Upset on AA Flight

[LOMCEVAK]

On 13th July a friend of mine was flying from Chicago to Albuquerque on an American airlines flight (flight number and aircraft type to be confirmed). He has stated that shortly before arrival, and at an estimated 20,000 ft, the aircraft rolled to around 90 degrees of left bank (although there was no sudden or violent motion to precipitate this), the nose dropped markedly, the roll reversed until the bank angle was an estimated 90 degrees to the right, then the aircraft rolled back to wings level and finally pulled out of the steep dive that it was now in at an estimated 2,000 ft. My friend was at the front of the cabin and heard audio alarms from the flight deck although he could not tell if there were any voice warnings. On levelling off he heard a call on the flight deck of "Get the gear down quick", and the aircraft landed (very smoothly!) about 2 minutes later. He and his colleagues thought at one stage that the aircraft was going to impact the ground. The cabin crew were very shaken but all of the passengers remained calm. At no stage prior to disembarkation was a PA made explaining the incident.

Does anyone out there have any details on this incident?

[PlaneTruth]

Probably a poor American guy trying to do the typical Southwest Airlines "slam dunk" approach. Only he dorked it up.

What type AC was it?

PT

[Thunderbug]

I seem to remember a Southwest Airlines approach that ended up with the aircraft "slam dunked" against a stop sign at a gas station outside the airport fence.

Is that typical..........?:confused:

T'bug

[golfyankeesierra]

Got an unexpected straight-in, had to make some steepturns to lose some height, pulled the GPWS cb just a second too late (P18-1 3rd row right side), so probably had no time to do PA and was doing his ASR instead.

[mancman]

Sounds more like an ex Fed Ex crew (or similar) forgetting they had pax instead of boxes. Watching them land in a similar fashion at Memphis is impressive.
" dorked it up" sounds like he nailed it.
Sorry for the pax though:yuk:

[broadreach]

How does one tell the difference between a serious Saturday night posting and the first off-the-cuff replies? Lomcevak's post is pretty blood-curdling. There must be lots of antennae raised for more info, particularly on a/c type.

[Crótalo]

It only sounds blood-curdling if it's true...but to be honest, this "story" sounds like a load of :mad:

I'm wondering if the post is a poor attempt at trolling. :rolleyes:

Arrivals and departures in and out of Albuquerque in the summer time are very bumpy to begin with, so an approach is never very comfortable (from a passenger standpoint) this time of year. Also, the airport sits at about 5300' and there is higher terrain to the east and north. It's possible that the aircraft in question was kept at altitude a bit longer than normal. Then when it came time to descend, they may have had to do a fairly expeditious descent.

However, I would bet cold hard cash that it was not a 90-degree bank, nor a 20000 to 2000 foot drop, nor anything else that could be classified as dangerous. They might have simply made a descending turn, and made an "S-turn" out of it, and they may have put the gear down early to help expedite their descent. It's possible that one pilot saw the need to do so before the other pilot did, which would explain the "get the gear down quick" remark. No big deal at all.

I'm inclined to think that the "witness" might not have his facts straight. Either that or my 2nd paragraph is true.

Think about it ... 20,000 to 2000 feet? As estimated by whom? 90 degrees of bank? As estimated by whom? Steep dive? (Same question...) Was anyone injured? Was this event mentioned in any industry news or public news?

I've heard pax say things like "Wow, we went right through that thunderstorm," when in fact we didn't get closer than 30 miles (we were simply in adjacent clouds). I've heard pax say an aircraft was "turned fully on its side" when in fact it was about 25 degrees of bank. I've heard pax say "we went over those mountains at only a few hundred feet" when in fact we went over them with at least 5000' clearance.

Warning sirens are often heard on aircraft when autopilots and/or autothrottles are disconnected. Or horns can be heard if approaching a given altitude.

I'm not insinuating that passengers aren't aware. Many of them are very astute, and are very much in tune with what is happening on an aircraft. However, other pax have limited knowledge of what is really happening on an aircraft, or they have limited experience, so when something "out of the ordinary" occurs (i.e. an expedited descent in an unfamiliar area), their perceptions get distorted.

It's just my opinion, but I think it makes more sense than the originally described scenario.

[Ignition Override]

Crotalo: Well-put. Without a doubt, this would have quickly made CNN and many newspapers' 2nd or 3rd pages. Even large chunks of blue ice from the fuselage have made a much bigger media splash than this "reported" incident.

Many passengers spend many years flying without attempting to learn the difference between a small bumpy cumulus cloud and a thunderstorm, or showing the initiative to find out if gusty winds are the same as windshear (i.e. microburst).

Careful: you might let the air out of the media's "balloons", that is, the constant attempts to capture the local yokels' attention by spreading dis-information and choosing NOT to enlighten the flying public. The fact that many airline tickets cost not much more than a US Greyhound bus ticket will allow the media's half-truths and innuendos to be even easier to propagate.
:=

[The Nr Fairy]

So, did it happen or not ? Just because it wasn't reported in the press doesn't mean it didn't happen.

And check Lomcevak's profile - he's one of the few posters on PPRuNe whose profile is accurate and as such, he's not prone to overstatement.

[Phoenix_X]

One thing that strikes me as odd (besides the bank angles ofcourse), is that supposedly the aircraft quickly lost 18000 feet, but immediately after that was in a perfect position for a landing? That would mean that before this alledged incident the aircraft was 18000 feet above it's profile. Now that seems unlikely to me.
Also to have no injuries after 90' bank and reversal to 90' the other way? Suggests to me that either the injuries are underestimated or the bank overestimated.
Agree with the above posts that it may well have felt and looked a whole lot worse than it was. However, worth trying to find out though!

[Crótalo]

Good point Nr Fairy, and perhaps I should clarify that I mean no offense to LOMCEVAK, and I am not doubting his personal credibility.

I am curious though regarding the experience level of his friend who was on the flight, since it is the friend's account which we are reading. I, like most pilots, have had friends who have related perceived flight conditions, only to find out that in reality, it was simply a matter of misinterpretation of their sensory inputs.

Edited to add: I've just completed a fairly exhaustive search of databases, to include FAA, NTSB, and ASRS/NASA. This last agency collects reports of irregular activity from Pilots, Cabin Attendants, and Air Traffic Controllers, and I've turned up nothing. I'm not claiming to be an expert on the databases, but I am reasonably familiar with how the reporting system works, and I believe that at least one of these three groups of people would have reported such an event.

[PlaneTruth]

Crótalo,

EXCELLENT posts!

Without knowing what type A/C it is hard to decipher. I know the 737 could go from 20,000 to 5,350 in about 4-5 minutes (Gear/Boards and 250KTS with room to slow and configure) but that is an unusual maneuver. I diverted into ABQ a few months back in a heavy 700 with a medical emergency and it seemingly took forever to get down.


Thunderbug,

"Is that typical..........?"

Thanks for offering the chance to educate you. My airline flies about 2000 flights a day throughout it's system, in all kinds of weather and at all times of day. Some of the approaches involve high finals as a matter of course. Example: The approach across DFW into Love Field landing 13R puts you at 9,000 feet about 15 miles out. That is by controler vector and approach procedure. We are told about this approach in class as newhires and when we see it on the line the first time, it is always an eye opener. From early on, we have established a historical reputation for doing the "near impossible" as viewed through the eyes of the controller within the context of what other airlines offer to do. If you ask any ATC controller what his favorite airline to work is, invariably SWA is amongst that small group.

True story: Continental held up for VFR traffic finally gets cleared to DFW tower. As they ship to tower, the Continental Captain tells DFW approach, "You need to come up to Chicago and learn how to control!" to which the DFW Approach controller says, "You need to go to Southwest and learn how to fly."

Without going into the BUR incident (which is detailed in the NTSB final report for your reading pleasure) anyone who would continue an approach as botched up as that one was clearly not thinking right. Aircraft are piloted by humans who occassionally make mistakes but I'll put our record up against anyone's. Make no mistake: We can do better and we constantly strive in that aim.

PT

[Casper]

If you wish to hear of an expert's opinion on such incidents, may I suggest that you contact wsherif1 from the MI185 thread. An extract from his pearls of wisdom follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"...windshear across the pitot tubes..."

If you would read excerpts from NWA Capt. Paul Soderlind's Flight Standards Bulletin 3-65 regarding erroneous flight instrument indications, (on this forum), and also Boeing Publication "Aero 08", which covers the same subject, it should be enlightning.

Because of my unique experience, encountering a strong updraft
induced pitch-up, in the clear, above thunderstorm activity, I am aware of what actually happens in a pitch-up. I am trying to pass along some information to those who have not had this happen to them, yet!

As the NTSB says, "Piot reaction to turbulence can be more of a problem then the jolt of turbulence itself."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[LOMCEVAK]

I have just reported data as described to me by my friend. His estimates probably do include large errors, but the event was startling to him and the 4 colleagues with whom he was travelling. The cabin crew were alarmed by the event, saying that they had never experienced anything like it, and the FO looked "white" as the passengers disembarked.

My friend is going to let me know the flight number so that hopefully we can ascertain the aircraft type. He travels frequently by air, but is not an enthusiast so does not recall the type. He is a very capable scientist by profession and not prone to exaggeration; he has also flown with me in a fast jet aircraft so has experienced aerobatic manoeuvres and extreme attitudes. One of the colleagues travelling with him has been rear crew on the Nimrod fleet and had never experienced such an event which, having frequently experienced 60 degree banked turns at low level, gives an indication of the magnitude of this incident.

This is a genuine post. If anyone wishes to discuss this further by private e-mail, I will obviously respect their confidence. Finally, Crotalo, no offence taken; I understand your scepticism.

[West Coast]

"Shortly before arrival, and at an estimated 20,000 ft"

My detector went off at that point.

As an aside, you can always tell who the private pilots are as they get off the plane. Little remarks, "that windsock showed us landing downwind" "ATC sure kept us high" "Did you see that traffic for the parallel?"

[WideBodiedEng]

LIke West Coast, my detector also went off.
If Lomcevak is as steely-eyed & square-jawed a superhero as his profile claims - well his post resembles a FlightSimmers first real flight.
Remember the pic of the incredibly fat baldy guy at the PC typing "My name is Shirley and I'm only 18 etc"
Methinks that someone with the experience claimed by Lomcevak
"RAF test pilot (mainly fast jet), a couple of years flying commercial long haul, currently flying military aircraft (sharp, pointy and largish ones) as a civilian. Many years display flying (military jets and Warbirds). " would not dream of posting it on a bulletin board. Real testpilots do not brag.
To me its a load of ballcocks.

[ZFT]

<<As an aside, you can always tell who the private pilots are as they get off the plane. Little remarks, "that windsock showed us landing downwind" "ATC sure kept us high" "Did you see that traffic for the parallel?">>

A little unkind. You held just a PPL once.

[Danny]

WideBodiedEng and any others who may doubt LOMCEVAK's credentials... don't! I and many other PPRuNer's have met the gentleman and can vouch for him. There is no 'bragging' as you are assuming. Just the mans credentials in his profile!

Now, back to the topic.

[Wino]

AA had 3 flights that day.
507,709 and 607
They were all MD80s, ship numbers 593, 594, 590

There are no maintenance items (log book entries) relavent to that sort of thing on that day or any time in the last 20 days against those 3 ships. The ships went out on the next leg on time without a substitution of equiptment.

A 90 degree right bank followed by a 90 degree immediate left bank would generate at the minimum a write up for cabin service to reinstall everything in the galley. and generally clean up the aircraft (including the LAVs, the MD80s have the tank type lavs I think, not the new suction ones), not to mention a structural check would be required...

It is possible that maybe this was an Eagle flight (one of those Jungle jets or canadair jets) in which case I can't see it in our partition of the computer, infact I can't even see if they fly between the two cities (management wouldn't want the old rank and file knowing how bad we are getting raped on scope after all :yuk: ) unless I go into a whole different computer system (res vs decs...).

The view from the small porthole windows has very little in common with the view from a big bubble canopy in a fast mover. Things may look more exciting than they were...

As for pale crew members, have you seen our pay checks lately? (most of us are down around 40 percent or more, and the F/O listed on 2 of the 3 flights are due to be laid off soon, I would look pale too)


Cheers
Wino (AA A300 F/O)

[Final 3 Greens]

West Coast

Sorry to disappoint you, but you can't spot all the PPLs mate.

Some of us who fly as pax a lot for our day jobs will probably give you not much more than 'thanks and bye', since your skills in getting us there are appreciated, but assumed and our focus is on getting to our next meeting, which is rather more important than discussing recent history.

Having said that, it is somewhat rare that the 'skygods' show themselves to the great unwashed these days ;)

[MikeJeff]

Now west coast the way to spot PPLs over ATPL is we know how to use that steering wheel type thing/stick type thing in front of us :ok:

No scratching our @rses and reading a book when we fly our aircraft! although you're probably a better computer programmer than i am!

[PlaneTruth]

"Having said that, it is somewhat rare that the 'skygods' show themselves to the great unwashed these days..."


As a general rule nowadays, I require plebe passengers to go through one of my three intermediaries. If they pass the test (adequate dress, hygiene, social status, etc.), I will consider meeting with them if their case is worthy of my highly valuable time. (NOT!):0

I try to get in back and say good-bye to as many PAX as possible. (Unless of course I am running for more "brain-food." SAFETY FIRST!!!)

PT:ok:

[oncemorealoft]

Invariably when I've flown BA, one of the Sky Gods from the pointy end has stood by the front door with the Purser to say goodbye to pax. It's a simple but nice gesture.

Of course thy're probably just checking we're not taking the seats with us!

[Final 3 Greens]

As a general rule nowadays, I require plebe passengers to go through one of my three intermediaries. If they pass the test (adequate dress, hygiene, social status, etc.), I will consider meeting with them if their case is worthy of my highly valuable time

:O :O :O :O

[G-ALAN]

As a general rule nowadays, I require plebe passengers to go through one of my three intermediaries. If they pass the test (adequate dress, hygiene, social status, etc.), I will consider meeting with them if their case is worthy of my highly valuable time

unless it's a celeb! I've watched the FO come out on 2 occasions (during the flight) to suck up to (or should I say pester) a celebrity :p The poor guy just wanted to get home to his £14M estate and gorgeous supermodel wife :rolleyes:

[dudly]

Planetruth beamed

"From early on, we have established a historical reputation for doing the "near impossible" as viewed through the eyes of the controller within the context of what other airlines offer to do."

You guys must truely be legends in your own minds. If only the rest of us could be such sky studs.

[747FOCAL]

If you fly into San Jose a lot you know what it means to dive at the runway. Everytime the ground prox warning comes on ans scares the crap out of those in first class.

:E

[LOMCEVAK]

Danny, thanks for the support.

WideBodiedEng, as I have said before I have just quoted what my friend said to me. I have refrained from adding any interpretation or personal comments, other than there may be significant errors in the data posted (see my first reply).

Wino, thank you - that was the sort of reply that I was looking for. If I can confirm for my friend that there was not an incident despite his perceptions of this manoeuvre, then I can help to restore some of the confidence that he has lost in the safety of air travel. It is difficult for me to contact him openly as he is afraid to tell his wife of what happened as he knows that it will worry her!

I am still trying to find out the exact flight number so that we can be more precise. I am not trying to be alarmist over this, just to establish facts for a frightened customer.

[Ignition Override]

747FOCAL: Do your company criteria for a stable approach include no more than 1,000 fpm sink rate when withing 1,000' of the touchdown zone, etc? Or do the normal aproaches at San Jose violate those limitations?

[West Coast]

Final, 3 green
A technical question, a comment, etc done for your own ediifcation is fine. Just as acceptable is as you say, a thanks and your gone is great. What I find annoying is a PPL who craves acknowledgement of being a pilot. Most of the time its no biggie, at times its a pain. "Why did we land downwind on such a short runway" We didn't but it was said as everyone was working their way off the plane at a level loud enough(intentional) to be heard by other pax. At other times its worse. Company provided an exampe of this not long ago in one of our training builletins. An aircraft was IMC being vectored into LAX. They got rocked a bit by a heavy ahead. Aircraft rolled some, nothing dramatic. A PPL on board took exception to the explanation on the ground from the Captain. He, a PPL without an instrument rating didn't believe the crew were following wake turbulence avoidance procedures he had been taught in his training. He wrote a scathing letter about how dangerous a situation he was put in by the crew not following procedures. He also took umbrage with the PA after landing because the Captain was lying about doing every thing properly and still encountering wake.(which is exactly correct) It was presented to us not because the crew did anything wrong but to underline differences in perception based on experience.

[Final 3 Greens]

West Coast

Sounds as if you are dealing with a few Monday morning quarterbacks, who just happen to hold PPLs ;)

I understand the irritation caused, since I encounter similar people in my job most weeks, when I deliver project management training around the world and there are always 'experts' on the programmes who know more than I do.

My response is to remember that they pay my fees, smile and remember that only I can choose to be upset!

However, the vast majority of folks do not act this way and I suspect that most PPLs don't either, but then neither do the majority of white sharks attack people, it's only the few that do that generate the bad image for the rest.

[pulse1]

This sort of behaviour is not confined to PPL’s. I was strapping myself into the rear of a HS748 when the guy behind me asked, in a very loud voice, who the captain was. He then told the FA to inform the captain that he was a nervous passenger and that he didn’t like “things with fans on the front”. It then became clear that he was a BAC111 captain with the same airline.

When the FA asked him to keep his voice down in case he worried the other passengers, he said that they should realise how dangerous propeller driven aeroplanes were.

All through the flight, and especially the landing, he was telling the pilot what to do. I just looked round at him and yawned.

[LOMCEVAK]

Back to the thread (interesting as the other discussions are), I can confirm that this occurred on flight AA709 on 13 July. My friend agrees that the bank excursions may not have been to 90 deg but that they were excessive compared to what he had ever seen before in a commercial aircraft. He also agrees that the aircraft may not have been at 20,000 ft as it appears that the aircraft was probably turning on to the approach when this happened. However, he and his companions were definitely concerned that the aircraft may crash!

I suspect that the incident was due to some aggressive handling for whatever reason, possibly due to atmospheric disturbance or an ATC input. However, the debate that has ensued has raised some lessons that everyone in the industry might like to consider.

1. An eyewitness's perception may be markedly different from reality due to the nature of visual and acceleration cues that they have received. They are just reporting an event as they perceived it. If they have been unsettled by an occurrence they need to be convinced of the reality so that their mental model can be refined. They then may have a more accurate perception if such an event occurs again.

2. Good use of the PA after an unusual event can allay many fears and uncertainties and restore passenger confidence. There are both humanitarian and commercial reasons to do this.

3. Scepticism of reported incidents such as this is healthy, cynicism is not so useful!

4. Thanks to Wino's reply, my friend is much happier as some of the uncertainties and questions that he had have been answered.

If anyone has any more details of this flight, I would still be interested to hear them.

[Kaptin M]

From your friend's account, LOMCEVAK, it might be indicative of an aircraft carrying out an S-turn (but banking >30 degrees to stay on the LLZ), with a steep nose down attitude to dive off height, then levelling off and chucking the gear out to slow down to flap extend speed, before catching the glide slope.

But just a guess. :confused:

Nothing wrong with going around these days is there? :ok:

[Wino]

Lomecevak,

I had to wait to answer this point till I went to work and asked an MD80 pilot about their EGPWS (enhanced Ground Proximity Warning sysyem) just to make sure I was right.

If your friend was close enough to the front of the cabin to hear cockpit crew talking (Put the gear down NOW!) he would have certainly heard the EGPWS saying "Bank Angle" in a VERY loud robotic voice every time bank exceded 60 degrees or so. Also, the terrain warning would have activated with high sink rates below 2000 feet. (The enhanced portion would not have the "Whoop Whoop" it would just say "pull up" or "terrain", if you ignored it and got into the old style envelope then you would get the "Whoop whoop" before the message) anytime the path of the aircraft gets within 60 seconds of the ground. Its suprisingly easy to get that portion of the EGPWS. 2000 feet a minute 2000 feet above the ground (not that high a sink rate) can get it in the right circumstances. Also don't forget the "sink rate" and "glideslope" calls that a severely unstable approach is likely to generate, but those are within the last 1000 feet or so (which is 1.3 minutes long btw)...

But basically anytime the sinkrate (in feet per minute) exceded the altitude of the aircraft he would have heard a LOUD computerized voice saying "pullup" or "terrain".

That being said, a likely scenario was the crew was descending far out on the localizer on the autopilot. Either they encountered the wake of the aircraft in front of them or the aircraft infront of them bent the localizer beam causing a rapid roll reversal as the autopilot tried to fly down a beam experiencing intereference from a preceding aircraft. As soon as that happened the crew would have disconnected the autopilot which will cause a loud non verbal alarm to ring in the cockpit. Furthermore if they were running into wake they might have climbed breifly above the glideslope (not really climbing, just slowing down the rate of descent untill they were a few hundred feet above the glidepath but you get the idea) and then slowed down as much as practical (hence "get the gear down now") to increase seperation with the aircraft infront of them.

When an autopilot attempts to track an interferred with localizer beam it can be quite ugly, though not dangerous. The autopilot has bank limitations that will prevent it from going past 35 degrees or so, but it might get there in a hurry, especially in localizer mode...

Cheers
Wino

[AAL_Silverbird]

I’m sorry Lomecevak but the story keeps changing. It sounds like the cockpit crew did their jobs and got your friend to ABQ safe and sound just like they were paid to do. If the cockpit crew put the aircraft in any unusual attitude then I’m sure the Super 80 Fleet Supervisor has the crews report on his desk and he would be your friends contact. If your friend feels his life was in jeopardy then have your friend contact American Airlines and the FAA to report the incident. He just might have lost his life that day hadn’t been for those two underpaid pros up front. If the crew did save his bacon then your friend should be writing a thank you note to the crew.

http://www.aa.com

http://www.faa.gov

No one has anything to hide when you have 139 paying customers in the back watching your every move.

Wino: The autopilot does not give an oral warning on disconnect except when in the autoland mode then Betty will announce “AUTOPILOT”. Only warning you get when not in autoland is the quite “click” of the magnetic switch going to off and two flashing red lights, one each in front the Captain and the F/O.

[Bubbette]

Well put AAS. I know often as a pax it seems like we are really turning/banking/falling out of the sky when in fact it is just the normal approach to the airport. But if your friend is concerned, he definitely should contact the faa or ntsb, instead of looking to an internet gossip board for information.

[scroggs]

Yes, Lomcevak's for real. Some of his friends are a bit strange, though.... ;) As for airliner landings, allow me to tell you the tale of his first 747 landing sometime! :}

As Danny said, back to the subject.......

Scroggs

[LOMCEVAK]

Thanks, guys. I agree that all of the last few technical suggestions are possible. Interestingly, the report was of audio alarms only. I specifically asked about voice warnings and apparently none were remembered as being heard. Overall this is definitely an interesting example of observation and memory being, perhaps, inconsistent with reality; limitations of homo sapiens I am afraid. It was actually my idea to air this on PPRuNe not my friend's, and curiosity was the only motivation of both of us. No-one wants to start stirring it unnecessarily with AA or the FAA.

Scroggs, how are you? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone! Did you bid for/get the trip that we discussed next month?

Best regards and thanks to all.

L

[scroggs]

L - hello, mate. All in jest, you understand (how many oxygen masks was it...?). No, I didn't get the trip - SEP, Sim, linecheck and a gutful of US stuff screwed me. Hope you both have a great time - let me know how it goes. You doing the Xmas Bash?

Apologies to all for hijacking the thread for social purposes!

[RiverCity]

The event reminded me of the approach and landing at Juneau. As I recall, the plane went (approx) south, then did a neat 180 while dropping, eventually landing (approx) north. Seemed as if we were standing on our left wing. Watching a similar approach --from the ground this time-- it looked a lot less scary.

[411A]

<....two underpaid pros up front.>

Underpaid...compared to whom? :E :E

[AAL_Silverbird]

Let me get this straight Lomecevak, you tee up here on PPRuNe with the title of the thread of “Upset on AA flight” with the date, flight number, departure airport and arrival airport with an allegation of two knife edge 90 degree bank angles, a loss of 2000 feet at FL 200, "audio alarms" etc, etc, etc. Serious stuff to be putting on a public board about a major US air carrier. What you don’t think someone from the FAA sniffs around here to pickup little tidbits? Oh I’m sure the Super 80 Fleet Manager for American has already talked to the Captain about your “revelation.” Wouldn’t be surprised if the flight data recorder wasn’t pulled over this too just to keep AA Legal and the FAA happy.

You just want to “chat” about it here on PPRuNe just amongst us ol boys, hush hush, keep on the QT etc. You’re funny!

In answer to your question about just audio alarms, there are none. All alarms on the MD-80 are an audio alarm followed by female voice telling you what is wrong. On the MD-80 you can’t have one without the other.

We have all these “Walter Mittys” running around here on PPRuNe wring their hands every time a plane does a go around or a fire truck follows a plane to the gate. What’s the next thread “Flight Attendant Drops Glass In First Class Galley?”

Lomecevak I’ll give the crew the benefit of the doubt by saying I’ll put my family on any American Airlines flight, any day, anytime.

[Ranger One]

AAL_Silverbird,

Don't shoot the messenger. I've never knowingly met Lomcevak, but I trust the people who vouch for him, implicitly. Lomcevak speaks highly of the friend who reported the incident. That's good enough for me to say there is a case to answer, something to be explained - even if the explanation proves to be mundane.

I don't trust eyewitness accounts of what an aircraft did from non-aviation people - or at best I take them with a large pinch of salt.

However, if a *credible* witness makes a report of what *people* did - witness and 4 colleagues, frequent fliers, all 'startled', and CC stating they had 'never experienced anything like it' - then yeah, ask the questions.

Let's face it, on occasion 'incidents' do get... not exactly hushed-up, but perhaps not taken sufficiently seriously. Seem to remember reading a recent ?Norwegian? report of a ?757? crew pulling serious G at a preposterously low level, following a seriously unstabilised approach... was initially treated as 'probably tea with no biccies in CPs office' rather then the bloody near thing it really was...

R1

[Kaptin M]

American Airlines and the crew concerned needn't be worried if the flight was operated within sop limits.
Should they.

[vector4fun]

Actually, this just sounds like a visual approach to runway 26 from the north and east, over the Sandia Mountains. The flight would be up at around 14,000 feet until about ten-fifteen miles from the airport, then a left turn parallel the peaks as you cross into the valley, followed by a close-in right to final, as the airport is only a few miles from the hills. I've done the straight-in visual to Rwy 26 in a MU-2, and it's pretty "interesting" even from the cockpit.

And for what it's worth, while I respect and appreciate the professionalism of ALL major airline crews, it IS a well-worn perception amongst us controllers that SWA crews in general are more willing to do the "unusual".

Thanks guys! :ok:

[411A]

Well, certainly have to admit the parking a 737 in a gas station across Hollywood Way in KBUR, is certainly 'unusual', to say the least....:uhoh:

[PaperTiger]

I'm with AAL_Silverbird and others here. Both the profile and the common winds at ABQ lead to 'unusual' approaches, which are actually quite usual. A non-pilot pax is in no position to judge an "upset" from the cabin however experienced he/she may consider themself to be. The alleged bank angles and RoD are simply not credible - there would be a smoking hole somewhere.

If a pax looks out the window and sees nothing but ground, it is impossible to judge the angle. And if the airplane is being tossed around (again common at ABQ), adrenalin will impair the judgement even more.

Without some more detailed and knowledgeable accounts, I'd write this off as a non-event, even if it did shake up some friends.
The Flight Data Recorder will have long since been overwritten. Since there was no damage or injuries, this was not a reportable incident and the airplane simply continued its schedule after a normal (if bumpy) arrival.

[dudly]

vector4fun

"And for what it's worth, while I respect and appreciate the professionalism of ALL major airline crews, it IS a well-worn perception amongst us controllers that SWA crews in general are more willing to do the "unusual".

Just because a crew is very capable of doing the unusual, it is the professional crew that takes the passengers comfort and safety into account and declines. This in no way reflects on the ability of the crew to "max perform" the aircraft in a slam dunk or whatever you consider unusual, but it does reflect on their maturity and professionalism. Just becacause a controller asks you to do something has nothing to do with what should actually be done. All too often crews attempt to do things controllers ask that should have been declined right up front.

As I understand it, commercial aviation is essentially going from point A to point B. It is not max performing an aircraft to the edges of its envelope which commercial airliners were never designed to do, especially and most importantly with passengers on board.

Vector4fun, I would be interested in what "willing to do the unusual" means.

[Final 3 Greens]

Dudly

You commernts remind me of a posting a few months ago asking for advice on slipping a 737-800.

I hoped at the time that the post was a wind up.

[vector4fun]

Dudly,

Apparantly, you have an "axe" to grind of some sort. I started my statement with an explicit appreciation for the professionalism of ALL the major airline crews I work with. I don't know whether that "axe" is with ATC or SWA...

That said, and since YOU ask, it's GENERALLY easier to:

Get a SWA crew to switch runways on a five- ten mile visual final.

It's easier to get a SWA crew to change departure runways. (rather than wait ten minutes while company comes up with a new set of "numbers")

It's easier to get a SWA crew to turn a visual base inside the FAF. (short approach)

It's easier to get a SWA crew out on a rolling takeoff with traffic 2 mile final.

It's generally easier to give a SWA crew a rather odd WX re-route due to TS. They generally accept the fact we're doing the best we can to get them safely on their way. Even if that means starting out SW 100 miles to go E.

And, yes, it's easier to "slam-dunk" a SWA flight. Perhaps they get more practice?

That's just a few off the top of my head. Now, I've seen pilots from ALL major airlines do similar things, but not often. And just as often, they complain, so we try not to ask. Perhaps the SWA crews just don't have time to call and chat with 20- 30 minute turns?

[dudly]

vector4fun, all good points. It looks like you just described the normal ops of all major carriers, except for the slam dunk. Cheers

[RRAAMJET]

Vector4fun, you beat me to it.....the normal app. to 26 at ABQ can seem very odd from the back, maneuvering around with the terrain close by on the right, and steeply descending onto the 3 degree path. Remember, folks, ABQ is hot and high, and you can't use 'brakes with flaps on the 80 (as I recall - I'm 777 now), so the gear would be a good idea to keep the speed under control.

Nope, nothing abnormal here....but it goes to show how nervous fliers perceptions can be different from those driving. That's why we used to explain the HKG IGS 13 to the pax before we landed...or why we brief the pax before t/o from Orange County...

There would also be an ATC report for any emergency, and diving from 20k to 2k would certainly trigger a response from ATC!!! Oh, BTW, 2k would put you into the rocks....

Any FDR recording of a parameter exceedence is locked-in at AA, and triggers an investigation if you don't put it in the book - I know a guy that was caught out by that on the 80.

We've been thru' the SWA thing before....it's just their way, nothing to it as a story. It's v. important to their modus operandi to shave time wherever they can (they can also pick-up a trip if they save flight time, my neighbour says!), and I believe they have a higher tailwind limit than we do on the 80. That's a big advantage at places like ELP, with the terminal right at one end of the field. Land towards it, depart away from it. Also, the 80 is limited to idle reverse 'cos of rudder blanking, and has a cr@ppy wing and crummy stopping performance with a high Vref to boot. A stable approach from far out is many Capt's "comfort zone" on it....and we have 300-odd of them, so it's the AA a/c most ATC folks deal with domestically. Just my opinions....

[vector4fun]

Raamjet,

Speaking for myself, that was actually a very educational post about the MD-80. I didn't know about the speedbrake vs flaps restriction.

Question: Did I understand correctly that the crew is not supposed to use more than idle reverse during roll-out? Is there a speed below which more than idle thrust is approved?


You mentioned ELP; I spent several years out there. Some of the best all-time "slam-dunks" I ever saw were the NASA pilots who visited for STA training. I once saw a T-38, from 15 miles, FL210, 520 kts gs.; land straight in rwy 22, no overhead. Probably not even a stretch in comparison to what they practice up a White Sands. Oh, and try explaining to an airline crew on 12 mile final that they're actually following traffic 2 miles behind at FL170. Best to not even mention it....


:}

[flite idol]

Yep, flown into ABQ several times! Very high terrain to the east and north east as I recall. Not inconeivable to encounter some kind of pseudo mountain wave type of effect on the slam-dunk descent if the winds are right. If it was easy they`d let chimps and children do it!

[AAL_Silverbird]

MD-80 thrust reversers are canted slightly inboard at the top to reduce FOD while in reverse. When pulling anymore than 1.30 EPR on landing roll out the exhaust from the upper thrust reverser bucket will disturb the airflow over the rudder. When conditions are right this can induce a possible loss of directional control at slower speeds on rollout.

Normal procedure on landing is to pull anywhere from idle reverse to 1.30 EPR until 80 knots. At 80 knots slowly start reducing thrust and come out of reverse at the 60 knot call.

[broadreach]

Déjà vu

I followed this thread with interest from the beginning and as it dipped back and forth between slanging match and good insight into how people’s perceptions vary. Anyone who comes through here regularly would know that Lomcevak’s credentials are as Danny described, and that the post was not a wind-up.

I tried to put myself in the position of Loncevak’s friend, a frequent flyer who may never have experienced anything more than moderate turbulence and the gradual descents, and I wondered what sort of rate of descent in a commercial jet it would take to alarm me. I am 58, not as frequent a flyer as I used to be, but I was brought up around airplanes and have flown in a fair assortment of aircraft, the widest range being whatever was available in Peru and the Amazon in the fifties, sixties and seventies. That covers from Stearmans through PBYs, DC-3/4/6s, Twin Otters on floats and not, 1-11s, F-28s, 727s and 737s. Given the weather and terrain there was the occasional fright.

One of the things this thread reminded me of was how much we take smooth, gradual manouvers for granted. Most frequent flyers today can go their passenger careers without experiencing anything you might call radical, even heavy turbulence, and they have no idea of the punishment a modern aircraft can take or what sort of manoeuvers these aircraft could accomplish if pushed, i.e far more than anything built 30-50 years ago and which had punishment dosed out to them in great gobs.

The explanations that came through in the thread later about the peculiarities of Albuquerque approaches, made perfect sense. No uproar in the cabin probably because most passengers had experienced the same before. Just alarming to Lomcevak’s friend.

Well, today I had a similar experience and I was alarmed. It was an Aerolineas Argentinas shuttle flight from Aeroparque in Buenos Aires, to Montevideo in a very vintage 737. Only about a 35 minute flight. Drizzling in BA, cloud all the way across at 22,000 feet, breaking through at what I estimated to be between 7 and 10 thousand feet after a gradual descent. And then the steepest descent I have ever experienced in a commercial aircraft and which I could only compare to going into St Barts or some tight places in the Amazon in a Twin Otter. I was sitting in 10A, the emergency exit, The downward angle felt like 60° although it may never have exceeded 20°. In rapid succession, spoilers, then gear and a rapid and continuous extension of flaps. I heard a few moans from around the cabin, nothing more. Didn’t time the descent, estimated it at 2, maybe 3 minutes. A few S-turns, then about 20 seconds wings level, still pointing down until about 100 feet off, rounding out, flare and a light thump down not too far from the threshold.

MVD is not exactly mountainous. Flat as a pancake all around. Suppose I could have asked why, because the captain was at the cockpit door, but there were people behind me and, frankly, I felt embarassed. I suspect that rapid a descent wasn’t necessary. But even if it wasn’t necessary, did it make a blind bit of difference? And from the wisp of smugness I saw in the captain’s slight grin I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, as the yoke was being pushed forward, someone up front said “watch this”.

[Rollingthunder]

Once was on NAN-HNL-YVR on a DC8-63 approaching YVR. We seemed to be still at cruising altitude and I could see the airport below us. We slowed and started a rapid descent, the inboard thrust reversers deployed. We sank like a stone but quite stable and landed.

I had a cold and had been deep snorkling in Fiji to compound the problem. My ears went U/S during descent. I ended up at customs unable to hear a word that the customs officer was saying to me. I told him what the situation was but he kept on talking to me. Couldn't hear a word. Tried to tell him what I thought he wanted to hear. Asked him to write out what he was asking me. Fed up, he waved me through.

[robmac]

I would have to say that there is an awful lot of ego flying around in pprune.

I am a ppl, and fly my own twin IFR around SE Asia, I know for example what a thunder storm looks like, my aircraft might come apart a bit easier than yours if I should accidentally find myself inside one, and although sometimes I have the benefit of a qualified pilot in the right seat, sometimes it is just me the aircraft, and a fairly steam driven flight deck, with quite a heavy workload depending on circumstances, especially with the "support" of Indonesian controllers.

The principles of flight are somewhat universal, regardless of equipment (except maybe the A320) or "pilot status", so I don't see that even if Lomcevak was not an aviation superhero, why his points should not be valid.

I have two recent incidences which, I do not suppose led to any reports, but certainly caused alarm for myself and fellow pax.

1. SWA 737 Oakland to LAX, in descent the aircraft appeared to momentarily depart from controlled flight, with what could only be described as a "wing drop" to the left followed by a high rate rolling reversal to the right and then a recovery. I couldn't tell you the bank angle or height loss, as I had my eyes shut by then !!!, but it would seem like a good job was done on the flight deck.

2. United 747-400 out of Washington Dulles to LHR. In the first class lounge the TV weather channel was showing red/yellow radar returns virtually circling Washington, when we taxied the rain was hammering down like anything I have seen on a bad day in the tropics, lightning flashes all around, the aircraft turns in to a holding point with at least six other aircraft holding ahead in the queue. Five minutes later with no change in the weather we taxi past all the other waiting aircraft, and depart. As Airshow was showing on the TV screens, it was quite interesting to watch the aircraft, twist and turn, looking for a hole in the CBs, reversing course at least 4 times and once even manageing a 450 degree turn. The ride can only be described as moderate to severe turbulence, and at some point some joker on the outside appeared to firing golfballs at the fuselage, at least that was what it sounded like from seat 2A, but to be fair, on arrival at LHR, there were no dents in the airframe, although the paintwork looked a bit "worn". The captain came on the PA to reassure all that this was perfectly normal, he didn't sound much like a sky god, more like he was trying to reassure himself !! United did not cover themselves in glory that day.

Whether I fly in a friends PA28 or a 777-200 with a professional crew, I am not so much worried about a pilots credentials, more that he/she understands about limits !!

[RiverCity]

I would have to say that there is an awful lot of ego flying around in pprune.

-- Oh, surely you are jesting.

-- No, I'm not; and don't call me Shirley.

[PlaneTruth]

vector4fun

Thanks for the SWA Kudos. We aim to please (most of us at least. I have had to call ATC to apologize about company a couple of times.)

robmac

That was most likely wake turbulence. The Sadde arrival is flown by heavy iron coming from Asia and Europe. With GPS accuracy, one aircraft can fly right into anothers wake with precision measured in feet. On a calmer day, the wake vortices from a heavy can be quite startling. I always sit my cabin crew down early going into LAX because I expect a bump or two. As an old friend of mine once said, "I'd rather be down here wishing I was up there than up there wishing I was down here." Same for seating the ladies and gents. Better safe than sorry.

I had LAX tower request an immediate 30 degree turn on departure across the south side. They didn't tell us a 767 had just departed and as luck would have it, we hit both vortices. Tha Captain got on the p.A. and explained what it was but nontheless, it gets your attention. ("Brain to body, ignore the adrenalin. This was only a test.)

411A,

Extremely unusual. (Am I mistaken or do you repeatedly like to make that point?) By the way, it seems someone in the BUR city thought better of allowing a petrol station to operate behind the blast fence of a short runway used by passenger jets: The facility is now closed and scheduled for demolition.

Also: Shortly after the "crunchy concrete" barrier was installed on the stopway on the end of 08, a Gulfstream (or similar) put it to the test and only rolled halfway into it. Had it been there when United came within inches of going through the fence, it would have helped them too. Well, perhaps less so. They were traveling 90 degrees to the runway in full reverse (wet RWY) and came to stop with their wing sticking through the blast fence. I had the BUR senior TWR controller on my jumpseat and he said it was a hell of a deal. Tower is yelling at her asking if they need assistance. No response. About 15 SWA rampers run over to assist in case they deploy slides. Then, after about 90 seconds, they taxi away from the fence leaving the #1 slat dangling by a thread. DOH!!!

Oh, sorry. Getting off the thread a tad there. Won't happen again.


PT:ok:

[411A]

PT,
Been landing at BUR since 1966, pistons, turboprops, jets....and 08 (07 years before) has always been the same, no different then, or now.

If you pay attention, no problems.

A Flying Tiger Connie many years ago got tangled in the wires about a mile short...with bad results.

You gotta admit, those particular SW clowns were really ignorant.

[BrightonGirl]

I feel badly -- and puzzled -- that some of you (AAL Silverbird, most obviously) seem so negative toward Lomcevak's post. I'm just pax, and somewhat white-knuckled at that -- and I've been considerably reassured re my safety in the air by reading pprune. I've learned that I really can't judge from my humble little coach seat how deeply the plane has banked, etc. And now I know that should I ever need to fly into ABQ, I may well experience an approach that seems a little scary but just to me, not to the Captain. And that's fine. It's whether he (or she) knows what (s)he's doing that matters. I think that one of the reasons we pax sometimes get scared is that when we encounter something that feels different from the smooth, gradual descents and relatively soft landings with which we've usually been spoiled, we make the mistake of thinking that something's wrong -- and that the Captain might have been unprepared or erred in some way. Knowing that the approach to ABQ is often a little "complex" makes quite a difference -- because I'll know that the Captain is quite ready for and in fact expecting that "complexity." (probably not a very good word to describe it, I know)

AAL Silverbird: I certainly am not knocking you in any way. I fly AA and have never had any qualms about the expertise of the crew, flight or cabin.

[Tripower455]

As one that routinely flies in and out of ABQ, I can unequivocably say that it is usually an airshow. The approach to 26 from the east is fun, to say the least........... It's always bumpy going over the mountains, and once you clear them, you turn base way above profile, necessitating "square" turns. There is probably more room between the Sandia Mts. and the runway threshold than meets the eye, but they look REAL close!