TAP A310 avoiding collision in AZORES
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TAP A310 avoiding collision in AZORES
From RTP television site (translated)
Sudden manouver on a TAP plane causes 25 injured
25 people were injured when a TAP plane was forced to make a sudden manouver to avoid a collision before landing at Ilha Terceira (TER), Azores, said an airline source.
The Airbus A-310 was travelling from Lisbon (LIS) to Terceira (TER) and the accident ocurred at 10:30 , Lisbon time, said the same source.
25 were injured (23 pax and 2 crew) and were sent to the local hospitals. The same source informed that the some of the injured suffered head (skull?!) trauma but nobody was inconscient.
TAP official source said to LUSA news agency that the Captain received an indication that they were on a collision course with another plane and "as the rules say" was forced to divert from its course. "To do so, he had to lower the plane's altittude, and for the urgency of the situation, there was no time to warn the passengers, whom without seatbelts, hit the top of the deck" they explained.
The plane flying from Lisbon to Terceira, left Lisbon at 08:20.
The story (in portuguese) is here RTP Television
(please forgive the errors
)
Sudden manouver on a TAP plane causes 25 injured
25 people were injured when a TAP plane was forced to make a sudden manouver to avoid a collision before landing at Ilha Terceira (TER), Azores, said an airline source.
The Airbus A-310 was travelling from Lisbon (LIS) to Terceira (TER) and the accident ocurred at 10:30 , Lisbon time, said the same source.
25 were injured (23 pax and 2 crew) and were sent to the local hospitals. The same source informed that the some of the injured suffered head (skull?!) trauma but nobody was inconscient.
TAP official source said to LUSA news agency that the Captain received an indication that they were on a collision course with another plane and "as the rules say" was forced to divert from its course. "To do so, he had to lower the plane's altittude, and for the urgency of the situation, there was no time to warn the passengers, whom without seatbelts, hit the top of the deck" they explained.
The plane flying from Lisbon to Terceira, left Lisbon at 08:20.
The story (in portuguese) is here RTP Television
(please forgive the errors
)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Guernsey
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hope no one was seriously injured.
It obviously loses something in translation and so I humbly accept corrections but you write "before landing". I assume therefore that this was not in the cruise and therefore the initial approach checks should have been made. Given that S.O.P.'s normally state that seatbelts signs should be on I'm wondering why so many were not strapped down. Surely by this stage only C.Crew should be on their feet?
It obviously loses something in translation and so I humbly accept corrections but you write "before landing". I assume therefore that this was not in the cruise and therefore the initial approach checks should have been made. Given that S.O.P.'s normally state that seatbelts signs should be on I'm wondering why so many were not strapped down. Surely by this stage only C.Crew should be on their feet?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 58
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add some new info, from this site (in portuguese).
The other aircraft involved in this incident was a beechcraft turboprop operated by OMNI, a small airline company, flying from Terceira(TER) to Lisbon(LIS), with only the 2 pilots onboard. OMNI told the reporters that this plane was just following its previously approved flightplan.
Carl Rawson , the info I have is that the plane was about 10 mins from the airport, and probably on approach.
My guess is that they were still high enough for the seatbelt signs to be off.
The latest reports say that 14 people suffered from neck and head injuries, some of them very serious.
The other aircraft involved in this incident was a beechcraft turboprop operated by OMNI, a small airline company, flying from Terceira(TER) to Lisbon(LIS), with only the 2 pilots onboard. OMNI told the reporters that this plane was just following its previously approved flightplan.
Carl Rawson , the info I have is that the plane was about 10 mins from the airport, and probably on approach.
My guess is that they were still high enough for the seatbelt signs to be off.
The latest reports say that 14 people suffered from neck and head injuries, some of them very serious.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
A/c occupants are inside a machine moving at hundreds of mph and the capability for almost any type of movement! It should be common sense to stay (at least a bit) buckled up!!
Remember reading a thread a while back about pasengers who unbuckle to get stuff from overhead bins, before the sign goes out - what if additional manouvering is neccessary at the gate? They all fall over like dominoes and then sue the airline for their own stupidity.
Ok ok enough rant! But I hope the sb sign was switched on!
Andy
A/c occupants are inside a machine moving at hundreds of mph and the capability for almost any type of movement! It should be common sense to stay (at least a bit) buckled up!!
Remember reading a thread a while back about pasengers who unbuckle to get stuff from overhead bins, before the sign goes out - what if additional manouvering is neccessary at the gate? They all fall over like dominoes and then sue the airline for their own stupidity.
Ok ok enough rant! But I hope the sb sign was switched on!
Andy
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Europe-the sunshine side
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
10 ' from landing and seatbelts sign off?
We position seatbelts sign to ON at TD ,which usually is at no less than 20' to land.I think it's the safest way to do.
We position seatbelts sign to ON at TD ,which usually is at no less than 20' to land.I think it's the safest way to do.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Never diverting!
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is completly in line why I avoid flying with TAP. On one flight alone there was a disabled person in the emergency exit row, during turbulence the sign was switched on but cabin crew REFUSED passage to pax from the lav's on the way back to their seats(and allowed people to go the lav's....) During the following heavy turbulence as part of the macho factor they continued serving hot drinks and food, they clearly have never been in clear air turbulence... At this point cockpit had done the right thing it was only totally ingnored in the back.
Then after starting the sightseeing approach to LIS the sign was only switched on when we were line up..... CC ran through the cabin as standing in the galley was more important than checking seatbelts and taking a seat themselves... extremely unprofessional and I changed my return flight to LH after this...
This is not a reflection on this particular incident but it helped color my conceptions about TAP... as refered to by my Portugeese collegues as Take Another Plane
Then after starting the sightseeing approach to LIS the sign was only switched on when we were line up..... CC ran through the cabin as standing in the galley was more important than checking seatbelts and taking a seat themselves... extremely unprofessional and I changed my return flight to LH after this...
This is not a reflection on this particular incident but it helped color my conceptions about TAP... as refered to by my Portugeese collegues as Take Another Plane
PPRuNe Co-Pilot
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Sky
Posts: 931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TT2
I wonder why i have a different opinon of TAP than your's ( and i had problems with TAP before, but im not avoiding them ), surely that doesnt happen only in TAP? So what... Will you stop flying with other airlines too? No airline is perfect, i think you and any other aviation professional knows that.
Let me see, following your theory what airlines i wouldnt be flying either because of unprofessionalism or problems that happened to me:
BA
Ryanair
Iberia
Thomas Cook
It's going to get to a point that i will have no airline to fly with if something unprofessional happens everytime i fly as a passenger.
I wonder why i have a different opinon of TAP than your's ( and i had problems with TAP before, but im not avoiding them ), surely that doesnt happen only in TAP? So what... Will you stop flying with other airlines too? No airline is perfect, i think you and any other aviation professional knows that.
Let me see, following your theory what airlines i wouldnt be flying either because of unprofessionalism or problems that happened to me:
BA
Ryanair
Iberia
Thomas Cook
It's going to get to a point that i will have no airline to fly with if something unprofessional happens everytime i fly as a passenger.
Last edited by AIRWAY; 21st Aug 2004 at 13:41.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Monrovia / Liberia
Age: 63
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All aside from which.... if a TCAS RA ( one assumes that both aircraft involved where equipped with and using TCAS ?! ) is complied with in the correct manner it is actually a very gentle manouver, one which shoud barely be noticed by the passengers - wherein a Chuck Yeager styled max climb / max dive it is not ! .... of course if one chooses to diregard the TA, the RA, and subsequently has to manouver out of the way, that is a different matter.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Europe-the sunshine side
Posts: 755
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airway: no matter what the B200 was equiped with,the response to a RA is an immediate SMOOTH maneuvre,which won't be necessary felt by the pax.The system is designed so you'll have enaugh time to do such a maneuvre.High G should be avoided.
Of course,you can be scared sometime by a sudden 'climb,climb' ,but this is not a reason for aerobatics.As I said the system is calculated for smooth maneuvre,this is also taught in the QRH and FCTM.
Of course,you can be scared sometime by a sudden 'climb,climb' ,but this is not a reason for aerobatics.As I said the system is calculated for smooth maneuvre,this is also taught in the QRH and FCTM.
PPRuNe Co-Pilot
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: The Sky
Posts: 931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alexban,
If im not mistaken a TCAD wont give you RA's It simply says where traffic is, as for TCAS it will give you RA's commands... Now could someone confirm this? My knowledge of this 2 systems is limited so i would be greatful if someone could shed some light regarding TCAD's.
AVIACO, responding to your question regarding the fleet replacement, it is schedule to be the A330 to replace their A310 ( According to a few pilots i know from Air Portugal )
If im not mistaken a TCAD wont give you RA's It simply says where traffic is, as for TCAS it will give you RA's commands... Now could someone confirm this? My knowledge of this 2 systems is limited so i would be greatful if someone could shed some light regarding TCAD's.
AVIACO, responding to your question regarding the fleet replacement, it is schedule to be the A330 to replace their A310 ( According to a few pilots i know from Air Portugal )
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Mk. 1 desk at present...
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AVIACO:
Hang on... if (IF IF ) the reports are accurate, and if (IF IF ) they well and truly bunted the thing in response to a 'simple' TCAS RA, I'd stop short of describing the airmanship of the A310 crew as 'excellent'.
Note the 'ifs' - no-one should be acting as judge, jury, & executioner at this stage.
R1
...a cockpit scenario, where I am sure all TAP crews are excellent, vindicated by those who handled the current A310 situation
Note the 'ifs' - no-one should be acting as judge, jury, & executioner at this stage.
R1
Back to the thread. It seems that subsequent to this incident the TAP flight from Terceira to Sao Tome e Principe, due to be performed by the same aircraft, was cancelled. This from Portuguese tv which was reporting on the incident a few minutes ago. The coverage seemed fair enough although TAM's communication skills weren't being praised by passengers.
Would a cancellation be sop after what appears to have been a violent avoidance manoeuver or - my own surmise - necessary to clean up the mess on board: broken glass, cutlery scattered, olive oil all over the place etc.
And, regarding that "10 minutes before landing": it's been revised to 18 minutes which would put the incident as having happened at peak pre-arrival toilet time. On any airline.
Would a cancellation be sop after what appears to have been a violent avoidance manoeuver or - my own surmise - necessary to clean up the mess on board: broken glass, cutlery scattered, olive oil all over the place etc.
And, regarding that "10 minutes before landing": it's been revised to 18 minutes which would put the incident as having happened at peak pre-arrival toilet time. On any airline.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Somewhere between Europe and Africa
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TT2 said:QUOTE]Then after starting the sightseeing approach to LIS the sign was only switched on when we were line up..... CC ran through the cabin as standing in the galley was more important than checking seatbelts and taking a seat themselves... extremely unprofessional and I changed my return flight to LH after this...[/QUOTE]
On TAP's SOP's the SB sign comes on/off at FL100. Or if turbulence is found irrelevant of altitude.
Old King Coal said:
.[
With a RA , TAP's SOP's states to respond promptly and smoothly, disengage AP and A/THR.
"NOTE- The TCAS orders may require an incremental g which is greater than that achieved by the autopilot.
-Avoid excessive maneuvers but, if necessary use the full speed range Vss and Vmax."
Also it states not to maneuver based on a TA alone.
From the reports I've seen on TV and newspapers, it appears that the A310 was descending and the B200 was climbing. Furthermore, the RA appears to have intructed the crew to descend as well as the controler to turn right. So, at at speed of, say, 320 Knots, AP off , TCAS screaming descend, I would find rather understandable this amount of g (we're talking about the A310).
Anyway, I won't make any further acessements regarding this particular incident as I don't have all the facts. But saying that the flight crew was excellent or cowboys is going a little faster than the investigation.
My two cents...
On TAP's SOP's the SB sign comes on/off at FL100. Or if turbulence is found irrelevant of altitude.
Old King Coal said:
.[
All aside from which.... if a TCAS RA ( one assumes that both aircraft involved where equipped with and using TCAS ?! ) is complied with in the correct manner it is actually a very gentle manouver, one which shoud barely be noticed by the passengers - wherein a Chuck Yeager styled max climb / max dive it is not ! .... of course if one chooses to diregard the TA, the RA, and subsequently has to manouver out of the way, that is a different matter.
"NOTE- The TCAS orders may require an incremental g which is greater than that achieved by the autopilot.
-Avoid excessive maneuvers but, if necessary use the full speed range Vss and Vmax."
Also it states not to maneuver based on a TA alone.
From the reports I've seen on TV and newspapers, it appears that the A310 was descending and the B200 was climbing. Furthermore, the RA appears to have intructed the crew to descend as well as the controler to turn right. So, at at speed of, say, 320 Knots, AP off , TCAS screaming descend, I would find rather understandable this amount of g (we're talking about the A310).
Anyway, I won't make any further acessements regarding this particular incident as I don't have all the facts. But saying that the flight crew was excellent or cowboys is going a little faster than the investigation.
My two cents...
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Malta
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well...another history that passengers could read and learn....I wonder why both in general aviation and on line people are so unwilling to fasten their seatbelts! maybe they don't listen, they forget, they are scared or simolpy think they are "too machos for this stupid thing"! I think that most people as soon as pass the airport main doors experience a sort of "panic" at different levels and when they sit on the plane is even worst! it is part of human mind, they are not in their typical ambient, but looking back a lot of minor incidents ended with similar situations. Usually as soon as descent starts (20 mins before landing) automatically signs goes up and possibly a pre recorded voice or a cabin crew remember pax to fasten seat belts, if they don't do (I've heard the most disparate excuses about that!!!) well....I'm sorry if they injiure, but it is only their fault!
Ever seen, flying as a passenger, that soon after take off the first "ding" they hear (maybe only end of sterile cockpit not connected to unfasten seatbelts) suddenly you hear a thousand people unlocking belts? Like monkeys trained to respond to a sound they do the first thing they remember connected to that sound!!!! During short flights Pilots often never unlock them, but anyway they are all standing up and a lot of times they answer you badly or ignore cabin crew who warn to remain seated and fastened.....I'm always sorry for injiured but sooner or later they have to learn that flying is not exactly like taking a bus!!!!!
Skunkie
Ever seen, flying as a passenger, that soon after take off the first "ding" they hear (maybe only end of sterile cockpit not connected to unfasten seatbelts) suddenly you hear a thousand people unlocking belts? Like monkeys trained to respond to a sound they do the first thing they remember connected to that sound!!!! During short flights Pilots often never unlock them, but anyway they are all standing up and a lot of times they answer you badly or ignore cabin crew who warn to remain seated and fastened.....I'm always sorry for injiured but sooner or later they have to learn that flying is not exactly like taking a bus!!!!!
Skunkie
Guest
Posts: n/a
Skunkie
I do agree with your observations, but you have to ask yourself the question of who has normalised the air travel experience to the extent that pax equate it to a bus?
Have a look at the airlines marketing/promotions material and ask yourself what % talks about the risks of flying?
Safety is a state of mind and that involves being aware of the risks involved.
The message going out to the pax is not very strong on this generally (I mean from booking the ticket onwards) and relies on a PA or video briefing when emplaned, supported by PA announcements in a noisy and distracting cabin environment.
So, at least to my way of thinking, it is understandable that some pax don't take seat belts too seriously.
This may have been made worse by (a) their experience of travelling on airlines where the seat belt sign is used very conservatively, i.e. during long periods of calm cruise, meaning that they "learn" that the seat belt sign is not necessarily related to turb and (b) the fact that distrubances are rare - I fly about 80-90 sectors a year and the last rough ride was about 70 sectors ago (and it wasn't really that rough) - thats many years flying for the average pax.
Last week, I was on an internal flight in Italy and the PF was doing a great job in actively steering the airbus around widespread CB cells topping out way above us, in VMC; The belt sign was on and most people were strapped in, save for some Americans, who were changing seats, using the washrooms etc.
We never hit even a small bump, but I do wonder if the Americans have experienced the seat belt sign being on for long periods and have learned to ignore it?
Of course, the average pax looks out of the window and thinks "that a pretty white cloud", whereas those of us with a little insight see the possibility of windshear, hail, sev turb etc.
So the paradox is that feeling safe and secure increases bookings and revenue for airlines, but we need a little fear (or at least healthy respect) of the environment to convince pax to take the belt sign seriously.
I do agree with your observations, but you have to ask yourself the question of who has normalised the air travel experience to the extent that pax equate it to a bus?
Have a look at the airlines marketing/promotions material and ask yourself what % talks about the risks of flying?
Safety is a state of mind and that involves being aware of the risks involved.
The message going out to the pax is not very strong on this generally (I mean from booking the ticket onwards) and relies on a PA or video briefing when emplaned, supported by PA announcements in a noisy and distracting cabin environment.
So, at least to my way of thinking, it is understandable that some pax don't take seat belts too seriously.
This may have been made worse by (a) their experience of travelling on airlines where the seat belt sign is used very conservatively, i.e. during long periods of calm cruise, meaning that they "learn" that the seat belt sign is not necessarily related to turb and (b) the fact that distrubances are rare - I fly about 80-90 sectors a year and the last rough ride was about 70 sectors ago (and it wasn't really that rough) - thats many years flying for the average pax.
Last week, I was on an internal flight in Italy and the PF was doing a great job in actively steering the airbus around widespread CB cells topping out way above us, in VMC; The belt sign was on and most people were strapped in, save for some Americans, who were changing seats, using the washrooms etc.
We never hit even a small bump, but I do wonder if the Americans have experienced the seat belt sign being on for long periods and have learned to ignore it?
Of course, the average pax looks out of the window and thinks "that a pretty white cloud", whereas those of us with a little insight see the possibility of windshear, hail, sev turb etc.
So the paradox is that feeling safe and secure increases bookings and revenue for airlines, but we need a little fear (or at least healthy respect) of the environment to convince pax to take the belt sign seriously.
F3G and Skunkie, I beg to differ just a bit and from what's probably a narrow perspective.
My impression as a passenger is that more people than before (before being 10-40 years ago) tend to stay buckled throughout the flight. I'm pretty sure it's so where I travel; even what used to be a mass rising to get stuff out of the overhead lockers has changed to a patient wait until the aircraft's parked.
It may be cultural. The impressions of cabin crew would be more valid, I'm sure. But perhaps any contributing cabin crew could also give their views on what passengers do 20 minutes prior to landing on any flight longer than a few hours? Queue up for the loo maybe?
My impression as a passenger is that more people than before (before being 10-40 years ago) tend to stay buckled throughout the flight. I'm pretty sure it's so where I travel; even what used to be a mass rising to get stuff out of the overhead lockers has changed to a patient wait until the aircraft's parked.
It may be cultural. The impressions of cabin crew would be more valid, I'm sure. But perhaps any contributing cabin crew could also give their views on what passengers do 20 minutes prior to landing on any flight longer than a few hours? Queue up for the loo maybe?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 933
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the airport where I have seen my one(and hope last)TCAS red warning,we were approaching TER over the harbour(can"t remember the direction)never been so scared in my life apparently an Air Azores HS748 was decending on top of us.I was in a L1011 must have been the summer of 1994.
matkat
matkat