EK207 Jfk
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: bkk
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The very fact that incidents like this are occurring fairly often at EK is a very serious worry in my view.A company wide approach to address this is essential IMMEDIATELY.Please do this now if you are an EK manager listening.
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Burgherville
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cessnapete
That's part of the problem. Because EK don't fly it as a visual approach from the MDA. That's not to say you can't or that you aren't visual, but if you get it wrong and go around, questions will be asked as to why you didn't use the company approved approach.
BTW, we used to fly it from the MDA and I don't remember any of these type of incidents.
Look out of the window on Carnarsie 13L/R Approach into JFK, its a visual approach
BTW, we used to fly it from the MDA and I don't remember any of these type of incidents.
I don't understand. Its a visual approach at least from the 800ft MDA point, using the Lead In lights as reference.
How can you not be looking outside acquiring the runway, and manually flying from that point? I find it unbelievable, that it seems an A380 Capt is unable/not skilled to fly a gentle right turn and land.
Most of us used to fly it from the VOR.
How can you not be looking outside acquiring the runway, and manually flying from that point? I find it unbelievable, that it seems an A380 Capt is unable/not skilled to fly a gentle right turn and land.
Most of us used to fly it from the VOR.
short flights long nights
cessnapete
That's part of the problem. Because EK don't fly it as a visual approach from the MDA. That's not to say you can't or that you aren't visual, but if you get it wrong and go around, questions will be asked as to why you didn't use the company approved approach.
BTW, we used to fly it from the MDA and I don't remember any of these type of incidents.
That's part of the problem. Because EK don't fly it as a visual approach from the MDA. That's not to say you can't or that you aren't visual, but if you get it wrong and go around, questions will be asked as to why you didn't use the company approved approach.
BTW, we used to fly it from the MDA and I don't remember any of these type of incidents.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Been around the block
Posts: 629
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overly complicate the “maneuver”, generate paperwork and training syllabus, practice said approach in the sim, brief it from Gander until TOD, then congratulate themselves on a job well done, keep a stiff upper lip, then tell the rest of the world how they perfected it and finally, make it leak oil.
short flights long nights
OK, so that leads me ask...who designed this 'manoeuvre'? Is it approved by a regulator?
Im not sure I would like to be standing in an American court of law explaining how I managed to park a large passenger jet several hundred feet from the approach end of a runway because ISO flying the approved FAA designed approach procedure, I was carrying out some sort of "manoeuvre" designed by a couple of numpties over a flat white in Costa.
Im not sure I would like to be standing in an American court of law explaining how I managed to park a large passenger jet several hundred feet from the approach end of a runway because ISO flying the approved FAA designed approach procedure, I was carrying out some sort of "manoeuvre" designed by a couple of numpties over a flat white in Costa.
Im interested too. What possible heads down procedure do EK use from the 800ft MDA? And when do they go visual, look out the window? They have to at some point because A/L unavailable.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
OK, so that leads me ask...who designed this 'manoeuvre'? Is it approved by a regulator?
Im not sure I would like to be standing in an American court of law explaining how I managed to park a large passenger jet several hundred feet from the approach end of a runway because ISO flying the approved FAA designed approach procedure, I was carrying out some sort of "manoeuvre" designed by a couple of numpties over a flat white in Costa.
Im not sure I would like to be standing in an American court of law explaining how I managed to park a large passenger jet several hundred feet from the approach end of a runway because ISO flying the approved FAA designed approach procedure, I was carrying out some sort of "manoeuvre" designed by a couple of numpties over a flat white in Costa.
And speaking of raw data, were these guys shooting a VOR approach using a non-approved in-house RNAV profile (either the non-approved AR RNAV-X or the canceled by notam RNAV Visual 13L) in the box? Is VOR data displayed in the A380 in this case?
I'm not questioning the nav accuracy of a modern plane but since the FAA is taking a look, is this legal? I've questioned similar kludges in the past but been assured that as long as you can monitor raw data to insure compliance it is OK.
I'm not questioning the nav accuracy of a modern plane but since the FAA is taking a look, is this legal? I've questioned similar kludges in the past but been assured that as long as you can monitor raw data to insure compliance it is OK.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“At or above.”
It’s stunning to watch how many treat it as mandatory in VFR conditions.
Makes putting DHYML in the fix page and watching TCAS altitudes readouts interesting. Or sad depending upon your POV.
It’s stunning to watch how many treat it as mandatory in VFR conditions.
Makes putting DHYML in the fix page and watching TCAS altitudes readouts interesting. Or sad depending upon your POV.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With cockpit monitoring systems and emails that state “this can no longer be tolerated”, both points lead to pilots continuing to satisfy those in the ivory tower while enshrouded in fear that this might be their last flight.
If pilots weren’t worried about the constant issue of ensuring that as PF, button pushing is in the right sequence, at the right time, and as PM, checking the PF’s sequence against the chart, then they both would have had more time to look outside the window. I truly believe that my colleagues, who are known to be competent pilots, were more engrossed with compliance to an infrequently flown procedure than to look up and fly the plane. A typical case of “operating buttons to meet parameters” and not “flying” a descending curved approach visually, simply done by looking out.
These pilots would have successfully flown hundreds of descending “finals base turns” before this. I would also state (I guess) that they had flewn this approach less than the fingers on 1 hand if at all.
More and more, recent aviation has become the norm for pilots to be operators of company desk monitored procedures (with consequences) and not allowed to just fly the plane.
As a result of this incident, another new procedure and callout has been created. The current intercept from above has also been revised which potentially will lead to further issues and a TCAS event on the G/A.
Further procedures and more complications will lead to further incidents, simplification is what is required.
Happy Christmas to one and all, abandon the net for the next 10 days and enjoy real conversation.
Jack
If pilots weren’t worried about the constant issue of ensuring that as PF, button pushing is in the right sequence, at the right time, and as PM, checking the PF’s sequence against the chart, then they both would have had more time to look outside the window. I truly believe that my colleagues, who are known to be competent pilots, were more engrossed with compliance to an infrequently flown procedure than to look up and fly the plane. A typical case of “operating buttons to meet parameters” and not “flying” a descending curved approach visually, simply done by looking out.
These pilots would have successfully flown hundreds of descending “finals base turns” before this. I would also state (I guess) that they had flewn this approach less than the fingers on 1 hand if at all.
More and more, recent aviation has become the norm for pilots to be operators of company desk monitored procedures (with consequences) and not allowed to just fly the plane.
As a result of this incident, another new procedure and callout has been created. The current intercept from above has also been revised which potentially will lead to further issues and a TCAS event on the G/A.
Further procedures and more complications will lead to further incidents, simplification is what is required.
Happy Christmas to one and all, abandon the net for the next 10 days and enjoy real conversation.
Jack
short flights long nights
With cockpit monitoring systems and emails that state “this can no longer be tolerated”, both points lead to pilots continuing to satisfy those in the ivory tower while enshrouded in fear that this might be their last flight.
If pilots weren’t worried about the constant issue of ensuring that as PF, button pushing is in the right sequence, at the right time, and as PM, checking the PF’s sequence against the chart, then they both would have had more time to look outside the window. I truly believe that my colleagues, who are known to be competent pilots, were more engrossed with compliance to an infrequently flown procedure than to look up and fly the plane. A typical case of “operating buttons to meet parameters” and not “flying” a descending curved approach visually, simply done by looking out.
These pilots would have successfully flown hundreds of descending “finals base turns” before this. I would also state (I guess) that they had flewn this approach less than the fingers on 1 hand if at all.
More and more, recent aviation has become the norm for pilots to be operators of company desk monitored procedures (with consequences) and not allowed to just fly the plane.
As a result of this incident, another new procedure and callout has been created. The current intercept from above has also been revised which potentially will lead to further issues and a TCAS event on the G/A.
Further procedures and more complications will lead to further incidents, simplification is what is required.
Happy Christmas to one and all, abandon the net for the next 10 days and enjoy real conversation.
Jack
If pilots weren’t worried about the constant issue of ensuring that as PF, button pushing is in the right sequence, at the right time, and as PM, checking the PF’s sequence against the chart, then they both would have had more time to look outside the window. I truly believe that my colleagues, who are known to be competent pilots, were more engrossed with compliance to an infrequently flown procedure than to look up and fly the plane. A typical case of “operating buttons to meet parameters” and not “flying” a descending curved approach visually, simply done by looking out.
These pilots would have successfully flown hundreds of descending “finals base turns” before this. I would also state (I guess) that they had flewn this approach less than the fingers on 1 hand if at all.
More and more, recent aviation has become the norm for pilots to be operators of company desk monitored procedures (with consequences) and not allowed to just fly the plane.
As a result of this incident, another new procedure and callout has been created. The current intercept from above has also been revised which potentially will lead to further issues and a TCAS event on the G/A.
Further procedures and more complications will lead to further incidents, simplification is what is required.
Happy Christmas to one and all, abandon the net for the next 10 days and enjoy real conversation.
Jack
When I left, almost 3 years ago..I did not think the wheels could come off much more..but they have. Burnt one 777...tried to park a couple of A380s in a suburb or two..plus numerous other "events".
What the hell is going on..?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: >FL310
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know any of the individuals involved, but perhaps this is the tip of the iceberg around the world. Children of the magenta line. All, including the first world legacy carriers, are having similar issues. DAL just had a 73 try to land on the grass at their home base. Don't fly, use automation, you have all the info you need in your nifty EFB. But a 380 mucking up an approach in JFK will make news. BUT, managemen's response my just be a bit different.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How did they get low? Did they increase their descent rate to follow a false indication or was there just a sudden loss of signal? Was it at night?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know any of the individuals involved, but perhaps this is the tip of the iceberg around the world. Children of the magenta line. All, including the first world legacy carriers, are having similar issues. DAL just had a 73 try to land on the grass at their home base.
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
g109, you have misunderstood the way Emirates works. After any incident like this, there is a full, fair and unbiased investigation.
THEN the crew are fired.
You are WRONG! The crew is fired even before they get back to DXB, just ask the MEL crew.
Emirates the Dream Job of.......NO ONE!
THEN the crew are fired.
You are WRONG! The crew is fired even before they get back to DXB, just ask the MEL crew.
Emirates the Dream Job of.......NO ONE!
