Papers pick up story
 

Steve Creedy has a big story on the incident in the Australian too. Sounds like there is something to be worried about.

Qantas pilots forgot to lower wheels | The Australian

Wow, crew should be commended for both
"firewalling"
"throttles"
Neither of which exist on a 767.
Did they push the pitch lever up as well?

Big deal.
Hands up all pilots who have forgotten to select the gear down at least once in their career.

That's settled that then.

Qantas pilots forgot to lower wheels
 

QANTAS has stood down two pilots after a Boeing 767 landing in Sydney came within 700ft of the ground before the flight crew realised they had not lowered the plane's undercarriage.

The airline and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau have launched investigations into the October 26 incident. The pilots are due to be interviewed by authorities on Friday.

The crew on the Melbourne-Sydney CityFlyer service apparently recognised the problem and had started go-around procedures when they received a "gear too low" aural warning from the aircraft's enhanced ground proximity warning system.

It is understood investigators are looking at possible human error and a communication breakdown between the first officer and captain about who was lowering the landing gear.

According to a former Boeing 767 pilot, a crew on an instrument approach would normally start lowering the undercarriage when the plane was between 2000ft and 1500ft in order to ensure that it met requirements that the aircraft was stable and configured to land at 1000ft.

In visual conditions, the aircraft needed to be stable by 500ft, but lowering the gear at 700ft or even at 1000ft was still far too late, the pilot said.

Landing gear problems or gear-up situations were involved in 15 per cent of airline hull-loss accidents last year, according to an analysis by the International Air Transport Association.

But Qantas said yesterday that a crew failing to lower the undercarriage was extremely rare and it was taking the incident seriously. "The flight crew knew all required procedures but there was a brief communications breakdown," a spokeswoman said.

"They responded quickly to the situation and instigated a go-around. The cockpit alert coincided with their actions. There was no flight safety issue.

"The incident was reported to the ATSB and the pilots were stood down. We are supporting the ATSB's investigation and our own investigations will determine what further action might be warranted."

Then why do we have an 'authothrottle'? Most of Boeing's terminology refers to them as throttles also. :p

I wonder how current the crew was. Thoughts are with you lads.

See here....http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-reporting...-incident.html

It looks like some here are very precious questioning terminology or the phraseology used by the journalists...

Are those here arguing about semantics upset that the incident happened or that it is being questioned in the media....?
I agree with Keg....

Give it a break
 

FFS, how many seconds away Ben like 55?! Thats more like a minute u twit.

Oh, theres not that much to say about that story except the crew made what would have been an honest and embarrassing mistake but then did the correct thing and resolved the situation and landed safely. It was reported, correct channels alerted, it will be reviewed, reasons for the occurrence identified, then if deemed necessary a change to the system/procedure may take place. So ****, I need more to write about at I couldn't sensationalise that enough. I know...role in QF1 again...:rolleyes::ugh::yuk:

I used to read your stuff and even agree with some of it Ben but if your articles on the flying operations side of things are so bad and off the mark it begs the question how accurate your other articles are and as such I won't bother reading any again.

Good Day.

I'll get my post count up too.. and just to prove I go looking at different levels to see reactions.. Whats a wibble mean? http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...ies/wibble.gif

What's more dangerous.....a crew error resulting in a safe G/A from 700ft or a journalist armed with a LITTLE bit of knowledge about the industry writing an article full of bullsh*t and sensationalism.

What about a recent incident over in the states Ben of a carrier landing on a taxiway???? Or the other incident of the crew overflying the destination. Surely they are more aviation newsworthy that this crap.

This thread is a waste of bandwidth :E

I think it means when some people are more upset about something being reported than it happening in the first place....

What's the phrase...."You're only doing something wrong if others find out about it.."

Mistakes happen we're human. It would be a terrible time for the guys up the front. Glad to hear it turned out okay. We all remember the Ansett 74 accident in the early 90's. I still cringe thinking about it now.

I don't think there is any need to go off at Ben Sandilands. He writes better articles than most who really write only aviaton infomercials (a future selling abmasters on Kerri Ann).

Assuming there were NO other problems leading to this situation (arriving at 700ft without the gear down) then it is quite simply a stuff up. It was always going to 'turn out OK' as I would seriously doubt ANY pilot working for ANY airline in Australia would attempt to land from this situation (putting the gear down first of course). Whilst not knowing SOPs for other airlines, it's a no brainer for QF ops....go around (must be stable and configured etc by 500' in VMC). So, it was always going to result in a missed approach which remember is in the NORMAL section of the FCOM.

People make mistakes. We have all done it. This crew will go away...eat some humble pie and accept responsibility for probably falling victim to becoming complacent on the old CitiFlyer route.

Dam these sorts of things always lead to another procedure change and an exercise in the next sim session. :ugh:
Where is that GPWS inhibit button….. :E

Sorry im jsut a simple flight instructor and dont understand the workings of an airline, but is it fair or standard practice to stand down pilots pending an investigation? Just like the people have said on this forum to Err is human and therefore a simple error like this surely doesnt constitute such actions? Sure if the aircraft continued and landed there could be a cause for concern, however due to practices in place and the actions of these pilots they completed the correct actions to stop all the holes lining up.
Anyways im jsut venting feel free to criticise the simpleton:)

Yep.
Knowing how the lawyers run the show you'll be flying around with the gear locked down soon.

Capt Fathom,

Thats why I didnt make a comment, just passing on news. I wasnt aware that a thread had already started. My bad.

Speedi, QF put out a burst recently to their crew articulating the methodology utilised in the aftermath of an incident such as this. The stand down is not a punitive action in the first instance but it does facilitate the investigation being completed in a timely manner and without the crew being subsequently distracted by having this hang over the heads.

Anyone recall what the weather was doing last Monday? Breezy IIRC? Rainy too? Wasn't that the day that we had a bunch of storms and such through Sydney? Anyone got a TAF for the day? If the weather was pretty ordinary I can see a particular chain of events that could lead to this.

About now, I'm glad I don't fly for an airline. Long periods of time with little to do but sit in a chair monitoring systems with brief periods at each end of the flight where you're supposed to be infallible and at the top of your game and under surveillance for performance the entire time. One little misstep and it's a week or two off with knuckle-rapping, paperwork and retraining.