Pilot Pete

Erm, not when I studied Human Factors we weren't. Computers are better at monitoring than humans and we are better at doing than computers when something goes wrong, because the computer is dumb and the pilots aren't.........

The trouble with automatics is that it gets the pilots to do the monitoring (which we are not as good as as we cannot concentrate on vast different bits of info at a similar speed to a computer and stay concentrated for long periods of time). If you practice hand flying and get good at it you will notice deviations very quickly and correct, whereas with the automatics in you will not notice these deviations as quickly and hence why we have warning horns and bells etc to get our attention.

PP

warm beer

All but one of the TNT 733 are clockwork, the only EFIS is TNF which is a QC

Magplug

It's back to hand flying for me then. CAT 3 is clearly far too dangerous!

fireflybob

PilotPete is quite correct - NASA established many years ago that human beings are poor monitors of automation - remember when the B757 first arrived the joke was that the most common comment on the flightdeck was "What's it doing that for now!".

That does not mean we should not use automation but that we need to be aware of the drawbacks. Also automation can put you in a situation you would not be in if you didnt have it! E.g. Cat III and something disconnects at 50 ft - maybe then you have to sort it out manually. On the other hand if you didnt have Cat III etc you would have diverted to a Cat I airport.

This crew have all my sympathies - like the proverbial block of cheese with holes in it all lining up to create an incident, I suspect there will be many factors involved in this incident and the report will make interesting and educating reading for us all.

Good show to the crew getting it down at BHX in trying circumstances!

britannia66

What was the EMA actual at the time of the approach there?

Shaggy Sheep Driver

I've had it confirmed by one who knows that there were no issues with the ILS. To quote:

"There were no go-arounds, no offset approaches, all arrivals landed safely.

Plus, post accident checks gave the ILS a clean bill of health and it was put straight back into service with no problems afterwards.

The NOTAM taking it out of service is pure co-incidence. A brand new ILS is being installed which has been known about for a long time. Nothing wrong with the present one, just the airport is deciding to invest in more modern equipment."


SSD

handsfree

As to the reasons for the excursion on to the grass, the AIB will come up with the answers BUT why did they crew say nothing to ATC with regards to having knocked chunks out of the airfield and left it with scattered debris. I know they were under considerable pressure etc etc but to just inform EGNX ATC that they were overshooting and going to BHX with no thought of warning any poor innocent following them in is unforgiveable. I can't believe they thought nobody would notice.

FougaMagister

... how about maybe they had a little bit too much on their minds after having hit the deck at EGNX to warn ATC? EGNX to EGBB is about 10-12 minutes flying time, so when you are sorting an emergency and trying to find if your a/c does have some bits missing, you might be a bit too busy. Remember: "Aviate, Navigate, Communicate!" - PPL lesson no.1 or so.

Cheers

JW411

handsfree:

Since you obviously have inside information as to what exactly was said and what was not said between the 737 and ATC at EMA would you like to enlighten the rest of us?

Perhaps you even have the R/T transcript?

Avman

But handsfree, what makes you believe that nothing was said to ATC? Have you heard the tapes? Were you monitoring the frequency? I think that you may be guilty of jumping to uncorroborated conclusions here.

Edited: Beat me to it JW411

787FOCAL

Good show. Not many pilots can say they crashed the same airplane twice in one day..........and lived.

Sobelena

You have obviously never seen my landings

irmscher001

I think with the information provided above, we are all speculating as to why the a/c very almost crashed well off to the side of the runway at ema.

Not being qualified on the older variants of 737 I am unable to comment on what warnings or indications were available to the crew at the time as to the Localiser deviation, however here's a few thoughts of mine, and those that I have heard:

1) How about if both autopilots were not angaged for the approach? The aircraft would fly initially down the ILS as normal, the first warning sign available to the crew would be an amber single channel flag on FMA, and then also the lack of FLARE armed indication. Miss these warnings and the a/c will not complete an autoland. Try and do a go-around in this situation at minimums, press TOGA, you'd expect the A/c to pitch up and do a dual channel go-around, what happens? The autopilot disconnects, you continue to descend and eventually after a few microseconds realise it is your job to manually go-around. It is feasable for this to happen in some 73 variants due to the procedure for a go-around differing depending on if there is two autopilots engaged or not.

2) The Localiser indication would have almost certainly shown more than 1/3 dot deviation (regardless of the cause!), calling for a go-around pretty sharpish to avoid turning into a 140kt grass cutter! The decision time is minimal, not even seconds! Add a long shift, tired crew etc it's possible that it may have been missed. No commercial pilot would be able to tell you they maintain 100% alertness at all times, and have never been a little tired on the last approach of the day!


I think we're all going to learn a lot from this incident when all the facts become available, and it just reiterates the fact that you really do need to stay sharp ready to deal with the unexpected.

Well done to the crew who undoubtedly did a good job to get on the ground safely in BHX, faced with a second diversion with an aircraft that had such damage, there would have been incredible pressure on the crew that night diverting to BHX.

JHS

JW411 wrote :



I was simply responding to the statement that the crew "had better not be over 13 hours or there would be trouble". I have tried to point out that under Belgian FTLs, 13 hours is irrelevant.

But then, what's an hour between friends?[/quote]


One hour, in fact, is nothing.
But one extra hour, after a long night and probably up to 4 sectors, is sometime like torture !
So, please, have respect for the 'victims' of this ******* business !

JW411

JHS:

I assume that English is not your first language otherwise you would have realised that I was using ironic language and was in fact saying that one hour could indeed be very important.

NutLoose

This should answer a few queries, will leave it up a couple of days, took it on Friday.

http://mysite.orange.co.uk/il2skins/737_EGNX_copy.jpg

ExSimGuy

Four whites, Nutloose? You were a tad above the GS

NutLoose

who said we were landing still better than being below it and off to one side

ExSimGuy

Landing -

Seriously though, the black marks were where the gear and the engine presumably made contact? Hell of a way off the runway.

Nevertheless, a scary ride for the crew from then on, and well done for coming out of it safely.

Magplug

My My that's a way off the centreline.....

G/s capture but not Lczr ????????