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

Air Canada A320 accident at Halifax

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

Air Canada A320 accident at Halifax

Old 30th Mar 2015, 19:41
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Wet Coast, Canuckland
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
+1
Imrich: Best post in this thread...well said

and by the way.. I agree with those that are forced to use this approach... it can be a scary one on a dark and stormy night!
hr2pilot is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 19:49
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,822
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
That’s fair comment from Tom and I’d really like for it to happen but as a professional operating in the transitional period, you have to work with what you’re given and apply appropriate safety margins.

The forecast and actuals at CYHZ seem pretty grim for the day of the accident. It’s reported that they held for some considerable time, so it looks like extra fuel was taken. With 280’ above the runway and 1sm as the minima, chances were high that the non-precision approach would fail.

I’d really like to know what the view out of the cockpit looked like in the last 20-30s after they went below MDA. What convinced them to continue with such a drastic undershoot?
FullWings is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 19:59
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Los Gatos, CA
Age: 76
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Shared GS channel a problem?

I notice the unusual sharing of LOC frequencies on 05 and 23. I wonder if the reason there is no GS is that sharing the channel would cause some instability in the vertical guidance for either RWY. Just a thought. I would hate to think that the reasoning was purely financial.
Jilted is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 20:06
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 73
Posts: 1,071
Received 151 Likes on 53 Posts
Optical Illusion? Need PAPI or VGSI?

The 1996 767 accident, reported by TSB, noted the optical illusion of the sloping runway. Its not that this approach needed a glide slope - to what several hundred feet HAT, or a GPS, because the same illusion would affect the final few hundred feet of the visual segment - but it may indeed be helped in the visual segment - so why not PAPI/VGSI?
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 20:22
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Age: 55
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some photos from the crash scene here

Mudman is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 20:25
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It had PAPIs the last time I flew in there - and according to the plates, still does.

GS profile runs straight to the threshold, and you would hit MDA 0.7nm (0.6SM) from the threshold.... if flying the profile. Looking at the METARS suggest they may not have been visual at MDA?

Incidentally, am I reading this Actual right, or is this a typo:

CYHZ 290400Z 34019G54KT 3/4SM R14/5000VP6000FT/D -SN DRSN BKN007

????

If that's correct, it's one hell of a gust factor!

Last edited by TheInquisitor; 30th Mar 2015 at 22:29.
TheInquisitor is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 21:03
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: CYUL
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Imrich,
Another thing to consider, they were probably clearing snow on 14-32. So this favored runway, 32 into wind was released for snow removal.
Then YHZ arbitrarily open up 05/23 with a 30 knot crosswind. How long would it have taken to get an approach to 32? It's another coupled/selected approach; LOC BC but at least they would be landing into the wind.

Last edited by Retired DC9 driver; 30th Mar 2015 at 23:21.
Retired DC9 driver is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 22:32
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Jackson Hole, WY
Posts: 7,634
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
86000 views for what could have prevented for a few thousand bucks on an ILS and relocation of power lines...a lesson that could be used all over to improve safety.

Over 3 million views for a fluke occurance that's basicallly unpreventable.

Meanwhile, bombs threats on Turkish, passengers storming the cockpit on United.....on and on.

But the problem is suicidal pilots. It's amazing.
737er is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 22:39
  #149 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tom Imrich:

...to the A330 in Nepal on 4 March...
The A330 in Nepal had just finished its second RNP AR to Runway 02, when the excursion occurred. I posted the Jepp chart in that thread.
aterpster is offline  
Old 30th Mar 2015, 22:40
  #150 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jilted:

Sharing of ILS frequencies is done at many airports.
aterpster is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 00:36
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: usa
Age: 37
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont know Tom, count me in the minority perhaps.

I suppose government officials and the flying public would ask the same question rhetorically, how many more airframes...., until pilots learn to use proper judgement in conducting their operations?

The LS system in place may be all that is budgeted for service to remote locations and I am sure folks would be glad to keep the service the way it is and not suffer additional taxes and levies to improve the field, given the assumption that good judgement will be used by the pilots and the worse passengers might expect would be the inconvenience of a bus ride from an hour or two away, not a crash landing
In a perfect world, yes, all runways should have precision approaches but the resulting consequence of having non precision approaches should not be hull losses (pilots fault) but rather more diversions and missed approaches (added airline expense).

We have come a long way and the last couple decades and if you have flown internationally you would know just how good we have it in North America.

Off the cuff, sir, I totally agree with you but its just not that easy. As professional pilots we need to make proper decisions and that was not the case with this airframe loss.
jdawg is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 00:40
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Imrich

Imrich:
...from from Asiana 214, to the A330 in Nepal on 4 March, to UPS at KBHM, to even the LGA MD88 not potentially landing using Rwy 04 into the wind, instead of facing the XW on Rwy 13 in low mu, could have likely prevented each accident.
The A330 at Kathmandu was flying an RNP AR procedure.

JFK -- not LGA -- drives the runway configurations for the rest of the NYC metroplex.

When/how is the "big switch" to RNP going to be made all at once? Which airplanes will be left out?

What should be done with the Airbus and Boeings manufactured in the early 1990s?

...So the authorities, ANSPs, and airlines also own "a piece of this one" for culpability, and not just as always, "blame it exclusively on the pilots".
Somehow the airplane mfgs got left out of that culpability roster.

Has Boeing ever posted a $$$ quote for retrofitting MD-88s to fly RNP?
Zeffy is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 00:46
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: usa
Age: 37
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good post Zeffy, I left so much out rushing to the obvious.
jdawg is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 01:03
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Great White North
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Localiser Berm/Burm

I can't find the link who said the runway extension removed the berm/burm (about 12' AGL).
Plus the antennae on a concrete cap.
The antennae shown are an extexsion array . . . berm removed or lowered?

Apparently the same berm MK 747 encountered in 2004
RESA is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 01:09
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: at an airport
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
86000 views for what could have prevented for a few thousand bucks on an ILS and relocation of power lines...a lesson that could be used all over to improve safety.
Not to minimize your point 737er, but an ILS isn't a few thousand dollars. An ILS and associated approach lighting is easily $3+ million.
Throttle Arms is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 02:28
  #156 (permalink)  
Drain Bamaged
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Earth
Age: 56
Posts: 536
Received 25 Likes on 9 Posts
Originally Posted by Throttle Arms
Not to minimize your point 737er, but an ILS isn't a few thousand dollars. An ILS and associated approach lighting is easily $3+ million.
If I remember correctly, some studies were done back in the days in Halifax for an ILS on 05.
I believe mineral deposits prevented that (terrains too!?)
This have been mitigated later on, if we look at the current published RNAV(GNSS) 05 it shows a WAAS LPV component of 720 DA (257ft HAT)

Maybe it has been already mentioned but I think this particular A320 is not GPS equipped.

Last edited by ehwatezedoing; 31st Mar 2015 at 02:52.
ehwatezedoing is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 02:35
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mercer Island WA
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GLS RNP and CYHZ and Nepal

@aterpster (WR?) It doesn't matter even if it was RNP AR in Nepal. The point sticks. RNP helps as a start to get one effectively to the best runway, but it only gets you down the FAS to a relatively low DA. However, when RNP is is used with GLS, as well as use of full autoflight, FMGC, or HUD (LAND3 or AIII modes), with a vertical and lateral path to the TDZ, these serious landing events will virtually stop. Yes, pilots can always save the day, since the days of the four course range, back to when Ed B, and L DeC, and the All-WX-Flying Committee were still fretting about Tom Goldsmith and the Martin at KIPT... but there is no need to do any of that any more. It is time to take stock, bit the bullet, dump these obsolete approach types, and start to expeditiously move to 100% RNP and GLS. It is vastly better, less expensive, and you wouldn't even need the ALSF-I/II or MALSRs any more. As to the MD series getting RNP, they already could have low RNP now, with systems like the HT-9100, if they'd just invest the money instead in upgrading those systems wisely, and not waste it on useless things like obsolete WAAS/LPV, or FAA's over-specified and still dysfunctional 91.227/DO-260 flawed ADS-B, at least until and unless it is re-specified with sensible NIC and NAC.

Last edited by 7478ti; 31st Mar 2015 at 03:04.
7478ti is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 02:42
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Age: 55
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@RESA
I can't find the link who said the runway extension removed the berm/burm (about 12' AGL).
Plus the antennae on a concrete cap.
The antennae shown are an extexsion array . . . berm removed or lowered?

Apparently the same berm MK 747 encountered in 2004
Different berm if you look at page 30 of the MK747 accident the new location is much closer to the road after the runway was extended.

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-re...4/a04h0004.pdf
Mudman is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 02:52
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Hyperspace...
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont know Tom, count me in the minority perhaps.

I suppose government officials and the flying public would ask the same question rhetorically, how many more airframes...., until pilots learn to use proper judgement in conducting their operations?

The LS system in place may be all that is budgeted for service to remote locations and I am sure folks would be glad to keep the service the way it is and not suffer additional taxes and levies to improve the field, given the assumption that good judgement will be used by the pilots and the worse passengers might expect would be the inconvenience of a bus ride from an hour or two away, not a crash landing
In a perfect world, yes, all runways should have precision approaches but the resulting consequence of having non precision approaches should not be hull losses (pilots fault) but rather more diversions and missed approaches (added airline expense).

We have come a long way and the last couple decades and if you have flown internationally you would know just how good we have it in North America.

Off the cuff, sir, I totally agree with you but its just not that easy. As professional pilots we need to make proper decisions and that was not the case with this airframe loss.
jdawg, you can count me in with that minority.

I disagree with the conclusion you have reached, in the face of few available facts at present - it's too early in this one to castigate the crew. There could well have been a tech issue with the aircraft; we simply don't know yet. And the weather was bloody awful - Vis aside, I wouldn't discount windshear as a distinct possibility.

However, I am in total agreement with the rest of your sentiment - I don't agree with the complainants about approach aids. Pilots have been flying non-precision approaches for decades without major issues.

Frankly, if you can't fly a safe NPA to minimas, using the correct procedures, there is a serious competence / training / practice issue. The cardinal rule on a NPA is DO NOT descend below MDA until you have the required visual references. Pilots seem to have gotten far too used to precision approaches.
TheInquisitor is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2015, 03:26
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mercer Island WA
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Safe NPAs in 2015?...perhaps an oxymoron?

For air transport, there is no reason to be doing anything but RNP and moving expeditiously toward use of GLS based approaches any more, globally. They are vastly better than any other approach options, including even ILS, they can be much less expensive, and vastly more reliable, especially if properly designed and produced. GBAS and especially RNP can be cost effective for any airport, even rarely used locations like ETOPS alternates. The installation costs for GBAS can be vastly lower than any other navaid type, and in the long run, we don't even need off runway approach lighting any more, if the airplanes are using their autoflight systems properly (including options like HUD AIII if desired, for pilots to still use manual control through rollout). The very same refrain that "All that we need are good pilots with good training" was heard at the sunset of the bi-plane, tailwheel, radio operators, navigators, 4-course range, DR, star shots, ADF, VOR, VORTAC, Tacan, MLS, Talar, State, A-Scan, C-Scan, Co-Scan, Microvision, VAM, Consolan, Loran, Decca, mag-checks, ILM, PAFAM, BCRS, circling approaches,....and now finally MDA(H)s and LOC approaches. But who now would go back to any of those bygone eras, except for perhaps some historic DC-3 nostalgia? Instead, there is a vastly better, safer, less expensive way, ....even for good well trained professional pilots. So let's not stay on this present course of losing perfectly good jets, and passengers, and thoughtful pilots not otherwise trying to crash, for no good reason whatsoever. It is time to move on, to 100% RNP and GLS, globally. Then we'll finally see these unnecessarily hull losses abate.
7478ti is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.