Qatar 77W at MIA
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Maybe I missed it but has anyone addressed what "demystification" the FDR/CVR's will surely provide in time?
The FDR certainly might have data of interest if it was pulled after the flight. Things like power settings, rotation rate and MCP stuff. Does it perhaps capture FMS data in some installations?
A few comments from the ATC side :
Listening to the VHF recordings everything sounds normal there: It looks like ATC did not " suggest" an intersection dep and pilot knew where he was as he repeated T1, and took the line up and wait at T1, and later the take off clearance from there.
Listening to the VHF recordings everything sounds normal there: It looks like ATC did not " suggest" an intersection dep and pilot knew where he was as he repeated T1, and took the line up and wait at T1, and later the take off clearance from there.
I do wonder whether the crew was really unaware of the incident until hours later. The damage to the approach lights was significant – would no-one have noticed an unusual sound? Dare I wonder whether the crew might conceivably have said to each other, we seem to be in one piece, no indications, let's carry on and avoid the hassle of going back (and we didn't say that, so don't pull the CVR breaker)? No, no, of course not ...
Deefer, there's also the old adage that if the real world you can see out of your window doesn't match what your computer says, reality is almost certainly correct. (That applies to your car's satnav too.)
On the one hand, you might think someone would have looked out at the runway and said, wow, isn't that a bit short for a max weight takeoff? On the other hand, it was dark or at least dusk, so the shortness of the available runway may not have been so obvious?
On the one hand, you might think someone would have looked out at the runway and said, wow, isn't that a bit short for a max weight takeoff? On the other hand, it was dark or at least dusk, so the shortness of the available runway may not have been so obvious?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With Flaps 15 and an 11,000' runway we used full thrust with no ATM allowed.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The damage to the approach lights was significant – would no-one have noticed an unusual sound?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ijatta
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
The damage to the approach lights was significant – would no-one have noticed an unusual sound?
The damage to the approach lights was significant – would no-one have noticed an unusual sound?
Airport lights are designed to be frangible , I.e breaking off easily. The mast arms cut off and the one bent that we see in the photo. , if in aluminum with a plastic fuse, will offer little resistance against a 350 tons aircaft. From the voice of the PNF on the frequency after departure my bet is that they did not notice anything.
Last edited by wanabee777; 21st Sep 2015 at 18:40.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I do wonder whether the crew was really unaware of the incident until hours later. The damage to the approach lights was significant – would no-one have noticed an unusual sound? Dare I wonder whether the crew might conceivably have said to each other, we seem to be in one piece, no indications, let's carry on and avoid the hassle of going back (and we didn't say that, so don't pull the CVR breaker)? No, no, of course not ...
A discussion of this ANC incident from the PPRuNe archives:
China Airlines taxi-way take-off! [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums
Like the QR crew in MIA, CI was very fortunate to avoid disaster.
This article compares the China Airlines mistake with the SQ wrong turn at TPE, which was deadly, in a table at the end:
Aviation Today :: China Airlines' Takeoff Shows Breakdown in Situational Awareness
Unlike CI and SQ, QR at MIA knew where they were but it was the wrong place to turn onto the runway for a heavyweight takeoff.
Did the QR crew know something was wrong on climbout and chose to face the music back in Doha instead of reporting it to MIA departure? I don't claim to know.
I'm reminded of a saying from the 89th Airlift Wing, the outfit that operates Air Force One: 'You are allowed one mistake, and they won't fire you until you get back from the trip.'
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: WA
Age: 84
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On Sep 17th 2015 the FAA reported the aircraft struck approach lights on departure from Miami and continued to destination. The aircraft received substantial damage to its belly, the occurrence was rated an accident.
The above from the very first entry on the thread begs questions as to who first found the "substantial" damage, who it was reported to, and the like. The infamous "Who knew what, and when did they know it?"
"Substantial damage" would seem to have been obvious to bag handlers chocking the a/c at the arrival gate? Well, maybe. But surely seen by the first line mech to visit the scene whenever that was. But somebody informed FAA. When? The latter, however, would not have been the first people to be properly informed of whatever was found. Logic says, though, that the discovery had to have been made in time to preserve complete FDR data right there at the beginning when the a/c was first grounded. I don't know what exactly would be the investigatory protocol, but I can envision it would have begun very soon after landing, and would have resembled something like the proverbial "flies on stink."
The above from the very first entry on the thread begs questions as to who first found the "substantial" damage, who it was reported to, and the like. The infamous "Who knew what, and when did they know it?"
"Substantial damage" would seem to have been obvious to bag handlers chocking the a/c at the arrival gate? Well, maybe. But surely seen by the first line mech to visit the scene whenever that was. But somebody informed FAA. When? The latter, however, would not have been the first people to be properly informed of whatever was found. Logic says, though, that the discovery had to have been made in time to preserve complete FDR data right there at the beginning when the a/c was first grounded. I don't know what exactly would be the investigatory protocol, but I can envision it would have begun very soon after landing, and would have resembled something like the proverbial "flies on stink."
Logic says, though, that the discovery had to have been made in time to preserve complete FDR data right there at the beginning when the a/c was first grounded.
Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 22nd Sep 2015 at 23:41. Reason: Punc...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We will hear nothing further.
Surely MIA will send Qatar a bill for repairs. If they do not pay it, or deny knowledge of it, either could start an interesting process.
Surely MIA will send Qatar a bill for repairs. If they do not pay it, or deny knowledge of it, either could start an interesting process.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Centre of Universe
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have any photos of the damaged areas of the aircraft surfaced yet?
Strange that folk are expecting to see photo's, no need to elaborate surely?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: somewhere
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We will hear nothing further
Come on... Few years ago, a QR 777 made a landing on a closed runway by night on a visual approach in Osaka (ATC and markings quite not correct...)
The report is availble on Jap' NTSB. As said above, NTSB and FAA are in DOH; time to explose the " booze permit" !
We'll have a report, quite sure.
Come on... Few years ago, a QR 777 made a landing on a closed runway by night on a visual approach in Osaka (ATC and markings quite not correct...)
The report is availble on Jap' NTSB. As said above, NTSB and FAA are in DOH; time to explose the " booze permit" !
We'll have a report, quite sure.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Ijatta
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wanabee777
Have any photos of the damaged areas of the aircraft surfaced yet?
Originally Posted by Twiglet1
Don't expect to see photo's until the FAA report comes out in xx months.
Strange that folk are expecting to see photo's, no need to elaborate surely?
Strange that folk are expecting to see photo's, no need to elaborate surely?
At what point is the FAA required to relinquish control of the investigation process to the NTSB?
"anytime they are asked"
Fundamentally the FAA is a regulator and seeks information in order to act against it's regulations.
The NTSB is an investigator and seeks answers to causal chains and weighing of contributing factors. They also look for holes in regulations as well as unregulated procedures.
Together they do a pretty good job. In many cases the FAA action is taken even before an investigation is finished.