Atlas Identifies Causes of 747’s Landing at Wrong Airport
 

Aviation International News reports on Atlas Air findings on the recent Dreamlifter landing at the wrong airport.

The topic on Pprune about this incident has been closed by the moderator.
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...g-airport.html


Atlas Identifies Causes of 747?s Landing at Wrong Airport | Aviation International News

A part of the article is listed below:

&

Dreamlifter landing at wrong airport
 

Evidently Atlas Air (the operator of the Dreamlifter) has created a training video describing how the holes in the swiss cheese aligned to cause the pilots to land it at the wrong airport -- combination of some avionics issues and CRM.

Report: Video describes wrong-airport 747 landing

Curious for the reason why there are nill replies to this news, seeing the many replies just accent the incident happened.
Better move it to another forum

Oh good, another airline I once considered respectable can be added to the list of places I'll certainly never work at.

I am sure we will manage without you! :ugh:

Fr8Dog

So no visuals?

Fr8dog,

I'm sure you will, my point is the fact that companies like yours are forcing the actual flying out of aviation... At this rate a bus driver will need a wider skill set than a jet pilot as you will truly be reduced to a glorified button pusher.

I will also snicker to myself in the cockpit of my aircraft every time I hear a "Giant" crew say they'll need to stay on the approach when the weather is CAVU, you guys are in Asiana territory now.

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

There is NOTHING preventing a crew from doing a visual approach using instrument procedures. You -- or ATC -- need not have ANY knowledge of the procedures being used in the cockpit. Following the ILS profile is well within the parameters for a visual approach, as would be following the last vector to the final approach course or going direct to the FAF. Either of those options is within the realm of "using instrument procedures"...

How's that kool-aid taste Intruder?

Intruder

OK, you're at HITOP int on the ZIGGY FOUR into KONT, and the controller asks you if you want the visual to 26L. What do you do?

If I have the airport in sight or am familiar enough with the area, accept the visual, continue on through Ziggy & Petis using LNAV & VNAV, pick up the ILS if available, and land. If not yet visual, tell him so and continue on the STAR.

Is this a trick question? I haven't flown into ONT in 15 years...

That is the biggest bunch of B.S. I have ever read, but given it is Atlas I am not surprised. Irregardless of GPS or any other nav aid or lack of a tower warning, looking out should give you a clue. Having flown at McConnell for several years the runway is a lot larger and a lot wider, not to mention that it has centerline and touchdown lighting. The other runway, nada on tocuhdown zone lighting and the ramp being closed. He actually though he was Beechcraft! The Boeing facility is quite visible even at night and the Air Force ramp is always lit and very visible from several miles out. This was a complete F.U by the Captain, nothing more, nothing less and would not have happened if he would have just looked outside.

Snicker all you want! I still fly the 400 & -8 the same as I did the 200/300.
And while you fly your little "light twin" for 3 or 4 landings a day, I will be laughing my ass off eating Chinese food in Hong Kong on the company dime.

aviatorhi

After yesterday's event, I guess you won't be accepting that job offer from Southwest either! :ugh::D

Not sure yet, they haven't come out and done anything stupid like effectively banning visual approaches.

Neither has Atlas, just to keep them backed up until the FAF. I don't think that is such a bad idea do you? :p

Just wondering whether you accept a real visual or continue with the arrival-approach, if any. If the visual to Rwy 25R at ANC was in use, there would be no arrival, approach or FAF. The company decision just seems like an illogical restriction for a professional flight crew, but then it is 2014.

Landing on the wrong runway might have been more easily accomplished in the 70's, but with today's technology it becomes a bit more baffling when it occurs. I always marvel at the "fix" decided upon by those in government and management to resolve an issue which was never a majority issue.

and this

Are not the same thing. Remaining on an instrument approach procedure would require you to actually remain on the procedure, not having it tuned or identified as a backup.

Also, isn't the prevailing industry standard (partially required by regulation) to always have the LOC/ILS tuned in as a backup?

Or failing that some sort of other useful information displayed to help you get to the runway?

Shouldn't you have been doing what you say all along?

Isn't this new requirement posted in the thread starter something that goes "above and beyond" and into the realm of nonsense?

Four yes answers will suffice.

:ok:

As I said in my previous post, I do and will continue to fly these aircraft the same way I did on the classic. If I am in the position to fly a visual approach, I will do so. And yes I have always backed myself up with the LOC or ILS just to make sure I don't make the same mistake that these poor guys did. But then you are perfect and I am sure you have never made a mistake in your aviation career. Next time your in the Jet Lag Club in Narita I will buy you a beer for being the ace of the base. Oh that's right, your little airplane doesn't fly that far does it?

The true nature of the beast is revealed, a small man with a Napoleon complex. :rolleyes:

It flies far enough, and I sleep in my own bed each night, thank you very much. :p