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

West Atlantic ATP runway excursion in Birmingham

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

West Atlantic ATP runway excursion in Birmingham

Old 18th Jun 2020, 16:56
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,761
Originally Posted by Pegasus912 View Post
It mentions that the AAIB are currently using the video as part of their investigations in the description of the second video so one presumes they may have contacted the owner.
I think it might take more than an unmoderated comment on Avherald to spur the AAIB into action.

It doesn't appear to satisfy the Annex 13 criteria for either an accident or a serious incident, so I suspect any interest the AAIB may have will be very short-lived.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 18:01
  #22 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 756
Originally Posted by GKOC41 View Post
Load of tosh
Agreed, what baseless rubbish.
giggitygiggity is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 18:18
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ready to Depart
Age: 42
Posts: 290
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
I think it might take more than an unmoderated comment on Avherald to spur the AAIB into action.

It doesn't appear to satisfy the Annex 13 criteria for either an accident or a serious incident, so I suspect any interest the AAIB may have will be very short-lived.
It is reportable as a "serious incident", covered by "Takeoff or landing incidents, such as undershooting, overrunning or running off the side of runways."
See Definition of Aircraft Accident and Serious Incident
Dusty_B is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 18:24
  #24 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,142
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
It doesn't appear to satisfy the Annex 13 criteria for either an accident or a serious incident, so I suspect any interest the AAIB may have will be very short-lived.
ATC will have filed a MOR, and the pilot will have filed a ASR/MOR.
It is more than likely that ATC notified the AAIB that day.

The AAIB website on current field investigations is dated 17 February 2020.
Under current investigation is a runway excursion by a Global 6000 on 11 December 2019 at Liverpool.

So my money is that the AAIB will be taking an interest, with a field investigation as this will be regarded as a “serious incident”.
parkfell is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 20:59
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,761
Originally Posted by Dusty_B View Post
It is reportable as a "serious incident", covered by "Takeoff or landing incidents, such as undershooting, overrunning or running off the side of runways."
See Definition of Aircraft Accident and Serious Incident
Those are examples of occurrences which may or may not be categorised as a serious incident.

As the Annex 7 definition that you're quoting from says, the event must also involve "circumstances indicating that there was a high probability of an accident" to satisfy the definition. Obviously, that judgement is the AAIB's call.

Originally Posted by parkfell View Post
ATC will have filed a MOR, and the pilot will have filed a ASR/MOR.
It is more than likely that ATC notified the AAIB that day.

The AAIB website on current field investigations is dated 17 February 2020.
Under current investigation is a runway excursion by a Global 6000 on 11 December 2019 at Liverpool.
All of that is true, and the AAIB was doubtless made aware of the occurrence.

But if they investigated every MOR and ASR, they would require many times the number of staff that they currently have.

Time will tell if we see the report in a future AAIB Bulletin. I'm not holding my breath.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 21:10
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: London
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by giggitygiggity View Post
Agreed, what baseless rubbish.
I’d be interested in your qualifications for making that assertion.

A few here have a great deal more extremely relevant experience and would say that Nil further is making an understatement. Have you read some of the Branch’s recent output?
Monty Niveau is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 21:26
  #27 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,142
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post

But if they investigated every MOR and ASR, they would require many times the number of staff that they currently have.
Time will tell if we see the report in a future AAIB Bulletin. I'm not holding my breath.
Only the CAA will see ALL Mandatory Occurrence Reports, and an edited version distributed to interested parties including the airlines.
If an Air Safety Report is not a MOR, it remains internal within the airline, and may have extracts published to crews. It might generate a Notice to Crews. It may modify a SOP, and even result in an amendment to the Part A or B etc.

Having said that the FOI may well attend the regular flight safety meetings where all new ASRs are discussed and actioned as required.

They were fortunate to regain the paved surface intact. They did get perilously close to it ending in tears.

Last edited by parkfell; 19th Jun 2020 at 14:19. Reason: syntax
parkfell is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 21:42
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: London
Posts: 1
Remember the Airlander crash?

The ‘world’s biggest aircraft’, operating under an EASA flight test scheme, overseen by the CAA, crushed its crew compartment because of an screw-up with a mooring line. The crew lost control and were in mortal jeopardy; they survived by chance not design.

Bedford is under two hours from Farnborough by car.

The AAIB sent a form to the captain for him to fill in.

No examination of the flight test programme or its oversight.

So the likelihood that they’ll look into a foreign-registered ATP having a bit of a hop and a skip and jump is debatable.
Monty Niveau is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 22:47
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 298
Well, the airline has appeared in the AAIB reports quite a lot of late. Last year, it' had two ATP, serious incidents in one AAIB bulletin. These were highly detailed investigations. I don't think that the AAIB will (or can) ignore this event, especially when it has been broadcast all over the internet.

Does anyone remember Emerald Airways and how that played out?

Fair_Weather_Flyer is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 00:02
  #30 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 756
Originally Posted by Monty Niveau View Post
Iíd be interested in your qualifications for making that assertion.

A few here have a great deal more extremely relevant experience and would say that Nil further is making an understatement. Have you read some of the Branchís recent output?
My qualifications are that I can read. Nil furthers post suggested to me that they felt the AAIB were in cahoots with the manufacturers and the airlines to make problems disappear. I do read what the AAIB writes and have done for about 15 years and personally I havenít detected any trend to support that hypothesis. Perhaps you or nil could elaborate. Iím not saying your wrong, I just havenít seen it so iím open to examples that demonstrate it.
giggitygiggity is online now  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 03:23
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: IL, USA
Posts: 11
Flugsnug are amazing aviation videographers, check out their YT channel. Cool that they caught an incident as it happened.
sansmoteur is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 07:26
  #32 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,142
Originally Posted by Fair_Weather_Flyer View Post

Does anyone remember Emerald Airways and how that played out?
Two events same day at the IOM. Variation to their AOC occurred & eventually their demise.
parkfell is online now  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 07:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,761
Originally Posted by Fair_Weather_Flyer View Post
Well, the airline has appeared in the AAIB reports quite a lot of late. Last year, it' had two ATP, serious incidents in one AAIB bulletin. These were highly detailed investigations. I don't think that the AAIB will (or can) ignore this event, especially when it has been broadcast all over the internet.
I assume that's a reference to the December 2018 bulletin, so rather more than a year ago.

The two incidents were in December 2017 (autopilot refused to disconnect) and February 2018 (frozen flight controls). There was also a loss of electrical power during cruise in May 2018.

It's not clear what conclusions we should draw from those three occurrences.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 08:12
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 64
Posts: 327
The Chief Inspector of Air Accidents has the power under The Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 2018 to investigate any aircraft incident he sees fit if he thinks there safety lessons to be drawn from it, whether it meets the ICAO accident/serious incident definitions or not. The Ethiopia B787 lithium battery fire at Heathrow in 2013 was one such event - vacant aircraft, stationary, not being prepared for flight, no injuries, no statutory requirement for an investigation, but findings that grounded the whole fleet while a fix was found.
Fortissimo is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 08:29
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under a Rock
Age: 51
Posts: 78
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
I assume that's a reference to the December 2018 bulletin, so rather more than a year ago.

The two incidents were in December 2017 (autopilot refused to disconnect) and February 2018 (frozen flight controls). There was also a loss of electrical power during cruise in May 2018.

It's not clear what conclusions we should draw from those three occurrences.
Maybe that the ATP is past its best. Never a great aircraft in its "heyday". Can't see that the BHX botched landing has anything to do with the aircraft. One for the training officer and DFO to have a good look at.
Wickerbill is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 09:08
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: East Sussex
Age: 82
Posts: 258
When I trained in Canada (1956) we were taught the "wing down" technique which was much as Parkfell described except that the wing down was initiated after establishing on finals. This worked well on Chipmunk, Harvard and T33. On return to UK "kick off drift" was the RAF order of the day and QFIs insisted on it. I, even then, considered wing down preferable but sensibly did the latter. However, I never forgot the former. Much later, when I became a TP and resumed my love affair with the Harvard, I was able to resume the affair and was able to to some experimenting. I became even more convinced in my opinion. Subsequently I was tasked to cary out trials on Nimrod and Hercules in very adverse X wind conditions. I was able to compare the handling using both techniques. There was no doubt at all as to which resulted in the most consistent and accurate performance. Subsequently I flew the Lancaster which had an evil reputation in a xwind. Wing down allied to a "slow cut" made it a pussy cat. Unfortunately the RAF were unwilling to change the habit of a lifetime. Of course wing down is inadvisable with 4 engined jets but there is nothing to use it with 2 engine types. Indeed the Tristar autoland computer uses wing down, and why does the B52 crank its landing gear to avoid having to use KOD (wing down would not be practible)? Sorry to have gone on at such length but this is my lifelong hobby horse.
pontifex is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 09:17
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Birmingham - UK
Posts: 57
Originally Posted by sansmoteur View Post
Flugsnug are amazing aviation videographers, check out their YT channel. Cool that they caught an incident as it happened.
Whist this isn't the spotters forum; if there is only one thing we can agree on in this thread, this is it. Always superb content.

Although someone will no doubt have a moan
xanda_man is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 10:45
  #38 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,142
Originally Posted by pontifex View Post
......... On return to UK "kick off drift" was the RAF order of the day and QFIs insisted on it. I, even then, considered wing down preferable but sensibly did the latter. However, I never forgot the former.........Sorry to have gone on at such length but this is my lifelong hobby horse.
I learnt to fly (PPL) in 1972 at Carlisle where Oxford had their northern base. I remember trying to “kick off the drift” from crabbing it in as well. Lack of experience etc. I found it hard and not very successful!

Fortunately All Nippon Airways (ANA) were training at Carlisle under some hybrid FAA style syllabus. Japanese examiners would sit in the back of PA30/39 on their IRTs.

They were taught ‘wing down technique’ where you went cross controls probably after passing 500’ QFE. Held that during the flare, to centralise on touchdown. So much easier for me to do. Confidence grew.

So later in life when crabbing it in was required, going cross control as you started the flare was a piece of cake.

I remember seeing on TV, NIMROD crosswind trials at Lossiemouth/Kinloss (?) 50-60 knots across. Not exactly pretty but it worked.

When I am feeling brave I will demonstrate to MPL students crosswind landings in the B737-800 sim. They train to 30 kts.
Start at 30 knots x/w. Increasing each time.
I stop at 60 knots x/w. Quite a handful with max control deflection required.
Good confidence building exercise in case that 10 to the minus X event occurs and no other bolt holes exist.

Learnt about max control deflection flying the Shorts 360 in Scotland with 30 knot limit.
Again, not at all pretty.

My other pet topic is TRIMMING....

Last edited by parkfell; 19th Jun 2020 at 16:55. Reason: Insert SH360
parkfell is online now  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 12:54
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: chances are, not at home
Posts: 296
Of course wing down is inadvisable with 4 engined jets but there is nothing to use it with 2 engine types. Indeed the Tristar autoland computer uses wing down,
Actually the 747-400 does it too (which gave me some gip in the sim, for an operator that insisted on doing manual cat 2 landings, because I'd disconnect the AP, and instinctively roll wings level, which would knock me off the localiser, until I realised that the AP was cross controlling, and I was undoing its good work).

Interesting that the RAF favour kicking off the drift - my UAS QFI insisted on me completely mastering the wing down method on the bulldog, before he would let me do the BFT(?). My lament too, is that most airline pilots these days don't get intensive instruction or screening for handling techniques, and there are some truly abysmal examples out there. This video doesn't surprise me at all - infact I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often!

Last edited by Joe le Taxi; 19th Jun 2020 at 13:19.
Joe le Taxi is offline  
Old 19th Jun 2020, 13:29
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 433
I'd certainly call that a contol failure. As in a failure to control.
Hard to tell in the first vid but in the second as they are departing the centreline there is not only no sign of right rudder at all but a brief stab of left rudder (!!) as the left main gear lifts off but that's accompanied and followed by a protracted period of right-roll aileron - ie further lifting the flying port wing that continues as they stabilise parallel to the runway, but the swing reoccurs briefly as the large left aileron input remains in place and the port gear becomes unweighted again.. It's almost as though the crossed controls got crossed!
No wonder the swing and wing-lift immediately got worse after touchdown.

Last edited by meleagertoo; 19th Jun 2020 at 13:42.
meleagertoo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.