Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.

EK207 Jfk

Old 12th Dec 2017, 22:24
  #141 (permalink)  
short flights long nights
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 3,031
Originally Posted by Jack D View Post
New training manager previous assistant... problem solved , but wait it happened again ! Problem not solved ... what to do ?
Eye monitoring things in the sim....that will fix it!
SOPS is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2017, 23:08
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,461
I can't believe people are doing these kind of visual or RNP/GPS approaches with no altitude/distance cross check from the runway. SOP or not it may save your life one day when the stars align and you or ATC screw up a QNH.

It saved a AIR NZ crew on a ILS years ago in the Pacific when there was a problem with the glideslope.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 04:12
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Springfield
Posts: 281
Neville the subject flight was flying an RNAV approach that follows the Canarsie approach and is designed by EK for use by the 380. The reasons for the design are questionable but one is the limition of the 380 FMS. There is a published distance height table that is based on the CRI VOR and covers from ASALT to DMYHL. Beyond that point in addition to visual cues the FMS displays a constant descent flight path which you could have validated on the previous segment from CRI to DMYHL. Using the Position page as suggested is of little use as its assumes a straight line to the threshold. The very same FMS is displaying distance to go via the curved path so why not use that. So a distance to height cross check is used or at least can and should be used on this approach as with any other. But hey I've only ever flown it once..
Praise Jebus is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 05:08
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,484
Why is it a training problem? Fleet designs and test the approachs.
fatbus is online now  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 06:26
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 683
Praise..
Using the Position page as suggested is of little use as its assumes a straight line to the threshold. The very same FMS is displaying distance to go via the curved path so why not use that. So a distance to height cross check is used or at least can and should be used on this approach as with any other. But hey I've only ever flown it once..
Spoken like a true airbus pilot, “it’s in the FMS..so let’s use and rely on that”
The point is, DESPITE these wonderful procedures and sophisticated and cleverly designed approaches...the jet was descended to an altitude that bore no semblance to even a cursory check of height and distance.
How can that happen?
Part of understanding that event is to break down an approach into its component parts, and too also understand that we do as humans make mistakes, most of which can be recovered from with early enough intervention if the mistake is recognised. Part of that recognition is based when I’m operating on multiple sources.
As far as the fix page is concerned....Praise, clearly you’ve missed the point, landing on 13L I know it’s approximately 3.5 track miles from DYHML, so 3miles in the fix page threshold 13L is about right at 1000’.
It’s a gross error check to be certain that I’m in the right place for the visual segment.
Relying primarily on the FMS guidance in a visual environment is foolhardy in my view, it’s merely one source of useful but ultimately limited information.
Apologies Praise if it sounds like I’m having a go at you, I’m not, but its important to understand that the reason these procedures are created is that the egg heads and administrators believe they are safer, they believe this because most of them couldn’t fly themselves out of a wet paper bag, so when it goes wrong ordinary line pilots who have been trained this way don’t have the resilience and experience to recognise and correct an issue.
The G650 I fly around in these days is light years ahead of the 777 before, and the 380, and yet Gulfstream in their initial course and recurrent training emphasise basic mode operations in both autoflight and manual flight as they understand unlike it seems Airbus and EK that a skill set and resilience only happens and is maintained with fundamentals and basic skills.
falconeasydriver is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 08:19
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Springfield
Posts: 281
Falcon you're stretching it a bit, My point was not to rely on the FMS where as you suggested the fix page to the threshold was a good idea. How do you know you're at DYHML When it is an FMS waypoint, you xcheck 3 miles using the same FMS?? I referred to the CRI VOR which is on the chart and independent of the FMS. I'm not a fan of the approach but as long as you have a system to check distance v altitude then well done.

Last edited by Praise Jebus; 15th Dec 2017 at 12:23.
Praise Jebus is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 09:09
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 683
Praise, in a word no, I wouldnt be flying the RNAV approach as its IMHO an EK fudge, itd be the VOR 13L with the visual segment, as I know from experience this works far better and has a lot less in the way of subtle traps.

Last edited by falconeasydriver; 13th Dec 2017 at 10:04.
falconeasydriver is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 12:11
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: hang on let me check
Posts: 564
I am shocked we are even discussing these things talking about a huge passenger jet.
Like I said mistakes are always around the corner, but ití s a vor approach with a little bit of A/P off A/THR off FD off please thrown at the end. In good weather at a major western airport.
bringbackthe80s is online now  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 13:50
  #149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,187
DYHML is 3.6 nm to the threshold. At 300:1, and VFR a normal glide slope, you would cross DYHML at 1080’.

Why people descend to 800’, level off, then re-establish the descent in VFR conditions puzzles me. Why make it harder?
misd-agin is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 14:46
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 62
Posts: 421
Emirites low at JFK

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgoldstein/2017/12/11/did-an-emirates-a380-almost-crash-at-jfk/#1c4ca8b77807
Sailvi767 is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 14:57
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 62
Posts: 421
Originally Posted by OLVpilot View 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....

Notice, US pilots aren't flying fatigued anymore and receive non-jeopardy AQP training and are overseen by a governmental body that is able to critique itself and its own rules. EK and FZ will continue to threaten their passengers safety until they learn from their mistakes by developing truthful self-reflection and proper CRM application.

Don't blame New York controllers because you don't know how to fly a visual approach...
Amen! This is not even a remotely difficult approach. In a FMS aircraft regardless of which approach you load it should be a non event.
Sailvi767 is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 15:08
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Blandings
Posts: 705
Falcon is on the right track in identifying that most of the "procedures" and "techniques" that are sent our way originate from people who are daunted by the task of manipulating an airplane. To them, it is beyond comprehension that any pilot should find it a simple matter of pleasure and pride to be able to confidently direct an airplane towards the threshold during the last two minutes of the flight.

These are the people who produce diagrams that show how to fly a visual circuit, timing the downwind leg past the threshold, correcting for wind of course, so that the pilot does not forget to turn base.

To paraphrase Woody Allen, "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach design procedures".
Dropp the Pilot is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 15:14
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Clipperton island
Posts: 346
Dropp, excellent, 120 % agree. Nothing more to say, you did catch it all.
recceguy is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 15:16
  #154 (permalink)  

Dog Tired
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,683
I fear you may be a little late here...


EK207 Jfk
fantom is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 15:28
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 868
The article appears to be a journalistic view of a particular incident and then associates it with other issues involving a particular operator which are already under investigation.
Did the aircraft crash - no.
Could it have - depends on the chosen viewpoint. Aviation has safety back ups from EGPWS, crew cross checks, MSAW, none of which were discussed from the journalistís point of view.
PEI_3721 is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 15:32
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Isla Grande
Posts: 922
Ehrm, even tower relized they goofed it up....
Maybe tower safed the ship!?

tower to warn EK-207 "you appear to be extremely low on approach"
Incident: Emirates A388 at New York on Dec 4th 2017, at about 200 feet in the middle of turn to runway 13L
gearlever is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 15:51
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,731
Aviation has safety back ups from EGPWS, crew cross checks, MSAW, none of which were discussed from the journalist’s point of view.
Not discussed, OK....:

EGPWS - given circumstances ( configuration/position) - not sure but might not ever come into play.
Crew cross checks - good question - given the approach was "blown" well before the go-around what happened to those.?
MSAW - Sorry not my aisle so can't comment on whether that would or could have produced a "save"...

Fundamentally this was a visual approach ( albeit at night) that appears to have gone badly amiss...? As has been mentioned elsewhere essentially you fly to Dymhl and then follow the lights... No good blaming the journalist for the account and/or assume all would have been eventually saved by the technology, and also imply so it's sort of OK because there wasn't a crash..this was pretty darned serious, but we really need to know human factors were at play here...
wiggy is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 16:51
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Red Star
Posts: 55
These two 380 incidents smell a lot like ASIANA in SFO.
The aircraft flying the pilots, not the other way around. At least they managed to go around.
Well, the EK 777 didn’t manage to do that either.

How many more like this before various CAAs start to ask questions? A 380 will make a very big hole if it decides to land in a big city.
Xiamen is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 17:20
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,748
Originally Posted by Sailvi767 View Post
Amen! This is not even a remotely difficult approach. In a FMS aircraft regardless of which approach you load it should be a non event.
One possible area of concern that has been recently cited is the low standards of some of the U.S. pilots hired by EK:

Originally Posted by typhoonpilot View Post
Emirates had quite a few 20 year+ captains from major U.S. airlines who could not even pass the initial course or who later made serious operational errors resulting in their downgrade to First Officer. There were also a number who could not pass the upgrade course after being a first officer for 3 years. A large percentage of those were from Delta and Northwest Airlines. The pilots who tended to do well, with a few exceptions, came from USAirways, American, and United. There were, of course, a few good ones from Delta and Northwest but they were a minority.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2017, 17:41
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,037
One also wonders how much pilots can - forget - just how much lift/energy/vertical component can be lost in a constant bank.
pattern_is_full is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.