UAL refusing to takeoff at Logan due to ship
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASSUMES THE CLIMB RATE ACHIEVED AT T/O WEIGHT ON ONE ENGINE AT 75% OF MAX THRUST
Where did you get that idea?
Limp, we have different performance data for a couple of airports with ships or no ships... For whatever reason, if this crew didnt have the performance to clear the ship, then they were right to wait until they obtained the information.
BTW, do you know how much they clearance they should have had over that ship?
Mutt
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where do these people come from?! How do they get on our airplanes?! I say from now on, all pilots stay at home and let the passengers fly these machines and see how well they do.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<most probably >>
With a big jet I don't do "most probably" - "definitely" is the order of the day. Oh, and you know what.... I'll decide when I'm happy it's definitely OK because I'm the guy that will be blamed for any incident/accident. It is my responsibility to be sure. ............ "why didn't he make sure", you can hear it now !
Some might call the above attitude. So be it but I would say to some posting here, "walk a mile in another man's shoes"
With a big jet I don't do "most probably" - "definitely" is the order of the day. Oh, and you know what.... I'll decide when I'm happy it's definitely OK because I'm the guy that will be blamed for any incident/accident. It is my responsibility to be sure. ............ "why didn't he make sure", you can hear it now !
Some might call the above attitude. So be it but I would say to some posting here, "walk a mile in another man's shoes"
Mutt,
The A320 (which I believe this was) is certified for an engine failure at the critical point (v1) at max flex, which by definition is climb power, which by definition (on the 320) is 75% TOGA, without increasing thrust on the good engine. Therefore all single engine performance at max derate (which BOS 27 probably is) is calculated at 75% TOGA.
Can't be arsed digging the reference out, do it yourself and learn something
LD
The A320 (which I believe this was) is certified for an engine failure at the critical point (v1) at max flex, which by definition is climb power, which by definition (on the 320) is 75% TOGA, without increasing thrust on the good engine. Therefore all single engine performance at max derate (which BOS 27 probably is) is calculated at 75% TOGA.
Can't be arsed digging the reference out, do it yourself and learn something
LD
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright, I have a stack of paperwork to go through, so I put the cans on just for giggles.
First, there are numerous demonstrably wrong things that were said:
The only thing correct here is that 823J did ask about Tall-Masted Ships.
For the rest:
The ATC tapes are not available. You are listening to the feed from LiveATC, which is a scanner. Since it is a scanner, and since tower is on more than one frequency, you are not getting "the full story". For example, at times, the first part of transmissions will be clipped: in this case, the "unidentified aircraft" is unidentified only because of the scanner. In any case, 823J was on ground at that time.
So there is no relation between the two transmissions, outside of the fact that there was a tall-masted ship in the harbor.
At other times, you'll miss whole transmissions.
Also false is this statement:
The facts: they taxied to 22R, then called with their concerns three minutes after being instructed to monitor tower freq.
UA823J asked for 27, and TOWER replied unable.
From there, everyone sorted it out. After about a half hour, Tower offered that the ship was really more in line with 22L than R, and passed the number of the cab supervisor. At that point, UA was already in contact with company, and resolving the issue. There was no hysteria, no accusations, and no irritation, outside of sitting around for an hour.
Armchair Captains? Doesn't LiveATC have forums full of people who listen to scanners all day and can decipher it?
First, there are numerous demonstrably wrong things that were said:
A question from an unidentified aircraft about ships at 19:30z plus 15:05
Then an identified request from 823J at 19:30z plus 25:19? about ships!(different voice)
This is a set up, someone is proving a point, or being an arsehole.
The ATC tapes are available.
Then an identified request from 823J at 19:30z plus 25:19? about ships!(different voice)
This is a set up, someone is proving a point, or being an arsehole.
The ATC tapes are available.
For the rest:
The ATC tapes are not available. You are listening to the feed from LiveATC, which is a scanner. Since it is a scanner, and since tower is on more than one frequency, you are not getting "the full story". For example, at times, the first part of transmissions will be clipped: in this case, the "unidentified aircraft" is unidentified only because of the scanner. In any case, 823J was on ground at that time.
So there is no relation between the two transmissions, outside of the fact that there was a tall-masted ship in the harbor.
At other times, you'll miss whole transmissions.
Also false is this statement:
They offered him a couple of options, but he didn't take them.
UA823J asked for 27, and TOWER replied unable.
From there, everyone sorted it out. After about a half hour, Tower offered that the ship was really more in line with 22L than R, and passed the number of the cab supervisor. At that point, UA was already in contact with company, and resolving the issue. There was no hysteria, no accusations, and no irritation, outside of sitting around for an hour.
Armchair Captains? Doesn't LiveATC have forums full of people who listen to scanners all day and can decipher it?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't be arsed digging the reference out, do it yourself and learn something
And if i really wanted to get pedantic about it, i would point out that unless you are using LPC, the flex temperature used in the takeoff calculation could be a lot less than 75%!
Mutt.
Last edited by mutt; 20th Feb 2009 at 16:01.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if i really wanted to get pedantic about it, i would point out that unless you are using LPC, the flex temperature used in the takeoff calculation could be a lot less than 75%!
Yeah, even the 'ole L1011.
Mutt would be the first I would contact regarding aircraft performance.
Ha!
All the rest are just speculating...
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dani - Who cares what the tower says!
As a professional aviator, it is YOUR decision to make a judgement if a ship affects take off performance. Can you do that visually? NO.
It doesn't matter if ATC say the ship is actually off the end of the other runway... he doesn't have your company performance data, and he doesn't know if the aircraft is in your E/O splay.
Old aviatiors have made it to be old aviators because they've learned how to protect themselves and their aircraft. The number of times in my relatively short airline career I've been set up by ATC/Groundstaff is staggering. The key to being a fine aviator is to take advice from others, but make the decision for yourself.
Take offs are optional. If you aren't entirely sure, then you don't go. Who cares if later its proven that you were wrong and the ship was out of the way? You have not taken any unnecessary risk, and THAT is the mark of a fine aviator.
As mutt would know, most people are very surprised by just how large the E/O area actually is, and how small an obstacle can still cause havoc!
As a professional aviator, it is YOUR decision to make a judgement if a ship affects take off performance. Can you do that visually? NO.
It doesn't matter if ATC say the ship is actually off the end of the other runway... he doesn't have your company performance data, and he doesn't know if the aircraft is in your E/O splay.
Old aviatiors have made it to be old aviators because they've learned how to protect themselves and their aircraft. The number of times in my relatively short airline career I've been set up by ATC/Groundstaff is staggering. The key to being a fine aviator is to take advice from others, but make the decision for yourself.
Take offs are optional. If you aren't entirely sure, then you don't go. Who cares if later its proven that you were wrong and the ship was out of the way? You have not taken any unnecessary risk, and THAT is the mark of a fine aviator.
As mutt would know, most people are very surprised by just how large the E/O area actually is, and how small an obstacle can still cause havoc!
It doesn't matter if ATC say the ship is actually off the end of the other runway... he doesn't have your company performance data, and he doesn't know if the aircraft is in your E/O splay.
An obstacle may look insignificant but supposing a particular ET said "turn 30deg left at end of runway" and that was where a ship was parked?
As mutt would know, most people are very surprised by just how large the E/O area actually is, and how small an obstacle can still cause havoc!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dani - I'm with the majority of respondents to this thread, decisions based on 'most probably' are just not how it should be, no matter how many pax you may or may not have on board.
Some tragic examples of 'most probably' decisions leading to disaster and we should all learn from those.
Some tragic examples of 'most probably' decisions leading to disaster and we should all learn from those.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bring it on, guys. I can handle it.
I just tell you: Your E/O path is calculated for IFR conditions. If you see that there is an obstacle, if you know that it's not in your way and if you know that you can do a turn of 1 or 2 degrees even single engine (well at least I can do it, I'm not sure about the grey-haired ones), then you certainly can assume that you can make it.
That's what I mean with common sense.
Reflect yourself. Even you (when you still where young) could do such "calculation". And you remember that your pilot's everyday life consists constantly of such assumptions. If you couldn't do that, you couldn't fly anymore. Or are you also one of such guys who declines a visual approach (there could be an obstacle somewhere!!) or don't allow your collegues to make a visual separation 5NM behind you through your level (he could suddenly stop in the air!!!!)? I'm so glad that I don't have to share my cockpit with you
Dani
I just tell you: Your E/O path is calculated for IFR conditions. If you see that there is an obstacle, if you know that it's not in your way and if you know that you can do a turn of 1 or 2 degrees even single engine (well at least I can do it, I'm not sure about the grey-haired ones), then you certainly can assume that you can make it.
That's what I mean with common sense.
Reflect yourself. Even you (when you still where young) could do such "calculation". And you remember that your pilot's everyday life consists constantly of such assumptions. If you couldn't do that, you couldn't fly anymore. Or are you also one of such guys who declines a visual approach (there could be an obstacle somewhere!!) or don't allow your collegues to make a visual separation 5NM behind you through your level (he could suddenly stop in the air!!!!)? I'm so glad that I don't have to share my cockpit with you
Dani
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Age: 66
Posts: 2,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and I'd bet a fair amount of money that ATC would have no idea what we were up to until we told them.
I just tell you: Your E/O path is calculated for IFR conditions. If you see that there is an obstacle, if you know that it's not in your way and if you know that you can do a turn of 1 or 2 degrees even single engine (well at least I can do it, I'm not sure about the grey-haired ones), then you certainly can assume that you can make it.
I think I'd class an engine failure on/soon after takeoff as more of a 'heads down' manoeuvre than usual? Trying to visually avoid obstructions at low level while dealing with the effects of a power loss seems to me like a good start towards 'losing it', assuming you can even see the problem under the nose at takeoff body angle...
The probability of losing an engine in the first couple of hundred feet and being compromised in terms of obstacle clearance is very low (and getting lower). However, this rare event is what all of our performance calculations are based on.
...remember that your pilot's everyday life consists constantly of such assumptions. If you couldn't do that, you couldn't fly anymore. Or are you also one of such guys who declines a visual approach (there could be an obstacle somewhere!!)...
For an EO departure, you are in a low height, high drag state trying to accelerate and climb using your remaining power source. You may have marked asymmetry to deal with plus cockpit warnings and a possible ET. Depending on when the failure occurred, your calculated clearance of the first obstacle may only be 35 feet! There is also very little you can do to improve the situation and you have to carry on as per the book and hope the engineers got their sums right. There is no go-around available: you're stuck with what you have. I would suggest that there is very little latitude for creativity here.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know how other operators do it, but for Singapore 02L and 02C, which have a "ship crossing" problem, we carry several RTOW pages for each of these runways for a range of ship heights.
ATC are very good at advising conflict times and the height of the ship, thus enabling (even at a late stage) crews to revise Takeoff data. Most Takeoffs are at Derated and/or reduced thrust, thus the shipping conflict is quickly resolved by using higher thrust.
The problem is when the aircraft is already at maximum "non-ship" RTOW, and no performance enhancement is possible, then the only solution is to wait whilst the ship chug, chug, chugs out of the way.
Top marks for UAL, they just rose a few points higher on my "will fly with" list.
Regards,
Old Smokey
ATC are very good at advising conflict times and the height of the ship, thus enabling (even at a late stage) crews to revise Takeoff data. Most Takeoffs are at Derated and/or reduced thrust, thus the shipping conflict is quickly resolved by using higher thrust.
The problem is when the aircraft is already at maximum "non-ship" RTOW, and no performance enhancement is possible, then the only solution is to wait whilst the ship chug, chug, chugs out of the way.
Top marks for UAL, they just rose a few points higher on my "will fly with" list.
Regards,
Old Smokey
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pprune is a funny place sometimes. How can a 'bizarre' contributor like limp leek, a passenger, come in on a thread like this and get 1 1/2 pages of this 4 page thread devoted to him not understanding what it is about? How can he possibly dare make criticism of the pilots knowing nothing of procedures and the industry, apart from being a self appointed 'expert' loudmouth? Extraordinary. All he can come up with is expletives and 'LMAO'. Where is a Mod when you need him? Sometimes, aren't some posts here are so weird there is a time to quietly remove them? What an peculiar character! You can see the warning signs. When the profile says 'up your nose', you know you are dealing with someone with personality issues!
The 'ignore' strikes again!
The 'ignore' strikes again!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Boston
Age: 73
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks
As the OP I want to say that it was never my intention to start a contentious row about this. I heard the exchange in real time and having never heard something quite like that before I posted here to get input.
I was never an airline pilot, but I was a private/commercial pilot for over 30 years before losing my medical. I listen to ATC because I miss aviation very much.
In any event, I am sorry for turning this into a slugfest.
As the OP I want to say that it was never my intention to start a contentious row about this. I heard the exchange in real time and having never heard something quite like that before I posted here to get input.
I was never an airline pilot, but I was a private/commercial pilot for over 30 years before losing my medical. I listen to ATC because I miss aviation very much.
In any event, I am sorry for turning this into a slugfest.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not being actively engaged in performance today, but with a goodly recollection of past projects -
and given the massive computer power on a $1K laptop today -
Why can't the KBOS dispatch desk issue three TO clearances routinely (Tall, short, or no ship) so the front office can choose the appropriate one? This situation must occur often enough at KBOS to warrant this "overkill".
and given the massive computer power on a $1K laptop today -
Why can't the KBOS dispatch desk issue three TO clearances routinely (Tall, short, or no ship) so the front office can choose the appropriate one? This situation must occur often enough at KBOS to warrant this "overkill".
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
News Shooter -
Don't be sorry. You merely posted something you wanted an answer for. It's just unfortunate that some of the replies you got were from those that don't know a thing about flying airplanes. And, you also got a few responses from those that THINK they know about airplanes. You even got some replies form those that claim to be airline pilots, but can somehow avoid the ops specs laid down by those who do know what's going on.
.....I am sorry for turning this into a slugfest.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: way out there
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We used to get some tall masted yachts try to anchor at western end at Gibraltar. We had a speaker system(known as the voice of neptune) that we would use to tell them to anchor elsewhere and if that did not work a Police boat would go and move them. The best bit was watching it through the bino's wondering where the voice was coming from.
Upto The Buffers
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Leeds/Bradford
Age: 48
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comfy Chair; I'd go for know-it-all spotter.
I don't fly for a living, but I do have jet experience and own an (albeit modest) aircraft. I've got myself into situations in the past which were, in retrospect, avoidable. I learnt from them. Such caution as displayed by the Captain in question is not without merit.
I don't fly for a living, but I do have jet experience and own an (albeit modest) aircraft. I've got myself into situations in the past which were, in retrospect, avoidable. I learnt from them. Such caution as displayed by the Captain in question is not without merit.