Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Pilots blamed INITIALLY in 2006 British Airways crunching of lights at MIA

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Pilots blamed INITIALLY in 2006 British Airways crunching of lights at MIA

Old 1st Oct 2008, 23:33
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Poor 'ole Big Airways, they seem to have rather bad luck in North America.
Engine failure on takeoff, then continuing all the way to LHR...and not able.
Taxying over frangible light bits...gosh, what a shame.
Perhaps the bearded one's airline can take over some of the routes, as they seem to do a slightly better job...in more ways than one.
411A is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2008, 23:39
  #22 (permalink)  
Couldonlyaffordafiver
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As heard in many a BA briefing room:

Charts, charts, charts, charts, charts, charts.......
To be fair, it's got a lot better recently.
Human Factor is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 05:55
  #23 (permalink)  

the lunatic fringe
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@411A

/yawn
L337 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 06:28
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Down south, USA.
Posts: 1,595
Received 9 Likes on 1 Post
Airbubba:

Yep, those sophisticated FAA notams can be of very limited help in the winter, with lights inop or working and unknown timing of plowing runways, taxiways (keeping lights cleared off?). And Dispatch is allowed to find more ways to use creative wx forecasting to sometimes avoid alternate fuel, if allowed by us.

This winter, if we anticipate landing more than about 15 minutes after tower closes with falling light snow etc, we will have a braking action report from a jet with MSP or ORD Center etc, and Dispatch will hear about this need before we begin the preflight.
Outsourcing rampers has led to interesting late departures and unknown conditions during arrivals.

Oh well, back to SKS and MN 44 discussions.
Commie-built rifles (no, not Kalifornia), what cheap, dependable fun! Keep this a secret...
It's been a wonderful change from reading about this industry, and the boring aloofness of our ever-present resident expert in all matters aviation...
Ignition Override is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 07:35
  #25 (permalink)  

A Runyonesque Character
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
NTSB have withdrawn the report from their website.
Oops
The SSK is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 09:32
  #26 (permalink)  
Junior trash
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If the lights were that at fault, at one of the worlds busiest airports - how come similar incidients are well, nigh on zero?
Because 30 is a fairly unusual landing runway and BA is one of the few (only?) 747 operator into MIA that would wish to vacate towards the end of 30 due its (now former) terminal location.
Hotel Mode is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 10:00
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
411A,

Once again your ignorance of the facts does your posting no good whatsoever.

Engine failure on takeoff, then continuing all the way to LHR...and not able.
No, they did not continue to LHR; they continued towards it. There is a BIG difference. You like to make it sound as if you know all the details and factors which the crew would have taken into account but, evidently, you do not. The CAA regulations, under which BA operate, permit the continuation of the flight in a 4-engine aircraft if certain conditions have been fulfilled. The crew complied with those conditions and continued their flight. Doubtless you will have some comment on their decision but save yourself the typing because you have absolutely no credence in these pages and no-one wants to hear your unsupported and factless suppositions. You were not there, you do not fly for BA, you do not fly under CAA regulations and have no grounds on which your base your disparaging remarks apart from what you would have done

Perhaps the bearded one's airline can take over some of the routes, as they seem to do a slightly better job...in more ways than one
Tw*t, VS already fly to MIA. You really need to learn more of what goes on in the real world, rather than that little tin-pot museum flight for whom you operate.
Pontius is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 12:31
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No, they did not continue to LHR; they continued towards it.
Yes, with an engine failure right after departure, and the destination some eleven hours distant.
Flawed mental process on the part of the Commander, no more, no less.
IF Big Airways should try this stunt again, I suspect that the USDOT will have the FAA suspend BA's 14CFR129 authority...and yes, they have to have same to continue scheduled services to America, on a regular basis.

As for the incident at MIA, flawed operational decision, no more, no less...unless we consider the possibility that these frangible lights were just waiting for Big Airways, and rushed to the scene to partake of the situation...
411A is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 12:31
  #29 (permalink)  

the lunatic fringe
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think 411A is going senile. He only visits this forum to post disparaging remarks about the British, and BA in particular.

His posts are becoming more childish with the passage of time.
L337 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 12:38
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
IF Big Airways should try this stunt again, I suspect that the USDOT will have the FAA suspend BA's 14CFR129 authority...and yes, they have to have same to continue scheduled services to America, on a regular basis.
Wonder what happened to that big fine the FAA were talking about giving BA? It all went rather quiet when the FAA realised the stupidity of their own situation.

As for the incident at MIA, flawed operational decision, no more, no less...unless we consider the possibility that these frangible lights were just waiting for Big Airways, and rushed to the scene to partake of the situation
Just waiting for the other American carriers who've also hit them too no doubt.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 13:48
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
NTSB have withdrawn the report from their website.
Oops
The links I posted earlier still work for me, perhaps they rely on a cookie dropped on my computer or they persist in my cache (whatever that means ).
Airbubba is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 14:32
  #32 (permalink)  

A Runyonesque Character
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Airbubba: The links I posted earlier still work for me, perhaps they rely on a cookie dropped on my computer or they persist in my cache (whatever that means ).
When I open that second link, I don't see the 'probable cause' that you mention, merely a summary version of the facts.
The SSK is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 15:51
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK.
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It was also Cathay policy, in the event of a single engine failure on a four, to continue towards destination.
There is plenty of time to continue climb, stabilise the situation, take all possibilities into account - range, further failure, high ground, O2, en route alternates, discuss with ops: availability of onward aircraft, maintenance, least disruption to pax, port with highest allowances. If good: continue, if not: return. You're only going to dump the fuel anyway.
After the fuss about BA going into Manch I don't know what policy in BA & CX is now.
Basil is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 16:08
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
When I open that second link, I don't see the 'probable cause' that you mention, merely a summary version of the facts.
You're absolutely right, the paragraph about the 'probable cause' has indeed disappeared. Hmmm...
Airbubba is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2008, 17:28
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Report blaming British Airways pilots for runway light damage at Miami International Airport released prematurely, NTSB says -- South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
Shore Guy is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2008, 00:56
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, with an engine failure right after departure, and the destination some eleven hours distant.
Flawed mental process on the part of the Commander, no more, no less.
Once again, the self-proclaimed expert on all things aviation comes out with a sweeping statement about which he knows so little. 411A, you may consider it 'flawed' to continue but you're used to your clapped out, junk yard specials in the aviation bowels of the world. I will say this v..e...r...y slowly so you can understand. An engine failure in a 744 is not a big deal. If the terrain (in case another engine fails), alternates and fuel allow it, the Company policy, the CAA policy and, indeed, the preferred policy of anyone who matters on the subject of BA's 744s is to continue. The destination will, obviously, be taken into account and I know of no-one who would continue to LOS or MEX but going towards LHR, knowing you have so many places to go if something else happens is not 'flawed' thinking. It may well represent different thinking to such a self-opinionated, has-been (in his own head) as you but one day you'll, maybe, realise that it's not the rest of the world that's wrong.

And, since you do love your clear cut statements. I'm right and you're wrong. Simple as, so get over it.
Pontius is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2008, 01:47
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,789
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
Having operated into many large US airports (including MIA), I've often thought that it would be nice if those airports could operate to some sort of worldwide standard where pilots from every country could understand the lighting and markings without ambiguity and risking their aircraft.

It's not just MIA, JFK, SFO, EWR, and BOS all have some sort of issues which are a challenge to Threat and Error Management. (TEM, the new buzzword which is replacing CRM!) Having extensive NOTAMS and briefings is all good and well, but when faced with the problem in poor vis/rain, when you're fatigued and ATC are telling you to get off the runway 'NOW", the threats are mounting up and mistakes are more likely to be made.




PS: Those worldwide standards exist of course. The Chinese can manage it - why can't the US?
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2008, 04:25
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Those worldwide standards exist of course. The Chinese can manage it - why can't the US?
Two reasons.

1) China has been involved in civil aviation on a large international scale for only a relatively short time.

2) The USA, on the other hand, has had far more experience, on a huge scale for a very long time, so we can do what we want.

Others have a choice, of course.
Don't like it, don't fly here.

Quite simple, really.

...but when faced with the problem in poor vis/rain, when you're fatigued and ATC are telling you to get off the runway 'NOW"....
An interesting observation.
One must ask, however...just whom is flying the airplane, you or ATC?
411A is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2008, 06:44
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Umm...

The pilot in command is the final authority and takes the ultimate responsibility but the outcome is determined by many things. You have the crew, the aircraft, ATC, the environment and lots of other things too.

Unless you think (or in some cases here, know) you are Superman then you have to acknowledge that you as PIC can be caught out by something such as lighting set up differently to what you are used to. It's easy to be wise after the fact but when events are unfolding it can be a different story. Afterwards, of course, you have to take the blame!

I used to operate at Lagos, where we could enjoy all sorts of weird features, missing signs, markings and lights, a taxiway that seemed to allow a direct crossing of the active but had no exit on the other side, another exit that saw you turning the wrong way first, humps, dips and big holes, radio blind spots for no obvious reason... You would be listening to some airline crew new to the place getting themselves tied in knots trying to figure out what to do next when there was nothing wrong with their airmanship, it was just a lack of local knowledge.

The ideal is having things the same wherever we go but we just are not there yet and probably never will be. The States can be a problem because of our sheer size, "We do things differently but so what?" is the basic attitude, as so succinctly enunciated above. You come to the States, you need to figure out how we do things. That really is sub-optimal, making us part of the problem instead of part of the solution but...

I once had a fascinating dialogue with the white man in charge of a new regional airport "somewhere in Africa". The exit from the runway involved two 90 turns flanked by deep, unguarded monsoon ditches. I told him that this was just an accident waiting to happen, when he pointed out the pale yellow stripes on the taxiway plus the fact that "Everyone has been told not to go straight ahead."

I had figured on a bizjet going in a ditch in the rain, maybe a nice, new GV. Instead it was a helo, when a main rotor blade flew over the terminal to land in the parking lot, killing no-one. Next week the ditches were covered!

It is just human nature that we have to deal with, ours and that of others.
chuks is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2008, 13:45
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
PS: Those worldwide standards exist of course. The Chinese can manage it - why can't the US?
Not sure I would call the Chinese very standard. Metric RVSM? Bilingual ATC? At least you always get a follow me truck turning onto the ramp...
Airbubba is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.