Vietnam 787 No gear down
Nope. With WoW, altitude is always shown as zero, no QFE required.
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, knowing where MEL tower is, if they observed no gear down, damn.....
Low drag approach on the 787??....that is a lot of energy to manage on that ac...
the crew did GA...
Low drag approach on the 787??....that is a lot of energy to manage on that ac...
the crew did GA...
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The crew went around.
Yes the alert maybe came earlier but perhaps the initial “oh crap” reaction was to drop the gear. Then realisation sinks in and a go around flown.
or perhaps a few seconds where taken in the cockpit “oops, we screwed up, ready to go around? Yup? Ok off we go”.
It doesn’t have to be an instant TOGA.
Yes the alert maybe came earlier but perhaps the initial “oh crap” reaction was to drop the gear. Then realisation sinks in and a go around flown.
or perhaps a few seconds where taken in the cockpit “oops, we screwed up, ready to go around? Yup? Ok off we go”.
It doesn’t have to be an instant TOGA.
ROFL
The poor schmuck can't win.... put the gear down too soon, you aren't efficient, put it down too late and ATC complain about the impending noise and FOD issue, and associated NOTAMS for runway closure. Now I recall one pilot who used to congratulate his FO's who out of an abundance of caution would lower the gear metaphorically at TOD.... he had a beef on contract terms with "the company". you just can't be too careful....
I think this is an appropriate thread to bring this great story by John Deakin to the attention of a wider audience:
Gear-Up Landing In A 747?
https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...ding-in-a-747/
Gear-Up Landing In A 747?
https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...ding-in-a-747/
I think this is an appropriate thread to bring this great story by John Deakin to the attention of a wider audience:
Gear-Up Landing In A 747?
https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...ding-in-a-747/
Gear-Up Landing In A 747?
https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...ding-in-a-747/
Great reminder that we all are fallible India Four Two, thanks!
Last edited by Mariner; 24th Sep 2019 at 12:44. Reason: editorial
I think this is an appropriate thread to bring this great story by John Deakin to the attention of a wider audience:
Gear-Up Landing In A 747?
https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...ding-in-a-747/
Gear-Up Landing In A 747?
https://www.avweb.com/features/pelic...ding-in-a-747/
PPRN at its finest, a true learning network!!
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Way north
Age: 47
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normally in older aircraft (I strongly suspect it's the same in newer aircraft), the altitude sent by the transponder is fixed at a standard QNH setting of 1013.25 hPa... So there is no connection between the altitude sent by the transponder and the shown value on the altimeter (where it can be adjusted by the pilots).
The secondary radar systems will the make the conversion to the altitude based on the local QNH that is inserted into the radar system (automatically or manually).
As long as the transponders all just transmit using the standard QNH setting, everything is fine... cause that also ensures the safety nets in for example ACAS, and radar systems....
The altimeter setting by the pilots versus the transponder altitude is what we confirm every time you show up on radar. Sometimes we catch a wrong QNH setting by the pilots, sometime we catch a malfunctioning transponder...
How flightradar24 handles it, I have really no clue... but I suspect it uses the transponder altitude as well, whether it calculates according to local QNH or standard pressure?
EDIT: A response to the FR24 users, not this case in particular.
The secondary radar systems will the make the conversion to the altitude based on the local QNH that is inserted into the radar system (automatically or manually).
As long as the transponders all just transmit using the standard QNH setting, everything is fine... cause that also ensures the safety nets in for example ACAS, and radar systems....
The altimeter setting by the pilots versus the transponder altitude is what we confirm every time you show up on radar. Sometimes we catch a wrong QNH setting by the pilots, sometime we catch a malfunctioning transponder...
How flightradar24 handles it, I have really no clue... but I suspect it uses the transponder altitude as well, whether it calculates according to local QNH or standard pressure?
EDIT: A response to the FR24 users, not this case in particular.
Normally in older aircraft (I strongly suspect it's the same in newer aircraft), the altitude sent by the transponder is fixed at a standard QNH setting of 1013.25 hPa... So there is no connection between the altitude sent by the transponder and the shown value on the altimeter (where it can be adjusted by the pilots).
The secondary radar systems will the make the conversion to the altitude based on the local QNH that is inserted into the radar system (automatically or manually).
As long as the transponders all just transmit using the standard QNH setting, everything is fine... cause that also ensures the safety nets in for example ACAS, and radar systems....
The altimeter setting by the pilots versus the transponder altitude is what we confirm every time you show up on radar. Sometimes we catch a wrong QNH setting by the pilots, sometime we catch a malfunctioning transponder...
How flightradar24 handles it, I have really no clue... but I suspect it uses the transponder altitude as well, whether it calculates according to local QNH or standard pressure?
EDIT: A response to the FR24 users, not this case in particular.
The secondary radar systems will the make the conversion to the altitude based on the local QNH that is inserted into the radar system (automatically or manually).
As long as the transponders all just transmit using the standard QNH setting, everything is fine... cause that also ensures the safety nets in for example ACAS, and radar systems....
The altimeter setting by the pilots versus the transponder altitude is what we confirm every time you show up on radar. Sometimes we catch a wrong QNH setting by the pilots, sometime we catch a malfunctioning transponder...
How flightradar24 handles it, I have really no clue... but I suspect it uses the transponder altitude as well, whether it calculates according to local QNH or standard pressure?
EDIT: A response to the FR24 users, not this case in particular.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Way north
Age: 47
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All aircraft with altitude reporting transmit their pressure altitude. (altitude based on an altimeter set to standard pressure)
Some newer aircraft also transmit the QNH used by the pilots.
Also some report GPS altitude.
FR24 does not correct for QNH.
Some newer aircraft also transmit the QNH used by the pilots.
Also some report GPS altitude.
FR24 does not correct for QNH.
Yes, in fact all aircraft that are equipped with EHS (Mode S EnHanced Surveillance) send the baro setting in the same transmission as Selected Altitude, though only when interrogated for it by a suitably-equipped SSR ground station.
