West Atlantic ATP runway excursion in Birmingham

[giggitygiggity]

Not seen this here yet. The video will explain it far better than I could.


First try

etkyguzNXBM


Last try

H5mnCEMzV-0


avherald summary (http://avherald.com/h?article=4d8d2671&opt=0)

A West Atlantic British Aerospace ATP, registration SE-MAO performing flight PT-425 from Guernsey,CI to Birmingham,EN (UK), was on approach to Birmingham's runway 33 in stormy conditions at 13:43L (12:43Z), when the aircraft touched down far down into the runway, began to veer left and lifted off again for a go around. The aircraft positioned for another approach to runway 33 about 15 minutes after the balked landing, touched down again, again began to veer left, departed the runway surface with all gear, rolled parallel to the runway and returned onto the runway surface after slowing down.

The aircraft departed Birmingham about 47.5 hours after landing.

Metars:
EGBB 221520Z 24015G26KT 190V280 CAVOK 17/04 Q1014=
EGBB 221450Z 23016KT 200V270 CAVOK 18/04 Q1014=
EGBB 221420Z 23015G25KT 190V260 9999 FEW040 18/04 Q1014=
EGBB 221350Z 23016G27KT 200V270 9999 FEW040 18/04 Q1013=
EGBB 221320Z 23018G31KT 190V280 CAVOK 18/04 Q1013=
EGBB 221250Z 24015G26KT 190V280 9999 SCT048 18/05 Q1013=
EGBB 221220Z 25015G25KT 210V280 9999 SCT048 17/05 Q1013=
EGBB 221150Z 23015G25KT 190V270 9999 SCT047 17/05 Q1013=
EGBB 221120Z 23016KT 200V270 9999 SCT046 18/05 Q1013=
EGBB 221050Z 23015G25KT 190V260 9999 SCT039 17/05 Q1012=
EGBB 221020Z 23014KT 200V260 9999 BKN042 17/05 Q1012=
EGBB 220950Z 24012KT 190V280 9999 SCT041 16/06 Q1012=
EGBB 220920Z 23014KT 190V270 9999 SCT039 16/06 Q1012=

[parkfell]

An unfortunate event. Clearly not an ex Loganair pilot who operate in those conditions ‘up North’ frequently.

ATP demonstrated crosswind limits : 34kts Dry, 25kts Wet.

[DaveReidUK]

I'm guessing that the passengers were rendered speechless. :O

[AAKEE]

I guess the cargo ( mail?) was speechless even before the final landing. :)

[Atlantic Explorer]

Looking at the metar, doesn’t seem that bad. Be interesting to see the crew experience up front. Not sure how much the rudder deflects in normal operation but looking at those videos, doesn’t seem to be doing an awful lot.

They’re lucky the ground wasn’t soft or they might have ended up minus some undercarriage when they ‘re- entered’ the runway.

[Time Traveller]

Not sure how much the rudder deflects in normal operation but looking at those videos, doesn’t seem to be doing an awful lot.. Nor do the ailerons. To be fair to crews, a lot of training departments tell crews not to apply into wind aileron, but whenever it gets badly out of shape, as it does here, it's nearly always the UPWIND wing that lifts, precipitating a loss of directional control. If nothing else, kicking off the drift has the secondary dihedral effect of lifting the upwind wing. Much better to come into the the flare with a bit of roll input and be ready for more, then up to full aileron after touchdown.
​​​​

[lsh]

Rudder, Rudder, RUDDER!

They never cancelled the drift, the a/c was pointing in the wrong direction most of the time.

If the wind was too strong, go somewhere more into wind (EMA?).

[tubby linton]

Looking at the metar, doesn’t seem that bad..
The reported wind and the actual wind can be very different at Birmingham. When it was still open the wind at Coventry was a better indication of what the wind was really doing at BHX. It is not unusual to see the three windsocks alongside the runway all pointing in different directions as the buildings behind them make it even more turbulent.Once in the flare the runway falling away beneath you due to the waves built into doesn’t help either.

[Uplinker]

I learned and refined my crosswind technique on that runway, both 33 and 15, while based at EGBB in a variety of turboprops and jets. As you say, Tubby; when the wind is from the west, it can be very challenging, and that hump in the runway does not help.

These conditions did not look too bad, but I was not in the cockpit, so cannot say. What they did not appear to do on either landing attempt was to yaw the aircraft straight by pushing the rudder immediately before touching down?

Rudder failure maybe? Rudder limiter stuck? (Although if it were, then an into-wind runway should be sought out).

I have never flown the ATP, but in crosswinds on other turboprops, transferring from crab approach to wing down (crossed controls), approach at, say, 1nm can be helpful.

[parkfell]

Nor do the ailerons. To be fair to crews, a lot of training departments tell crews not to apply into wind aileron, but whenever it gets badly out of shape, as it does here, it's nearly always the UPWIND wing that lifts, precipitating a loss of directional control. If nothing else, kicking off the drift has the secondary dihedral effect of lifting the upwind wing. Much better to come into the the flare with a bit of roll input and be ready for more, then up to full aileron after touchdown.
​​​​
The Operator’s Manual (OM) specify the definitive technique to be used in a crosswind.

The phrase “kicking off” the drift is somewhat misleading, and likely to actually cause problems.

One technique to consider:
You apply (I prefer “squeeze”) rudder to align the aircraft with the centreline and simultaneous apply opposite aileron to prevent the secondary effect of yaw. You might even apply up to 5° degrees of roll into wind.

This technique commences probably as you commence the flare and closing the throttles.

On touchdown increase the into wind aileron input as required, and apply forward pressure on the control column to improve the nose wheel steering capability.

You might get the other pilot to hold the control column in place until taxi speed?

[sprite1]

You can see how just after touchdown and throughout the veering off to the left, there’s a right aileron input.

Crew must’ve had a brain fart of sorts.

[750XL]

Good god, just imagine if that accident had been filmed in Asia, Africa or any other part of the world?

The forum would be in uproar (rightly so) questioning the pilots abilities and decision making.

But being a European airline in the UK? Meh. No one bats an eyelid.

Unreal

[Capt Fathom]

Never stop flying the aeroplane until you are parked at the gate!

[parkfell]

...........But being a European airline in the UK? Meh. No one bats an eyelid.

Unreal

I think that you will find that a number of “eyelids have been raised”.

Start with the UK CAA and the FOI conversations with the operator in particular their training department.
The UK AAIB will be investigating this event and a report will be issued in due course.

”No one bats an eyelid” is simply not true, and given the very recent posting earlier today, further comments will invariably follow.

What is important is that in common with all other accidents/events/incidents lessons are learnt and you reduce the risk of such events in the future.

[DaveReidUK]

The UK AAIB will be investigating this event and a report will be issued in due course.

What makes you think that ?

[Pegasus912]

It mentions that the AAIB are currently using the video as part of their investigations in the description of the second video so one presumes they may have contacted the owner.

[Nil further]

The AAIB is not in my experience what it once was.

Like many other bits of the industry a bit too close these days to the manufacturers and airlines.

[YBN_Canoehead]

Unless this airplane had a flight control malfunction, there is no way that should have happened. I don't care what the winds were doing at any windsock.
That was amateur hour (with all due respect to the amateurs).

[GKOC41]

The AAIB is not in my experience what it once was.

Like many other bits of the industry a bit too close these days to the manufacturers and airlines.

Load of tosh

[parkfell]

Good god, just imagine if that accident had been filmed in Asia, Africa or any other part of the world?

The forum would be in uproar (rightly so) questioning the pilots abilities and decision making.

But being a European airline in the UK? Meh. No one bats an eyelid.

Unreal

Perhaps you might like to take a look at ‘avherald.com’ as to various adverse comments now appearing.

Somewhat critical I would suggest irrespective of what part of world it occurs and by whom.

“No one bats an eyelid” ? I think not.

[DaveReidUK]

It mentions that the AAIB are currently using the video as part of their investigations in the description of the second video so one presumes they may have contacted the owner.

I think it might take more than an unmoderated comment on Avherald to spur the AAIB into action.

It doesn't appear to satisfy the Annex 13 criteria for either an accident or a serious incident, so I suspect any interest the AAIB may have will be very short-lived.

[giggitygiggity]

Load of tosh
Agreed, what baseless rubbish.

[Dusty_B]

I think it might take more than an unmoderated comment on Avherald to spur the AAIB into action.

It doesn't appear to satisfy the Annex 13 criteria for either an accident or a serious incident, so I suspect any interest the AAIB may have will be very short-lived.

It is reportable as a "serious incident", covered by "Takeoff or landing incidents, such as undershooting, overrunning or running off the side of runways."
See Definition of Aircraft Accident and Serious Incident (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/definition-of-aircraft-accident-and-serious-incident/definition-of-aircraft-accident-and-serious-incident)

[parkfell]

It doesn't appear to satisfy the Annex 13 criteria for either an accident or a serious incident, so I suspect any interest the AAIB may have will be very short-lived.

ATC will have filed a MOR, and the pilot will have filed a ASR/MOR.
It is more than likely that ATC notified the AAIB that day.

The AAIB website on current field investigations is dated 17 February 2020.
Under current investigation is a runway excursion by a Global 6000 on 11 December 2019 at Liverpool.

So my money is that the AAIB will be taking an interest, with a field investigation as this will be regarded as a “serious incident”.

[DaveReidUK]

It is reportable as a "serious incident", covered by "Takeoff or landing incidents, such as undershooting, overrunning or running off the side of runways."
See Definition of Aircraft Accident and Serious Incident (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/definition-of-aircraft-accident-and-serious-incident/definition-of-aircraft-accident-and-serious-incident)

Those are examples of occurrences which may or may not be categorised as a serious incident.

As the Annex 7 definition that you're quoting from says, the event must also involve "circumstances indicating that there was a high probability of an accident" to satisfy the definition. Obviously, that judgement is the AAIB's call.

ATC will have filed a MOR, and the pilot will have filed a ASR/MOR.
It is more than likely that ATC notified the AAIB that day.

The AAIB website on current field investigations is dated 17 February 2020.
Under current investigation is a runway excursion by a Global 6000 on 11 December 2019 at Liverpool.

All of that is true, and the AAIB was doubtless made aware of the occurrence.

But if they investigated every MOR and ASR, they would require many times the number of staff that they currently have.

Time will tell if we see the report in a future AAIB Bulletin. I'm not holding my breath.

[Monty Niveau]

Agreed, what baseless rubbish.

I’d be interested in your qualifications for making that assertion.

A few here have a great deal more extremely relevant experience and would say that Nil further is making an understatement. Have you read some of the Branch’s recent output?

[parkfell]

But if they investigated every MOR and ASR, they would require many times the number of staff that they currently have.
Time will tell if we see the report in a future AAIB Bulletin. I'm not holding my breath.

Only the CAA will see ALL Mandatory Occurrence Reports, and an edited version distributed to interested parties including the airlines.
If an Air Safety Report is not a MOR, it remains internal within the airline, and may have extracts published to crews. It might generate a Notice to Crews. It may modify a SOP, and even result in an amendment to the Part A or B etc.

Having said that the FOI may well attend the regular flight safety meetings where all new ASRs are discussed and actioned as required.

They were fortunate to regain the paved surface intact. They did get perilously close to it ending in tears.

[Monty Niveau]

Remember the Airlander crash?

The ‘world’s biggest aircraft’, operating under an EASA flight test scheme, overseen by the CAA, crushed its crew compartment because of an screw-up with a mooring line. The crew lost control and were in mortal jeopardy; they survived by chance not design.

Bedford is under two hours from Farnborough by car.

The AAIB sent a form to the captain for him to fill in.

No examination of the flight test programme or its oversight.

So the likelihood that they’ll look into a foreign-registered ATP having a bit of a hop and a skip and jump is debatable.

[Fair_Weather_Flyer]

Well, the airline has appeared in the AAIB reports quite a lot of late. Last year, it' had two ATP, serious incidents in one AAIB bulletin. These were highly detailed investigations. I don't think that the AAIB will (or can) ignore this event, especially when it has been broadcast all over the internet.

Does anyone remember Emerald Airways and how that played out?

[giggitygiggity]

I’d be interested in your qualifications for making that assertion.

A few here have a great deal more extremely relevant experience and would say that Nil further is making an understatement. Have you read some of the Branch’s recent output?
My qualifications are that I can read. Nil furthers post suggested to me that they felt the AAIB were in cahoots with the manufacturers and the airlines to make problems disappear. I do read what the AAIB writes and have done for about 15 years and personally I haven’t detected any trend to support that hypothesis. Perhaps you or nil could elaborate. I’m not saying your wrong, I just haven’t seen it so i’m open to examples that demonstrate it.

[sansmoteur]

Flugsnug are amazing aviation videographers, check out their YT channel. Cool that they caught an incident as it happened.

[parkfell]

Does anyone remember Emerald Airways and how that played out?

Two events same day at the IOM. Variation to their AOC occurred & eventually their demise.

[DaveReidUK]

Well, the airline has appeared in the AAIB reports quite a lot of late. Last year, it' had two ATP, serious incidents in one AAIB bulletin. These were highly detailed investigations. I don't think that the AAIB will (or can) ignore this event, especially when it has been broadcast all over the internet.

I assume that's a reference to the December 2018 bulletin, so rather more than a year ago.

The two incidents were in December 2017 (autopilot refused to disconnect) and February 2018 (frozen flight controls). There was also a loss of electrical power during cruise in May 2018.

It's not clear what conclusions we should draw from those three occurrences.

[Fortissimo]

The Chief Inspector of Air Accidents has the power under The Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 2018 to investigate any aircraft incident he sees fit if he thinks there safety lessons to be drawn from it, whether it meets the ICAO accident/serious incident definitions or not. The Ethiopia B787 lithium battery fire at Heathrow in 2013 was one such event - vacant aircraft, stationary, not being prepared for flight, no injuries, no statutory requirement for an investigation, but findings that grounded the whole fleet while a fix was found.

[Wickerbill]

I assume that's a reference to the December 2018 bulletin, so rather more than a year ago.

The two incidents were in December 2017 (autopilot refused to disconnect) and February 2018 (frozen flight controls). There was also a loss of electrical power during cruise in May 2018.

It's not clear what conclusions we should draw from those three occurrences.
Maybe that the ATP is past its best. Never a great aircraft in its "heyday". Can't see that the BHX botched landing has anything to do with the aircraft. One for the training officer and DFO to have a good look at.

[pontifex]

When I trained in Canada (1956) we were taught the "wing down" technique which was much as Parkfell described except that the wing down was initiated after establishing on finals. This worked well on Chipmunk, Harvard and T33. On return to UK "kick off drift" was the RAF order of the day and QFIs insisted on it. I, even then, considered wing down preferable but sensibly did the latter. However, I never forgot the former. Much later, when I became a TP and resumed my love affair with the Harvard, I was able to resume the affair and was able to to some experimenting. I became even more convinced in my opinion. Subsequently I was tasked to cary out trials on Nimrod and Hercules in very adverse X wind conditions. I was able to compare the handling using both techniques. There was no doubt at all as to which resulted in the most consistent and accurate performance. Subsequently I flew the Lancaster which had an evil reputation in a xwind. Wing down allied to a "slow cut" made it a pussy cat. Unfortunately the RAF were unwilling to change the habit of a lifetime. Of course wing down is inadvisable with 4 engined jets but there is nothing to use it with 2 engine types. Indeed the Tristar autoland computer uses wing down, and why does the B52 crank its landing gear to avoid having to use KOD (wing down would not be practible)? Sorry to have gone on at such length but this is my lifelong hobby horse.

[xanda_man]

Flugsnug are amazing aviation videographers, check out their YT channel. Cool that they caught an incident as it happened.

Whist this isn't the spotters forum; if there is only one thing we can agree on in this thread, this is it. Always superb content.

Although someone will no doubt have a moan :ok:

[parkfell]

......... On return to UK "kick off drift" was the RAF order of the day and QFIs insisted on it. I, even then, considered wing down preferable but sensibly did the latter. However, I never forgot the former.........Sorry to have gone on at such length but this is my lifelong hobby horse.

I learnt to fly (PPL) in 1972 at Carlisle where Oxford had their northern base. I remember trying to “kick off the drift” from crabbing it in as well. Lack of experience etc. I found it hard and not very successful!

Fortunately All Nippon Airways (ANA) were training at Carlisle under some hybrid FAA style syllabus. Japanese examiners would sit in the back of PA30/39 on their IRTs.

They were taught ‘wing down technique’ where you went cross controls probably after passing 500’ QFE. Held that during the flare, to centralise on touchdown. So much easier for me to do. Confidence grew.

So later in life when crabbing it in was required, going cross control as you started the flare was a piece of cake.

I remember seeing on TV, NIMROD crosswind trials at Lossiemouth/Kinloss (?) 50-60 knots across. Not exactly pretty but it worked.

When I am feeling brave I will demonstrate to MPL students crosswind landings in the B737-800 sim. They train to 30 kts.
Start at 30 knots x/w. Increasing each time.
I stop at 60 knots x/w. Quite a handful with max control deflection required.
Good confidence building exercise in case that 10 to the minus X event occurs and no other bolt holes exist.

Learnt about max control deflection flying the Shorts 360 in Scotland with 30 knot limit.
Again, not at all pretty.

My other pet topic is TRIMMING....

[meleagertoo]

I'd certainly call that a contol failure. As in a failure to control.
Hard to tell in the first vid but in the second as they are departing the centreline there is not only no sign of right rudder at all but a brief stab of left rudder (!!) as the left main gear lifts off but that's accompanied and followed by a protracted period of right-roll aileron - ie further lifting the flying port wing that continues as they stabilise parallel to the runway, but the swing reoccurs briefly as the large left aileron input remains in place and the port gear becomes unweighted again.. It's almost as though the crossed controls got crossed!
No wonder the swing and wing-lift immediately got worse after touchdown.

[jmmoric]

Always good there is a safety zone along a runway.

[parkfell]

My lament too, is that most airline pilots these days don't get intensive instruction or screening for handling techniques, and there are some truly abysmal examples out there. This video doesn't surprise me at all - infact I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often!

I would suggest that the diminishing standard probably began 20-25 years ago when the number of A2s leaving the Services for the ‘“Approved Schools’” began to reduce with a contraction of the RAF.

So the number of pilots being trained by ex A2s reduced, and so the known quality passed down reduces as an overall percentage.
You are now faced with instructors who, through no fault of their own, have been taught indifferently in the first place. Hardly surprising the overall standard reduces?

“You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear to quote an old proverb.

That said, there are some hotspots of QUALITY; and of course a good student will succeed despite his instructor....

The fundamental skill which needs to be learnt is one of selecting the prescribed ATTITUDE and TRIMMING.
Get that correct and Joe might yet smile...?

[Uplinker]

In turboprops, the Shorts 360, the Dash 8 and the Q400; crabbing, then converting to wing-down/crossed controls at about a mile or two out seemed the best way to me.

On heavier aircraft that were also jets with underslung engines, crabbing right down into the flare and then gently pushing* straight with rudder just before the mains touch seems best.

Broken rudder control?
This ATP did not appear to put in any rudder during the flare. Would love to know why. A control fault or restriction of some sort perhaps?


* note: pushing, not "kicking". No control should be kicked or moved violently.

[lsh]

The winds at BHX were between 80 to 100 degrees off the runway (33). Full x-wind component.

The same winds (if they were the same?) at EMA would have been 20 to 40 degrees off the runway (27). Between 2/3rds max and 1/3rd min x-wind component, approx, using rule of thumb.

Control fault or restriction = go to the most into wind runway you can find. EMA.

Regardless of the method (or combination of methods) selected for handling, the aircraft did not appear to use rudder in any meaningful form on either landing attempt.

Our Ops Manual precluded more than two approaches to the same runway - a diversion to EMA after the second approach might still have worked well overall, with no paperwork.

I did 14 years of turbo-prop night freight and am a decidedly average pilot. I empathise with tired crew. But the basic flying and management skills seem totally lacking here.

[revik]

Well, the airline has appeared in the AAIB reports quite a lot of late. Last year, it' had two ATP, serious incidents in one AAIB bulletin. These were highly detailed investigations. I don't think that the AAIB will (or can) ignore this event, especially when it has been broadcast all over the internet.

Does anyone remember Emerald Airways and how that played out?

................and installation of an ILS to RW08 not long after. The countdown-in/countup-from a VOR as an approach was always a (near) disaster waiting to happen.

[stilton]

Never seen anyone ‘kick off drift’


But it’s an unfortunate expression that should be retired to prevent it being attempted

[flyboy146]

Nor do the ailerons. To be fair to crews, a lot of training departments tell crews not to apply into wind aileron, but whenever it gets badly out of shape, as it does here, it's nearly always the UPWIND wing that lifts, precipitating a loss of directional control. If nothing else, kicking off the drift has the secondary dihedral effect of lifting the upwind wing. Much better to come into the the flare with a bit of roll input and be ready for more, then up to full aileron after touchdown.
​​​​

a lot of training departments? Evidence for this?

[Meester proach]

I would suggest that the diminishing standard probably began 20-25 years ago when the number of A2s leaving the Services for the ‘“Approved Schools’” began to reduce with a contraction of the RAF.

So the number of pilots being trained by ex A2s reduced, and so the known quality passed down reduces as an overall percentage.
You are now faced with instructors who, through no fault of their own, have been taught indifferently in the first place. Hardly surprising the overall standard reduces?

“You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear to quote an old proverb.

That said, there are some hotspots of QUALITY; and of course a good student will succeed despite his instructor....

The fundamental skill which needs to be learnt is one of selecting the prescribed ATTITUDE and TRIMMING.
Get that correct and Joe might yet smile...?

yeah, of course, because only the military can produce basic flight instructors.zzzzzzzz.

[Chris2303]

I realise that telephoto distorts the effect of the dip in the runway, but surely it shouldn't have been built like that

[DaveReidUK]

Never seen anyone ‘kick off drift’

But it’s an unfortunate expression that should be retired to prevent it being attempted

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/460x353/kod2_441c4a3fcde37b6f8fe623d658b453e934de8dcd.jpg

[parkfell]

yeah, of course, because only the military can produce basic flight instructors.zzzzzzzz.

Unless they are civilian contractors carrying out military contracts and training civilians as instructors...

[RetiredBA/BY]

a lot of training departments? Evidence for this?
Having always used, and taught when training, into wind aileron after landing in a significant crosswind, on all the jets I have flown single, twins and fours ,civil and military , I am indeed curious to know why some training departments are teaching NOT to use this technique. I have no Airbus experience, perhaps they have some reason because of their flyby wire system.

Anyone?

and yes, a strong crosswind at BHX can be very challenging because of the sometimes very strong turbulence created by the hangars upwind of the crosswind.

[parkfell]

Any training dept would be extremely courageous teaching a crosswind technique not recommended/approved by the manufacturer.

Someone with “crossed wires”...?

[Uplinker]

....and yes, a strong crosswind at BHX can be very challenging because of the sometimes very strong turbulence created by the hangars upwind of the crosswind.

Yes, especially on approach to RWY15. Good fun though, and an excellent place to practise and refine your crosswind landing technique.

That hump in the runway was in the worst place on RWY33 - I haven't landed there since they extended the runway, but from memory the hump used to be just around where you would touch down, so it was an extra challenge after coping with a turbulent crosswind approach.

Regarding controls after landing: Many years ago the local flying club used to hold full elevator up after landing C152's on its grass runway. This was to protect the delicate nose-wheel on the rough surface and give a bit of "aerodynamic braking" apparently. But one day an aircraft, slowing down on roll-out suddenly got airborne again owing to a strong gust and the full elevator-up. It got up to about 12' with no airspeed and crashed back down. The nose-gear collapsed and the prop drove into the ground. The two occupants were shaken but not hurt. I know because I helped wheel the broken aircraft across the airfield back to the hangar.

[ManaAdaSystem]

Kicking the nose straight works like a charm on the 737. Never flown the ATP, but it looks like these guys did a good job all the way to touchdown, then they forgot to fly the aircraft. I’m firmly in the «nose pointing down the runway when landing is a good thing» corner. Even more so when you are in the habit of landing on contaminated runways. And my ailerons will stay into the wind until I leave the runway.

[RetiredBA/BY]

Aligning the ac with runway works equally well on the 75 and 76, my last two aircraft.

It was always a pleasure to see a pilot smoothly aligning the aircraft with a nicely judged push on the rudder, simultaneously applyIng into wind aileron to counter the yaw/ roll coupling.

Glad to see Parkfell appreciates we ex RAF A2 QFIs !!

[srjumbo747]

Never seen anyone ‘kick off drift’


But it’s an unfortunate expression that should be retired to prevent it being attempted
Obviously haven’t flown a big jet!

I don’t intend to post more than this. If this aircraft had control problems they should never have attempted an approach in these conditions.

The camera has distorted nothing. Whoever was flying this aircraft needs to be retrained and definitely needs their training history looked at from gaining their first licence to now.

Absolutely shocking. To think I am sharing the skies with these people worries me.

[thetimesreader84]

I’ve got >1200 hours on ATPs, over about 5 years. Not loads, but enough I think to have an opinion.

I don’t know how you get it this badly wrong flying this aeroplane.

The ATP has many shortcomings, but crosswind capability isn’t one of them. I can’t think off the top of my head an aeroplane I’d rather have in a limiting crosswind into a short runway.

[ehwatezedoing]

I'd certainly call that a contol failure. As in a failure to control.
Hard to tell in the first vid but in the second as they are departing the centreline there is not only no sign of right rudder at all but a brief stab of left rudder (!!) as the left main gear lifts off but that's accompanied and followed by a protracted period of right-roll aileron - ie further lifting the flying port wing that continues as they stabilise parallel to the runway, but the swing reoccurs briefly as the large left aileron input remains in place and the port gear becomes unweighted again.. It's almost as though the crossed controls got crossed!
No wonder the swing and wing-lift immediately got worse after touchdown.
I saw that too, the right aileron input while the aircraft was going left and I think I know why.
As incredibly as it sounds, it's a classic (rookie!?) mistake of "driving" your aircraft once on the ground instead of keep flying it.
Aka literally using your yoke as a steering wheel like a car!

Don't laugh, I saw it happen a few times on Turbo Dak where the guy usually overwhelmed would do exactly that, start "driving it" trying to recover his yaw while the two mains are on the ground. Forgetting his rudder and everything else in the process... Which turns ugly and has the exact opposite effect intended.

To talk about the DC3T, your downward big sized aileron will pretty much act like an airbrake. Using your yoke the opposite way you want your aircraft going is actually a technic used to keep it centred during gusty crosswind landings. Depending on conditions, your ailerons can have as much power on steering than your rudder.

It takes some practice master it.

[A320LGW]

I know of a few captains who feel it should be prohibited to film aircraft with such intent as can be found in numerous locations on the British Isles

"do we go and film them in their places of work ...!!???"

[Pistonprop]

A320LGW, just for your info, it was filmed outside airport property. I've had plenty of people filming me at work over the years. Never bothered me.

[OPENDOOR]

I know of a few captains who feel it should be prohibited to film aircraft with such intent as can be found in numerous locations on the British Isles

Would you care to explain why?

[DaveReidUK]

to film aircraft with such intent

With what intent ?

[beamer]

Retired now but I always preferred wing down as opposed to crab in a brisk crosswind. Manufacturer was flexible up to around 25-30 kts but beyond that they preferred a crab technique. I appreciate the perception that going against the manufacturers recommended method of operating is increasingly difficult in this litigious world we live in.

Like others I don't like the expression 'kicking the rudder' when applied to the operation of medium to large transport aircraft. It may be a question of semantics but it could lead to misconceptions as was evidenced by the Airbus that lost its fin and rudder in NY just after 9/11.

[Hot 'n' High]

..... Like others I don't like the expression 'kicking the rudder' when applied to the operation of medium to large transport aircraft (or any aircraft at all for that matter!!!!). It may be a question of semantics but it could lead to misconceptions as was evidenced by the Airbus that lost its fin and rudder in NY just after 9/11.

Adjusted that for you beamer - hope you don't mind! The only person permitted to treat their aircraft in that manner was, in my opinion, of course, https://giphy.com/gifs/blackadder-goes-forth-gif-xtSYruVOOVou4 (with thanks to the BBC and the Blackadder team!). Honestly, those who use the saying are just that - Lord Flashhearts!

"Apply sufficient rudder pressure to smoothly bring the nose of the aircraft round to where you want it..." - just like any other control! Simples!!!!

Doing my IR training - textbook x-wind landing. Instructor on roll-out "H 'n' H, you are utterly hopeless on Instruments - but I'll give you your due, I couldn't do better on that landing myself!!!" Not sure that much changed!!!!!!! :\

[3wheels]

I hope the AAIB, who are going to be looking into this, have a really good look at these two pilots’ previous experience. I do not mean their recent experience but their overall claimed total experience for licence issue.

There have been many accidents in the past where claimed experience has not been substantiated. The Basle Vanguard accident immediately comes to mind.

The AAIB should ensure that claimed experience is genuine.

I have heard they have both been let go. Can anyone confirm?

[cappt]

Just incredibly poor technique.

[parkfell]

..........it could lead to misconceptions as was evidenced by the Airbus that lost its fin and rudder in NY just after 9/11.

You may well get away with large rudder applications on light aircraft, but to use that control input on that Airbus simply demonstrated very shoddy training.......
SKY “accident investigation” program interviewed some of the airline’s trainers who comments were somewhat surprising.....

[parkfell]

The AAIB should ensure that claimed experience is genuine.

I believe Airtours had a pilot who carried out a substantial amount of “Parker Pen” flying.
Hove Crown Court sentenced him to 9 months, suspended & £ 4000 cost.

The CAA reset the trip counter to ZERO.
Reappeared at GLOBESPAN. Joe Foster (DFO) gave him a second chance.....understandable resentment when possibility of a Command appeared. More newspaper headlines......

I believe the CAA no longer accept sworn affidavits when logbooks go “missing” etc.....

[DaveReidUK]

I hope the AAIB, who are going to be looking into this

That hasn't been confirmed.

[Hot 'n' High]

You may well get away with large rudder applications on light aircraft, but to use that control input on that Airbus simply demonstrated very shoddy training.......
SKY “accident investigation” program interviewed some of the airline’s trainers who comments were some surprising.....

Is it not so much the "amount" but rather the "rate of application" that leads to things heading South - with any control input? Even on a light aircraft, you rapidly apply a large rudder input (or any control input for that matter), you just compound any issues you may have with the associated secondary effects rapidly appearing from Stage Left to add to your woes as you now need to counter those too - that's what the first few lessons for even a PPL are all about. Was the NY Airbus "accident" more a product of repeated and rapid applications of rudder if I recall correctly? Was it also not a case of the PF applying a glider technique he'd picked up where secondary effects can be used intentionally and he was trying to counter the rolling induced by the wake by using the secondary effects of rudder?

Yes, you may need to apply a sufficiently large control input to get the aircraft to do what you want it to do - but, ideally, you should always be ahead of the plane/anticipating that eventuality so that you detect any deviation early before it fully develops and "emergency measures" are needed. True, the Law of Sod can apply (particularly with the weather) and a freak gust hit you out the blue at the worst possible moment (we've all been there, had that!!!) - but you should still be as gentle as you can in the recovery. And you can usually predict when something is likely to happen (eg look upwind from the threshold on short final just in case there are large buildings which may cause you some fun & frollicks over the fence) and so your reaction when it does should be more "Mmmm, took a while before it threw that trick in!" rather than "Blimey, what the bleep was that???!!!".

Either way, in this case, it seems to be the zero use of rudder which assisted in the x-country roll-out. Anyway, just some thoughts FWIW!

[Alrosa]

It is still taught, and still the recommended technique in the B737 FCTM (don’t know about the ATP...)

https://youtu.be/_2zD_gdpouk

[pattern_is_full]

As far as I know, the "side-slip, crossed controls during approach," "crab until flare, with rudder in the last few feet" - and even "plant it with some drift on" techniques are all taught and used.

Rudder yaw can lift the upwind wing (yaw/roll coupling) at the worst possible moment.

Which is appropriate for a given aircraft type or situation depends significantly on the aircraft geometry and ground clearance, and the possibility of a wing-, prop- or engine-strike if touching down with one wing low. Thus it is not one-size-fits-all.

It did occur to me that if this West Atlantic crew is rated for both WA's jets and ATPs, but had mostly been flying the jets the past few months, they might have "reverted to type" unintentionally under stress.

The ATP looks like an aircraft I would land in Xwind using crossed-controls/sideslip all the way to touchdown on one wheel. But the manual may say otherwise.

[flydive1]

It's disappointing to see so many videos of airliners these days landing in xwinds without removal of drift prior to touchdown - is this technique no longer taught?

Yes, you did not see so many videos of bad landings on youtube or facebook 40 or 50 years ago ;)

[Uplinker]

........Another question - why didn't BHX extend its old runway 06/24?


There is a railway line just beyond the end of 06 and hangars and housing I think beyond 24, so no room for extension.

I landed a shed on 06 or 24 once about 100 years ago.

[Doors to Automatic]

When I was at university in Birmingham in the late 1980s I used to spend many a happy hour on the observation deck at BHX. Back then the ATP was in passenger service with British Midland and Manx. I saw it land on many occasions and it didn’t seem to have any more or less trouble with crosswinds than other types so I don’t think one can blame the aircraft here.

With regard to Discorde’s question, by the time the runways needed extending in the 1960s, 06/24 was hemmed in by the railway and the A45 so I am guessing extending 15/33 was a lot cheaper. In the late 1980s 06/24 was still in use with full length (4,600ft) available and the occasional BAC111 and B737-200 would land on it if winds were strong enough.

[White Knight]

Is it so difficult to build a level runway instead of this roller coaster?

Is it really so difficult to land on this roller coaster?:rolleyes: It's actually not a roller coaster, just compression of perspective from a long lens!

[Judd]

My lament too, is that most airline pilots these days don't get intensive instruction or screening for handling techniques, and there are some truly abysmal examples out there. This video doesn't surprise me at all - in fact I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often!

Never a truer word. Normal simulator sessions per handling pilot is two hours per session. Two pilots means four hours including break for changeover/coffee. Landing any aircraft consistently safely at its maximum cross-wind component requires considerable handling skill. A pilot doesn't achieve that sort of skill with just one or two a couple of practice landings in the simulator.

There are too many instances of box ticking after two crosswind landings and then moving on to something else. For example, at the beginning of the simulator session ask the simulator instructor to hop in the seat and first demonstrate a max crosswind landing. A picture is worth a thousand words. Chances are he will ignore your request with a weak excuse that he suddenly has a sore toe or something. Not many simulator instructors are game enough to chance their arm by demonstrating.

Some may argue the simulator is nothing like the real aircraft in crosswind landings and therefore simulator practice on crosswind landings is a waste of time and could even be negative training whatever that may be. In that case, either the full flight simulator lacks fidelity which may be a maintenance problem, or someone doesn't know what he is talking about. Lack of knowledge by simulator technicians is a common problem and this can impact upon the fidelity of simulators.

A new pilot to type needs lots of handling practice. This includes crosswind takeoffs and landing in strong crosswinds. This is not a fun exercise thrown in only if time permits. One cost efficient method is to place the simulator at five miles final with the crosswind already set.at maximum.and all landing checks complete. Forget standard calls since a squawking nervous copilot unnecessarily rattling out "Speed" "Speed" "Track Track Track" is more of a hindrance to a new pilot than a help. Remember it is a training exercise not a test and the instructor needs to use common sense rather than play at back seat driving. Silence is golden in these situations. Remember though, the silence no talking policy is purely for the sake of the training exercise in the simulator and not necessarily the norm in real life. .

An average new to type pilot will need at least ten practice maximum component crosswind landings from five miles before he is confident enough to get the hang of things. It is the flare and touch down technique the student needs to get a handle on. Again, for the purpose of the exercise, there is no pressing need for the full roll-out to aircraft stopped. That comes later once the student is both competent and confident he can do a reasonably good job of the landing itself.

Once the nose-wheel is on the ground and the pilot has things under immediate control, there is nothing wrong with the simulator instructor freezing or pausing the simulator to discuss pertinent points of handling. Only then should the instructor re-position the simulator to five mile final once more and repeat the exercise.

If time is critical, repositioning for a one mile final may be necessary. Don't forget to change the crosswind to the other side once the student is reasonably competent. Once the student is confident with day max crosswind landings, then night crosswind landings should also be practiced.

Depending on the students progress, the simulator instructor may need to spend 40 minutes or more on this exercise before the student is confident he can hack it consistently well. But it is important that the PM is briefed to keep his mouth shut throughout this training and leave the simulator instructor to add his bit where needed.

[Uplinker]

Good post, Judd, agree with all your points. A lot of basic flying control needs to be learned by doing. Having people constantly talking at you is a distraction - let the student just fly and get the hang of it. Nobody would expect an orchestra flute player to go through a piece of music twice with an instructor prompting them, and then be able to play it well in front of an audience. They would need practice. The SIM is a safe place to practice the basic technique and coordination, followed by some crosswind landings in the real plane.

I spent about 3 years flying turboprops (including at EGBB), and really got my crosswind landing technique sorted, which helped when I transferred onto big jets.

Transport policy in the UK is woeful. First we had Beeching rip up most of the train branch lines. Now we still have airports with no train links - at Edinburgh for example there is a double train line running past about a mile from the end of RWY24, but no rail link to the actual airport ! Forget HS2, let's get the basics sorted first.

The hump at EGBB RWY15 is, or used to be, right at the point where you wanted to put the mains down, especially on a turbulent day. So you had to land spot on, or late, or ride the hump as you were flaring. Not a massive problem, but a significant one and something you could do without on some tricky days !

The HR method of recruitment by testing your mental maths and verbal reasoning etc - that we all have to endure these days to get a flying job - is not much use if someone doesn't actually know how to fly in the first place !

[fox niner]

When you operate in northwestern europe, you are guaranteed to encounter high winds somewhere during any given year. Scandinavia, the Benelux, Britain/Ireland are all In the middle of wind paradise.
You grow up with it, and you fly in wind a lot. It becomes easier if you know what you are doing.
I have landed at Amsterdam in gale force winds. On several occasions we had so much wind that my windshield was dirty after landing due to salt residue. Caused by sea water sprayed up from the north sea!
30 knots crosswind is nothing to worry about. If you cant handle 30 knots, get some training. It isn’t even the max limit.

[parkfell]

..........Britain/Ireland are all In the middle of wind paradise.
You grow up with it, and you fly in wind a lot. It becomes easier if you know what you are doing.....

Although Prestwick remains a distinct challenge flying single engined ac in the winter months, the overall experience gained by students undertaking CPL/IR training with BAeFC last century was second to none where crosswinds occurred most of the time.

Probably the best UK location for twin engined flying with multiple routes and airports to visit. It would not be uncommon for an IRT candidate on TEST to be flying an approach not previously flown in the ac for the first time.
The overall training experience prepared the student for such a situation.

Developed their AIRMANSHIP and handling skills to the full.

In the UK you need to get north of 54°30’N to get the real value of training. Contentious moi?

[judge11]

'Developed their AIRMANSHIP and handling skills to the full.'

Irrelevant to the HR desk-wallahs who recruit. They want 'our pilots' in the top 90% in verbal reasoning.

Most at fault are chief pilots, or DFOs or whatever guise they go under these days, who have become so spineless as to yield to HR departments which, of course, have the full support of the other 'humanities' graduates running airlines, for the recruitment of 'their' pilots; recruiters who wouldn't know one end of a 747 from the other.

[DaveReidUK]

It's actually not a roller coaster, just compression of perspective from a long lens!

The hump at EGBB RWY15 is, or used to be, right at the point where you wanted to put the mains down, especially on a turbulent day.

The overall average runway slope (threshold-to-threshold) is a relatively modest 1.1% (0.6°). But if the AIP is to be believed, the gradient between the final 15 TDZ marker and the intersection with the old cross runway is a whopping 6.8% (3.9°).

So perhaps the roller-coaster description isn't that far off. :O

[parkfell]

Manchester RW 23R has a down slope at an inconvenient point,
as does Carlisle RW 24.
Add Knock to the list; one long slope.

Something Threat & Error management briefing should mitigate?
Local knowledge can play a very useful part.

[Uplinker]

The overall average runway slope (threshold-to-threshold) is a relatively modest 1.1% (0.6°). But if the AIP is to be believed, the gradient between the final 15 TDZ marker and the intersection with the old cross runway is a whopping 6.8% (3.9°).

So perhaps the roller-coaster description isn't that far off. :O


Yes it's a proper hill alright ! Much worse than the hump at EGCC. You actually have to 'drive' down the Birmingham one, otherwise you risk taking off again !

[lsh]

Rwy 09 at Bristol gets my vote!

[RVF750]

I see all your airports and raise you a landing at LBA in a gentle 12kt crosswind from 240' on rw32. Enjoy!

[safetypee]

The issue is not the bumps the runway, but the lumps in the air; wind, crosswind, gusts, and associated assumptions.
Either pilots are not experiencing a sufficient range of conditions or unable to relate training / experience to the real conditions, … or, … or,

It would be interesting to review the extent of experience, how many crosswind landings, against the depth of experience, how close to the 'limit' or range of gust intensity. Just because 15kts X was 'easy', then so too will be 30kts X with gusts; not so for every aircraft type. Every wind encounter is different, all situations must be treated as such.

Previous posts cited difficulties with simulators; many lack representative roll-yaw interaction and most do not have the ability to induce side-force, lateral acceleration - 'seat of the pants' feedback; yet we believe that they are sufficiently representative of the aircraft. Then there is the 'jump through the hoop' training; time for management / regulator to look at 'work as done', vice what they imagine.

Do First Officers get to fly a sufficient rage of conditions; or are they always limited to xx kts. How are they to generate experience; when do they see higher X winds - when they become Captain, and fly in limiting situations, without further experience.

[biscuit74]

'DaveReidUK' - what was the interesting instrument you showed a couple of posts (of yours) back? Most intriguing!

[Herod]

I see all your airports and raise you a landing at LBA in a gentle 12kt crosswind from 240' on rw32. Enjoy!

Ten years at LBA on the F27. 12 kts? That counts as flat calm up there

[NoelEvans]

With over 20 years at LBA on four different types, I will NEVER criticise any pilot's landing in a gusty cross-wind.

[DaveReidUK]

'DaveReidUK' - what was the interesting instrument you showed a couple of posts (of yours) back? Most intriguing!

Seen in action here: https://www.huntleyarchives.com/preview.asp?image=1090171

[safetypee]

fredthedog.

Advice on technique / procedure may be aircraft / manufacturer specific.

Note info below on takeoff, and discussion of alternatives; crab, de-crab, mixed, for crosswind landings.

Boeing info: http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Crosswind_Guidelines.pdf

Airbus info from testing: https://safetyfirst.airbus.com/app/themes/mh_newsdesk/documents/archives/airbus-crosswind-development-and-certification.pdf

Joint A+B view of testing: https://www.dropbox.com/s/zq6lxugvocvhmio/A-B%20Crosswind%20presentation.pdf?dl=0

[Stick Flying]

The B737 FCTM allows touchdown with full crab up to max crosswind limits. It also goes on to suggest it is the more preferable technique on very slippery runways but its not recommended to use this technique on a dry runway at max crosswind (which incidentally is generally more in the FCTM than in operator's limitations).

It may well have been your trainers preferred crosswind technique but labelling them as clueless is a bit harsh.

[Uplinker]

I think it is the phrase "Kicking it straight" that some object to; nothing needs to be actually kicked.

However, yawing your aircraft to align with the runway as you flare is entirely sensible and desirable. as fredthedog says, it only takes a gentle movement of the rudder pedals to achieve this, coupled with slight into-wind wing down to counter any secondary roll.

Regarding SIMs, well OK they cannot reproduce all the forces one would experience, but they could still be used to practise the coordination of the crab-to-flare-to-yaw-straight manoeuvre.

[Time Traveller]

The B737 FCTM allows touchdown with full crab up to max crosswind limits. It also goes on to suggest it is the more preferable technique on very slippery runways but its not recommended to use this technique on a dry runway at max crosswind (which incidentally is generally more in the FCTM than in operator's limitations).
. Yes, not recommended for dry runways. Besides, on any aeroplane, it makes for a lurching, squirrelly arrival with results such as seen here - and the Emirates 380 which recently just planted it in sideways, didn't exactly make themselves popular with the training dept.

I'd agree - nothing wrong with"kicking it straight" (meaning aligning with the runway using rudder keeping wings level) ... But it requires perfect timing, just before the mains touch. More often I see the rudder go in too early, they float, and the airplane quickly starts drifting towards the downwind edge of the runway, and it gets messy from there

[Stick Flying]

More often I see the rudder go in too early, they float, and the airplane quickly starts drifting towards the downwind edge of the runway, and it gets messy from there

And that is one reason why Boeing recommend crab landings on very slippery runways. The important thing is to keep the direction of travel straight along the runway and plan for a firm landing on both mainwheels at the same time.

[RVF750]

shhh! you shouldn't be telling the great unwashed that secret!

[parkfell]

The AAIB have today confirmed that this event is under investigation ~ 2 July website update.