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

Air India B788 descends to 200 ft over water at HKG

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

Air India B788 descends to 200 ft over water at HKG

Old 15th Dec 2018, 19:21
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Back of Beyond
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yup, agree with the above 3 comments. I think we've reached a verdict on this lot.
Flying Clog is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2018, 11:06
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: House
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...erfere-454525/


Topical......ATC will not protect the ILS signals if it's CAT 1 approaches in use.....buyer beware.
nike is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2018, 15:16
  #83 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the U.S. weather below 800 and or 2, they will.
aterpster is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2018, 18:23
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not protecting the signals and allowing departures from the same runway is quite something different.
wiedehopf is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2018, 08:59
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: House
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts


Eh?

If the signal is not protected and you choose to keep the automatics in....buyer beware.....

nike is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2018, 10:26
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Traps for the unwary.
The Ancient Geek is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2018, 10:47
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A 747 tail taxiing through the glideslope is different from an airplane taking off going through the localizer beam.

The glideslope disturbance is much closer to the antenna so will be a lot stronger.

Also you need to differentiate between the sensitive and critical areas. Or whatever the nomenclature is.
With the 747 in the glideslope the ILS is basically unusable.

With the aircraft taking off crossing the localizer beam the disturbance should be short and less severe.
(So the real important areas were still protected in Munich while that was not the case in HKG
Just wanted to point out the difference)

Anyway while we are on the topic i'll add another incident:
My guess would be that the 747 Air China Cargo that had a runway excursion / go-around at Chicago O'Hare was the same situation as Munich.
(Incident: China Airlines B744 at Chicago on Jun 21st 2018, veered off the runway and went around)

Last edited by wiedehopf; 21st Dec 2018 at 12:31.
wiedehopf is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2018, 11:59
  #88 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting not home
Age: 46
Posts: 4,319
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Due to the TWY - GS antenna configuration the same was an issue at SVO for 25L (it's been a while).

Their ATC solution was to declare NDB apch in progress in VMC+ conditions, when the close holding points were needed to keep high flow. .

Not saying better or worse, just in agreement with w. that it is a major issue.

Somewhat related: Approaching LGW behind an A380, the controller would offer an RNAV approach with the standard super-separstion, or an ILS which required (almost) additional 2 NM in trail.

Maybe someone here kept the ILS scales on during the RNAV APCH and observed what was the actual behaviour?
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2018, 19:06
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,226
Received 13 Likes on 8 Posts
Due to the TWY - GS antenna configuration the same was an issue at SVO for 25L (it's been a while).
Yes - the geometry of a GS antenna is fixed everywhere - the antenna is, by definition, the place where the G/S beam intersects the ground. ~300m/1000 feet beyond the threshold "piano keys." Thus a taxiway that meets the threshold at 90° (extremely common) will also always be ~300m from the G/S antenna, and risk a holding/taxiing aircraft becoming an obstruction.

Workarounds can only be done by adjusting the taxiways to not lead directly to the threshold at 90°, or changing ops otherwise: displaced threshold; long looping taxiway that connects to the threshold at 0°, all departures from an intersection beyond the G/S antenna; back-taxiing from an intersection for >300m (probably not a good idea when another aircraft is inbound inside the marker - and might still produce interference). Switching to a 6° GS would put the beam angle "above" even tall aircraft that might block the signal - maybe.

All of which produce their own issues.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 21st Dec 2018, 20:54
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: House
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
The concept of promoting autolands as the future due to inexperienced crew, fails to consider the busy ATC environment, the lack of ILS signal protection unless weather conditions dictate it, and therefore the potential consequences of conducting auto-coupled approaches in day to day operations.

Piloting skills..... still required.
Minimum 2 crew...still required.

Airline Management have for years belittled/discredited our Profession by reducing T&Cs, looking to increase productivity.
They have believed an increase in automation with a transition to single crew operations on large aircraft as an opportunity to reduce costs, yet time and again we see the realities of operating in an increasingly busy airspace environment prove that there is no quick fix despite the accountants wishes.
nike is offline  
Old 22nd Dec 2018, 09:47
  #91 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
nike :
The concept of promoting autolands as the future
I was attending a presentation 2 years ago by an executive of a large European low cost operator on the introduction of the 737-8 max who said that they were planning mandating auto lands on the type where it was feasible in order to reduce go arounds and tyre wear. Did this actually materialize ? never heard anything about it since.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2018, 05:36
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 61
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks to everyone here that posted. We just flew into HKG for the normal 07L landing. During the arrival, ATC changed our arrival and told us to land on 07R. They gave us the verbal GS warning, as described above. We saw an Emirates aircraft approaching the hold short line, which could disrupt the GS signal. We turned off the autopilot, and followed the PAPIs just in case the GS signal was disrupted, and landed uneventfully. The EK aircraft did not get near the hold short line before we landed, and we saw no GS distruption.
atpcliff is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2018, 06:01
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sand pit
Age: 54
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Often though they are using 7R at night, or early mornings. When it happened to me it was probably the most violent autopilot malfunction I had ever experienced, even though we were familiar with warning will take you by surprise.
Clicked off autopilot And recovered....but when I read possible gs interference this is not what my mind conjured up.
casablanca is online now  
Old 24th Dec 2018, 08:17
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: 3.5 from TD
Age: 47
Posts: 1,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Would not the simplest solution in HKG be to only line up airplanes on 7R from J and H when using the runway in mixed mode? Just make all GA and Cargo aircraft cross at J6 and join the cue on the north side of the runway. By not using K1 you would avoid any issues.

Or just hold aircraft at the Cat 2 hold. I don’t understand why that is so hard. If you time it right then it makes absolutely no operational impact. If the planes are that tightly spaced, holding at the CAT 2 would not make that much difference to holding at K1.
Sqwak7700 is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2018, 09:04
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,787
Received 7 Likes on 3 Posts
This is an issue that has plagued HKG for many years. Now that it's being investigated by the new investigation authority rather than the regulator, something may be done about it.
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 24th Dec 2018, 16:58
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An easy solution is to hand fly and not blindly fly momentary fluctuations in the G/S signal. Otherwise you'd might have to hold every departing aircraft at the CAT II hold line whenever an aircraft is established on the G/S. What impact would that have on the arrival and departure capacity of the airport?
misd-agin is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2018, 06:23
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Wanderlust
Posts: 3,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An easy solution is to hand fly and not blindly fly momentary fluctuations in the G/S signal.
Even if you handfly the false GS result will be same. It will have to be planned to closely monitor the VS and DME checks. With VIS 9999 better would have been to fly localiser approch with steady FPA.
vilas is online now  
Old 26th Dec 2018, 06:37
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Not over the Rockies anymore.
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
atpcliff

you did what...disconnect the a/p...in Asia? Are you insane?
act700 is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2018, 14:08
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 880
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
LOL... I know you are being sarcastic (well I hope you are) but the real problem remains all those pilots (not just Asians) that can't fly and land an aircraft in visual conditions without the help of on board electronics (autopilot, Fight Director, etc) or external aids (GPS, ILS etc).

There are way too many pilots today that have no common sense, no real stick and rudder abilities and are nothing but little programmed robots them selves that cannot think outside the box and once a simple problem is encountered and it falls outside "their" programmed training, all things fall apart.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2018, 05:41
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Rosterabuseland
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BANG ON FC! Some of the comments here are a trifle worrisome
petrichor 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.