RNZAF 757 Emergency Antarctic Landing report
Aviation Reports[G]skins/taicAviation/skin_aviation
You can download the full Incident Report here...however its curious the fact its a report made by a civil organization to a military aircraft??
You can download the full Incident Report here...however its curious the fact its a report made by a civil organization to a military aircraft??
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hardly worth commenting unless you read the report itself, at which point it all seems quite reasonable.
The report hints, but does not detail, the Plans B, C... available if they had not got in off the last approach. There were options even "runways" available - not ideal but I suspect there was a reason they made the last approach to land with 3T.
NoD
The report hints, but does not detail, the Plans B, C... available if they had not got in off the last approach. There were options even "runways" available - not ideal but I suspect there was a reason they made the last approach to land with 3T.
NoD
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With no alternate and only a non-precision approach, it seems that the only smart policy would be to not continue past the PNR unless it is a beautiful clear day. It appears that the temp and dew point spread were not far apart according to the weather reports.
In my opinion, deciding to hold for two hours when the weather has already started coming down and was now below minimums was not a good idea. Their decision to hold was based on an improving forecast but the forecasts for the day were already proven to be useless. They are very lucky that it didn't get really foggy. Actually, it did as it went from 1200m vis down to 200m vis in that time period. Any worse and they never would have made it in.
There is a time to play by the regulations and a time to bust them as was eventually done here but it really should have been done earlier when the ceiling was still 300' with 1200m vis with consistently deteriorating weather, daytime conditions in snow country which makes airport lighting almost useless and no alternate. It would have been fairly easy do get in two hours earlier.
In my opinion, deciding to hold for two hours when the weather has already started coming down and was now below minimums was not a good idea. Their decision to hold was based on an improving forecast but the forecasts for the day were already proven to be useless. They are very lucky that it didn't get really foggy. Actually, it did as it went from 1200m vis down to 200m vis in that time period. Any worse and they never would have made it in.
There is a time to play by the regulations and a time to bust them as was eventually done here but it really should have been done earlier when the ceiling was still 300' with 1200m vis with consistently deteriorating weather, daytime conditions in snow country which makes airport lighting almost useless and no alternate. It would have been fairly easy do get in two hours earlier.
Last edited by JammedStab; 23rd Mar 2015 at 11:32.
I can't believe what I'm reading.
"It's perfectly acceptable to take risks in the name of Science/development". NO IT ISN'T!!
There is only one way this will end and seating (presumably blissfully ignorant) passengers near Emergency exits is pointless and ridiculous.
As somebody just said - do all this on a Gin clear day with a good forecast or TURN Back! What on earth is the PNR for if you don't "R" when the weather is awful and getting worse???
Somebody needs to get a grip here.
"It's perfectly acceptable to take risks in the name of Science/development". NO IT ISN'T!!
There is only one way this will end and seating (presumably blissfully ignorant) passengers near Emergency exits is pointless and ridiculous.
As somebody just said - do all this on a Gin clear day with a good forecast or TURN Back! What on earth is the PNR for if you don't "R" when the weather is awful and getting worse???
Somebody needs to get a grip here.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is equivaent to a military flight
everyone on board knows the risks of going to the Great White South, they know about Points of No Return, white-out and useless weather forecasts
They know about "Impact on Erebus"
It is a judgement you make
Agreed it would be criminal for a flight with the average SLF but for informed adults (and that includes tourists) it's what you risk to ge there. No one is forced to go
everyone on board knows the risks of going to the Great White South, they know about Points of No Return, white-out and useless weather forecasts
They know about "Impact on Erebus"
It is a judgement you make
Agreed it would be criminal for a flight with the average SLF but for informed adults (and that includes tourists) it's what you risk to ge there. No one is forced to go
I can't believe what I'm reading.
"It's perfectly acceptable to take risks in the name of Science/development". NO IT ISN'T!!
There is only one way this will end and seating (presumably blissfully ignorant) passengers near Emergency exits is pointless and ridiculous.
As somebody just said - do all this on a Gin clear day with a good forecast or TURN Back! What on earth is the PNR for if you don't "R" when the weather is awful and getting worse???
Somebody needs to get a grip here.
"It's perfectly acceptable to take risks in the name of Science/development". NO IT ISN'T!!
There is only one way this will end and seating (presumably blissfully ignorant) passengers near Emergency exits is pointless and ridiculous.
As somebody just said - do all this on a Gin clear day with a good forecast or TURN Back! What on earth is the PNR for if you don't "R" when the weather is awful and getting worse???
Somebody needs to get a grip here.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Surely this incident is a prime example of why we still need two human brains at the pointy end. Classic example of it all going t*ts-up, and the humans make the sensible decision and save the day.
Classic example of it all going t*ts-up, and the humans make the sensible decision and save the day.
"Frankly, without the excellent technology of the Airbus A330 flight control laws, the outcome could have been very different, with the realistic potential for the loss of the aircraft and 198 of our people."
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and seating (presumably blissfully ignorant) passengers near Emergency exits is pointless and ridiculous.
NoD
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Risk is only acceptable if there is sufficient reward.
What was the urgency for this flight?
What was the urgency for this flight?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,071
Received 2,939 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Incidentally how it got its name, another amazing landing
http://chefbillmorris.B l o g s p ot...ane-crash.html
http://www.messynessychic.com/2014/0...uried-in-snow/
Must be a pig of a place to get fuel supplies too.
http://chefbillmorris.B l o g s p ot...ane-crash.html
http://www.messynessychic.com/2014/0...uried-in-snow/
Must be a pig of a place to get fuel supplies too.
Hmmmmm, an interesting report. Well done the crew!
Having operated widebody pax in difficult wx and similar forecasting situations, it is still difficult to be objective without having their actual SOP and orders. However, I have two observations: without a wx div/any div, you will always be committed to destination after PNR. Also, surely a CAT3 ILS/MLS would be immune to movement of the airfield and should be mandatory for no div pax (outside pure mil ops)?
OAP
Having operated widebody pax in difficult wx and similar forecasting situations, it is still difficult to be objective without having their actual SOP and orders. However, I have two observations: without a wx div/any div, you will always be committed to destination after PNR. Also, surely a CAT3 ILS/MLS would be immune to movement of the airfield and should be mandatory for no div pax (outside pure mil ops)?
OAP
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very good point OAP; surely the GPS minima is based on a precise track and becomes meaningless when placed on a moving ice cap. And While I'd heartily agree with the "well done" for the approach, but perhaps not for the en-route decision making.
As for plans B and C, er, what were they, just out of interest?
As for plans B and C, er, what were they, just out of interest?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for plans B and C, er, what were they, just out of interest?
but perhaps not for the en-route decision making
NoD
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With 3000 kg fuel over a fogged out icecap and nowhere to land for thousands of miles, those plans B and C would have to be exceptionally cunning, NoD!
I'm intrigued by some of the detail here; the decision to use an earlier PNR based on pressurisation failure forced them to commit to land or crash in Antarctica 45 minutes earlier in worsening weather. Yet this is described as "conservative".
Given the critical importance of weather reports, the phraseology strikes one as rather "of the cuff" ... like "cloud on the ground" -as if someone desperately wanted to avoid using the word "fog"! And why no mention anywhere of temperature versus dew point?
I'm intrigued by some of the detail here; the decision to use an earlier PNR based on pressurisation failure forced them to commit to land or crash in Antarctica 45 minutes earlier in worsening weather. Yet this is described as "conservative".
Given the critical importance of weather reports, the phraseology strikes one as rather "of the cuff" ... like "cloud on the ground" -as if someone desperately wanted to avoid using the word "fog"! And why no mention anywhere of temperature versus dew point?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and nowhere to land for thousands of miles, those plans B and C would have to be exceptionally cunning, NoD!
I would agree there was no suitable diversion in conventional terms. I would disagree there was "nowhere to land in extremis", one option is mentioned in the risk profile.
NoD
Something that could be highlighted is that, despite the best professional capabilities of the met man, the weather can be so unreliable in some locations that a current METAR is the only accurate info. If you read the report, it says that the forecasting mainly relied on 4 general wind directions.
In worldwide aviation we can get conditioned to give a very high reliability factor to all forecast weather. Unfortunately, there is no quality index for forecasting locations that I am aware of.
OAP
In worldwide aviation we can get conditioned to give a very high reliability factor to all forecast weather. Unfortunately, there is no quality index for forecasting locations that I am aware of.
OAP
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some on here have a lack of understanding about the operating circumstances of Antarctica.
To give some idea of context.
There are aircraft down there carrying passengers which land IMC on flat areas of snow in IMC/whiteout.
They set a hand flown gentle rate of descent in IMC and continue down until the aircraft stops going down and then they stop.
No ILS, No runway, No CAT3B, no minima, no autopilot, single pilot and not so much as an NDB.
That is SOP, not an emergency.
A 757 I will grant you had more pax, but in the grand scheme of things, a planned descent below minima is not that big a deal.
Antarctica is not normal ops. If you get ill down there you may die because of lack of doctors too.
Without risk nothing new has ever been achieved. If the wussy on here had been in charge man would have never have left the trees.
To give some idea of context.
There are aircraft down there carrying passengers which land IMC on flat areas of snow in IMC/whiteout.
They set a hand flown gentle rate of descent in IMC and continue down until the aircraft stops going down and then they stop.
No ILS, No runway, No CAT3B, no minima, no autopilot, single pilot and not so much as an NDB.
That is SOP, not an emergency.
A 757 I will grant you had more pax, but in the grand scheme of things, a planned descent below minima is not that big a deal.
Antarctica is not normal ops. If you get ill down there you may die because of lack of doctors too.
Without risk nothing new has ever been achieved. If the wussy on here had been in charge man would have never have left the trees.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anyone going south knows the weather forecasts are.... aspirational
You go and most of the time it works out ok - occasionaly you have to turn back - and very occasionaly it requires the sort of effort these guys put in
as has been said - that's what it takes to operate down there - this isn't running a 737 from Stansted to Ibiza
You go and most of the time it works out ok - occasionaly you have to turn back - and very occasionaly it requires the sort of effort these guys put in
as has been said - that's what it takes to operate down there - this isn't running a 737 from Stansted to Ibiza
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all very well to argue" man would never have left the trees" but another view is that if we just accepted everything's fine, aviation would never have developed to its current pinnacle. Yes, tourist, aircraft land on skis in zero vis. But what might work at 50 kts in a twin otter won't in a 757 ! Fwiw, I believe Antarctic research IS worth incurring risk but a few issues stand out; given its crucial importance, weather information seemed to be passed in a surprisingly casual and conversational way. Were visibility, temp and dew point ever passed? If so they weren't mentioned here. And why was the 50' position shift only discovered by the crew? Surely this could have been checked by anyone with a £50 handheld GPS, or even an iPhone, rather than a low flyby in an airliner full of passengers?