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

EVA B777 close call departing LAX

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

EVA B777 close call departing LAX

Old 27th Dec 2016, 10:32
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 603
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
If you look at webtrack they turned left, turned right (abeam the Montebello label on the map, turned left and then right.

This basically lines up with the various instructions as best I can tell.
Snakecharma is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2016, 16:45
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,899
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
No argument there, although I wasn't aware that FR24 used any kind of estimating algorithm other than crude extrapolation and dumb joining-the-dots.
I probably got the idea from some of the FR24 forum posts like this one from 'FlightAware Staff':

The current mlat server tracking filter has trouble with things that are maneuvering hard, as you've probably noticed (it's a constant-velocity Kalman filter which works well enough for commercial flights most of the time)
MLAT - This flight is restricted from public view: ADS-B Flight Tracking

This was discussing an mlat plot of maneuvering fighters but it does seem to explain some of the FR24 plotting behavior as the ADS-B coverage gets spotty.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 11:15
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,341
Received 29 Likes on 18 Posts
If you look at webtrack they turned left, turned right (abeam the Montebello label on the map, turned left and then right.

This basically lines up with the various instructions as best I can tell.
Well.......apart from the fundamental 'heading 180 degrees' instruction !

As pilots, our primary response to any ATC heading instruction is the heading given. If we are told to turn onto a new heading, then that heading is the number one priority, and that 'number' is what we set with the heading knob. If the turn direction is not given or seems illogical or wrong, we will query that turn instruction. BUT we will not ignore the heading given, (as long as we are not being turned directly towards a hazard of course).

EVA015 were given a heading of 180 degrees. The actual turn direction might have been wrong or odd or whatever, but they :

a) failed to query the turn direction, and;
b) failed to turn onto the heading they were given.

They actually maintained a heading which was about 160 degrees opposite to what they were initially told (and read back) - despite repeated instructions to turn - and it could have got them killed. Twice. First with AC788 and again with Mount Wilson.

I still wonder if they had a compass/heading malfunction, because I find it hard to believe that a longhaul B777 crew would ignore such basic instructions otherwise.

Last edited by Uplinker; 28th Dec 2016 at 11:28.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 12:55
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: usa
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Uplinker
I still wonder if they had a compass/heading malfunction, because I find it hard to believe that a longhaul B777 crew would ignore such basic instructions otherwise.
I doubt it. It looks to me more likely that they were about a third of the way through the original left turn to 180 deg when they were told to reverse the direction of turn, which they began, only to be told to reverse the direction yet again (and head 270 deg), which they began, and then told to head southbound to which they tried to query the controller about the direction of turn and got no answer. It is only during that last part that they maintained their present heading (which happened to be north-ish as a result of the previous maneuvers) while they tried to obtain clarification about the direction of turn. After all, it was the controller getting her left and right mixed up that started the whole mess, so they figured direction of turn was important. Had they maintained heading and queried the controller for that first turn, all of this would be averted, so they were just a bit late in doing the right thing.

Anyway, it wasn't their compass, but rather the timing of the controller's instructions that got them going north.
fepate is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 14:29
  #165 (permalink)  
epc
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Uplinker

EVA015 were given a heading of 180 degrees. The actual turn direction might have been wrong or odd or whatever, but they :

a) failed to query the turn direction, and;
b) failed to turn onto the heading they were given.
You have been repeating the same of line of argument in this thread. FAA spokesman has said the controller meant to say "right" but said "left."

We could hear the EVA crew read back the first "left turn" instruction, and the controller did not correct. So what do you think the EVA pilot should do at this point? Steer left or right or keep chatting on the radio?

Additional tracking data have shown that EVA had initiated turns as instructed, but appeared to have repeatedly been given new directions to turn the opposite way before the current turn was completed.

Towards the end, the controller stopped giving turn directions all together. But, like others have pointed out, after having been given repeated, emphatic instructions for turn direction, the EVA crew could assume by this point that somehow for reasons beyond them that the turn direction was important. Hence the delay to commence the turn to southbound.

If the compass really malfunctioned, how did the flight complete the trip to TPE later?
epc is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 15:02
  #166 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Uplinker:

I still wonder if they had a compass/heading malfunction, because I find it hard to believe that a longhaul B777 crew would ignore such basic instructions otherwise.
The 777 doesn't have a compass. It is a highly redundant inertial system (three inertial platforms) that also has mag var tables to convert true heading into magnetic heading when in domestic airspace. These inertial platforms also provide the attitude platform for the airplane. On rare occasions one inertial reference unit (IRU) might fail. In that rare event the airplane only loses triple redundancy.
aterpster is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 18:17
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 214
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
These highly redundant inertial systems are not foolproof and if not aligned properly can display incorrect headings. eg:

AirAsia Navigation Error
Bleve is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 19:01
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SCAL
Posts: 116
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
It passed pretty much over the top of my apartment. I was there but don't claim to have heard it.

Here's the LAX Terminal Chart (1:250,000). I have pretty much stopped flying now so it is from 2014 but they had not built any new towers the last time I looked out of my window.

Perhaps some photoshop whizz with a bit of time could superimpose the track to see how close to the towers it was but it looks pretty near to me by eyeball. Maybe a fraction to the South. In the class G for sure.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
IMG_0379.JPG (1.03 MB, 88 views)

Last edited by sherburn2LA; 28th Dec 2016 at 19:17.
sherburn2LA is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 19:10
  #169 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bleve:
These highly redundant inertial systems are not foolproof and if not aligned properly can display incorrect headings. eg:
Gross pilot error combined with a company too cheap to buy the mod from AB that would have prevented that.

EVA obviously did not have that problem as represented by their track to TIA once they got it pointed in the correct direction.
aterpster is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 20:15
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 603
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Uplinker, I think you are missing the point.

The aircraft started various turns in response to instructions from Atc.

Give someone a turn through 270 degrees to turn to 180 and the aircraft will, at some point turn through north.

When it is pointing in the northerly direction give it another instruction to turn right and it will head generally north while the angle of bank comes off and the right turn commenced.

Issue another instruction and the right turn comes off and a left turn commenced, all the while the aircraft heads generally northish.

Would an native English speaking crew have handled it differently, possibly, but they weren't put in that position. It was a crew with English as a second (third or fourth) language.

On another point I am not sure what the panic was re air Canada. The webtrack (I don't know how accurate this is) on face value has plenty of vertical separation between the two, despite the various level off instructions given by the controller. The webtrack may not give the complete (or accurate) story but by the time the two aircraft got close there were thousands of feet vertical separation according to the webtrack labels. Davereiduk's screen shot shows that there is close to 6000ft vertically between the two aircraft.

Last edited by Snakecharma; 28th Dec 2016 at 22:26.
Snakecharma is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 20:37
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Snakecharma has summed it up perfectly IMO.
enola-gay is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2016, 20:53
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: CYUL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Snakecharma,
I will make some inquires with a 787 pilot I know in Toronto, and see if he heard what the AC crew saw..re EVA below them. I'm sure they were looking for the other aircraft and had it on their TCAS!
Retired DC9 driver is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 01:53
  #173 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Retired DC9 Driver:

I will make some inquires with a 787 pilot I know in Toronto, and see if he heard what the AC crew saw..re EVA below them. I'm sure they were looking for the other aircraft and had it on their TCAS!
The chances of a collision was near zero. The controller had been trained to think airplane-to-airplane separation and had only absorbed that into her "priority memory bank." Knowing the ATC facility I am sure they thought they had trained her better,

Alas, she was trapped by the terrain to the north of LAX, which may have been a cursory part of her training.

Damn, this is all pathetic without an NTSB incident investigation.
aterpster is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 02:47
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: on the road less travelled
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the 270 heading was meant for AC to provide additional separation but the controller was pre-occupied with EVA and gave the wrong aircraft the westerly heading.
HighSpeedAluminum is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 09:14
  #175 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
HighSpeedAluminum:

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the 270 heading was meant for AC to provide additional separation but the controller was pre-occupied with EVA and gave the wrong aircraft the westerly heading.
The Ventura 7 SID requires radar vectors.
aterpster is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 10:09
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Would an native English speaking crew have handled it differently, possibly, but they weren't put in that position. It was a crew with English as a second (third or fourth) language.
A question for non-native English speakers on PPRuNe ... what would be understood by the colloquialism "southbound"? Granted it contains the word "south", but if you were not familiar with the word, what would "bound" mean to you as an adjunct? And what did these guys take it to mean?
DuncanF is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 18:59
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: here and there
Age: 69
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
towards a Southern direction (as ATC instruction), towards the South, 180

going / heading / travelling / flying / navigating towards and maintaining a Southern direction,
say, from 120 through 240 or from SE to SW roughly.


to me it is clear she wanted them to avoid flying Northbound where the mountains are.

Last edited by vmandr; 29th Dec 2016 at 19:15.
vmandr is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 19:14
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Southbound" is an adjective which describes the direction of a track, such as " southbound M6"

"South" can be an adverb which tells which way a specific motion goes.

So the correct English, whether in California, Cumbria or China is "Turn South" and no one will be confused.
enola-gay is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 20:17
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Or even better, "turn heading south", but preferably with a "right" or "left" after "turn"!
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2016, 22:26
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mexico
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The way he hesitates reading it back suggests that he's unfamiliar with the word.
Mora34 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.