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

Kiwi B777 burst 12 tyres in aborted takeoff at NRT

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

Kiwi B777 burst 12 tyres in aborted takeoff at NRT

Old 17th Mar 2010, 23:42
  #121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Preswick
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The incident should never have happened if the flight crew sticks to time honoured practice.........if the authrottle did not engage, set the thrust ( EPR/N1 ) manually by 60 kts. No messing around with the MCP. One wonders how the flight crews of 1st world airlines can make such deliberate violation of SOP! No, not schadenfrude but just wondering...........
Kalistan is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2010, 09:06
  #122 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 2,951
Received 856 Likes on 256 Posts
Really?

The incident should never have happened if the flight crew sticks to time honoured practice.........if the authrottle did not engage, set the thrust ( EPR/N1 ) manually by 60 kts. No messing around with the MCP. One wonders how the flight crews of 1st world airlines can make such deliberate violation of SOP! No, not schadenfrude but just wondering...........
"All human actions have one or more of these seven causes; chance, nature, compulsion, habit, reason, passion, and desire"
.
Aristotle (384 BC - 322 BC)

As AD 2010-06-09 refers, there have been 9 cases reported since 1995 of this event occurring with similar responses from the crew.

On this occasion, there probably was at least 3 properly qualified and competent flight crew on the flight deck. Yet in spite of the training, SOP's and procedures, this event type has occurred at least 9 times with the same result, sufficient to get the FAA and Boeing's attention. What is not reported is the extent that such actions by crew do not result in a problem, yet would be an indication of spontaneous crew actions. The comment on failure to follow SOP's is as correct as it fundamentally disregards the human element. The reason the industry has accepted Human Factors training as a basic component of qualification. That the crew(s) have not followed the procedures and as are promulgated is self evident, as is the failure of monitoring of the pilot monitoring.

That's what human do.

Even well trained ones.

While most, if not all programs strive to maintain SOP's at all times, none achieve 100% compliance, nor does any one individual if they are honest about their own performance.

Hence the training.

The training doesn't ensure complete protection, but it does give some insight into the inherent problems, and occasionally modifies behavior patterns.

100% compliance with Policy, Practices & Procedures is a desirable goal but has not been achieved in any industry at any time in human history. (Non compliance probably started with Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden.... hasn't improved since. Human error?, consider Bhophal, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, "Weapons of Mass Destruction", The Maginot Line, "Peace in Our Time", "Titanic", The Somme (I & II), "Waterworld", Emperor Constantine XI's armament procurement program, the Inqusition, Enron, The Edsel, Lincoln's choice of theaters, Romeo's decision making, Napoleon's Eastern European Tour 1812, Paris' choice of girlfriend, Wallstreet 1987, 2008, 20??, IMF 1997 etc... let alone the aviation industry; AA191, JAL103, AA1420, TE901, IA605, AF296Q, GF072, TAM3054, D-AXLA, F-WWCJ, THY981, AC621, UAL173...Challenger, Columbia.... [direct and indirect causations]).

On a day to day basis, if you (metaphorically, not personally...) get to completing the Before Start Checklist without a non compliance, non adherence of standard crew actions or callouts, I would be happy. If you get to engine shutdown without a momentary lapse of same, I would be rather impressed. If a pilot believes they achieve full compliance on a daily basis, it may be that a more critical analysis of their performance is in order, rather than they are inhuman in their performance.

The vast majority of flight crews are professional and do an impressive job day in and day out. They remain human, and that is their strength and their weakness as well. Flight crew make mistakes, and the system copes generally well with these. Occasionally it doesn't. Being surprised the crew failed to follow SOP's appears to forget the human factor in the operation utterly.

"have no fear of perfection - you'll never reach it"
Salvador Dali (1904 - 1989)

Cheers,
Fly Safe,


FDR
fdr is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2010, 11:00
  #123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The word is the autothrottle was not engaged for the takeoff. The Word goes on to say that, on reaching for the MCP's A/T engage switch, the handling pilot pressed the autopilot engage switch by mistake at the commencement of the takeoff roll. Not rated on the B777, I'm informed said switch is similarly located and looks the same as the A/T switch. More informed sources may say otherwise.

Moving on: apparently the flight crew did not notice the FMA change to CMD on the PFD, but they did notice the A/T didn't engage. Whatever, I wasn't there. The decision to continue was made and the thrust levers advanced manually. V1 was called, a trusty hand came off the TL's and, when VR was called, pulled back, along with his other trusty hand..... yet nothing!!!

Gladly, **** did not turn to trumps. They rejected. Pretty well done too. The word from on-high went on to suggest the abort occured at V2 + 20 kts....so the situ was very serious from thereonin.

I've had five RTO's as operating crew: two were for HPSOV valves not locking out at low speed - Master Caution, had to stop; another was upon seeing an A340 barreling in from the left as we took off on 18 at EDDF. He was on 25.

One other was on Tower's command. Our's was a late tkof clearance after having lined up behind a landing who exited beyond the Tower-anticipated HST. We had one up our chuff on final, a 73, and, with us now rolling merrily along at around 60 or 70 knots, Tower called the abort. The B737 was ordered to go-round. There was one more, a low speed reject but the details are sketchy. It was a long time ago. I did not perform the reject. The Captain on the day did.

On each RTO, my heart was pumping harder than a whore's in church.

Air NZ did a great job. So they 'allegedly' had some finger trouble. **** happens. It's happened before; it'll happen again. I was once told that if all things are equal and gross negligence is not a contributing factor then it matters not how you got into the problem, but how you get out of it. So I say bravo to the Air NZ crew. Life has probably gotten a little tough for youse lately. Hang in there. I wish I could say more to help...
4PW's is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2010, 14:11
  #124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: TWIMyOyster
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Obstacle Clearance -

Mind the last line of the AD:

"We are also issuing this AD to prevent a lower-than-optimal climb gradient during takeoff, and consequent failure to clear obstacles on the ground during a performance-limited takeoff."

The docket states:

"The Boeing Company has also discovered during flight simulations that the climb gradient is less than optimal for obstacle clearance during a one-engine takeoff (performance-limited) situation. This is caused by an error in the pitch command law of the autopilot flight director computer (AFDC). This condition, if not corrected, could result in a lower-than-optimal climb gradient during takeoff, and consequent failure to clear obstacles on the ground during a performance-limited takeoff."
...
"Because an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD, we find that notice and opportunity for prior public comment hereon are impracticable and that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days."

Interesting ..
HotelT is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2010, 19:30
  #125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Suncorp Stadium
Age: 62
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Me thinks kalistan was trying to make the point that pprune has a lot of apologists for pilots from the western world but when third world pilots made similar mistakes the racist innuendoes and comments of incompetence abound.

I have noticed this all through other threads too; guys too easy to offer all kinds of excuses for the yanks ( AA in Kingston, Delta landing on wrong runway/taxiways; NWA pilots overshooting destination, just to mention a few ). Time for introspection and honest questions about our " racist " tendencies...........flame on!
paulomarko is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


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.