Thomas cook b757 incident, what a total mess
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Northern Hemisphere
Age: 63
Posts: 14
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easiest way to get out of approach mode in an NG is to deselect LLZ frequency on navs. A/P will then revert to CWS pitch and roll and then you can select whichever modes you like. Or even easier press TOGA and hand fly the aircraft.....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon Mods. What has all this to do with the thread ? Best for most of the development to shift over to Tech-log. On thread, I remain interested in why they went through the LOC in the first place and how has the company handled the incident.Not in a morbid fashion but consulting with other airlines on disciplinary and re-training methodolgy. Notice the BA Joburg incident. Aircraft totalled, airfield building demolished and the guys are back flying. Hope
upon hope that the TC guys were given a fair hearing and remedial action in the training dept taken in order to avoid a repeat.
upon hope that the TC guys were given a fair hearing and remedial action in the training dept taken in order to avoid a repeat.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: another place
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe the 73! In my aircraft if you want to go around, push the red button on the thrust levers, watch the flight director pitch up and apply thrust. Go pink screen lnav and its done.
I haven’t seen that this study was referenced earlier, but sometimes GAs don’t go as imagined. Note the opportunity for distraction, workload, inadequacy of SOPs, etc. etc.
Aeroplane State Awareness during Go-Around.
Aeroplane State Awareness during Go-Around.
As a pax do you think the industry needs to ask;
Why were the crew tired and do we want to take steps to reduce the likelihood of crews being this tired?
Why were the crew "caught out"? Was it lack of training? Inappropriate training? Lack of experience? Inappropriate attitudes? Poor automation design? Lack of systems knowledge ? ( read checking and training)
Why was
? Inadequate CRM? Degraded mental/ emotional state? If so why?
Or shall we just leave it be?
Why were the crew tired and do we want to take steps to reduce the likelihood of crews being this tired?
Why were the crew "caught out"? Was it lack of training? Inappropriate training? Lack of experience? Inappropriate attitudes? Poor automation design? Lack of systems knowledge ? ( read checking and training)
Why was
everything contaminated by growing concern as to what just happened.
Or shall we just leave it be?
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion. Sometimes things happen & the aircraft runs away with you & quick thinking is required. Sometimes brain is too slow. I always found automatic ap engaged go arounds in the 75 were a dream manual ones you needed to be aware of early alt cap.
Airbus things are different I've had ap engaged go arounds try & stall the aircraft taking it into VLS especially on those without global speed protection. Had them try & over speed the flaps. Ie accelerating faster than the flaps can run. But manual go arounds are a little easier as you can vary the pitch.
But the BIG caveat in all cases click click FD off and fly the B'dy aeroplane works even if you are a little slow in doing so & may get a small level bust.
I have sympathy for this crew as sometimes aircraft do something you don't expect usually your fault but the human brain can only process things at a given rate & dumps stuff IT thinks it doesn't need. First to go is hearing for instance.
So as others have said. Their are those who have & those who will.
(Mind you some have the ability to blank out their past errors & deny they ever made a mistake)
Airbus things are different I've had ap engaged go arounds try & stall the aircraft taking it into VLS especially on those without global speed protection. Had them try & over speed the flaps. Ie accelerating faster than the flaps can run. But manual go arounds are a little easier as you can vary the pitch.
But the BIG caveat in all cases click click FD off and fly the B'dy aeroplane works even if you are a little slow in doing so & may get a small level bust.
I have sympathy for this crew as sometimes aircraft do something you don't expect usually your fault but the human brain can only process things at a given rate & dumps stuff IT thinks it doesn't need. First to go is hearing for instance.
So as others have said. Their are those who have & those who will.
(Mind you some have the ability to blank out their past errors & deny they ever made a mistake)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rule number 1:
NEVER let the aircraft get ahead of you.
Part of every approach is to fully brief for a possible go around.
Clearly this was not done and the crew were caught with their pants down.
The moment the aircraft gets ahead of the pilot all bets are off.
NEVER let the aircraft get ahead of you.
Part of every approach is to fully brief for a possible go around.
Clearly this was not done and the crew were caught with their pants down.
The moment the aircraft gets ahead of the pilot all bets are off.
Part of every approach is to fully brief for a possible go around.
This has less to do with verbal diarrhoea ad-nauseam standard briefings and more to do with "Crikey, this is what's going on, I dunno why but I've got to do something to fix it!". That requires skill, not mouth-music. And, of course, a PNF that is also skilled enough to spot the unfolding mistake.
Yes it's hard to imagine the PM not saying something along the lines of " pitch to 15 degrees.....pitch" or something similar. Two tired and overloaded brains?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part of every approach is to fully brief for a possible go around
Quite unnecessary for a competent crew. After all, do you "fully brief" on how to conduct the actions you intend to use for the take off run from brakes release to VR? Of course not. A go-around is a normal operation that should not require a blow by blow description of physical actions. Do you "fully brief" before every engine start, the actions you intend to take in event of a hot start or a hung start? Where does it all stop.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that for most crews a go-around it rare so they are not ready and it is not a normal opperation.
It is not only the mechanical actions required to reject the approach, each airport has a missed approach pattern to be flown, shown on the approach plate. In many cases there are obstructions and conflicts to be considered.
Back in my days in the game reserves it was unusual to go around less than once a week, mainly due to wildlife. OK, so the Twotter is a lot simpler to fly than a modern jet but every approach was briefed and on a hair trigger for a go around. Nowadays we have persistent incidents due to continuing with unstable approaches, I have a strong suspicion that many of these would not have happened if the crew had been confident of their ability and prepared to go around.
It is not only the mechanical actions required to reject the approach, each airport has a missed approach pattern to be flown, shown on the approach plate. In many cases there are obstructions and conflicts to be considered.
Back in my days in the game reserves it was unusual to go around less than once a week, mainly due to wildlife. OK, so the Twotter is a lot simpler to fly than a modern jet but every approach was briefed and on a hair trigger for a go around. Nowadays we have persistent incidents due to continuing with unstable approaches, I have a strong suspicion that many of these would not have happened if the crew had been confident of their ability and prepared to go around.
Last edited by The Ancient Geek; 26th Oct 2014 at 00:25. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: another place
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spandex
But didn't I read it disconnects the autopilot? Can't you just press toga then disconnect auto thrust and tug back a bit on the levers? Either way there is enough discussion here to imply the procedure is not a easy as it should be by design.
D and F, they're talking about alternative ways to GA in instances where you don't want TOGA.
Pressing the red tit still works, 'cept it's black.
Pressing the red tit still works, 'cept it's black.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact of the matter is it is not a normal every day manoeuvre and that is only reaffirmed by the number of poorly flown go arounds over the years. A quick précis of the go around could save a lot of embarrassment. It's a big like touch drills for a reject just before you line up, having talked about it you increase your chances of getting it right under stress.
Having worked for TCX I can only say positive things about their training department, we have trained many different scenarios over the years a couple of valuable ones I remember are engine failures at various different stages after Vr, the argument being that you have more chance of hitting birds a little after rotate than at V1 (although the ThomsonFly was pretty close!). Another exercise we did was go arounds at different stages including being told to GA just above your GA alt. For all those that have gone into PMI on 06 (if I remember correctly) I believe the initial altitude is 2000'........what would you do if you were told to GA at 2300'.........when asked the question I came up with all sorts of wonderful ideas but the solution was very simple, one I wouldn't have thought of without guidance from an excellent training department!
These poor sods were just caught out by a little startle factor, reversion to type (I know I have made calls for flap 2 instead of 5!) and some other NOTECH issues possibly affecting their judgement or ability on the day.
Should this have happened.........of course not........could it have been handled better.........absolutely...........but we wouldn't be talking about it if it had been managed better and been a non event. Take this opportunity to learn...
Having worked for TCX I can only say positive things about their training department, we have trained many different scenarios over the years a couple of valuable ones I remember are engine failures at various different stages after Vr, the argument being that you have more chance of hitting birds a little after rotate than at V1 (although the ThomsonFly was pretty close!). Another exercise we did was go arounds at different stages including being told to GA just above your GA alt. For all those that have gone into PMI on 06 (if I remember correctly) I believe the initial altitude is 2000'........what would you do if you were told to GA at 2300'.........when asked the question I came up with all sorts of wonderful ideas but the solution was very simple, one I wouldn't have thought of without guidance from an excellent training department!
These poor sods were just caught out by a little startle factor, reversion to type (I know I have made calls for flap 2 instead of 5!) and some other NOTECH issues possibly affecting their judgement or ability on the day.
Should this have happened.........of course not........could it have been handled better.........absolutely...........but we wouldn't be talking about it if it had been managed better and been a non event. Take this opportunity to learn...
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
beardy . . .
I have confidence in the automatics, they allow me capacity to MANAGE the situation, hand flying decreases that capacity.
Have seen new schooled F/Os trying to correct an automation/programming anomaly by introducing more automatics instead of instantly going manual to first reestablish correct flight path control. (We are 300 feet above assigned FL with altitude alert, and I have to take the controls from the F/O who was still dabbling with A/P modes). Unfortunately, current training mind-set has drifted into a dangerous trend of doubting our hand flying skills.
@gatbusdriver; agreed. Good post.
I for one have now started briefing the actual go-around actions, pitch, flap selections, calls etc. for both myself and PNF instead of simply trotting out the G/A routing. I already feel more prepared as a result.
I am also making an effort to do raw data approaches whenever possible, (though not after a 10 hour night flight yet !).
As I and others have said on this thread, in our SIMs nowadays there seems to be too much emphasis on new SOP's, new company procedures, (such as the F/O starting the second engine during taxy out); and the basic motor responses are not being practised enough.
I for one have now started briefing the actual go-around actions, pitch, flap selections, calls etc. for both myself and PNF instead of simply trotting out the G/A routing. I already feel more prepared as a result.
I am also making an effort to do raw data approaches whenever possible, (though not after a 10 hour night flight yet !).
As I and others have said on this thread, in our SIMs nowadays there seems to be too much emphasis on new SOP's, new company procedures, (such as the F/O starting the second engine during taxy out); and the basic motor responses are not being practised enough.
Last edited by Uplinker; 27th Oct 2014 at 10:36.
