"Funny looking lights" says pilot of B707 over-run at Sydney years ago.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Funny looking lights" says pilot of B707 over-run at Sydney years ago.
Boeing 737 Classic FCTM. Chapter 6 Landing. Note depiction of the T-VASIS.
The T-VASIS depiction is misleading and is nothing like what a real T-VASIS looks like to an aircraft approaching to land. For example individual lights are shown as bars not as dots of light.
If you are unfamiliar with the real T-VASIS and accept the Boeing FCTM depiction of the T-VASIS as an accurate representation of the various approach angles, then you will have been seriously misled. Makes you wonder how that passed the undoubtedly rigorous Boeing proof reading.
Here is a link to what a real T-VASIS looks like compared to the Boeing FCTM example.
Trivial question? Probably is. But annoying to the purists. Reminds me of the accident to a PANAM Boeing 707 in the Fifties when approaching to land at Sydney runway 25 where a T-VASIS had recently been installed. The T-VASIS system was unknown to pilots outside of Australia.
Used to an entirely different VASIS in USA and around the world, the pilots remarked on "those funny looking lights on the side of the runway" In fact they were seeing all the VASIS Fly-Down lights because they were far too high. The 707 landed long and went off the end of Runway 25 into the nearby creek.
The Indonesian airline Lion Air has experienced several incidents of over-runs of runways even though PAPI systems are in place. To mitigate against future incidents of this nature, it is general practice for some of their pilots to deliberately approach low on PAPI glide slope indication in order to touch down close to the threshold rather than at the normal approach angle where touch down aiming point is the 1000 ft marker. This technique comes with its own risks of an undershooting touch down.
The T-VASIS depiction is misleading and is nothing like what a real T-VASIS looks like to an aircraft approaching to land. For example individual lights are shown as bars not as dots of light.
If you are unfamiliar with the real T-VASIS and accept the Boeing FCTM depiction of the T-VASIS as an accurate representation of the various approach angles, then you will have been seriously misled. Makes you wonder how that passed the undoubtedly rigorous Boeing proof reading.
Here is a link to what a real T-VASIS looks like compared to the Boeing FCTM example.
Trivial question? Probably is. But annoying to the purists. Reminds me of the accident to a PANAM Boeing 707 in the Fifties when approaching to land at Sydney runway 25 where a T-VASIS had recently been installed. The T-VASIS system was unknown to pilots outside of Australia.
Used to an entirely different VASIS in USA and around the world, the pilots remarked on "those funny looking lights on the side of the runway" In fact they were seeing all the VASIS Fly-Down lights because they were far too high. The 707 landed long and went off the end of Runway 25 into the nearby creek.
The Indonesian airline Lion Air has experienced several incidents of over-runs of runways even though PAPI systems are in place. To mitigate against future incidents of this nature, it is general practice for some of their pilots to deliberately approach low on PAPI glide slope indication in order to touch down close to the threshold rather than at the normal approach angle where touch down aiming point is the 1000 ft marker. This technique comes with its own risks of an undershooting touch down.
Last edited by A37575; 29th Jul 2013 at 09:57.
