Afriqiyah Airbus 330 Crash
I have recently been with the limp-wristed-and-never-had-a-real-job-incompetent-though-filled-with-righteous-entitlement with 400 hours total time and already in an intercontinental jet set (whoopeee) for a while. I guess this is what this toxic industry is coming to. I thank those who think you might someday need some chops.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how they feel about circling approaches where base is downwind?
I normally leave the circling handling to the First Officer, so I can keep a sharp look outside.
He flies, I monitor.
Much safer this way...in my opinion.
It also gives him good handling experience under a variety of conditions.
More experience now equals a better Captain, later on....hopefully
TWA had a term for this, long ago....it was called crew co-ordination.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sales versus training
Just a thought but when Airbus sold the Libyans this fleet of new aircraft what care did they take over the training of crews?
Was the training carried out in house or outsourced?
Which Airbus department carries the biggest weight, sales or training?
Some us, including me, have become very adept at blaming the crews when a new aircraft flown by a rookie crew from the developing world crashes.
The usual banter, Camel drivers, Mercedes etc.
I think they deserve a better deal, perhaps Airbus and Boeing need to make sure the customer can actually operate the aircraft under local conditions before they let them go..... and sometimes maybe they should insist on more training
Bigpants
Was the training carried out in house or outsourced?
Which Airbus department carries the biggest weight, sales or training?
Some us, including me, have become very adept at blaming the crews when a new aircraft flown by a rookie crew from the developing world crashes.
The usual banter, Camel drivers, Mercedes etc.
I think they deserve a better deal, perhaps Airbus and Boeing need to make sure the customer can actually operate the aircraft under local conditions before they let them go..... and sometimes maybe they should insist on more training
Bigpants
Bluestar,
I am referring to the "dive and drive" where you fly to MDA and then level off looking for the runway. If you can't find it by the MAP, then you go around.
This is not allowed in our company (and many others). You have to fly a stabilised, or continuous descent approach. When you descend down to 50' above MDA you either continue in a stable descent down to the runway, or go around. It is assumed that the initiation of the go around takes less than 50', so you never bust your MDA. This old, de-stabilised method is what makes the old boys real men, but also was a contributory factor in many accidents so is now prohibited by operators with a proactive safety culture.
Hand flying is fine though, but most people choose to practice their skills by flying eyes down on fine days so the PNF can just monitor by watching out of the window. When you are in marginal WX and you need to get in, maximum use of all the aids is a wise strategy. It minimises risk, and in my company that's what I'm paid to do.
I am referring to the "dive and drive" where you fly to MDA and then level off looking for the runway. If you can't find it by the MAP, then you go around.
This is not allowed in our company (and many others). You have to fly a stabilised, or continuous descent approach. When you descend down to 50' above MDA you either continue in a stable descent down to the runway, or go around. It is assumed that the initiation of the go around takes less than 50', so you never bust your MDA. This old, de-stabilised method is what makes the old boys real men, but also was a contributory factor in many accidents so is now prohibited by operators with a proactive safety culture.
Hand flying is fine though, but most people choose to practice their skills by flying eyes down on fine days so the PNF can just monitor by watching out of the window. When you are in marginal WX and you need to get in, maximum use of all the aids is a wise strategy. It minimises risk, and in my company that's what I'm paid to do.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few points...
100% great post... Yes the Jeppesen does not have the approach path angle - this could lead to an error with a tired crew. LIDO does show the correct angle - actually they work it out to a 3 degree approach path by starting the decent further back and arriving at minimums (670) - they also already show the CANPA minimums (620 + 50)... again just another way of avoiding a slip up with a tired crew.
The approach in Tripoli seems to me (no expert in IAP design) to be quite poor... why not make the state published procedure a 3 degree path?
For the poster who does not know when to pull without DME, the A320/330/340 are aircraft that with crew who know what they are doing are independent and not reliant on ground based navigation aids.
There are no less than 3 ways to fly the approach into Tripoli using just aircraft systems and not having to use the aids on the ground... which is a good thing as they don't work correctly!
Now a question for those really in the know with regards to approval for managed / managed can BA and LH for example do a fully managed approach into Tripoli (Legally) when the state who designed the underlying procedure does not authorise managed / managed approaches?
A few years ago at the request of Continental Airlines, in the UK several RNAV approaches were published but only for their (COA) use as they were not yet approved procedures in the UK.
PT6A
100% great post... Yes the Jeppesen does not have the approach path angle - this could lead to an error with a tired crew. LIDO does show the correct angle - actually they work it out to a 3 degree approach path by starting the decent further back and arriving at minimums (670) - they also already show the CANPA minimums (620 + 50)... again just another way of avoiding a slip up with a tired crew.
The approach in Tripoli seems to me (no expert in IAP design) to be quite poor... why not make the state published procedure a 3 degree path?
For the poster who does not know when to pull without DME, the A320/330/340 are aircraft that with crew who know what they are doing are independent and not reliant on ground based navigation aids.
There are no less than 3 ways to fly the approach into Tripoli using just aircraft systems and not having to use the aids on the ground... which is a good thing as they don't work correctly!
Now a question for those really in the know with regards to approval for managed / managed can BA and LH for example do a fully managed approach into Tripoli (Legally) when the state who designed the underlying procedure does not authorise managed / managed approaches?
A few years ago at the request of Continental Airlines, in the UK several RNAV approaches were published but only for their (COA) use as they were not yet approved procedures in the UK.
PT6A
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Playing Golf!
Age: 46
Posts: 1,037
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigpants, Airbus failed a few of their local guys.....
These guys were then promptly retested by a "local" TRE and found fit....
Draw your own conclusions....
Airbus training staff in Libya have documented their concerns.. maybe this will come to light.
PT6A
These guys were then promptly retested by a "local" TRE and found fit....
Draw your own conclusions....
Airbus training staff in Libya have documented their concerns.. maybe this will come to light.
PT6A
Reminds me a bit of the debate after the Schipol crash. As I pointed out then a stabilised approach is important in avoiding this kind of thing happening. I would be amazed if the final report does not show a similar degree of the crew getting behind the aircraft.
I am interested why they sailed through the MDA.....maybe they were above profile (or thought you were), took out the autopilot and sailed through the MDA and below the profile, maybe they had set the minimum for the ILS the other side? Either way it seems to indicate a serious loss of situational awareness.
I am interested why they sailed through the MDA.....maybe they were above profile (or thought you were), took out the autopilot and sailed through the MDA and below the profile, maybe they had set the minimum for the ILS the other side? Either way it seems to indicate a serious loss of situational awareness.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Floating around the planet
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fully agree....You don`t know what was to make the transition from the libians to the airbus philosophy...While a normal training takes about 10 sim sections , for the lybians it were taking 28 and they were beeing released in marginal minimums...
Inside Airbus there were people under the table saying that an accident was waiting to happen...
It happened...Maybe the training is takem more seriously now, otherwise a second accident is just a question of time.
Inside Airbus there were people under the table saying that an accident was waiting to happen...
It happened...Maybe the training is takem more seriously now, otherwise a second accident is just a question of time.
Inside Airbus there were people under the table saying that an accident was waiting to happen...
It happened...Maybe the training is takem more seriously now, otherwise a second accident is just a question of time.
It happened...Maybe the training is takem more seriously now, otherwise a second accident is just a question of time.
- GY
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, the label on the video says 'Copilot slaps pilot while Flight Engineer watches'.
However, the 'watcher' is not a Flight Engineer, he is the Navigator, as DC-4's did not have a F/E
Oh well...the younger guys wouldn't know the difference, I expect.
However, the 'watcher' is not a Flight Engineer, he is the Navigator, as DC-4's did not have a F/E
Oh well...the younger guys wouldn't know the difference, I expect.
BOAC,
Don't worry, I've got a bit of an idea. CDA NPAs, both DB and Non DB, have been routine for our ops for over 25 years. My point was that "pointing" the nose at the FAF, hoping you get the to MDA at the point where the 3° approach path/PAPI coincides with the MDA, is not the ideal way to do it. FPA is not the be-all-and-end-all: one good gust of wind, turbulence (or perhaps selection of final flap) will bump the aeroplane off the original 3° and FPA will not get you back to the intended approach path. It will maintain/re-establish a 3° FP, but not back to the original, intended descent path. FPA is a reactive control, not a pro-active, guide-to control.
The only proper way to do a CDA on an NPA is to either use the DB 3° coded approach, follow a charted 3° profile (we've had these on our AIP charts for many years - catch up world) or create your own profile using the DME or GPS to a suitable distance reference waypoint. If you can't do that, then getting to the MDA nice and early and steaming in is the way to go. Sit there fat dumb and happy. Get Visual, land. If you don't get visual, continue steaming along, level, to the MAPt then do the missed approach. Easy.
It may be, of course, that Capn Bloggs is not aware of the relationship between G/S and R of D for a given glidepath?
The only proper way to do a CDA on an NPA is to either use the DB 3° coded approach, follow a charted 3° profile (we've had these on our AIP charts for many years - catch up world) or create your own profile using the DME or GPS to a suitable distance reference waypoint. If you can't do that, then getting to the MDA nice and early and steaming in is the way to go. Sit there fat dumb and happy. Get Visual, land. If you don't get visual, continue steaming along, level, to the MAPt then do the missed approach. Easy.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....then getting to the MDA nice and early and steaming in is the way to go. Sit there fat dumb and happy. Get Visual, land. If you don't get visual, continue steaming along, level, to the MAPt then do the missed approach. Easy.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capn Bloggs
What tosh, have you even flown an airbus.
411A
It is not just some airlines that have banned the dive and drive but STATE (as in countries) authorities as well!
What tosh, have you even flown an airbus.
411A
It is not just some airlines that have banned the dive and drive but STATE (as in countries) authorities as well!
Last edited by iceman50; 23rd May 2010 at 23:55. Reason: spilling!!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not just some airlines that have banned the dive and drive but STATE (as in countries) authorities as well!
Not where we fly, they haven't.
So, lets review.
Many say the the CDA is better, and yet....we are discussing an accident where the aircraft was so fitted with all the latest and greatest kit to do the deed, and the pilots (being factory trained) surely must have been trained accordingly...but the airplane crashed anyway.
Nope, simply not convincing.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: A quiet backwater
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CANPA and CDA are great if you put in the right waypoints and get your altitudes all right. I have seen some cases where folks get that all screwed up and end up with the EGPWS going nuts. It isn't hard to do,
Start your descent at the Initial approach altitude and level off at the MDA - not a lot of button pushing here to enter data incorrectly. OK- Pushing the stopwatch.
Watching some of the guys in the sim do CANPA all bets are covered but generally no one is watching the store. Lots of chatter about checking altitudes every mile but the purpose of the exercise, to get the airplane safely on the ground, seems to take a back seat.
I still do the dive and drive in my own plane. Much less work load. Single pilot no autopilot.
Start your descent at the Initial approach altitude and level off at the MDA - not a lot of button pushing here to enter data incorrectly. OK- Pushing the stopwatch.
Watching some of the guys in the sim do CANPA all bets are covered but generally no one is watching the store. Lots of chatter about checking altitudes every mile but the purpose of the exercise, to get the airplane safely on the ground, seems to take a back seat.
I still do the dive and drive in my own plane. Much less work load. Single pilot no autopilot.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: A quiet backwater
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way, factory training can be good but eons ago I attended one where 2 of the guys couldn't speak English. The instructor kept asking if they were understanding and they kept nodding their heads and said yes, yes. They smiled a lot and were in the graduation picture. A year later they were dead - killed in the plane they had purchased.