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

PIA A320 Crash Karachi

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

PIA A320 Crash Karachi

Old 27th May 2020, 12:16
  #741 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by krismiler
This crew were in excess of normal parameters by about double, ATC should have the authority to discontinue an approach when it exceedes normal plus a certain percentage, unless a MAYDAY call has been made. I don't want to be told to go around because I had VS - 1100 fpm briefly at 1000' but if a safe landing is in doubt, it's a further safety layer. Complying with an ATC instruction enables the crew to save face, anyone who has flown in Asian knows how important that is, and it cuts through confusion and tunnel vision.

In aircraft carrier operations, the Landing Signals Officer has full authority to "Wave Off" any approaching aircraft if it deviates from set parameters. I'm not suggesting this is needed at civil airports, but safety might be improved if ATC were to enforce a "gate" on arriving aircraft which if not met would result in an immediate instruction to go-around.
This is not how ATC works and Controllers have generally no idea of detailed aircraft performance. And where do you draw the line ? a 10 degree vertical profile can be performed by large jets in KTM for instance. It is up to the PIC and only the PIC to decide if the landing is feasible or not. .We should not attempt to shift responsibilities to outside of the cockpit, as by doing so you will create far more issues than you will potentially solve, .

Now the ATC R/T
I was refraining from continuing commenting on that part before as nearly always nowadays after an accident in this forum , , the amateurs are jumping in pretending to be either airline pilots or controllers and making stupid statements .. after a couple of days they are generally gone and we can start discussing more seriously.
Looking at facts so far and the videos photos posted, 2 things bother me
This heading 180 given by the Approach controller after aircraft reported being established on ILS , , you simply do not do this unless the runway is blocked or something . The other one is the fact that apparently no mention of the gear issue was made on the R/T prior the first landing.This is highly unusual to say the least. .
As I said earlier on , we have to be careful on exchanges recorded by spotters using hand held scanners . I strongly believe the R/T transcript posted is most probably not complete and we are missing important exchanges.

I can think of a couple of scenarios that will make a lot of sense if there were only 2 or 3 additional R/T exchanges.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:17
  #742 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,786
Received 129 Likes on 58 Posts
Originally Posted by atakacs
Is this SOP ? I think not and frankly unrealistic at any busy airport. And what about night / low vis landings ? I'd say it is the responsibility of the crew to make sure the gear is extended...
ex-Mil ATCO perspective. Whilst I fully agree that the Captain is wholly responsible for operating the aircraft (and rightly so) a Local Controller should be more than just a parrot repeating clearances. Certainly in my former world, even at very busy units, the controller should (vis/wx permitting) ensure that the runway is clear and monitor closely all aircraft approaches and movements in his area of responsibility. That’s why one of our tools was a pair of binoculars immediately ro hand.

As a SATCO I suffered from a Local Controller who never seemed to look out of the windows. Queues of vehicles waiting at traffic lights waiting to cross an empty runway with no movements, that sort of thing. Never actually unsafe, just dismally inefficient. A year or so after I left I was conducting a Staff visit, and there he was in Local ... with no movements and a queue of vehicles stuck at the lights. “Nothing’s changed, I see, Sergeant XXX”, pointing at the vehicle queue.
MPN11 is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:18
  #743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by xetroV

With that speed over the threshold, I believe the crew would never have received a TOO LOW GEAR warning during the first approach; they would have received TOO LOW TERRAIN instead (or another mode if that would have priority). I can see how a crew would discard the latter GPWS warning as being erroneous/nuisance when approaching a runway in VMC, especially a crew that had already lost their situational awareness due to extreme (probably self-induced) tunnel-vision.


Here's the mode 4a envelope.
Thanks, very good point. This is the one from GTG with Surveillance.

sonicbum is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:24
  #744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Serenity
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That is the F/O must act decisively to call aloud "Captain Go Around - Landing Gear coming up" . Simultaneously the F/O deliberately selects gear up without waiting for a response. . Even the most culture driven pilot in command would be shocked to the core and be forced into a go-around.
600+ posts about not bringing gear up until there is a confirmed positive climb ... this go-around strategy seems to conflict with that.


malr is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:32
  #745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re the suggestions that ATC should have done something....
Aircraft commander is responsible for the operation of the aircraft - that is how it should be. But we are all human and we can all err. ATC has always been able to take decisions and issue instructions or advice to aircraft if it appears that an aircraft may be in a dangerous situation. The text below - my bold - is related to surveillance services but includes instructions from aerodrome control. And, hopefully, a lack of wheels on short final would be considered sufficient grounds to advise the pilot or issue a go-around instruction, either directly or via the approach controller. I am of what appears to be the old school - even though the pilot is responsible for the aircraft, I still like to see an aerodrome controller keeping an eye on what is going on outside when he/she is able. No guarantee that the controller will spot something amiss, but it might close one of those holes in the cheese.

Originally Posted by From ICAO Doc 4444 PANS-ATM
8.9.6.1.8 An aircraft making a radar approach should: a) be directed to execute a missed approach in the following circumstances: i) when the aircraft appears to be dangerously positioned on final approach; or ii) for reasons involving traffic conflictions; or iii) if no clearance to land has been received from the procedural controller by the time the aircraft reaches a distance of 4 km (2 NM) from touchdown or such other distance as has been agreed with the aerodrome control tower; or iv) on instructions by the aerodrome controller; or b) be advised to consider executing a missed approach in the following circumstances: i) when the aircraft reaches a position from which it appears that a successful approach cannot be completed; or ii) if the aircraft is not visible on the situation display for any significant interval during the last 4 km (2 NM) of the approach; or iii) if the position or identification of the aircraft is in doubt during any portion of the final approach. In all such cases, the reason for the instruction or the advice should be given to the pilot.
LookingForAJob is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:33
  #746 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by MPN11
ex-Mil ATCO perspective. Whilst I fully agree that the Captain is wholly responsible for operating the aircraft (and rightly so) a Local Controller should be more than just a parrot repeating clearances. Certainly in my former world, even at very busy units, the controller should (vis/wx permitting) ensure that the runway is clear and monitor closely all aircraft approaches and movements in his area of responsibility. That’s why one of our tools was a pair of binoculars immediately ro hand.
.
Do not put military and civil operations on a par here . I a large airport such as Karachi , the binoculars are not there monitor if landing gears are extended. In any case you need your 2 hands to do something else.
I know in this case it this was a single aircraft due Corona, but this how civil TWR controllers are trained today.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:47
  #747 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 38
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...but this how civil TWR controllers are trained today.
But is it correct?
Flying_Scotsman is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:51
  #748 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,786
Received 129 Likes on 58 Posts
I fully agree there’s little comparison between Civ & Mil operations and environment, which is why I prefixed my post the way I did.

OK, heads down, look at ASMA or whatever and shuffle the flight strips. And it works very well for Civ (most of the time). I know how it works ... I started as a Civil ATCA. 😎

Anyway, the BIG issue is the missing CVR. The FDR will presumably tell in much detail WHAT happened, but the CVR will hopefully help explain WHY..
MPN11 is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 12:54
  #749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good point, well made.... No GPWS "Too Low Gear"

A320


Milvus Milvus is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 13:19
  #750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia the Awesome
Posts: 399
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
L/G NOT DOWN Ecam Warning

In answer to the question of whether there would be a warning for the L/G not being down, the following is not related to EGPWS, it is a seperate warning purely for the gear not being down and the aircraft below 750ft RA.

L/G NOT DOWN

Triggering Conditions:

L2

This alert triggers when:

1. L/G is not downlocked and radio height is lower than 750 ft and both engines N1 lower than 75% (or if engine shutdown N1 of remaining engine lower than 97%) or

2. L/G is not downlocked and radio height is lower than 750 ft and both engines are not at T.O power and flaps at 1, 2, 3 or FULL or

3. L/G is not downlocked and flaps at 3 or FULL and both radio altimeters are failed.

There is a strong possibility, as someone mention much earlier, that the Pilots were distracted by the OverSpeed warning and didn’t read the ECAM when the Master Warning came up again at 750’RA, therefore not realising they had a Second ECAM Warning happening. It is not Airbuses intention that you continue an approach and/or land an a/c with unresolved ECAM’s unless in grave danger. Ie: FIRE etc.

I think by this point, target fixation had taken over from any “normal” operation.

On a side note, I have spent some time flying in India, very different country but similar class hierarchy and face saving culture, pilots arguing and bullying ATC is common.

The ATCO had tried to hint at the a/c being above profile and was dismissed with “we are comfortable”, I doubt he would have had much success at getting them to go around after that.

A very complex accident, and we may never really know the reason unfortunately.

Stay safe and blue side up
Roj approved is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 13:24
  #751 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,529
Received 45 Likes on 27 Posts
I'm sure any Air Traffic Controller would prefer not to have an accident occurring during their shift, with more modern ATC systems would it not be possible to have an alarm sound if an approaching aircraft is way out of acceptable parameters ? If I have a V/S of - 1500 fpm at 1000' I can probably still land but will be looking at a meeting with the Chief Pilot soon afterwards, whereas V/S - 2500 fpm and VREF + 40 at the same position is a whole different matter. Alerts are triggered for altitude deviations, terrain clearance and possible collisions with other aircraft, so why not for an excessive descent rate at low level or a groundspeed which makes an overrun likely ?

Human factors and CRM training have had a major effect in improving safety and have been around long enough to be a known and proven concept but appear to be not as effective in some cultures when compared to others. The strong authority Captains who the crew are afraid to speak out with, are very much a dying breed in the west, either eliminated in the selection process or forced to change their ways by management. First Officers are encouraged to speakout and report safety concerns. Unfortunately this isn't true in all countries, and a junior first officer challenging an ex military senior Captain would be unthinkable, sometimes with tragic results. I'm sure we can all think of the regions and airlines where this applies.

Back when I was getting my PPL, we had a very conscientious controller in the tower who would check retractable aircraft had their wheels out when issuing a landing clearance and she saved a few insurance claims. Noted that this involved light aircraft with less reliable undercarriage systems and lesser experienced pilots.
krismiler is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 13:40
  #752 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 38
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Back when I was getting my PPL, we had a very conscientious controller in the tower who would check retractable aircraft had their wheels out when issuing a landing clearance and she saved a few insurance claims. Noted that this involved light aircraft with less reliable undercarriage systems and lesser experienced pilots.[/QUOTE]

Maybe we need to resurrect the Jet Provost system? "Finals 3-Greens (Beep-Beep-Beep) for those who remember
Flying_Scotsman is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 13:45
  #753 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you ever fly at an airport that has a tower staffed by U.S. Air Force controllers, they always make the call "check gear down" as part of issuing their landing clearance.
ObadiahDogberry is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 14:16
  #754 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 63
Posts: 5,609
Received 57 Likes on 41 Posts
we had a very conscientious controller in the tower who would check retractable aircraft had their wheels out when issuing a landing clearance
That's very nice, though does not solve the problem, and could introduce another one...

If you ever fly at an airport that has a tower staffed by U.S. Air Force controllers, they always make the call "check gear down" as part of issuing their landing clearance.
If a pilot gets used to being reminded over the radio to confirm the landing gear position, that pilot does not build the necessary self discipline to carry out that responsibility independently. If a controller forgets, the pilot is landing elsewhere, or any of a number of other variables, the artificial safety system is lost. And, there are GA aircraft models available as fixed gear or retractables, from PA-18, many Cessnas, right up to the Twin Otter the controller might not know if the plane is an RG or not, and thus not make the call the pilot was holing for. Finally, the controller has no way of knowing that the gear is down and SAFE. During a few landing gear problem flights, I have had controllers say to me that: "The gear appears to be down", which is fine, but that's about as much as they could say for certain.

In the mean time, flying RG planes, it is up to the pilot(s) to take full responsibility for confirming the gear position. Relying on warning systems and the such is lazy. I've trained many pilots on airplanes which have no gear position warning systems at all, and trained them to observe the gear position, and say that position out loud twice before every landing, as a matter of personal pilot discipline. If I'm on final in my retractable (which has no warning system), and I realize that I have not spoken the gear position out loud for that approach, I will go around, simply for the self discipline. I do realize that a disciplinary go around is not appropriate for the commercial world, but the discipline of saying the gear position out loud as you're checking it's position should not be a problem, and certainly can only be a good thing when there is a second pilot aboard!

Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 14:23
  #755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,130
Received 318 Likes on 204 Posts
Originally Posted by ObadiahDogberry
If you ever fly at an airport that has a tower staffed by U.S. Air Force controllers, they always make the call "check gear down" as part of issuing their landing clearance.
Which is fine when landing at a USAF base but not very applicable to commercial flying. And if you want to give the USAF controllers a rise, you can do as my instructor did (I was flying Hueys at the time, he was a Marine) when we came in to land after an instrument approach into an Air Force Base. When told to "check gear down" he responded with "Two down and welded."

Pilot(DAR) makes a good point about discipline and habit forming; the crew training that most airlines do is intended to do that same thing - establish reliable patterns as well as to form, and reinforce good habits.
Likewise, the training for how to set one's self up for a stabilized approach long before you get to the five miles out point is intended to form good and reliable habits.
Those habits and those disipline building measures seem to have not helped in this case.
The exam question to be answered is: why?
What interfered with that?
Where's the CVR? That may provide some answers.
One of our controller contributors has pointed out that a full transcrip of R/T may paint a slightly different picture than the excerpts so far available.
Hoping to see that as well.
As an aside: a friend of mine flies A320's for an American carrier, and has had very few trips in the last two months. Is hoping to get some sim time to keep the rust off. When I asked about this accident, all I got was an eye roll and this - "Putting the gear down is a key to a successful landing, even you know that. "
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 14:33
  #756 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Common , guys, forget this idea of having ATC checking if the gear is down or not. .we are not in a small local VFR local airport checking Bonanzas.. We are talking large civil multi runways airports with large capacity . operating 24/7 in all wx conditions . Also when visibility is less than 10 Km and at night..
We are also not in the military where less than ergonomic types are being flown single pilot, where indeed you have to confirm in the R/T , or initiate an electric confirmation like the" beep-beep" mentioned above which is as far as I know still standard in many types, ( like the Fouga Magister I was flying in the french air force when I was younger )
@Krismiller :
with more modern ATC systems would it not be possible to have an alarm sound if an approaching aircraft is way out of acceptable parameters ?
You mean during the approach phase? ( TWRs normally do not have radar) I see the idea but for what purpose ? why creating a monster to solve a case in a few millions ? Is landing forgetting the gear a problem today in ANY airliner ? as to the speed/altitude/ROD it differs so much from type to type , and again, is this a real issue causing many accidents needing to be solved asap ?

Last edited by ATC Watcher; 27th May 2020 at 14:40. Reason: addition
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 14:38
  #757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 66
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Mr Optimistic
(pax). A bit disconcerted by the talk about using the gear to slow the thing down. Is that really an option in day to day ops and if you do it aren't there subsequent consequences since you shouldn't have been in that state anyway ( well so I assume). Thanks for your patience, I only sit in the back.
Its absolutely a option that is used often. There are many reasons you might need to use the big speed brakes ranging from weather avoidance, ATC requirements, ATC error, pilot error, runway changes, approach changes, aircraft slowing ahead of you to fast or to far out, VFR aircraft, Aircraft MEL restrictions ect....
Sailvi767 is online now  
Old 27th May 2020, 14:53
  #758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Are we seriously spending several pages of thread to discuss the fact that ATC should cross check if the landing gear is down and locked ? Come on... let's discuss -as much as possibile given the data- the likely root cause of the event so we can learn something from it.
sonicbum is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 14:54
  #759 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Yes.
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I am very interested to see the CVR transcript.

Also the autopsy report/results of the two pilots, may make very interesting reading
Dan_Brown is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 15:29
  #760 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The middle
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by sonicbum
Are we seriously spending several pages of thread to discuss the fact that ATC should cross check if the landing gear is down and locked ? Come on... let's discuss -as much as possibile given the data- the likely root cause of the event so we can learn something from it.
As I said in an earlier post, it is a couple of years since I’ve been to Karachi, but every time I went there the tower controller always said something along the lines of “surface wind blah blah blah, cleared to land check gear down and locked” The problem is they generally cleared us to land well before intercepting the glide slope so we didn’t have the gear down and locked. But we never told them that, just acknowledged the clearance and followed our SOPs as to when configure for landing.
I think I read somewhere on about page 1000 of this thread that they didn’t talk to the tower, but even if they did, if they were told to “check gear down and locked”, and were regular visitors to Karachi they would possibly have been in the habit of ignoring the call anyway, even if they heard it.
excrab 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.