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

Runway overrun in thessaloniki

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

Runway overrun in thessaloniki

Old 20th Jun 2013, 11:27
  #41 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,584
With the recent AF 'approach' we are seeing more and more of bad decision making. Why? Personally I would not associate the word 'airmanship' with either evet.
BOAC is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 11:32
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: EGNX
Posts: 1,160
- could you highlight for us what you see as 'airmanship'?
Pressing the TOGA button when you have missed the TDZ by the length of another TDZ and are still airborne doing VREF plus 80%
Doors to Automatic is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 11:34
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,872
Airmanship is nothing more than commonsense/good [insert various aspects of flying] including decision-making, which is created/developed by experience and training. In both of these incidents, either the crew deliberately did it or more likely, bad airmanship prevailed.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 11:37
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,425
Well, I suppose it's "poor" airmanship versus "good" airmanship in terms of decision making. Nevertheless the question is indeed why. As regard an apparent increase in frequency of these type of incidents, were there not just as many, if not more, incidents like these in the pre internet, phone camera times? They just didn't get the publicity back then.
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 11:45
  #45 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,584
Originally Posted by Doors
Pressing the TOGA button when you have missed the TDZ by the length of another TDZ and are still airborne doing VREF plus 80%
- but don't you think the 'mistakes' occurred well before that? In AF's case, around 20,000', in this one somewhat before 1000'?
BOAC is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 11:57
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: EGNX
Posts: 1,160
Yes good point BOAC - they could and should have gone around at any point from the "stable by 500ft" gate
Doors to Automatic is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 12:57
  #47 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,584
they could and should have gone around at any point from the "stable by 500ft" gate
- indeed, but that is FAR TOO LATE - let's not hide the fact that they should have 'gone round' far far earlier than that. To break off an approach when it just will not work, early - at say 1500' or even earlier - is so easy, no real need for TOGA/passengers pushed back in their seats (unless the crew cannot fly manually), probably no mandatory ASR - in many respects it is not even a 'go round' as such. The idea of the 500/1000' 'stable' gates is as a final check, not to leave everything until then.
BOAC is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 13:40
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: EGNX
Posts: 1,160
Or even just ask for an orbit at 2000 feet. I can't imagine that would have caused a problem at Thessalonki?
Doors to Automatic is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 14:39
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Manchester, UK
Age: 31
Posts: 14
I'm not a pilot but Is there any chance the flap load relief was in action a lot here? Even with the spoilers up at the start they just seemed to be fighting an ever growing battle to lose energy. Very hard to grasp why they didn't just fire back around and try again. Maybe a case of "nearly-home-itis" ?
squarehole is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 15:17
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 16
Flap load relief

If I'm not mistaken it only acts at higher flaps settings. To my untrained eye it seems they never got this far.

The Boeing 737 Technical Site
A flap load limiter (-3/4/500) / flaps/slats electronics unit (-NG) will automatically retract the flaps from 40 to 30 (-3/4/500) / also 30 to 25 (-NG) if the limit speed is exceeded. The flaps will extend again when speed is reduced. This feature is on all aircraft even though the FLAP LOAD RELIEF light is only fitted to a few.
PieterPan is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 15:38
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
When you've dug a hole the primary object it to get out of it, not keep digging. This is basic of many things in life, not just aviating. However, aviating, or anything defying mother nature, tends to have a hidden big bite. Evidently, and how on earth, as it seems quite a long approach path over the sea, did they not make room and manoeuvre. At some point, a long way out, they were on the edge of a hole. They then stepped into it. Now was a good time to think this is not a comfortable place to be, but they kept digging. B738 offers you a massive amount of information to determine if you are good or not. You can interpret the basic numbers and see where you are, or the VNAV deviation gives a clue: that plus they were visual. It's mind boggling as to how they could not realise they were getting deeper in the poo. What is more staggering, considering all the publicity over the past few years of similar events, is that the F/O still did not howl and scream. There are 2 crew who are likely to die. Surely self preservation takes over from a cockpit gradient. So many prangs because the F/O was passive. I thought airmen were supposed to learn from previous mistakes and airlines had a duty to inform crews of others' failing so as to avoid them in-house. Either there was a macho dictator in LHS, or the company culture is gravely at fault. The relevant XAA, both of the airline and the charterer now has to take responsibility for its own future actions. There has to be an investigation of behind the scenes and not just the up-front cause. i.e. pilot error. too much energy. That would be a white-wash.
It has been said that pilots are naturally cautious people and take care of themselves and the pax. it was often said by some that "if you stay with me you'll be fine. I'm sitting closer to the crash, so I have a vested interest in avoiding one." It has also been said by e.g. NTSB investigators when discussing such events that led to severe accidents, is that pilots are also 'mission orientated.' They can get tunnelled vision on success at all costs and miss the alarm bells that tell them it is time to bail out. Solving that one is a training and company culture issue; hence the need for an in-depth scrutiny.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 18:03
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ...
Posts: 3,789
Did these pilots get arrested? Or did they happily fly back 10hrs later?
737Jock is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 22:07
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sand on the Rocks !
Age: 37
Posts: 109
@pieterpan
With the SFP package, the Flap Load Relief is active from flaps 10-40. I wonder if this aircraft had the SFP package.
iflytb20 is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 03:39
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: TOF
Posts: 37
It has been said that pilots are naturally cautious people and take care of themselves and the pax.
I'm not so sure anymore. Because the industry - if it ever did - no longer waits for young people wishing to pilot, and selects, but lures to squeezes each new year of birth, and won't this increase the probability of bringing mismatches up front?

Plus, the current economy seems not at all likely to make the younger speak up and ultimately risk their income, if any, when just having been lucky enough and hired.

How long until this eats into legacies...
Machrihanish is online now  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 10:17
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: up front on the right
Posts: 39
fuel anyone?

the only reasons that i can think of for having such an overwhelming urge to be on the ground are fire and fuel.

there was no fire, so.....
NinER fIveR is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 10:45
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ...
Posts: 3,789
I doubt they had Flaps 10 out, looks like 5 to me.
737Jock is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 12:03
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 595
the only reasons that i can think of for having such an overwhelming urge to be on the ground are fire and fuel.

there was no fire, so.....
Unless the fuel problem developed very late in the descent, a crew with possible fuel problems would have made certain that their approach was stable enough to minimise the chance of a go around being required.
Speed of Sound is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 12:07
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast
Posts: 89
Can somone here explain how this aircraft was able to fly again ten hours after the overrun, did 737 Engineers check it out to fly, surely after going off the runway and for a good distance on grass it must have required some technical inspection, I would not have liked to be going back in that aircraft
Thunderbirdsix is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 12:16
  #59 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,584
Never mind the 'aircraft' - who flew the **** thing?
BOAC is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 12:22
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Moscow
Age: 49
Posts: 38
Pilot command to PAX was in English:"Remain seated" so they were not Russian pilots for sure.
mitrosft is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.