Two aborted takeoffs in a row on the same flight!
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeeesus ! Controllers and Pilots are taking good Safety decisons and passengers think it is dangerous ? I think some here should take the train...
Frankfurt: with the introduction of the 3rd runway , the 2 "old" ones are used simousteanously , one for take off one for landing, in case of go around, it is absolutely normal and safe for the dep controller to cancel a take off clearance on the other . That is the opposite that would be very dangerous. ( as it happenned last year Incident: Lufthansa A388 and Aeroflot A320 at Frankfurt on Dec 13th 2011, loss of separation
Procedures too tight ? try Boston and their "land and hold short" one.
Frankfurt: with the introduction of the 3rd runway , the 2 "old" ones are used simousteanously , one for take off one for landing, in case of go around, it is absolutely normal and safe for the dep controller to cancel a take off clearance on the other . That is the opposite that would be very dangerous. ( as it happenned last year Incident: Lufthansa A388 and Aeroflot A320 at Frankfurt on Dec 13th 2011, loss of separation
Procedures too tight ? try Boston and their "land and hold short" one.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote ATC Watcher..."Procedures too tight ? try Boston and their "land and hold short" one."
Not sure of your point here......land and hold short procedures here are simple....you either accept them or you dont......they have a requirement than you inform the app controller as to whether u can accept the hold -short requirement......if not ...you are sequenced so that it is not an issue...I have refused the hold short requirement many times,mostly due to weather conditions and weight....
Not sure of your point here......land and hold short procedures here are simple....you either accept them or you dont......they have a requirement than you inform the app controller as to whether u can accept the hold -short requirement......if not ...you are sequenced so that it is not an issue...I have refused the hold short requirement many times,mostly due to weather conditions and weight....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: US
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm. Frankfurt in November in heavy fog. I am guessing that each takeoff required a 30 second static engine run before commencing takeoff roll to clear any potential engine icing. Why must we make such drama about what another PROFESSIONAL crew did. They most likely know what they are doing and none of us where there.
Jet
Jet
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pakeha-boy :
I was talking about "tight" not "unsafe" procedures.
On introduction of the 4th runway in FRA the procedures were " tight" they have been revised since, but you land less a/c per hour.
LAHSO :these are very tight procures. so tight that some (e.g BALPA and BA,just to name 2 ) refuse them on principle. Does not mean they are unsafe.
I made a LAHSO in BOS on a Dash 8 in the jumseat some years ago, while a DC10 was landing on a interecting runway . Great .I asked what happens if both decide to go around at same time in poor vis ? I agree the likelyhood of this happening is remote, but I could hear Murphy laughing out loud in the background.
There was a time where Safety was first, now it is number of movements per hour...Unsafe ? probably not, Tight?, yes.
Not sure of your point here
On introduction of the 4th runway in FRA the procedures were " tight" they have been revised since, but you land less a/c per hour.
LAHSO :these are very tight procures. so tight that some (e.g BALPA and BA,just to name 2 ) refuse them on principle. Does not mean they are unsafe.
I made a LAHSO in BOS on a Dash 8 in the jumseat some years ago, while a DC10 was landing on a interecting runway . Great .I asked what happens if both decide to go around at same time in poor vis ? I agree the likelyhood of this happening is remote, but I could hear Murphy laughing out loud in the background.
There was a time where Safety was first, now it is number of movements per hour...Unsafe ? probably not, Tight?, yes.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: europe
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like somethings not right here.
Cleared for take off then not, this is FRA not some third world, new world we have LVPS and we are going to be the next super power etc Delhi Belly etc.
I hate to say it but compared to lots of airports Frankfurts generally one of the good ones.
LVPs in force distance between aircraft is increased to 8nm, parallel ops in FRA I assume, they have lots of runways there, so why have departures and arrivals on the same runway.
More like as mentioned engine run up forgotten in fog or a config warning, speed brake not in the detent etc
Who am I to comment as I sit here in the comfort of my lounge.
Cleared for take off then not, this is FRA not some third world, new world we have LVPS and we are going to be the next super power etc Delhi Belly etc.
I hate to say it but compared to lots of airports Frankfurts generally one of the good ones.
LVPs in force distance between aircraft is increased to 8nm, parallel ops in FRA I assume, they have lots of runways there, so why have departures and arrivals on the same runway.
More like as mentioned engine run up forgotten in fog or a config warning, speed brake not in the detent etc
Who am I to comment as I sit here in the comfort of my lounge.
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come to think of it, what, technically, is the difference between "Cleared for TO" and Cleared immediate TO"?
I thought that the ANO/EU Ops dictated that once cleared that you must take off without delay or inform ATC anyway.
I thought that the ANO/EU Ops dictated that once cleared that you must take off without delay or inform ATC anyway.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: new jersey
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I made a LAHSO in BOS on a Dash 8 in the jumseat some years ago, while a DC10 was landing on a interecting runway . Great .I asked what happens if both decide to go around at same time in poor vis ? I agree the likelyhood of this happening is remote, but I could hear Murphy laughing out loud in the background.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
9.G
It was my previous airline SOP during LVP T/0(when rvr between 400 and 125 M).
Have you ever asked for an intersection take off during LVP?
Some may argue that in low vis all aircraft taking off from the same point is a safer as it surely reduces the threat of runway incursion in areas in front of departing traffic...wouldnt you think?
Some may also argue that the use of full thrust may be safer as one would get airborne earlier and hence spend less time with limited vision(possibly nil if thicker fog) where one vision is the biggest clue to achieve a safe take off roll.
NO intersection, NO flex takeoff in LVO, well that's something new. I most certainly disagree with that.
Have you ever asked for an intersection take off during LVP?
Some may argue that in low vis all aircraft taking off from the same point is a safer as it surely reduces the threat of runway incursion in areas in front of departing traffic...wouldnt you think?
Some may also argue that the use of full thrust may be safer as one would get airborne earlier and hence spend less time with limited vision(possibly nil if thicker fog) where one vision is the biggest clue to achieve a safe take off roll.
Last edited by de facto; 25th Nov 2012 at 03:41.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caber :
I am aware of that, but take " in low vis" away from my remark. It was only there to reinforce my point.
So back to my question :
Is both a/c going around at same time while one is performing LAHSO a sound procedure ? even in CAVOK ?
To make sure we understand each other : I said " sound", did not say unsafe.
LAHSO does have restrictions on it. If the visibility is poor LAHSO isn't allowed.
So back to my question :
Is both a/c going around at same time while one is performing LAHSO a sound procedure ? even in CAVOK ?
To make sure we understand each other : I said " sound", did not say unsafe.
You know it does just happens sometimes. I had a situation once on the Dash where we were cleared an immediate takeoff so we started the takeoff straight from the line-up. In the mean time an A320 on final approach obviously got a little nervous and commenced a missed approach. We were then told to stop the take-off run, we did a low speed reject, taxied off and lined up again. Next time around we powered up only for the config horn to go off so had a second low speed reject. We checked everything by jiggling all the handles that needed to be set for the takeoff config. 3rd time was a charm, on the next departure we had a repeat of the takeoff config and it turned out to be a faulty flap sensor.
So it is certainly possible and no doubt made us look like real dickheads to the passengers. Sometimes though this sh*t just happens, and you get the feeling no matter how you explain it on the PA there will always be a doubting element in the cabin.
So it is certainly possible and no doubt made us look like real dickheads to the passengers. Sometimes though this sh*t just happens, and you get the feeling no matter how you explain it on the PA there will always be a doubting element in the cabin.
Last edited by Ollie Onion; 25th Nov 2012 at 04:53.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: 0ft AGL
Age: 33
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain of this airBaltic flight reported that they were cleared for T/O on 25C, the started the roll and around 60KT controller asked to reject T/O due to traffic doing missing approach on final 25L.
New clearance for T/O received, however T/O roll rejected at 40KT on request from ATC again due to A/C executing approach to 25L.
Third T/O clearance received, remaining RWY length 3200m. Executed normal.
New clearance for T/O received, however T/O roll rejected at 40KT on request from ATC again due to A/C executing approach to 25L.
Third T/O clearance received, remaining RWY length 3200m. Executed normal.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: FZFG
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"In the interest of expediting traffic, a clearance for immediate take-off may be issued to an aircraft before it enters the runway. On acceptance of such clearance the aircraft should taxi out to the runway and take off in one continuous movement"
Then, of course, an aircraft may well be taxiing out at 3 kts, line-up at 3 kts and take-off, all a in a single continuous movement, and still fall within the definition of an 'immediate' takeoff...but that's not exactly what I'm looking forward to, when I ask for one
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for confirming my info. At least now I won't get comments that I am inventing things...
I do understand that sh*t happens, and would like to believe that everyone acted professionally in this case. On the other hand, probably this could be (and should have been) avoided. So far we only know the captain's perspective - would be interesting to hear more comments from ATC side.
I do understand that sh*t happens, and would like to believe that everyone acted professionally in this case. On the other hand, probably this could be (and should have been) avoided. So far we only know the captain's perspective - would be interesting to hear more comments from ATC side.
The takeoff data isn't just calculated to get you airborne in the TODA, its also pretty damn important to clear obstacles as well in the takeoff path Engine out.
Therefore if I'm commencing my third attempt to takeoff someway down the runway with now invalid data I'm going to:-
1/ Vacate the runway and taxy back to the holding point
and 2/ re do the before takeoff checklist.
We are not paid to "guess"
Therefore if I'm commencing my third attempt to takeoff someway down the runway with now invalid data I'm going to:-
1/ Vacate the runway and taxy back to the holding point
and 2/ re do the before takeoff checklist.
We are not paid to "guess"
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: paradise
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
d.f.
SOP of an airline isn't a regulation. Let's be clear there's no restriction as per regs to conduct a intersection takeoff in LVO.
To answer your second question: YES and I've been asked for acceptance of intersection takeoff in LVO not to be delayed, etc. As long as performance is calculated from the intersection, don't see a problem there.
During LVO t/o directional control is the most important factor thus less thrust equates to weaker yaw moment in case of EO at low speed. Simple logic. How much less time will you spend on the rwy with TOGA? 5 secs. This is a discussion for a tech thread anyway.
It was my previous airline SOP during LVP T/0(when rvr between 400 and 125 M).
To answer your second question: YES and I've been asked for acceptance of intersection takeoff in LVO not to be delayed, etc. As long as performance is calculated from the intersection, don't see a problem there.
During LVO t/o directional control is the most important factor thus less thrust equates to weaker yaw moment in case of EO at low speed. Simple logic. How much less time will you spend on the rwy with TOGA? 5 secs. This is a discussion for a tech thread anyway.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Home soon
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During LVO t/o directional control is the most important factor thus less thrust equates to weaker yaw moment in case of EO at low speed
If ATC asks you to use an intersection,if all perf is ok,sure do it but as a general rule i believe wiser to use same entry point for all aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: East Anglia
Age: 83
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS GF F/o I was trained by BA on the L1011 in 1975/6...
For a LV takeoff... We were to use full thrust to increase and enhance centre line light visual reference streaming effect..if fog thickened during the take off roll then pilot visual reference distance naturally shortened and pilot reference distance became reduced and eventually was naturally inside the cockpit.
Now the HSI heading reference and localiser were scanned... plus centreline guidance was also available from the displayed PVD streamers previously tuned to the runway ILS and displayed by pushing the Toga switch.
For a rejected take off the sequence of scanning was reversed from inside the cockpit to outside the cockpit and runway centre line lights used as speed was lost. I never saw any pilot loose the centreline by very much during a below V1 speed rejected take off with a wing engine problem or a problem that required stopping the take off.
For a LV takeoff... We were to use full thrust to increase and enhance centre line light visual reference streaming effect..if fog thickened during the take off roll then pilot visual reference distance naturally shortened and pilot reference distance became reduced and eventually was naturally inside the cockpit.
Now the HSI heading reference and localiser were scanned... plus centreline guidance was also available from the displayed PVD streamers previously tuned to the runway ILS and displayed by pushing the Toga switch.
For a rejected take off the sequence of scanning was reversed from inside the cockpit to outside the cockpit and runway centre line lights used as speed was lost. I never saw any pilot loose the centreline by very much during a below V1 speed rejected take off with a wing engine problem or a problem that required stopping the take off.
Plumbum Pendular
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Avionics Bay
Age: 55
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The takeoff data isn't just calculated to get you airborne in the TODA, its also pretty damn important to clear obstacles as well in the takeoff path Engine out.
If I don't have intersection data I don't take off from the intersection, as pilots we just don't know what else is a factor.
What I do know is that you are changing your net take off flight path bring in factors that might not be relevant with a full length take off, therefore specific figures for the intersection should be used.
mebur_verce, thank you for that. Good to get some cold hard facts around here!
