Airblue down near Islamabad
Superpilot re “EGPWS - And associated memory items/actions. Did they switch it off? ignore it? was it not working?” (#151)
You may have overlooked the issues about ‘map-slip’ as the cause of the apparent lack of EGPWS; the degraded navigation system accuracy (FMS) would have affected the EGPWS as well.
Essentially the aircraft’s actual position would not correlate with the terrain database, thus the only warnings available were from the old style GPWS using Rad Alt.
(This line of speculation assumes that the aircraft did not have GPS nav, which based on its previous history, appears most likely).
“Asking crew to turn immediately, … ”
As above, if the map indicated erroneously that their indicated position was safe then there was a conflict of advice; the crew (human nature) chose ‘their’ solution – there ‘knew’ where they were based on ‘the map’. Unfortunately this weakness in ‘knowledge’ has been a common factor in CFIT accidents; similarly and unfortunately, a late pull up and not quite clearing a hill top.
Yes complacency, perhaps the final link in a chain of contributing factors; - not the best standard of equipment, weak systems knowledge, procedures, training, situation/weather judgement, and the ‘illusion of normality’ based on technology – ‘the magenta line on the map’.
You may have overlooked the issues about ‘map-slip’ as the cause of the apparent lack of EGPWS; the degraded navigation system accuracy (FMS) would have affected the EGPWS as well.
Essentially the aircraft’s actual position would not correlate with the terrain database, thus the only warnings available were from the old style GPWS using Rad Alt.
(This line of speculation assumes that the aircraft did not have GPS nav, which based on its previous history, appears most likely).
“Asking crew to turn immediately, … ”
As above, if the map indicated erroneously that their indicated position was safe then there was a conflict of advice; the crew (human nature) chose ‘their’ solution – there ‘knew’ where they were based on ‘the map’. Unfortunately this weakness in ‘knowledge’ has been a common factor in CFIT accidents; similarly and unfortunately, a late pull up and not quite clearing a hill top.
Yes complacency, perhaps the final link in a chain of contributing factors; - not the best standard of equipment, weak systems knowledge, procedures, training, situation/weather judgement, and the ‘illusion of normality’ based on technology – ‘the magenta line on the map’.
Last edited by PEI_3721; 29th Jul 2010 at 20:16.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
old airbus would remember a left turn to MA heading where you originally set it and turn flight directors the wrong way! Boeing knew to take the shortest path to the heading preset. Airbus did not. One more friggin distraction!
You also had to check and see that the MA was still in the FMS, IIRC. Sometimes it just didn't stay in there with the runway change.
All part of the fun. It is what it is, and as always you just have to know your plane and think ahead of it modern or not. Some like to make this a young vs. old thing, but I've seen both have problems with it. From what I've seen most older guys seem to understand the basic systems (elec, hyd, air, etc) better and more in-depth than younger guys, probably because that's how they were trained initially and that's where most of the problems with older a/c are. When it comes to those systems, which often have as many quirks and things that need massaging as modern ac fmc/autopilots, those pilots tend to think of those issues like a fine wine and hammer those who do not understand the quirks well or complain about how they should be fixed. However that doesn't extend to the A/P FMC on modern a/c where the same pilots will often spend half the flight telling you how the thing should be redesigned and is a crime against humanity. The younger guys tend to accept the FMC/AP for what it is, sometimes turning their brains off in the process, but have little interest or knowledge in how the other a/c systems work. They're comfortable with the automation and they know the 'routine' very, very well. Where a lot screw up to me is that they don't apply that sometimes natural comfort with the automation with the older guys zeal for understanding how the system really works and what could go wrong. Worst is that many don't seem to care. While I'm still big nag on keeping your handflying skills up in an FMC/AP world, overtime I'm beginning to think that lack of true understanding of what the system is doing beyond following the profile is almost as big of a factor in many incidents/accidents. Most of the main systems on modern a/c are pretty reliable making the old school overanalyzing them not as fruitful imo, but the same cannot be said for the automation which is more complex than it often seems on the surface and becoming increasingly so. Most of the time the answer to 'what's it doing now?' is that we didn't really understand what it was doing in the first place. Very broad brush strokes for sure on young v. old before I get jumped on the above.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: East Anglia
Age: 83
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh my aching arse.......ATC...Told him to "Turn immediately"....What sort of quality and confusing advice to a pilot under pressure was that?
Was this a professional controller or the bloody tea boy?
For Christ sake ATC in future give the poor disoriented pilot bugger a break and a clue!
This was not a simulator check ride real peoples lives were involved.
I think it would have been nice to have told him a direction to a heading in proper ATC radio speak....this pilot you had clearly observed was starting to get this approach badly wrong.
To think it used to be called an Air traffic control SERVICE!
This accident reminds me of the film Aeroplane when ATC pulled the plug to turn off the runway lights to "help" the pilot see the runway and land.
Was this a professional controller or the bloody tea boy?
For Christ sake ATC in future give the poor disoriented pilot bugger a break and a clue!
This was not a simulator check ride real peoples lives were involved.
I think it would have been nice to have told him a direction to a heading in proper ATC radio speak....this pilot you had clearly observed was starting to get this approach badly wrong.
To think it used to be called an Air traffic control SERVICE!
This accident reminds me of the film Aeroplane when ATC pulled the plug to turn off the runway lights to "help" the pilot see the runway and land.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: north-south of nowhere
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
theres only one turn avialible on the circle to land. you turn left, the controllers had already advised them that they had overshot to which the crew responded runway insight...the second call was turn left immdiately you are going into margalla
besides, to the 1st warning the crew responded runway insight and to the second one, they said we see it or on that lines. not much more a controller can do can he?
for the guys who dont operate to/from OPRN. you realistically have 1 turn avialible after rbeaking off for the circle to land.if you make a right hand turn to abort, you not only overfly the presidency, parliment etc, but you also overfly some very sensitive area after which you will be greated by the ISI at the stand. not to mention a right hand turn mean a minimum of alteast 110 degree turn just to get parallel to the hills. fastest way is to turn left where its less than a 80 degree turn to get parallel to the hills
besides, to the 1st warning the crew responded runway insight and to the second one, they said we see it or on that lines. not much more a controller can do can he?
for the guys who dont operate to/from OPRN. you realistically have 1 turn avialible after rbeaking off for the circle to land.if you make a right hand turn to abort, you not only overfly the presidency, parliment etc, but you also overfly some very sensitive area after which you will be greated by the ISI at the stand. not to mention a right hand turn mean a minimum of alteast 110 degree turn just to get parallel to the hills. fastest way is to turn left where its less than a 80 degree turn to get parallel to the hills
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC, I think you summed it up. Circling as they did to the crash site was not a circling approach authorized in any country. The FDR and CVR will tell the story of how they managed to accomplish it. Bet if they were in an all manual 727 not fiddling with stuff they would have been fine just looking out the window.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I play around with the Garmin G-1000 trainer for the Cessna Mustang a lot these days. The trainer is a genuine nav trainer with the actual terrain modeling for TAWS, and it has a worldwide, albeit out of date, nav database. But, not that far out of date for OPRN; i.e., the datebase is late 2008 and the last Jeppesen revisions for OPRN are dated in 2006.
Also, the G-1000 in this version has synthetic vision.
This is not a desktop toy, but an accurate representation of an airframe certified system.
All coupled up I arrived from the south and flew the ILS DME Rwy 30 procedure down the G/S to 2510, msl, then at the appropriate place I departed the electronic guidance to the right on heading and altitude at 2510 to do a circle-to-land.
I also entered "direct-to" to a waypoint I had constructed to represent the approach end of Runway 12.
I flew 40 degrees to the right of the LOC until I felt I was in a position to turn left to a runway parallel heading. This was at about 2.5 miles on my Runway 12 waypoint. I then charged onward. Everything was fine at 5 miles, but of course I should have been turning left in time to remain within 5.2 miles. Since I didn't I was headed towards the nasty terrain on a heading of 296. The TAWS woke up quite loudly at about 5.5 miles. The terrain became more detailed on the synthetic vision, and at 6 miles yellow became red. The crash was at 7.2 miles.
Chilling, but very informative.
Also, the G-1000 in this version has synthetic vision.
This is not a desktop toy, but an accurate representation of an airframe certified system.
All coupled up I arrived from the south and flew the ILS DME Rwy 30 procedure down the G/S to 2510, msl, then at the appropriate place I departed the electronic guidance to the right on heading and altitude at 2510 to do a circle-to-land.
I also entered "direct-to" to a waypoint I had constructed to represent the approach end of Runway 12.
I flew 40 degrees to the right of the LOC until I felt I was in a position to turn left to a runway parallel heading. This was at about 2.5 miles on my Runway 12 waypoint. I then charged onward. Everything was fine at 5 miles, but of course I should have been turning left in time to remain within 5.2 miles. Since I didn't I was headed towards the nasty terrain on a heading of 296. The TAWS woke up quite loudly at about 5.5 miles. The terrain became more detailed on the synthetic vision, and at 6 miles yellow became red. The crash was at 7.2 miles.
Chilling, but very informative.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US we have category C and D circling minimums that restrict your altitude and visibility depending on approach speed. It never lets you exceed 2 miles from the airport. How did they meander 7 miles away into the hills? I don't think EGPWS and automation on Airbus planes can prevent accidents like this if pilots do not adhere to standard procedures. Map shifts probably are a thing of the past. Seven years ago I did my last flight retiring into a dangerous mountain airport in Honduras and all of our aircraft had GPS so map shift ever happened. We made all turns visually using visual check points and it worked very well. Programming a computer to do the same thing is very time consuming and better spent looking outside.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the US we have category C and D circling minimums that restrict your altitude and visibility depending on approach speed. It never lets you exceed 2 miles from the airport.
Having flown to ISB a few times, have to say the ATC is 'OK' generally, however, the circle to land for runway 12 (at night) is one of the blackest holes I have seen in quite a long time...and we circle regularly at other airports.
I don't think EGPWS and automation on Airbus planes can prevent accidents like this if pilots do not adhere to standard procedures.
We made all turns visually using visual check points and it worked very well. Programming a computer to do the same thing is very time consuming and better spent looking outside.
Basic flying skills, no more, no less.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, close to the top of the hill indeed, but the vast majority of CFIT accidents occur on the highest 500 feet of local terrain. We don't miss by much.
I would have to assume this Airblue aircraft was equipped with EGPWS, as the date of manufacture is 2000 and EGPWS was standard on Airbus by then.
There should be no reason to shut off EGPWS going into Islamabad based on database, OPRN has been in the database since first EGPWS in mid-1990s.
As mentioned above, Airbus EGPWS solution did not include GPS input for many years, just FMS, and map shift does happen as B-Med at Addis Ababa vividly demonstrated. When EGPWS and nav data are both using garbage, watch out - Report: British Mediterranean A320 at Addis Abeba on Mar 31st 2003, wet VOR nearly causes two CFITs and http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0Report%20.pdf
Get that GPS into your EGPWS and keep that terrain/airport database up to date.
I would have to assume this Airblue aircraft was equipped with EGPWS, as the date of manufacture is 2000 and EGPWS was standard on Airbus by then.
There should be no reason to shut off EGPWS going into Islamabad based on database, OPRN has been in the database since first EGPWS in mid-1990s.
As mentioned above, Airbus EGPWS solution did not include GPS input for many years, just FMS, and map shift does happen as B-Med at Addis Ababa vividly demonstrated. When EGPWS and nav data are both using garbage, watch out - Report: British Mediterranean A320 at Addis Abeba on Mar 31st 2003, wet VOR nearly causes two CFITs and http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0Report%20.pdf
Get that GPS into your EGPWS and keep that terrain/airport database up to date.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: France
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
these guys probably got lost. Just checked taf/metars:
- OPRN 300900Z 23008KT 5000 HZ SCT030 31/25 Q1003.0- OPRN 300330Z 3006/3112 09010G20KT 3000 HZ FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3008/3015 2000 TSRA FEW030CB SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3016/3020 10010G20KT 3000 HZ FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3022/3103 2000 TSRA FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3104/3112 10010G20KT 4000 HZ FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100
=> crappy vis and TAFs so-so.
- All FMS get lost (I flew 737s, 310, 747, A320), but GPS is the prefered input in 320s and reliability is there now.
- Circling IS tricky, specially with bad weather. you need to stick tight to your pattern and brief for hazards: ground (EGPWS, PULL UP proc.), weather (time your pattern, what to do if you lose ground sight), and check your position with radio aids and map if you have one (careful), and imply all cockpit.
- OPRN 300900Z 23008KT 5000 HZ SCT030 31/25 Q1003.0- OPRN 300330Z 3006/3112 09010G20KT 3000 HZ FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3008/3015 2000 TSRA FEW030CB SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3016/3020 10010G20KT 3000 HZ FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3022/3103 2000 TSRA FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100 TEMPO 3104/3112 10010G20KT 4000 HZ FEW030TCU SCT040 BKN100
=> crappy vis and TAFs so-so.
- All FMS get lost (I flew 737s, 310, 747, A320), but GPS is the prefered input in 320s and reliability is there now.
- Circling IS tricky, specially with bad weather. you need to stick tight to your pattern and brief for hazards: ground (EGPWS, PULL UP proc.), weather (time your pattern, what to do if you lose ground sight), and check your position with radio aids and map if you have one (careful), and imply all cockpit.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: grenoble
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh my aching arse.......ATC...Told him to "Turn immediately"....What sort of quality and confusing advice to a pilot under pressure was that?
Was this a professional controller or the bloody tea boy?
For Christ sake ATC in future give the poor disoriented pilot bugger a break and a clue!
This was not a simulator check ride real peoples lives were involved.
I think it would have been nice to have told him a direction to a heading in proper ATC radio speak....this pilot you had clearly observed was starting to get this approach badly wrong.
To think it used to be called an Air traffic control SERVICE!
This accident reminds me of the film Aeroplane when ATC pulled the plug to turn off the runway lights to "help" the pilot see the runway and land.
Was this a professional controller or the bloody tea boy?
For Christ sake ATC in future give the poor disoriented pilot bugger a break and a clue!
This was not a simulator check ride real peoples lives were involved.
I think it would have been nice to have told him a direction to a heading in proper ATC radio speak....this pilot you had clearly observed was starting to get this approach badly wrong.
To think it used to be called an Air traffic control SERVICE!
This accident reminds me of the film Aeroplane when ATC pulled the plug to turn off the runway lights to "help" the pilot see the runway and land.
Secondly, even if you are to believe this, the phrase uttered by the ATC was "Immediately turn left, Margalla (hills) are ahead". And the source of this supposed communication is Express News...well known for their exaggeration and "being first to break the news" (even if it is false).
What sounds more ridiculous, however, is that the black boxes have not been found so far even though this happened just a couple of kilometers from the Capital city not some freakin middle of the ocean.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
p51guy:
Check the FAA's AIM. That is not quite correct.
In the US we have category C and D circling minimums that restrict your altitude and visibility depending on approach speed. It never lets you exceed 2 miles from the airport.
Oh my aching arse.......ATC...Told him to "Turn immediately"....What sort of quality and confusing advice to a pilot under pressure was that?
Was this a professional controller or the bloody tea boy?
For Christ sake ATC in future give the poor disoriented pilot bugger a break and a clue!
Was this a professional controller or the bloody tea boy?
For Christ sake ATC in future give the poor disoriented pilot bugger a break and a clue!
Are you frekin' kiddin?
Who is in control of the plane. Come on, please remind me?
- GY
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks - even if 411A doesn't know his own circling area , it matters not for this crash. Whether they were using a TERPS area or a PansOps circling area is TOTALLY irrelevant as they were way outside both.
, it matters not for this crash. Whether they were using a TERPS area or a PansOps circling area is TOTALLY irrelevant as they were way outside both.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Virginia USA
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do any of you remember how long it took to find the black box in the Manglore accident? I think it was some days and everyone was getting antsy.
Nothing yet from this accident and conspiracy theories are starting to grow -- including that the army has confiscated it.
Nothing yet from this accident and conspiracy theories are starting to grow -- including that the army has confiscated it.
Circle to land procedures are quite safe so long as crews are trained and practiced to do same and know the limitations etc.
However, I think that maybe the question we should be asking is, given the area navigation capabilities of most modern aircraft. why is it ever necessary to carry out a circle to land procedure (ok yes there may be certain locations where a straight in isn't feasable due terrain etc)?
A much more concerted effort should be made to approve and regulate approaches which would avoid having to do a circle to land.
However, I think that maybe the question we should be asking is, given the area navigation capabilities of most modern aircraft. why is it ever necessary to carry out a circle to land procedure (ok yes there may be certain locations where a straight in isn't feasable due terrain etc)?
A much more concerted effort should be made to approve and regulate approaches which would avoid having to do a circle to land.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: north-south of nowhere
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actaully the FDR was foundon the 1st day. considering theh crash site is barely 2NM from the Air HQ and Naval HQ, they had people on site pretty quick.
no it has not been confiscated by the military. i can see this romour would come from, the CAA is comes under the MoD in pakistan. plus everything is blamed on the army anyway .
Meekal. the C-130 with Zia ul Haq went down due to full Boast Package Failure. in other words they lost total hydraullics including the 2 redundant systems. it take 2 fully grown men to move the yoke without hydraullics on the herk. anyone here flying the herks can verify that. it happens extremely rarely but yes it does happen. ps recurrent training after the BoI showed only 1 crew could actaully bring it back and that too resulted in a crash landing. all the info is there.
no it has not been confiscated by the military. i can see this romour would come from, the CAA is comes under the MoD in pakistan. plus everything is blamed on the army anyway .
Meekal. the C-130 with Zia ul Haq went down due to full Boast Package Failure. in other words they lost total hydraullics including the 2 redundant systems. it take 2 fully grown men to move the yoke without hydraullics on the herk. anyone here flying the herks can verify that. it happens extremely rarely but yes it does happen. ps recurrent training after the BoI showed only 1 crew could actaully bring it back and that too resulted in a crash landing. all the info is there.