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

Airbus Within 6ft of the Ground nearly 1 mile Short of Runway

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

Airbus Within 6ft of the Ground nearly 1 mile Short of Runway

Old 13th Jul 2022, 15:40
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,522
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Before descent, the flight crew prepared for a RNP approach with LNAV/VNAV minima3 to CDG runway 27R4 . The meteorological conditions indicated in the ATIS Q used by the flight crew when preparing the approach were the following: transition level 70, wind 280 / 10 kt, visibility 10 km, broken clouds at 1,500 ft, few cumulonimbus (CB) at 5,000 ft, temperature 19 C, dew point 14 C, QNH 1001. The crew stated that during all the approach they remained in clouds, without visual references. They experienced moderate turbulence and flew through heavy rain, using the wipers at high speed ... At the time of the incident, the ILS of runway 27R was out of service.
No ILS ? - um, remind me how many parallel main runways CDG, one of the key airports of Europe, has. And in heavy rain, with questionable cloud base. And seemingly advised even at first contact they were getting a runway with no ILS.
WHBM is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 16:27
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Austria
Age: 47
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Dear fellow pilots!
You have to be vigilant flying in France. They do funny things!
Be safe.
8314 is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 16:35
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 65
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
My $3500 dollar EFIS in a light aircraft cross checks the closest airports altimeter settings via ADSB in with what I have set and gives me a warning if there is more than a slight difference. Would be nice at my work job!
Sailvi767 is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 16:49
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: kent, england
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
8314,

Indeed they do. But not always funny sadly. But things NEVER change......
fokker1000 is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 17:23
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,346
Received 29 Likes on 18 Posts
Originally Posted by ATC Watcher
French officilal phraseology spells numbers in full . here the QNH would have been mille onze. English phraeology spells all numbers digit per digit , one-zero-one- one, No French controller mixes this up,
.
Thanks for the info

Not wishing to start an argument, but the ITM controller did mix it up. According to the BEA report, ATC got it wrong twice, by saying one zero one one in English when speaking with two English speaking aircraft, but got the QNH correct when speaking in French to a French speaking crew.

Edit: thanks for the correction, spekesoftly. (below) Ironic mistake !

Last edited by Uplinker; 14th Jul 2022 at 10:07.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 17:50
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,909
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Uplinker
According to the BEA report, ATC got it wrong twice, by saying one zero zero one in English when speaking with two English speaking aircraft, but got the QNH correct when speaking in French to a French speaking crew.
ATC got it wrong twice by saying one zero one one, not one zero zero one.



spekesoftly is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 20:57
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 62
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If this had happened in the LTMA the approach controller would have had a flashing alert on the radar that the wrong QNH was set as soon as they were descending through the TL, surprised there’s not similar for CDG. Link

On the subject of do pilots check others transmissions for their own SA: yes they do. Multiple airports in our sector, we prefix the relevant airport when issuing QNH to save the next couple of transmissions being “confirm QNH?” from a pilot inbound to a different airport with a different QNH.

Last edited by Request Orbit; 13th Jul 2022 at 21:23. Reason: Added link
Request Orbit is online now  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 21:21
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 723
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does it compute[(?)]

I try (as SLF/attorney) not to post this sort of comment on every instance or incident where human beings save a situation that was headed toward a seriously bad outcome from reaching that outcome --

Write the computer app or algorithms or software that will do as good a job in this exact situation as the flight crew in the pointy end of the aircraft performed in actual fact. I realize that up to that point, all kinds of flight-operational things happened or didn't happen and that I don't understand (as only SLF, etc.) but nevertheless, disaster was averted, was it not?

Oh, and when programming the mainframe (latest model, or System 4Pi-Model ML-1, or anything else), be sure to allow for uncertainties in translation as between all languages in use in civil aviation, globally. Thanks in advance, ....
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 22:03
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,429
Received 111 Likes on 60 Posts
Does it compute[(?)]

Originally Posted by WillowRun 6-3
I realize that up to that point, all kinds of flight-operational things happened or didn't happen and that I don't understand (as only SLF, etc.) but nevertheless, disaster was averted, was it not?
Well clearly the outcome wasn't a smoking hole in the ground, but I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 22:26
  #90 (permalink)  

"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Age: 76
Posts: 4,058
Received 121 Likes on 43 Posts
An explanation please. I'm way out of the loop, having retired in '04, so before computer-generated approaches had come about. If the aircraft is carrying out a NPA, and has no ILS glidepath, would not the EGPWS be screaming well before this point? Back when, home base on one runway flew over an escarpment. At about 2 miles, suddenly the rad alt went from about 1,000' to 600' almost instantaneously. The GPWS (no EGPWS then) certainly shouted at that point.
Herod is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2022, 22:29
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: FL390
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
would not the EGPWS be screaming well before this poin
You'd think so but in reality the terrain clearance floor function* inhibits the alert due to the vicinity of the runway.

* I think it's this component
​​​​​
Fursty Ferret is online now  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 00:18
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: away from home
Age: 62
Posts: 872
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is Norwegian (Sweden or any part) still using the services of this operator?
oceancrosser is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 00:58
  #93 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting not home
Age: 45
Posts: 4,282
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Herod
An explanation please.
As mentioned. The old, RA-based GPWS had no reason to go off.

The basic (most likely fitted as per mandate) E-GPWS has a 'Terrain Clearance Floor' which protects you from killing people fully configured where there's no airport - but in this case they were sufficiently close to a runway the alarm did not trigger.

There are more evolved setups, EGPWS+ if you will, unlikely to be fitted to this ship.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 01:58
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 723
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DaveReidUK

1. That devotees of the inevitability as well as desirability of more and more flight control automation, to and including deactivating the roles and responsibilities of human being aviators, should acknowledge that the programs or code that run the automation do not at this time have the capacity to deal with a situation such as the one that is the subject of this thread.
2. It can be anticipated that some would point out that the occurrence of the situation resulted from human error, by the controller, and perhaps also by the pilots with regard to various systems, decisions, situational awareness or lack thereof, and probably others. Before noting the human operator saved the situation, the post acknowledges that it doesn't claim or assert an understanding of the pilots' acts or omissions prior to their acts to avert imminent disaster.
i hope that helps as clarification.

WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 04:30
  #95 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting not home
Age: 45
Posts: 4,282
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Contrary.

The technology exists to save this much sooner than 6 ft RA. It's not deployed yet.

The technology exists to avoid this from even starting to develop. A fistful of elements were there on the flight deck already but not all of the wide range.

Re-counted my chicken yesterday, 6 places in the A320 cockpit where the correct QNH was to be found as per a very unassuming run off the mill set of SOP. (less than Uplinker alludes to).

We're devotees for the not-so-much-of-a-pilots be not allowed to kill the travelling public.

The industry

A) de-skill the crew (check BA dual engine over London),

B) equip the planes with more human centric technology and imperfect solutions to bridge the newly built gap (gazilion cases, from nuisance TCAS, across the whole RNAV freakshow, to ad-extremis MCAS)

C) provide less training overall after putting all those additional systems in place, compared to the old up/forward/down/reverse days

and expect a constant improvement in professional conduct (=maintaining margins from undesirable aircraft state)

Does not work. Overwhelmed and undertrained.

Checkpoint one: PBN is a mandatory part of the Type Rating chckride. For many years, even so it is not listed on the endorsement anymore as a unique skill and becomes embedded.

Then: How many training departments actively teach that for Baro-VNAV 3D approach (this case), the altitude distance checks are futile, not part of the system or certification, and better not be done in lieu of the important stuff? (sound of brains exploding..., sure). There are critical items to verify, about 4 and QNH being one of the 2 more severe - does not have self-monitoring and alerting.

Checkpoint two: Wrong QNH kills immediately on NPA since before WWII and the invention of ATC. How come crews lost the sight of what separates them from TV headlines?

Checkpoint three:
Does your favourite EU lo-co run the annual line-flying checks on real airplane or have they given up 1 of the yearly training sessions (50%) to simulate a normal route flight (with a glitch), depriving the crew of a valuable learning opportunity?

It does not please us to observe and explain that while flying cannot be reduced to become fully deterministic, much of what we do so proudly can be algorithmized (in the non IT sense). That is where supervised automation (even remotely) will completely circumnavigate the challenges above at a lower overall industry cost.

And there you go again, the very last, single word is the crux of all this.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 05:52
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2022
Location: QLD
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Close call. Really suprising how the French controllers said the incorrect QNH in english - the ICAO standard aviation language, and correct in French. Something is wrong, or ATC was on autopilot that day.
HalfGreen is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 06:38
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by das Uber Soldat
English is the most spoken language in the world, and the language of the people who literally invented powered flight.

https://www.ethnologue.com/guides/most-spoken-languages
https://www.berlitz.com/blog/most-spoken-languages-world


There is absolutely no reason to change the international language of aviation.
There is not only one international language of aviation (see ICAO).
More importantly, beyond the language itself, the English phraseology should also be the same everywhere in the world, which is not a given! (USA for instance)

.
Bidule is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 07:32
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 978
Received 50 Likes on 29 Posts
Every "phrase" could be data transmitted to be a symbol or text on a cockpit display (with confirmation button) anyway to keep voice frequencies clear for any non standard needs.

There will be more non-native english speaking pilots in the future and more long range capable narrowbodies with less long range experienced crews at the controls mixing up global ATC.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 07:46
  #99 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Commuting not home
Age: 45
Posts: 4,282
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair
There will be more non-native english speaking pilots in the future and more long range capable narrowbodies with less long range experienced crews at the controls mixing up global ATC.
this.

The Airbus Global Market forecast for the next 18 years, growth factors:
China domestic = 2.5 (becoming world's largest)
India = 4
​​
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 14th Jul 2022, 07:53
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Tranquility Base
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Checkpoint one: PBN is a mandatory part of the Type Rating chckride. For many years, even so it is not listed on the endorsement anymore as a unique skill and becomes embedded.

Then: How many training departments actively teach that for Baro-VNAV 3D approach (this case), the altitude distance checks are futile, not part of the system or certification, and better not be done in lieu of the important stuff? (sound of brains exploding..., sure). There are critical items to verify, about 4 and QNH being one of the 2 more severe - does not have self-monitoring and alerting.
That is why the Aircraft should automatically compare the QNH put (during cruise or early descent) into the FMGC approach page with the QNH set on the FCU during transition and give an alarm if off by more than one.

With the increase in PBN, we need more protection against wrong QNH. This would lead to a strong safety net against wrong QNH information or wrong setting.
1201alarm is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.