Air India Express B738 crash
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Load
For a flight from DXB to IXE (4 hrs) what would be the expected fuel load?
As a % of "tank full" what would this be?
Is it a normal practice for flights to tank up cheap in the ME on such routes?
If this was the case how much more runway length would be required for a safe landing?
As posters have noted AI is lax on carry on luggage and weight. Assuming the argument that oversized at 10 kgs extra shoved into the hold at the gate and another 7 kg of duty free that would add up to about 10 kgs more per pax or about 1.5 tons more. How much more would this add?
As a % of "tank full" what would this be?
Is it a normal practice for flights to tank up cheap in the ME on such routes?
If this was the case how much more runway length would be required for a safe landing?
As posters have noted AI is lax on carry on luggage and weight. Assuming the argument that oversized at 10 kgs extra shoved into the hold at the gate and another 7 kg of duty free that would add up to about 10 kgs more per pax or about 1.5 tons more. How much more would this add?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately,most cabin crews only notice over bulky bags in the cabin rather than checking/mentioning the overhead weight limitation...
Some airlines have a max of liquor/pax, as too much liquor could become an Hazmat issue.
Some airlines have a max of liquor/pax, as too much liquor could become an Hazmat issue.
Waiting for the inbound aircraft in the Company office in New Delhi, Palam Airport early one foggy morning, the inbound Captain called on the Company radio, I took the call and he said that the ATIS was giving 200m. RVR. and he was holding at F/l 200 over the VOR, which was some 14 nm north of the field in those days - if I recall correctly - and it was all Cavok at that location, so what was the vis. on the field really like, as he had about 15 mins left before diverting to Bombay ( not Mumbai )
I replied that it really was very foggy but I didn't know what 200 m really looked like from my position, so would go over to the tower and find out. ( yes, one could ).
Reaching the tower a quasy-digital Indian design RVR meter was showing 200 m as broadcast, but as I looked it increased to 210, then 220 and eventually reached the legal limit - which I forget - but the controller said nothing. Eventually the RVR increased to be of no further consideration, the field became almost Cavok, as being experienced by the aircraft further North, but still the controller said nothing, so I tapped him on the shoulder and asked why he wasn't advising the holding aircraft to commence an approach ? " I cannot transmit an improvement in the visibility until it has been positively sustained for 10 minutes " he said.
I ran back to the office and advised the inbound Captain - a friend, whose voice I recognised - that the vis. was now well above minima - but they weren't going to tell him for 10 minutes, but if he requested a descent, by the time he got on to finals they would have ! A diversion saved.
Maybe the ATC controller was following the book, but my question later was - if the RVR was reducing below legal minima one dark and dirty night, would they not tell me until 10 minutes after I had crashed on the field ?
I replied that it really was very foggy but I didn't know what 200 m really looked like from my position, so would go over to the tower and find out. ( yes, one could ).
Reaching the tower a quasy-digital Indian design RVR meter was showing 200 m as broadcast, but as I looked it increased to 210, then 220 and eventually reached the legal limit - which I forget - but the controller said nothing. Eventually the RVR increased to be of no further consideration, the field became almost Cavok, as being experienced by the aircraft further North, but still the controller said nothing, so I tapped him on the shoulder and asked why he wasn't advising the holding aircraft to commence an approach ? " I cannot transmit an improvement in the visibility until it has been positively sustained for 10 minutes " he said.
I ran back to the office and advised the inbound Captain - a friend, whose voice I recognised - that the vis. was now well above minima - but they weren't going to tell him for 10 minutes, but if he requested a descent, by the time he got on to finals they would have ! A diversion saved.
Maybe the ATC controller was following the book, but my question later was - if the RVR was reducing below legal minima one dark and dirty night, would they not tell me until 10 minutes after I had crashed on the field ?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PugetSound
Age: 76
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Earlier posts in this thread (18, 22, 49) all state or imply that there was no precipitation and the runway was dry.
Raw WX data at 05:30 LC and 08:30 LC report zero precip and partly cloudy skies.
Several messages at airliner.net report dry runway
Yet - several speculators continue to postulate hydroplaning - am I missing something?
Raw WX data at 05:30 LC and 08:30 LC report zero precip and partly cloudy skies.
Several messages at airliner.net report dry runway
Yet - several speculators continue to postulate hydroplaning - am I missing something?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#26 22 May
Low vis. Drenched runway surface.
That's where I came in, promptly left and 10 pages appeared out of nowhere.
Wet, dry...I don't know.
Thought that was resolved already.
Low vis. Drenched runway surface.
That's where I came in, promptly left and 10 pages appeared out of nowhere.
Wet, dry...I don't know.
Thought that was resolved already.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if you're a starving CFI, it might pay to review how an airliner can run off the end of a runway and kill pretty much everyone onboard. This you would do to ensure you don't repeat the exercise. Find out if the rwy was dry. I'm outa here. Like the last thread, already. But if it was dry, the situation is much, much worse. Yet very clear, again. Stuffed up the approach, ignored stabilized criteria, landed long and this is the result. Repeat action at your peril.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vortex Ring-in-Bangalore
Age: 62
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Chopper Driver's Perspective---
Just a few points from an ex-military Chopper Driver from the Land of Heat and Dust-
- Even if the procedure for Mangalore is an arc-DME approach, with a possibility of starting high, (if) the aircraft was on an autopilot-coupled ILS approach (which I suppose is the norm), the aircraft would have arrived at the correct height on the threshold - or am I missing something?
@swish266 and others (“and a million uneducated, corrupt and inefficient people from Developing and Developed countries from further diminishing the importance of the job of professional pilot.”) - I believe you are deluding yourself that most Indian aviators are low-level morons tarnishing the image of a professional pilot. Agreed, you have seen the seamy side of civil aviation in India up-front and close and there is little doubt that the civil regulatory system here, is loose and corrupt at best. However, having served a tenure as Chief of Operations of an IAF base in the northeast, I have also witnessed some fine handling of emergencies and good airmanship by Indian civil pilots. Yes - having a loose and decrepit civil regulatory system is a terrible disadvantage and may have been a factor in the accident, but then let’s wait for the report of the investigation, shall we?
And before also you write off the investigating capabilities of the same million, uneducated corrupt b*ggers (!), news has it that the NTSB will also aid in the investigations... so there, the whole truth is bound to come out .
@swish266 –Finally in all seriousness -having interacted and flown with military aviators world-wide in exercises, evaluations and airshows, I can confidently state that at least the Indian military pilots aren’t all that different in our skillsets.
So then, let’s get off our high horses and have some objectivity here, shall we?
- Even if the procedure for Mangalore is an arc-DME approach, with a possibility of starting high, (if) the aircraft was on an autopilot-coupled ILS approach (which I suppose is the norm), the aircraft would have arrived at the correct height on the threshold - or am I missing something?
@swish266 and others (“and a million uneducated, corrupt and inefficient people from Developing and Developed countries from further diminishing the importance of the job of professional pilot.”) - I believe you are deluding yourself that most Indian aviators are low-level morons tarnishing the image of a professional pilot. Agreed, you have seen the seamy side of civil aviation in India up-front and close and there is little doubt that the civil regulatory system here, is loose and corrupt at best. However, having served a tenure as Chief of Operations of an IAF base in the northeast, I have also witnessed some fine handling of emergencies and good airmanship by Indian civil pilots. Yes - having a loose and decrepit civil regulatory system is a terrible disadvantage and may have been a factor in the accident, but then let’s wait for the report of the investigation, shall we?
And before also you write off the investigating capabilities of the same million, uneducated corrupt b*ggers (!)
, news has it that the NTSB will also aid in the investigations... so there, the whole truth is bound to come out .@swish266 –Finally in all seriousness -having interacted and flown with military aviators world-wide in exercises, evaluations and airshows, I can confidently state that at least the Indian military pilots aren’t all that different in our skillsets.
So then, let’s get off our high horses and have some objectivity here, shall we?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@exspeedbird - you said: "..."I cannot transmit an improvement in the visibility until it has been positively sustained for 10 minutes " he said.
......
Maybe the ATC controller was following the book, but my question later was - if the RVR was reducing below legal minima one dark and dirty night, would they not tell me until 10 minutes after I had crashed on the field ?"
Don't you answer your own question? Note that the key words: "I cannot transmit an improvement in the visibility until it has been positively sustained for 10 minutes" he said."
......
Maybe the ATC controller was following the book, but my question later was - if the RVR was reducing below legal minima one dark and dirty night, would they not tell me until 10 minutes after I had crashed on the field ?"
Don't you answer your own question? Note that the key words: "I cannot transmit an improvement in the visibility until it has been positively sustained for 10 minutes" he said."
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Birthplace of Aviation
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quasy-digital Indian design
I wonder what exactly is a 'quasy'[sic] digital design. I can only hazard a guess..
the RVR equipment that has to display a reading of ABCD m, may be having 4 dials, one for each digit, am I close enough?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: mumbai
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'But if you're a starving CFI, it might pay to review how an airliner can run off the end of a runway and kill pretty much everyone onboard. This you would do to ensure you don't repeat the exercise. Find out if the rwy was dry. I'm outa here. Like the last thread, already. But if it was dry, the situation is much, much worse. Yet very clear, again. Stuffed up the approach, ignored stabilized criteria, landed long and this is the result. Repeat action at your peril.'
true...but i'm not. i understand these things. i was merely pointing out the fact that the speculation only creates confusion. some say wet, some say dry. everyone seems to know exactly what happened before the bodies are cold.
true...but i'm not. i understand these things. i was merely pointing out the fact that the speculation only creates confusion. some say wet, some say dry. everyone seems to know exactly what happened before the bodies are cold.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Maybe the ATC controller was following the book, but my question later was - if the RVR was reducing below legal minima one dark and dirty night, would they not tell me until 10 minutes after I had crashed on the field ?"
You won't crash on the field because the vis has dropped. However, you might crash on the field if you don't react correctly to the fact that the vis has dropped. All you have to do is carry out the correct missed aproach if you don't acquire the correct visual refrences at MDA/H. It is not rocket science, it's aviation...it's your job.
You won't crash on the field because the vis has dropped. However, you might crash on the field if you don't react correctly to the fact that the vis has dropped. All you have to do is carry out the correct missed aproach if you don't acquire the correct visual refrences at MDA/H. It is not rocket science, it's aviation...it's your job.
I agree with TopTup - it's the System, and the Culture.
David1300 Good point ! To be honest I can't accurately recall the precise words some 30+ years later, but the impression I formed, and am therefore left with, was that any change had to be proved to be sustained in the same direction before it was passed to an aircraft .
I would agree that one has to wait a little time to prove that a change in the reading was not transitory, and that the 'improvement' - in this case - was continuing in a positive direction, it would be confusing to be told that the RVR was 200 - 210 -215 - 205 - 220 - 200 etc. over a short space of time, but my point was that the sun was getting higher in the sky, the fog was clearing, the controller had a good view of the whole airfield,and terrain beyond, I was up there with them and could see how the visibility had rapidly improved, yet he insisted in sticking to the book in full knowledge that he had an inbound flight holding at altitude within minutes of having to divert to a distant airfield if he didn't at least advise them that the situation was improving and that the aircraft could shortly expect a descent clearance.
Occasionally one has to think outside the square - and of course justify that action At The Subsequent Court Of Inquiry !
And ....... I did - later - question to others what their procedure might be when the situation was degrading. I never found out.
Fireflybob Why ? no idea, probably a local requirement.
Jimmygill the numbers were shown by a series of what I would now describe as little red LED's, like nothing I had seen before, or since, it looked very 'local' !
One did occasionally despair ! Flying from Bangkok to Calcutta when one of the Indian / Pakistan wars broke out, we were adv. that our track would carry us over East Pakistan ( now Bangladesh ) and this was now forbidden, so turn left and proceed to a Lat. and Long. South of Calcutta and then intercept and fly inbound on the 180 radial of the Calcutta VOR.
Out with the sextant and 'found' the required position, then turned North and discovered that we couldn't pick up the Calcutta VOR. Yes, said ATC, we have turned off all Navaids and airport lights due enemy attack, but maintain the 180 radial of the VOR. You want us to maintain the 180 radial of the Calcutta VOR, which you have turned off ? Affirmative.
We called company who told us that the airport was in complete darkness, and confirmed that all navaids - including the ILS - were turned off, but they had been assured that when we were on finals we could have the runway lights for 30 secs. What was the current weather ? 800 ft. overcast in rain. Goodnight !
Back to ATC to request a diversion to Rangoon. OK, cleared via the 180 radial of the Calcutta VOR to the previous Lat / Long position. We're not receiving the VOR. Correct, it is turned off due enemy attack, maintain the 180 radial Southbound.
Monty Python couldn't have written the script, and Bill Gates wouldn't believe it, so it would never be part of a Flight Sim. scenario, still, I did get to see Rangoon - my one and only visit !
David1300 Good point ! To be honest I can't accurately recall the precise words some 30+ years later, but the impression I formed, and am therefore left with, was that any change had to be proved to be sustained in the same direction before it was passed to an aircraft .
I would agree that one has to wait a little time to prove that a change in the reading was not transitory, and that the 'improvement' - in this case - was continuing in a positive direction, it would be confusing to be told that the RVR was 200 - 210 -215 - 205 - 220 - 200 etc. over a short space of time, but my point was that the sun was getting higher in the sky, the fog was clearing, the controller had a good view of the whole airfield,and terrain beyond, I was up there with them and could see how the visibility had rapidly improved, yet he insisted in sticking to the book in full knowledge that he had an inbound flight holding at altitude within minutes of having to divert to a distant airfield if he didn't at least advise them that the situation was improving and that the aircraft could shortly expect a descent clearance.
Occasionally one has to think outside the square - and of course justify that action At The Subsequent Court Of Inquiry !
And ....... I did - later - question to others what their procedure might be when the situation was degrading. I never found out.
Fireflybob Why ? no idea, probably a local requirement.
Jimmygill the numbers were shown by a series of what I would now describe as little red LED's, like nothing I had seen before, or since, it looked very 'local' !
One did occasionally despair ! Flying from Bangkok to Calcutta when one of the Indian / Pakistan wars broke out, we were adv. that our track would carry us over East Pakistan ( now Bangladesh ) and this was now forbidden, so turn left and proceed to a Lat. and Long. South of Calcutta and then intercept and fly inbound on the 180 radial of the Calcutta VOR.
Out with the sextant and 'found' the required position, then turned North and discovered that we couldn't pick up the Calcutta VOR. Yes, said ATC, we have turned off all Navaids and airport lights due enemy attack, but maintain the 180 radial of the VOR. You want us to maintain the 180 radial of the Calcutta VOR, which you have turned off ? Affirmative.
We called company who told us that the airport was in complete darkness, and confirmed that all navaids - including the ILS - were turned off, but they had been assured that when we were on finals we could have the runway lights for 30 secs. What was the current weather ? 800 ft. overcast in rain. Goodnight !
Back to ATC to request a diversion to Rangoon. OK, cleared via the 180 radial of the Calcutta VOR to the previous Lat / Long position. We're not receiving the VOR. Correct, it is turned off due enemy attack, maintain the 180 radial Southbound.
Monty Python couldn't have written the script, and Bill Gates wouldn't believe it, so it would never be part of a Flight Sim. scenario, still, I did get to see Rangoon - my one and only visit !
Last edited by ExSp33db1rd; 24th May 2010 at 08:49.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well sorry about the misunderstanding. Your handle and number of posts led me to think you were a starving chief flying instructor on light aircraft.
Knowing why these accidents occur isn't guess work. Not for those in the industry when their airline proffers information on unstabilized approaches to hopefully inculcate a revulsion for them by its pilots.
If training alone won't force pilots to realise the hazards, industry statistics for over-run's might. They are very telling. They're not massaged.
Over 95% of all over-run's began life as an unstabilized approach. Not all unstabilized approaches end up this way, true, but over 95% of over-run's began unstabilized. Sadly, some may get away with it once, twice, even more times than you'd care to count.
Hence the imperative of airline flight ops departments to insist people carry out missed approaches if not in the slot at the final gate lest a trend develop whereby 'he got away with it' and so can I.
I'm a bit perplexed by what you said on the Afriqiyah thread.
Half way down the runway and you're still coaxing the Libyan pilot to not force it on. This is odd, but I wasn't there. Would you care to expand on that, specifically the reasons why. I'm just left with what you wrote.
Not only would my ass-be-grass for doing that (where I've worked, and now work) but the risk of tailstrike grows alarmingly high when floating down a runway.
Over-run's, tailstrikes...these are very big issues.
This was an over-run. The reasons will be clear soon enough. For me, it already is. Wet or dry, he landed long. Argument over. And that's got naught to do with sounding off. It's got a lot to do with frustration, amazement, distress.
Knowing why these accidents occur isn't guess work. Not for those in the industry when their airline proffers information on unstabilized approaches to hopefully inculcate a revulsion for them by its pilots.
If training alone won't force pilots to realise the hazards, industry statistics for over-run's might. They are very telling. They're not massaged.
Over 95% of all over-run's began life as an unstabilized approach. Not all unstabilized approaches end up this way, true, but over 95% of over-run's began unstabilized. Sadly, some may get away with it once, twice, even more times than you'd care to count.
Hence the imperative of airline flight ops departments to insist people carry out missed approaches if not in the slot at the final gate lest a trend develop whereby 'he got away with it' and so can I.
I'm a bit perplexed by what you said on the Afriqiyah thread.
Half way down the runway and you're still coaxing the Libyan pilot to not force it on. This is odd, but I wasn't there. Would you care to expand on that, specifically the reasons why. I'm just left with what you wrote.
Not only would my ass-be-grass for doing that (where I've worked, and now work) but the risk of tailstrike grows alarmingly high when floating down a runway.
Over-run's, tailstrikes...these are very big issues.
This was an over-run. The reasons will be clear soon enough. For me, it already is. Wet or dry, he landed long. Argument over. And that's got naught to do with sounding off. It's got a lot to do with frustration, amazement, distress.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can see from zaccy's posted video that there is a big drop-off at the RWY 06 end as well, the approach end here - this city is right on the ocean and they build the airport on a precipitous ridge - go figure..
Here's a link to a terrain map of the area around the airport. The gradations in altitude are set at 20m, so about 100 ft steep drop to the river valley below.
Here's a link to a terrain map of the area around the airport. The gradations in altitude are set at 20m, so about 100 ft steep drop to the river valley below.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4PW's
You've just mentioned tail strikes. There's a rumour going around AI that AI Express has had a number of them in the first quarter of this year. If it's true then something is very rotten in the airline and, of course, being well and truly covered up.
You've just mentioned tail strikes. There's a rumour going around AI that AI Express has had a number of them in the first quarter of this year. If it's true then something is very rotten in the airline and, of course, being well and truly covered up.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but my point was that the sun was getting higher in the sky, the fog was clearing, the controller had a good view of the whole airfield,and terrain beyond, I was up there with them and could see how the visibility had rapidly improved, yet he insisted in sticking to the book in full knowledge that he had an inbound flight holding at altitude within minutes of having to divert to a distant airfield if he didn't at least advise them that the situation was improving and that the aircraft could shortly expect a descent clearance.
It would be very risky to fly an approach to minimums without having an out. I would suspect that most companies have fuel policies that prevent you from doing such a thing. I would relate that situation as continuing to your destination and waving your alternate fuel. Most companies have strict guidelines that must be met before waving your alternate fuel requirements (some include the requirement of multiple runways and approaches, no known further delays, and WX well above precision minima).
By passing that information on to your friend you and him both took the risk on your shoulders that he would be landing after his approach. You lined up a couple of holes in the swiss cheese but you were lucky enough that everything else went alright instead of going pear-shaped.
I understand you were only trying to help, and maybe the WX was improving rapidly. But you must understand that aviation is a game of always having back-up plans - that is why we have achieved such a good safety record. Everything we do has backups, and if it doesn't, we are most likely squawking 7700 and including MAYDAY in our call-sign.