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

EK207 Jfk

Old 9th Dec 2017, 15:17
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Miami
Age: 54
Posts: 230
EK207 Jfk

Another up into JFK . Canarsie approach, ek 207 few days ago.
Busted minimas no level segment. GPWS activated on go around.

http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kj...2017-0100Z.mp3
Jack330 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 15:46
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Among camels and dunes
Posts: 426
From 26:12 of the above link.
Jetjock330 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 15:57
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Dubai, UAE
Age: 40
Posts: 34
Only a matter of time until another one hits the dirt. Even then, management will not wake up. Just find someone or something else to blame... complacent pilots.
go46ball is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 16:53
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL290
Posts: 737
No reply?

Are you visual?
NO reply
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
207.jpg (1.00 MB, 988 views)
1a sound asleep is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 17:27
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,982
Originally Posted by Jetjock330 View Post
From 26:12 of the above link.
Those mp3 time hacks seem to be slightly different depending on the player.

On the approach control LiveATC clip Emirates 5KP is given "cross ASALT at 3000, cleared VOR 13L approach."

At 25:42 on the tower clip linked above "Emirates 5KP low altitude alert, check your altitude, Kennedy altimeter 30[.]43." "3043 Emirates 5KP."

Then at 26:03 "Emirates 5KP you appear to be extremely low on your approach, do you have the runway in sight?"

EK then went missed for vectors and it appears that they subsequently successfully landed out of the VOR/DME 22L.

The FR24 data looks like they were indeed quite low. They should have been 800 feet at DMYHL, the FR24 track log shows 250 feet and they continued down to ZERO indicated (uncorrected) altitude on the FR24 plot for several data points before going around. Any apartment building rooftop clotheslines and satellite dishes missing?

The flight is the one that departed on December 4, the times and dates are often a mix of local, your computer and UTC on these online trackers :

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/f.../ek207#fba99be

Last edited by Airbubba; 9th Dec 2017 at 18:36.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 17:31
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Miami
Age: 54
Posts: 230
Emirates safety record is hitting rock bottom, actually the worst among the 3 gulf carriers and this is happening despite ultra modern aircrafts and in excellent weather, the future doesnít look so bright.
Jack330 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 17:59
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Norway
Posts: 49
And the augmentors?

4 lots of eyes and ears in that cockpit at the time. Scary.
Adam Barfy is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 18:22
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,982
Looking at another dataset over at:

WebTrak JFK with the time set to 8:25 pm local on December 4.

This display appears to be corrected for the local altimeter setting. It looks like EK hit DMYHL at 800 feet at 151 knots (probably groundspeed but not sure). Then they continue down to a low of 338 feet at 137 knots in the Howard Beach area before starting to climb. Speed on this plot dropped to 120 knots (!) at 922 feet on the missed approach/terrain avoidance maneuver.

Usual caveats but this looks like yet another major miscue.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 19:40
  #9 (permalink)  
Longtimelurker
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: killington Vt
Posts: 377
Any reason they didnít ask for the RNAV approach? Lots lots easier for sure .
filejw is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 20:22
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kopavogur
Posts: 144
Because there is no RNAV Approach for RWY13L.

To be honest JFK is one the absolute worst airports in the Western Hemisphere.
Giving non precision approaches with lead-in tight visual manoevring in marginal weather is an absolute insult to Safety, yet accepted by the FAA and all Operators, including the one I fly for. Luckily, we do train this approach almost every sim.

The whole JFK operation, from approach to taxi into the gate is full of Safety issues, compounded by less than impressive, obnoxious and non standard ATC.
Icelanta is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 20:35
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,982
Originally Posted by Jack330 View Post
Busted minimas no level segment. GPWS activated on go around.
Looks to me like they made ASALT, CRI VOR and DMYHL OK. Where do you see the level segment on the VOR 13L?

The called visual when they checked in with the tower on 119.1 for the VOR 13L, it may have been on the preceding traffic rather than the runway however.

Did they somehow follow bad path guidance past DMYHL? Or did they see the wrong lights for the runway or aircraft ahead?

Originally Posted by filejw View Post
Any reason they didnít ask for the RNAV approach? Lots lots easier for sure .
Originally Posted by Icelanta View Post
Because there is no RNAV Approach for RWY13L
Well, there certainly is an RNAV RNP 13L approach but it is probably not available to third world carriers. Most of the U.S. carriers use it though.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 20:40
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,873
On behalf of the crew I would like to thank everyone for their support.
No one goes to work wanting to make the news. Lots of this type of event in the recent past and spread across the two fleets. Who's head will fall next!
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 20:42
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Dee Sea
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by Icelanta View Post
Because there is no RNAV Approach for RWY13L.
There's a carrier-specific RNAV/RNP to 13L. It was developed by JetBlue, and I believe one of the other hometown carriers (Delta or American) bought the rights to use it.

I haven't played back the tracks, but it's likely they passed CRI at the required 1500, but then started the descent angle to aim for 13R instead of 13L, which is 1.0 track miles further.

[EDIT: Just realizing that this happened about 16 hours before the Volaris 13R/13L stuff-up. See thread on the North America board]
Matvey is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 20:50
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Kopavogur
Posts: 144
Airbubba,

“Third World Carrier”?!
I fly for an EASA carrier with excellent training thank you.
Third World is more applicable to JFK and the FAA non ICAO standards.
Icelanta is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 21:49
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,982
Originally Posted by Matvey View Post
There's a carrier-specific RNAV/RNP to 13L. It was developed by JetBlue, and I believe one of the other hometown carriers (Delta or American) bought the rights to use it.
I'm pretty sure Delta and JetBlue currently use that approach. I thought American did also but now I'm not so sure.

Anyway, some of us know about that supersecret supposedly nonexistent RNAV RNP approach to 13L. But it probably isn't an option for Emirates or any of them EASA carriers (whatever that means ).

Originally Posted by Matvey View Post
I haven't played back the tracks, but it's likely they passed CRI at the required 1500, but then started the descent angle to aim for 13R instead of 13L, which is 1.0 track miles further.
As I said, from the playback it looks to me like they also crossed DMYHL at 800 feet. Did they make the 800 feet constraint at DMYHL a hard altitude in the box instead of leaving it at or above? It is probably right for 13R but puts you on a shallow profile for 13L. Sometimes the 'advisory' guidance below mins on a non-precision approach can take you somewhere bad.

They were given cross ASALT at 200 knots, cross CRI at 180 knots.

If you hit DMYHL at 800 feet and go for 13L, it looks like you do need that dive and drive level segment Jack330 mentioned before you start down again.

Non-precision approaches in FMS aircraft continue to generate a lot of EGPWS saves.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 21:59
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Midlands
Posts: 160
Is that RNP AR not authorised for EK on 13L???

We sure flew it enough times on sim checks for practice during my time in the company.
Odins Raven is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 22:27
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Miami
Age: 54
Posts: 230
http://avherald.com/h?article=4b21e320&opt=0
Jack330 is offline  
Old 9th Dec 2017, 23:02
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 562
Because there is no RNAV Approach for RWY13L.
Because in the US they call it a GPS approach?

The caveat here is that we are used to a continuous descent. We do that all the time. Here it isn't. If you cross DMHYL at 800' you're about 3.5 NM out so about 300' low. If you continue descent you're in for a surprise. I guess they discovered that the hard way. Better to find out in the sim; as a regular to JFK, we do.

A lot of fun, but a challenging approach, already harder in a heavy then a 73, must be twice as hard after a long haul from DXB.

Last edited by golfyankeesierra; 9th Dec 2017 at 23:15.
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2017, 01:28
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: a very sandy place
Posts: 65
Hi All,

I will let others argue the how, when, why, ect. For safety though, and having flown that approach many times in may career including a few times at EK, in my opinion, and I will emphasis, my opinion, the most critical mistake that people not familiar with this approach make whether they are flying the VOR or RNAV is that they look for the runway first instead of picking up the visual lead in lights. These lights, can be used to ensure you are going towards the correct runway and even provide for a pretty accurate turn rate to 13L if you follow them. They will also assist in determining if you are low or not. The main point is they will lead you to the correct runway. They are depicted on both charts and are a briefing point I make every time I fly this approach.

Although I agree that there has to be a better way to get in to these runways with today's technology, for now, this is what we have. Remember, this approach was designed for steam gauge airplanes and they safely made it work for longer than GPS and RNAV have been around. The difference is, back then, they new how to look out a window, hell they used the stars, lol. Point being is, if you are going fly this approach, remember when it was designed, and the fact it was designed to look out the window and be visual. If you brief the visual cues, it should help protect you from picking up the wrong runway.

I hope my post helps those reading in for safety reasons, and if anyone else has any tricks to add, please post them. I really hope if we get some more info out there, we can help protect from future mistakes.
a747jb is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2017, 02:53
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Gadhafi's tunnel
Posts: 24
Originally Posted by Odins Raven View Post
Is that RNP AR not authorised for EK on 13L???

We sure flew it enough times on sim checks for practice during my time in the company.
According to the CCI, only available on EK B777 acft.
camel_hump is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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