PIA A320 Crash Karachi
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Eindhoven, NL
Age: 59
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is ignoring ATC a common thing?
(SLF) After reading through this thread I haven't seen an answer to this question I am having: is it a common thing for the PIC to simply ignore a given vector by ATC and bluntly answer that they are fine and won't comply?
de minimus non curat lex
There would have to be justification to decline an ATC instruction. In this case the aircraft had established on the ILS (albeit grossly not stable) and the Captain was ‘comfortable’ with the situation, despite the circumstances which tragically unfolded.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Queensland
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a PIA website where at least one post refers to both pilots fasting. Shouldn't be too hard to find. My detailed information or research indicating the reasons why "cultural" matters could have contributed to this accident were removed by the moderator, apparently under "moderator discretion" rather than specific posting rules.
It would be an improvement if posters would avoid an attempt at political correctness re dehydration.
It would be an improvement if posters would avoid an attempt at political correctness re dehydration.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a PIA website where at least one post refers to both pilots fasting. Shouldn't be too hard to find. My detailed information or research indicating the reasons why "cultural" matters could have contributed to this accident were removed by the moderator, apparently under "moderator discretion" rather than specific posting rules.
It would be an improvement if posters would avoid an attempt at political correctness re dehydration.
It would be an improvement if posters would avoid an attempt at political correctness re dehydration.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Feet on the rudder pedals
Age: 59
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I explained already at the beginning of this thread , TWR controllers cannot issue a Go around instruction for that reason, Once a PIC reports established on the ILS ,he is on his own , It is up to them to manage his approach .TWR Controllers should not interfere unless the runway is blocked or becomes not avail . In addition in many modern Towers you cannot monitor the approach anyway ( too far away )
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Feet on the rudder pedals
Age: 59
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK. Makes sense. This fact is in my opinion a satisfying reply to my earlier question.
I know that !! But if I were an ATC controller watching a supposedly routine flight flaring gear up afew feet above the runway, I couldn't help yelling on the radio in order to warn the crew of the situation. "XXXX Go around !!" could be the first sentence coming into my mind. It would be a reflex and meanwhile I wouldn't think about the rules and the lawyers. Time for that later.
Report will (should) tell but it seems to me that TWR's inaction is unlikely to play a significant part in probable cause
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I were an ATC controller watching a supposedly routine flight flaring gear up afew feet above the runway, I couldn't help yelling on the radio in order to warn the crew of the situation. "XXXX Go around !!" could be the first sentence coming into my mind. It would be a reflex and meanwhile I wouldn't think about the rules and the lawyers. Time for that later.
If you were watching a take off, and you saw flames coming from an engine, you would probably tempted to shout "Stop!".
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Feet on the rudder pedals
Age: 59
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Feet on the rudder pedals
Age: 59
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But anyway I'm not an ATC controller, and beeing closer to retirement than to CPL-IR course, I've no plans to start a new career..
de minimus non curat lex
I am a bit puzzled how that squares with a non-compliance report made by ATC controller, and formal notice sent to PIA regarding. https://www.aviation-accidents.net/w...ht-pk8303-.pdf
The other question is whether a report (MOR?) would have been raised had the tragic events not have occurred?
With the benefit of hindsight approach radar controller should have notified the aerodrome controller that is was decidedly “iffy”
and instructed a Go-Around.
Was he transferred to tower frequency?
A time that you are required to do as you are told might be, for example : “I am instructed by Her Majesty Government to refuse you entry into United Kingdom Airspace. What are your intentions?
Failure to comply would be followed by a QRA by air defence.........
There may well be others......yet to be pointed out
Missed approach instructions
There are criteria in ICAO 4444 which define when an aircraft should be instructed to go around, vs when it should be advised to go around. If the ATCO considers the aircraft is dangerously positioned, then it's an instruction; if he/she considers it to be in a position where a safe approach cannot be completed, then it's advice. Both of those hinge on understanding what the ATCOs involved were able to see, what they could deduce from that information, & of particular note, how much that differed from how they were used to seeing the aircraft fly it's approach. Without understanding how PIA normally fly, & how different this approach was, it's difficult to draw any conclusion as to whether the ATC reaction was appropriate or not.