Operational non-compliance involving a Boeing 777, VH-VPH, near Melbourne Airport
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Operational non-compliance involving a Boeing 777, VH-VPH, near Melbourne Airport
Investigation: AO-2013-130 - Operational non-compliance involving a Boeing 777, VH-VPH, near Melbourne Airport, Victoria on 15 August 2013
Have not seen any discussion on this. It this just another "what are the computers doing now" incident or something else? Just curious.
Have not seen any discussion on this. It this just another "what are the computers doing now" incident or something else? Just curious.
Ben Sandilands ran an article on this incident...
Virgin Australia 777 in sudden brief dive near Melbourne Airport
....although most of the commentary focussed on the ATsB blurb and in particular the word "guests"??:
You're right though not much commentary on here about anything much at the moment!!??
Virgin Australia 777 in sudden brief dive near Melbourne Airport
....although most of the commentary focussed on the ATsB blurb and in particular the word "guests"??:
Virgin Australia is assisting the Air Transport Safety Bureau with an investigation of an international flight at Melbourne International Airport on Thursday 15 August. The aircraft landed without incident after the crew disengaged the autopilot and manually flew the aircraft. There was no danger to the aircraft or guests at any time.
Last edited by Sarcs; 22nd Aug 2013 at 02:46. Reason: FYSTI thanks fixed now!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your link is broken: Virgin Australia 777 in sudden brief dive near Melbourne Airport.
Interesting to research this event using the "basic" tools available on the internet to a general observer.
Utilizing both flightaware and webtrak data, it seems that the descent, which is commenced after passing overhead SHEEDS continued down quite a bit quicker and lower than is normal. Flightaware and webtrak both show the aircraft descending from approx 2500ft at SHEEDS to between 700 and 900ft before the aircraft even starts its right turn onto finals for runway 34.
Again, this is only using flightaware and webtrak so their reliability isn't guaranteed but watching the same approach from subsequent aircraft, most dont venture below ~1400ft before the turn to final on runway 34.
Just a few observations. Perhaps a few of the guys who shoot this approach regularly in real life can explain the approach a bit more specifically.
A few links:
Flightaware data
Flight Track Log ? VOZ24 ? 13-Aug-2013 ? KLAX - YMML / MEL ? FlightAware
Webtrak
WebTrak: Melbourne International Airport
(you need to change the date on the left side to Augut 15th at approx 8am to view the flight in question)
Utilizing both flightaware and webtrak data, it seems that the descent, which is commenced after passing overhead SHEEDS continued down quite a bit quicker and lower than is normal. Flightaware and webtrak both show the aircraft descending from approx 2500ft at SHEEDS to between 700 and 900ft before the aircraft even starts its right turn onto finals for runway 34.
Again, this is only using flightaware and webtrak so their reliability isn't guaranteed but watching the same approach from subsequent aircraft, most dont venture below ~1400ft before the turn to final on runway 34.
Just a few observations. Perhaps a few of the guys who shoot this approach regularly in real life can explain the approach a bit more specifically.
A few links:
Flightaware data
Flight Track Log ? VOZ24 ? 13-Aug-2013 ? KLAX - YMML / MEL ? FlightAware
Webtrak
WebTrak: Melbourne International Airport
(you need to change the date on the left side to Augut 15th at approx 8am to view the flight in question)
Last edited by vee1-rotate; 22nd Aug 2013 at 08:45.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visual Sheed approach to 34 at MEL
Regarding the visual approach to MEL 34 from over head Sheed, it's a piece of cake. I've done it many times.
Speaking for the B747-400 and the A380 (can't speak for smaller aircraft) the technique is simple.
Firstly it is a VISUAL approach flown MANUALLY. Repeat, MANUALLY.
Aim to be overhead Sheed fully configured and then (shock horror) disconnect the A/P and turn of the F/D at Sheed.
That's right. you need to fly it yourself!!
Set up a ROD of approx 1000'/min immediately (depending on the headwind on r/w 34) and aim to be at 1350' (1000'agl) by 3nm from touchdown. Simple.
Having said that, I've had 3 F/O's who told me they wouldn't do it and "required" the Rnav approach. Oh, it was CAVOK.
I told them if they wouldn't do it, then I'd do it myself. Surprise, change of heart and they all did a beautiful job of it.
WHY is everyone so scared of hand flying?
I commonly do it (in the right environment) all the way to TOC and from TOD.
Does wonders to improve your scan. I do say "in the right environment", because there are times when it is not appropriate.
Surely we haven't descended to the "apparent" lack of manual manipulation that "appears" to be the case on SFO.
Or have we??
Speaking for the B747-400 and the A380 (can't speak for smaller aircraft) the technique is simple.
Firstly it is a VISUAL approach flown MANUALLY. Repeat, MANUALLY.
Aim to be overhead Sheed fully configured and then (shock horror) disconnect the A/P and turn of the F/D at Sheed.
That's right. you need to fly it yourself!!
Set up a ROD of approx 1000'/min immediately (depending on the headwind on r/w 34) and aim to be at 1350' (1000'agl) by 3nm from touchdown. Simple.
Having said that, I've had 3 F/O's who told me they wouldn't do it and "required" the Rnav approach. Oh, it was CAVOK.
I told them if they wouldn't do it, then I'd do it myself. Surprise, change of heart and they all did a beautiful job of it.
WHY is everyone so scared of hand flying?
I commonly do it (in the right environment) all the way to TOC and from TOD.
Does wonders to improve your scan. I do say "in the right environment", because there are times when it is not appropriate.
Surely we haven't descended to the "apparent" lack of manual manipulation that "appears" to be the case on SFO.
Or have we??
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't even need to hand fly it, at least in the 737. Most do, though. The problem in the past for some has been configuring in time....... Can't offer a reason for the issue with the 777 tho.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East of Eden
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't even need to hand fly it, at least in the 737
If you don't practice manual flying skills in these types of approaches, come the time when you really need them, it's all over the place.
Sub Orbital is right - fly it manually - couple of ways to do it, but my technique is about 1200 ft min until it intercepts DME x 3 which puts the a/c exactly on the 3 degree slope for RWY 34.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Guests", what sort of toss pot came up with that? Most of us do not charge guests in our homes to come in. They are passengers.
All modern aircraft are fitted with a special optical devise that has been designed for these sort of approaches. It is called a window. Most airlines fail to instruct their crews in its correct use.
All modern aircraft are fitted with a special optical devise that has been designed for these sort of approaches. It is called a window. Most airlines fail to instruct their crews in its correct use.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CHILDREN OF THE MAGENTA
Excuse the intrusion of an old ATC type into an operational flying discussion.
An old video no doubt but sill of some relevance to this discussion.
I wish I could find a similar video to show to automation dependent controllers.
MJG
An old video no doubt but sill of some relevance to this discussion.
I wish I could find a similar video to show to automation dependent controllers.
MJG
Well with the likes of Sub Orbital and Des Dimona telling us all that we MUST hand fly this approach I will have to go back over the last 11 years on the 737 and thank the almighty that somehow I cheated death every time I passed over Sheed.
How about we loosen up on the joystick boys and acknowledge that there are numerous ways to safely conduct this approach.
As Porch Monkey described it can be flown effortlessly and very accurately in LNAV/VNAV and can be manually flown just as well.
Hopefully the high horses are back in the corral.
How about we loosen up on the joystick boys and acknowledge that there are numerous ways to safely conduct this approach.
As Porch Monkey described it can be flown effortlessly and very accurately in LNAV/VNAV and can be manually flown just as well.
Hopefully the high horses are back in the corral.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: 41,000'
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the SHEED requirement of 2500A, you do not have a 3 degree path to the runway so the rate of descent is always going to be a bit higher than normal unless you have a rip roaring northerly which is sometimes the case. So you need the dunlops down and almost full flap before you leave SHEED. 737 can be flown down to short final before disconnecting automatics. Just set up the runway extension (2.85nm final) and Bob's your aunt!
How about we loosen up on the joystick boys and acknowledge that there are numerous ways to safely conduct this approach.
Hopefully the high horses are back in the corral.
The ATSB report is based on a Operational non-compliance.
All the talk here is how to fly a visual approach from over Essendon. How does that relate to this particular Operational non-compliance event?
The report doesn't say.
All the talk here is how to fly a visual approach from over Essendon. How does that relate to this particular Operational non-compliance event?
The report doesn't say.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'SHEED' and 'overhead EN' are the same place, the waypoint has been given a different name to define it as part of the ML 34 approach. The limit NB 2500' til overhead SHEED is due to the 1500' circuit at EN
All the talk here is how to fly a visual approach from over Essendon. How does that relate to this particular Operational non-compliance event?
If you don't practice manual flying skills in these types of approaches, come the time when you really need them, it's all over the place.
Again, I can only relay what I have been told. And that is, if the captain is a stickler for hanging on to the automatics asap after take off and until committed on landing, then, if it is the first officer's sector, it is doubtful the captain will let him go click click and hand fly when he wants the practice.
On the other hand, those captains who are only too happy to let the first officer keep his hand in on manual flying, and have offered their F/O's the opportunity to hand fly, sometimes get knocked back because the F/O is too nervous and lacking confidence in his ability to hand fly. I get the distinct impression that both scenarios are more common in Australian crews that one would think.
It'll be interesting to see what punishment is meted out to the aircraft for not operationally complying. Maybe banished to only conduct ILS approaches from 20nm out for the next 12 months?
I have no idea about the gear in the 777. What would you expect to happen if that approach was flown in VNAV with the hold-up at SHEED? My jalopy would stuff the nose down to try to get back on the 3° profile to the runway after passing SHEED.
I have no idea about the gear in the 777. What would you expect to happen if that approach was flown in VNAV with the hold-up at SHEED? My jalopy would stuff the nose down to try to get back on the 3° profile to the runway after passing SHEED.
Originally Posted by Claret
How many track miles SHEED to the 34 threshold?
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...ml#post6900086