"2010 JFK A380 go-around incident highlights need for change"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"2010 JFK A380 go-around incident highlights need for change"
That's according to a recent BEA report on situational awareness during go-arounds:
BEA: A380 Incident Highlights Need For Go-around Changes
Apparently the A380 (airline not named - who was flying A380s to JFK in Oct 2010?) went around due to an unstabilised approach:
BEA is asking regulators to update certification rules to add devices to limit thrust during a go-around and to "adapt thrust to flight conditions."
BEA: A380 Incident Highlights Need For Go-around Changes
Apparently the A380 (airline not named - who was flying A380s to JFK in Oct 2010?) went around due to an unstabilised approach:
Due to a relatively low initial go-around altitude of 1,000 ft. and the first officer’s inability to properly control thrust, the aircraft experienced several flap overspeed warnings and experienced vertical speeds as high as 4,200 fpm
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: PORTUGAL
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Such a device is already fitted in all Airbus - we call it the Thrust Levers.
In an high energy/altitude go-around you just momentarly firewall the TL to the TOGA to arm the G/A modes and quickly bring them back MCT or to CL. Otherwise it is clear that you will overspeed the flaps and/or overshoot the altitudes.
In an high energy/altitude go-around you just momentarly firewall the TL to the TOGA to arm the G/A modes and quickly bring them back MCT or to CL. Otherwise it is clear that you will overspeed the flaps and/or overshoot the altitudes.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEA is asking regulators to update certification rules to add devices to limit thrust during a go-around and to "adapt thrust to flight conditions."
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, that's it. Dumb the profession down some more
From the BEA analysis (P2 PF):
"At 480 feet, the approach had still not been stabilised and the speed remained at 210 kt. The Captain ordered a go-around, which surprised the co-pilot who was focused on the landing."
Surprised!!
For God's sake don't limit the thrust, you may need it one day. All that is required is to explain (train, indoctrinate, lead them by the hand) to pilots the need to apply thrust appropriate to the situation, in other words plain old ordinary airmanship.
BEA is asking regulators to update certification rules to add devices to limit thrust during a go-around and to "adapt thrust to flight conditions."
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno, on my extremely quaint old 737 that is already installed. Just use one click on the TOGA button and you get reduced go around thrust good for around 1000 to 2000 fpm climb, not more. If you need more another click gives full go around thrust.
Doesn't prevent the need for good training though.
Doesn't prevent the need for good training though.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 938
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly, Air France's safety record is much more similar to that found in Africa rather than than that associated with Europe. I have no doubt that there are some great pilots there, but boy are there some shockers.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Flyin' low and feeling mean
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When was it that pilots stopped being pilots? Wouldn't it be less expensive and more desirable to just require pilots to be able to fly (and I do mean actually fly) to a minimum standard, rather than redesign whole fleets (just because AF is having another pilot-related flying problem)? 
Just fly the f
ing airplane! It is not that hard. Really it's not.
Just fly the f
ing airplane! It is not that hard. Really it's not.
The frogs need to go for a ride in a 717 to see how autothrottles should perform during a go-around.
Amazing the world's premier people-mover overspeeds flaps on a GA.
Amazing the world's premier people-mover overspeeds flaps on a GA.
Bloggsie,
A friend of yours (an ex supa driver) over here has suggested you have seen them operate in the go-around mode quite often.
the Don
A friend of yours (an ex supa driver) over here has suggested you have seen them operate in the go-around mode quite often.
the Don
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: uk
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently LOSA have identified mis flown, high energy GA's as an industry problem. It was included in our last LPC training cycle due to this. Apparently main problems arise from unanticipated GA's when not close to minima ( in crap weather you have it mentally prepared) which don't require prolonged TOGA and especially when they occur above the published GA platform. What they call 'startle factor' leading to slow or incorrect handling of events.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: europe
Age: 67
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Analysis
The small difference between the decision altitudes and the recovery altitude for the go- around gave the crew little time to manage the rapid rise of a light aircraft with high thrust.
The small difference between the decision altitudes and the recovery altitude for the go- around gave the crew little time to manage the rapid rise of a light aircraft with high thrust.
The handling pilot simply couldn't handle the airplane would be my analysis. The approach had all the ingredients of a screw up way before the go around, and displayed that the pilot was way out of his depth. It really is about time the industry considered the value of good old fashioned art of "airmanship" when choosing who to stick in the RHS.
Integrated training is all very well, and does serve the purpose of teaching how to make use of the "magenta" technology used today, but nobody in their right mind could claim to have any level of experience when they jump into the RHS of a transport cat aircraft with only 200hours! Without experience its impossible to even make a start on acquiring any degree of airmanship.
The self improver route to gaining a Commercial licence worked very well in my opinion.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C212-100 has nailed it. Remember, just because the BEA (or NTSB, AAIB etc.) recommend something doesn't mean it'll happen - in fact it's usually fairly unlikely.
@LapSap - Hand Solo's right. The FADECs demanded TOGA thrust the second the thrust levers were pushed forward. The problem was that the engines had spooled down to expedite the descent and needed time to spool up again.
@Capt. Bloggs - wasn't there an SAS MD-80 where the autothrottles firewalled (and destroyed) the engines following ice ingestion?
@LapSap - Hand Solo's right. The FADECs demanded TOGA thrust the second the thrust levers were pushed forward. The problem was that the engines had spooled down to expedite the descent and needed time to spool up again.
@Capt. Bloggs - wasn't there an SAS MD-80 where the autothrottles firewalled (and destroyed) the engines following ice ingestion?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignoring any lamentable handling skills for a minute, why was the published level off 1000' for the GA as the article suggests? Anyone know why this is the case? Even from minima that's always going to be a sporty GA.