Mahan air impounded at Birmingham
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots unprepared to actually fly the airplane..
>>Yes, if they have to, but why not make it smoother & easier to monitor? Autopilot in = much more brain capacity & easier for the NFP to monitor.<<
Any NFP who can't properly monitor the flight path while the autopilot is not engaged, needs to turn in his/her license at the nearest CAA office and take up another line of work.
Autopilot in (nearly all the time)= not much practise with basic flying skills, and unable to do the task that has been assigned.
Any NFP who can't properly monitor the flight path while the autopilot is not engaged, needs to turn in his/her license at the nearest CAA office and take up another line of work.
Autopilot in (nearly all the time)= not much practise with basic flying skills, and unable to do the task that has been assigned.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tea green International
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lack of Practice
It will only get worse, and more difficult to hand fly, or A/P with raw data ADF/VOR app.
I made a right pigs of one last week, ILS went tech, and no time to set up FMS I was forced to fly raw data... NO pax.......so no complaints, but my ego was battered a little bit...
Bumz
I made a right pigs of one last week, ILS went tech, and no time to set up FMS I was forced to fly raw data... NO pax.......so no complaints, but my ego was battered a little bit...
Bumz
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously I have to clarify the Mahan-Fleet
Yes, F- stands definately for France.
The A310s are leased via Airbus Asset Management and due to some Law&Leasing Construction they have been registered in France after being registered in Iran (EP-) after Mahan took delivery.
On the other side Mahan operates 2 A320s from the german Bluewings that meanwhile carry EP-Reg.
The good old A300s have all EP-Reg.
Furthermore, Mahan leased the following acfts:
1. A310 TC-SGB and SGC from Saga Air (Turkey)
2. A320 F-GZZZ from Eagle aviation (Which spontaniously also operated A310s on their behalf)
3. L1011 JY-SGI from SkyGate
4. MD80 LZ-LDZ from Bulgarian Air Charter.
More A310s via Airbus Asset Managemnt from Turkish Airlines are planned to replace the old 300s and in addition Mahan seems to be in Talks with some Lessors about MD80, older A320 or similar ones to replace the Tupolevs!
Hope this helps to clarify how mixed Mahan-Operations is
Yes, F- stands definately for France.
The A310s are leased via Airbus Asset Management and due to some Law&Leasing Construction they have been registered in France after being registered in Iran (EP-) after Mahan took delivery.
On the other side Mahan operates 2 A320s from the german Bluewings that meanwhile carry EP-Reg.
The good old A300s have all EP-Reg.
Furthermore, Mahan leased the following acfts:
1. A310 TC-SGB and SGC from Saga Air (Turkey)
2. A320 F-GZZZ from Eagle aviation (Which spontaniously also operated A310s on their behalf)
3. L1011 JY-SGI from SkyGate
4. MD80 LZ-LDZ from Bulgarian Air Charter.
More A310s via Airbus Asset Managemnt from Turkish Airlines are planned to replace the old 300s and in addition Mahan seems to be in Talks with some Lessors about MD80, older A320 or similar ones to replace the Tupolevs!
Hope this helps to clarify how mixed Mahan-Operations is
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: leamington Spa
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by INKJET
Next time your in Carrot county just tell them your ADF is u/s and request an SRA, that'll stop em drinking tea and reading Nut's & Zoo all afternoon
Viktor
Viktor
- we're more usually found chatting to you pilots who've popped in for a vist!!and as for SRA's - bring it on -we like a good challenge with the Westerley wind!!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
twopints,
Last time I did request an SRA at BHX (during period of NDB/DME approaches last summer), I had to terminate it as it was so far off track!!
Thought it might be useful for the new F/O who was with me and had never done one (having been ex military and only done PAR's). Sadly however the only lesson he could have learnt was not to request one - if I had let the exercise go on any longer we would not have been able to land from the approach
30W
Last time I did request an SRA at BHX (during period of NDB/DME approaches last summer), I had to terminate it as it was so far off track!!
Thought it might be useful for the new F/O who was with me and had never done one (having been ex military and only done PAR's). Sadly however the only lesson he could have learnt was not to request one - if I had let the exercise go on any longer we would not have been able to land from the approach
30W
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kenilworth
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birmingham Mail - Saturday
Two articles in the Birmingham Mail on Saturday.
Article 1
A PASSENGER jet heading into Birmingham International Airport was just 177 feet from the ground and 20 seconds from a major disaster.
The 210-seater A310 Airbus, operated by Iranian carrier Mahan Air, was so low it would have smashed through the Birmingham Wheel had it been in the city.
Last week experts said the jet was flying at 600ft when near disaster happened over the flightpath near Honiley in Warwickshire at midday on Thursday February 23.
But they failed to reveal that they meant 600ft above sea level - that's a spine chilling 177 feet above farmer John Conneally's house.
The Mail's investigation has also revealed that pilots have been approaching the airport without the aid of a crucial piece of 'guiding' equipment.
Had the pilot continued on his trajectory he would have ploughed through hundreds of homes in Balsall Common.
The true extent of the potentially catastrophic near-miss with the plane still six miles from the runway was revealed by a reliable source.
The jet would have cut a devastating path through homes in Balsall Common but for the intervention of air traffic controllers.
Mr Conneally, a farmer who lives under the flight path, said at the time:
"They say the plane was 600 feet, but it looked as if it was 200 feet. It was terrifying."
His house is 423 feet above sea level.
Article 2
THE airport has been operating on several occasions without a crucial piece of guiding equipment, the Mail can reveal today.
The major hub has operated without a "glide path" - a radio beam which provides a trajectory for pilots to follow - during the past year because of engineering work.
Instead some pilots have been operating a "dive and drive" technique, where the plane descends more quickly.
Flight experts posting on a website used by professional pilots said the dive and drive system -where the pilot drops to a certain level and drives onwards to the runway - was a recipe for disaster.
Dive and drive is dangerous in such a large plane, professional pilots say on a website. One said: "You simply do NOT fly an approach like that in a heavy jet." Another said it could be a "quick way to an accident".
The Department of Transport's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is currently conducting an investigation into the incident, where the plane was only saved from disaster after frantic work by air traffic controllers.
Today a spokesman for BIA confirmed the plane's height from the ground was only 177ft, and that the 600ft figure originally reported was its height above sea-level.
The claims from our source also indicate:
There was a communication breakdown between the pilot and air traffic controllers on the ground, struggling to communicate in English, the international language for pilots.
If the plane had not pulled up when it did, it was just 20 seconds from a fatal crash.
The jet was not lined up with the runway when making its approach over Honiley, near Kenilworth.
Today a spokesman for BIA said: "The aircraft was held at Birmingham whilst its flight data recorder was removed for analysis, but has now returned to Tehran.
"The precise trajectory of the aircraft together with interaction with traffic controllers and other relevant issues, is the subject of investigation.
"Indications are that the aircraft was around 600 feet altitude above sea level, though the CAA inquiry will no doubt verify the correct height.
"BIA does not have the precise terrain height at the lowest point of the aircraft - no doubt this will be determined as part of the inquiry.
"On a normal approach, we would expect an aircraft to descend at 300 feet per mile. Approach speed would be in the order of 120-150 mph."
The airport also confirmed the "scheduled outages" of the "Cat 3b Instrument Landing System", or glide path.
A spokesman said these were because of engineering work and all authorities had been notified.
"A Cat 3b Instrument Landing System permits a 'precision approach' to be flown by modern aircraft, with the latest navigational aids, in poor visibility.
"Weather conditions at BIA on the day in question did not require a cat 3b approach.
"Instances of low-flying are very rare in the UK. Whilst it can be an unsettling and frightening experience, it should be appreciated that a number of safeguards exist. For instance, all modern aircraft are fitted with ground proximity warning systems, which would alert pilots if they were flying dangerously low."
Article 1
A PASSENGER jet heading into Birmingham International Airport was just 177 feet from the ground and 20 seconds from a major disaster.
The 210-seater A310 Airbus, operated by Iranian carrier Mahan Air, was so low it would have smashed through the Birmingham Wheel had it been in the city.
Last week experts said the jet was flying at 600ft when near disaster happened over the flightpath near Honiley in Warwickshire at midday on Thursday February 23.
But they failed to reveal that they meant 600ft above sea level - that's a spine chilling 177 feet above farmer John Conneally's house.
The Mail's investigation has also revealed that pilots have been approaching the airport without the aid of a crucial piece of 'guiding' equipment.
Had the pilot continued on his trajectory he would have ploughed through hundreds of homes in Balsall Common.
The true extent of the potentially catastrophic near-miss with the plane still six miles from the runway was revealed by a reliable source.
The jet would have cut a devastating path through homes in Balsall Common but for the intervention of air traffic controllers.
Mr Conneally, a farmer who lives under the flight path, said at the time:
"They say the plane was 600 feet, but it looked as if it was 200 feet. It was terrifying."
His house is 423 feet above sea level.
Article 2
THE airport has been operating on several occasions without a crucial piece of guiding equipment, the Mail can reveal today.
The major hub has operated without a "glide path" - a radio beam which provides a trajectory for pilots to follow - during the past year because of engineering work.
Instead some pilots have been operating a "dive and drive" technique, where the plane descends more quickly.
Flight experts posting on a website used by professional pilots said the dive and drive system -where the pilot drops to a certain level and drives onwards to the runway - was a recipe for disaster.
Dive and drive is dangerous in such a large plane, professional pilots say on a website. One said: "You simply do NOT fly an approach like that in a heavy jet." Another said it could be a "quick way to an accident".
The Department of Transport's Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) is currently conducting an investigation into the incident, where the plane was only saved from disaster after frantic work by air traffic controllers.
Today a spokesman for BIA confirmed the plane's height from the ground was only 177ft, and that the 600ft figure originally reported was its height above sea-level.
The claims from our source also indicate:
There was a communication breakdown between the pilot and air traffic controllers on the ground, struggling to communicate in English, the international language for pilots.
If the plane had not pulled up when it did, it was just 20 seconds from a fatal crash.
The jet was not lined up with the runway when making its approach over Honiley, near Kenilworth.
Today a spokesman for BIA said: "The aircraft was held at Birmingham whilst its flight data recorder was removed for analysis, but has now returned to Tehran.
"The precise trajectory of the aircraft together with interaction with traffic controllers and other relevant issues, is the subject of investigation.
"Indications are that the aircraft was around 600 feet altitude above sea level, though the CAA inquiry will no doubt verify the correct height.
"BIA does not have the precise terrain height at the lowest point of the aircraft - no doubt this will be determined as part of the inquiry.
"On a normal approach, we would expect an aircraft to descend at 300 feet per mile. Approach speed would be in the order of 120-150 mph."
The airport also confirmed the "scheduled outages" of the "Cat 3b Instrument Landing System", or glide path.
A spokesman said these were because of engineering work and all authorities had been notified.
"A Cat 3b Instrument Landing System permits a 'precision approach' to be flown by modern aircraft, with the latest navigational aids, in poor visibility.
"Weather conditions at BIA on the day in question did not require a cat 3b approach.
"Instances of low-flying are very rare in the UK. Whilst it can be an unsettling and frightening experience, it should be appreciated that a number of safeguards exist. For instance, all modern aircraft are fitted with ground proximity warning systems, which would alert pilots if they were flying dangerously low."
Just to clear up a few things. The GP at BHX has been out for what seems like years! (about 1 to be precise). They have been utilising the LOC/DME procedure onto 33. The FAF(4DME) alt is 1680ft and the MDA is 740 (although we add 50ft to this for a constant decent approach). If the aircraft in question was at 300ft over HON, then what they were doing there is beyond me as it bears no relation to any of the BHX approaches. 300ft is well below MDA, and HON is six miles out. I hear the weather was good so they should have been vissual with the airfield and there are PAPIs at 3deg anyway.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: leamington Spa
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 30W
twopints,
Last time I did request an SRA at BHX (during period of NDB/DME approaches last summer), I had to terminate it as it was so far off track!!
30W
Last time I did request an SRA at BHX (during period of NDB/DME approaches last summer), I had to terminate it as it was so far off track!!
30W
I hope you'll not be put off from asking for an SRA for crew training in the future, we all need the practice for that one day when SRA's have to be done as no other approach facilities available or in an emergency situation.
I will pass your comments on to our training manager though and see if we can build a few more in to the system. I'd appreciate any other pilots thoughts on SRA's at brum - susscessful or otherwise!!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 18A
Age: 38
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ithought this was a bgi fuss when i heard it was 600ft.but i didnt realise that meant it was 600ft above sea level (nobody mentioned this before)
How on earth do trained professional pilots manage to do something like this,regardless of what equipment is or isnt available.surely they should have the capability to land an aircraft correctly when instruments arent working correctly?
two pints check your pms
How on earth do trained professional pilots manage to do something like this,regardless of what equipment is or isnt available.surely they should have the capability to land an aircraft correctly when instruments arent working correctly?
two pints check your pms
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: U.K.
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes and landing QNH with 33 elev at 325' they sure weren't 600' agl. However, I guess their radar return would have been seen at 600' when the ATCO fortunately gave what ever instruction to climb.
You always were on the ball up in that Twr.....well once you got the camera looking at the 33 Thr and you could see what had chosen to position & hold, but that one was a long time back
You always were on the ball up in that Twr.....well once you got the camera looking at the 33 Thr and you could see what had chosen to position & hold, but that one was a long time back
"ithought this was a bgi fuss when i heard it was 600ft.but i didnt realise that meant it was 600ft above sea level (nobody mentioned this before)
I rather thought I had - on Feb 23rd:
"600 ft in an A310 over Honiley must have looked....interesting. Hope that was height, not altitude!"
I rather thought I had - on Feb 23rd:
"600 ft in an A310 over Honiley must have looked....interesting. Hope that was height, not altitude!"
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
>>I'm pretty sure that this happened on a day when the QNH was around 985 mb. The difference in height between 1013 and 985 is around 1000ft - need I say more?
This is a well known gotcha with the low transition level (and frequent low QNH's) in the UK. In most of the world TL's are much higher, you can still mess it up but you have a lot better chance of catching it before terrain avoidance becomes a factor. Departures are no better with having to twist in QNE just as you get an altitude capture and a climb clearance with a new heading on the many SID's with a low altitude restriction.
The quaint old QFE approach procedures were finally abandoned after so many crashes, perhaps someday the transition layer will be raised to a less busy, higher level in the UK.
This is a well known gotcha with the low transition level (and frequent low QNH's) in the UK. In most of the world TL's are much higher, you can still mess it up but you have a lot better chance of catching it before terrain avoidance becomes a factor. Departures are no better with having to twist in QNE just as you get an altitude capture and a climb clearance with a new heading on the many SID's with a low altitude restriction.
The quaint old QFE approach procedures were finally abandoned after so many crashes, perhaps someday the transition layer will be raised to a less busy, higher level in the UK.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why we have persisted with low Transition Altitudes in England is quite beyond me. The TA should be set countrywide to 1000' above the highest safety altiude in the land.... and left there.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Transition height/Levels
Well over four years ago a CAA level-bust project, "On the Level", among it's many conclusions, recommended that the TA in the UK should be a common 6000ft. The recommendation suggested that the common altitude should be even higher, like the USA, but at least 6000ft would be a good starter at taking the knob twiddling further away from the gear up, flap up sequence, power back, acceleration activity on a take off. (These recommendations were based on what all you practising pilots felt, not by a group of people who were living in the past)
It was understood that the project recommendation had been accepted along with suggestions from a similar on-going NATS sponsored project. Wake me up when the CAA decide to take some ACTION or does there have to be an accident! I must say that the attitude in the corridors of power seems to be "Lets talk about it for five years via dozens of meetings and maybe it will go away!! It's all far to difficult and in any case there's no money"!!!
It was understood that the project recommendation had been accepted along with suggestions from a similar on-going NATS sponsored project. Wake me up when the CAA decide to take some ACTION or does there have to be an accident! I must say that the attitude in the corridors of power seems to be "Lets talk about it for five years via dozens of meetings and maybe it will go away!! It's all far to difficult and in any case there's no money"!!!