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

Boy, it's noisy in here!

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

Boy, it's noisy in here!

Old 27th Jul 2017, 10:58
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: 43N
Posts: 178
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Of course they knew they gear was down shortly after takeoff.
The classic excuse "technical fault", or perhaps somebody forgot to check the gear pins?

For some reason they pressed on, at least when fuel got low a good decision was made. Without a transparent investigation published we'll never know.
Koan is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 11:45
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 58
Posts: 949
Received 38 Likes on 22 Posts
Originally Posted by Onesixty2four
Yes Andy, you're not a pilot so why do you feel your opinion is in any way relevant?
My apologies if I caused any offence. For the record, I’ve always taken the view that R&N should primarily be for the use of industry professionals which is why I clearly stated that I wasn’t one. And I agree – my opinions are less valid than yours. But this was such an incredible bordering on unbelievable story I couldn't resist commenting……

Originally Posted by Onesixty2four
Your last point. How the hell is radar and ATC going to figure out they have not retracted their gear?
I may not be an aviation professional, but I’m not stupid. Obviously the position of the landing gear can’t be deduced by radar. But the flight level can. I would have thought that FL240 was an unusual flight level to request and would have raised a few questions. But as White Knight noted, ATC may not particularly care, and you and others seem to think that these sort of things aren’t unusual for India in any case.

So once again, with my humble apologies, I’ll quietly back out of this discussion.
Andy_S is online now  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:00
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: 43N
Posts: 178
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
ATC will give generally you any available altitude you request, unless it is in conflict with route requirements. I once did a flight in an RJ at 12,000 feet. Way low, a few questions were asked but engine anti-ice was MEL'ed and even thought it was midsummer I had to stay out of icing conditions. I also flew one in to maintenance hub about 300 miles with the gear pins installed. Max Extended Speed 250. We got no more than 220 out of it don't remember the altitude.
Koan is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:01
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I expect the crew will be along shortly to offer their side of the story.

Or not.
currawong is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 12:53
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Positive rate...

ATC in the US will often ask if your unusual altitude is for 'Operational Reasons' but no RVSM will be denoted in the equipment suffix.
As far as this being a previously unheard of event; if your company or regulator shares ASR or FOQA data you may be able to see otherwise.
Personally I struggle to see how anyone gets this far configured like this; but they were likely talking to company and deeply
Into the PERF pages too..
Woods for the trees.
If in doubt; re run the checklists...!
neilki is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 15:40
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DESDI or BUBIN
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wouldn't credit Indian ATC with that level of situational awareness!
Eau de Boeing is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 21:54
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Canuckland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry to burst your bubble but I have done more than my fair share of flying in India and with single pack dispatches. Without any exceptions, have been queried by ATC about staying at 240/250.

Always appreciated the crosscheck which I would expect from ATC. Indian ATC sure is a pain in the backside but on this I cannot judge them as dimly as you do.
FalseGS is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 22:15
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Martian
Posts: 101
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Eau de Boeing
I wouldn't credit Indian ATC with that level of situational awareness!
Well would seem to be in keeping with their piloting skills
packapoo is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 22:48
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unless tings have changed, minimum FL on airways in India is FL280.
I did a flight with one pack inop, and despite calling ATC and telling them we could not climb above FL250 and getting their permission to fly at this FL, the moment we climbed out from MAA and asking for FL250 we were told we could not fly at that level.
It took some explaining (again) before we got clearance for FL250.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2017, 23:48
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
History of PIA - Pakistan International Airlines

In that part of the world, they either forget to retract Landing Gear, or forget to lower it!
Perwazee is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 02:29
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: europe
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe this story.

Years ago a mate needed to off load a problem.

Had taken off from a rough runway in bad weather with a new FO (Boeing)

With the distraction of the rough runway combined with a deviation from the SID for weather avoidance, the FO never said positive climb, que the captain didn't say gear up.

The knew they had a problem.

Aviate Navigate Communicate.

So they continued to climb and avoid weather, the aircraft didn't climb well and vibrated but as he said it wasn't a gear problem because they had three greens, so it must have been engine problems or weather, 15000ft again looked at the gear, three greens, said he really wanted to hang his hat on a problem and not create a new one and three greens looked good, over loaded by the weather the vibration and flying single pilot.

Raised the gear
Enos is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 05:51
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bristly Retort

Andy, you should feel no requirement to offer any apology to onesixty2four. Not everyone is so full of their own importance and so dismissive of others. As something of a "old dinosaur" in comparison to many on this forum I am constantly amazed by some of the comments made by so called "professionals". In these days of automation in aircraft and systems I wonder at just how "professional" some pilots really are, especially when I read some comments on PPRuNe.
Old Fella is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 09:24
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After T/O Checks

Originally Posted by Job Knockey
Not all A320 operators have an "After Take Off Checklist".

easyJet, for example.

I'll go and check how often this happens there.

I may be some time. Don't wait.
I have no idea whether this story is an "Indian April Fool's Day" beatup or not. What I do find hard to accept is that there are some operators out there who do not use any formal "After Take-off Checklist". What other checklists do these operators not bother with? What is the rationale in dispensing with the After Take-off Checklist or any other checklist?
Old Fella is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 09:31
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DESDI or BUBIN
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
False G/S my bubble with Indian ATC was burst a long time ago when I started flying in the region and that's if you can even get through to them at all on VHF or HF.


I will agree with you that they are the second best ATC unit in the world, the best being everyone else!
Eau de Boeing is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 11:53
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Isla Grande
Posts: 996
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Old Fella
I have no idea whether this story is an "Indian April Fool's Day" beatup or not. What I do find hard to accept is that there are some operators out there who do not use any formal "After Take-off Checklist". What other checklists do these operators not bother with? What is the rationale in dispensing with the After Take-off Checklist or any other checklist?
Interesting..., in my outfit (EU legacy carrier) we had a formal "After Take-off Checklist", but..... the landing gear wasn't incorporated.
gearlever is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 12:10
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Old Fella
Andy, you should feel no requirement to offer any apology to onesixty2four. Not everyone is so full of their own importance and so dismissive of others. As something of a "old dinosaur" in comparison to many on this forum I am constantly amazed by some of the comments made by so called "professionals". In these days of automation in aircraft and systems I wonder at just how "professional" some pilots really are, especially when I read some comments on PPRuNe.
Seconded.
Andy must have written his "apology" through gritted teeth. Of course we professionals have nothing to learn from the muggles, as this event may or may not demonstrate.

PS: will the real 16024 please stand up...
16024 is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 13:59
  #97 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 77
Posts: 4,131
Received 215 Likes on 62 Posts
Also seconded. As someone who retired with some 19,000 hours, I find I can still learn from people on this site. If PPLs and SLFs wish to expand their knowledge, then why not, as long as they declare their status. i.e. non-professional.
Herod is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 14:07
  #98 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,874
Received 60 Likes on 18 Posts
Smoking holes in the ground pay no respect to hours and experience. It sometimes takes a question from out of left field to realize how much sub-conscious bias experience gives you.
Two's in is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2017, 14:16
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Always something to learn

Originally Posted by Herod
Also seconded. As someone who retired with some 19,000 hours, I find I can still learn from people on this site. If PPLs and SLFs wish to expand their knowledge, then why not, as long as they declare their status. i.e. non-professional.
Thank you Herod. I spent almost all of my working life in aviation and one of the most appealing aspects of the profession to me is that there was never a day or a flight during which I did not have an opportunity to learn something new or revise something old. Unfortunately age and health issues mean all I am allowed to fly these days is a "drone", and I sure as hell have much to learn about that activity.
Old Fella is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2017, 12:53
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 66
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
No Ecam message, no problem! Ignore the slow climb rate, vibration, slow speed, noise, high fuel flow and FL240 max altitude. No Ecam continue to destination!
Sailvi767 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.