Sackings at Emirates
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack the Lad
Very much agree with your last paragraph.Twas a kneejerk reaction if ever i saw one.Ironically,the findings are out but seem to have been 'mislaid'.HH,however,has been handing out safety awards and congratulations all round to GCAA and various other relatives for some safety awarness program that's been running in UAE.Plenty of sand in Dubai to bury those heads in.Can't lose face if you can't see it eh?
Shake....CRM.....IS....Human Factors.Your point there being what exactly?
Very much agree with your last paragraph.Twas a kneejerk reaction if ever i saw one.Ironically,the findings are out but seem to have been 'mislaid'.HH,however,has been handing out safety awards and congratulations all round to GCAA and various other relatives for some safety awarness program that's been running in UAE.Plenty of sand in Dubai to bury those heads in.Can't lose face if you can't see it eh?
Shake....CRM.....IS....Human Factors.Your point there being what exactly?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is ,i gather,what he may have used.As the A/C rotated,Pitch indications would have increased ( DYNAMIC CHANGE) so to compensate for the apparent over rotation, actual pitch was decreased,to around 4 degrees,give or take.17sec in total from 1st stick movement to fully airborne.Yes,that's one hell of a long time and why wasn't he..sorry..THEY,looking out of the window.But.my whole point about this sorry incident is the poss lack of training they received.I don't fly Airbus but would it be an easy mistake to make,confusing the 'maltese cross' with the actual F/D and is there a big diff between pitch targets on A340-300/500.i'd imagine so and this may well have been in the back of his mind to avoid over rotating.Remember,this WAS his first flight on the -300 series AND out of J'burg as well! Swiss cheese model....need i say more?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys my earlier post was in response to a claim that initially selecting 9 degrees on the Maltese cross was an Emirates training department teaching and that it was wrong. This is not true! Read my earlier post again, it is an extract from the Airbus training manual not a one off memo and it is also what I was taught by Airbus.
They do not suggest that this is a pitch target or indeed a parameter you need to monitor just a good place to start from to get the rotation going. Out of interest I have tried this in the sim on a hot day at max take-off weight at the airfield in question and it works! The target attitude is 12.5 degrees and then follow the SRS for an A330. This may be a little different for an A340 I don't know as I have no experience of the 340. Also the Maltese cross disappears once the weight is off the wheels so continuing to use the cross and getting it confused with pitch attitude is not going to happen.
I know nothing of Emirates internal politics and will be very interested in the results of the enquiry.
They do not suggest that this is a pitch target or indeed a parameter you need to monitor just a good place to start from to get the rotation going. Out of interest I have tried this in the sim on a hot day at max take-off weight at the airfield in question and it works! The target attitude is 12.5 degrees and then follow the SRS for an A330. This may be a little different for an A340 I don't know as I have no experience of the 340. Also the Maltese cross disappears once the weight is off the wheels so continuing to use the cross and getting it confused with pitch attitude is not going to happen.
I know nothing of Emirates internal politics and will be very interested in the results of the enquiry.
Last edited by spy; 19th Jun 2004 at 22:17.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Infinity and Beyond
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who want to know...
The training recieved by those of us at EK, we had 2 days groundschool, almost exclusively computer based training, followed by 2 sim sessions. The A340-300 manuals we had were handed back in after the grounschool was completed as there were not sufficient for us to keep them.
The sim sessions were flown on the A340-300 but the emphasis for techniques was for the A340-500. So we were taught the 1/2 sidestick input (as opposed to 2/3 for the -300) and to quick check the maltese cross was at 9 degrees pitch up (purely used as a cross check).
On the night of the incident, it was the first operating flight for BOTH the crew on the A340 (of either series) at an airfield which has its inherent problems associated with an elevation of 5500 feet.
It is rumoured that there were no FCOMs on board and that there was no laptop for use as a reference to the documents either.
The tech log had notification of the captains sidestick having approximately 1.5 cm of slack before any control surface reaction was noticed.
Somebody mentioned the Swiss Cheese model....here the holes lined up perfectly and the result is now history.
What happens next is up to the operating crew to decide, but I wish them luck and one has to now think of the future of the 'Award Buying Airline'.
The training recieved by those of us at EK, we had 2 days groundschool, almost exclusively computer based training, followed by 2 sim sessions. The A340-300 manuals we had were handed back in after the grounschool was completed as there were not sufficient for us to keep them.
The sim sessions were flown on the A340-300 but the emphasis for techniques was for the A340-500. So we were taught the 1/2 sidestick input (as opposed to 2/3 for the -300) and to quick check the maltese cross was at 9 degrees pitch up (purely used as a cross check).
On the night of the incident, it was the first operating flight for BOTH the crew on the A340 (of either series) at an airfield which has its inherent problems associated with an elevation of 5500 feet.
It is rumoured that there were no FCOMs on board and that there was no laptop for use as a reference to the documents either.
The tech log had notification of the captains sidestick having approximately 1.5 cm of slack before any control surface reaction was noticed.
Somebody mentioned the Swiss Cheese model....here the holes lined up perfectly and the result is now history.
What happens next is up to the operating crew to decide, but I wish them luck and one has to now think of the future of the 'Award Buying Airline'.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4HolerPoler
I see that you are starting to realise that flying in thin air is not that easy after all.
Once more it's not 5556ft but around 8000 ft, pilots that forget that thing caled air wil have problems geting in the air.
J'Burg is aspecial place that in my opinion needs a sim ride before being dispatched as a crew.
As far as instructors are concerned, it is the UAE CA that endorses the qualification and not EK.
I see that you are starting to realise that flying in thin air is not that easy after all.
Once more it's not 5556ft but around 8000 ft, pilots that forget that thing caled air wil have problems geting in the air.
J'Burg is aspecial place that in my opinion needs a sim ride before being dispatched as a crew.
As far as instructors are concerned, it is the UAE CA that endorses the qualification and not EK.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At sea level you might get some reaction ( certainly not 3 degrees per second) but at 5500 AMSL very little is going to happen.
Must be the same on landing.
HotDog
I have explained this before,it\'s density altitude that counts.
Basic PPL stuff.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Dubai, UAE
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the two guys sacked:
I can only offer my regret that you were sacked and am utterly dismayed at the Companies reaction.
Fear & mistrust will continue to be the underlying ethos of how pilots interact with a management that cares little for it's staff. A sad day indeed.....
I can only offer my regret that you were sacked and am utterly dismayed at the Companies reaction.
Fear & mistrust will continue to be the underlying ethos of how pilots interact with a management that cares little for it's staff. A sad day indeed.....
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FMGC
Not to be a nitpicker, but you just posted a dangerous misconception. The MALTESE CROSS DOES NOT TELL YOU WHERE THE FLIGHT CONTROLS ARE. It tells you what the sidestick is asking for. To see where the flight controlls are you would have to look at the flight controlls page.
Airbus has a long history of innaccurate operating/training manuals on their aircraft. They like to hide behind "translation" problems. However the language of aviation is ENGLISH, and untill Airbus can print an accurate operating manual in English they should be suspended from building aircraft (in otherwords get a better techinical writing or translation team). That would get them off their asses in a hurry.
Even mature aircraft turn out to having glaring errors in the English versions of their FCOMS (like the American Airlines A300 for example)
Cheers
Wino
Not to be a nitpicker, but you just posted a dangerous misconception. The MALTESE CROSS DOES NOT TELL YOU WHERE THE FLIGHT CONTROLS ARE. It tells you what the sidestick is asking for. To see where the flight controlls are you would have to look at the flight controlls page.
Airbus has a long history of innaccurate operating/training manuals on their aircraft. They like to hide behind "translation" problems. However the language of aviation is ENGLISH, and untill Airbus can print an accurate operating manual in English they should be suspended from building aircraft (in otherwords get a better techinical writing or translation team). That would get them off their asses in a hurry.
Even mature aircraft turn out to having glaring errors in the English versions of their FCOMS (like the American Airlines A300 for example)
Cheers
Wino
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Following are two excerpt from the Airbus manuals. First id from Supplementary Techniques second is from Take-off SOP. These are for Single Aisle Family.
Perfectly clear and unambigous to me...
Quote
The PFD includes a symbol (1) that is the sum of sidestick positions given to the computers. It permits the PNF to check that the PF is making an appropriate control input during takeoff roll.
Small limit marks (2) indicate the limits of stick travel (± 16° in pitch, ± 20° in roll).
They are only displayed with the aircraft on ground. The flight crew must not use this display for control checks, because it does not necessarily indicate the control position in failure cases. The flight crew must use the ECAM flight controls page for making that check.
Unquote
Quote
-ANNOUNCE « ROTATE »
-ROTATION PERFORM
At VR, initiate the rotation to achieve a continuous rotation with a rate of about 3°/sec, towards a pitch attitude of 15° (12.5° if one engine is failed).
Minimize lateral inputs on ground and during the rotation, to avoid spoiler extension.
After lift-off, follow the SRS pitch command bar.
Unquote
Perfectly clear and unambigous to me...
Quote
The PFD includes a symbol (1) that is the sum of sidestick positions given to the computers. It permits the PNF to check that the PF is making an appropriate control input during takeoff roll.
Small limit marks (2) indicate the limits of stick travel (± 16° in pitch, ± 20° in roll).
They are only displayed with the aircraft on ground. The flight crew must not use this display for control checks, because it does not necessarily indicate the control position in failure cases. The flight crew must use the ECAM flight controls page for making that check.
Unquote
Quote
-ANNOUNCE « ROTATE »
-ROTATION PERFORM
At VR, initiate the rotation to achieve a continuous rotation with a rate of about 3°/sec, towards a pitch attitude of 15° (12.5° if one engine is failed).
Minimize lateral inputs on ground and during the rotation, to avoid spoiler extension.
After lift-off, follow the SRS pitch command bar.
Unquote
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: in the kitchen
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The MALTESE CROSS DOES NOT TELL YOU WHERE THE FLIGHT CONTROLS ARE. It tells you what the sidestick is asking for.
With the plane still on the ground the "Maltese cross" at ~ 9 degrees would mean: "I want ~ 9 degrees of pitch."
During rotation, no change of input on the sidestick will mean: "I want more than 9 degrees" and therefore the Maltese cross will move to higher angles.
At this point, if you wanted to keep the cross at 9 degrees you'd have to reduce the pitch!
No big deal if it was a video-game
Mad
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loungelizard
Perhaps you could enlighten us?
I would be very interested in what they have been teaching in all seriousness.
However, you did not expand on your earlier post and your statement merely mentioned selecting 9 degrees on the PFD Maltese cross. There is nothing wrong with teaching that as long as it is in the context of my earlier post. Minimal training is not restricted to Emirates, many airlines these days could be accused of cutting corners on training and my sympathy is with the crews if this is another example.
Yes the Maltese cross is an indication of side stick deflection!
The recommendation in the Supplemental Techniques also suggests the use of two thirds aft side stick deflection which appears as around 7.5 to 10 degrees on the Maltese cross!! As I said before the technique is described in the instructors guide to aid instructors in teaching students how to set up the correct rotation rate!
Maddog62
Selecting 9 degrees on the Maltese cross does not mean I want 9 degrees of pitch it is simply an indication of single or combined side stick deflection. It has no relevance the required pitch attitude.
It is all too easy to point the finger following events like these. The reasons are rarely as simple as they first appear.
Perhaps you could enlighten us?
I would be very interested in what they have been teaching in all seriousness.
However, you did not expand on your earlier post and your statement merely mentioned selecting 9 degrees on the PFD Maltese cross. There is nothing wrong with teaching that as long as it is in the context of my earlier post. Minimal training is not restricted to Emirates, many airlines these days could be accused of cutting corners on training and my sympathy is with the crews if this is another example.
Yes the Maltese cross is an indication of side stick deflection!
The recommendation in the Supplemental Techniques also suggests the use of two thirds aft side stick deflection which appears as around 7.5 to 10 degrees on the Maltese cross!! As I said before the technique is described in the instructors guide to aid instructors in teaching students how to set up the correct rotation rate!
Maddog62
Selecting 9 degrees on the Maltese cross does not mean I want 9 degrees of pitch it is simply an indication of single or combined side stick deflection. It has no relevance the required pitch attitude.
It is all too easy to point the finger following events like these. The reasons are rarely as simple as they first appear.
Last edited by spy; 20th Jun 2004 at 11:27.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many times have I seen during the revisions of manuals “rewritten for clarity”, it is an ongoing process.
But who initiates that process?
The Airlines of course by asking questions, technical meetings etc…
The position of the technical pilot is crucial in this process.
JAR OPS provided this possibility for good reasons.
Boeing or Airbus, it does not make a difference its a question of proper communication and transparency in both directions.
But someone has to identifythe problem first and that\'s the frontline instructors.
But who initiates that process?
The Airlines of course by asking questions, technical meetings etc…
The position of the technical pilot is crucial in this process.
JAR OPS provided this possibility for good reasons.
Boeing or Airbus, it does not make a difference its a question of proper communication and transparency in both directions.
But someone has to identifythe problem first and that\'s the frontline instructors.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP 56
Well done! Forgive me for appearing facetious but for once i actually agree with you! unlike in the J'burg overrun forum!
The only problem in this case,however,is whether Emirates Culture fosters an open feedback/reporting of problems amongst it's instructors.If it doesn't,then they might as well be pi**ing into wind!
Well done! Forgive me for appearing facetious but for once i actually agree with you! unlike in the J'burg overrun forum!
The only problem in this case,however,is whether Emirates Culture fosters an open feedback/reporting of problems amongst it's instructors.If it doesn't,then they might as well be pi**ing into wind!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do not worry, PPRuNe has it’s limitations…..semantics, connotation etc…it’s not always easy to get a point across.
Definitely not in a highly sensitive context. I se this one rather clearly because I lived trough it myself that's all.
One of the biggest challenges of the human being is to see the pitfalls in human communication.
Definitely not in a highly sensitive context. I se this one rather clearly because I lived trough it myself that's all.
One of the biggest challenges of the human being is to see the pitfalls in human communication.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Spy,
Yes, you are correct in all you say. The problem here is the teaching of setting 9 deg with the Maltese and holding until "she bites the air". This equates to only a 4.5 to 5 deg pitch. At a DENSITY ALTITUDE at prob close to 7500 ft on the day, "she" aint gonna go anywhere near "biting".
I am not jumping to judgement here whatsoever, nor should any of us because we were not the poor bas#ards there on the day. However, as the snout is taken further up in attitude, obviously to the lads by now that it aint quite working "THE WAY THEY WERE BLOODY WELL TRAINED", the RWY disappears under the nose and how much RWY is left nobody knows. I would be surprised if these guys were able to see the threshold come and go due to the pitch attitude they now had to input and their normal eye level. TOGA was now applied and the rest is history.
EK management should be dropping to their pathetic knees in the fact that they had this particular driver at the helm and not some, well errr, ahhh, I dont think you should go there Lizard. !!!!
Yes, you are correct in all you say. The problem here is the teaching of setting 9 deg with the Maltese and holding until "she bites the air". This equates to only a 4.5 to 5 deg pitch. At a DENSITY ALTITUDE at prob close to 7500 ft on the day, "she" aint gonna go anywhere near "biting".
I am not jumping to judgement here whatsoever, nor should any of us because we were not the poor bas#ards there on the day. However, as the snout is taken further up in attitude, obviously to the lads by now that it aint quite working "THE WAY THEY WERE BLOODY WELL TRAINED", the RWY disappears under the nose and how much RWY is left nobody knows. I would be surprised if these guys were able to see the threshold come and go due to the pitch attitude they now had to input and their normal eye level. TOGA was now applied and the rest is history.
EK management should be dropping to their pathetic knees in the fact that they had this particular driver at the helm and not some, well errr, ahhh, I dont think you should go there Lizard. !!!!