Emirates B777 gear collapse @ DXB?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lack of understanding of Automation and how it behaves in a non normal situation is what has caused the recent accidents including the 777 accident in Dubai.
I can't agree with this statement. This is a contributory factor for sure, but the cause goes back further than that.
If you are flying the aircraft as every PF should be - that is monitoring attitude, airspeed, altitude, vertical speed & thrust - and only using the autoflight system as one of a number of aids to assist in that process, there would not be an issue as long as pilots were competent & adequately trained.
The problem is that in recent times pilots have started to abdicate their responsibility to the automatics & have ceased to monitor most, if not all, the basics. And the first two to go are airspeed & thrust. I have seen it many times over the years. Pilots tell the A/T system what they want via the MCP & then just expect the system to react correctly, without confirming and/or backing up to ensure that that is the case.
The bottom line is that it wouldn't matter if they didn't completely understand the automatics, as long as the continued to fly the aircraft at all times & remove or override the automatics manually if required. Of course it would be preferable if pilots did fully understand the automatic systems on the aircraft, but lack of understanding is not where the primary cause of these accidents lies.
It seems to me that some have become uncomfortable with the standard of their basic flying skills & have become reliant on the automatics to cover their shortfalls. The reasons for this are varied, but a number of accidents over the years has highlighted this problem. The Kenyan & Ethiopian B737 accidents come to mind, along with the Asiana B77 accident. Coupled with this, is the fact that two engine go-arounds are perhaps the worse performed exercises in the industry. This is common knowledge in the checking circles I have moved in, in the past.
The go-around procedure that has been used on all the Boeings I have flown, in all the airlines I have worked for, has always been the same.
1. PF calls "Going around - Flap 20 (B777)", hits TOGA & ensures that the thrust levers go forward - way forward, while pitching to the target pitch attitude or ensuring that the A/P is responding correctly
2. PNF selects the flap, verifies & calls "Positive climb(or rate)"
3. PF calls "Gear up - check thrust"
4. PNF selects gear up, checks that go-around thrust is set & calls "Thrust set".
Seems simple, but it gets messed up all the time in the sim & even in the aircraft. In this case it looks like the aircraft has settled back onto the runway with the gear in transit. It will be interesting to read the final report to see if anything was missed & whether or not environmental factors had a role to play in the outcome.
Last edited by Oakape; 11th Aug 2016 at 00:11.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dxb 30L
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dxb 30L
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. PF calls "Going around - Flap 20 (B777)", hits TOGA & ensures that the thrust levers go forward - way forward, while pitching to the target pitch attitude or ensuring that the A/P is responding correctly
2. PNF selects the flap, verifies & calls "Positive climb(or rate)"
3. PF calls "Gear up - check thrust
4. PNF selects gear up, checks that go-around thrust is set & calls "Thrust set".
2. PNF selects the flap, verifies & calls "Positive climb(or rate)"
3. PF calls "Gear up - check thrust
4. PNF selects gear up, checks that go-around thrust is set & calls "Thrust set".
1. PF hand flying increasing workload for all
2. A/C touched rwy and rules of TOGA have changed
3. OAT very high, 996mb, tail wind
4. Additional drag of LDG gear in transition
.... you need to be a superman to save the day
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hearing the recordings, the tower controller was acting normal, while flights in front of EK521 were going around. For windshear? Why did tower not inform all approaching aircraft, instead the only thing he said was the high speed exit to expect. Apologies if this has already been discussed in the long topic.
The B777 has been flying for nearly 19 years. And therefore could be regarded as a fairly mature design. It's safety record is excellent, with few incidents directly attributable to the aircraft. There is a huge knowledge base out there of thousands of pilots with years of experience operating all over the world.
Surely by now any inherent faults would be known about and either corrected, or the pilots trained to deal with them.
Airbus had a number of incidents when the A320 was first introduced but that type was radically different from anything previously flown. Some design changes were made and training improved as operational experience grew. Today it's safety record is excellent, especially given that it operates multiple sectors per day into secondary airports with less experienced crews. The B737 also has an excellent record in the same operational environment as the A320 but relied on older, tried and proven technology rather than cutting edge new design.
When the final report comes out it's likely to show that once again the weak link in the safety chain is the human interface with the automation together with the age old "if it can go wrong, it will go wrong."
Surely by now any inherent faults would be known about and either corrected, or the pilots trained to deal with them.
Airbus had a number of incidents when the A320 was first introduced but that type was radically different from anything previously flown. Some design changes were made and training improved as operational experience grew. Today it's safety record is excellent, especially given that it operates multiple sectors per day into secondary airports with less experienced crews. The B737 also has an excellent record in the same operational environment as the A320 but relied on older, tried and proven technology rather than cutting edge new design.
When the final report comes out it's likely to show that once again the weak link in the safety chain is the human interface with the automation together with the age old "if it can go wrong, it will go wrong."
Originally Posted by Bobdxb
However hand flying will not improve your knowledge of SOP's clearly not followed by 521 crew
Originally Posted by Bobdxb
... and most probably they did all above, probably real trap was:
1. PF hand flying increasing workload for all
1. PF hand flying increasing workload for all
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Bailey article amazes me. Also the positive reception it gets from a number of people. The article appears to be high on judgement (Always, Rigorous, Exactly, Any, Not, Very High - are words used multiple times) and low (and wrong) on facts (difference between Boeing and Airbus, many assumptions, understanding of design, ...). An innocent bystander could get the impression that the author never read an investigation report. There is no sequence of fact, analysis, conclusion, recommendation. It skips that and immediately starts out with the chapter apportioning blame, and surprisingly judging that it was what insurers call "an Act of God". The author says that a pilot saw "exactly what happened" but only gives us 3-4 lines on that. Instead of the very detailed timeline that you would require. Would help to get a second by second transcript of that exact observation. I also find it hard to understand that a trained pilot would not know what the effect of wheels on the ground was for his type. From those pilots who read accident reports you might even expect that they could have read a final report (on another type) which describes what it can mean when only one leg hits the ground. Amazed, yes.
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Escaped the sandpit 53° 32′ 9.19″ N, 9° 50′ 13.29″ E
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
. I also find it hard to understand that a trained pilot would not know what the effect of wheels on the ground was for his type. From those pilots who read accident reports you might even expect that they could have read a final report (on another type) which describes what it can mean when only one leg hits the ground. Amazed, yes.
I've seen (and failed) guys in the sim who push the switch, then just assume the thrust will appear.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just curious as to what the Boeing FCOM says with regard to windshear on approach? Delay the approach or divert like the Airbus FCOM? Was windshear reported on the ATIS/METAR or by the tower? We read so much about windshear in our ATPL theory and our OM-A but when it's actually reported we takeoff with TOGA or land with CONF 3 because everyone else is departing/arriving no problem so it must be ok...unless your the unlucky one who gets bitten on the ass.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because you have windshear and you have windshear.
Not every windshear is a microburst, which is what we practise in the simulator.
No microburst in the EK accident.
If I divert every time the wind shifts/varies by 10-15 kts, I would not be doing much else.
And if you, xhamster, had bothered to read this thread before you posted, you would know if WS was reported or not.
Not every windshear is a microburst, which is what we practise in the simulator.
No microburst in the EK accident.
If I divert every time the wind shifts/varies by 10-15 kts, I would not be doing much else.
And if you, xhamster, had bothered to read this thread before you posted, you would know if WS was reported or not.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dxb 30L
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just curious as to what the Boeing FCOM says with regard to windshear on approach? Delay the approach or divert like the Airbus FCOM? Was windshear reported on the ATIS/METAR or by the tower? We read so much about windshear in our ATPL theory and our OM-A but when it's actually reported we takeoff with TOGA or land with CONF 3 because everyone else is departing/arriving no problem so it must be ok...unless your the unlucky one who gets bitten on the ass.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dxb 30L
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Survivor of Dubai Crash-Landing Wins $1 Million Sweepstakes
Talk about good luck. First he survives this crash, then he wins $1 million.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/wo...html?ref=world
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/wo...html?ref=world
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Dxb 30L
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know Capt's name, I just followed what was mentioned here in pprune #736 that his name is.... and staff no .....
And to be very honest It doesn't matter who it was coz initial question was just speculating about ... #779
And to be very honest It doesn't matter who it was coz initial question was just speculating about ... #779
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Earth
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know Capt's name, I just followed what was mentioned here in PPRuNe #736 that his name is.... and staff no .....
And to be very honest It doesn't matter who it was coz initial question was just speculating about ... #779
And to be very honest It doesn't matter who it was coz initial question was just speculating about ... #779
My statement was clear. Don't make a claim that the pilot wasn't Airbus trained when you don't know. As I said before - I think you may need to check your facts on that, which judging by your post above you didn't do, yet tried to make a 100% factual post which wasn't.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leaked
A newspaper in India has given computer screen photo of pilot incident report and even names him as Capt I.H.M. (As there is no official name disclosed so far I don't want to)
Not for a minute do I want to belittle the enormity of what happened to 521; I also feel for the crew and pax of that flight as well as respecting the firey who died, but I had a slight chuckle at the title of that Incident Report (if it's true...unlikely) "Crash Landing". I hope I never have to write in a title like that...