SIA 777 off the rwy at EDDM
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 846
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargojock makes some valid points regarding most of the local F/O's in SIA. Through no fault of their own and due to the nature of the flying in SQ they do not get many sectors in each month and therefore are somewhat timid.
If I gave a F/O a sector into say Bali where the landing was on RW 27 with an ILS and where radar always vector the aircraft on a long right downwind to finals so the F/O has the RW on his side I used to say shall we tell them we have the RW in sight and we will go visual, not once did any F/O say yes despite having the ability to extend the centre line and know exactly the miles to touchdown.
I doubt if any of them would cope with a night visual into say Heraklion or a circling approach at Corfu to RW 17 or at Porta Plata circling to RW 09 at night.
If I gave a F/O a sector into say Bali where the landing was on RW 27 with an ILS and where radar always vector the aircraft on a long right downwind to finals so the F/O has the RW on his side I used to say shall we tell them we have the RW in sight and we will go visual, not once did any F/O say yes despite having the ability to extend the centre line and know exactly the miles to touchdown.
I doubt if any of them would cope with a night visual into say Heraklion or a circling approach at Corfu to RW 17 or at Porta Plata circling to RW 09 at night.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In a bunk at 40,000 ft
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Such a very sad incident could happen to anybody at any point in time. Lets not flog a dead horse here. It's just a question of the level of preparedness for this kind of a glitch at the end of a long Duty period and at the fag end of that too.
At no point will I deny the 'monitor and disconnect' mode of LV ops. But how does any one of us here know that he didn't do just that!
By what I see, the initial excursion on the LHS of the rwy occoured at low speed. Probably less than 60 kts. The rudder aerodynamic control must be close to zero at this point in time. He therefore chose to use the tiller, i reckon.
Over steered, cause obviously he saw the excursion a nano second too late(probably due low the vis/fog), and over reacted.
I, however, am of the firm belief that ALL of us here are in some learning phase or another, irrespective of the level(s) of experience we wield.
This incident should positively be highlighted as a learning experience for all of us here rather than the proverbial finger pointing attitude we choose to adopt. And in the process, grind our very old machettes.
I, for one, am changing my attitude for myself and my pupils from this moment on, towards LVP and Cat-2/3 training.
Needs some hard re thinking. Too many holes lined up already.
Off now..
At no point will I deny the 'monitor and disconnect' mode of LV ops. But how does any one of us here know that he didn't do just that!
By what I see, the initial excursion on the LHS of the rwy occoured at low speed. Probably less than 60 kts. The rudder aerodynamic control must be close to zero at this point in time. He therefore chose to use the tiller, i reckon.
Over steered, cause obviously he saw the excursion a nano second too late(probably due low the vis/fog), and over reacted.
I, however, am of the firm belief that ALL of us here are in some learning phase or another, irrespective of the level(s) of experience we wield.
This incident should positively be highlighted as a learning experience for all of us here rather than the proverbial finger pointing attitude we choose to adopt. And in the process, grind our very old machettes.
I, for one, am changing my attitude for myself and my pupils from this moment on, towards LVP and Cat-2/3 training.
Needs some hard re thinking. Too many holes lined up already.
Off now..
Last edited by A380 Jockey; 6th Nov 2011 at 13:58. Reason: Missed out "the" as kindly pointed out by BOAC
How long does it usually take for the reports to be announced for an incident like this?
If there is a mechanical or systems fault, that all other operators need to know, then within weeks.
If its a CRM issue and or training, then it depends on the investigators workload to create a public report (mostly long after the public has forgotten about it.
as a PPruner, if this thread doesn't reveal the answer via leaks within a month, then you really don't need to know
meanwhile the "could ofs/ should ofs" among us will have a field day of posts to extend the thread life
Join Date: May 2009
Location: hk
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We do not know the facts and the findings at this point of in time.
Autopilot failure? GS? antiskip?(unlikely) or failure to disengage, whatever?
But much have been speculated about unprotected ILS signal.
Have we ever questioned ourselves that "at which point" exactly - the localizer/lateral signal deviated and the RATE at which it deviated?
The results would be very different between at say-- 200ft and "just touch down" with reversers deploying? or charging down the runway at 130 knots with full reversers? etc.
Also not forgeting how fast or slow the rate of deviation is?
I can just imagine no pilot (although guarding controls at all times expecting the worst "at all times" like most pilots will) will be anticipating a; say; full force lateral deviation ; say;...at touch down? (imagine your FO suddenly went mad and kicked full rudder/bank at flare or at 100 knots?) Are we train for that? Hmmm... Why not just train a pilot for every god damn scenerio we can think of...(a mosquito nailing and sucking your di#k at roatation? a little humour wont kill)
I guess the pilot given the situation at THAT point in time did what he had to. Whether Hero or Zero... he had to face whatever it was with everything he had. Who are we to criticise what their training department;the pilot, their FOs their country did etc was it even RELEVANT? Come on guys... Assumptions are mother of all F###UPS. None of us know the facts but some are just quick to point the guns as if "Oh, it will never happen to me when i am at the controls(THE FAMOUS LAST WORDS)..
Utter Disgust for some.
Autopilot failure? GS? antiskip?(unlikely) or failure to disengage, whatever?
But much have been speculated about unprotected ILS signal.
Have we ever questioned ourselves that "at which point" exactly - the localizer/lateral signal deviated and the RATE at which it deviated?
The results would be very different between at say-- 200ft and "just touch down" with reversers deploying? or charging down the runway at 130 knots with full reversers? etc.
Also not forgeting how fast or slow the rate of deviation is?
I can just imagine no pilot (although guarding controls at all times expecting the worst "at all times" like most pilots will) will be anticipating a; say; full force lateral deviation ; say;...at touch down? (imagine your FO suddenly went mad and kicked full rudder/bank at flare or at 100 knots?) Are we train for that? Hmmm... Why not just train a pilot for every god damn scenerio we can think of...(a mosquito nailing and sucking your di#k at roatation? a little humour wont kill)
I guess the pilot given the situation at THAT point in time did what he had to. Whether Hero or Zero... he had to face whatever it was with everything he had. Who are we to criticise what their training department;the pilot, their FOs their country did etc was it even RELEVANT? Come on guys... Assumptions are mother of all F###UPS. None of us know the facts but some are just quick to point the guns as if "Oh, it will never happen to me when i am at the controls(THE FAMOUS LAST WORDS)..
Utter Disgust for some.
Last edited by shinkai744; 6th Nov 2011 at 14:32.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by A380
Corrected my post BOAC.
I assume it would suffice.
I assume it would suffice.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cheshire, UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A380
Just for completeness of information and to allow people to judge what they read and understand here correctly. This is not a long flight duty. They fly MUC-MAN-MUC (fairly quick turn around in MAN). The aircraft is then re-crewed for MUC-SIN as SQ327. I would be surprised if they were fatigued. Just my input.
C-J. Glad to see that you agree with me on the level of LVP training in SQ(C). 777 and 744 fleets (particularly freighter) do find themselves operating in LVO's quite frequently.
Just for completeness of information and to allow people to judge what they read and understand here correctly. This is not a long flight duty. They fly MUC-MAN-MUC (fairly quick turn around in MAN). The aircraft is then re-crewed for MUC-SIN as SQ327. I would be surprised if they were fatigued. Just my input.
C-J. Glad to see that you agree with me on the level of LVP training in SQ(C). 777 and 744 fleets (particularly freighter) do find themselves operating in LVO's quite frequently.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In a bunk at 40,000 ft
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC--Nope I haven't seen it. Was assuming marginal Cat-1/2 ops. You have intel...?!
Neill--Am sorry. Assumed it was the Sin-Muc run. A lil jetlagged am I...
Neill--Am sorry. Assumed it was the Sin-Muc run. A lil jetlagged am I...
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A380 jockey - you think the a/c generated all of that rubber/side loads/skidding, and traveled that far, from less than 60kts?
I don't, which is why we'll have to wait for the investigation.
I don't, which is why we'll have to wait for the investigation.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a bottle
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fact: LVP not is effect(ils not protected)
fact: autoland used for landing
fact: toga use to initiate go-around... a/c veered violently to the right.
to be confirmed: why toga? and when was toga used initiate???
also to be confirmed: no FLARE capture during autoland... thats why hard landing and the need for go-around
always happens to the good guys....cruel world.....
fact: autoland used for landing
fact: toga use to initiate go-around... a/c veered violently to the right.
to be confirmed: why toga? and when was toga used initiate???
also to be confirmed: no FLARE capture during autoland... thats why hard landing and the need for go-around
always happens to the good guys....cruel world.....
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G/A due no FLARE? then TO/GA
ok, just my thoughts on slayerdude's NO FLARE followed by TO/GA "facts":
FLARE activates between 60 and 40 ft radio alt.
so, if you watch the modes you should notice it's not there by about 30 or 20 ft, which gives you enough time to disconnect and land manually or
if you don't watch them, you'll notice it on impact with the runway.
The TO/GA weren't pressed in the air, as this would have ended in a go-around, maybe with a brief touchdown during the procedure, but they would not have landed from this situation.
now if you then press TO/GA after touchdown you'll get nothing, as TO/GA is inhibited and Autothrottle is not available. Only way to reject a landing after touchdown is manually add thrust and hit the TOGA after getting airborne again.
So unless there was a severe malfunction (of TOGA inhibit, A/T inhibit, and you'd need 1 Eng failure followed by a Thrust Asymmetry compensation failure) I can't understand how pushing the TO/GA leads to a runway excursion....
Do you have any more details, as so far this TO/GA "fact" only creates more confusion...
from the picture it looks like a slow departure to the left followed by a violent correction to the right, not an immediate right turn...
so maybe a undetected no "ROLLOUT" only corrected after it got apparent that she won't come back to the centerline all by herself?
FLARE activates between 60 and 40 ft radio alt.
so, if you watch the modes you should notice it's not there by about 30 or 20 ft, which gives you enough time to disconnect and land manually or
if you don't watch them, you'll notice it on impact with the runway.
The TO/GA weren't pressed in the air, as this would have ended in a go-around, maybe with a brief touchdown during the procedure, but they would not have landed from this situation.
now if you then press TO/GA after touchdown you'll get nothing, as TO/GA is inhibited and Autothrottle is not available. Only way to reject a landing after touchdown is manually add thrust and hit the TOGA after getting airborne again.
So unless there was a severe malfunction (of TOGA inhibit, A/T inhibit, and you'd need 1 Eng failure followed by a Thrust Asymmetry compensation failure) I can't understand how pushing the TO/GA leads to a runway excursion....
Do you have any more details, as so far this TO/GA "fact" only creates more confusion...
from the picture it looks like a slow departure to the left followed by a violent correction to the right, not an immediate right turn...
so maybe a undetected no "ROLLOUT" only corrected after it got apparent that she won't come back to the centerline all by herself?
Last edited by freightdog188; 7th Nov 2011 at 01:58. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a bottle
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
freightdog.... no flare... boeing says hit toga ..... boeing also says do not disconnect autopilot in no flare situation during autoland.....
however this I can only verify for the 777 training manual for low vis ops.
the source of info is as close as the fingers that hit the toga buttons....not offering any opinions... juz letting the forum know what i know.
still plenty of facts to be established...
a rumour heard is the uneven spool up of the right engine .... cant confirm fact yet but .... also it was a new right engine that just got slung under the wing the week before last... again to be substantiated.
and please gents ...really no need to reply to wind ups by CJ.... he needs a new thread call bash the mainliners.....nothing really of substance to think about with the CJ rave
fly safe blue side up.
however this I can only verify for the 777 training manual for low vis ops.
the source of info is as close as the fingers that hit the toga buttons....not offering any opinions... juz letting the forum know what i know.
still plenty of facts to be established...
a rumour heard is the uneven spool up of the right engine .... cant confirm fact yet but .... also it was a new right engine that just got slung under the wing the week before last... again to be substantiated.
and please gents ...really no need to reply to wind ups by CJ.... he needs a new thread call bash the mainliners.....nothing really of substance to think about with the CJ rave
fly safe blue side up.
Is the assumption that they were in reverse mode and slow enough for nosewheel steering ?
That would certainly place them in a dicey situation if at the same time they had significant asymetrical thrust.
Similar effect on PA flt 45 A310 landing at DTW (while in reverse it went in one direction and when reverse was cancelled it went in the opposite direction.)
That would certainly place them in a dicey situation if at the same time they had significant asymetrical thrust.
Similar effect on PA flt 45 A310 landing at DTW (while in reverse it went in one direction and when reverse was cancelled it went in the opposite direction.)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SE Asia
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks slayerdude.
I think the "no FLARE -> hit TOGA" and "do not disconnect the AP during Autoland" are valid only for actual LWMO ops, where it is required since you can't land manually without forward visibility.
Any other time you can disconnect and land manually, if you have the necessary visual clues..
I think the "no FLARE -> hit TOGA" and "do not disconnect the AP during Autoland" are valid only for actual LWMO ops, where it is required since you can't land manually without forward visibility.
Any other time you can disconnect and land manually, if you have the necessary visual clues..
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: In a bottle
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
frieghtdog....agreed ...being a boeing...one has manual control at anytime...and the do not disconnect autopilot for no flare is in the LVP procedures and nothing said about an autoland....so how this happened... jury still out...plz be advise that am speculating as the crew now have a gag order in force.....so information presented about the slow spool up was a rumour....
fly safe... blue side up
fly safe... blue side up