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

CNN Reports FEDEX crash in Tokyo

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

CNN Reports FEDEX crash in Tokyo

Old 31st Mar 2009, 20:05
  #341 (permalink)  
quidquid excusatio prandium pro
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 351
Okay, so what’s the going price for a competent, automation-savvy-but-independent, John-Wayne-on-demand, big-iron aviator anyways?

I want a comprehensive pay package that includes a salary suitably fitting to the responsibilities I take on a daily basis. Stock options, a company car, and invites to all the management junkets on remote tropical islands. And a secretary. Maybe an I-Phone.

But above all, I want to be just like the big guys, the ones who really know what they're doing. The Wall Street types, bankers, insurance execs, and especially the very smart folks who run the real estate industry...



My Golden Parachute clause stays firm, even if I crash the airplane!
bugg smasher is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 20:19
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Edmonds, WA
Age: 49
Posts: 16
Just so that our uninformed speculation can be somewhat more informed, the ever-amazing SmartCockpit just posted a bunch of MD-11 stuff:

SmartCockpit - Boeing MD-11

Cheers,

--Nick
just-nick is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 20:42
  #343 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 72
Posts: 2,445
Smilin',
I'm not against all automation. But, what is needed on the part of aircrews is to be able to do the right when the automation fails, and it will. Clearly, we've had several recent horrible examples of failure to recognize and respond to automation failures.
No, I know you're not - we're on the same page simply because we know. I suspect Flight Safety's here and even DC-ATE among many others - it's good company because it's right view. The devil's in the details, but this has clearly gone south and needs correcting while the trend is still turning and not fully established.

How we get the airline and government execs to understand that is the big question.
It seems as though change only occurs when sufficient heat is applied. Heat is the result of the effective appication of power; power derives from money or threat of loss of political position or possibly prestige and inflluence, (power's distant cousins).

Political heat here means too many accidents killing too many people (particularly in the wrong countries - those that pay attention to statistics), or raising the awareness of insurance companies and passenger lobby groups and professional aviation organizations.

Bureaucratic structures usually though not always do nothing nor will they change unless mandated by those above. Even then, sufficient change to just stop the "hissing" will be done.

This is nothing new and in some ways is a complex but valid check and balance. The system seems to have sorted itself out thus far but it is the processes above which have accomplished this. There are plenty of current examples. This is not the only place that the kind of questioning we are seeing here is being done.

Last edited by PJ2; 31st Mar 2009 at 21:22.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 21:05
  #344 (permalink)  
Trash du Blanc
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,184
My company (also the accident crew's) has actually been trending away from The Highest Level of Automation and other such nonsense. The newest philosophy is that "Pilots Will Maintain Proficiency in All Levels of Automation...."

My last (MD11) sim ride I was given a takeoff in PANC with deferred autothrottles (!!!) on a VFR day (blue skies are never a good sign in a sim).

Out of 400' we were given a cargo fire. Mayday, request vectors back and current weather. Guess what - winds and runway closures meant a closed pattern to rwy 32 - and by the way, localizer inop!

So, essentially, a no-autothrottles trip around the patch to a landing with nothing but a VASI to help in the approach. I punched the end of the runway into the Fix page to give me distance to go, but otherwise it was pure pilotage.

So... maybe some can blame their companies, but at my company we are expected to know a little bit more than how to engage the magic.
Huck is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 21:29
  #345 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 72
Posts: 2,445
Huck;
So... maybe some can blame their companies, but at my company we are expected to know a little bit more than how to engage the magic.
Re, "expected" - Yessir, I think that is a key as well and that is up to oneself and one's professional standards. OTJ training isn't new, nor is home-study. In the end it is never up to someone else - it is up to oneself, to keep one's skills honed and ready. That's what an aviator does.

That said, one doesn't need a lot of training to understand the 320/340's autothrust system for example. It's just like the DC8's in one way...that airplane didn't have moving throttles either and we always kept tickling them to keep the cruise EPR from overspeeding the airplane as fuel was burnt. For any autothrust system, all one needs is a few minutes of reading and a bit of practise either in the sim or the airplane, hopefully with someone who knows a bit more, but that isn't necessary either. It just isn't a big deal.

Glad to hear there's a company out there that "gets it".

My sympathies for your and FedEx's loss.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2009, 23:21
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... It's Permanent!
Posts: 3,536
Different types, different systems?

Reactive windshear warnings (and recovery guidance) are generated by the flight guidance system including the IRS and other parameters such as IAS, not the GPWS
The GPWS generates the warning. The Flight Guidance systems provides guidance for the escape manoeuvre, which in reality, is just a max effort go-around!

GPWS provides immediate alerts, and look-ahead obstacle and terrain alerts for
potentially hazardous flight conditions involving imminent impact with the
obstacles and the ground.

GPWS immediate alerts and altitude voice annunciations during approach, are
based on a combination of RA, barometric altitude, IRS, airspeed, glideslope
deviation, and aircraft configuration.

GPWS alerts are provided for the following:
• altitude loss after takeoff or go-around
• excessive and severe descent rate
• excessive terrain closing rate
• unsafe terrain clearance when not in the landing configuration
• excessive deviation below an ILS glideslope
• windshear
• bank angle
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2009, 01:19
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the Old Folks' Home
Posts: 396
Localizer Inop

Huck, you and I certainly agree an much but if it's VMC/VFR, why would you even think about the localizer?
Smilin_Ed is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2009, 04:37
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,795
So you're saying in VMC ( or a visual app ) you wouldn't bother to tune the ILS/LLZ if one was available?

That is just plain dumb.................

You use ALL available data to complete the approach.
I'd like to see you explain why you didn't in a subsequent court of law under cross examination.
ACMS is online now  
Old 2nd Apr 2009, 06:47
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 13
Posts: 1,517
So you're saying in VMC ( or a visual app ) you wouldn't bother to tune the ILS/LLZ if one was available?

That is just plain dumb.................

You use ALL available data to complete the approach.
I'd like to see you explain why you didn't in a subsequent court of law under cross examination.
Agree completely.

This is why so many continue to line up on wrong runway/wrong airport. Not using all available info....
blueloo is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2009, 08:09
  #350 (permalink)  
Trash du Blanc
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,184
I'll admit it's fun to bring one in with only the runway as a reference.

I get to, occasionally, down in Mobile, Alabama.

One might beg a little forgiveness, however, for wanting a bit of a backup sometimes. Fastest approach speeds in the world (since the Concorde retired) and all that.

I'll be honest, in VMC I use the ILS and the flight director, and I use the FMS to give me distance to the TDZ, and as a vertical backup.

Number one, I like to follow The Book.

And number two, I like to look good, damn good, to the guy in the other front seat.

(You've got to give me that, it's just the two of us, not even a farking flight attendant to water my ego with a "nice landing" after we open the doors.....)
Huck is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2009, 11:38
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: LPPT
Age: 54
Posts: 431
You've got to give me that, it's just the two of us, not even a farking flight attendant to water my ego with a "nice landing" after we open the doors.....
Someone can reprogram bitchin' betty to do that for ya

GD&L
GearDown&Locked is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2009, 22:26
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 48
MD-11 reactive windshear

The MD-11 reactive windshear guidance and warning generation are both performed in the FCC. To be specific the warnings are generated in both FCC-1 and in FCC-2 and the data is sent to CAWS for annunciation.

MD-11 had reactive windshear warning and guidance long before EGPWS was invented.
EXDAC is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2009, 18:10
  #353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Doha, Qatar
Age: 51
Posts: 426
Just by memory so these numbers may not be exact....but i believe it is said if you are 10 feet high on the G.S that it will cause you too touch down approximately 1000-1500 feet further down the ry. 10 kts extra speed, if bled off by delaying landing/floating will burn up approx 2000 feet of ry.
Also my personal experience in this airplane , you have less depth/height perception than some airplanes. I believe this is caused by the very large windows and if your seat adjustment if even off a little bit it can really give you a different sight picture. Therefore I think it wise to back yourself up with all available data as this airplane has to be flown very precisely when heavey and landing on shorter runways.
Besides I have seen toooo many people line up on the wrong parallel rys at big busy airports. A mistake that need not be made if you used all data. Also if you go missed approach,(granted in vfr it should be a standard go around and vectors) and you had not programed all the approach into the Fms you will have no guidance to fly what can be a very complicated procedure....just my 2 cents
casablanca is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2009, 19:38
  #354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: E.U.
Posts: 27
Thumbs up Know how to fly your airplane

PJ2 Couldnt agree more.
Excellent post.
rooaaiast is offline  
Old 4th Apr 2009, 22:21
  #355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sonoma, CA, USA
Age: 76
Posts: 143
Re: 3REDS

Y'all know the old saying, "Hire a teenager while they still know it all!"
Robert Campbell is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2009, 00:07
  #356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the Old Folks' Home
Posts: 396
Do the Trigonometry

Just by memory so these numbers may not be exact....but i believe it is said if you are 10 feet high on the G.S that it will cause you too touch down approximately 1000-1500 feet further down the ry.
With a three degree glideslope, being ten feet above will cause you to land 190 feet down the runway.
Smilin_Ed is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2009, 01:38
  #357 (permalink)  
Trash du Blanc
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,184
Yes the MD11 lands hot and heavy.

But I'll worry about running off the end of the runway when that actually happens to somebody. As far as I know we've never done that - but we've balled up plenty of MD-11's trying to hit the TDZ at idle....

I have a theory that one of the problems in the freight business is this - no witnesses. A pax pilot will do everything possible to grease the landing. If that means holding on to the power a bit longer, fishing for the runway, so be it. As I said, these things don't routinely run off the ends of runways.

But a freight dog focusses on flightpath - nailing the ILS until the roundout, planting the mains exactly where they go. Many of our pilots came from military pointy jets and have never in their careers made a landing with a couple hundred spectators in the back. Different set of priorities, maybe....
Huck is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2009, 07:13
  #358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 267
Huck

... a question

Although not a commercial pilot I have visited a couple of sims, one at Rediffusion in the UK nearly 25 years ago and one near DFW (courtesy of AA) in the 90's. I always asked pilots 'how do they compare' and invariably there's a pause and something like "not bad... the graphics are getting better. But you can still feel the difference".

Obviously they've moved on since my last experience. The question is, given your last few posts, and given that there is a knack to flying this aircraft, is this a training issue?

If it is, how close does the MD11 sim come to the real thing and can it be used to model these quirky situations which catch some - perhaps ex military or perhaps less intuitive - pilots unawares?

Pinkman
Pinkman is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2009, 08:27
  #359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South, near the end of the world.
Age: 46
Posts: 264
Thumbs down

My dear friend, I had been flying DC10-30 Freighters for more than 6 years and I was always trying to make nice landings.
It is not for the pax, it is for my as.
At this moment I am working for a company with both pax and freighter airplanes, so I am flying both and I don't see much difference when I am flying one or the other.

Now, if the former right stuff guys in UPS/FEDEX or any other company are trying to make aircraft carrier landings in a MD11...that's another problem. Nothing to do with Freight or Pax in your back.

Cheers.
cosmiccomet is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2009, 09:50
  #360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: aboard
Age: 60
Posts: 74
Pax or freight; whats the difference?

I too, have flown both pax and cargo on the MD11.

My company has freighters and convertibles, and until a few years ago, converted them seasonally. We alternately flew long or short haul pax flights, mixed with freight trips worldwide.
Whatever was behind that cockpitdoor; there was no difference whatsoever in how hard we would try to make proper, and also comfortable ie. soft, landings.
Both for passenger comfort and our own ego's.

The only difference I saw between flying pax vs freight was when running into turbulence enroute; with a freighter you don't worry about who is out of their seat in the cabin.

So I doubt if this is an issue here.

Last edited by Mariner; 5th Apr 2009 at 11:59.
Mariner is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.