EK15 Diverting to MAN from LGW
Time traveller...you said....
".....But it scares me that some crews would actually keep going around again and again because the book says so...."
Please provide an example of this having happened.
".....But it scares me that some crews would actually keep going around again and again because the book says so...."
Please provide an example of this having happened.
Was this go around because of the same conditions...
It is quite possible to get a windshear warning, perhaps just a momentary one, at a point during the approach when a decision to continue is an option, say 1500-1000 ft above touchdown. In my experience, and I am a couple of years into retirement now, most operators have an SOP regime where a go-round is mandatory and in-flight monitoring systems are such that a zero tolerance policy is likely to be strictly observed. I suppose one could take the argument to the extreme of an island-holding destination where an aircraft would have no option other than to land despite continued windshear warnings !
What is it with the pilots or the tools they are given, today?
Back in the late '90's I watched (in awe) B707's land at Ostend. The wind was 29kts gusting 35kts, straight across. Yes the wind was straight off the sea, so not quite the turbulence as today. Old school people who had the skills to do the job.
I am aware we are talking AB here. If it wasn't Boeing I wouldn't go
Back in the late '90's I watched (in awe) B707's land at Ostend. The wind was 29kts gusting 35kts, straight across. Yes the wind was straight off the sea, so not quite the turbulence as today. Old school people who had the skills to do the job.
I am aware we are talking AB here. If it wasn't Boeing I wouldn't go
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my 20 years, in several airlines, a windshear warning (not caution) has been a compulsory go around, unless of course, there is an emergency. I am making an assumption here that they (EK), after 2 go-arounds no longer thought they might land with less than final reserve, they knew, as such a Mayday was called. Am I missing something here?
Did they make it to MAN? Did they take out a few tower blocks near BHX?
Did they make it to MAN? Did they take out a few tower blocks near BHX?
Hi - I was a passenger on this flight. The pilot seemed concerned from the outset. When we boarded in Dubai he mentioned the predicted wind and rain at Gatwick and said “we hope to get you there safely”.
With the cameras we were able to watch both landings and we seeemed a long way from runway on both attempts. Would crew confidence and an obvious landing worry before we even left Dubai come into it?
With the cameras we were able to watch both landings and we seeemed a long way from runway on both attempts. Would crew confidence and an obvious landing worry before we even left Dubai come into it?
As for the on board cameras, wouldn’t they make the aircraft look misaligned because of the crabbing effect in the wind?
Its very easy to draw conclusions as a passenger.
Hope that helps.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used to work for an Operator who's SOP was to divert after two GA . No questions, no discussion, no AB v B . Dead easy really. One guy did get on on a third attempt and the tea & bickies at HQ went on for so long they sent for more bickies. EK, good job.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
The pilot was obviously confused by this and after a pause (presumably to confer with the captain) he declared that they didn't have any PAR equipment* fitted! Only at that stage did they decide to divert!
* For those who don't know, a PAR is a Precision Approach Radar letdown. No equipment is required to be fitted to any aircraft because the pilot just listens to continuous ATC glidepath and centreline information given during the descent and makes the appropriate left/right and descent corrections suggested.
I made a mental note not to fly with that airline...
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm surprised bickies were on offer!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I listened to the Hong Kong Approach frequency during a typhoon. One airliner, from the middle east, had gone around three times from runway 13 at Kai Tak. The eye of the typhoon passed right through Kowloon harbour and a runway change was carried out. The wind was gusting to 90 kts! By then it was possible to discern the increasing tension in the tone of the pilot's radio transmissions. He requested fuel priority and because the ILS for the reciprocal, runway 31 was taking a little time to come online, ATC offered him a PAR approach to runway 31.
The pilot was obviously confused by this and after a pause (presumably to confer with the captain) he declared that they didn't have any PAR equipment* fitted! Only at that stage did they decide to divert!
* For those who don't know, a PAR is a Precision Approach Radar letdown. No equipment is required to be fitted to any aircraft because the pilot just listens to continuous ATC glidepath and centreline information given during the descent and makes the appropriate left/right and descent corrections suggested.
I made a mental note not to fly with that airline...
The pilot was obviously confused by this and after a pause (presumably to confer with the captain) he declared that they didn't have any PAR equipment* fitted! Only at that stage did they decide to divert!
* For those who don't know, a PAR is a Precision Approach Radar letdown. No equipment is required to be fitted to any aircraft because the pilot just listens to continuous ATC glidepath and centreline information given during the descent and makes the appropriate left/right and descent corrections suggested.
I made a mental note not to fly with that airline...
The last SRE approach I did was 1991 (I think) into LHR RWY 23.
I don’t think these approches are covered in our manuals anymore. Never been offered a PAR approach into a civilian airport.
EK carry large amounts of economy fuel from DXB. Remember the A380 that did 3 approcahes to MAN before diverting to LHR? How much fuel did he carry for that exercise?
Most airlines require a go around if you get a windshear warning. The part hard to understand is running yourself into a low fuel situation. Perhaps they should have diverted after the first attempt.
I think my last PAR was at Roveneimi about twenty years ago and I think I was once asked to do an SRA at BHX for controller currency but thats about it since I left the military. Mind you, I did come back across the pond in a 767 into Bournemouth on a fairly miserable morning to find that both their radar and ILS were out so had to do a procedural NDB - we got in !
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used to work for an Operator who's SOP was to divert after two GA . No questions, no discussion, no AB v B . Dead easy really. One guy did get on on a third attempt and the tea & bickies at HQ went on for so long they sent for more bickies. EK, good job.
Don't know about you, but I take some pleasure in this job by using my knowledge, experience, skills to get passengers and freight to its destination.
Like the BA 787 bounce post.
Move along job well done.
2 attempts divert!
Move along job well done.
2 attempts divert!
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Midlands
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN forecast for the 8th (yesterday) was a 10 knot gust straight down the runway.
Pretty sure LGW was forecast to be something like 210 degrees 29G42 wasn’t it??? That’s almost all crosswind component.
Therefore 2 wind shear go-arounds with the option of a diversion to a less windy ‘into-wind’ runway doesn’t sound all that stupid. Don’t know many skippers who’d act any differently. If the alternate was just as bad, then fair enough make a judgement call - but it clearly wasn’t the case!
Pretty sure LGW was forecast to be something like 210 degrees 29G42 wasn’t it??? That’s almost all crosswind component.
Therefore 2 wind shear go-arounds with the option of a diversion to a less windy ‘into-wind’ runway doesn’t sound all that stupid. Don’t know many skippers who’d act any differently. If the alternate was just as bad, then fair enough make a judgement call - but it clearly wasn’t the case!