Jetstar A320 Go Around Melbourne
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stralya
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before we degenerate into a Q v J* battle, I think the most pertinent part of the event is the timeline...
It would appear from my reading that there was an attempt from the to reduce the impact of an ASIR. The ATSB state "following media reports further information was sought from the company". That would imply to me that the information was NOT forthcoming from the company in the first instance. The report did not acurately reflect the occurence.
There is no way the ATSB would "database" a report alleged to contain information pertaining to an autoflight failure...It is clear to me that the report if any, downplayed the seriousness of the incident. Any attempt by J* to say further information came to light after the event is crap.
The FDR and the QAR would most certainly hold data pertaining to an EGPWS warning at 43' RALT.
So I wonder will anyone be held repsonsible or will J* claim to be at the same standard as Qf- As they are a group airline??
Yeah yeah all you wannabes, I certainly know about QF1- you can't hide a golf course...But to me the disclosure by J* was well below what would be expected if the airline were fair dinkum Q group.
Let's get "group audit" in there, "group safety" too....
Mind you the midget won't allow it. Funny thing is Qantas own him, not the other way around..
It would appear from my reading that there was an attempt from the to reduce the impact of an ASIR. The ATSB state "following media reports further information was sought from the company". That would imply to me that the information was NOT forthcoming from the company in the first instance. The report did not acurately reflect the occurence.
There is no way the ATSB would "database" a report alleged to contain information pertaining to an autoflight failure...It is clear to me that the report if any, downplayed the seriousness of the incident. Any attempt by J* to say further information came to light after the event is crap.
The FDR and the QAR would most certainly hold data pertaining to an EGPWS warning at 43' RALT.
So I wonder will anyone be held repsonsible or will J* claim to be at the same standard as Qf- As they are a group airline??
Yeah yeah all you wannabes, I certainly know about QF1- you can't hide a golf course...But to me the disclosure by J* was well below what would be expected if the airline were fair dinkum Q group.
Let's get "group audit" in there, "group safety" too....
Mind you the midget won't allow it. Funny thing is Qantas own him, not the other way around..
Nunc est bibendum
Hmmm. When a crew makes an error and fails to report, action is taken against the crew- a recent thread on PPRUNE WRT fuel pumps springs to mind. It'll be interesting to see if there is a proportional response to when a 'company' fails to report or will that failing to report just be seen as an 'error' that we 'learn from'. 
I don't suspect that I'll ever find out the answer.
I don't suspect that I'll ever find out the answer.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This incident is potential one of the worst we have ever been made aware of in Australia. The only difference between this and Monach / Seaview / Lochardt River is we have living.
ATSB must broaden its investigation to cover the management and cutural issues within JQ or more broadly low cost carriers!
ATSB must broaden its investigation to cover the management and cutural issues within JQ or more broadly low cost carriers!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heres a good laugh, lifted from Todays SHM...
a near miss? did the ground have its transponder on?
Jetstar near miss blamed on throttles
Stephen Moynihan
October 31, 2007
Advertisement
A JETSTAR flight that came within moments of landing on a runway its crew could not see had its engine throttles in the wrong setting, according to an investigation released yesterday.
On the morning of July 21, the Jetstar A320 from Christchurch with 138 passengers made two attempts to land at a fog-bound Melbourne Airport.
So heavy was the fog that the pilot made the decision to keep the plane on autopilot and land using instruments. Earlier flights had aborted their landings because of poor visibility.
When the fog proved too thick for the Jetstar crew to see the runway lights, the pilot decided to abort the landing. Engine power was increased for the plane to climb, but instead it continued to descend with wheels lowered. At its lowest point, the jet was approximately 15 metres from the ground.
The pilot switched to manual control and reached higher altitude, and after permission from air traffic control attempted to land again. After the second attempt was aborted, the plane touched down safely at Avalon.
Stephen Moynihan
October 31, 2007
Advertisement
A JETSTAR flight that came within moments of landing on a runway its crew could not see had its engine throttles in the wrong setting, according to an investigation released yesterday.
On the morning of July 21, the Jetstar A320 from Christchurch with 138 passengers made two attempts to land at a fog-bound Melbourne Airport.
So heavy was the fog that the pilot made the decision to keep the plane on autopilot and land using instruments. Earlier flights had aborted their landings because of poor visibility.
When the fog proved too thick for the Jetstar crew to see the runway lights, the pilot decided to abort the landing. Engine power was increased for the plane to climb, but instead it continued to descend with wheels lowered. At its lowest point, the jet was approximately 15 metres from the ground.
The pilot switched to manual control and reached higher altitude, and after permission from air traffic control attempted to land again. After the second attempt was aborted, the plane touched down safely at Avalon.
a near miss? did the ground have its transponder on?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
For Boeing people, this incident is broadly similiar to deciding to go around, thinking you have hit the TOGA switches, whilst actually not doing so.
The ATSB graph reveals some confusion on the part of the crew.
It also reveals;
Failure of the PF to engage the correct go-around mode.
Failure of the PNF the verify and ensure the correct mode had been selected.
Attempts by Jetstar management to blame the aircraft systems!
For Jetstar to say that this was not a serious incident, and hence was not initially worthy of an ASIR, is total crap.
The ATSB graph reveals some confusion on the part of the crew.
It also reveals;
Failure of the PF to engage the correct go-around mode.
Failure of the PNF the verify and ensure the correct mode had been selected.
Attempts by Jetstar management to blame the aircraft systems!
For Jetstar to say that this was not a serious incident, and hence was not initially worthy of an ASIR, is total crap.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet another reason for two engine go arounds to be included in simulator training. Most pilots become very proficient at single engine GAs but a two engine GA is a rarely performed manoeuvre.
Boeing pilots have the luxury of a "one click" or "two click" option.
The company performance and culture in this matter leave much to be desired.
Boeing pilots have the luxury of a "one click" or "two click" option.
The company performance and culture in this matter leave much to be desired.
Not setting THR LVRs in the TOGA detent is one of the harder mistakes to make in an Airbus . . . . . just move them all the way to the forward stop! There are no switches to push as such.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wybacrik
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's unfortunate that the crew is for the high jump, Capt probably been demoted and the F/O on shaky ground, but, that go around was way, way, outside acceptable tolerances! We all know that.
Seems to me the Flight Dept tried to protect the crew, and good on them for that, however, the s**t has hit the fan, and I would think that there may be some Flight Dept changes also!
Seems to me the Flight Dept tried to protect the crew, and good on them for that, however, the s**t has hit the fan, and I would think that there may be some Flight Dept changes also!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scary Indeed
Its really scary that the 2 pilots didnt know their aircarft Systems VERY WELL.
I would like to get a copy of the CVR to see what kind of SOPS were or were not followed, which would have prevented this from happening, all be it at very very high workload of the first approach.
Whats more appalling, is the safety culture demonstrated by the handful of personnel within the organisation to sweep it under the table.
When one does not acknowledge a problem and or a mistake there can be no remedy nor learning to prevent such incidents happening again which is the most sacriest indeed
I would like to get a copy of the CVR to see what kind of SOPS were or were not followed, which would have prevented this from happening, all be it at very very high workload of the first approach.
Whats more appalling, is the safety culture demonstrated by the handful of personnel within the organisation to sweep it under the table.
When one does not acknowledge a problem and or a mistake there can be no remedy nor learning to prevent such incidents happening again which is the most sacriest indeed
Nunc est bibendum
At the end of the day the crew made and error. We all make errors from time to time. Whilst it's important to get to the bottom of it and ensure that everyone (J*, QF, whoever operates airliners with autoflight systems really) learns the lessons gleaned, to my thinking the real issue is the organisational response.
J* protecting the crew by not reporting to the ATSB? If the crew reported the incident then they don't need further protection. It's not like CASA or the ATSB is going to recommend demotion or other sanction along those lines, that's not what the they do in instances like this.
So the question is why wasn't it reported to CASA? Was it a mere oversight and a simple error? If so, what caused the oversight? An overloaded safety department? Time pressures? What about if it was a deliberate decision to not report? Was this due to negligence or deliberate omission? Like a 'choose your own adventure' book the answers to each of these questions leads to various outcomes. Most of those outcomes are very unpleasant and none of them paint a pretty picture of the organisational culture.
What is most interesting is how quickly things can go from being 'stable' to seriously out of shape. A reminder for all of us that no matter whether you're a LCC or a 'legacy' carrier that aviation is very unforgiving and that no one has a mortgage on being error free.
J* protecting the crew by not reporting to the ATSB? If the crew reported the incident then they don't need further protection. It's not like CASA or the ATSB is going to recommend demotion or other sanction along those lines, that's not what the they do in instances like this.
So the question is why wasn't it reported to CASA? Was it a mere oversight and a simple error? If so, what caused the oversight? An overloaded safety department? Time pressures? What about if it was a deliberate decision to not report? Was this due to negligence or deliberate omission? Like a 'choose your own adventure' book the answers to each of these questions leads to various outcomes. Most of those outcomes are very unpleasant and none of them paint a pretty picture of the organisational culture.
What is most interesting is how quickly things can go from being 'stable' to seriously out of shape. A reminder for all of us that no matter whether you're a LCC or a 'legacy' carrier that aviation is very unforgiving and that no one has a mortgage on being error free.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this and one of the worlds supposed "leading aviation safety regulators" is effectively handing over safety responsibility (i.e another means of self regulation) to the very industry it is supposed to be monitoring! It's all been done before and failed miserably.
Note the recent report on the Metro in QLD that was within 10 minutes of running out of fuel on it's only remaining engine, the recent fuel exhaustion incident in the Brasilia at Jundee in WA, the overall shortage of experienced pilots and you can't help but think that the holes are all starting to line up for the big one!
Just my 2 cents worth.
Henry the Octopus
Note the recent report on the Metro in QLD that was within 10 minutes of running out of fuel on it's only remaining engine, the recent fuel exhaustion incident in the Brasilia at Jundee in WA, the overall shortage of experienced pilots and you can't help but think that the holes are all starting to line up for the big one!
Just my 2 cents worth.
Henry the Octopus
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure what report has been read by most people but the one I read stated that the incident was reported to the ATSB and they also did not consider it serious enough to investigate. Try Googling the term "Mode Trap" and find out just how "simple" the go-around is on an Airbus.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stralya
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes Henry,
Unfortunately history does repeat. We have seen this crap repeated in countless other countries, we are such a cycle behind it isn't funny. Australia is still the backwater in the wrong hemisphere........
Perm FO
My contention is simple. Read the intro to the report. The ATSB said it was not investigating on the basis of what was provided to them...WHO provided it to them?? Look at the timeline??
If j* had provided all information, it is clear an investigation would be undertaken. It wasn't they didn't....
So if the ATSB is lying, and they have nothing to gain from this, then let J* insitute legal proceedings....
My bet is that J* were less than forthcoming in their information, as a result of information obtained from the media, the ATSB requested further information from the company....They have gone to print. They have made a legal enforceable statement with respect to the events surrounding this debarcle. Let us just see what the clowns at J* WRITE in reply..
Unfortunately history does repeat. We have seen this crap repeated in countless other countries, we are such a cycle behind it isn't funny. Australia is still the backwater in the wrong hemisphere........
Perm FO
My contention is simple. Read the intro to the report. The ATSB said it was not investigating on the basis of what was provided to them...WHO provided it to them?? Look at the timeline??
If j* had provided all information, it is clear an investigation would be undertaken. It wasn't they didn't....
So if the ATSB is lying, and they have nothing to gain from this, then let J* insitute legal proceedings....
My bet is that J* were less than forthcoming in their information, as a result of information obtained from the media, the ATSB requested further information from the company....They have gone to print. They have made a legal enforceable statement with respect to the events surrounding this debarcle. Let us just see what the clowns at J* WRITE in reply..
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
I think the concern of most here is not that the crew screwed up but that Jetstar management, ever attempting to push the "Qantas group" safety message, is either actively trying to make these incidents go away, or fostering a non-reporting culture with it pilots.
THAT is the worry.
THAT is the worry.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF Insider- I would suggest that Qantas are not squeaky clean on providing information either. I recall that the ATSB only investigated the 737 EGPWS incident near Canberra because of media coverage of the incident. The ATSB were provided with the information on the incident via the normal process. As to a non-reporting culture attributed to Jetstar pilots,scan down the ATSB website and look at another prelim about CWT fuel pumps and a 737 an incident that could have had far more serious consequences.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PermFO - I can lend you a pair of glasses if you are having trouble reading.
As far as I can see - QF Insider is not saying the pilots didnt report it - he is saying that JETSTAR management may have been a bit light on in the details. Which is the way I read the report too.
Then again maybe I am blind and cant read.
As far as I can see - QF Insider is not saying the pilots didnt report it - he is saying that JETSTAR management may have been a bit light on in the details. Which is the way I read the report too.
Then again maybe I am blind and cant read.