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

Dubai near disaster..?

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

Dubai near disaster..?

Old 12th Jan 2022, 19:32
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Southern Shores of Lusitania Kingdom
Age: 51
Posts: 693
Dubai near disaster..?

Hi all... Some rumours in some aviation web and Facebook groups are saying an EK 777 to Hyderabad last night lined up and rolled for takeoff without clearance... Tower order asked EK to stop his roll around 130kts , its was only a couple of seconds away from another Tenerife it seems ... There's a clip also wich can't post here but here's a vidcap of the red EK decelerating the TO roll while another plane crossing the rwy ahead. Can't find more on the net...

JanetFlight is online now  
Old 12th Jan 2022, 20:27
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Up
Posts: 80
Incident: Emirates B773 at Dubai on Jan 9th 2022, rejected takeoff without clearance due to crossing aircraft

By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jan 12th 2022 21:18Z, last updated Wednesday, Jan 12th 2022 21:18Z

An Emirates Boeing 777-300, registration A6-EQA performing flight EK-524 from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to Hyderabad (India), was accelerating for takeoff from Dubai's runway 30R when the crew was instructed to reject takeoff at high speed (above 100 knots over ground) due to a crossing aircraft. The aircraft slowed safely and vacated the runway via taxiway N4 behind the aircraft, that had crossed the runway.

An Emirates Boeing 777-300, registration A6-EBY performing flight EK-568 from Dubai (United Arab Emirates) to Bangalore (India), was taxiing for departure and was cleared to cross runway 30R from taxiway M5A to N4 and was entering the runway just when EK-524 began the takeoff roll.

According to information The Aviation Herald received from two independent sources, EK-524 began their takeoff roll without ATC clearance. Tower subsequently instructed EK-524 to stop. According to information EK-524 may have reached 130 KIAS when they rejected takeoff. According to ADS-B data transmitted by the aircraft's transponder EK-524 had reached 100 knots over ground about 790 meters/2600 feet down the runway and about 1700 meters/5700 feet short of taxiway N4.

EK-568 continued taxi and departed normally. EK-524 taxied back the holding point of runway 30R and departed about 30 minutes after the rejected takeoff.

Seat4A is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2022, 20:50
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Róisín Dubh
Posts: 1,308
Is this one of the airlines only counting time at the controls for duty limits?
Una Due Tfc is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2022, 21:18
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 53
Posts: 2,825
Originally Posted by Una Due Tfc
Is this one of the airlines only counting time at the controls for duty limits?
Not for many years…
White Knight is offline  
Old 12th Jan 2022, 21:42
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 64
Posts: 495
I am somewhat surprised they were able to take off after just 30 minutes brake cooling. I know the A330 would have been much longer at average takeoff weights. Pilots almost always underestimate Abort speed by 10 to 20 knots. We required the data to be read from the aircraft for that reason on any high speed abort.
Sailvi767 is online now  
Old 12th Jan 2022, 22:37
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 899
Originally Posted by Sailvi767 View Post
I am somewhat surprised they were able to take off after just 30 minutes brake cooling. I know the A330 would have been much longer at average takeoff weights. Pilots almost always underestimate Abort speed by 10 to 20 knots. We required the data to be read from the aircraft for that reason on any high speed abort.
Brake Fans? Even so it seems short for a 130kt reject.
EK cropping up on here a bit too often for my liking.
macdo is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 00:22
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 64
Posts: 495
I don’t think brake fans were a option on the 777.
Sailvi767 is online now  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 00:56
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: the ridge where the west commences
Posts: 754
Ah the weknowbetterwe'reEmirates and the 777 brake fans. Now that's an even better story than the thread starts with.
Dropp the Pilot is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 04:47
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Home
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by Dropp the Pilot View Post
Ah the weknowbetterwe'reEmirates and the 777 brake fans. Now that's an even better story than the thread starts with.
Yes indeed. Many such tales abound.

Originally Posted by Saliva767
I am somewhat surprised they were able to take off after just 30 minutes brake cooling.
I am somewhat surprised they were able to take off without having the Captain's seat-cover replaced. After a high speed RTO on instruction by the Tower with another 777 looming in the windscreen I'm not sure I'd be in the right state of mind to continue the pairing, not least because the outcome is almost assured. What did Ops have to say? Still, plenty of time to be sacked after the duty is completed.

The luck of the devil continues: DXB, JNB, MEL, DXB, DME, JFK, DXB, DXB.....
FatPilot is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 05:50
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: ...
Posts: 629
Originally Posted by Sailvi767 View Post
I am somewhat surprised they were able to take off after just 30 minutes brake cooling. I know the A330 would have been much longer at average takeoff weights. Pilots almost always underestimate Abort speed by 10 to 20 knots. We required the data to be read from the aircraft for that reason on any high speed abort.
That's totally empirical
fulminn is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 06:01
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 11
Pilots are gone already. Easy solution for EK in this times of full pools…
Whip717 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 07:44
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,934
Originally Posted by JanetFlight View Post
Hi all... Some rumours in some aviation web and Facebook groups are saying an EK 777 to Hyderabad last night lined up and rolled for takeoff without clearance... Tower order asked EK to stop his roll around 130kts , its was only a couple of seconds away from another Tenerife it seems ... There's a clip also wich can't post here but here's a vidcap of the red EK decelerating the TO roll while another plane crossing the rwy ahead. Can't find more on the net...
Without wishing to minimise the seriousness of the event (which elsewhere would likely prompt an AIB investigtion), beware of "real-time" action replays from the flight trackers, which are prone to suffer from synchronicity issues.

Here's another screenshot, this time from FR24 (again to be viewed with caution), which shows a rather different picture from the above:



Examination of the data would suggest that reality lay somewhere between those two extremes.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 10:18
  #13 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 72
Posts: 3,123
Indeed Dave, I am constantly amazed to see how people constantly believe what they see on FR24 to be the absolute truth and nothing but the truth.
That said, from an ATC point of view the initial post here does not make much sense.( Tower order asked EK to stop his roll around 130kts ) but waiting to see the initial report.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 10:51
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Salzburg
Posts: 105
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Without wishing to minimise the seriousness of the event (which elsewhere would likely prompt an AIB investigtion), beware of "real-time" action replays from the flight trackers, which are prone to suffer from synchronicity issues.
Here's another screenshot, this time from FR24 (again to be viewed with caution), which shows a rather different picture from the above:
Examination of the data would suggest that reality lay somewhere between those two extremes.
To add to this:

According to the raw data received from the Mode-S transponders from both aircraft:

- at 18:04:04 EK-568 had already passed the hold short line M5A but was still short of the runway edge at position N25.2576 E55.3616
- at 18:04:05 EK-524 had reached 102 knots over ground at position N25.2500 E55.3767 while accelerating on runway 30R.
- at 18:04:15 EK-568 was at position N25.2582 E55.3620 crossing the runway centerline
- at 18:04:19 EK-568 had crossed the other runway edge and was now on taxiway N4 between runway edge and hold short line N4 at position N25.2586 E55.3623
- at 18:04:24 EK-524 had slowed to 24 knots over ground again at position N25.2537 E55.3702

Last edited by Austrian Simon; 13th Jan 2022 at 10:56. Reason: added position for 18:04:19
Austrian Simon is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 12:47
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: New jersey
Posts: 101
I fly primarily at night. When given instructions to cross an active runway, while another aircraft is lined up and holding for me, I often do a triple check to insure that aircraft is indeed holding, and not commencing it’s takeoff roll. With all the technology we have today, I always wondered why they cant develop a system, perhaps tied to the nose wheel lights, to flash or signal that an aircraft is accelerating.. It’s very difficult to sense an aircraft is accelerating, in darkness, head on, until it too late. Food for thought. I understand this wasn’t the case here, but we all know taxing around an airport can be one of the most dangerous times of a flight.
Chiefttp is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 13:24
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dubai
Age: 53
Posts: 259
I would have thought that the runway status lights that they have in the USA would be very effective to prevent this kind of event. Should be mandatory throughout the world.
Kennytheking is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 13:30
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 147
Originally Posted by Kennytheking View Post
I would have thought that the runway status lights that they have in the USA would be very effective to prevent this kind of event. Should be mandatory throughout the world.
They can be useful yes, but not a great deal of use in the glaring Middle East sunlight to be honest in the middle of the day
3Greens is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 14:02
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Up
Posts: 80
Additional info on AvHerald:

"On Jan 13th 2022 the airline reported, that EK-524 was instructed by tower to abort takeoff on Jan 9th 2022, the crew rejected takeoff successfully. There was no damage to the aircraft and there were no injuries. An internal investigation has been initiated, UAE's GCAA also opened an investigation."
Seat4A is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 14:47
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 577
Originally Posted by Chiefttp View Post
I fly primarily at night. When given instructions to cross an active runway, while another aircraft is lined up and holding for me, I often do a triple check to insure that aircraft is indeed holding, and not commencing it’s takeoff roll. With all the technology we have today, I always wondered why they cant develop a system, perhaps tied to the nose wheel lights, to flash or signal that an aircraft is accelerating.. It’s very difficult to sense an aircraft is accelerating, in darkness, head on, until it too late. Food for thought. I understand this wasn’t the case here, but we all know taxing around an airport can be one of the most dangerous times of a flight.
What needs to change is that it should become standard procedure that aircraft only turn on thd landing lights once starting T/O role, as opposed to when entering the runway. This is the best indication for pilots crossing.
Originally Posted by 3Greens View Post
They can be useful yes, but not a great deal of use in the glaring Middle East sunlight to be honest in the middle of the day
I've never had a problem deciding whether the stop bar lights are on or off, so why would RWSLs be any more difficult?
Airmann is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 14:53
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 147
Originally Posted by Airmann View Post
What needs to change is that it should become standard procedure that aircraft only turn on thd landing lights once starting T/O role, as opposed to when entering the runway. This is the best indication for pilots crossing. I've never had a problem deciding whether the stop bar lights are on or off, so why would RWSLs be any more difficult?
RWSL have their uses maybe but of far more Importance here is a complete analysis of the human factors involved. I have grave concerns that these will be addressed given the employers history though.
Not a bad idea about the landing lights though. I quite that about the USA
3Greens 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.