View Poll Results: Was the pilot of this display acting dangerously?
I AM a professional pilot and I believe YES
1,571
46.22%
I AM a professional pilot and I believe NO
360
10.59%
I AM NOT a professional pilot and I believe YES
1,024
30.13%
I Am NOT a professional pilot and I believe NO
311
9.15%
I have no opinion
133
3.91%
Voters: 3399. This poll is closed
Video footage of TAP A310 in extreme low flying turn at airshow
747 Lax Lhr
Janspeed,
I f you read the CAA report on this incident the BA crew were deemed to have carried out a safe operation. A B744 on three engines loses no systems, and is still Cat111C for landing. Flys a bit lower and slower, and as long as route has no implications if another engine shut down ,then no problem. The only reason the a/c diverted to Manchester was finger trouble on the crews part with fuel crossfeeding, leading them to believe they had unusable fuel. They in fact had ample fuel for Lhr.
A B744 on three engines has more redundancy than a fully serviceable Twin!!
I f you read the CAA report on this incident the BA crew were deemed to have carried out a safe operation. A B744 on three engines loses no systems, and is still Cat111C for landing. Flys a bit lower and slower, and as long as route has no implications if another engine shut down ,then no problem. The only reason the a/c diverted to Manchester was finger trouble on the crews part with fuel crossfeeding, leading them to believe they had unusable fuel. They in fact had ample fuel for Lhr.
A B744 on three engines has more redundancy than a fully serviceable Twin!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Would that be the grassy knoll just below the wingtip in the videos? 
I'm pretty sure this thread has run out of steam until/if the results of any internal TAP investigation are published and/or someone can enlighten us as to the minimums allocated by INAC for the day in question but can I just make a request for anyone thinking of posting a video?
FFS please, please, please make sure it's not one of those from the preceding pages that we've seen half a dozen times (each) already. If you can't be arsed to read the whole thread before posting "OMG!! OMG!! LOOK AT THIS!!!
" then do us all a favour and don't bother.
I'm pretty sure this thread has run out of steam until/if the results of any internal TAP investigation are published and/or someone can enlighten us as to the minimums allocated by INAC for the day in question but can I just make a request for anyone thinking of posting a video?
FFS please, please, please make sure it's not one of those from the preceding pages that we've seen half a dozen times (each) already. If you can't be arsed to read the whole thread before posting "OMG!! OMG!! LOOK AT THIS!!!
" then do us all a favour and don't bother.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just my eyes, or do the various videos seem to show that the A310 rolls off some of his initial angle of bank during the turn, whilst maintaining (or even increasing) the pitch attitude?
This would suggest to me that internally they thought they'd overcooked the initial roll input.
As a military pilot and QFI, I've always taught and been taught that roll off the bank and keep the pitch was the most efficient and quickest way to avoid the ground. Just out of interest, I've a fair amount of time flying large aircraft (about 310 size) at low level and unless I was going over a big (1000') ridge, I'd always pitch before roll. I'd never initiate a turn with less than 100' on the rad alt and my ball park figure was 250' was the min for 45 degrees. Not saying this was right or wrong, but just some figures for those who would crucify from their MS FlightSim experience!
Is this a dangerous manoevre? Probably yes, as I suspect they overcooked it.
Did they get it wrong? Yes, IMHO.
Are the crew/airline/country reckless and negligent (although I appreciate they've already been hung by this 'professional' forum)? It's a bit difficult to tell for definite isn't it?
There but for the grace of God...
This would suggest to me that internally they thought they'd overcooked the initial roll input.
As a military pilot and QFI, I've always taught and been taught that roll off the bank and keep the pitch was the most efficient and quickest way to avoid the ground. Just out of interest, I've a fair amount of time flying large aircraft (about 310 size) at low level and unless I was going over a big (1000') ridge, I'd always pitch before roll. I'd never initiate a turn with less than 100' on the rad alt and my ball park figure was 250' was the min for 45 degrees. Not saying this was right or wrong, but just some figures for those who would crucify from their MS FlightSim experience!
Is this a dangerous manoevre? Probably yes, as I suspect they overcooked it.
Did they get it wrong? Yes, IMHO.
Are the crew/airline/country reckless and negligent (although I appreciate they've already been hung by this 'professional' forum)? It's a bit difficult to tell for definite isn't it?
There but for the grace of God...
Last edited by rudekid; 1st Oct 2007 at 12:24. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Norfolk U.K.
Age: 68
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For my first post I'm not sure if this thread is the best place to start, but here goes. I've always enjoyed seeing large aircraft doing things they normally don't - it is more interesting than fast jets traveling fast! However when said aircraft is this low then it's time to call a halt. I am quite sure that just an extra 100ft of altitude would have meant this thread never reached 348 posts, regardless of how the PIC handled the turn (or not). I believe the laws of aerodynamics apply to airliners in much the same way as to my 365kg microlight: stalling speed increases in a turn. As the A310 had gear and a fair amount of flap down in the pictures and video, I assume it wouldn't (couldn't?) have been flying particularly quickly, and a sudden wind gust (as noted by many posters observing the clouds) could have easily reduced the wing tip clearance to zero. For this reason alone the turning pass was far more risky than any of the low level "clean & fast" passes referred to. I also agree with the comments regarding the proximity to parked aircraft and the effects of wake vortices, something I have to constantly watch for. Before I get shot down in flames I'm not perfect, and like most pilots have got it wrong on occasion, but doing something like this in full view of thousands of camera wielding spectators is pretty dumb.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Where the Money Takes Me
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Guest Speaker due to appear at next week's UK Aviation Club lunch is none other than Mr. Fernando Pinto, TAP's CEO.
Now, shall I ask a question or two in front of a very distinguished audience??
Now, shall I ask a question or two in front of a very distinguished audience??
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portugal
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Guest Speaker due to appear at next week's UK Aviation Club lunch is none other than Mr. Fernando Pinto, TAP's CEO.
Now, shall I ask a question or two in front of a very distinguished audience??
Now, shall I ask a question or two in front of a very distinguished audience??
Good luck
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portugal
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Calculating from the FDR & all available video images, what was closest distance the port wing tip came to the ground?"
"What was the minimum authorised height/speed?"
(I doubt it was the 3m - 5m as shown by the port wing tip)
"What INAC approval, if any, was given to this event - & if so, what were the approved criteria for display?"
"What actions did you instigate when the publicity of the fly-past was brought to your attention?"
"If the pre-briefed/authorised manoeuvres/heights were breached, what action has been taken against the crew?"
These sample questions are a very good way to show how the "professionals" of this forum know about aviation in general. Do you even know what legislation applies to this situation?
Only the perverted minds of evil keypunchers can continue to pounder the display. It was too good for you to understand, get over it already.
People should stay with subjects they can handle, like computers and the Internet. Google does not give you all the answers, maybe a path, from time to time.
Only the perverted minds of evil keypunchers can continue to pounder the display. It was too good for you to understand, get over it already.
People should stay with subjects they can handle, like computers and the Internet. Google does not give you all the answers, maybe a path, from time to time.
Answering Mike Jenvey's reasonable questions with another question hardly moves the debate forward.
The similarities at least in terms of potential ground contact, due to overestimating the capabilities of your aircraft remind me strongly of the tragic A320 crash at Habsheim. Senior pilots wanting to give an impressive airshow display, they almost went out with the kind of bang they were not intending! Fortunately they got away with it.
Fair enough to defend your colleagues or maybe even yourself, I personally am concerned by what the replies from apparent TAP insiders suggest about company culture and attitudes towards safety.
It can be difficult to spot the difference between sixteen year old spotters and real pilots. But whoever is posting some of this macho stuff is doing TAP no favours.
The similarities at least in terms of potential ground contact, due to overestimating the capabilities of your aircraft remind me strongly of the tragic A320 crash at Habsheim. Senior pilots wanting to give an impressive airshow display, they almost went out with the kind of bang they were not intending! Fortunately they got away with it.
Fair enough to defend your colleagues or maybe even yourself, I personally am concerned by what the replies from apparent TAP insiders suggest about company culture and attitudes towards safety.
It can be difficult to spot the difference between sixteen year old spotters and real pilots. But whoever is posting some of this macho stuff is doing TAP no favours.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portugal
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike Jenvey wrote:
Yes, you're right. Don't really know where you're pointing at, since, if you also read my previous posts, you could see that I strongly disaprove 2 of the maneuvers performed that day.
I also know Fernando Pinto, and additionally, I know the proper places to take care of things.
lederhosen wrote:
The problem with this forums is that, if someone comes here to the last pages without reading from the begining, may grab a totally wrong idea based on this inconsequent statements.
I'm not TAP, I don't aprove the display, I voted "YES, dangerous", and I don't see many insiders here. But I'm a professional, unlike many here.
We even see a swiss guy here saying "take another plane". Did it strike you that it's very easy to interpret a swiss motivation against TAP?
Bom dia, 3Ten. I guess that with your profile, you probably (certainly?) know/knew the pilots concerned.......? 
I also know Fernando Pinto, and additionally, I know the proper places to take care of things.
lederhosen wrote:
Fair enough to defend your colleagues or maybe even yourself, I personally am concerned by what the replies from apparent TAP insiders suggest about company culture and attitudes towards safety.
I'm not TAP, I don't aprove the display, I voted "YES, dangerous", and I don't see many insiders here. But I'm a professional, unlike many here.
We even see a swiss guy here saying "take another plane". Did it strike you that it's very easy to interpret a swiss motivation against TAP?
3ten you imply that many people may not have read previous posts, which suggests it is you making assumptions. The vast majority of ppruners, including by your own admission yourself, think this was poor flying.
I am having trouble understanding what point you are trying to make. Previous posts have named the pilots and their roles at TAP. You say you know them and Mr Pinto.
You go on to say that the trouble with Pprune is that people may get the wrong idea ībased on this inconsequent statementsī(sic). This implies that my points were not logical and indeed incorrect.
I can't believe you have not seen the video of Capt. Asseline's low pass and crash at the Habsheim airshow on the 26 June 1988. I do not think further commentary on that sad episode is necessary.
If our chief pilot did something like this which reflected badly on the company he would be in pretty deep water. I fail to see a lack of logic in pointing out that this episode reflects badly on TAP.
We can all resort to name calling. Let us just stick to the facts.
However as an airline captain and long time pprune lurker I can reveal that it was JFA's timeless prose which finally drove me to contribute an opinion. "Perverted minds of evil keypunchers can continue to pounder the display" really is a classic even by pprune standards.
I am having trouble understanding what point you are trying to make. Previous posts have named the pilots and their roles at TAP. You say you know them and Mr Pinto.
You go on to say that the trouble with Pprune is that people may get the wrong idea ībased on this inconsequent statementsī(sic). This implies that my points were not logical and indeed incorrect.
I can't believe you have not seen the video of Capt. Asseline's low pass and crash at the Habsheim airshow on the 26 June 1988. I do not think further commentary on that sad episode is necessary.
If our chief pilot did something like this which reflected badly on the company he would be in pretty deep water. I fail to see a lack of logic in pointing out that this episode reflects badly on TAP.
We can all resort to name calling. Let us just stick to the facts.
However as an airline captain and long time pprune lurker I can reveal that it was JFA's timeless prose which finally drove me to contribute an opinion. "Perverted minds of evil keypunchers can continue to pounder the display" really is a classic even by pprune standards.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portugal
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lederhosen, we seem to agree in general terms. My point is mainly to refresh information, and leave clearly stated that I don't aprove what happened, and I'm not an insider. This facts have been challanged in the last posts.
No organization is exempted of having one of it's members performing against it's culture. Lack of safety is not a recurrent issue with TAP or portuguese airlines, but this topic has become a insulting ground. We even have here considerations about Latin culture.
Gi'me a break
No organization is exempted of having one of it's members performing against it's culture. Lack of safety is not a recurrent issue with TAP or portuguese airlines, but this topic has become a insulting ground. We even have here considerations about Latin culture.
Gi'me a break
I am glad we seem to be in agreement, at least mostly, and am happy to give your intentions the benefit of the doubt, if that is what you meant by "Gi'me a break".
By the way just for the sake of clarity, "company culture" is a general term used to describe attitudes and behaviours within an organisation and has no automatic connotations of racial stereotyping. I am pretty sure you were not suggesting my post was denigrating Latin culture, but just wanted to be sure any non english native speakers were not confused.
What I think is important to understand is that when respected senior pilots provide a poor example there is a danger that others may follow. TAP in my opinion has always had an excellent reputation for safety and I would suggest a robust statement by the company, if it has not already done so, could only help matters.
By the way just for the sake of clarity, "company culture" is a general term used to describe attitudes and behaviours within an organisation and has no automatic connotations of racial stereotyping. I am pretty sure you were not suggesting my post was denigrating Latin culture, but just wanted to be sure any non english native speakers were not confused.
What I think is important to understand is that when respected senior pilots provide a poor example there is a danger that others may follow. TAP in my opinion has always had an excellent reputation for safety and I would suggest a robust statement by the company, if it has not already done so, could only help matters.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portugal
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I think is important to understand is that when respected senior pilots provide a poor example there is a danger that others may follow. TAP in my opinion has always had an excellent reputation for safety and I would suggest a robust statement by the company, if it has not already done so, could only help matters.
Latin culture issues had nothing to do with your post, it was a previous one, and "Gi'me a break" is really oriented to uncivillized posts, not yours.
