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

3 point turn in a 757

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

3 point turn in a 757

Old 28th Jun 2017, 15:47
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: HKG 'visitor'
Posts: 292
Originally Posted by JammedStab View Post
Cathay did it last year in Hong Kong on a 777. Captain was fired, not sure where he was from.
Not HKG: Toronto. Canada. No slur intended to the other great guys based there!
spleener is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 16:14
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 373
I think that someone has posted this somewhere on PPRuNe in the past (similar topic, although a lot more 'dramatic'!!):
https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=20110110-1

'Power Backs' should always be guided by a marshaller. (Although maybe ATC gave the required guidance?)
Trossie is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 05:01
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 265
Originally Posted by Hotel Tango View Post
Not at all. It's entering the runway using the taxiway prior to the one the 757 was going for. Check out the link to the plate above.
Thanks for that, I appreciate it. Here to learn.
rottenray is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 10:17
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
IMHO the debate is not focused correctly. It is concentrating on the merits of if and how to back up a B757. Perhaps we should be discussing why it was ever contemplated in the first case when there was a perfectly simpler & safer solution: use the turning circle. There is only one person who can tell us why not.

I've reviewed the video and it is touch & go whether full right hand down could have turned the nose wheel enough to avoid the edge markers and return to the C/L and continue to the turning circle. Those markers under the nose would have been hidden from view. Regarding the point about starting this manoeuvre from off the C/L: it would seem that the a/c reached a stop position slightly beyond the turnoff, therefore turning to the right to give more room would have made the matter worse and taken the a/c well beyond the exit. I was surprised how quickly, after stopping and turning then stopping again, the back up manoeuvre was commenced. That would suggest very little cockpit discussion about "Oops, what shall we do now?" and also suggest the captain had done this before, perhaps on other types. It seemed like an instant decision. I've been placed in this predicament in Africa, where it seemed it was the only solution: not to exit the runway, but to back up on a taxiway to enter runway. There was lots of 'what & how shall we do this' discussion; 'is it a good idea'; what other options are there (no tugs); etc. etc. In the end the apparently blocked (non-notam'd) taxiway was cleared and we could continue straight ahead.
The speed of executing this solution is startling.

Last edited by RAT 5; 29th Jun 2017 at 10:28.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 10:31
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by RAT 5 View Post
IMHO the debate is not focused correctly. It is concentrating on the merits of if and how to back up a B757. Perhaps we should be discussing why it was ever contemplated in the first case when there was a perfectly simpler & safer solution: use the turning circle. There is only one person who can tell us why not.


I am not an airline pilot (just an interested ppl holder) but from what I have seen and read it looks to me as though the pilot started to turn into the taxiway and only then realised that due to the angle of the taxiway they were not going to make it. At that point the option of using the turning circle was not available, the only options would be to reverse or shut down and call for a tug.
PJD1 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 13:37
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: munich/frg
Posts: 45
from what I have seen and read it looks to me as though the pilot started to turn into the taxiway and only then realised that due to the angle of the taxiway they were not going to make it. At that point the option of using the turning circle was not available, the only options would be to reverse or shut down and call for a tug.
exactly! and that´s why all the discussions on turning circles and why-not-using-the-whole-runway-length etc. are a little absurd.
... another ppl-holder
sf25 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 13:40
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: same planet as yours
Posts: 246
Originally Posted by RAT 5 View Post
... Perhaps we should be discussing why it was ever contemplated in the first case when there was a perfectly simpler & safer solution: use the turning circle.
Me thinks, case of tunnel-vision, getting there(=on the exit)-itis, a state of mind set, well before touchdown, on performing a carrier-style landing...
Impossible to measure, especially with the rather wide angle of view of the approach, but with reference to a 3° approach I very well know, I would be inclined to qualify this as a rather shallowish approach path, followed by a nice touchdown just in front of the aiming point, lots of perfectly normal (but probably sportive) braking and reversing, however finishing the last meters of the 900-ish meter ground roll with some kicking the brakes, making the tires smoke-puff more than needed and keeping the reversers on till the last meter (they are still closing whilst 45° in the left turn), with still ample, albeit rather boring, 600m of concrete ahead (and 600m back)...

I feel rather sorry for this guy/girl, one second less float before touchdown would have made their day; on the other hand maybe it's a lesson learned now, and once speed is under control, future roll-outs will hopefully be handled more docile when applicable. And let's hope their CP hasn't heard of Utube yet...
Regrettably as it may be, one has to keep in mind that many airports nowadays are red-carpets, full of paparazzi lenses, ready to capture and show the world every fart escaping your control...

Last edited by DIBO; 29th Jun 2017 at 18:18. Reason: Typos
DIBO is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 16:12
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
If the mains don't need to start and end at the edge of the runway then, by definition, you're on a runway that's wider than the theoretical minimum required for a 180, which is what we're discussing here.

Let me (or rather, Boeing) draw you a picture:
From your picture, it looks like the mains would end up somewhere near the word "engines". The nose gear would go near the edge about half-way round, but the main would make a smaller circle. But now I'm being pedantic
baselb is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 16:36
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 37
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by RAT 5 View Post
IMHO the debate is not focused correctly. It is concentrating on the merits of if and how to back up a B757. Perhaps we should be discussing why it was ever contemplated in the first case when there was a perfectly simpler & safer solution: use the turning circle. There is only one person who can tell us why not.

I've reviewed the video and it is touch & go whether full right hand down could have turned the nose wheel enough to avoid the edge markers and return to the C/L and continue to the turning circle. Those markers under the nose would have been hidden from view. Regarding the point about starting this manoeuvre from off the C/L: it would seem that the a/c reached a stop position slightly beyond the turnoff, therefore turning to the right to give more room would have made the matter worse and taken the a/c well beyond the exit. I was surprised how quickly, after stopping and turning then stopping again, the back up manoeuvre was commenced. That would suggest very little cockpit discussion about "Oops, what shall we do now?" and also suggest the captain had done this before, perhaps on other types. It seemed like an instant decision. I've been placed in this predicament in Africa, where it seemed it was the only solution: not to exit the runway, but to back up on a taxiway to enter runway. There was lots of 'what & how shall we do this' discussion; 'is it a good idea'; what other options are there (no tugs); etc. etc. In the end the apparently blocked (non-notam'd) taxiway was cleared and we could continue straight ahead.
The speed of executing this solution is startling.
I said this yesterday, then my post disappeared. A consideration would have been how long to organise the tug, given that the tug would have had to have started on the grass, maybe there is a lip there, maybe there would have been a long delay with passengers disembarking on the runway whilst they were discussion whether or not the push would have been succesful from the grass. I feel this was a snap decision to keep operations flowing. Looks like a decent and pragmatic outcome was reached with a minimum of disruption. If the airfield was closed for 90 minutes, I am sure that many here would have suggeted a tickle of reverse.... or just using gravity on the sloped runway. Obviously, if they damaged an engine, or put it on its tail (especially with a cc member injured while walking down the aisle, we would also be having a different discussion.
JumpJumpJump is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 16:42
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newcastle
Age: 49
Posts: 567
Have we ruled out a problem with the nose wheel? Could it be turned enough to do a 180 or turn at the end of the runway?
MATELO is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 17:53
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The north overlooking the beach
Posts: 61
Evening

Watched this with interest having been there many times.

Always went to the (rather squashed and much smaller) turning circle up at the top of the cliff and never tried to come off early.

However, once started, there was only one solution..... Getting a tug whether it be on or off the grass is rather problematic as the nearest one would be in Thessaloniki and the boat would probably have to go via Athens!
It's only Me is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 18:42
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,439
Do you imply there is no tug there?
atakacs is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 19:00
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The north overlooking the beach
Posts: 61
I don't imply; there isn't one. There is parking for 3 aircraft. In one end, out the other.
It's only Me is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 19:25
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brasil
Age: 37
Posts: 128
Can we assume that this has ended in a meeting with management, an explaination given, and back on the line immediately with a little note in the permanent record and an on the record slap on the wrists and an off the record smile, nod and a wink?
JumpJumpJump is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 20:21
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,439
Originally Posted by It's only Me View Post
I don't imply; there isn't one. There is parking for 3 aircraft. In one end, out the other.
Well it is certainly a relevant piece of the "puzzle". Thanks.

FWIW it seems to be a fairly busy airport for such limited real estate...
atakacs is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 20:51
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 173
As several have said before we practiced it on the B707 (feet off brakes etc).
However in the early 90s on the B757 I seem to remember it was not approved.
Mike6567 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 07:27
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,509
Having considered this scenario further I think we'd all fall into this category:

Oops. I've just dug a very big hole and jumped into it. We are where we are and now we have to get out of it. Options? Only 3. Deplane the pax, hope there is the local rugby team, local sumo wrestling team, local fire brigade and a few lumberjacks on board. Maybe take an hour. Those guys can push us back on the gear. (kid you not; heard about it being done B767). Failing that, get the local fire trucks and some rope on the gear and pull us back Maybe take an hour. Or (as JJJ suggested) a tickle of reverse might do the trick.

I suppose we always teach that digging a hole and jumping in is human nature; it's what you do afterwards that counts: keep digging or get out. It seems, they got out, so all's well that ends well. The message taken away is, "oops, I won't do that again in hurry."

I still would have liked to have been a fly on the wall in the flight deck.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 07:54
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: N . Daarset
Age: 66
Posts: 169
Guys , 737s and ATPs reversing around the a/d approved , only proviso feet under the rudder pedals / brakes . Stop using forward thrust . Off a pier /stand with marshaller , around the a/d not necessary . 75's I honestly cannot remember any prohibitations . Reversed ATPs down runways to avoid ground manoeuvring tailwind limits .
3rd world ..E.Med , Africa , India have used rev. to get out of trouble on a Tristar.
In Amsterdam down some of the bridges in Icy conditions , even a Trident can be steered and braked with reverse ; when the brakes [ inc. Maxaret anti-skid ] and steering were useless .
Have used rev. on 744 on one side to tighten a turn on limiting width rwys . Cannot remember limitations 'tho ; well retired .
condor17 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 10:45
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,425
Having considered this scenario further I think we'd all fall into this category:
etc.

The obvious conclusion which should have been reached by post 2 on page 1.

Can we put this to bed now?
Hotel Tango is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 14:58
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oran
Posts: 135
Originally Posted by RAT 5 View Post
Having considered this scenario further I think we'd all fall into this category:

Oops. I've just dug a very big hole and jumped into it. We are where we are and now we have to get out of it. Options? Only 3. Deplane the pax, hope there is the local rugby team, local sumo wrestling team, local fire brigade and a few lumberjacks on board. Maybe take an hour. Those guys can push us back on the gear. (kid you not; heard about it being done B767). Failing that, get the local fire trucks and some rope on the gear and pull us back Maybe take an hour. Or (as JJJ suggested) a tickle of reverse might do the trick.

I suppose we always teach that digging a hole and jumping in is human nature; it's what you do afterwards that counts: keep digging or get out. It seems, they got out, so all's well that ends well. The message taken away is, "oops, I won't do that again in hurry."

I still would have liked to have been a fly on the wall in the flight deck.
You are correct Rat . The 767 did it in Rome when the ground handling went on strike
icemanalgeria is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.