Messy afternoon at NZAA
I notice the union was in the media very upset about the initial comments by TAIC when they said ‘the pilot lost control’. I would hate to think that when they took out 360m worth of edge lighting shortly after the flare they were actually ‘in control’. No it may be that there is NO FAULT on the pilots that led to being ‘out of control’ but the statement seems to be irrefutable.
I briefly lost directional control in about 25 knots of crosswind, vacated the runway, got the bastard back under control and got it back on the runway. There was quite a bit of puckering going on. The puckering must have been substantial in the 777.
Originally Posted by tossbag
I briefly lost directional control in about 25 knots of crosswind, vacated the runway, got the bastard back under control and got it back on the runway. There was quite a bit of puckering going on. The puckering must have been substantial in the 777.
Skidding does not necessarily mean that the PF has lost control - they might well be doing everything correctly in the circumstances to control the skid and bring the aircraft back to the centreline.
Having said that; commencing a landing in such extreme rain ??? That seems to me to be the real problem here.
Having said that; commencing a landing in such extreme rain ??? That seems to me to be the real problem here.
Originally Posted by Uplinker
Skidding does not necessarily mean that the PF has lost control - they might well be doing everything correctly in the circumstances to control the skid and bring the aircraft back to the centreline.
Having said that; commencing a landing in such extreme rain ??? That seems to me to be the real problem here.
Having said that; commencing a landing in such extreme rain ??? That seems to me to be the real problem here.
True!
Originally Posted by Uplinker
Skidding does not necessarily mean that the PF has lost control - they might well be doing everything correctly in the circumstances to control the skid and bring the aircraft back to the centreline.
Having said that; commencing a landing in such extreme rain ??? That seems to me to be the real problem here.
Having said that; commencing a landing in such extreme rain ??? That seems to me to be the real problem here.
Originally Posted by Uplinker
When a rally car four wheel drifts round a forest corner on loose gravel, has the driver lost control ?? Or are they controlling it very well ?
To be honest I’m not sure if your post was sarcasm or not?
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Uplinker
When a rally car four wheel drifts round a forest corner on loose gravel, has the driver lost control ?? Or are they controlling it very well ?
The investigator didn’t follow protocol when commenting to the media, hence ALPA’s response.
Unofficially, through the usual crew room gossip, I’ve been told there was no Runway condition reported other than “wet” when they landed. Heavy rain and crosswind yes, but all within limits for a wet runway. Had it been reported contaminated with standing water, I suspect the outcome would have been different..
Regardless, simply stating the Pilot lost control absent of any contributing factors is rather unprofessional for an investigator. Aren’t all Accidents a case of lost control? Outside of the deliberate…. Facts matter.
Unofficially, through the usual crew room gossip, I’ve been told there was no Runway condition reported other than “wet” when they landed. Heavy rain and crosswind yes, but all within limits for a wet runway. Had it been reported contaminated with standing water, I suspect the outcome would have been different..
Regardless, simply stating the Pilot lost control absent of any contributing factors is rather unprofessional for an investigator. Aren’t all Accidents a case of lost control? Outside of the deliberate…. Facts matter.
No, not sarcasm. If an aircraft has deviated owing to the environment, but PF reacts and controls the situation to correct that skid, I personally would not characterise that as "losing control".
Like with an EFATO or EFBTO; the aircraft initially yaws significantly until PF gets the rudder in - I would not call that losing control.
Perhaps this incident was a bit more severe though.
Like with an EFATO or EFBTO; the aircraft initially yaws significantly until PF gets the rudder in - I would not call that losing control.
Perhaps this incident was a bit more severe though.
Originally Posted by Uplinker
No, not sarcasm. If an aircraft has deviated owing to the environment, but PF reacts and controls the situation to correct that skid, I personally would not characterise that as "losing control".
Like with an EFATO or EFBTO; the aircraft initially yaws significantly until PF gets the rudder in - I would not call that losing control.
Perhaps this incident was a bit more severe though.
Like with an EFATO or EFBTO; the aircraft initially yaws significantly until PF gets the rudder in - I would not call that losing control.
Perhaps this incident was a bit more severe though.
Originally Posted by ElZilcho
Unofficially, through the usual crew room gossip, I’ve been told there was no Runway condition reported other than “wet” when they landed. Heavy rain and crosswind yes, but all within limits for a wet runway. Had it been reported contaminated with standing water, I suspect the outcome would have been different..
Familiarity, resulting in pushing just that little bit too hard/far, has been the cause of many a Code Brown (and worse). The same folks would probably happily drive at high speed through standing water on their way to the airport, never thinking that one day they might need to be rescued.
The following users liked this post:
Originally Posted by PiperCameron
Since the PF is required to be able to actually see the runway they're landing on, if he/she can't see the runway because it's under water, don't you think a go-around might have resulted in a better outcome?? At very least their jet blast might have cleared the water.
Familiarity, resulting in pushing just that little bit too hard/far, has been the cause of many a Code Brown (and worse). The same folks would probably happily drive at high speed through standing water on their way to the airport, never thinking that one day they might need to be rescued.
Familiarity, resulting in pushing just that little bit too hard/far, has been the cause of many a Code Brown (and worse). The same folks would probably happily drive at high speed through standing water on their way to the airport, never thinking that one day they might need to be rescued.
You do know the difference between Wet and Contaminated right? Why we have runway condition and braking action reports and how they apply to landing performance calculations and crosswind limits?
That it’s impossible to determine the depth of water from the cockpit which is why the runway condition is reported on the ATIS? And when the Atis says “wet” it means less than 3mm of water?
And finally, you do realise that the runway wasn’t submerged like the lost city of Atlantis and would of been lit up like a Christmas tree in those conditions?
Tell me you don’t do the job without telling me you don’t do the job.
The following users liked this post:
Originally Posted by big buddah
Once again I’m not sure you’re grasping the reality of the situation.
