Virgin ATR runs off runway
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Back Paddock
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chatting to some ATR guys last night, max x-wind component is 30 knots, max downwind 10 knots.
Max x/w dry is 35kts, wet 28kts and max aircraft (not company) downwind for take-off and landing is 15kts (used to be 10 a few years ago).
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually max tailwind is 15 knots for ATR72.
Maybe 10 is the operators limit?
Maybe 10 is the operators limit?
Last edited by CAR256; 14th Jul 2013 at 04:21. Reason: Predictive text knows what I mean better than I?
A pathological organisation in turn tends to be filled with rogues, rule breakers and shonks. None of these attributes normally produce a safe environment.
'Just Culture' is a great idea but unfortunately the rules these days are way to numerous to make it work.
Last edited by neville_nobody; 14th Jul 2013 at 05:15.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks again for the clarification, proves you shouldn't trust what you read on pprune 
Despite the tailwind limit, the argument still stands tailwind had nothing to do with the ATR becoming a lawn mower.
Despite the tailwind limit, the argument still stands tailwind had nothing to do with the ATR becoming a lawn mower.
Am amazed at the thought that just because the T/W limit is there & set by a manufacturer that it's written in stone as usable.
I'd like to think that every Commander would make the decision to land with ANY TW component on an individual basis. Just 'cause it's written doesn't mean it's acceptable & safe.
Wmk2
I'd like to think that every Commander would make the decision to land with ANY TW component on an individual basis. Just 'cause it's written doesn't mean it's acceptable & safe.
Wmk2
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am very wary of taking off or landing with any tailwind at all.
Call me old fashioned, however there was an accident in the UK many years ago (can't remember type or airline) where an accident which was totally survivable ended up with a large amount of fatalities because the subsequent fire after the runway overrun engulfed the aircraft as the crew had chosen to land downwind.
Had they landed into wind the flames would have been blowing away from the aircraft and the survival rate would have been much higher.
Call me old fashioned, however there was an accident in the UK many years ago (can't remember type or airline) where an accident which was totally survivable ended up with a large amount of fatalities because the subsequent fire after the runway overrun engulfed the aircraft as the crew had chosen to land downwind.
Had they landed into wind the flames would have been blowing away from the aircraft and the survival rate would have been much higher.
Just 'cause it's written doesn't mean it's acceptable & safe.
It's not my job to interpret the flight manual limits, that's for the test pilots. If the AFM says I can do X if I do A, B, and C, then if I do A, B and C then X is safe.
No worries 'user' we shall have to agree to disagree
I use my 'judgment' not just what's written in the book on every occasion.
All these book figures are done using new machines, well experienced test drivers & in some cases under 'ideal' conditions but we don't live/fly in an ideal world so that's where good Cmd decisions make the difference:-)
The man behind the steering wheel isn't a 'book' he's a living thinking person whom at that split second makes a decision based on the best info at the time.
Wmk2
I use my 'judgment' not just what's written in the book on every occasion.
All these book figures are done using new machines, well experienced test drivers & in some cases under 'ideal' conditions but we don't live/fly in an ideal world so that's where good Cmd decisions make the difference:-)
The man behind the steering wheel isn't a 'book' he's a living thinking person whom at that split second makes a decision based on the best info at the time.
Wmk2
Last edited by Wally Mk2; 14th Jul 2013 at 11:57.
Call me old fashioned, however there was an accident in the UK many years ago (can't remember type or airline) where an accident which was totally survivable ended up with a large amount of fatalities because the subsequent fire after the runway overrun engulfed the aircraft as the crew had chosen to land downwind.
Had they landed into wind the flames would have been blowing away from the aircraft and the survival rate would have been much higher.
Had they landed into wind the flames would have been blowing away from the aircraft and the survival rate would have been much higher.
TV doco on it:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayday_(TV_series)
Last edited by TBM-Legend; 14th Jul 2013 at 12:09.
Moderator
It's not my job to interpret the flight manual limits, that's for the test pilots
Actually, in respect of handling limits, the TPs determine them ..
If the AFM says I can do X if I do A, B, and C, then if I do A, B and C then X is safe.
A novel approach to life, death and the Universe.
A bit like saying that a speed limit on a particular section of roadway ALWAYS represents the "safe" limit, regardless of any other considerations .. and just as silly, I suggest.
The (approved section of the) AFM, being an extension of the CofA (historically) is a source of limitations and prescriptive requirements. Whether it be sensible to apply some conservatism on any given occasion is a matter for risk assessment.
As a wise and grey-bearded checkie observed to me during a post check debrief decades ago in respect of the ops manual (similar philosophy) ... "to be read with a modicum of commonsense, young John"... thanks, Brian G, should you be a PPRuNer.
What if taking the tailwind meant you could use an approach to a lower minima and subsequently land instead of holding/diverting??
Then such would be one of the range of considerations the commander takes into consideration in making his/her risk assessment and decision.
Actually, in respect of handling limits, the TPs determine them ..
If the AFM says I can do X if I do A, B, and C, then if I do A, B and C then X is safe.
A novel approach to life, death and the Universe.
A bit like saying that a speed limit on a particular section of roadway ALWAYS represents the "safe" limit, regardless of any other considerations .. and just as silly, I suggest.
The (approved section of the) AFM, being an extension of the CofA (historically) is a source of limitations and prescriptive requirements. Whether it be sensible to apply some conservatism on any given occasion is a matter for risk assessment.
As a wise and grey-bearded checkie observed to me during a post check debrief decades ago in respect of the ops manual (similar philosophy) ... "to be read with a modicum of commonsense, young John"... thanks, Brian G, should you be a PPRuNer.
What if taking the tailwind meant you could use an approach to a lower minima and subsequently land instead of holding/diverting??
Then such would be one of the range of considerations the commander takes into consideration in making his/her risk assessment and decision.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks TBM - that's the one, although clearly my memory had faded 
on what actually happened!
Also I could't get your link to work.
This one seems to :AirDisaster.Com: Special Report: British Airtours Flight KT28M
on what actually happened!Also I could't get your link to work.
This one seems to :AirDisaster.Com: Special Report: British Airtours Flight KT28M
Last edited by fl610; 14th Jul 2013 at 18:14.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Amongst the weeds and the dust
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pics?
Nil damage, so a fairly boring pic to look at. From what I've heard they're waiting for ATR to give the OK to ferry it back. Probably should have ferried it back and then asked ATR what to do about it...
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 58
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tailwind accident in Europe? Which one??
Do you mean:
14 September 1993; Lufthansa A320-200; Flight 2904; Warsaw Airport, Poland: Aircraft landed with a tail wind. Landing performance and aircraft design led to a late deployment of braking devices. Aircraft overran the runway. One of the 6 crew and 1 of the 64 passengers were killed.
A320-211 Warsaw Accident Report
Another:
ASN Aircraft accident Airbus A320-233 EI-TAF Tegucigalpa-Toncontin Airport (TGU)
Some light reading:
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1148.pdf
Nice post Johnny T. The AFM specifies what is safe under optimal circumstances. Just as a 30km/h corner on the road is safe when it is dry, daytime and your car is roadworthy, the same corner may require a slower speed when conditions are wet and your tyres are bald.
Anything that you do in an aeroplane can be safe, or dangerous. Just make sure that you bring your brain to work with you and don't leave it in the boot of your car.
Remember that a PA18 (Piper Cub) is the safest aeroplane ever built....it can only just kill you.
Do you mean:
14 September 1993; Lufthansa A320-200; Flight 2904; Warsaw Airport, Poland: Aircraft landed with a tail wind. Landing performance and aircraft design led to a late deployment of braking devices. Aircraft overran the runway. One of the 6 crew and 1 of the 64 passengers were killed.
A320-211 Warsaw Accident Report
Another:
ASN Aircraft accident Airbus A320-233 EI-TAF Tegucigalpa-Toncontin Airport (TGU)
Some light reading:
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1148.pdf
Nice post Johnny T. The AFM specifies what is safe under optimal circumstances. Just as a 30km/h corner on the road is safe when it is dry, daytime and your car is roadworthy, the same corner may require a slower speed when conditions are wet and your tyres are bald.
Anything that you do in an aeroplane can be safe, or dangerous. Just make sure that you bring your brain to work with you and don't leave it in the boot of your car.
Remember that a PA18 (Piper Cub) is the safest aeroplane ever built....it can only just kill you.
Last edited by Anthill; 16th Jul 2013 at 08:37.
Moderator
Remember that a PA18 (Piper Cub) is the safest aeroplane ever built....it can only just kill you.
.. ah, but having cut my teeth on glider towing with the Super Cub many decades ago ... it sure can frighten you very effectively from time to time as only a young and foolishly overconfident chap knows ... real good for wave soaring after all the plastic fantastics have launched for the day though ..
Definitely the best fun one can have with clothes on.
As has been said in various places, the only differences between killing oneself in Aircraft A versus Aircraft B are ..
(a) the size of the hole and the amount of smoke
(b) whether, and on which page, the news is recorded the following day.
.. ah, but having cut my teeth on glider towing with the Super Cub many decades ago ... it sure can frighten you very effectively from time to time as only a young and foolishly overconfident chap knows ... real good for wave soaring after all the plastic fantastics have launched for the day though ..
Definitely the best fun one can have with clothes on.
As has been said in various places, the only differences between killing oneself in Aircraft A versus Aircraft B are ..
(a) the size of the hole and the amount of smoke
(b) whether, and on which page, the news is recorded the following day.
