Name the hero crew!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Central London
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Name the hero crew!
This is worth a credit for the flight deck and cabin crew members....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weather/St...994900,00.html
One passenger on a Lanzarote service to Leeds-Bradford, which finally landed at Liverpool after aborting attempts at Humberside and Manchester, said the plane "went everywhere, up, down and sideways, everyone was sick - we had been told it would be bad but it was far worse than anyone imagined".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weather/St...994900,00.html
One passenger on a Lanzarote service to Leeds-Bradford, which finally landed at Liverpool after aborting attempts at Humberside and Manchester, said the plane "went everywhere, up, down and sideways, everyone was sick - we had been told it would be bad but it was far worse than anyone imagined".
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
...but it was hardly a glowing endorsement of the Airline's ability to successfully (and meaningfully) decode a TAF. Applies to every operation that was "caught out" by the weather being exactly as forecast for that day.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two
What exactly is the meaning of your post, from what do you infer bad decision making by this or other airlines/crews?
This crew made an approach(es) that at some point were broken off and a go-around executed for a reason that we know not, but may or may not have been related to crosswind limits/unstable approaches/control difficulty etc. Having done that they went and tried elsewhere. One would expect that they did this with a reasonable chance of the weather being within limits and after consultation with their ops department. The fact is that they ended up safely at an airport with no injuries, and no emergency declared.
The weather was pretty extreme, and no damage resulted. It sounds to me as if professionals did their job professionally on a trying day.
What exactly is the meaning of your post, from what do you infer bad decision making by this or other airlines/crews?
This crew made an approach(es) that at some point were broken off and a go-around executed for a reason that we know not, but may or may not have been related to crosswind limits/unstable approaches/control difficulty etc. Having done that they went and tried elsewhere. One would expect that they did this with a reasonable chance of the weather being within limits and after consultation with their ops department. The fact is that they ended up safely at an airport with no injuries, and no emergency declared.
The weather was pretty extreme, and no damage resulted. It sounds to me as if professionals did their job professionally on a trying day.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Such negativity.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo Two
Could,'t agree more, what is the point of trying if you know it won't work, except asking for trouble or being able to show off in front of your favorite ops director. Attitude problem it seems.
Could,'t agree more, what is the point of trying if you know it won't work, except asking for trouble or being able to show off in front of your favorite ops director. Attitude problem it seems.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Switzerland
Age: 55
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Negativity" aside, i think Two has a point: i often remember with no fondness at all the 2000 storm "Lothar", at the height of which we fought our A320 down into ZRH with winds of 65kts, gusting 80-90. Having made a successful landing amidst countless others having to do go-arounds, we did not feel like "heroes" at all:
- at 7 am, we had commented on, but not reacted to, a significant weather chart showing a low-level (FL230 if i recall), 150kts jetstream traversing Europe like straight as an arrow from the UK towards the Adriatic. Should have rung alarm bells, didn't...
- Forecast for ZRH were westerly winds 35, gusting 45... we made a note to take on more fuel for the Düsseldorf-ZRH sector to cover delays resulting from usage of rwy 28 and high winds... correct, but not exactly rocket science..
- After landing in Düsseldorf, meteo update: still the same SWC, newer TAF for ZRH and GVA and MUC with wind upwards of 50 kts... now THIS is where we should have reacted and asked ourselves seriously if taking to the air made sense. We did not, and just took 2 hours of additional fuel.
- The storm started hitting the Switzerland area about the time we were taking off from DUS. we had to do about 50 minutes of VERY turbulent holding in the SHA area north of ZRH, badly scaring 130 passengers, many of whom got sick. Diversion made little sense: GVA was Closed, MUC closing and pretty much everything else as far as Marseille was equally bad or worse than ZRH. After a very lively approach to rwy 28, we were lucky enough not to catch any gusts between 300ft and GND, so we set her down, and proceed to an outside stand (D) in ZRH.
- It is noteworthy that 5 flight coming into ZRH during that time ultimately had to declare emergency, for various reasons, and had a FAR worse time of it than we did.
- By then, the wind on the ground had peaks at 110 kts (!!), cargo containers were blowing over the tarmac, all ground personnel wisely instructed to stay the hell off the tarmac. So our poor passengers spent another hour onboard a puke-smelling airplane, scared and unhappy.
I do not know if i would today have the wisdom and foresight to stay on the ground in Düsseldorf, when everybody else is still flying. The point is that our environment is exceedingly mission-oriented, because a weather-abort almost never happens. Ultimately, the decision and the responsibility to operate the flight, or NOT, rests with us, and it is certainly worth a thought, even with hindsight, to ask if staying on the ground would not have been better that day.
That apart, kudos for a job well done to the crew...
- at 7 am, we had commented on, but not reacted to, a significant weather chart showing a low-level (FL230 if i recall), 150kts jetstream traversing Europe like straight as an arrow from the UK towards the Adriatic. Should have rung alarm bells, didn't...
- Forecast for ZRH were westerly winds 35, gusting 45... we made a note to take on more fuel for the Düsseldorf-ZRH sector to cover delays resulting from usage of rwy 28 and high winds... correct, but not exactly rocket science..
- After landing in Düsseldorf, meteo update: still the same SWC, newer TAF for ZRH and GVA and MUC with wind upwards of 50 kts... now THIS is where we should have reacted and asked ourselves seriously if taking to the air made sense. We did not, and just took 2 hours of additional fuel.
- The storm started hitting the Switzerland area about the time we were taking off from DUS. we had to do about 50 minutes of VERY turbulent holding in the SHA area north of ZRH, badly scaring 130 passengers, many of whom got sick. Diversion made little sense: GVA was Closed, MUC closing and pretty much everything else as far as Marseille was equally bad or worse than ZRH. After a very lively approach to rwy 28, we were lucky enough not to catch any gusts between 300ft and GND, so we set her down, and proceed to an outside stand (D) in ZRH.
- It is noteworthy that 5 flight coming into ZRH during that time ultimately had to declare emergency, for various reasons, and had a FAR worse time of it than we did.
- By then, the wind on the ground had peaks at 110 kts (!!), cargo containers were blowing over the tarmac, all ground personnel wisely instructed to stay the hell off the tarmac. So our poor passengers spent another hour onboard a puke-smelling airplane, scared and unhappy.
I do not know if i would today have the wisdom and foresight to stay on the ground in Düsseldorf, when everybody else is still flying. The point is that our environment is exceedingly mission-oriented, because a weather-abort almost never happens. Ultimately, the decision and the responsibility to operate the flight, or NOT, rests with us, and it is certainly worth a thought, even with hindsight, to ask if staying on the ground would not have been better that day.
That apart, kudos for a job well done to the crew...
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
There's no hidden meaning or subtle message in my post, it was meant to imply that some of the go/no go decisions made that day throughout the operational chain were the classic building blocks of an AAIB report.
But we all knew the weather was going to be extreme, so whereas everyone made sure they had their "A" game on board, and everyone who flew that day suddenly remembered why being a professional pilot is paid the money it is, in some cases, there was no need to get into that situation in the first place. Remembering that the final decision to go is always the Captain's.
But what company had an Ops Director that looked at that TAF and said, "there's a high probability that we will end up with aircraft diverted all over the place, crews performing some exciting landings, and a chance of some bent metal, looks like we had better cancel some flights", not many, I'll wager. Whether it's shareholder pressure, overall profitability, or just today's requirement in society for instant gratification, very few people seem to consider that an airline schedule is not sacrosanct and sometimes, it has to go.
On one of the few occasions when I operated in some very, very marginal weather (my decision) my expectation at getting praise for my superb piloting skills was very short-lived, when I was suitably chastened by the equivalent of the Ops guy for my poor decision making in the first place.
When Joe Public gets on board he is not expecting excitement or thrills, he's expecting to get there. That was not the case for a lot of people on Thursday.
The weather was pretty extreme, and no damage resulted
But what company had an Ops Director that looked at that TAF and said, "there's a high probability that we will end up with aircraft diverted all over the place, crews performing some exciting landings, and a chance of some bent metal, looks like we had better cancel some flights", not many, I'll wager. Whether it's shareholder pressure, overall profitability, or just today's requirement in society for instant gratification, very few people seem to consider that an airline schedule is not sacrosanct and sometimes, it has to go.
On one of the few occasions when I operated in some very, very marginal weather (my decision) my expectation at getting praise for my superb piloting skills was very short-lived, when I was suitably chastened by the equivalent of the Ops guy for my poor decision making in the first place.
When Joe Public gets on board he is not expecting excitement or thrills, he's expecting to get there. That was not the case for a lot of people on Thursday.
Trouble is FlyMD if you had not gone you would have been in a black taxi to explain your decision of not going and taking a look see.
In this day & age the commercial considerations are taken to be above flight safety. Oops gosh who said that!
In this day & age the commercial considerations are taken to be above flight safety. Oops gosh who said that!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for somewhat butchering an old axiom. It is better to demonstrate superior judgement, than superior flying skills.
Of course, 20/20 hindsight is an unfair advantage.
Of course, 20/20 hindsight is an unfair advantage.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My father, an old and bold ex-Navy and Civilian pilot, once told me "If what you stand to gain is less than what you stand to loose, then don't do it". Wise words which I've kept in my thoughts ever since.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: edge of reality
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who do not actually fly airline work .... it's XTREMELY rare for a departure to not take place due to destination weather forecast ...Widespread Fog is usually the exception. Rarely much else at a well equiped a/p... extra fuel is often loaded, a delayed departure considered if conditions are likely to change but cancellation almost never... alternates are almost always the preferred option.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought this was related to the SAR incident in the Channel?
Full praise to the crews that got the crew of the striken ship all off safely.
Think they decribed it as the worst conditions they had experienced
Full praise to the crews that got the crew of the striken ship all off safely.
Think they decribed it as the worst conditions they had experienced
Guest
Posts: n/a
Let's not confuse wisdom with common sense.
Airline work - bah humbug.
A Burm in a seat, is a revenue Burm, No Burm in a seat is no revenue.
Just get the Burms on board and take off - go somewhere, alternate can be good, it does'nt matter where, cut the losses and scoop whats left of the revenue.
Baggage - well if we're go for the slot, leave it on the tar, they'll get it sometime, somewhere, somehow.
Been there - got the teeshirt pack - ever tried Skiing in a teeshirt and jockeys!
Ground the lot I say and up the trains.
Rather gutted - imagegear (ex jockey)
A Burm in a seat, is a revenue Burm, No Burm in a seat is no revenue.
Just get the Burms on board and take off - go somewhere, alternate can be good, it does'nt matter where, cut the losses and scoop whats left of the revenue.
Baggage - well if we're go for the slot, leave it on the tar, they'll get it sometime, somewhere, somehow.
Been there - got the teeshirt pack - ever tried Skiing in a teeshirt and jockeys!
Ground the lot I say and up the trains.
Rather gutted - imagegear (ex jockey)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was a bit fruity to say the least.70 kt g/s with 180(at 2000') on the clock did get my juices flowing a bit! Reckon we could have got out and walked the last bit,I think you're all heroes!
