Chinese Pilot refused to give way to Qatar Aw. Emergency
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Above the Transition Level
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's more a question of "if" the Qatari had to go around they would have been into their 30mins final reserve and have some serious explaining to do rather than being doomed.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Qatari really had 5 min of fuel remained, for some reasons the Qatari went around on the final approach, even the Juneyao gave way, the Qatari would be doomed.
The bible of radio communications at least in a JAR environment (CAP 413 Radiotelephony Manual) state:
'As soon as there is any doubt as to the safe conduct of a flight, immediately request assistance from ATC. Flight crews should declare the emergency situation early; it can always be cancelled.'
... priority must be given to the distress call! I don't think there are any doubt about it!
Now, if one ATC controller has to control two or more distress aircraft ... in minimum fuel, emergency fuel scenario ... the rules is 'first come, first serve!' unless the crew clearly announce the flight time remaining.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...but all Chinese pilots speak English to level 6, right ICAO? 
Grrr...
Grrr...
Join Date: May 2010
Location: EU
Age: 82
Posts: 5,505
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation Herald:
Qatar Airways confirmed on Aug 26th that due to a substantial delay because of weather at Pudong Airport the captain decided to divert to Hongqiao Airport declaring emergency enroute to Hongqiao because of concerns the flight might need to cut into final fuel reserve if further delayed. The aircraft landed safely at Hongqiao Airport with 5 tons of fuel remaining, more than 30 minutes of flight time remaining and above final fuel reserve. The airline specifically mentioned media reports in China, that the aircraft had only 5 minutes of fuel remaining, are not true.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
777-300.
5 tonnes, assuming it is symetrical, is just 800kgs above the LOW FUEL EICAS would display.
Leading to a Flap 20 landing, limited pitch for any G/A, possibly flying one wing down to get fuel to feed.
So about 5 mins of titting about time with some flap out, not much on a "Dark and Stormy Night"
5 tonnes, assuming it is symetrical, is just 800kgs above the LOW FUEL EICAS would display.
Leading to a Flap 20 landing, limited pitch for any G/A, possibly flying one wing down to get fuel to feed.
So about 5 mins of titting about time with some flap out, not much on a "Dark and Stormy Night"
The story made the South China Morning Post today and is interesting in it's assetions. It says the China Aviation Administration reported that the 777 had considerably more fuel remaining than the pilots told the controllers - enough for about half an hour's flying. However a fuel state of 5 tonnes, there was not much room for error.
What worries me is that our Ops manual requires us to declare an emergency if the aircraft will land below final reserve fuel which in our case is thirty minutes. If we were put into the same position as the Qatari crew and knew that a go around was going to put us in the position of landing with less than fianl reserve - we would have no option but to do what they did.
I suspect that this is a communication problem. I fly into Shanghai a lot and although outwardly the controllers appear to have a grasp of English, they just appear know the standard phrases and responses. If there is any problem which involves something non-standard, they struggle to comprehend.
In my opinion the actions of the Juneyao crew were indefensible if their reported fule state was accurate. THE scmp reports they have been suspended pending further investigations.
What worries me is that our Ops manual requires us to declare an emergency if the aircraft will land below final reserve fuel which in our case is thirty minutes. If we were put into the same position as the Qatari crew and knew that a go around was going to put us in the position of landing with less than fianl reserve - we would have no option but to do what they did.
I suspect that this is a communication problem. I fly into Shanghai a lot and although outwardly the controllers appear to have a grasp of English, they just appear know the standard phrases and responses. If there is any problem which involves something non-standard, they struggle to comprehend.
In my opinion the actions of the Juneyao crew were indefensible if their reported fule state was accurate. THE scmp reports they have been suspended pending further investigations.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: hkg
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here's today's SCMP article in full
Air incident based on lies, report says
Flight crews on both a Qatari and a domestic airliner lied about a fuel shortage during a scare this month, China's aviation watchdog claims
Will Clem in Shanghai
Aug 27, 2011
Flight crews on both aircraft involved in a controversial mid-air emergency over a Shanghai airport this month lied to air-traffic controllers, air-safety watchdogs said.
Pilots on flights operated by Qatar Airways and Juneyao Airlines both exaggerated fuel shortages in order to be given landing priority in the August 13 incident, China Central Television reported yesterday.
The Civil Aviation Administration has been investigating allegations that the pilot of Juneyao flight HO1112 refused to follow controllers' instructions to give way to a Qatar flight from Doha that had issued a Mayday call due to lack of fuel.
The pilots on Qatar flight QR888 reportedly requested an emergency landing as they had just five minutes' worth of fuel remaining, but the flight crew on the Juneyao aircraft - which was already on final approach to Hongqiao International Airport - ignored orders to give way, saying they were also running short of fuel.
The Qatar flight was forced to delay landing, but made it onto the runway without incident.
However, CCTV reported yesterday that the aviation administration found that both aircraft had considerably more fuel remaining than the pilots had told air-traffic controllers.
The Qatar aircraft, a Boeing 777-300ER, still had around five tonnes of aviation fuel after landing, sufficient for approximately half an hour's flying time, while the smaller Juneyao plane had between two and three tonnes, enough to keep it in the air for another hour, the report said.
The aviation administration's eastern branch could not be reached for comment yesterday, and no update had been posted on the administration's website since an initial statement released on Wednesday.
Juneyao said the flight crew involved had been suspended pending the outcome of the administration's investigation, but also stated that "parts of online discussions" of the incident had a "comparatively large discrepancy" from the facts.
Qatar, in a statement released late on Thursday night, said its aircraft had been diverted from Pudong International Airport, also in Shanghai, due to unforeseen thunderstorms.
"In the captain's judgment, in order not to compromise flight safety en route to Hongqiao airport, he declared an emergency."
The release made no mention of the amount of fuel the plane was carrying at the time, but said that media reports of the incident "contain information which is ambiguous and misleading".
A spokesman for the airline declined to elaborate.
"There are many reports and rumours on the internet, and much of the information is not accurate," he said. "The incident is currently under investigation and we are co-operating with the authorities."
Professor Sun Ruishan, director of the Research Institute of Civil Aviation Safety in Tianjin , said that although it was difficult to comment without knowing the full details of the case, it would be highly irregular for pilots to give inaccurate information to air-traffic controllers.
"In the interests of safety, it is absolutely necessary for air-traffic controllers to be able to trust what they are being told by pilots," Sun said. "There can be no room in the industry for pilots to be giving the wrong information so they can jump the queue. That would be a very immoral thing to do."
[email protected]
Flight crews on both a Qatari and a domestic airliner lied about a fuel shortage during a scare this month, China's aviation watchdog claims
Will Clem in Shanghai
Aug 27, 2011
Flight crews on both aircraft involved in a controversial mid-air emergency over a Shanghai airport this month lied to air-traffic controllers, air-safety watchdogs said.
Pilots on flights operated by Qatar Airways and Juneyao Airlines both exaggerated fuel shortages in order to be given landing priority in the August 13 incident, China Central Television reported yesterday.
The Civil Aviation Administration has been investigating allegations that the pilot of Juneyao flight HO1112 refused to follow controllers' instructions to give way to a Qatar flight from Doha that had issued a Mayday call due to lack of fuel.
The pilots on Qatar flight QR888 reportedly requested an emergency landing as they had just five minutes' worth of fuel remaining, but the flight crew on the Juneyao aircraft - which was already on final approach to Hongqiao International Airport - ignored orders to give way, saying they were also running short of fuel.
The Qatar flight was forced to delay landing, but made it onto the runway without incident.
However, CCTV reported yesterday that the aviation administration found that both aircraft had considerably more fuel remaining than the pilots had told air-traffic controllers.
The Qatar aircraft, a Boeing 777-300ER, still had around five tonnes of aviation fuel after landing, sufficient for approximately half an hour's flying time, while the smaller Juneyao plane had between two and three tonnes, enough to keep it in the air for another hour, the report said.
The aviation administration's eastern branch could not be reached for comment yesterday, and no update had been posted on the administration's website since an initial statement released on Wednesday.
Juneyao said the flight crew involved had been suspended pending the outcome of the administration's investigation, but also stated that "parts of online discussions" of the incident had a "comparatively large discrepancy" from the facts.
Qatar, in a statement released late on Thursday night, said its aircraft had been diverted from Pudong International Airport, also in Shanghai, due to unforeseen thunderstorms.
"In the captain's judgment, in order not to compromise flight safety en route to Hongqiao airport, he declared an emergency."
The release made no mention of the amount of fuel the plane was carrying at the time, but said that media reports of the incident "contain information which is ambiguous and misleading".
A spokesman for the airline declined to elaborate.
"There are many reports and rumours on the internet, and much of the information is not accurate," he said. "The incident is currently under investigation and we are co-operating with the authorities."
Professor Sun Ruishan, director of the Research Institute of Civil Aviation Safety in Tianjin , said that although it was difficult to comment without knowing the full details of the case, it would be highly irregular for pilots to give inaccurate information to air-traffic controllers.
"In the interests of safety, it is absolutely necessary for air-traffic controllers to be able to trust what they are being told by pilots," Sun said. "There can be no room in the industry for pilots to be giving the wrong information so they can jump the queue. That would be a very immoral thing to do."
[email protected]
Some serious butt-covering going on here.
The Qatari may have landed with 5 tonnes of fuel, but only AFTER declaring an emergency and being given a priority approach. Had they not done so, and had had to hold further, they would have DEFINATLEY gone into fixed reserve and had an Emergency.
If Qatari SOPs are the same as ours, this was DEFINATLEY an urgency situation, and REQUIRED at least a PAN call. Thing is PAN is not recognised in many places, and it is absolutley at the Commanders discretion to institute a distress phase if he deems it necessary for flight saftey- SAFTEY, not expedience, which was clearly the case with the A320.
To give some numbers, FRES on a 777-300 is typically 3200kg (30 mins, 1500 ft at landing weight) and holding rate is around 6T/hr, so landing with 5T meant he had about one 1.5 min holding pattern between him and Min fuel.
To call initiating a distress Phase in those circumstances "Lying" is just not reasonable, and neither in refusing a go-around to make way for a MAYDAY aircraft when you have 1.5hrs worth in the tanks.
The Qatari may have landed with 5 tonnes of fuel, but only AFTER declaring an emergency and being given a priority approach. Had they not done so, and had had to hold further, they would have DEFINATLEY gone into fixed reserve and had an Emergency.
If Qatari SOPs are the same as ours, this was DEFINATLEY an urgency situation, and REQUIRED at least a PAN call. Thing is PAN is not recognised in many places, and it is absolutley at the Commanders discretion to institute a distress phase if he deems it necessary for flight saftey- SAFTEY, not expedience, which was clearly the case with the A320.
To give some numbers, FRES on a 777-300 is typically 3200kg (30 mins, 1500 ft at landing weight) and holding rate is around 6T/hr, so landing with 5T meant he had about one 1.5 min holding pattern between him and Min fuel.
To call initiating a distress Phase in those circumstances "Lying" is just not reasonable, and neither in refusing a go-around to make way for a MAYDAY aircraft when you have 1.5hrs worth in the tanks.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: China
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ICAO English language
Spitoon re your question. I do not have the exact wording with me, regarding ICAO English requirements. However, if I may paraphrase, they state that level 4 English is required for any pilot or ATC operating or handling an international flight.
the captain decided to divert to Hongqiao Airport declaring emergency enroute to Hongqiao because of concerns the flight might need to cut into final fuel reserve if further delayed.
That could be said to be true of every flight!