Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BMI's Hailstorm damage- Radar turned off!

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BMI's Hailstorm damage- Radar turned off!

Old 11th Jul 2004, 21:57
  #61 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Perhaps in the EU, perhaps not
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Let me repost this...

I accept I was mistaken with the particular segment of the 12 hour clock, however...

According to the AAIB report ...http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ty_029049.hcsp :

The radar was set to a scale of 160 nm and with no significant returns ahead and no thunderstorm activity forecast the radar was switched OFF. The aircraft had been in clear skies above towering Cu for most of the flight and, in accordance with normal procedures, the radar had only been turned on when required..."

*****No SIG WEATHER*****
*****Normal Procedures*****
The weather radar, when used by the crew, did not show the severity of the weather ahead of the aircraft....
The apparent lack of significant weather returns resulted in the crew of the G-MIGJ (sic) turning off their weather radar. Having entered the area of turbulence and hail associated with a storm cell, the PF made measured control inputs, monitored by the commander, which reduced the excursions of the aircraft without imposing large load factors on the airframe or those onboard. ...
... The inability of weather radar to detect certain types of precipitation, associated with storm cells, in the upper levels of the atmosphere above 30,000 feet however make it impossible to determine with any accuracy the upper limit of a cell when its vertical development exceeds 30,000 feet. Calculations to determine the aircraft's clearance above the upper limit of a cell can therefore be inaccurate resulting in an aircraft entering the active element of a storm cell whilst attempting to safety over-fly it....

I think I am correct in saying that the crew carried out their SOP

Ergo, you don't like what the crew did??? Slag off their managers, NOT the crew...

More to the point if you don't like what the crew did, don't fly BMA...or whatever the company's trading name is at the moment..

Pilots do as the company prescribes..viz: BA have strobes on before aligning the active runway.. can be good SOPS

or not... if there is someone else within a couple of wingspans away on the taxiway... at night

Look at the BIG picture before shooting either the messenger, who's the Devil's Advocate, or, more importantly the Pilot ... who hurt nobody

Last edited by duffgen; 11th Jul 2004 at 22:16.
duffgen is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2004, 22:32
  #62 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,797
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
....and there we are at the nub of it. Had you bothered to read a few posts back you would have seen the question. Whose procedures were these 'normal procedures'? They are mentioned briefly in the AAIB report and then ignored. If adherence to the 'procedures' led to the incident then, at the very least, we should explore the thinking behind the procedures. If the 'normal procedures' originate from neither Airbus nor BMI then there would be questions to ask of the crew and, more particularly, the AAIB.

So the question is, once again, does anyone know whose procedures were these 'normal procedures' referred to in the AAIB report? Airbus pilots say it's not an Airbus thing. Is it an airline specific SOP then, a BMI thing?

[edited to clarify]

Last edited by Alex Whittingham; 12th Jul 2004 at 09:57.
Alex Whittingham is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2004, 10:00
  #63 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The best in the world... of course!!!
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

I am amazed by the amount of crap…

Good day at the office!

Well done !

Switching the WX Radar off, for the sake of it!

“So if "no-one was seriously hurt" people shouldn’t make a fuss about it...”

What, somebody has to die, for you to consider as a serious?

Flying without Radar and knowing that the weather prognostic showed Thunderstorms on that track and region?

And some of you consider yourselves as Professional Pilots?

Regardless, thanks to Lord nothing worst did happen, this is extremely serious, if some of you do not realize it.

Captain Mercurius is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2004, 17:34
  #64 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: gatwick
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well said Mercurious!
srjumbo is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2004, 10:00
  #65 (permalink)  

Mach 3
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For me this report is a learning experience that one:
  • ought not to be lackdaisical regards the use of the Wx radar
  • ought to be diligent when interpreting the SIGMET chart during the pre-flight brief

If the company SOP is as stated, I find it hard to understand why one wouldn't be expecting CAT + Wx enroute.

Extrapolating forward from 1200 UTC the SIGMET chart has CAT area 2 moving NE placing it around Vienna within 3/4 hrs which extends to FL400 and ISOL EM CB's to FL300 at least...all on the expected flight path.

At FL340 it would always be hard to comply with a SOP that obliged you to be +5000' above cell tops.

In conjunction with a B757 radar picture of the scale reported, echoes certainly weren't being avoided by 15-20 miles as per the SOP.

Of course, their radar wasn't showing the equivalent information.

The incident reminds me not to be too cursory when examining a SIGMET chart and when enroute meteorology indicates TCU/CB/CAT think a little more about what the weather is actually doing. I'd be the first to admit one could say that about my attention to such detail in the past.

Of course if you're at FL550....

SR71 is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2004, 12:33
  #66 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why are British hailstones as big as golfballs, but never as big as table tennis balls?
autoflight is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2004, 13:36
  #67 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NY
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lessons for all.

I have carefully read all the aforegoing intelligent and sensible posts. Some from evidently well qualified and experienced aircrew(s) and from from complete prats!

Perhaps it is time to say; I guess the Captain and F/O are truly embarrassed! They will NEVER operate again with their WX Radar switched of (bit like riding a m/c with your crash helmet strapped to the rear carrier!) and BMI have taken both a financial and moral bashing, if the crew actually followed to the letter their SOP's.

As an ex-military pilot with 34 total years flying experience I have to say whilst I ALWAYS BUT ALWAYS have my WX Radar switched on, even in clear blue skies...but for the Grace of God there go I!

Time now to bring this to a close - I think they have learned their lesson. Yes! They were PRATS, big time but enough is enough and if murderers can be rehabilitated then surely these guys can be permitted to get on with their lives.

God Bless the Queen and America.
MercenaryAli is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.