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

SIA 777 off the rwy at EDDM

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

SIA 777 off the rwy at EDDM

Old 30th Jan 2012, 20:21
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: FL510
Posts: 910
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They basically say that an Avro aircraft went airborne before that landing, but had not yet overflown the localizer antenna by the time the B777 touched down.
The seconds the Avro approached the antenna are the moment the B777 veered of track and eventually left the runway.
A go around was attempted, but "TOGA had no effect" (already on ground), the autopilot (roll out) was disconnected about the time the plane hit the grass.
safelife is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2012, 20:43
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
My airline still requires us to carry out practice autolands. Yes I know a lot of other companies have stopped this including Denti's mob. But I can report from years of trying it in Munich, that it is a hopeless place to practice as the autopilot more often than not trips out on the 737 when the runway is unprotected.

Combine this with very professional but at times sporty sequencing from the tower and I am not at all surprised by the interference with the signal. Interestingly the report says that the 777's autopilot remained engaged, but steered off to the left. Another question is why the go-around did not happen as the captain says he intended. It is in any case a cautionary tale about autolanding without protection.
lederhosen is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2012, 21:02
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: here and there
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From the report:
"Als sich aber abzeichnete, dass das Wetter in München unter den festgelegten Bedingungen lag, bei denen der Copilot die Landung durchführen durfte, übernahm der Kapitän die Aufgabe des Pilot Flying und der Copilot agierte als Pilot Monitoring (PM)"

"But when it became clear that weather in Munich was below the conditions, where the co-pilot was allowed to perform the landing, the captain took over the job of the pilot flying and the co-pilot was acting as pilot monitoring (PM)"

The FO had almost 3700 hours on type
EDDM 031120Z 07010KT 2200 BR OVC003 05/05 Q1010 BECMG 3000 OVC005
EDDM 031050Z 10008KT 2000 BR FEW002 OVC003 04/04 Q1011 BECMG 3000 OVC005
And THIS is the best CAT I weather you can get. Do I have to understand this policy? It's not about flying anymore. It's about sitting around, drinking coffee and enjoying the nice sunset...
bavarian-buddy is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2012, 22:01
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: In front of a computer
Posts: 2,355
Received 85 Likes on 33 Posts
Another question is why the go-around did not happen as the captain says he intended.
Easy to answer - "Automatic go-around cannot be initiated after touchdown"

That's a quote direct from the 777 Flying manual.
ETOPS is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2012, 22:44
  #265 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But when it became clear that weather in Munich was below the conditions, where the co-pilot was allowed to perform the landing, the captain took over the job of the pilot flying and the co-pilot was acting as pilot monitoring (PM)"
and
Do I have to understand this policy? It's not about flying anymore. It's about sitting around, drinking coffee and enjoying the nice sunset...
Possibly something missing here in the translation. FOs may land the aircraft in Cat I conditions. The Ops Manual used to say, (and probably still does), that in visibility of 2000m or less an autoland is recommended.
If company policy on the B777 doesn't allow FOs to carry out practice autolands in Cat I conditions then maybe the captain was using this one to maintain his currency. All a bit irrelevant now!
parabellum is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2012, 23:42
  #266 (permalink)  

Controversial, moi?
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
I am sure they were conforming to the rules but the event was initially down to carrying out an autoland without the protection of LVPs.

I would imagine it all happened very quickly judging by the fact an immediate go-around wasn't flown either automatically or manually after touchdown.

There are several learning points from the incident.

It is easy to criticise but the speed with which events occur can easily catch out all but the most prepared and vigilant, especially after a long and tiring flight.

I recall during my command training when on an approach into LHR my training captain drew my attention to the fact that we had a very light tail wind from around the half past four position and explained that from experience he had once found that a similar wind had blown the preceding aircraft's wake vortex over the threshold resulting in a violent roll just before the flare! I never forgot that and have once experienced the same since.

My point being that despite briefing and mentally preparing myself the onset and speed of the roll was dramatic and I was lucky not to have an embarrassing incident.
M.Mouse is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 02:19
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Copilot stomping on the rudder . . .

The BFU bulletin also mentions that during the initial runway excursion, the captain had applied 23lbs pressure on right rudder pedal and the copilot had simultaneously applied 41 lbs pressure on the right rudder pedal.

This may have contributed to an initial control overcompensation, enhanced at high speed [with no reverse, no spoilers].
GlueBall is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 04:15
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: the ridge where the west commences
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'"Easy to answer - "Automatic go-around cannot be initiated after touchdown"'

It's actually a little more interesting than that. Go-around can't be done through the AFDS from just before touchdown until the airplane is once again airborne. The interesting part is getting airborne again: how is your average johnny going to do that precisely?
Dropp the Pilot is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 05:19
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 880
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
If this crew had been flying an Airbus it would have been a non-event.

Sorry I could not resist seeing all the Airbus bashing there is on PPrune.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 05:20
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hotel
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Parabellum

Unfortunately the term "recommended" is not used. It says an autoland "should" be accomplished in this "severe" weather.
A completely stupid SOP that created this incident. Let's hope they get rid of it now.
Patty747400 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 05:34
  #271 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks Patty747. The word 'should' implies a bit more pressure than 'recommended'! I agree an unecessary SOP, 2000meters is not 'severe' weather!
parabellum is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 06:26
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
The german report suggests there was no clear call for a go-around just the captain calling for flaps 20 and what sounded like the toga switches clicking and the speed brake handle being lowered. Both pilots seem to have been fully focussed on trying to kick the aircraft straight and from then on they seem to have been along for the ride. It is interesting to note in how short a distance the aircraft then came to a stop.

I remember a very early morning approach into Munich a couple of years ago when the weather was just within CAT 1 limits. I briefed for an autoland with the proviso that I would land manually if conditions allowed. Sure enough the fog rolled in. I had already informed the tower of our intentions and we completed a successful auto land. The A330 behind went around and was on stand next to us twenty minutes or so later.
lederhosen is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 07:09
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Dropp the Pilot----Sorry I haven't read all the thread but.......

Go Arounds shouldn't be attempted once Reverse is selected. ( all Airline crew know this )

However, If the A/C is on the ground before reverse is selected then an "Rejected landing" may be conducted safely.

1/ Apply thrust ( t/o Config warning will sound )
2/ At VRef/VApp AND thrust set Rotate
3/ Once airborne Push Toga ( Boeing )
4/ Then continue with a "normal" go around proceedures and calls.

Both for Boeing and Airbus.

Easy peezy

Most Airlines now train this very manoeuvre, at least mine does.

Last edited by nitpicker330; 31st Jan 2012 at 12:11.
nitpicker330 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 09:50
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Far East
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
I fear that the PF tried to initiate the GA by simply pressing the TOGA switches and doing nothing else. As nitpicker comments certain things have to happen.
1. Power must come up. If it doesn't then you push those sticks up (Boeing) towards the panel.
2. The nose must rotate up - be it 5, 7, 10 degrees its got to go up. If it doesn't then make it do so, by taking out the autopilot.

But then all this would be moot if, at the onset of center line deviation the autopilot was disconnect and manual control was taken.
CDRW is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 10:02
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
with more and more information being handed over to the interested public, I see my initial suspicion confirmed: SIA, like many airlines from the warm weather league, does not really have a practical concept on LVP and autoland.

- LVP is when it is in force. It's the airport that decides, not the captain.

- LVP required (mostly) autoland.

- Autoland has nothing to do with visibility. It's an automatic landing. You can do it in any weather.

- Practise autoland should be done in good weather conditions. That's how you keep up your currency.

- Autoland should only be done when LVP is in force, when protected zones are granted OR when it's good weather (so you can see that something goes wrong, i.e. you have an aircraft in your protected zone).

I see here a complete mess-up of procedures, rules and principles. All in all I'm not surprised this has happened.
Dani is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 11:26
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Dani:- Autoland has nothing to do with Visibility? Not sure what you mean by that statement? Yes the Aircraft can't see but the Commander sure has to see something in basically all LVP proceedures. ( excluding Cat 3B with no decision ht ) So Visibility does matter........not to mention there is also a crosswind limit for the Airbus Autoland which is considerably lower than the normal crosswind limit.

Practice Autoland does not have to be done in VMC, currency is kept every 6 months in the SIMULATOR during your Sim cycles as per your Countries regulatory agency.

There is nothing to stop Autolands in marginal weather or if the crew feel tired ( for eg ) Just be aware the protected areas are not protected!! Indeed some Airlines recommend Autoland be used even in conditions which technically don't require it.
nitpicker330 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 11:42
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,548
Received 73 Likes on 42 Posts
Just be aware the protected areas are not protected!!
That is Dani's point. If LVPs are not in place, watch out.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 11:55
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Yes I see that but it's the "Autoland has nothing to do with visibility......you can do it in any Weather" comment that I'm not sure about!! There are further limits with crosswind that certainly do effect Autoland capability.
nitpicker330 is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 12:00
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1/ Apply thrust ( t/o Config warning will sound )
2/ At VRef AND thrust set Rotate
3/ Once airborne Push Toga ( Boeing )
4/ Then continue with a "normal" go around proceedures.
I believe after all wheels on ground,(thrust reversers not deployed), a touch/go maneuver is necessary and not a balked landing which for BOEING is:

1)
Thrust levers mid position,retract speed brakes,retract flaps to 15 while trimming nose around 5 units(737ng).
2)thrust stabilized,apply GA thrust and rotate using white bug.

While a balked landing in the flare area(<50ft) would require to maintain landing pitch while applying GA thrust,when VREF,retract flaps 15 and increase gently pitch to maintain your white bug,about 15 deg.

Autoland practice without prior ATC approval is plain stupid for the reasons mentionned by Dani.
de facto is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2012, 12:07
  #280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Sorry the term is "Rejected Landing" I've edited my previous.

Its an approved and trained Boeing/Airbus proceedure.

Changing the Flaps and Trim is only done during a "planned" Touch and Go with appropriate Training/Check Captains along.

This "Rejected Landing" technique is kept relatively simple so that the un- prepared crew can complete it safely without needing to reset Flaps/Trim.
KISS method!!

And more importantly you need a lot less Runway and time to get airborne again. ( not waiting for flaps and trim to run )
nitpicker330 is offline  

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.