|
Originally Posted by Bus Driver Man
(Post 9986155)
EK created FMS coding from the MAP to the threshold after the Canarsie approach. Very useful and you can make it a continuous descent as well, but it may create the false impression that you don't need to be visual until short final. The minima is still 800' and you don't continue unless visual with the runway or lead-in lights. The whole FMS coding to the runway is still a visual segment, which might have been flown on instruments in this case.
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. |
This is all a total mix up of everything because of this homemade APPR
ATC will never issue that APPR if the WX min is too low IT IS STILL A VOR with 800Min and a VISUAL SEG FROM DYMHL nothing else the first guys flew it with FLS - big failure - but induced by SOP as A380 is flying RNAV APPR with FLS - except RNAV RNP, which are not allowed at this time. What happens if u fly that APPR with FLS - once u come towards the Centerline the imaginary GS will come into capture range as it is lower than u should be the airplane tries to intercept it which leads to being to low at the end. according to the FCOM The AP or FD in OP DES or DES mode can be used in approach. However, its use is only permitted if the AFS CP selected altitude is set to, or above, the higher of: - MDA/MDH - 500 ft AGL. this includes per Airbus also the use of FPA with AP on. Which means in other words, once u pass the minimum u fly manual to the runway this limitation is there to avoid CFIT Again this is and stays a VOR with visual turn segment. nothing else - our max automation Philosophie leads to false Conclusiones and therefore to such Szenarios our procedure has created rocket science into this APPR |
Originally Posted by Icelanta
(Post 9985754)
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. BTW that is a race track not a baseball stadium . |
Originally Posted by Bus Driver Man
(Post 9986155)
EK created FMS coding from the MAP to the threshold after the Canarsie approach. Very useful and you can make it a continuous descent as well, but it may create the false impression that you don't need to be visual until short final.
|
Originally Posted by Icelanta
(Post 9985754)
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. Not mentioning many others where it's not due to noise abatement but for survival purposes close to terrain (turkey has a few of them). We need to get on with it. Mistakes are always around the corner no doubt, but are you suggesting that someone who is in command of a 570.000 kg jet (or second in command for that matter) should not be perfectly able to easily hand fly them? |
JFK ATC and Canarsie, what a combo.
My Canarsie story.... I was sent to the Holding Point at 13L for departure (Canarsie approaches were in use). I spent the next 30 minutes watching the air show as the heavies flung themselves at the runway. A little Commuter Jetstream appeared at the Holding Point on the opposite side of the runway and was given barked instructions to line up after a landing Air France A330 on short finals, and be ready immediate. Air France rolled onto finals and touched down - a bit long. The Jetstream lined up and held. ATC began yelling at Air France to get off the runway - the reason being a Speedbird B747 now rolling onto finals! As AF finally was clearing, the Jetstream was ordered to “stand up your throttles and release brakes when I tell you” (what kinda BS!). He was then cleared immediate take-off, and started rolling. We watched in amazement - the BA jumbo was now at about 200’. The Jetstream probably got to 50kts only, then the shout came for him to “abort your takeoff immediately” followed by another order for the BA to GoAround. Which he did, from about 150’ - spectacular! I’m sure the BA crew knew they’d have to throw it away, but were hoping? So now we had just seen an RTO and a low GA. With the Jetstream still on the RWY the next up was an American Airlines MD-11 peeling around the Canarsie corner onto finals for 13L. “American, do you have 13R in sight?” “Affirmative sir” “OK you’re cleared land 13R!” American peels off toward 13R, then quickly realises the staggered runway is closer and he’s too high and too close. He calls Going Around. Two GAs and an RTO in the space of a minute. Gobsmacking. But that’s Kennedy... |
JFK ATC and Canarsie, what a combo. My Canarsie story.... I was sent to the Holding Point at 13L for departure (Canarsie approaches were in use). I spent the next 30 minutes watching the air show as the heavies flung themselves at the runway. A little Commuter Jetstream appeared at the Holding Point on the opposite side of the runway and was given barked instructions to line up after a landing Air France A330 on short finals, and be ready immediate. Air France rolled onto finals and touched down - a bit long. The Jetstream lined up and held. ATC began yelling at Air France to get off the runway - the reason being a Speedbird B747 now rolling onto finals! As AF finally was clearing, the Jetstream was ordered to “stand up your throttles and release brakes when I tell you” (what kinda BS!). He was then cleared immediate take-off, and started rolling. We watched in amazement - the BA jumbo was now at about 200’. The Jetstream probably got to 50kts only, then the shout came for him to “abort your takeoff immediately” followed by another order for the BA to GoAround. Which he did, from about 150’ - spectacular! I’m sure the BA crew knew they’d have to throw it away, but were hoping? So now we had just seen an RTO and a low GA. With the Jetstream still on the RWY the next up was an American Airlines MD-11 peeling around the Canarsie corner onto finals for 13L. “American, do you have 13R in sight?” “Affirmative sir” “OK you’re cleared land 13R!” American peels off toward 13R, then quickly realises the staggered runway is closer and he’s too high and too close. He calls Going Around. Two GAs and an RTO in the space of a minute. Gobsmacking. But that’s Kennedy... HDG SEL and V/S is ALL you need to fly a perfectly good Canarsie onto either runway, why do EK insist on making it so complicated? My argument would be that this is an appropriate level of automation and it works just fine. |
Originally Posted by Bus Driver Man
(Post 9986155)
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.
Originally Posted by WB1900
(Post 9986363)
This is all a total mix up of everything because of this homemade APPR
ATC will never issue that APPR if the WX min is too low IT IS STILL A VOR with 800Min and a VISUAL SEG FROM DYMHL nothing else the first guys flew it with FLS - big failure - but induced by SOP as A380 is flying RNAV APPR with FLS - except RNAV RNP, which are not allowed at this time. EK5KP is cleared for the VOR 13L on approach control. They switch to tower on 119.1 and are cleared to land on 13L. EK acknowledges 'Cleared to land 13L visual Emirates 5KP'. Force of habit or were they cleared for the VOR but had the 'homemade visual' in the box? |
mitigate the risk
EK could mitigate the risk by removing the rotating bid system and apply a true seniority bid system. Reward seniority and allow those who have stuck it out in EK over the years to bid what they want. Why force a 20 year Capt to do night turn to India, they should be able to bid what they can hold. Thus if a Capt want to fly to JFK 3 times a month, let them. If a 20 year Capt want to fly to SYD, then let them. EK then will have subject matter experts. Junior pilots accept this and its carrot to remain in EK as they know some day they will have a roster they can manage at 55 years old, not 5 night turns followed by a ULR to a destination they have never been to more desire to fly.
|
JACK
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. |
This incident is not a surprise. The array of confusing charts versus FMS entries and Approach charts names is staggering and confuses the best of the best. Sadly the company Info on that airport is not really helping. Same applies to NCE and possible other airports with mismatching charts/FMS approaches and ATC procedures.
What is needed to make these curved approaches safe for A380? Bin the complicated technological "solutions" to the "piloting problem". Did everybody know how top fly a visual approach prior to being told it was not the safest option? Well, you know the answer to that... Let pilots be pilots again and support them in their jobs by people who actually fly the line and understand the needs and risks. In time, they will reward the company with an improved incident record and less unwanted events on the line. My thoughts: Make pilots part of the solution instead of part of the problem. The rewards will not be instant, but they will be big when they finally reach home. Only a sincere attitude in this way will help. |
It’s not a tough approach. People, or SOP’s, make it a tougher. It’s fun when done correctly.
The next time you’re in the departure lineup for 13R but DYMHL in the fix page and watch the good, and bad, arrvals flown to 13L cross checking with the TCAS. Observe, analyze, then implement on your next arrival. It can be a head shaking experience to observe. EK 207 was VFR. VMC. Ten miles visibility. They probably could see the entire airport from ASSALT. Want to make it simple? Cross CRI at 1500’. Start down at 50-100’ FPM. Follow the ground track. At approx 1000’ you’ll pick up the VASI. Transition to a normal visual using the VASI. The TCAS and visual eye observation will show many US pilots do two continuous descents - 1. CRI to picking up the VASI 2. VASI ‘on glide path’ to impact (landing for some). Remember crosswinds separate the men from the boys. Have fun. |
Originally Posted by Killaroo
(Post 9986461)
JFK ATC and Canarsie, what a combo.
My Canarsie story.... I was sent to the Holding Point at 13L for departure (Canarsie approaches were in use). I spent the next 30 minutes watching the air show as the heavies flung themselves at the runway. A little Commuter Jetstream appeared at the Holding Point on the opposite side of the runway and was given barked instructions to line up after a landing Air France A330 on short finals, and be ready immediate. Air France rolled onto finals and touched down - a bit long. The Jetstream lined up and held. ATC began yelling at Air France to get off the runway - the reason being a Speedbird B747 now rolling onto finals! As AF finally was clearing, the Jetstream was ordered to “stand up your throttles and release brakes when I tell you” (what kinda BS!). He was then cleared immediate take-off, and started rolling. We watched in amazement - the BA jumbo was now at about 200’. The Jetstream probably got to 50kts only, then the shout came for him to “abort your takeoff immediately” followed by another order for the BA to GoAround. Which he did, from about 150’ - spectacular! I’m sure the BA crew knew they’d have to throw it away, but were hoping? So now we had just seen an RTO and a low GA. With the Jetstream still on the RWY the next up was an American Airlines MD-11 peeling around the Canarsie corner onto finals for 13L. “American, do you have 13R in sight?” “Affirmative sir” “OK you’re cleared land 13R!” American peels off toward 13R, then quickly realises the staggered runway is closer and he’s too high and too close. He calls Going Around. Two GAs and an RTO in the space of a minute. Gobsmacking. But that’s Kennedy... |
Originally Posted by Killaroo
(Post 9986461)
A little Commuter Jetstream appeared at the Holding Point on the opposite side of the runway and was given barked instructions to line up after a landing Air France A330 on short finals, and be ready immediate.
Originally Posted by shedsd330
(Post 9986886)
GOBSMACKING! And also reeks of total rubbish or in New York talk ‘complete :mad: bull :mad:.’ Line up after landing traffic isn’t a legal clearance in US today and certainly wasn’t when Jetstreams and American MD-11’s flew out of Kennedy (been at least 15 years).
Good story though... :D |
Originally Posted by Airbubba
(Post 9986918)
Yep, they don't do 'line up after landing traffic' in the U.S. And he didn't even start the yarn with 'Now, this is no s**t..." ;)
Good story though... :D |
Originally Posted by toilet flush
(Post 9986653)
EK could mitigate the risk by removing the rotating bid system and apply a true seniority bid system. Reward seniority and allow those who have stuck it out in EK over the years to bid what they want. Why force a 20 year Capt to do night turn to India, they should be able to bid what they can hold. Thus if a Capt want to fly to JFK 3 times a month, let them. If a 20 year Capt want to fly to SYD, then let them. EK then will have subject matter experts. Junior pilots accept this and its carrot to remain in EK as they know some day they will have a roster they can manage at 55 years old, not 5 night turns followed by a ULR to a destination they have never been to more desire to fly.
|
Originally Posted by Airbubba
(Post 9986918)
Yep, they don't do 'line up after landing traffic' in the U.S. And he didn't even start the yarn with 'Now, this is no s**t..." ;)
Good story though... :D Where did I say he was given line up instruction before AF passed him? You need to RTFQ and quit *mis*interpreting mate. But anyhow, in JFK those kinda dodgy ‘clearances’ are what goes on all the time, with constant friction and fk ups resulting, especially for foreign carriers. Is ‘stand up the throttles and release brakes when I tell ya’ a ‘legitimate’ clearance terminology in US ATC? Get off your high horse! What is interesting about your weasly denunciation is that you are obviously upset and embarrassed, and wish to make the truth about JFK ATC go away. Thats called Denial. The whole piloting community knows it’s a **** show. On the occasion in question it gradually became obvious that the reason I sat at the hold for 30+ minutes was there was zero coordination between the guy on Approach Control and the Tower. Another great job by JFK ATC. |
Just last week at LGA
“Traffic on crossing runway on short final and landing traffic has yet to clear be ready Delta”..... Since I’m not a dumb ass and have common sense I stood the throttles up and when ATC cleared us for takeoff we were rolling in no time. Has common sense left the cockpit or do we need everything spelled out for us? I have always loved the CRI approach since it gives us a chance to do something different. The River Visual into DCA is another fun one but some of the posters on this forum should stay away from those approaches. Please! |
Originally Posted by Killaroo
(Post 9987026)
Where did I say he was given line up instruction before AF passed him?
Originally Posted by Killaroo
(Post 9986461)
A little Commuter Jetstream appeared at the Holding Point on the opposite side of the runway and was given barked instructions to line up after a landing Air France A330 on short finals, and be ready immediate.
Originally Posted by Killaroo
(Post 9987026)
You need to RTFQ and quit *mis*interpreting mate.
It was shedsd330 who expressed some mild skepticism about the credibility of your narrative based on his years of flying out of JFK:
Originally Posted by shedsd330
(Post 9986886)
GOBSMACKING! And also reeks of total rubbish or in New York talk ‘complete :mad: bull :mad:.’ Line up after landing traffic isn’t a legal clearance in US today and certainly wasn’t when Jetstreams and American MD-11’s flew out of Kennedy (been at least 15 years).
|
Originally Posted by Neptune
I have always loved the CRI approach since it gives us a chance to do something different. The River Visual into DCA is another fun one but some of the posters on this forum should stay away from those approaches.
Originally Posted by Sheds330
Line up after landing traffic isn’t a legal clearance in US today
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 17:13. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.