Emirates emergency landing in JNB
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Tin Can
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bonajet,
you well exaggerated and misrepresented my post on using the SPI as an AID in validating the correct INITIAL sidestick input by a split second glance at the PFD before the nosewheel has left the ground.
The fact that we continue to have tailscrapes and overruns and very interesting QAR data on rotation rates indicates that not everyone is great at doing it by feel. Obviously and clearly, I never said that feel and external clues were not the PRIMARY means and intent.
I would suggest that many incorrect rotation rates and techniques are masked by the fact that there was not a critical failure during T/O.
Know your aircraft and use all available resources.
Still you are right and I am wrong and hope everyone recognizes me for the fool I am and ignores my post.
Best Regards.
you well exaggerated and misrepresented my post on using the SPI as an AID in validating the correct INITIAL sidestick input by a split second glance at the PFD before the nosewheel has left the ground.
The fact that we continue to have tailscrapes and overruns and very interesting QAR data on rotation rates indicates that not everyone is great at doing it by feel. Obviously and clearly, I never said that feel and external clues were not the PRIMARY means and intent.
I would suggest that many incorrect rotation rates and techniques are masked by the fact that there was not a critical failure during T/O.
Know your aircraft and use all available resources.
Still you are right and I am wrong and hope everyone recognizes me for the fool I am and ignores my post.
Best Regards.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cargo boy
You are 100 % right, in this case, the QRH required a length of around 1700 m, so 2800 m would cover you legally (JAR OPS) if the configuration of the aircraft is the same.
QRH values are advisory information that need correct interpretation.
In multiple failures, the QRH does no longer/ not always cover the situation. Crew should exercise sound judgement.
If for example the QRH “Flaps up landing” refers to max tire speed then I agree you’re your statement, if it does not, then you will have to think about it/asses it yourself.
The way you do that and the operational significance you attribute to that, is up to the crew.
Correct me if I overlooked something.
You are 100 % right, in this case, the QRH required a length of around 1700 m, so 2800 m would cover you legally (JAR OPS) if the configuration of the aircraft is the same.
QRH values are advisory information that need correct interpretation.
In multiple failures, the QRH does no longer/ not always cover the situation. Crew should exercise sound judgement.
If for example the QRH “Flaps up landing” refers to max tire speed then I agree you’re your statement, if it does not, then you will have to think about it/asses it yourself.
The way you do that and the operational significance you attribute to that, is up to the crew.
Correct me if I overlooked something.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Situation awareness, in case of multiple failures.
Various parameters need to be considered, two questions will give you the answer.
Q1. Touchdown groundspeed?
1. Landing fuel + ZFW = Landing weight + how much will I dump and why ? How time critical is this situation + any unbalance or leak ?
2. QRH + Landing Weight = V ref + advisory landing distance corrected for JAR OPS = 2800 m if all tires available?
3. Vref + wind correction + correction for elevation and temp (from instruments or rule of thumb) = groundspeed
Q 2. What do I have to stop and how will I use it?
1. Tires, brakes, auto brake and anti-skid
Tires? Affected but no warning Runway inspection + low approachto assess ?
Brakes? Affected but no warning
Autobrake? Affected but no warning
Antiskid? Affected but no warning
2.Spoilers ? Check hydraulics
3. Reversers ?
Cultural value of distance required using reversers only down to below 60 kts from previous line experience and various groundspeeds.
From Q1 and Q2 can be concluded:
1. QRH distance is unreliable
2. Reversers only distance = 3000 m
Conclusion:
ECAM, EICAS and QRH will not always give the full picture
Landing with reversers only, no auto brakes and braking below 60 kts.
Declare full emergency
Various parameters need to be considered, two questions will give you the answer.
Q1. Touchdown groundspeed?
1. Landing fuel + ZFW = Landing weight + how much will I dump and why ? How time critical is this situation + any unbalance or leak ?
2. QRH + Landing Weight = V ref + advisory landing distance corrected for JAR OPS = 2800 m if all tires available?
3. Vref + wind correction + correction for elevation and temp (from instruments or rule of thumb) = groundspeed
Q 2. What do I have to stop and how will I use it?
1. Tires, brakes, auto brake and anti-skid
Tires? Affected but no warning Runway inspection + low approachto assess ?
Brakes? Affected but no warning
Autobrake? Affected but no warning
Antiskid? Affected but no warning
2.Spoilers ? Check hydraulics
3. Reversers ?
Cultural value of distance required using reversers only down to below 60 kts from previous line experience and various groundspeeds.
From Q1 and Q2 can be concluded:
1. QRH distance is unreliable
2. Reversers only distance = 3000 m
Conclusion:
ECAM, EICAS and QRH will not always give the full picture
Landing with reversers only, no auto brakes and braking below 60 kts.
Declare full emergency
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 55
Posts: 2,832
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cap - I`m still intrigued as to what a "cultural value" is, as it`s not a term I`ve heard used in the aviation world...
By the way, at least one major airline absolutely forbids flypasts of the tower for inspection purposes.
If you want more idea of numbers for the 340-300, max ZFW is 178 tonnes. If the crew had dumped to around 10 tonnes, as you suggested in one of your previous deleted posts, then the landing weight would be 188 tonnes. Surprise, surprise that is only TWO TONNES below max landing weight.. And out of JNB we`re usually close to max ZFW.
By the way, at least one major airline absolutely forbids flypasts of the tower for inspection purposes.
If you want more idea of numbers for the 340-300, max ZFW is 178 tonnes. If the crew had dumped to around 10 tonnes, as you suggested in one of your previous deleted posts, then the landing weight would be 188 tonnes. Surprise, surprise that is only TWO TONNES below max landing weight.. And out of JNB we`re usually close to max ZFW.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Tin Can
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the EK FOM specifically does NOT recommend a low flypast in recognition of the fact that very little accurate information can be practicably obtained by doing so.
No matter how low and slow we fly past they just can't check them tyre pressures from the ground or clean the windscreens or top up the oil........yet.
After their most unfortunate initial problem, these guys did it all by the book and did it well.
No matter how low and slow we fly past they just can't check them tyre pressures from the ground or clean the windscreens or top up the oil........yet.
After their most unfortunate initial problem, these guys did it all by the book and did it well.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
White Night
Culture basically means that you remember what happened yesterday and why. No memory no culture.
I will give you another example:
You just landed in Casablanca and the temp is 45 °C
You are about to start your engines for the next leg.
On engines that had no FADEC you had to be careful NOT to follow SOP and NOT throw in the fuel at the SOP value of 25 % but continue the cranking until EGT dropped below 100 °C to avoid EGT over temperature.
On modern planes you have full authority FADEC that will do this for you.
When starting an engine equipped with FADEC you can either fall asleep or you can monitor to see if FADEC is doing what it should be doing. Culture will help you what to look for.
Same with rotation technique and many other things.
In short: SOP does not always cover everything nor does modern technology, basics still apply, as such culture is the same as what you guys call airmanship.
A pilot that wants everything written black on white would make a good lawyer.
A lawyer would never land on a slippery runway based on advisory data only; his brain does not work that way.
Radnav
It seems that the guys had themselves pretty well covered by the paperwork. What you forget to mention is that the EK FOM has been the cause of many problems.
Hence, 3 different directors of operation in 4 years, and serious arguments with some manufacturers and legal bodies.
You can be sure that Airbus is being very diplomatic at this time but inside the office they are not at all that pleased with the recent happenings.
Invictus
You are right; I may have been a bit to patronizing. However, EK as many other airlines that are multicultural have a common problem of different cultures and pilots coming with different SOP for the same aircraft.
The challenge is to get them all on one line. This is not achieved with dictatorial management style. The only way you get that done in a credible way is to have the manufacturers closely involved and have your SOP audited by them on a regular basis.
This is basically what the B 777 management tried to do in 1998 and almost all of them except the locals were removed because of it. Recent happenings on the A 340 proves the value of their intention and their courage at the time.
Culture basically means that you remember what happened yesterday and why. No memory no culture.
I will give you another example:
You just landed in Casablanca and the temp is 45 °C
You are about to start your engines for the next leg.
On engines that had no FADEC you had to be careful NOT to follow SOP and NOT throw in the fuel at the SOP value of 25 % but continue the cranking until EGT dropped below 100 °C to avoid EGT over temperature.
On modern planes you have full authority FADEC that will do this for you.
When starting an engine equipped with FADEC you can either fall asleep or you can monitor to see if FADEC is doing what it should be doing. Culture will help you what to look for.
Same with rotation technique and many other things.
In short: SOP does not always cover everything nor does modern technology, basics still apply, as such culture is the same as what you guys call airmanship.
A pilot that wants everything written black on white would make a good lawyer.
A lawyer would never land on a slippery runway based on advisory data only; his brain does not work that way.
Radnav
It seems that the guys had themselves pretty well covered by the paperwork. What you forget to mention is that the EK FOM has been the cause of many problems.
Hence, 3 different directors of operation in 4 years, and serious arguments with some manufacturers and legal bodies.
You can be sure that Airbus is being very diplomatic at this time but inside the office they are not at all that pleased with the recent happenings.
Invictus
You are right; I may have been a bit to patronizing. However, EK as many other airlines that are multicultural have a common problem of different cultures and pilots coming with different SOP for the same aircraft.
The challenge is to get them all on one line. This is not achieved with dictatorial management style. The only way you get that done in a credible way is to have the manufacturers closely involved and have your SOP audited by them on a regular basis.
This is basically what the B 777 management tried to do in 1998 and almost all of them except the locals were removed because of it. Recent happenings on the A 340 proves the value of their intention and their courage at the time.
Controversial, moi?
On engines that had no FADEC you had to be careful NOT to follow SOP and NOT throw in the fuel at the SOP value of 25 % but continue the cranking until EGT dropped below 100 °C to avoid EGT over temperature.
On modern planes you have full authority FADEC that will do this for you.
On modern planes you have full authority FADEC that will do this for you.
Autostart takes care of this for you.
Nothing to do with FADEC.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No need to get confused.
From your post I conclude that you will monitor that FADEC does what it is supposed to do. Your SOP covers that issue, well for you.
You talked about a specific engine, my reasoning is more general and covers all engines, FADEC or not.
You actually confirmed what I mean by culture.
The day you get on another plane you will take that with you and may have a valid reason to ask your trainer why they do not require EGT to be below 100 °C during manual start.
He may explain you why and back it up with data from the engine manufacturer or he may say, that’s the way it is. He may also go deeper in the issue and explain you why FADEC does so on the ground but not in flight.
As a result it will help you remember why there is a difference, the day you need it in flight, you will be ready for it.
You now decide what you think is the best.
Some instructors my show you what the deceleration capability of the aircraft is using reversers only.
In case you loose your anti-skid, brakes for whatever reason or end up on a slippery runway you will be more relaxed about it since you know what is going to happen.
Actually you might have been doing it yourself for a long time but did not give it another operational significance other than saving your brakes or keep the temp down for the next Take Off. I do not know.
From your post I conclude that you will monitor that FADEC does what it is supposed to do. Your SOP covers that issue, well for you.
You talked about a specific engine, my reasoning is more general and covers all engines, FADEC or not.
You actually confirmed what I mean by culture.
The day you get on another plane you will take that with you and may have a valid reason to ask your trainer why they do not require EGT to be below 100 °C during manual start.
He may explain you why and back it up with data from the engine manufacturer or he may say, that’s the way it is. He may also go deeper in the issue and explain you why FADEC does so on the ground but not in flight.
As a result it will help you remember why there is a difference, the day you need it in flight, you will be ready for it.
You now decide what you think is the best.
Some instructors my show you what the deceleration capability of the aircraft is using reversers only.
In case you loose your anti-skid, brakes for whatever reason or end up on a slippery runway you will be more relaxed about it since you know what is going to happen.
Actually you might have been doing it yourself for a long time but did not give it another operational significance other than saving your brakes or keep the temp down for the next Take Off. I do not know.
Controversial, moi?
What are you talking about?
FADEC is a system of digital engine control. It does not prevent fuel from being introduced during a manual start with EGTs greater than 100°C.
Autostart is a different system and does monitor EGT level before introducing the fuel.
FADEC is a system of digital engine control. It does not prevent fuel from being introduced during a manual start with EGTs greater than 100°C.
Autostart is a different system and does monitor EGT level before introducing the fuel.
Last edited by M.Mouse; 16th Jun 2004 at 17:48.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cap 56,
I think you may have mis-understood me, what I said was ;
Anyway, Cap56 what would You have done in the same circumstances ?
Invictus
Invictus
You are right; I may have been a bit to patronizing. However, EK as many other airlines that are multicultural have a common problem of different cultures and pilots coming with different SOP for the same aircraft.
You are right; I may have been a bit to patronizing. However, EK as many other airlines that are multicultural have a common problem of different cultures and pilots coming with different SOP for the same aircraft.
Cap56, as an outsider, you really do just look like a trouble making plonker, the problem is that because of that, I will treat any information that you provide on this and other threads as hmm ..... drivel.
Invictus
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
while all this friendly banter has been 'raging',you all might be interested to know that not only has the VP of flight ops been sacked,but the head of training has 'stepped' down and will continue as a 'normal'training Captain......something to do with the fact that he is the 'boss's son in law may have saved his job!Also,NOT confirmed but heavily suspected,both pilots have/are to be sacked.I hope this is not true.not only for their sake,but for the other pilots in Emirates who will feel there is no support from the company. 
Makes me glad to pay the 1% for peace of mind and work for a Company that will support their Flight Crew,even if i have to fly my b*****ks this summer. Emirates...you can keep your 10 weeks profit share thanks....you might need it to pay the mortgage!
Makes me glad to pay the 1% for peace of mind and work for a Company that will support their Flight Crew,even if i have to fly my b*****ks this summer. Emirates...you can keep your 10 weeks profit share thanks....you might need it to pay the mortgage!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Tin Can
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Extract of general media release :
EMIRATES HONOURS TOP GCAA OFFICIALS
Dubai, UAE, 16th June 2004 – Emirates has honoured top officials of the General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) for their support of the airline’s lead in promoting aviation training in the Middle East.
Emirates’ Chairman, His Highness Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed Al-Maktoum presented Awards of Appreciation to Mohammed Al Ghaith, Director General – GCAA, and Ahmed Al Haddabi, Director Flight Safety - GCAA
Congratulations to them.
EMIRATES HONOURS TOP GCAA OFFICIALS
Dubai, UAE, 16th June 2004 – Emirates has honoured top officials of the General Civil Aviation Authority (GCAA) for their support of the airline’s lead in promoting aviation training in the Middle East.
Emirates’ Chairman, His Highness Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed Al-Maktoum presented Awards of Appreciation to Mohammed Al Ghaith, Director General – GCAA, and Ahmed Al Haddabi, Director Flight Safety - GCAA
Congratulations to them.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good one RADNAV! Are these people living in the same world as the rest of us......unBELIEVABLE B******T. Well,luckily for them they live in Dubai.......plenty of sand to bury their heads in eh?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Invictus
My fried it is extremely simple what I would have done.
1. Get the right information. ATC, runway inspection and very likely a low approach to asses the real condition of my gear as much as possible. Not to asses the pressure but to find out if the tires are there at all. I am sure the would have seen 3 tires were missing.
2. Check how urgent this situation is by verifying any damage to the wing and fuel tanks (read fuel leak)
3. Check QRH for info.Determine my v ref and touchdown groundspeed. Using no formula but look at my instruments.
4. Check if my hydraulics were intact.
5. Get the distances from the QRH and double them then compare them to my cultural value of my previous landings. Since I would have lande the aircraft many times before, includsing the day before I would know what I can do with reversers only.
6. Check wind and runway slope
7. Get my cabin and ATC ready for full emergency
8. X-check with my F/O and brief him while looking for discrepancies.
9. If none, land at JNB using:
Reverseres only till below 80 Kts
No autobrakes
Probably manual speedbrake deployment would be needed
Very likely landed with 7 tons
10. After landing, call the Dubai pilot association.
In other words, I would use everything I have learned in the past.
In case it would have been established that all tires on same gear were missing, reducing my energy, (that ie m*v*v/2) would become crucial and I may have decided to go somewhere else.
So far I do not know if this was the case since I was not there. But I would have done everything possible to caver my A***
M.Mouse
You are talking type specific FADEC. It is not sure if all FADEC\'s are the same.
My opinion was not type specific but general and puts the finger on the importance of checking EGT before starting, that is all.
On some engines you can indeed launch fuel with high EGT already present.
radnav
Not so long ago EK and the UAE CAA were classified by ICAO as not meeting the minimum International Safety Standards.
This problem was caused by the fact the EK management was not up to speed with reality.
Mr Al Haddabi has done a tremendous effort to get the whole thing back on track.
I know what I talk about since I had 3 meetings with him.
My fried it is extremely simple what I would have done.
1. Get the right information. ATC, runway inspection and very likely a low approach to asses the real condition of my gear as much as possible. Not to asses the pressure but to find out if the tires are there at all. I am sure the would have seen 3 tires were missing.
2. Check how urgent this situation is by verifying any damage to the wing and fuel tanks (read fuel leak)
3. Check QRH for info.Determine my v ref and touchdown groundspeed. Using no formula but look at my instruments.
4. Check if my hydraulics were intact.
5. Get the distances from the QRH and double them then compare them to my cultural value of my previous landings. Since I would have lande the aircraft many times before, includsing the day before I would know what I can do with reversers only.
6. Check wind and runway slope
7. Get my cabin and ATC ready for full emergency
8. X-check with my F/O and brief him while looking for discrepancies.
9. If none, land at JNB using:
Reverseres only till below 80 Kts
No autobrakes
Probably manual speedbrake deployment would be needed
Very likely landed with 7 tons
10. After landing, call the Dubai pilot association.
In other words, I would use everything I have learned in the past.
In case it would have been established that all tires on same gear were missing, reducing my energy, (that ie m*v*v/2) would become crucial and I may have decided to go somewhere else.
So far I do not know if this was the case since I was not there. But I would have done everything possible to caver my A***
M.Mouse
You are talking type specific FADEC. It is not sure if all FADEC\'s are the same.
My opinion was not type specific but general and puts the finger on the importance of checking EGT before starting, that is all.
On some engines you can indeed launch fuel with high EGT already present.
radnav
Not so long ago EK and the UAE CAA were classified by ICAO as not meeting the minimum International Safety Standards.
This problem was caused by the fact the EK management was not up to speed with reality.
Mr Al Haddabi has done a tremendous effort to get the whole thing back on track.
I know what I talk about since I had 3 meetings with him.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP 56
"EARTH CALLING CAP 56". . . . ."EARTH CALLING CAP 56" .. "come in please....your time is up" Actually,lots of time and hindsight diagnostics from your armchair!You make it all sound sooooooh easy! Also, The reason why Emirates failed to meet safety req. of ICAO was to do with the fact that their chairman was also the head of GCAA,so there was a conflict of interest.A situation that had to change if Emirates were to be granted permission by FAA to fly to JFK.That's fact! Nothing whatsoever to do with management not being up to speed.
p.s who is this Mr.Habbadi gentleman you refer to?
"EARTH CALLING CAP 56". . . . ."EARTH CALLING CAP 56" .. "come in please....your time is up" Actually,lots of time and hindsight diagnostics from your armchair!You make it all sound sooooooh easy! Also, The reason why Emirates failed to meet safety req. of ICAO was to do with the fact that their chairman was also the head of GCAA,so there was a conflict of interest.A situation that had to change if Emirates were to be granted permission by FAA to fly to JFK.That's fact! Nothing whatsoever to do with management not being up to speed.
p.s who is this Mr.Habbadi gentleman you refer to?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Analysis the fact the people involved have been sacked that is a clear indication that pilot error was a contributory factor
Understand you guys love to close ranks but may be this can not be brushed away with the mantle of poor training. When the sh!t hits the fan maybe it is time to be man/woman and accept that wrong doing resulted in poor airmanship.
Understand you guys love to close ranks but may be this can not be brushed away with the mantle of poor training. When the sh!t hits the fan maybe it is time to be man/woman and accept that wrong doing resulted in poor airmanship.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BYMONEK
Youare only partly correct because I have a copy of the letter in wich the UAE CAA states all changes they will make in order to meet ICAO req and it's not only removing HH from the CA board it's much much more.
Mr Al Hadabi is the UAE CAA director of safety and security.
Hello earth do you read
There is nothing that even comes close to hindsight in my post: EK does not have a training/CRM model to handle multiple failures.
This problem was identified more that 5 years ago, hardly hindsight. Fact is that what I suggest works and so far I have heard no valid argument against it.
It\'s a method that tries to break the chain of error and was worked out in an airline with more than 75 years of experiance.
Many pilots who worked on it are now instructors with AIRBUS.
Your problem isthat it isnot British and therefore not good enough.
Youare only partly correct because I have a copy of the letter in wich the UAE CAA states all changes they will make in order to meet ICAO req and it's not only removing HH from the CA board it's much much more.
Mr Al Hadabi is the UAE CAA director of safety and security.
Hello earth do you read
There is nothing that even comes close to hindsight in my post: EK does not have a training/CRM model to handle multiple failures.
This problem was identified more that 5 years ago, hardly hindsight. Fact is that what I suggest works and so far I have heard no valid argument against it.
It\'s a method that tries to break the chain of error and was worked out in an airline with more than 75 years of experiance.
Many pilots who worked on it are now instructors with AIRBUS.
Your problem isthat it isnot British and therefore not good enough.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP 56
Poor show old chap,what what,one must never jump to conclusions or to make an assumption without getting ones facts right firstly...must one? Remember,if you' ASSUME',you will make an 'ASS' out of 'U' and 'ME' and you can keep 'ME' out of your 75 year CRM model thank you.
1) You ASSUME that i am British or that i would only accept a British CRM model..................Wrong
2) You state that " EK does not have a training/CRM model to handle multiple failures"...........Wrong again
3) One of your previous posts stated EK managment was not up to speed and made no mention about conflict of interest with H.H.,so in fact your statement wasn't entirely true.
4) Point 10.."after landing ,call the Dubai pilot association".......?Do you happen to have their phone number dear boy so that i can pass it on to my flying chums out in Dubai.One loves to catch up with a few stories about the good old days of shooting down Jerry in our Spitfires you know..........come on CAP 56,wake up and smell that Arabic coffee,or are you really on another planet?
Once Again....some more FACTS for you!Emirates CRM model is A A M ( ASSESS,ACTION,MANAGE )
It's emphasis is on gathering information and being sure of the problem BEFORE taking action.Manage the problem and ensure you review the proccess ie back to the assess stage just in case things have changed or may,for whatever reason,not be delivering the desired result.
Ek manual states that ;"a low flypast should only be undertaken when there is good reason to believe that Knowledge of the state of the landing gear can be improved from such a manoevre".At night, i doubt that a low flypast of the tower will add much to the info derived from their instruments.And before you ask,yes they did ask for a runway inspection but there weren't 3 tyres there!Yes,they did Jettison fuel,ATC and Cabin Crew were briefed and yes,Captain did cross check with F/O.....in fact, for whatever reason they got themselves into that situation,their CRM was excellent.AKA...FINAL RESULT!
So,before i waste anymore of my time correcting you on the facts,please spend a little time reviewing your tried and trusted CRM model that you place such faith in.I don't know what it is and i would love to Know if this experienced 75 year airline that uses it has ever had an incident involving Human factors.One things for sure though,i;m sure it involves not making assumptions and getting the facts before you dive in with solutions.
Poor show old chap,what what,one must never jump to conclusions or to make an assumption without getting ones facts right firstly...must one? Remember,if you' ASSUME',you will make an 'ASS' out of 'U' and 'ME' and you can keep 'ME' out of your 75 year CRM model thank you.
1) You ASSUME that i am British or that i would only accept a British CRM model..................Wrong
2) You state that " EK does not have a training/CRM model to handle multiple failures"...........Wrong again
3) One of your previous posts stated EK managment was not up to speed and made no mention about conflict of interest with H.H.,so in fact your statement wasn't entirely true.
4) Point 10.."after landing ,call the Dubai pilot association".......?Do you happen to have their phone number dear boy so that i can pass it on to my flying chums out in Dubai.One loves to catch up with a few stories about the good old days of shooting down Jerry in our Spitfires you know..........come on CAP 56,wake up and smell that Arabic coffee,or are you really on another planet?
Once Again....some more FACTS for you!Emirates CRM model is A A M ( ASSESS,ACTION,MANAGE )
It's emphasis is on gathering information and being sure of the problem BEFORE taking action.Manage the problem and ensure you review the proccess ie back to the assess stage just in case things have changed or may,for whatever reason,not be delivering the desired result.
Ek manual states that ;"a low flypast should only be undertaken when there is good reason to believe that Knowledge of the state of the landing gear can be improved from such a manoevre".At night, i doubt that a low flypast of the tower will add much to the info derived from their instruments.And before you ask,yes they did ask for a runway inspection but there weren't 3 tyres there!Yes,they did Jettison fuel,ATC and Cabin Crew were briefed and yes,Captain did cross check with F/O.....in fact, for whatever reason they got themselves into that situation,their CRM was excellent.AKA...FINAL RESULT!
So,before i waste anymore of my time correcting you on the facts,please spend a little time reviewing your tried and trusted CRM model that you place such faith in.I don't know what it is and i would love to Know if this experienced 75 year airline that uses it has ever had an incident involving Human factors.One things for sure though,i;m sure it involves not making assumptions and getting the facts before you dive in with solutions.