EK207 Jfk
mmmbop, same for you. Time to revisit your FCOM bud. In night time or IMC, a caution results in the escape maneuver. ONLY in daytime VMC can you adjust and continue if you wish so..
MR8
MR8
So MR8....how do you fly a night approach onto 13 at night into SEY?
This is how...
“A go-around shall be initiated in any case if the cause of the warning cannot be identified immediately“
So a caution is not a warning, so yet again something as simple as what’s written and understood gets lost in the minutiae of willy waving and not going back to the big picture, I agree this is getting off the point.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Africa
Age: 56
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So let me understand what some of you are trying to say......
If I am in daylight VMC and get a TOO LOW GEAR, I can just drop the gear (ie. correcting the configuration) and continue because it is only a CAUTION?
If I am in daylight VMC and get a TOO LOW GEAR, I can just drop the gear (ie. correcting the configuration) and continue because it is only a CAUTION?
So let me understand what some of you are trying to say......
If I am in daylight VMC and get a TOO LOW GEAR, I can just drop the gear (ie. correcting the configuration) and continue because it is only a CAUTION?
If I am in daylight VMC and get a TOO LOW GEAR, I can just drop the gear (ie. correcting the configuration) and continue because it is only a CAUTION?
As to whether you think it’s wise to continue? That would suggest that your have a rather flexible interpretation of the stabilisation policy at EK, or you are being facetious.
An EPWS mode 4 warning or caution isnt the point with your example as you appear to assume in isolation that solving one thing absolves you from other criteria.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Building Site
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So MR8....how do you fly a night approach onto 13 at night into SEY?
This is how...
“A go-around shall be initiated in any case if the cause of the warning cannot be identified immediately“
So a caution is not a warning, so yet again something as simple as what’s written and understood gets lost in the minutiae of willy waving and not going back to the big picture, I agree this is getting off the point.
This is how...
“A go-around shall be initiated in any case if the cause of the warning cannot be identified immediately“
So a caution is not a warning, so yet again something as simple as what’s written and understood gets lost in the minutiae of willy waving and not going back to the big picture, I agree this is getting off the point.
I don’t know how it’s done on the tractor, but I am pretty sure we were discussing an A380 incident here...
MR8
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Building Site
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no ‘under certain conditions’ at night, which is when the EK207 occurred.
And even if you mean that ‘certain conditions’ is day/VMC, even then at night time it is not a Missed Approach: it is the EGPWS escape manoever: AP Off, Full backstick and TOGA. Nothing else.... and yes, it’s a CAUTION, but the procedure is the same as for a WARNING at night time.
I’m not here to argue, but if you’re calling somebody out referring to ‘procedures’, please make sure you actually know your procedures yourself... so back to the FCOM it is... ;-)
MR8
MR8, at the risk of sounding like someone I am most certainly not....
What does the OMA say? And what is the controlling document in the event of a conflict between the two? and what does the company expect, and one last thing...what does the OMA say? It’s a grey area yes, but is about what’s written, and not assumed, unless of course you get so low on approach at night that causes a caution.
What does the OMA say? And what is the controlling document in the event of a conflict between the two? and what does the company expect, and one last thing...what does the OMA say? It’s a grey area yes, but is about what’s written, and not assumed, unless of course you get so low on approach at night that causes a caution.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Africa
Age: 56
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warning vs Caution
No MM, I am not missing the point at all. What I am saying is that instead of this you-don't-know-the-difference-between-warning-and-caution bickering, we should rather realise that the aeroplane is trying to tell us something.
There are only 2 options. Either the box of tricks is lying or it is for real.
This is where the VMC daylight thing comes into play. Look out the window and see for yourself whether this is the case or not! If it is lying, ignore it.
If you can't see, you have no option but to trust the computer.
If it is speaking the truth, maybe the first thing we should realise is that the links of the PJ-chain have already started holding hands. Just correcting flight path or configuration is not going to save us.
There are only 2 options. Either the box of tricks is lying or it is for real.
This is where the VMC daylight thing comes into play. Look out the window and see for yourself whether this is the case or not! If it is lying, ignore it.
If you can't see, you have no option but to trust the computer.
If it is speaking the truth, maybe the first thing we should realise is that the links of the PJ-chain have already started holding hands. Just correcting flight path or configuration is not going to save us.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Building Site
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MR8, at the risk of sounding like someone I am most certainly not....
What does the OMA say? And what is the controlling document in the event of a conflict between the two? and what does the company expect, and one last thing...what does the OMA say? It’s a grey area yes, but is about what’s written, and not assumed, unless of course you get so low on approach at night that causes a caution.
What does the OMA say? And what is the controlling document in the event of a conflict between the two? and what does the company expect, and one last thing...what does the OMA say? It’s a grey area yes, but is about what’s written, and not assumed, unless of course you get so low on approach at night that causes a caution.
I’ll bite... haha
This is the OM-A:
‘When a warning occurs during daylight VMC conditions, if positive visual verification is made that no hazard exists, the warning may be considered cautionary.
A go-around shall be initiated in any case if the cause of the warning cannot be identified immediately.’
So yes, in daylight/VMC, you can continue if a positive identification is made, otherwise you need to go-around.
It doesn’t mention IMC or night at all.
In the FCOM however, it is written very clear that at night or IMC, the escape manoever needs to be flown.
I don’t see any grey area here, it is as clear as can be to me...
MR8
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Africa
Age: 56
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used the TOO LOW GEAR example to play devil's advocate, because in the QRH, 1 line down on the CAUTION list, you find TOO LOW TERRAIN. If you hear these words at night whilst in a turn close to the ground, the last thing you should think about is that it is only a CAUTION and that if I just pull back a little, my situation has been corrected.
Lekke,
So why didn’t you just say that? Instead of posting quite frankly a facetious and idiotic set of circumstances....go and read what I’ve posted previously about this cockup, I’m firmly in the camp of fly the aeroplane properly and be prepared which includes on a night like the one highlighted “looking out the window”.
Putting my bum in the seat for a second, if I’d have got a caution..warning or what ever GPWS related, the approach would have been binned into JFK, simples, sod the chain and all the rest of the simpleton psycho speak, fly away and have another go. It’s not hard.
No MM, I am not missing the point at all. What I am saying is that instead of this you-don't-know-the-difference-between-warning-and-caution bickering, we should rather realise that the aeroplane is trying to tell us something.
There are only 2 options. Either the box of tricks is lying or it is for real.
This is where the VMC daylight thing comes into play. Look out the window and see for yourself whether this is the case or not! If it is lying, ignore it.
If you can't see, you have no option but to trust the computer.
If it is speaking the truth, maybe the first thing we should realise is that the links of the PJ-chain have already started holding hands. Just correcting flight path or configuration is not going to save us.
There are only 2 options. Either the box of tricks is lying or it is for real.
This is where the VMC daylight thing comes into play. Look out the window and see for yourself whether this is the case or not! If it is lying, ignore it.
If you can't see, you have no option but to trust the computer.
If it is speaking the truth, maybe the first thing we should realise is that the links of the PJ-chain have already started holding hands. Just correcting flight path or configuration is not going to save us.
Putting my bum in the seat for a second, if I’d have got a caution..warning or what ever GPWS related, the approach would have been binned into JFK, simples, sod the chain and all the rest of the simpleton psycho speak, fly away and have another go. It’s not hard.
@MR8
Good, we agree.....so it’s clear then that at night when you get a GPWS at FL250 going into SIN, as my friend did...you should perform the required actions? just so we are clear :-)
I’ll bite... haha
This is the OM-A:
‘When a warning occurs during daylight VMC conditions, if positive visual verification is made that no hazard exists, the warning may be considered cautionary.
A go-around shall be initiated in any case if the cause of the warning cannot be identified immediately.’
So yes, in daylight/VMC, you can continue if a positive identification is made, otherwise you need to go-around.
It doesn’t mention IMC or night at all.
In the FCOM however, it is written very clear that at night or IMC, the escape manoever needs to be flown.
I don’t see any grey area here, it is as clear as can be to me...
MR8
This is the OM-A:
‘When a warning occurs during daylight VMC conditions, if positive visual verification is made that no hazard exists, the warning may be considered cautionary.
A go-around shall be initiated in any case if the cause of the warning cannot be identified immediately.’
So yes, in daylight/VMC, you can continue if a positive identification is made, otherwise you need to go-around.
It doesn’t mention IMC or night at all.
In the FCOM however, it is written very clear that at night or IMC, the escape manoever needs to be flown.
I don’t see any grey area here, it is as clear as can be to me...
MR8
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Africa
Age: 56
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MM, if you go and read again, you will see that I quoted nobody in my first 3 posts. You took the bait and qouted me.
What I find idiotic is that "professionals" on this forum, in typical EK-style are trying to trip up other colleagues by nitpicking lines and words in manuals and suggesting that the 207-guys should have been thinking about the difference between a CAUTION and a WARNING at that critical time.
What I find idiotic is that "professionals" on this forum, in typical EK-style are trying to trip up other colleagues by nitpicking lines and words in manuals and suggesting that the 207-guys should have been thinking about the difference between a CAUTION and a WARNING at that critical time.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Building Site
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MM, that is about the most ridiculous argument I heard in a long time... if they got a WARNING at FL250, I’m sure they would have done the escape manoever??? What’s the difference, it is an obvious nuisance warning...
Seriously, I was just pointing out the A380 procedure, which has been changed not too long ago. If you find it too hard to understand the difference between the application of a GPWS procedure at 400ft compared to at FL250, I’m not wasting any more time...
MR8
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Midlands
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: evicted
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts