SIA 777 off the rwy at EDDM
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Around the World
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Men vs. Autopilot?
The skid marks might come from a "fight" between the autopilot being in rollout mode and the pilots trying to steer the plane manually. They might not have realised that the autopilot was still engaged when they applied asymmetric brake forces or nose wheel steering inputs.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: U.S. East Cost and Europe (travelling too much, and at home in both)
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@GYS - thank you for the long and clear answer, I learn something new ever yady.
Yes, you see the loc-signal swing from left to right and back. Most of the time you see it when somebody crosses the signal before you (when you are on final) but it can happen when you are on the ground as well.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In a bunk at 40,000 ft
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slayer,
Correct me if I am wrong here. But a 'No flare' situation during a planned autoland would reflect at 500 ft Agl with a 'Land 2' or above 500 ft Agl with a 'No Autoland' message right.
Like I said correct me.
And FWIW, the correct procedure for a 'No flare' at 40 ft RA is a simple TOGA. Tail may strike, but that's the flea with the dog.
Any other malfunction after successful touchdown, disconnect the A/P.
And freightdog is right about the abort landing procedure. IF in fact that happened here for whatever reasons.
Correct me if I am wrong here. But a 'No flare' situation during a planned autoland would reflect at 500 ft Agl with a 'Land 2' or above 500 ft Agl with a 'No Autoland' message right.
Like I said correct me.
And FWIW, the correct procedure for a 'No flare' at 40 ft RA is a simple TOGA. Tail may strike, but that's the flea with the dog.
Any other malfunction after successful touchdown, disconnect the A/P.
And freightdog is right about the abort landing procedure. IF in fact that happened here for whatever reasons.
Turning Moment
@69Flight
My take on that is that it would take more than just the nosewheel steering to generate the turning moment as shown by the skid tracks. perhaps a stuck reverser.
FN
The skid marks might come from a "fight" between the autopilot being in rollout mode and the pilots trying to steer the plane manually. They might not have realised that the autopilot was still engaged when they applied asymmetric brake forces or nose wheel steering inputs.
FN
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas, like a whole other country
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
all 78 killed on a taxi way masquerading as a runway in tpe
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
In fact, it was a closed runway (5R) choked with construction equipment, not a taxiway. And the pax death toll was actually 79.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: A parallel universe.
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@A380 Jockey
Correct me if I am wrong here. But a 'No flare' situation during a planned autoland would reflect at 500 ft Agl with a 'Land 2' or above 500 ft Agl with a 'No Autoland' message right.
Like I said correct me.
Like I said correct me.
I suppose it's not much different than on the A(irbus)380.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In a bunk at 40,000 ft
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Tank.
I assumed if there was a malfunction detected at 500' which would not let the flare mode engage at say 50', then the flare armed would not indicate. Therefore triggering the 'Land 2'.
I however say this from memory ..
I assumed if there was a malfunction detected at 500' which would not let the flare mode engage at say 50', then the flare armed would not indicate. Therefore triggering the 'Land 2'.
I however say this from memory ..
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: A parallel universe.
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assumed if there was a malfunction detected at 500' which would not let the flare mode engage at say 50', then the flare armed would not indicate. Therefore triggering the 'Land 2'.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is exactly the problem in SIA's FO autoland procedure: Nobody is checking the FMA and the AP. They both look outside and are merely passengers.
That's why this procedure has to be removed. The investigation will hopefully show who was at the controls.
btw very unlikely they tried a go around. A 777 climbs from 0 ft even with only one engine.
That's why this procedure has to be removed. The investigation will hopefully show who was at the controls.
btw very unlikely they tried a go around. A 777 climbs from 0 ft even with only one engine.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In a bunk at 40,000 ft
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Land 3' annunciated > 500', fault detected in flare mode, will revert to 'Land 2'.
Then at 500' if flare fault remains, 'No Autoland'.
However this sequence will only be initiated once 'Land 3' is annunciated on the AFDS.
'No flare' then at 40' RA is a simple TOGA procedure. Provided of course(and this is a very important provided)the PM catches it AND announces it on time.
With ground effect altitude loss is about half the height at which GA is initiated. Therefore you still might get away with no tailstrike(especially on the -300 variants),if GA initiated exactly at 40' RA(impossible humanly).
But there is a very very small number of things that can go wrong in the flare mode IF the AFSEM has not annunciated 'No autoland' by 500'. There ARE some component malfunctions that still can't be caught in a fail operational system for a no flare fault. But they are very very few and can be counted on the fingers of one hand or less(the failable components that is).
Hope I managed to make some sense.
Then at 500' if flare fault remains, 'No Autoland'.
However this sequence will only be initiated once 'Land 3' is annunciated on the AFDS.
'No flare' then at 40' RA is a simple TOGA procedure. Provided of course(and this is a very important provided)the PM catches it AND announces it on time.
With ground effect altitude loss is about half the height at which GA is initiated. Therefore you still might get away with no tailstrike(especially on the -300 variants),if GA initiated exactly at 40' RA(impossible humanly).
But there is a very very small number of things that can go wrong in the flare mode IF the AFSEM has not annunciated 'No autoland' by 500'. There ARE some component malfunctions that still can't be caught in a fail operational system for a no flare fault. But they are very very few and can be counted on the fingers of one hand or less(the failable components that is).
Hope I managed to make some sense.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dani :
How many times must it be stated on this thread that SIA FOs DO NOT CONDUCT AUTOLANDS AS A PF. IT IS ALWAYS THE CAPTAIN WHO IS THE PF, BOTH FOR PRACTICE AND ACTUAL AUTOLANDS.
That is exactly the problem in SIA's FO autoland procedure: Nobody is checking the FMA and the AP. They both look outside and are merely passengers.
That's why this procedure has to be removed. The investigation will hopefully show who was at the controls.
btw very unlikely they tried a go around. A 777 climbs from 0 ft even with only one engine.
That's why this procedure has to be removed. The investigation will hopefully show who was at the controls.
btw very unlikely they tried a go around. A 777 climbs from 0 ft even with only one engine.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do-Me-Please - Is it written in the Ops manual that FOs are not allowed to do an auto-land in Cat 1 or better weather, or is that just a habit that has developed? In my time on the B744 FOs were allowed, but rarely did do an autoland, they needed the manual landings for promotion. They were encouraged to do them for the Capt. incapacitation scenario but this was sometimes addressed in the SIM. Quite important that an FO can carry out a satisfactory autoland as in the Capt. incapacitation case he may have to if the weather is crap, can't go flying all over the globe looking for an alternate that is VMC with a possibly dying colleague in the other seat.
R/W 05R TPE - At the time of the SQ006 accident this runway was promulgated as a runway and NOTAM'ed as 'closed - under repair', it became a taxiway when the repairs were completed. On the night in question there were no crosses at the threshold and the runway lights were on.
R/W 05R TPE - At the time of the SQ006 accident this runway was promulgated as a runway and NOTAM'ed as 'closed - under repair', it became a taxiway when the repairs were completed. On the night in question there were no crosses at the threshold and the runway lights were on.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the first Operations Manual of Tiger Airways, which was a 1:1 copy of SIA/SLK procedures, there was a very strange paragraph, saying that CMD should let the FO make autoland if they don't want to give him the landing - for whatever reason.
I don't know if this paragraph has been lifted in SIA/SLK, in Tiger it never came to execution and was deleted very soon, like many other non-western things coming from SIA...
I don't know if this paragraph has been lifted in SIA/SLK, in Tiger it never came to execution and was deleted very soon, like many other non-western things coming from SIA...
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: India
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reason why this thread remains is that it involved an Asian airline; all the skygods are trying to find fault and gloat about an Asian carrier. Had it been a western carrier this thread would have been merged with an existing one on the SEA forum and all would have been forgotten. There are many failed skygods who just can't live down the self perceived insult of having not been able to con their way into plum positions in SQ that they keep having the axes primed for grinding.
Akali I think it is a shame you feel the way you do. I have just retired from SQ and have many Indian friends that I flew with. Great Guys and good pilots. As an Aussie I have never acted or felt like a "Sky God", far from it. We are all in this business together. As an ex-SQ employee I will not comment on this incident, except to say the FO never did the Auto-Land it was always the Captain, regardless of the weather. I go back to '98 on the 743. Sounds like you have met an Australian A-Hole, all nations have a few of them, we have a few in Parliament, it's called 'Human Nature'. Life would be dull without them.