Emirates A340-300 incident @ JoBurg. Report is public
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: West sussex
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Emirates A340-300 incident @ JoBurg. Report is public
I totally agree with the post by READY TO COPY. I must say that the management of the Flight Operations department of EK should be reviewed (no more YES men), I think only one face has disappeared post the accident. I am a non EK pilot but one who has experienced their approach to flying the Airbus, they are looking for a standard solution rather than encouraging good airmanship. The 2 pilots involved in the accident were not give proper exposure to the A340-300.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: In my skin
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Emirates A340-300 incident @ JoBurg. Report is public
The report goes on by stating that the crew had looked at the landing performance data and concluded that the reference figure was 1400 m
This figure is not factored and should be at least factored in the same way as the normal configuration figures are. (factor 1.67)
In non-normal configurations they should at least be doubled, so 2800m in this case; definitely if non normal flap configurations are concerned because of the difficult flare.
But the tables were not valid in this case since the brakes were affected!!!!!!
Also, on the take off, it is not advisable to change any configuration (gear and/or flaps) if performance does not require you to do so in case you have reason to suspect substantial damage. It takes a lot of force to make a 250 ton aircraft vibrate severely.Nobody wants a crippled tyre to explode in the wheel well.
Climb to a safe altitude and get to manoeuvring speed. Then take your time.
The real safety issue is not the passengers’ life; IT’S YOUR OWN life.
You are entitled to a good training and be well rested.
You are entitled to ask any question to the training department without having to sit on your knees.
But beware! What happened at Air Mauritius has happened in EK many times already.
And His Highness Sheigh Ahmed Bin Saeed Al Maktoum knows about it personnaly and directly!
This figure is not factored and should be at least factored in the same way as the normal configuration figures are. (factor 1.67)
In non-normal configurations they should at least be doubled, so 2800m in this case; definitely if non normal flap configurations are concerned because of the difficult flare.
But the tables were not valid in this case since the brakes were affected!!!!!!
Also, on the take off, it is not advisable to change any configuration (gear and/or flaps) if performance does not require you to do so in case you have reason to suspect substantial damage. It takes a lot of force to make a 250 ton aircraft vibrate severely.Nobody wants a crippled tyre to explode in the wheel well.
Climb to a safe altitude and get to manoeuvring speed. Then take your time.
The real safety issue is not the passengers’ life; IT’S YOUR OWN life.
You are entitled to a good training and be well rested.
You are entitled to ask any question to the training department without having to sit on your knees.
But beware! What happened at Air Mauritius has happened in EK many times already.
And His Highness Sheigh Ahmed Bin Saeed Al Maktoum knows about it personnaly and directly!
Last edited by Streamline; 8th Feb 2006 at 17:27.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: desert boots
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Statement in Flight International:
The co-pilot was looking out to ensure the aircraft was tracking the runway centreline, says the report, adding that his expectation of lower performance from the A340-300 than the Airbus types he was more familiar with, the selection of flexible thrust rather than full power, and Johannesburg’s high airport elevation had led him to expect the take-off run would be unusually long, so he did not intervene in the sequence.
Now I dont know much about flying widebody passenger jets but my understanding is that they would have worked out the take off performance and anticipated V speeds prior to take off - so why would alarm bells not start ringing in their own minds when they exceeded these pre-determined parameters?
Also, can we take from the underlined statement that perhaps the FO did see what was happening but this was simply a case of poor CRM skills/part of the culture in UAE that prevents the FO from speaking up/confronting someone in authority in such circumstances. Pure speculation here of course so please dont be offended if I am way off the mark with my comments!
The co-pilot was looking out to ensure the aircraft was tracking the runway centreline, says the report, adding that his expectation of lower performance from the A340-300 than the Airbus types he was more familiar with, the selection of flexible thrust rather than full power, and Johannesburg’s high airport elevation had led him to expect the take-off run would be unusually long, so he did not intervene in the sequence.
Now I dont know much about flying widebody passenger jets but my understanding is that they would have worked out the take off performance and anticipated V speeds prior to take off - so why would alarm bells not start ringing in their own minds when they exceeded these pre-determined parameters?
Also, can we take from the underlined statement that perhaps the FO did see what was happening but this was simply a case of poor CRM skills/part of the culture in UAE that prevents the FO from speaking up/confronting someone in authority in such circumstances. Pure speculation here of course so please dont be offended if I am way off the mark with my comments!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United Arab Emirates
Age: 49
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
send another acft in JNB
Last year I flew 2 months in lease for Comair and I tell you the T/O roll can be very long!5558ft!
WHen I went back home,this was guess what... an A340 with the poor ROLLS ROYCE engine(version of a swiss company).DUe to perfo about 20 PAX were left at check-in gate!
Why not sending another kind of plane at such airports?!
WHen I went back home,this was guess what... an A340 with the poor ROLLS ROYCE engine(version of a swiss company).DUe to perfo about 20 PAX were left at check-in gate!
Why not sending another kind of plane at such airports?!
ibelieveicanfly Actually Monsieur, engines fitted to the 340-300 are CFM-56, fabrique en France... and the USA. Joint venture by GE and Snecma.
The Rolls fitted to the 340-500/600 are excellent.
Next
EGGW
The Rolls fitted to the 340-500/600 are excellent.
Next
EGGW
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: In my skin
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The report states that a no bleed Take Off was made in order to have more power. This is complete B******.
A no bleed in this case was made in order to be able to select a higher assumed temp. Lower EGT and safe money on maintenance.
I have the impression that the investigator(s) do not know what assumed temp really is.
Why use assumed at this field if you know there is a performance problem anyway?
This field is a restricted Airport, EK training dep does not understand the implications nor do they understand ETOPs or AWO and much more.
A no bleed in this case was made in order to be able to select a higher assumed temp. Lower EGT and safe money on maintenance.
I have the impression that the investigator(s) do not know what assumed temp really is.
Why use assumed at this field if you know there is a performance problem anyway?
This field is a restricted Airport, EK training dep does not understand the implications nor do they understand ETOPs or AWO and much more.
Last edited by Streamline; 11th Feb 2006 at 19:58.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Trinidad
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont think that the person who suggested this techinique intended that the maltese cross be kept at 10 degrees . I dont use it . But I vaguely remember it being mentioned as an initial elevator possition to initiate rotation,around the time I was trained,as a possible way to prevent a tail strike.
I guess the person who recomended it is going to be canned because the person who applied the techinique didnt listen properly and what is more didnt realise that it wasnt working out.Tell me.. how long does it take for a pilot to realise that the aircraft is not getting airborn.
It sounds like a huge lack of experience or confidence here...strange
VP TAA
I guess the person who recomended it is going to be canned because the person who applied the techinique didnt listen properly and what is more didnt realise that it wasnt working out.Tell me.. how long does it take for a pilot to realise that the aircraft is not getting airborn.
It sounds like a huge lack of experience or confidence here...strange
VP TAA
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United Arab Emirates
Age: 49
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To EGGW : Have you got something against french people? I agree they are sometimes annoying, like could be also people across the channel?
Here is not the topic and I have absolutely nothing against Rollsroyce but here is a fact that Swiss A340 which are fitted with these engines,by the way, have somtimes to climb in the hold when taking off from Geneva rw23 due to perfo. So I wonder why not sending in JNB another kind of plane if operationnaly feasible?
Here is not the topic and I have absolutely nothing against Rollsroyce but here is a fact that Swiss A340 which are fitted with these engines,by the way, have somtimes to climb in the hold when taking off from Geneva rw23 due to perfo. So I wonder why not sending in JNB another kind of plane if operationnaly feasible?
ibelieveicanfly
Here is a link to a photo of a Swiss 340-300, fitted pal with CFM-56 engines, made in France or US like it or not.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0999655/M/
Picture 2
Emirates 340-500 powered by Rolls Royce Trent 500's.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0996453/M/
Please get you facts straight before you bother replying.
Nothing against you Frenchies, just you getting your facts wrong!
EGGW
(Le Rostbif)
Here is a link to a photo of a Swiss 340-300, fitted pal with CFM-56 engines, made in France or US like it or not.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0999655/M/
Picture 2
Emirates 340-500 powered by Rolls Royce Trent 500's.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0996453/M/
Please get you facts straight before you bother replying.
Nothing against you Frenchies, just you getting your facts wrong!
EGGW
(Le Rostbif)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: lgw
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Streamline,
Why would you factor performance in flight ref data. That is only for despatch to meet the criteria of perf a probability formula.
Ref distances from NNC/qrh etc are based on actual distances and not factored, or you would never achieve a landing distance in a non normal situation.The PI distances are conditional only on entering the tables in the right config/conditions/problem. Follow the sequence in these charts and you will have a actual distance for the condition and techniques so followed.
Why would you factor performance in flight ref data. That is only for despatch to meet the criteria of perf a probability formula.
Ref distances from NNC/qrh etc are based on actual distances and not factored, or you would never achieve a landing distance in a non normal situation.The PI distances are conditional only on entering the tables in the right config/conditions/problem. Follow the sequence in these charts and you will have a actual distance for the condition and techniques so followed.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by boeingboeingbong
Also, can we take from the underlined statement that perhaps the FO did see what was happening but this was simply a case of poor CRM skills/part of the culture in UAE that prevents the FO from speaking up/confronting someone in authority in such circumstances. Pure speculation here of course so please dont be offended if I am way off the mark with my comments!
Perhaps it would help you and others to understand that only about 2% of the pilot work force here is actually local. The rest are expats mainly Brits (me included), Aussies, Canadians, Yanks and other Europeans (well about 60 other nationalities to be exact).
No such "culture"/CRM problems exist at EK! In fact the company takes great pride in the fact that soooooo many different nationalities fly together.
Indeed the 2 guys involved were from "Western" countries.
I have only one rule when I fly, and thats to land safely at the other end! If that means shouting at/ taking control from the captain before we pile into the ground then so beit, regardless of where he's from.
For the record, I flown with several different "locals" and other Arabs, and have enjoyed flying with them, they're generally good/able guys with good CRM. (of course there is the odd exception, but you'll find that anywhere!)
I hope this helps with your question about this airlines environment, which you clearly know nothing about!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dirty Sands
Age: 62
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unbelievable
To use (or recommend the use) of the Maltese cross for rotation implies an absolute ignorance of its purpose or function. Although it's superimposed on the attitude indicator, its indication is the flight control input on a fixed scale that bears no relation whatsoever to aircraft attitude. Every Airbus pilot knows this!
I find it hard to believe that an A340 crew does not know how to properly rotate the aircraft. And harder still, the fact that such a flawed technique was taught at a major airline. Or is there something more than meets the eye here?
I find it hard to believe that an A340 crew does not know how to properly rotate the aircraft. And harder still, the fact that such a flawed technique was taught at a major airline. Or is there something more than meets the eye here?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: In my skin
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bushbolox
Streamline,
Why would you factor performance in flight ref data. That is only for despatch to meet the criteria of perf a probability formula.
Ref distances from NNC/qrh etc are based on actual distances and not factored, or you would never achieve a landing distance in a non normal situation.The PI distances are conditional only on entering the tables in the right config/conditions/problem. Follow the sequence in these charts and you will have a actual distance for the condition and techniques so followed.
Why would you factor performance in flight ref data. That is only for despatch to meet the criteria of perf a probability formula.
Ref distances from NNC/qrh etc are based on actual distances and not factored, or you would never achieve a landing distance in a non normal situation.The PI distances are conditional only on entering the tables in the right config/conditions/problem. Follow the sequence in these charts and you will have a actual distance for the condition and techniques so followed.
Last edited by Streamline; 11th Feb 2006 at 20:49.
Look at the facts. Crew new to the variant, difficult airport, minimal training. The factors were lining up in a row prior up to this accident.
But I'm not suprised that Airbus found the crew at fault with their using an incorrect technique. Anything else would put their Cross Cockpit Qualification system (a big seller for Airbus') in jepoardy.
But I'm not suprised that Airbus found the crew at fault with their using an incorrect technique. Anything else would put their Cross Cockpit Qualification system (a big seller for Airbus') in jepoardy.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by FlightDetent
OK. The question to all (bearing in mind that the bus' "german cross" is not a flight instrument yet mixed fleet flying has its difficulties): how early on rotation do you look down to the screens?
FD
(the un-real)
FD
(the un-real)
mixed fleet flying - Airbus has the GERMAN cross ( I like that ) on every airbus, so there shouldn´t be a problem with that. But to be honest, I do not like flying 3 different Airbus at the same time.
how early on rotation do you look down to the screens?
Rotation on the big birds is done by reference to the PFD ( primary flight display ), the chance of a tailstrike is way too high, if done by visual reference. On rotation your eyes should be more in than out.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gulf playing Golf
Posts: 1,141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stremline
Back to the study room with you. You are mixing pre departure planning with inflight requirements. Forget about 1.67 in this case.
A million factors brought this incident about. Luckily the guyes are here to tell the story. On that day you might have done the same. I know I could! Pilots who are involved in incidents/accidents are not the worst pilots around. The swiss cheese was just lined up wrong that day.
Someone mentioned you were fired from EK. Care to elaborate?
Back to the study room with you. You are mixing pre departure planning with inflight requirements. Forget about 1.67 in this case.
A million factors brought this incident about. Luckily the guyes are here to tell the story. On that day you might have done the same. I know I could! Pilots who are involved in incidents/accidents are not the worst pilots around. The swiss cheese was just lined up wrong that day.
Someone mentioned you were fired from EK. Care to elaborate?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Waterworld
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What?? Streamline fired from EK. did he fail his perf refresher? I notice his profile says "SENIOR ailrine capt".OOOOOEEErRRR Maybe his yerkes dobson has flattened out on the way to being senior :-)
I concede that some companies recommend factoring a PI figure for prudence, but it is not a legal requirement and having landed on a 1600 metre rwy with a PI pf 1300metres on a wet day, actual stop was 800 metres, i have every faith that the 1400 metres these guys calclated was a valid stopping distance for the emrgency config and conditions.
By german cross do we mean maltese cross...just curious
I concede that some companies recommend factoring a PI figure for prudence, but it is not a legal requirement and having landed on a 1600 metre rwy with a PI pf 1300metres on a wet day, actual stop was 800 metres, i have every faith that the 1400 metres these guys calclated was a valid stopping distance for the emrgency config and conditions.
By german cross do we mean maltese cross...just curious
Last edited by williewalsh; 12th Feb 2006 at 10:49.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: lgw
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Streamline,
I asked a reasonable question and you accuse me of being a danger.
Landing distances taken from a QRH are not factored I agree, but do YOU understand the difference between despatch performance and performance in flight and its legal implication. Quite obviously you dont. The distance claculated in flight from your Qrh (or rather mine) will produce the actual LDR this is what you physically need. Factored LDR is a function of despatch and subject to the factoring you mentioned. To sum up YOU MAY NOT DESPATCH to a destination without factoring,amonst other considerations. YOU MAY USE the PI as a real time indication as to whether LDA is sufficent for the actual conditions or non normals you find yourself in. Conversely you can not use PI to determine LDR for despatch as its not factored only advisory.If you choose to factor it , it is still only advisory and a pointless exercise as it would preclude alot of potential options. (The decision is yours in flight).The PD section of VOL1 of your ops manual is for performance despatch (or your afm, or your perf dept). Hope this is clear.
A landing distance produced just last night on a Boeing LAptop Tool was identical to one careful taken from the PI. You Sir obviously have a misunderstanding of the topic and i would suggest you are the danger , that is if I was as petty as you. If you need more advice on the conditions surrounding despatch and PI I'll be happy to guide you......Try applying your theory to say a slippery runway with medium BA. A PI of say 2500 metres then so factored as you suggest would rather limit your options to runways of Shuttle proportions. Where necessary the PI have factoring notes as in the case above. Now I speak confidently about the manufacturer i Fly. If yours is different You may have a valid point and opinion but dont ever makean accusation as to my being a danger. That would make you an ignorant ******** and we wouldnt want that would we?
PS I operate into many limiting, cat c, wet, slippy contaminated runways where PI is a daily occurrance.I recently underwent a caa refresher on the topic. On behalf of my pax i would like to thank you for your concern but assure you we are safe. I shall pass your concerns on to my DFO who was sitting next to me and had such a discussion on this topic and the misunderstanding common amongst enthusiasts.
PPS Just in case :LDA is landing distance available, it includes 300metres of air distance and is from 50 feet over the threshold. Cant be too careful when such ignorance is manifest...have a nice day
I asked a reasonable question and you accuse me of being a danger.
Landing distances taken from a QRH are not factored I agree, but do YOU understand the difference between despatch performance and performance in flight and its legal implication. Quite obviously you dont. The distance claculated in flight from your Qrh (or rather mine) will produce the actual LDR this is what you physically need. Factored LDR is a function of despatch and subject to the factoring you mentioned. To sum up YOU MAY NOT DESPATCH to a destination without factoring,amonst other considerations. YOU MAY USE the PI as a real time indication as to whether LDA is sufficent for the actual conditions or non normals you find yourself in. Conversely you can not use PI to determine LDR for despatch as its not factored only advisory.If you choose to factor it , it is still only advisory and a pointless exercise as it would preclude alot of potential options. (The decision is yours in flight).The PD section of VOL1 of your ops manual is for performance despatch (or your afm, or your perf dept). Hope this is clear.
A landing distance produced just last night on a Boeing LAptop Tool was identical to one careful taken from the PI. You Sir obviously have a misunderstanding of the topic and i would suggest you are the danger , that is if I was as petty as you. If you need more advice on the conditions surrounding despatch and PI I'll be happy to guide you......Try applying your theory to say a slippery runway with medium BA. A PI of say 2500 metres then so factored as you suggest would rather limit your options to runways of Shuttle proportions. Where necessary the PI have factoring notes as in the case above. Now I speak confidently about the manufacturer i Fly. If yours is different You may have a valid point and opinion but dont ever makean accusation as to my being a danger. That would make you an ignorant ******** and we wouldnt want that would we?
PS I operate into many limiting, cat c, wet, slippy contaminated runways where PI is a daily occurrance.I recently underwent a caa refresher on the topic. On behalf of my pax i would like to thank you for your concern but assure you we are safe. I shall pass your concerns on to my DFO who was sitting next to me and had such a discussion on this topic and the misunderstanding common amongst enthusiasts.
PPS Just in case :LDA is landing distance available, it includes 300metres of air distance and is from 50 feet over the threshold. Cant be too careful when such ignorance is manifest...have a nice day