EK207 Jfk
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MC80 Home One type Star Cruiser
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very glad that this was not a Big One. There was a EK training video made that showed how to fly RNAV / RNP approaches on to 13L/R @ JFK. Ludicrously complex and involved secondary flight plan swap @ low altitude. I commented on the complexity during RTGS and I may have just talked to the wall. To be frank, life was simpler flying a Carnarsie VOR and look for the lights.
But this shows again that EK is creating confusion about the approaches for 13L/R and that their procedures are based on full automation and use of FMS, instead of looking outside and flying the plane.
(If you want vertical deviation indication, just insert a waypoint on final and connect it with the threshold. But for some reason, EK wanted their pilots to be heads down and swap secondary flight plans at 800'.)
But I agree, too complicated for something that shouldn't be complicated. Just like many other procedures.
The whole automation policy and fear culture discourages EK pilots from actually flying the aircraft. The "new" policy is supposed to encourage manual flight, but with a fear of punishment, that will never happen. And to be honest, following 2 green bars and having the A/THR on all the time doesn't improve skills.
Flying skills are deteriorating rapidly when you work for EK, but don't blame the pilots, blame EK management and their company culture.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kopavogur
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sim is perfect to show you the VISUAL clues in minimum wx. To correctly follow the path. It also gives you confidence flying the procedure with an engine failure.
The highway and baseball stadium are the prominent visual clues to identify and to correctly align yourself with the prescribed approach path.
The lead in lights are obviously a help too, but the VOR/GPS approach to rwy13L is flown looking mainly outside, especially once at 800ft. And lower.
But once again, there is absolutely NO valid reason to have to fly such an approach other than politics and unwillingness by the authorities and airlines alike to put Safety first at KJFK.
The highway and baseball stadium are the prominent visual clues to identify and to correctly align yourself with the prescribed approach path.
The lead in lights are obviously a help too, but the VOR/GPS approach to rwy13L is flown looking mainly outside, especially once at 800ft. And lower.
But once again, there is absolutely NO valid reason to have to fly such an approach other than politics and unwillingness by the authorities and airlines alike to put Safety first at KJFK.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mile High, Colorado
Age: 38
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OLVpilot,
First off do you actually fly outside the US ? If so, you would realise just how bad NY ATC actually is, barking off instructions at high speed and not waiting for a response for example, another would be multiple runway changes at the last minute. If you want really excellent ATC I would suggest you watch and see how London Gatwick do it during the rush hour. And before you ask yes I do fly LH all over the world to.
As for assumption and I quote "Notice, US pilots aren't flying fatigued anymore " I think a fair few of your fellow countrymen would disagree with you.
You're not related to the Irish Leprechaun who runs Ryanair are you, he said something similar about his pilots, had to backtrack on that one when it was pointed out that it was BS.
First off do you actually fly outside the US ? If so, you would realise just how bad NY ATC actually is, barking off instructions at high speed and not waiting for a response for example, another would be multiple runway changes at the last minute. If you want really excellent ATC I would suggest you watch and see how London Gatwick do it during the rush hour. And before you ask yes I do fly LH all over the world to.
As for assumption and I quote "Notice, US pilots aren't flying fatigued anymore " I think a fair few of your fellow countrymen would disagree with you.
You're not related to the Irish Leprechaun who runs Ryanair are you, he said something similar about his pilots, had to backtrack on that one when it was pointed out that it was BS.
FAR117 has done wonders to mitigate fatigue in the past several years. Most of us at the bottom of the (rosters) schedules are flying with a set minimum days of 13-14.
Fedex laughed at flydubai when they saw the rosters in combination with the flipping of night/day cycles.
Simply put, if fatigue is to be taken seriously in the Middle East, days off need to be drastically improved to accomodate the circadian changes that are so detrimental (and definitive) of these carriers.
There’s always fatigue present as even the best carriers, but the US is light years ahead of EK and FZ.
None of the RNAV Visual, RNP AR or RNAV Overlay of the Canarsie approach (called RNAV X at EK) require any swapping of the secondary flight plan. They all have lateral guidance until the threshold. Maybe it was like that in the past, but I remember that the secondary flight plan swap was used on the original Canarsie approach because there was no lateral guidance to the threshold and therefore no vertical deviation indication.
But this shows again that EK is creating confusion about the approaches for 13L/R and that their procedures are based on full automation and use of FMS, instead of looking outside and flying the plane.
(If you want vertical deviation indication, just insert a waypoint on final and connect it with the threshold. But for some reason, EK wanted their pilots to be heads down and swap secondary flight plans at 800'.)
But I agree, too complicated for something that shouldn't be complicated. Just like many other procedures.
But this shows again that EK is creating confusion about the approaches for 13L/R and that their procedures are based on full automation and use of FMS, instead of looking outside and flying the plane.
(If you want vertical deviation indication, just insert a waypoint on final and connect it with the threshold. But for some reason, EK wanted their pilots to be heads down and swap secondary flight plans at 800'.)
But I agree, too complicated for something that shouldn't be complicated. Just like many other procedures.
The canasty isn’t a particularly difficult approach, even on a southerly day with a bit of blowing snow and murk about. It is an approach however that if you don’t fly it regularly, you require a bit of thought and reflection so that you’ve got a plan.
EK in their haste to try and create a plan or should I say “procedure” have attempted to remove the aviating bit out the process and replace it with a keystroke and a set of steps that were thought up in the sterile and utterly unrealistic environs of a simulator.
Assuming for a moment this crew managed to get themselves so far out of the slot that they binned it after some kind of EGPWS warning, I would be asking serious questions based purely on the initial incident.
No one is perfect, we all however have a responsibility to be prepared, in this case if the outcome is accurate, it would represent a significant loss of SA and worse in my view, an utter lack of any semblance of gross error check e.g. dist to fly v height etc.
The post I’ve copied above notes that part of the rationale along the way was to provide lateral and vertical guidance to the Rwy 13R/L, which is in my mind the real problem here, people are too scared to manoeuvre the aircraft appropriately when required...so would rather rely on the “safer” or easier option of letting the automation take care of it, which as time goes by continues the erosion of manual handling. It’s the company at fault here, but it’s also the crews who are at fault as well...at some point the buck does stop upfront, for me personally I’d rather do what was necessary and argue the point later..who cares what Fleet say, I place more faith in my experience and expertise than a partime pilot or an HR graduate with no flying experience.
I feel immense sympathy for the crew and what they will be facing, but I ask everyone from EK reading this, if you were PM or augmenting..at what point would you have said something? hint: I’d have first mentioned it when I was asked during the brief prior to the approach.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mile High, Colorado
Age: 38
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It’s been alluded to already, and of course I don’t discount that EK pilots are unnecessarily tired (that is the Dubai aviation model after all)...
1. Your company has put the fear of God in you to never ‘fly the aircraft.’ As it’s said before, you instead create convoluted procedures that nobody understands to do the most basic thing; flying the plane and looking outside.
It is what it is, Middle East aviation culture is incapable of self-reflection and progressive changes from within. Too arrogant to listen to what other countries have done to mitigate risk and continually marching forward to keep profits high, pilots fatigued, and accidents in the woodwork.
1. Your company has put the fear of God in you to never ‘fly the aircraft.’ As it’s said before, you instead create convoluted procedures that nobody understands to do the most basic thing; flying the plane and looking outside.
It is what it is, Middle East aviation culture is incapable of self-reflection and progressive changes from within. Too arrogant to listen to what other countries have done to mitigate risk and continually marching forward to keep profits high, pilots fatigued, and accidents in the woodwork.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
New York ATC is some of the best in the world; scapegoating the controllers is definitely misplaced, when its quite evident that the UAE suffers from a significant lack of training and ability to learn from its mistakes. Spoken by someone who has been based in both arenas....
Don't blame New York controllers because you don't know how to fly a visual approach...
Don't blame New York controllers because you don't know how to fly a visual approach...
Your company has put the fear of God in you to never ‘fly the aircraft.’ As it’s said before, you instead create convoluted procedures that nobody understands to do the most basic thing; flying the plane and looking outside.
It is what it is, Middle East aviation culture is incapable of self-reflection and progressive changes from within. Too arrogant to listen to what other countries have done to mitigate risk and continually marching forward to keep profits high, pilots fatigued, and accidents in the woodwork.
It is what it is, Middle East aviation culture is incapable of self-reflection and progressive changes from within. Too arrogant to listen to what other countries have done to mitigate risk and continually marching forward to keep profits high, pilots fatigued, and accidents in the woodwork.
I really feel for this crew - not because of the error they made (Unlike some) - but because they knew in those moment after of “uh oh - we screwed up” - that while they were preparing to come around and fly the 22 approach - they were fubar’d, pending upgrade gone, final warning coming, safety Dept position in question, Augmentors interrogation on PM’ing, possible downgrade, possible termination - yada yada yada.
The big one will come here not because of the error, but because of the cloud of punitive measures that are coming, as a crew tries to fix errors- because they know that with Fleet , unlike with a good trainer, resilience in getting it on the ground - will be met with swift, warped justice
The big one will come here not because of the error, but because of the cloud of punitive measures that are coming, as a crew tries to fix errors- because they know that with Fleet , unlike with a good trainer, resilience in getting it on the ground - will be met with swift, warped justice
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 55
Posts: 2,831
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by OLVpilot
Your company has put the fear of God in you to never ‘fly the aircraft.’
you instead create convoluted procedures that nobody understands to do the most basic thing; flying the plane and looking outside.
short flights long nights
[QUOTE=fliion;9985682
.
I really feel for this crew - not because of the error they made (Unlike some) - but because they knew in those moment after of “uh oh - we screwed up” - that while they were preparing to come around and fly the 22 approach - they were fubar’d, pending upgrade gone, final warning coming, safety Dept position in question, Augmentors interrogation on PM’ing, possible downgrade, possible termination - yada yada yada.
The big one will come here not because of the error, but because of the cloud of punitive measures that are coming, as a crew tries to fix errors- because they know that with Fleet , unlike with a good trainer, resilience in getting it on the ground - will be met with swift, warped justice
Tragic[/QUOTE]
Fliion, you are almost quoting me verbatim after the Moscow incident. I said at the time that the crew would have been under enormous pressure on the second and third approaches..simply because they were thinking about their (lack of ) future.
EK has to realise people are human and make mistakes, and a "just" culture is the only way to fix things. Unfortunately, we all know this will never happen, and things will just continue to worse until something really big happens.
.
I really feel for this crew - not because of the error they made (Unlike some) - but because they knew in those moment after of “uh oh - we screwed up” - that while they were preparing to come around and fly the 22 approach - they were fubar’d, pending upgrade gone, final warning coming, safety Dept position in question, Augmentors interrogation on PM’ing, possible downgrade, possible termination - yada yada yada.
The big one will come here not because of the error, but because of the cloud of punitive measures that are coming, as a crew tries to fix errors- because they know that with Fleet , unlike with a good trainer, resilience in getting it on the ground - will be met with swift, warped justice
Tragic[/QUOTE]
Fliion, you are almost quoting me verbatim after the Moscow incident. I said at the time that the crew would have been under enormous pressure on the second and third approaches..simply because they were thinking about their (lack of ) future.
EK has to realise people are human and make mistakes, and a "just" culture is the only way to fix things. Unfortunately, we all know this will never happen, and things will just continue to worse until something really big happens.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the weather is good, why not just cross DMYHL at 1200' for 13L and 800' for 13R and start your approximately 800 fpm descent from there. Then pick up the VASI's(actually, I heard PAPI's are being installed) and make your slight adjustments. By doing that, you know exactly what point to start your descent.
Can be a bit more difficult in the early morning sunrise though.
Can be a bit more difficult in the early morning sunrise though.
Last edited by JammedStab; 11th Dec 2017 at 21:42.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fatigue is a concern, in this case, lack of flying frequency might possibly be more the case.
As a professional pilot, on any day the following is a consideration.
RNAV, LNAV, VNAV, RNP, AR, GPS, GNSS, FLS, GLS, TRK/FPA, DES, NAV, V/S, LS ........confused yet?
+140 destinations, how can a pilot ever say that they are experienced in any particular destination, numerous local procedures, R/T, QNH, QFE, mmHg, M, Ft, transition altitudes 2,500 to 18,000ft, +50C, -30C, 9999, 75m, Oceanic, Himalaya Crossing, ETOPS, Polar, NAT, island holding fuel, continuation procedures.
Company rules, regulations, procedures, monitoring.......
I have no doubt in my mind, if any EK pilot was at the start of this procedure and was told to look out of the window, A/P OFF and land on 13L KJFK, the outcome would have been successful.
So, WHERE is the failure or WHY is it that the PROCEDURE didn’t go correctly if the pilots could have looked out of the window and made a safe approach. Something is telling me here that it is not only the pilots faults.
I would like to see a system implemented for now which allows a number of pilots who fly frequently to more challenging destinations, to be the only pilots rostered on those routes.
Experience breeds confidence and hopefully not complacency.
J
As a professional pilot, on any day the following is a consideration.
RNAV, LNAV, VNAV, RNP, AR, GPS, GNSS, FLS, GLS, TRK/FPA, DES, NAV, V/S, LS ........confused yet?
+140 destinations, how can a pilot ever say that they are experienced in any particular destination, numerous local procedures, R/T, QNH, QFE, mmHg, M, Ft, transition altitudes 2,500 to 18,000ft, +50C, -30C, 9999, 75m, Oceanic, Himalaya Crossing, ETOPS, Polar, NAT, island holding fuel, continuation procedures.
Company rules, regulations, procedures, monitoring.......
I have no doubt in my mind, if any EK pilot was at the start of this procedure and was told to look out of the window, A/P OFF and land on 13L KJFK, the outcome would have been successful.
So, WHERE is the failure or WHY is it that the PROCEDURE didn’t go correctly if the pilots could have looked out of the window and made a safe approach. Something is telling me here that it is not only the pilots faults.
I would like to see a system implemented for now which allows a number of pilots who fly frequently to more challenging destinations, to be the only pilots rostered on those routes.
Experience breeds confidence and hopefully not complacency.
J
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: on earth
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tend to agree with you Jack
I been called a " Dangerous pilot " in the small outfit next door to EK by a management pilot because I was flying a raw data ILS at DXB on a CAVOK day !!!!
I been called a " Dangerous pilot " in the small outfit next door to EK by a management pilot because I was flying a raw data ILS at DXB on a CAVOK day !!!!
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, WHERE is the failure or WHY is it that the PROCEDURE didn’t go correctly if the pilots could have looked out of the window and made a safe approach.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the Parkway is a continuous descent and the Canarsie is a step-down to 800'
So in good weather, fly the VOR approach with the profile of the visual.
Approach plate of the parkway in a better scale with more visual cues as well..
So in good weather, fly the VOR approach with the profile of the visual.
Approach plate of the parkway in a better scale with more visual cues as well..
Some inspiring stuff coming out of the chief pilots department with respect these incidents. It would appear they have it well in hand.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MC80 Home One type Star Cruiser
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the Parkway is a continuous descent and the Canarsie is a step-down to 800'
So in good weather, fly the VOR approach with the profile of the visual.
Approach plate of the parkway in a better scale with more visual cues as well..
So in good weather, fly the VOR approach with the profile of the visual.
Approach plate of the parkway in a better scale with more visual cues as well..
Another possibility is that with all the different approaches created by EK, they might have selected the wrong one and/or the wrong minima. The RNAV Visual requires a minima of 300' to be entered in the FMS according the EK procedures. Wrong in my opinion, because this can also create the false impression that you don't need to be visual until 300' on final. It is still a visual approach, but full automation is standard at EK.
If they selected the RNAV Visual instead of the Canarsie approach, selected 300' as minima and thinking that they were flying an instrument approach, then that might explain why they ended up so low.
