Perth "Mayday" From Crikey.com
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 73
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizofoz
To a point you are correct in that carrying an alternate every where you go helps out a lot, however it is not a panacea for all weather problems, you can still get caught out...........even in Europe!
To a point you are correct in that carrying an alternate every where you go helps out a lot, however it is not a panacea for all weather problems, you can still get caught out...........even in Europe!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF fuel policy has always been questionable. Just the way they like it.
Luckily not to many min op idiots around, however they do seem to get caught out - I seem to recall a fleet manager got caught somewhere in the NT not to long ago.
Luckily not to many min op idiots around, however they do seem to get caught out - I seem to recall a fleet manager got caught somewhere in the NT not to long ago.
The 3 most useless things in aviation:
-The sky above you.
-The runway behind you.
-The air in your tanks.
QF guys still know this and still order fuel accordingly.
Sandilands... Mate...
-The sky above you.
-The runway behind you.
-The air in your tanks.
QF guys still know this and still order fuel accordingly.
Sandilands... Mate...
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Indonesia
Age: 59
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this had happened to KAL, Garuda, Dyasty or Air China, asperions would have been cast on the competency of the crew or the leglity of deliberately going below minimaalbeit it is indeed within the skipper's emergeny authority. Questions would have been asked how in the world the crew screwed itup ig time. For QF? How tame!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the aircraft diverted to Learmonth, made an NDB approach and missed out.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably both pilots spent too much time heads down punching buttons while looking at the MAP with it's squillions of pretty dotted and magenta lines and green half circles and fixes and things and hadn't a clue how to fly a simple raw data NDB approach with all the time in the world to look outside for the aerodrome as the aircraft tracked ever so accurately on autopilot...
You don't think there's maybe just a chance that, I dunno, the weather was below minima or something?
Nunc est bibendum
Foot in mouth disease from Tee Emm
Probably both pilots spent too much time heads down punching buttons while looking at the MAP with it's squillions of pretty dotted and magenta lines and green half circles and fixes and things and hadn't a clue how to fly a simple raw data NDB approach with all the time in the world to look outside for the aerodrome as the aircraft tracked ever so accurately on autopilot...
Care to type a retraction Tee Emm?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my time on the classic, raw data NDB's to minima with circling were very common in just about every sim, so really I did more NDB's to minima in 3 years on the 747 then 10 + years in GA.
Anyone who has tried circling in a classic Sim would know that it is much harder than real life due to lack of side/rear vision.
Tee Emm, nice try!
Anyone who has tried circling in a classic Sim would know that it is much harder than real life due to lack of side/rear vision.
Tee Emm, nice try!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just ask Ralph: Aviation's foremost Monday morning expert!
Perth is an airport that has always been suseptable to unforecast fog. I used to operate in and out of PER fairly often in the AN days. Those crews who fly to PER should consider the chance of unforcast fog on arrival at any time that there is:
1) Calm winds.
2) Cavok and
3) Ambient Temp/ Dew point split of less than 4 degrees C.
4) especially at night.
The change in the QF fuel policy (as reported by Steve Creedy in 'The Australian'), to applying a 2 hour buffer on operational requierments regarding fog is insufficient. Blind adherance to such a policy will bite somone on the @ss without common sense consideration of the conditions for fog formation.
That said, I wonder why the crew did several approachs prior to landing. I would imagine that there was some pressing operational need for several approaches, however, once it was clear that a diversion was not possible, you might as well plan to autoland off the first approach.
1) Calm winds.
2) Cavok and
3) Ambient Temp/ Dew point split of less than 4 degrees C.
4) especially at night.
The change in the QF fuel policy (as reported by Steve Creedy in 'The Australian'), to applying a 2 hour buffer on operational requierments regarding fog is insufficient. Blind adherance to such a policy will bite somone on the @ss without common sense consideration of the conditions for fog formation.
That said, I wonder why the crew did several approachs prior to landing. I would imagine that there was some pressing operational need for several approaches, however, once it was clear that a diversion was not possible, you might as well plan to autoland off the first approach.
From Ben Sandilands:
Bull.
From the ATSB report:
ie, the crew did pretty much eveything right. Just one of those rare and unfortunate circumstances where they were caught out, past DPA, by the unpredictable weather systems that Perth is often subject to.
Should they have carried a full alternate? I'm sure that with the benefit of hindsight everyone is saying, "yes" however that is not always necessary, practical or possible. Sure QF could fly everywhere carrying fuel for a full alternate, some airlines do but it all comes down to risk-management. You can't carry enough fuel to cover every possible scenario. As the ATSB report states, "the statistics for the years 2003 to 2006 showed only one unforecast fog event at Perth". The risk was assessed by the crew and accounted for but unfortunately in this case they were caught out, it does happen and they managed the subsequent incident well.
The upside of this is that QF has now amended its policy to better manage the risk that fog in Perth presents. It's an extremely conservative policy now but that's obviously what the situation demands.
The BoM is also developing a Forecast Decision Support System for fog forecasting which should also reduce the chance of a similar incident.
What it all boils down to is that this is just another reminder that this industry is constantly maturing and evolving. We need to continue to learn and adapt to keep the industry safe and professional. What we don't need is "reporters" like Ben Sandilands scaremongering, it serves no useful purpose.
For a more objective article read Steve Creedy's coverage in the Australian or even better, read the ATSB report.
Qantas captains are under constant pressure to carry not a litre more in fuel than company operating procedures deem appropriate for each flight.
.From the ATSB report:
The forecasts used in planning the flight predicted fog would occur about 1.5 hours after the aircraft’s arrival at Perth....
Enroute, the flight crew actively sought weather information or received it from the operator’s operational support. As a result, the crew maintained an awareness of the developing meteorological situation. Significantly, it was only at 2400, after the aircraft had passed the Designated Point All Engines Operating (DPA), that the TTF predicted fog onset before the arrival time. Once the crew commenced descent they were committed to a landing at Perth...
In this case, the flight crew demonstrated their awareness of the risk in their conservative decision to carry fuel out of Singapore that was additional to the minimum fuel policy requirement...
In the circumstances, the crew’s action in attempting two approaches before committing to a landing below minima was sound. Crew selection of the runway 21 ILS as an operator-approved runway for autoland, and use of the A330 autoland capability reduced the risk inherent in landing in meteorological conditions that were below the specified minima.
Enroute, the flight crew actively sought weather information or received it from the operator’s operational support. As a result, the crew maintained an awareness of the developing meteorological situation. Significantly, it was only at 2400, after the aircraft had passed the Designated Point All Engines Operating (DPA), that the TTF predicted fog onset before the arrival time. Once the crew commenced descent they were committed to a landing at Perth...
In this case, the flight crew demonstrated their awareness of the risk in their conservative decision to carry fuel out of Singapore that was additional to the minimum fuel policy requirement...
In the circumstances, the crew’s action in attempting two approaches before committing to a landing below minima was sound. Crew selection of the runway 21 ILS as an operator-approved runway for autoland, and use of the A330 autoland capability reduced the risk inherent in landing in meteorological conditions that were below the specified minima.
Should they have carried a full alternate? I'm sure that with the benefit of hindsight everyone is saying, "yes" however that is not always necessary, practical or possible. Sure QF could fly everywhere carrying fuel for a full alternate, some airlines do but it all comes down to risk-management. You can't carry enough fuel to cover every possible scenario. As the ATSB report states, "the statistics for the years 2003 to 2006 showed only one unforecast fog event at Perth". The risk was assessed by the crew and accounted for but unfortunately in this case they were caught out, it does happen and they managed the subsequent incident well.
The upside of this is that QF has now amended its policy to better manage the risk that fog in Perth presents. It's an extremely conservative policy now but that's obviously what the situation demands.
The BoM is also developing a Forecast Decision Support System for fog forecasting which should also reduce the chance of a similar incident.
What it all boils down to is that this is just another reminder that this industry is constantly maturing and evolving. We need to continue to learn and adapt to keep the industry safe and professional. What we don't need is "reporters" like Ben Sandilands scaremongering, it serves no useful purpose.
For a more objective article read Steve Creedy's coverage in the Australian or even better, read the ATSB report.
Nunc est bibendum
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I know that there are people who have been caught out by unforecast fog at PH when it hasn't been on the forecast at all but for me personally, a forecast of FG within 90 minutes after ETA would have seen me carry the full alternate plus some.
Ah well. Yet another reason to remember to carry more juice.
Ah well. Yet another reason to remember to carry more juice.
It happened in YPAD in 1999 to Ansett A320 VH HYO.
Here is the report
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...199904029.aspx
I can tell you that HYO had nowhere else to go. Note the fix. CCTV cameras at PF and ED!
J
Here is the report
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...199904029.aspx
I can tell you that HYO had nowhere else to go. Note the fix. CCTV cameras at PF and ED!
J
Would you operate to an isolated island in the pacific, with FG forecast +90mins from your arrival and not carry an alternate...
Just because its not surrounded by hours of water, dosn't mean its not an isolated destination and treated as such.
Just because its not surrounded by hours of water, dosn't mean its not an isolated destination and treated as such.
vis report 150 meters
event at Perth". The risk was assessed by the crew and accounted for but unfortunately in this case they were caught out, it does happen and they managed the subsequent incident well.
the engineers at Perth told me the fuel in tanks at shutdown was 15minutes.
hardly enough to make a go round.
passengers desreve much better than that
the engineers at Perth told me the fuel in tanks at shutdown was 15minutes.
hardly enough to make a go round.
passengers desreve much better than that
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Straya
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hate to be harsh, but...
The fog was forecast. Perth is an isolated aerodrome.
Fuel for a suitable alternate should have been uplifted.
Yes, the crew uplifted extra fuel - but quite what the plan was, I'm not sure - hold to wait for any fog to lift?
Why not do what most professional airlines do all the time, always carry a destination alternate - and then leave it up to the crew to take extra fuel as required.
I do agree however, that the crew did a good job in handling the situation they should never have been put/put themselves in.
I also wonder, if they would have had enough fuel from TOD to go direct to Learmonth?
Couldn't have been much in it...
The fog was forecast. Perth is an isolated aerodrome.
Fuel for a suitable alternate should have been uplifted.
Yes, the crew uplifted extra fuel - but quite what the plan was, I'm not sure - hold to wait for any fog to lift?
Why not do what most professional airlines do all the time, always carry a destination alternate - and then leave it up to the crew to take extra fuel as required.
I do agree however, that the crew did a good job in handling the situation they should never have been put/put themselves in.
I also wonder, if they would have had enough fuel from TOD to go direct to Learmonth?
Couldn't have been much in it...
Nunc est bibendum
With respect bring back the biff, carrying YPKG or YPLM for every flight arriving into PH is overkill by a fair margin...unless you think that carrying Pearce is acceptable. That'd be like what SQ do at SIN when their destination alternate is Paya Leba.
It comes down to knowing PH and knowing what is likely to happen. I agree (and said previously) that faced with that sort of forecast, I would have had a truck load more fuel on.
It comes down to knowing PH and knowing what is likely to happen. I agree (and said previously) that faced with that sort of forecast, I would have had a truck load more fuel on.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Boggabilla
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again this raises the issue of extending / upgrading KG to cope with such a situation. With the resuming of east bound flights from the aforementioned likely in the near future, surely this is justified. Maybe a certain Mr Smith can reissue that cheque for a hundred big ones just for a feasibility study on the matter
Not very often you see 8/8ths on the deck at both PH + KG simultaneously.
Not very often you see 8/8ths on the deck at both PH + KG simultaneously.
the fog that formed at 0100 was all clear by 0300.
No one can call the exact time for the correct "mix" to form fog in a katabatic wind from the hills to the east.
most internationals, heavy aircraft, carry YPAD at night .HN. due unsure of YPLM lights and RFF. (previous diversions no lights avail at YPLM on arrival)
that is 20tons fuel, on landing. expensive to carry but very professional
every flight every night.
No one can call the exact time for the correct "mix" to form fog in a katabatic wind from the hills to the east.
most internationals, heavy aircraft, carry YPAD at night .HN. due unsure of YPLM lights and RFF. (previous diversions no lights avail at YPLM on arrival)
that is 20tons fuel, on landing. expensive to carry but very professional
every flight every night.