787s departing localizer into HKG - below minimum safe alt
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
787s departing localizer into HKG - below minimum safe alt
Now 4 incidents between July and October of last year - Virgin Atlantic (2), Etihad, and Ethiopian. Two reported on AVH today.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should imagine the OP's point is that there have been four strikingly similar incidents in a short time period with three different airlines (Virgin Atlantic, Etihad, and Ethiopian) but the same aircraft type - Boeing 787.
What is going wrong with the B787 under these specific circumstances, and why?
What is going wrong with the B787 under these specific circumstances, and why?
I should imagine the OP's point is that there have been four strikingly similar incidents in a short time period with three different airlines (Virgin Atlantic, Etihad, and Ethiopian) but the same aircraft type - Boeing 787.
What is going wrong with the B787 under these specific circumstances, and why?
What is going wrong with the B787 under these specific circumstances, and why?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: North by Northwest
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I should imagine the OP's point is that there have been four strikingly similar incidents in a short time period with three different airlines (Virgin Atlantic, Etihad, and Ethiopian) but the same aircraft type - Boeing 787.
What is going wrong with the B787 under these specific circumstances, and why?
What is going wrong with the B787 under these specific circumstances, and why?
Interesting, I be interested to know if they’re deviating right after they’re established on the LOC, or if the FMC is cocking up the interception turn? 25R ILS is not an approach that you want to be drifting right of while descending on the G/S!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We experienced this into Madrid 18L or 18R. After making the correction, it happened again 30s later. Reported it to mechanics on the ground at Madrid who said both Air Europa and Norwegian reported intermittent cases of the same and Boeing have been informed. This was late 2018.
We experienced this into Madrid 18L or 18R. After making the correction, it happened again 30s later. Reported it to mechanics on the ground at Madrid who said both Air Europa and Norwegian reported intermittent cases of the same and Boeing have been informed. This was late 2018.
Virgin has had earlier incidents, I remember one day very early on in the operation the 787 into HKG ATC giving them a terrain alert for sailing through the LOC near RIVER.
In 2028 AI314 got a GPWS warning at 200 feet approximately 2.6 nautical miles from 07R before performing a go around while flying the ILS.
The difference now is aircraft investigation is now done by an independent body, earlier incidents were reviewed by the HKCAD as there was no independent body.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To all 787 pilots this issue is well known and documented in an FCOM Bulletin that was released in mid-Dec of last year. The investigation into the HKG events resulted in the release of the Bulletin and was found to be a software anomaly that affects the CLC (Consistent Localiser Capture) mode during an approach. This occurs when the intercept vector onto the inbound Localiser course exceeds a certain angle (usually greater than 40 degrees). This HKG approach is also given as an example within the FCOM Bulletin and this issue may occur with less than 40 degrees onto RWY 25R due to LOC signal effects, and should be a ‘threat’ that all crews brief when operating into HKG. This issue has also been seen at other airports when ATC provide large angled vectors onto the LOC.
By the way this issue does not affect raw data on the PFD. With my LTC hat on - crews should ALWAYS be monitoring raw data (on every approach - regardless of airplane type) and backing up the automation. If it doesn’t do as advertised then either:
a. reduce the level of automation (ie. HDG SEL to return to LOC),
b. take it manually and correct the flightpath, or
c. conduct a Missed Approach.
Which is what the incident crews at HKG did.
Boeing state that a future update to the Flight Control Module software will correct this issue.
By the way this issue does not affect raw data on the PFD. With my LTC hat on - crews should ALWAYS be monitoring raw data (on every approach - regardless of airplane type) and backing up the automation. If it doesn’t do as advertised then either:
a. reduce the level of automation (ie. HDG SEL to return to LOC),
b. take it manually and correct the flightpath, or
c. conduct a Missed Approach.
Which is what the incident crews at HKG did.
Boeing state that a future update to the Flight Control Module software will correct this issue.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK, South East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which FCOM bulletin are you referring to?
If you’re referring to BAB-61, that deals with the aircraft entering a stabilisation mode following loss or degradation of the ILS signal. It is not a software bug....
If you’re referring to BAB-61, that deals with the aircraft entering a stabilisation mode following loss or degradation of the ILS signal. It is not a software bug....
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK, South East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Little bug below the Rad Alt???? I'm assuming you don't fly the 787... Could we get back to discussing this with people who know what they're talking about...
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK, South East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might like to elaborate what previous type you were on.
The display, as shown above is the same as the 777, 747, A320, 737, A350 and most commercial airliners. The only reason it looks different to the types I mention previously is the fact that the horizon line crosses the entire PFD and not just a box in the middle. It is a STANDARD display.
For info I am a 787 Examiner/Instructor/LTC and check Captain and have genuinely NO idea what you are talking about...
Would you like to show me an example of your previous type display so we can get a grasp of what you are saying please..
The display, as shown above is the same as the 777, 747, A320, 737, A350 and most commercial airliners. The only reason it looks different to the types I mention previously is the fact that the horizon line crosses the entire PFD and not just a box in the middle. It is a STANDARD display.
For info I am a 787 Examiner/Instructor/LTC and check Captain and have genuinely NO idea what you are talking about...
Would you like to show me an example of your previous type display so we can get a grasp of what you are saying please..
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK, South East
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you talking about an expanded ILS display on the ND possibly....? If so I can safely say that I very rarely IF EVER used that on the 777 in 15 years and 10,000 hours of flying it. I find the "Small bug" perfectly adequate...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This approach is an accident waiting to happen in my opinion. Any fly through the loc. Is a major threat. An RNAV onto a 10D point or a 20 Mn straight in would be better.
not aircraft specific I am sure.
not aircraft specific I am sure.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In trouble with Boeing for posting a picture of a simulated PFD? If that were even remotely possible, every MS and X-Plane Flight Sim developer would've been sued by now.
I am QUITE sure that MS and any other commercial developer would put in place measures to recognise Boeing's IP as appropriate.