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

Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported

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

Pegasus accident in SAW; just reported

Old 6th Feb 2020, 21:04
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PJ2,

Just for info, it's not all that unusual to have 3 crew up front if there's training or a check ride going on.
Pistonprop is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 21:16
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not sure why people are debating LDRs, disputing 10 or 15 knot airframe certifications or some belief that the -800 is susceptible to overruns?

I’m wanting to know what was going on in the flight deck and why they felt it was acceptable to land excessively deep into a rain soaked runway? Even if situational awareness was lost over the actual tailwind component or rapidly changing effects of the TS, the picture from the flight deck window combined with the pitch attitude, thrust inputs, IAS trends, descent rates alongside potential EGPWS cautions and warnings must’ve raised serious alarms with someone?



Callsign Kilo is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 21:21
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 900m
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
According CNN flight deck crew alive - in hospital but to be prosecuted when released.
Twitter is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 23:13
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not sure why people are debating LDRs, disputing 10 or 15 knot airframe certifications or some belief that the -800 is susceptible to overruns?
They are disproportionately represented in over-runs, and will be just because the the numerical number of takeoffs and landings they do, compared to almost every aircraft except the A32x.

The more interesting question is the relative rate of A32x vs B737-NG runway excursions. Eyeballing, wikipedia says about 7,900 A32x deliveries vs about 7000 B737-NG, so a very large sample size for both to make valid comparisons.

My understanding is the -800 is also significantly faster across the fence compared to the A32x, and even the 737-classic, so that would provide and extra margin for pilot error in the decision to land/go-around for deep landings and floats on marginal runways.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 6th Feb 2020, 23:45
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 69
Posts: 4,505
Received 261 Likes on 127 Posts
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
The more interesting question is the relative rate of A32x vs B737-NG runway excursions. Eyeballing, wikipedia says about 7,900 A32x deliveries vs about 7000 B737-NG, so a very large sample size for both to make valid comparisons..
Hull loss rates for the 737NG and the A320 series are virtually the same (last numbers I found, the NG rate was slightly better, but I doubt it was enough to be statistically significant). Further, we're talking over 20 years worth of data, so the numbers should be reasonably immune from 'statistical flukes'.
So if - as claimed - 737NGs are going off the end more often relative to A32x, then the A32x is crashing more often for other reasons...
I'm not a pilot, but if you land 'hot', on a wet runway with a 25 knot tailwind, and touchdown over halfway down the runway, a happy outcome is pretty unlikely regardless of what you're flying...
tdracer is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 00:58
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: away from home
Posts: 903
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Strumble Head
Oh cor strewth! Clearly someone who has never been (or known someone who has flown and been ... ) at the back of a stretched DC-8 (Series 6x) in flight. Occasionally the back end lined up with the front - but only occasionally.
Thank heavens for the more informed posters who are pointing out that a truly robust and rigid aeroplane would be too flippin' heavy to lift off with any meaningful payload. Great for the accident stats, stuff-all use as an aerial transport platform.
Rant over ....
Need a “like” button here!
oceancrosser is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 01:19
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,319
Received 247 Likes on 119 Posts
I think its just a different version of "get-home-itis" Runway overruns are not new and not statistically relevant to aircraft type. There have been A340's, 747-400's all the way down to turboprops going off the end of the runway. What needs to be looked at is the decision making process that leads to an attempt in those conditions in the first place. Is it fuel policy, is it rostering practices where a four sector day has to be completed, is it experience levels and steep cockpit gradients or is it the corporate culture of airlines and their over zealous emphasis on driving down costs?. With all the technology available such as flysmart and whatever the Boeing equivalent is then it should be obvious from the ATIS if there is enough runway. I know that in the bar at the end of the day every pilot will categorically state that none of the other stuff comes into it but something is going on in those flight decks that push the crew to persist with a bad situation.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 02:37
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,062
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher
The more interesting question is the relative rate of A32x vs B737-NG runway excursions. Eyeballing, wikipedia says about 7,900 A32x deliveries vs about 7000 B737-NG, so a very large sample size for both to make valid comparisons.
But a rough calculation wouldn't put any weight on which aircraft is more frequently used in various parts of the globe (west vs east to put it bluntly). This isn't an assumption or a guess - just a hypothetical - but what if the 737 is more popular outside the first world than the Airbus due to its age. How would you weight that factor in your rough eyeballing survey?
giggitygiggity is online now  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 04:07
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
High frequency short haul operations in a B737NG / A320 are by definition high risk operations. Multiple sectors in difficult weather plus an operator with fuel policy run by accountants who have contempt for Pilots , throw in a regulator that dumbs down experience requirements and training requirements and BINGO! , its the Pilots fault. It’s nothing to do with the B737NG. What’s amazing is that it doesn’t happen more often.
George Glass is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 04:19
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: BNE, Australia
Posts: 312
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by George Glass
High frequency short haul operations in a B737NG / A320 are by definition high risk operations. Multiple sectors in difficult weather plus an operator with fuel policy run by accountants who have contempt for Pilots , throw in a regulator that dumbs down experience requirements and training requirements and BINGO! , its the Pilots fault. It’s nothing to do with the B737NG. What’s amazing is that it doesn’t happen more often.
If that were entirely correct we would expect to see a number of serious incidents involving Ryanair every year. But we don't.
chuboy is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 04:44
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Plenty of NG over-runs in the US/West, Burbank, Jacksonville, a very close near miss in Christchurch recently come to mind, AA in Kingston back in 2009.
Anyone continuing an approach in such report conditions as this accident, unless so low on fuel that they are unable to go-around will struggle to get a defence from me.

If you really want to compare, EASA did a study and concluded the rates of runway excursion in the EU was very similar and representative of the rest of the world (p14). Runway Excursions study: European perspective


3.2 COMPARISON BETWEEN EUROPE AND THE REST OF THE WORLD An important part of the present study is to compare runway excursions that occurred in Europe to the rest of the world. In Table 1 an overview is given of the frequency of occurrence of the different types of runway excursions for the different flight phases for both Europe and the rest of the world. This table shows that there are only small (statistically not significant) differences in the frequencies in Europe compared to the rest of the world. For both Europe and the rest of the world runway excursions occurred most often during the landing phase with a more or less equal division between landing overruns and veeroffs.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 04:53
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My understanding is the -800 is also significantly faster across the fence compared to the A32x, and even the 737-classic, so that would provide and extra margin for pilot error in the decision to land/go-around for deep landings and floats on marginal runways
yes, the -800 has a higher average ref speed. It has been referred to as being ‘slippery’ however with over 8K hours on type I can say with a reasonable amount of conviction that this is due to it being mishandled/mismanaged. Regardless of aircraft type, there is no excuse for landing any aircraft almost 2/3rds into a 3km runway in wet conditions with a tailwind component that’s well beyond certification limitations (unless you were on fire or had a thimble full of fuel remaining). If that’s what has happened then this is regrettably another case of an avoidable runway excursion that has led to fatalities.
Callsign Kilo is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 05:16
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
chubby , Ryanair must be doing something right mustn’t they ? The point I was trying to make is that every shorthaul Pilot has been in this predicament. How you resolve it is down to the quality of the person in the left hand seat. Being able to operate independently of airline management is one of the great privileges and equally great responsibilities of being an airline Captain.
George Glass is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 06:06
  #174 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,486
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Pistonprop
PJ2,

Just for info, it's not all that unusual to have 3 crew up front if there's training or a check ride going on.
Thanks Pistonprop, yes, I'm aware of the arrangement, btdt etc. I recall that there were 3 up front on the Turkish 738 into AMS.

Whatever else is behind this accident, for me this has the scent of CRM issues to it.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 07:07
  #175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: It used to be an island...
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Callsign Kilo
Regardless of aircraft type, there is no excuse for landing any aircraft almost 2/3rds into a 3km runway in wet conditions with a tailwind component that’s well beyond certification limitations (unless you were on fire or had a thimble full of fuel remaining). If that’s what has happened then this is regrettably another case of an avoidable runway excursion that has led to fatalities.
That is the nub of the entire problem here.

Why isn't Ryanair pranging the slippery high-speed beast off the end of the runway on a daily basis? Because they don't fly like this!
nicolai is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 07:24
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Worldwide
Age: 43
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What was the experience of the pilots? Anybody knows?
samca is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 07:30
  #177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Sudbury, Suffolk
Posts: 264
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by nicolai
That is the nub of the entire problem here.

Why isn't Ryanair pranging the slippery high-speed beast off the end of the runway on a daily basis? Because they don't fly like this!
And, interestingly, this gives the lie to the blanket condemnation of "beancounters" as the fons et origo of all ills. Here is a business run with fanatic dedication to cost control and maximisation of revenue and yet with an effective safety culture as measured by results.

There may be learning that other organisations can gain.
Maninthebar is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 07:31
  #178 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,488
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
In my youth I worked for British Aerospace. As a junior pilot I recall on a ‘Black Flag’ day sitting in the crew room when an old hand came out with a saying which has stuck with me ever since...

IF YOU THINK TRAINING IS EXPENSIVE WAIT UNTIL YOU ARE AN ACCIDENT

In this particular case, the Swiss Cheese model springs to mind. You do wonder just what CRM training took place, and just how robust the whole process was......

They need to engage with an independent EASA CRM provider(s) who will look at the whole organisation root and branch. National cultures are of course the basic ingredients which need to be moulded into a safe secure organisation.

Even now it is difficult to understand how the crew fell into this trap given previous well publicised worldwide events....I know it is easy to sit in an armchair and pontificate......however comma this is a fundamental gross error given that no evidence has yet to emerge of aircraft unserviceable items.
parkfell is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 07:46
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 254
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by giggitygiggity
But a rough calculation wouldn't put any weight on which aircraft is more frequently used in various parts of the globe (west vs east to put it bluntly). This isn't an assumption or a guess - just a hypothetical - but what if the 737 is more popular outside the first world than the Airbus due to its age. How would you weight that factor in your rough eyeballing survey?
Comparing apples and oranges here. Autothrust on the A320 series is pretty good at keeping Vapp, whereas the tendency with manual thrust is to sit just about Vapp and frequently to apply a burst of power just before touch-down. Boeing technique seems to be to set the pitch attitude and gently bleed off power in the flare; in general with the Airbus the thrust levers are closed simultaneously with the flare commencing.
Fursty Ferret is offline  
Old 7th Feb 2020, 11:56
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: England
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AuroraAustralis
I'm not going to state any opinion, take these numbers and interpret as you wish:

Runway excursion hull losses in the past 2 years involving the B737NG (6700 built):
PGT8622: Jan 2018
CXA8667: Aug 2018
UTA579: Sep 2018
ANG73: Sep 2018
BSK293: May 2019
PGT2193: Feb 2020

Runway excursion hull losses in the past 2 years involving the A320 family (9200 built):
N/A
My takeaway from those statistics is that Pegasus, with only 24 737NGs have made up 33% of 737NG hull losses due to runway excursion in the last tow years, whereas Ryanair and Southwest with >1000 NGs between them have made up 0%.
tigerinthenight 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.