AirAsia issue SYD today?
 

Heard an issue at Lunchtime, anyone confirm or have more details?

AirAsia A330 XAX223 departed 16R, shortly after tracked LEFT across 16L upwind as a QF737 was rolling and aborted.

Virgin 737 went around that was an finals to 16L.

NAV? . . . . . . . Doh!!!! Tracked left indeed. (CAUTION:Parallel runway operations - DO NOT TURN LEFT)

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...055Z/YSSY/WMKK

Sounds like an ugly instrument failure, they Lost main NAV display and one Primary Flight Display, among other instruments (heard over ATC).

Looked pretty cool from where I was sitting to see a 330 takeoff and turn left from 16R. Caused a few collective gasps I can tell you.

Great job from ATC, especially departures. Kudos to that man. There was a brief pause while he and TWR worked out WTF was going on and then departures resumed as normal with a single controller managing Air Asia stooging around with no primary flight instruments and all the normal departure flow.

I'm guessing they headed to Melbourne due to the weather. It was reported as few at 3000, which was a lot better than the basically overcast at 2000 at SYD.

I'd still like to know why they turned left though. Even though the FMGC may have been saying turn left, self preservation should have kicked in and said, 'Turn right or at least go straight ahead -
away from the other runway.'

Incidents have occurred where the wrong runway was selected in the FMS for departure. If 16L was selected but the aircraft took off on 16R it would start tracking towards the initial waypoint aligned with 16L once NAV mode and the auto pilot engaged.

I'm not suggesting that is what happened on this occasion, but bear it in mind for future reference.

http://youtu.be/n2lFwyWVinIgl

seems to be the week for it. Asiana B777 went all the way through the centreline 34L and head on towards a JQ A320 on 34R on March 7th.

I seem to remember discussions that the One Engine Inoperative procedure on one of the Sydney runways involved a left turn after departing off the right hand runway. Maybe they activated that.

Damn lucky that didn't end up as a midair.:eek:

They will have to review SODPROPS after these incidents...................surely.

There wouldn't be a turn across an active runway, runway heading maybe?

Now everyone can fly

What'd the red one go around for? Thought the Airasia was going to do a quick circuit onto 16L? :8

While I think that sodprops are dumb and an incident waiting to happen, why would this incident trigger a review?

It was simultaneous parallel runway ops in use at the time...

With the initial right turn off 16R "as soon as practicable" but generally somewhere between 500'-1000' and cloud base of approx 2000', why would you turn left if still in VMC? Could be a very good reason not to chuck the autopilot in straight away.

The report should make for some interesting reading. Air Asia X obviously like to keep the ATSB busy!

Or at least positively check the magenta line is in the correct place when pushing the button, as alluded-to by MetroMan. :D

Procedures like that have a safety case put out there that it is safe and the things that could go wrong have been 'mitigated'.

If someone takes off and launches into a turn straight across the other runway you would have to ask how strong is the 'safety case'?

Not to mention someone with a control issue or a engine failure!!

I don't know how they justify it, but incidents like these show that it really isn't a good idea.

Meanwhile CASA has just given the Indonesian arm an AOC to commence flights into Australia.

Butttt the fares are sooo cheap!!:ugh:

What Transition Layer said.

You're taking off from the right hand runway, the SID you have briefed says 'CAUTION: Parallel runway ops. Do not turn left'. You know there is a runway there. There is no excuse for turning left, especially in VMC. Like I said, looked pretty spectacular but they were very lucky.

AirAsia issue SYD today?
 

SODPROPS (Simultaneous Opposite Direction Parallel Runway Operations) is the most efficient and "noise friendly" configuration. The landings turn off close to the terminals either side, the departure threshold of 16L is handy enough to the terminals (except for the departing heavies that require 34L), and most of the noise is over the bay for both landings and departures. This extremely rare "Xanadu" event is no reason to discontinue this optimum operation!

Did anyone else just have a flashback of Olivia Newton John on roller skates?

;)

:) hehehehe, the first line of that song is "A place where nobody dared to go"
lol.

Cheers

AirAsia issue SYD today?
 

Not a witty turn of phrase....AirAsia callsign is "Xanadu"

I think with 'children of the magenta' methodology (https://youtu.be/pN41LvuSz10) becoming more prevalent, it may become less rare. It's not a terribly difficult thing to load the wrong runway/SID (not at all suggesting this is what happened here). Are the risk assessments on SODROPS periodically reviewed?

Ahh but CASA love that sorta rare stuff. Absolute field day for them.

Why all the discussion about SODPROPS? This had nothing to do with SODPROPS. SODPROPS is 16L for departures and 34L for arrivals.

This incident occurred during a 'normal' runway configuration, with both 16 runways in use for arrivals and departures, given on the ATIS as 'parallel runway operations in progress, independent departures in progress.'

I think the concern was the unexpected turn after takeoff; had that happened to the right during SODPROPS (perhaps ATC build in segregation/spacing for just an eventuality?), things could be messy?

Whether that concern is justified is another matter.

Oh, ok. Makes sense. I thought some posters were under the impression this had occurred during a SODPROPS configuration.

I withdraw all comments. :-)

Sydney Tower ATCs have been doing compromised simulator sessions in the Melbourne Simulator using the 360º sim. This and other scenarios are discussed.

SODPROPS in Sydney uses 3000ft cloud base which is above the 2500ft specified in AIP.

The only occurrence that I am aware of involving anything like what has been suggested (turning right from RWY 16L) involved an Ansett A320 which tracked 155 rather than L125. As I understand the aircraft was flown by very senior pilots who only flew the minimum number of sectors to remain valid.
http://http://atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1997/aair/aair199700052.aspx

Departing aircraft are given a directed frequency transfer so this means that any identified non-compliance (not turning, drifting towards the RWY 34L approach) can be rectified prior to the transfer to Departures.

I encourage the use of the KEVIN or ABBEY SID during SODPROPS rather than use the SYDNEY SIX as I think this reduces the chance of someone dialling in 155 or even 170.

Where is the press???
 

I can't believe this has not been seriously reported by mainstream and tabloid media ,where is Today Tonight?

As a regular operator in and out of Sydney, this event is truly unbelievable and sends shivers up my spine.
FFS what were they thinking and how were they even allowed to depart Melbourne after showing such utter incompetence and lack of airmanship.

How is it safe to operate limited panel at FL310 to Melbourne if they could not even look out the window after rotate in Sydney and maintain runway track.

The slogan EVERYONE CAN FLY should not extend to the cockpit!

I hope there is a lot more to this story than so far reported as on the surface this terrifying lack of airmanship should have them banned from our airspace.:mad:

Quite the opposite unfortunately a big writeup in today's AFR on Air Asia X Indonesia expansion into Australia.

Exactly Mud Skipper.

It all comes about by a gutless and pissweak "Regulator" (for want of a better word) approving such operators into the country. No doubt they head down to the little man of the local flying school or charter company and bend them over the table and threaten a shutdown. But hey, don't touch the dangerous and undesirables in the airline game. It may appear to be "racist".

Tick tock, tick tock.

Didn't CASA just tell the Senate Estimates that the Indonesian arm of Air Asia, which is supposedly subject to an EU ban, does not have approval to fly into Australia? Maybe the Senators should also have asked if they are likely to get approval in the future.

Does not sound like they had the required instrumnts for RVSM if that it true.

Indonesia Air Asia has been operating Bali - Perth for a number of years now. It's the A330 operation, Indonesia Air Asia X that's been waiting for the approval .. and have just received their approval. They start operating on March 18.

As I understand it, Malaysia and Indonesia Air Asia X are two completely different operations having their own separate AOC and check and training departments (similar to how VAA and VANZ are run I assume?)

ATSB Final report.

What an utter disgrace.

How many ATSB Investigations will it take to get them banned? Or do we have to wait until lives are lost because it's heading that way...alarm bells having been ringing for a while now....

Why does our regulator have no balls in this area? Don't want to upset the Malaysian Government?

A disgrace alright.
We're just rolling the dice now.

They got iPads?

22.5k hours and couldn't pick up the most basic of errors with an almost endless number of cues and checks before take off.

22.5k hours is probably the only reason the thing stayed upright and nobody died.

Amen Framer, its a big 'effen dice roll!

CASA's response to this one will indeed be very interesting.

Notwithstanding circuit breakers, there are few irreversible switches/selectors in the flight deck of any aircraft, ADIRU rotary switches are definitely among the 'do not touch' while airborne unless specifically directed to in accordance with FCOM. The captain saying 'yep' to this action whether confirmed or not is telling.

I can appreciate that there are different AOC's involved with this 'incident' and the 8501 crash but CASA will also have to address public safety concerns and these two pilots who displayed a complete lack of rudimentary airmanship may well be beyond re training. On the day in question they certainly had no place up the front of an passenger aeroplane, let alone a wide body RPT jet over metropolitan Sydney.

How one simple mistake turned an AirAsia X flight into a nightmare


An investigation into an AirAsia X flight that turned the wrong way after taking off from Sydney has revealed a litany of failures by the airline and crew.

Flight 223 to Kuala Lumpur on March 10, 2015 had to be guided to Melbourne to land after the captain inadvertently entered the wrong data in the flight computer.

An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report found the captain got the longitudinal position of the aircraft incorrect by 11,000 kilometres, sending the A330's on-board navigation system into a spin.

"Despite a number of opportunities to identify and correct the error, it was not noticed until after the aircraft became airborne and started tracking in the wrong direction." said the ATSB report.

"The ATSB also found that the aircraft was not fitted with an upgraded flight management system that would have prevented the data entry error via either automated initialisation or automatic correction of manual errors."


Air Traffic Control was forced to hold up an aircraft on another runway when the AirAsia X plane turned in its path.

The report noted that the flight crew attempted to "troubleshoot and rectify the situation while under heavy workload" but that only made the problem worse.

"Combined with limited guidance from the available checklists, this resulted in further errors by the flight crew in the diagnosis and actioning of flight deck switches," the report said.

The pilot requested to return to Sydney to land but deteriorating weather conditions meant it had to be diverted to Melbourne with the assistance of ATC for a visual landing.

The ATSB praised the performance of Air Traffic Control for "reducing the risk to the aircraft and other aircraft in the area". "This occurrence highlights that even experienced flight crew are not immune from data entry errors," the report said.

"However, carrying out procedures and incorporating equipment upgrades recommended by aircraft manufacturers will assist in preventing or detecting such errors."

In response to the incident AirAsia X made a number of changes, including the development of a new training bulletin and package for flight crews.

The airline also shared the lessons from its internal investigation with all pilots, and reviewed the recovery procedures required in the event of a similar occurrence.

AirAsia X began direct flights to Australia in 2007, and currently flies between Kuala Lumpur and the Gold Coast, Sydney, Melbourne and Perth.