:18
I retract my earlier comment. I don't think you will look back and cringe. Yours will simply be one of those names that causes the captain to cringe when he sees it on his roster.

Cirrussy
7th Dec 2017, 22:25
I retract my earlier comment. I don't think you will look back and cringe. Yours will simply be one of those names that causes the captain to cringe when he sees it on his roster.

My god, there are too many already!

CAP A330
7th Dec 2017, 22:48
Given my knowledge base and lack of experience I really didn’t understand what happened. I'm sorry.

vapilot2004
7th Dec 2017, 22:52
Given my knowledge base and lack of experience I really didn’t understand what happened. I'm sorry.

Excellent response. You may have potential after all, young grasshopper.

Cazalet33
7th Dec 2017, 22:57
Unless he's quoting, verbatim, the cabin address given by the F/O after the G/A. ;)
(Or by the Captain :eek:)

cavortingcheetah
7th Dec 2017, 23:04
Jolly good thing he didn't rhetorically ask whether the hard and terrible landing could have been because the PH was a rookie woman pilot. Just think of the trouble that would have got him into. Why, the whole of Africa wouldn't be big enough for that hole, spades or no spade.

Cazalet33
7th Dec 2017, 23:07
he didn't rhetorically ask whether the hard and terrible landing could have been because the PH was a rookie woman pilotMebbe he couldn't be sure until she took off her burkah.:suspect:

megan
8th Dec 2017, 02:04
What the young fella needs to learn is no matter the experience in the log book everyone is capable of screwing the pooch, landings especially, the skill by which all pilots seem to be judged.

The very worse landing I've experienced, besides my own, was a QF 747 just after dawn following a trans Pacific non stop with zero wind. FO or Captain I've no idea. Even the CC were clutching their seats following the initial hit. It happens.

MAKING MISTAKES

No one likes to make mistakes.

But some are terrified of making them. They think it smart to "play safe". They avoid making decisions where there is an element of risk. They steer clear of controversy. They evade responsibility. They take sides only after the battle has been won.

Nobody should be ashamed of an honest error of judgement made in good faith. If we make a mistake we should frankly admit to it. None of us is infallible. "To err is human".

Human beings only grow and develop by learning from their mistakes.

If we do not put ourselves in a position where mistakes are possible, we will never do anything worth while. Like the tortoise we can only make progress if we stick our necks out.

In the end courage pays off. People do not admire the "fence sitter" or those who keep well away from where the going is toughest. They admire those prepared to "have a go", to back their opinions, to take a risk. These are the people who must, in the end, win the positions of leadership.

Nothing great was ever achieved by following the safe easy road.

The person that never made a mistake never made anything.Arthur Whitten Brown, to Capt. John Alcock after they crash landed in a bog at Cliften, Ireland, after completing the first transatlantic flight, 1919

"Oh well, I suppose lots of people will do it now."

Not sure if he was talking of the landing/crash or the trans Atlantic. He would have been correct on both counts in any event.

Good luck with the career young fella, if that's where you aim.

wiggy
8th Dec 2017, 09:33
A330

Are you saying f/o's aren't allowed to approach in Ba?

Nope, not saying that at all......in the interests of further education, above 1000' the F/O won't have been flying her own approach for her own landing, so it is entirely possible the first approach and go-around was handled by the captain..hence you can't simply pin any handling errors you perceived as being down to the "f/o" rookie or not, on the basis of the PA made at the start of the sector...hope that helps..

Just a gentle bit of advice to add to that given by others...Personally, even with the benefit of a bit more of a PPL I'll never ever criticise anyone's landing if I am sitting as a passenger down the back....I may have cringed a few times but as others have said sat at row whatever you simply don't have the data to know whether the arrival was the best that could be done in the circumstances..

Even when sat up front in my office I'm well aware it is a while since I instructed so I'm only likely to offer advice on a landing if it has gone really wrong or if asked and there's an obvious reason why my colleague's hard work has resulted in a sub-optimal touchdown.....like many of us I'm aware that the next landing will be mine.....( and I've crunched more than one, I watched more than a few confident students get a suprise as the ground has reached up and grabbed them, and trust me, you will find it will happen to you, more than once..).

Hope your PPL works out, hopefully with experience you'll get a bit of insight.

Sir Niall Dementia
8th Dec 2017, 09:49
A very long time ago a BA Captain wrote a brilliant poem about the approach SOP's, it was published in the Log, It actually explained the whole concept far better than the section out of Vol9 of the OM (Yep that long ago) that the SOP's were written in.

There was a lot about the handling landing pilot taking over handling from the handling non-landing pilot. I knew quite a few pilots who referred to it when doing the brief.

SND

Sallyann1234
8th Dec 2017, 09:50
I remember the instructor telling me, after I looked at him hoping for praise after a reasonably good landing, "You only learn from the bad ones."

G-CPTN
8th Dec 2017, 10:08
A very long time ago a BA Captain wrote a brilliant poem about the approach SOP's, it was published in the Log, It actually explained the whole concept far better than the section out of Vol9 of the OM (Yep that long ago) that the SOP's were written in.

"There appears to be some confusion over the new pilot role titles. This notice will hopefully clear up any misunderstandings.

The titles P1, P2 and Co-Pilot will now cease to have any meaning, within the BA operations manuals. They are to be replaced by Handling Pilot, Non-handling Pilot, Handling Landing Pilot, Non-Handling Landing Pilot, Handling Non-Landing Pilot, and Non Handling Non-Landing Pilot.

The Landing Pilot, is initially the Handling Pilot and will handle the take-off and landing except in role reversal when he is the Non-Handling Pilot for taxi Until the Handling Non-Landing Pilot, hands the Handling to the Landing Pilot at eighty knots.

The Non-Landing (Non-Handling, since the Landing Pilot is Handling) Pilot reads the checklist to the Handling Pilot until after the Before Descent Checklist completion, when the Handling Landing Pilot hands the handling to the Non-Handling Non-Landing Pilot who then becomes the Handling Non-Landing Pilot.

The Landing Pilot is the Non-Handling Pilot until the "decision altitude" call, when the Handling Non-Landing Pilot hands the handling to the Non-Handling Landing Pilot, unless the latter calls "go-around", in which case the Handling Non-Landing Pilot, continues Handling and the Non-Handling Landing Pilot continues non-handling until the next call of "land" or "go-around", as appropriate.

In view of the recent confusion over these rules, it was deemed necessary to restate them clearly."

VP959
8th Dec 2017, 10:13
For a couple of years I flew with an old RN carrier pilot (from the days when we had proper aircraft carriers). Every landing was undeniably firm, no matter what we were flying. He was just wired to plant aircraft on the ground at a descent rate that pretty much ensured the oleos bottomed out, every time, from years spent landing on carriers and making sure he caught the wire.

Sir Niall Dementia
8th Dec 2017, 11:29
G-CPTN;

Brilliant!!:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

That was it precisely, and it really was clearer than the OM!

SND

olympus
8th Dec 2017, 13:16
Some years ago I expressed scorn for BA's continued adherence to the 'monitored approach' SOP, which seems to date from the days of poor or no avionics, and got flamed for my trouble.

This thread again mentions the monitored approach and I continue to wonder why it is still the handling SOP of choice in BA. In my airline (now no longer, sadly) we always flew leg and leg about. That is to say the captain flew his sector take-off to touchdown then the FO flew the next sector take-off to touchdown. (In fact, most captains gave the FOs his/her choice of sectors). The only exceptions to this were Cat 2 approaches, either practice or for real, where the FO flew the approach and the capt took over at DH for the actual landing. The rest of the time the captain flew and the FO monitored or vice versa.

What is the practice in the likes of Emirates, QF, Virgin, Cathay etc?

wiggy
8th Dec 2017, 13:41
TBH, having used both the “old” BOAC style SOPS at BA and now the current (supposedly derived from BEA version ) I’d say there’s no great mystery to either. In fact with talk of better avionics it is perhaps worth bearing in mind that with the increasing frequency we fly RNAV approaches (sometimes given by ATC in preference to an ILS) there might even be more of an argument in favour of the monitored approach.....fundamentally it works OK, you just do what you are trained and paid to do.

blind pew
8th Dec 2017, 14:30
And it doesn’t mention who handles the throttles...

B2N2
8th Dec 2017, 15:17
Given my knowledge base and lack of experience I really didn’t understand what happened. I'm sorry.

;)...............

megan
8th Dec 2017, 16:25
And it doesn’t mention who handles the throttles...The retard, the rest of the time they're in auto ain't they? ;)

RAT 5
8th Dec 2017, 16:50
Nope, not saying that at all......in the interests of further education, above 1000' the F/O won't have been flying her own approach for her own landing,

I've flown monitored approaches as required in low cloud or misty vis: otherwise it was PF start to finish. The idea of swapping over had its merits if the approach was under auto-command and the landing pilot was searching for visual clues before disconnecting it and landing. It avoids the dangers associated with PF being head-in and then being required to be suddenly head-out at low height and low vis and assess what they see and manoeuvre the a/c with little margin of error. In such conditions it is not often to be in rock & roll weather.
However, in nasty gusty rainy conditions being hands on early helps you feel the a/c and the weather. There have been runway excursions and other incidents where the investigation commented that the landing pilot was criticised for keeping the automatics in command too late into the approach. They were then taken by surprise on disconnecting and being handed a twitchy cantankerous a/c. They were racing to catch up. So, on those days, especially in side-stick FBW is it not better for the PF landing to have an educated hand on the controls early?
I also flew for one outfit, who conducted certain flight safety procedures in a curious manner. Curious in that they were not in common with the vet majority of modern airlines. Their answer was, "we've been doing it like this for years and never had a problem with them." That might be true, but they were un-open for discussion even when it was suggested the newer procedures were an improvement not just different. It was a 'ain't broke don't fix it attitude' in extreme. That can be relevant in many cases, but improvements should not just be dismissed willy nilly.
I wonder if the BA monitored approach is born from the glory days of "we were one of the first and one of the best" attitude? That was true, but is it still the case? If that leads to closed eyes & ears it could be unhealthy. There are many procedures that have evolved over time and been tried & tested by many operators in various environments. They've been reviewed and watched and adopted by many. How many worldwide operators have adopted the BA method? That to me would be an indication of its true merit.

And it doesn’t mention who handles the throttles...

Careful; that could start a whole new thread drift topic. See the chat about 'Mr. Boeing can't speak simple'.

wiggy
8th Dec 2017, 17:25
I wonder if the BA monitored approach is born from the glory days of "we were one of the first and one of the best" attitude?

How far back do you want to go - the current method doesn't really go back to the glory days of empire (IMHO, others here will have a better handle on this), at least on longhaul...

As I recall it thirtyish years back on Long haul BA, certainly the 747, you flew your own precision approaches for your own landing...I think, but am not sure, that there was an option/requirement to switch to something along the lines of a monitored approach ("split"?) for non precison approaches in bad weather.

When we got the 744 we stuck with the BOAC, DIY method for a while, and probably changed to the current monitored method, on the 744 at least, in the early nineties, possibly at the behest of the ex BEA pilots who seemed to take over the training empire at around that time ( the rumour being that that was something to do with when shuttle back up credit disappearing....).

Having seen both "DIY" and the monitored done on big Boeings as I said earlier I'm not really convinced either has an obvious advantage, but don't get me started on reverser handling and full time mandatory autothrottle..

I hope the OP realisies what he started..........

rogerg
8th Dec 2017, 17:30
And it doesn’t mention who handles the throttles
I was told that gas turbines don't have throttles but thrust levers.

blind pew
8th Dec 2017, 22:53
Auto thrust levers just don’t sound right whoever his playing with them.

back to Boeing
8th Dec 2017, 23:26
Having done both. "Standard" approaches and BA style monitored approaches for every approach. I like the BA way. It keeps you invested in the whole approach. And as pilot handling (P2 as it were) your mind is purely focussed on hitting those toga buttons if you don't hear either stable or visual I have control.

As P1 you're also invested. If the other pilot hands you a bag of nails at the gate or decision well you take control and go around and discuss it in the bar later as opposed to in the chief pilot's office. Or you take the glory of a wonderfully flown approach.

You're a crew. I like this way of doing it. At the same time it's your employer who decides how you do it and they pay your mortgage

ExSp33db1rd
9th Dec 2017, 00:06
I wonder if the BA monitored approach is born from the glory days of "we were one of the first and one of the best" attitude?

In the early days of BEA playing with Monitored Approaches, we, in BOAC, were stood in New York Customs when we were approached by an "older" PanAm Captain who asked if we were the outfit that were using Monitored Approaches?

We replied in the negative of course, and then he said "PanAm has always used a monitored approach technique, since day 1" We expressed surprise, and he pointed to his co-pilot and said - " I fly, he monitors"

QED.

exeng
9th Dec 2017, 00:44
Started in BA as a pilot with the 'monitored approach'.

Quite liked it in many ways as the NHP was given the responsibility of ensuring the approach was accurately flown until the HP was visual to continue to landing. By the way in my time this meant that the NHP could hand fly the approach if conditions were appropriate - this in turn meant that as an F/O you had a lot of opportunity to actually hand fly the aircraft in what could be at times quite challenging conditions - all subject to the Captain agreeing with you hand flying of course, which most did.

Subsequently I flew in 3 different airlines who adopted the principle of the HP flying it all. On balance I preferred this 'approach' if you will excuse the pun. Why did I prefer it you may ask - well it comes down to my preference to 'seeing the whole thing through' if you like.

Now having said the above, in the 3 airlines where the HP flew everything it all changed in low vis where the monitored approach philosophy was adopted. In this low vis case the pilots were expected to adopt a style of operation that 99.9% of the time they did not operate to.

In conclusion it is my view that although I personally preferred the HP fly the whole thing routine, the overall operation would be safer if the overall 'monitored approach' philosophy was adopted.

Now on to handling of engine reverse because somebody has very unwisely opened that box!

Again I've seen it both ways in BA. (I worked there for a long time) In the early days the HP handled his/her own reverse and this worked quite well in that the HP could cancel reverse etc whenever he/she felt there was a directional control problem.

I was an F/E when BA changed to NHP reverser deployment and remember that the first landing we did on line resulted in a 'brakes only' landing. Anyway the two chaps/chapesses soon got used to the idea and the whole idea set in.

What I observed as an F/E and as F/O and Capt was that the NHP operating the reversers on landing generally resulted in a much quicker reverser deployment on touchdown - particularly when in limiting crosswind conditions etc. However it has always been of some concern to me that it may be quite difficult to regain control and cancel reverse should the need arise due directional control problems. This situation never happened to me but I always had a niggle at the back of my mind.

For me the jury is out on handling of reverse, but I have to say I felt more comfortable handling my own reverse when HP.


Kind regards
Exeng

Loose rivets
9th Dec 2017, 00:58
He was just wired to plant aircraft on the ground at a descent rate that pretty much ensured the oleos bottomed out, every time, from years spent landing on carriers and making sure he caught the wire.

Hmmm . . . years ago I was TRE-ing the same bloke I'd imagine. I finally had to tell him that A/It WASN'T funny. B/We just couldn't afford him.


The first takeoff I did without a line training bloke on board was with a captain that was also in the same position. He had never flown jet transport before.

We started the roll on a sunny day at LHR and it was only moments before it was obvious that our man was in a muddle with his hands. Tiller - throttles. Pole - throttles. Tiller - pole. Pole - pole. and we weren't at 80kts yet!!!!!

I called V1 Rotate and watched helpless as the aircraft took off Tiller - throttles and huge bulging eyes. Helpless cos of trying to stifle my laughter.

The trim, done in china-graph on a swizzle wheel, set us up to climb away at V2 + 8. Precisely on the money. After grabbing the pole and a lot of hurrrumphing, the speed was all over the place.

Flew with him a lot. I've always wondered if he ever realized he walked across the tarmac at Palma with my jacket on. He was as wide as he was tall and my two gold bars were nearly up to his elbows.

If one gets another go at life, I hope its in a place where there's no seniority.

blind pew
9th Dec 2017, 09:27
Wasn’t in the 70s by any chance. And if so I might have been there ;-)
Done all three styles of monitored approach.
The “all change hands” style led to a horror comic 400 piece where the buttons were mixed up..probably late 80s Wiggy If u research it.
The FO tried to describe the incident,amongst insane laughter, as to how it flew with an outer at full chat about 50 ft above the runway.
The skipper,who had grown up on the gripper, couldn’t claim “new procedure” as his defence and couldn’t really invite himself for tea and no biscuits but to his credit did publish the bare facts.

ShyTorque
9th Dec 2017, 11:32
I had the opportunity to transfer from rotary wing to the airlines at about the time all this "HP/NHP/Who am I supposed to be" stuff was being introduced.

I'm glad to say I chose not to transfer. A quarter of a century on, I still get to hand fly every approach (because the great majority are visual approaches), or if IFR/IMC I can choose either way and I still have to do the landing because the aircraft doesn't know how to do it.

Trossie
9th Dec 2017, 12:11
" I fly, he monitors"

Like the CRM explanation that I had once from a captain just about to retire:

He pointed at the cabin crew and said "Crew".

He then pointed at the F/O and said "Resource".

He then pointed at himself and said "Management"!!

Zeus
10th Dec 2017, 13:42
When a senior BA trainer explained their system to me he ended the talk by saying "it really is the best system".
Stupidly I asked "how many other airlines use it?"
From the look on his face I realised I had not made a friend.

chuks
10th Dec 2017, 16:22
It's interesting that a student was able to assess the landing from back in the cabin so accurately. The guy must match Niki Lauda for having something going with what he sits upon.

I once had that "Someone is watching me," feeling as I was filling out the tech log. A look out the little round document hatch (the "whiskey hatch" to some) told the tale; there was a Shellie stood there on the ramp glaring at me. I asked him if I could be of help, when he said, "That was a bad landing."

No, it was a firm landing, right out of the book for getting the spoilers out and the brakes activated, and one not flown by me anyway but never mind that now.

I told him that when I made a bad landing it broke all the light bulbs in the airport café, that he must be new here not to know that. He silently tried to absorb what I was telling him (to naff off, basically), and then he said, "I still think that was a bad landing."

I asked him if there was anything else he had a question about, when answer came there none. I resumed filling out the tech log, and when I looked up again, he was gone.

Now, here he is, back again! In a different guise, clearly, but it has to be the same fellow ....

RAT 5
10th Dec 2017, 16:46
When a senior BA trainer explained their system to me he ended the talk by saying "it really is the best system".
Stupidly I asked "how many other airlines use it?"
From the look on his face I realised I had not made a friend.

It is excellent, when required by weather.
Good weather = PF approach & landing. Dodgy weather ILS or NPA = monitored approach for captain's landing. LVO = auto land captain's landing. KISS.

Does BA allow shortened visual approaches in non radar airfields, or is it still full NPA procedure?

wiggy
10th Dec 2017, 17:26
Does BA allow shortened visual approaches in non radar airfields, or is it still full NPA procedure?

If you asking if pilots at BA can opt for a self position/visual circuit or similar circumstances permitting?

If so the answer is yes, and it’s certainly not uncommon at some of Caribbean destinations on the T7...

Despite stories to the contrary BA’s SOPs are not always as massively restrictive in some areas as some people seem to think or are claiming....

M.Mouse
10th Dec 2017, 17:37
I believe some airlines use the 'monitored approach' procedure similar to BA's SOPs but only in poor visibility.

That has always struck me as an interesting philosophy to use an unfamiliar procedure in demanding conditions only!

I flew for BA for over 20 years. Their procedures work just fine. Like any procedure as long as everybody understands it and operates to Company SOPs then it is not a problem.

I now work as an instructor for a well known aircraft manufacturer. I was quite amazed at how many airlines modify the manufacturer's SOP's. Some sensibly, some not so sensibly. What is very apparent is that the changes are often instigated by a Flight Training Manager who brings with him/her the way of doing it from his/her last airline/type! Some work well, some do not.

I have always maintained that the great thing with SOPs is that there are so many to choose from.

Trossie
10th Dec 2017, 19:55
That has always struck me as an interesting philosophy to use an unfamiliar procedure in demanding conditions only!Agreed!!!!

RAT 5
11th Dec 2017, 18:05
I believe some airlines use the 'monitored approach' procedure similar to BA's SOPs but only in poor visibility.
That has always struck me as an interesting philosophy to use an unfamiliar procedure in demanding conditions only!

That's how I've done it with various airlines, and adopted it one day, to 'get in' after an PF F/O ILS + GA before the airline introduced it as an SOP. Cloud base was at minimums and changeable.
It's not that unfamiliar as that is the procedure of an LVO ILS. F/O is PF, monitors the autopilot and captain calls landing and monitors the auto land. F/O stays inside all the time and is ready for GA until captain take over. The only difference with a bad Wx monitored approach is the F/O monitors the autopilot to DA, or earlier, on a single channel instead of multi channel. The captain then has, OMG, to make a manual landing instead of monitoring an auto land. Completely familiar.

Trossie
11th Dec 2017, 18:40
Done both. I like the chopping-and-changing-who-is-actually-handling a lot less.

TangoAlphad
11th Dec 2017, 21:36
Used to fly the old monitored approach during bad wx at my old outfit and it actually worked very well for us.

Bearing in mind this was a turbo prop with no Vnav/autothrottle and no lnav overlay so this was NDB/DME ETC in HDG/VS and manual power and flown go around. I agree in a newer machine with LNAV VNAV Auto throttle etc etc it seems a tad pointless.

Pace
11th Dec 2017, 22:39
I used to be heavily involved in a FS forum after being part of a third party add-on company for MSFS
Huge Hobby with millions of followers world wide

We used to have a guy who claimed he was a 747 Captain in the forums and all the flight simulator enthusiasts looked to him in awe to answer their questions which he did in absolute detail

Then one day he made a major blunder which no real pilot would ever make and that set some of us in the forum questioning how real this guy was
We eventually found out he was a 12 year old kid who got a kick out of being idolised as a real 747 Captain
Basically he was googling the Answers and changing the script to look like it was natural chat from him
But then what harm? he obviously put a lot of time and research into his responses and he was 95% accurate until he got too Cocky and sidestepped google

G-CPTN
11th Dec 2017, 23:20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxyJ80a2OyY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maPB_KMmMJU

RAT 5
12th Dec 2017, 13:19
But then again, remember the Russian captain & son in a large Airbus cockpit, before they crashed.

Simplythebeast
12th Dec 2017, 15:02
But then again, remember the Russian captain & son in a large Airbus cockpit, before they crashed.
Yes....very sad. However when this kid was in the cockpit earlier the aircraft was at the gate.

olympus
12th Dec 2017, 15:54
Interesting comments re the BA-style approaches vis-a-vis the 'normal' ones.

I'm still not convinced of the merits of swopping roles at various times during the flight. A 'normal' SOP where one pilot pilots and the other monitors for the whole leg still gives a 'monitored' approach but with no chopping and changing of who does what. (With the proviso that low vis conditions may require a different SOP.)

How does a BA pilot log his flying? Just for the time he handles the controls or for the whole leg even though he didn't do the landing?

Again, what system do other major airlines use in normal operations?

treadigraph
12th Dec 2017, 23:27
I used to be heavily involved in a FS forum after being part of a third party add-on company for MSFS
Huge Hobby with millions of followers world wide

We used to have a guy who claimed he was a 747 Captain in the forums and all the flight simulator enthusiasts looked to him in awe to answer their questions which he did in absolute detail

Then one day he made a major blunder which no real pilot would ever make and that set some of us in the forum questioning how real this guy was
We eventually found out he was a 12 year old kid who got a kick out of being idolised as a real 747 Captain
Basically he was googling the Answers and changing the script to look like it was natural chat from him
But then what harm? he obviously put a lot of time and research into his responses and he was 95% accurate until he got too Cocky and sidestepped google

FS? Experience? Seneca Five? Asking as a non-pilot, Pace are you really a CPL or an ATPL? Even a PPL? Just asking...?

RAT 5
13th Dec 2017, 17:35
If you asking if pilots at BA can opt for a self position/visual circuit or similar circumstances permitting? If so the answer is yes, and it’s certainly not uncommon at some of Caribbean destinations on the T7...

How does that work then with a monitored approach and a swap over of controlling pilot? It has been said that PF non-landing sets ups the approach and PF landing takes over about 1000' and lands. It sounds a potential mess as PF sees the island ahead, sets up for a ripping downwind descending circuit to a gentle glide aimed at hitting the 1000' gate at >3nm and then has to hand over. I know there were some captains who were much more reserved and conservative, even uncomfortable with 'short finals'. It's your approach, but their landing. Are you suggesting that the landing pilot can influence how you fly a visual approach? I hope not. It will be interesting to learn just how that is avoided.

Trossie
14th Dec 2017, 10:09
Again, what system do other major airlines use in normal operations?Normal systems?

wiggy
14th Dec 2017, 20:12
How does that work then with a monitored approach and a swap over of controlling pilot?

Whilst I would certainly agree this is one area the SOP is not particularly elegant it’s still not rocket science to get it organised TBH...you sort out the gates/bottom lines on energy states at the briefing stage, tell your colleague what you want and if your colleague then starts stuffing it up you say something.

If there is one perhaps dubious advantage to doing it that way it is what somebody mentioned a while back - as the non handler you remain “invested” in what your colleague is doing, rather than potentially sitting back and wondering how they are going to salvage their landing out of the mess they are making.....

As for someone flying an approach that the other pilot isn’t comfortable with, well that can happen regardless of the SOPs used....

piperboy84
15th Dec 2017, 01:27
Given my knowledge base and lack of experience I really didn’t understand what happened. I'm sorry.

Damn it CAP A330 this is the aviation business we're in here not Sunday confessional. Never ever let a lack of knowledge, experience or the facts let you lose an argument. Bluster, bullshit and flat out lie till you either win or dig yourself out of the hole, or if that doesn't work plead not guilty and blame everyone else. You're not gonna get very far up the pecking order in this game with that mea culpa nonsense.

B2N2
15th Dec 2017, 05:30
Sadly enough ‘84...that happens to be true.

wiggy
15th Dec 2017, 08:12
You're not gonna get very far up the pecking order in this game with that mea culpa nonsense.

I wouldn't worry...if you look at how the thread developed and you see how the OP ended up with that choice of words I rather suspect it wasn’t a heart felt mea culpa at all....

chuks
15th Dec 2017, 09:54
I have seen stranger ways to kick off a thread, but not by much. The guy chooses CAP A330 as his handle, but then it turns out he's not a pilot at all? This is like choosing Studley McStudmuffin as your handle but then letting drop that you were the last castrato in the Sistine Chapel Choir.

As to my own aviation credentials let me asseverate that I once listened to the last castrato in the Sistine Chapel Choir, on HF, the BBC World Service, 15400 kHz, in a Twin Otter flying between Jos and Lagos, Nigeria, at FL100. It was not that I chose that to listen to, since he (it? whatever) was kind of wavery and screechy, a lot like Paul Gambaccini sounded on Radio 4.

It was all that was on offer right then, Alessandro Moreschi singing, sort of, and we had that strong headwind during harmattan so that we were only doing about 110 knots over the ground. That's my excuse and I am sticking to it. (I don't even listen to James Blunt the rhymes-with-blunt if I can help it, even though my wife thinks he sounds pretty nice; I am, like, totally hetero!)

Anyway, it was not all that much of a career, no A330s at all, but I was PIC on the Twin Otter and I did get to know a lot more than I needed to know about how the last castrato in the Sistine Chapel Choir sounded. (I already knew how Paul Gambaccini sounded because I went to high school with him back in the Sixties.)

CAP A330, don't listen to that guy telling you to "bluster, bullshit and flat out lie .... " Okay, you started that way, but you have all the time you need to turn that around. Aviation has a way of punishing fantasists, mostly by having the ground come up and smack them in the face. Unless you go straight into management, when you probably could swallow a nail and emit a corkscrew, no problem, no harm to your career, and better terms and conditions all around ... play it straight from here on in, okay? Oh, and GET A DIFFERENT HANDLE!

CAP A330
30th Dec 2017, 19:08
I have seen stranger ways to kick off a thread, but not by much. The guy chooses CAP A330 as his handle, but then it turns out he's not a pilot at all? This is like choosing Studley McStudmuffin as your handle but then letting drop that you were the last castrato in the Sistine Chapel Choir.

As to my own aviation credentials let me asseverate that I once listened to the last castrato in the Sistine Chapel Choir, on HF, the BBC World Service, 15400 kHz, in a Twin Otter flying between Jos and Lagos, Nigeria, at FL100. It was not that I chose that to listen to, since he (it? whatever) was kind of wavery and screechy, a lot like Paul Gambaccini sounded on Radio 4.

It was all that was on offer right then, Alessandro Moreschi singing, sort of, and we had that strong headwind during harmattan so that we were only doing about 110 knots over the ground. That's my excuse and I am sticking to it. (I don't even listen to James Blunt the rhymes-with-blunt if I can help it, even though my wife thinks he sounds pretty nice; I am, like, totally hetero!)

Anyway, it was not all that much of a career, no A330s at all, but I was PIC on the Twin Otter and I did get to know a lot more than I needed to know about how the last castrato in the Sistine Chapel Choir sounded. (I already knew how Paul Gambaccini sounded because I went to high school with him back in the Sixties.)

CAP A330, don't listen to that guy telling you to "bluster, bullshit and flat out lie .... " Okay, you started that way, but you have all the time you need to turn that around. Aviation has a way of punishing fantasists, mostly by having the ground come up and smack them in the face. Unless you go straight into management, when you probably could swallow a nail and emit a corkscrew, no problem, no harm to your career, and better terms and conditions all around ... play it straight from here on in, okay? Oh, and GET A DIFFERENT HANDLE!

Don't be offended at this, but this forum seems to attract people that love telling stories and writing long winded posts. Again, no offence intended, but this is something you will struggle to find in other forums.

MFC_Fly
30th Dec 2017, 19:11
Don't be offended at this, but this forum seems to attract people that love telling stories and writing long winded posts. Again, no offence intended, but this is something you will struggle to find in other forums.
Well feel free to go and stick with your flight sim forums then, I am sure the wannabes there will look up to your expertise :ok:

NWSRG
30th Dec 2017, 19:30
Don't be offended at this, but this forum seems to attract people that love telling stories and writing long winded posts. Again, no offence intended, but this is something you will struggle to find in other forums.

That's called 'experience'...sadly undervalued these days, but of vital importance at the critical moments of life. And I say that not as a pilot (unless a lapsed PPL counts) but as a 46 year old, with a few bruises to show it!

cavortingcheetah
30th Dec 2017, 20:08
Long winded stories on wrinkled plums? That's one of the great pleasures of being amongst the mighty of aviation, the living Valhalla, so to speak, of pilots still alive today. I remember when a monitored approach was when you chucked the F/O out of his seat and substituted his backside with a much more attractive one pulled from the ranks of female passengers on a casino route in Southern Africa. Their squeals of delight as the runway lights rushed towards one always drowned the irritating Too Low Pull Up message or the exhilarating Whoop Whoop of the klaxon, which always took me back to my days as a U Boat skipper in the bathtub. Suffice to say that, Ops Manual nothwithstanding, the purpose of those monitored approaches was to provide amusement to the tittilators of tinsel town and gratification of one sort or another, usually rendered somewhat later and with great enthusiasm, to the errant pilot providing the pantomime.

RAT 5
30th Dec 2017, 20:25
Their squeals of delight as the runway lights rushed towards one always drowned the irritating Too Low Pull Up message or the exhilarating Whoop Whoop of the klaxon, which always took me back to my days as a U Boat skipper in the bathtub.

The mind boggles and the imagination is rife with activity. Sadly the body & mind are no longer in sync; one being more capable than the other. When I went down I went down in flames, or with a cry of 'dive dive'. I never triggered the Too Low scream, but dreamt of the Whoop Whoop, Oh Yeah.

Tom Cundall
31st Dec 2017, 09:34
You should become an SFI doing MCC courses.

You can get a lifetime of "Whoop Whoop" in a single day and you never have to explain yourself to the head Honcho. :)