WIZZ AIR Skiathos vid
Sorry, am going to take issue with this one.
You have no idea how they were trained or what’s set out in their procedures.
I will shed a little light on the subject.
They were very probably (although I can’t be 100% sure) sent into the sim to train for a narrow runway.
To start that sim would be an A320, not the A321 they were flying. Then the sim would be VERY unlikely to have dedicated Skiathos visuals. It would have been a generic airport, just with a 30m wide runway. They may not even have trained on one so short.
Then if they were very lucky, the captain may have sat on the jump seat to Skiathos before operating in there. If he/she did jumpseat, they would have seen a training captain do pretty much what they did. Why? Because that’s what happens in Skiathos. Maybe the trainer might have been 15-20 ft higher, but that’s about it.
If we go right back to basics at this place, the touch down markings (the bit you actually aim for) are 150m from the threshold. The PAPIs are at the same position. As FD has already pointed out, if you aim for these points (as you have been trained) your wheels over the threshold are 8ft. Probably about 30 over the road.
So their “willingness to press on” is because that’s how they were trained. It’s how we have ALL been trained. And it’s why EVERY approach into Skiathos looks like a minor variation of this one.
What I will end with (and it’s my last post on the matter, because I’m obviously not some Sky God, just an ordinary line guy) is if you think you could do better fill your boots. I feel for these Wizz guys, everything is stacked against them. And then some Cuck Yeager wanna be’s come on here and tell them how badly they have flown.
You have no idea how they were trained or what’s set out in their procedures.
I will shed a little light on the subject.
They were very probably (although I can’t be 100% sure) sent into the sim to train for a narrow runway.
To start that sim would be an A320, not the A321 they were flying. Then the sim would be VERY unlikely to have dedicated Skiathos visuals. It would have been a generic airport, just with a 30m wide runway. They may not even have trained on one so short.
Then if they were very lucky, the captain may have sat on the jump seat to Skiathos before operating in there. If he/she did jumpseat, they would have seen a training captain do pretty much what they did. Why? Because that’s what happens in Skiathos. Maybe the trainer might have been 15-20 ft higher, but that’s about it.
If we go right back to basics at this place, the touch down markings (the bit you actually aim for) are 150m from the threshold. The PAPIs are at the same position. As FD has already pointed out, if you aim for these points (as you have been trained) your wheels over the threshold are 8ft. Probably about 30 over the road.
So their “willingness to press on” is because that’s how they were trained. It’s how we have ALL been trained. And it’s why EVERY approach into Skiathos looks like a minor variation of this one.
What I will end with (and it’s my last post on the matter, because I’m obviously not some Sky God, just an ordinary line guy) is if you think you could do better fill your boots. I feel for these Wizz guys, everything is stacked against them. And then some Cuck Yeager wanna be’s come on here and tell them how badly they have flown.
Ask yourself; Do all Wizz flights replicate this? As you say, their trainers probably don't and would be 15 to 20 feet higher.
"Maybe the trainer might have been 15-20 ft higher, but that’s about it."
Take issue as you wish, but for whatever reason this flight did not follow the profile and should have been aborted with a go around. Getting it wrong is one thing, not putting it right is far worse.
Your insult in the final sentence I will ignore and not respond to.
I agree with Jonty, JSI is a special place. Short, narrow runway with a hump, sat on made up ground between two islands. It's not the place where you do an hour in a Sim and off you go. All approaches are are low and "exciting".
It would be useful if anyone commenting on this thread started their post by stating if they had trained for or operated an aircraft into JSI. These people I will happily listen to. The rest should stop criticising something they don't fully understand....
'bill
It would be useful if anyone commenting on this thread started their post by stating if they had trained for or operated an aircraft into JSI. These people I will happily listen to. The rest should stop criticising something they don't fully understand....
'bill
I have not flown into JSI.
What I have done though is flown into numerous challenging airfields for many years. Narrow, short, steep approach, very mountainous etc.. Hopefully you will consider me worthy of at the very least, an opinion?
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Looking north out to sea
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
4 Posts
Firstly to be clear. Yes, I have operated into JSI on multiple occasions, on both runways, in the LHS and the RHS as a trainer.
Early on in the thread I tried to stop speculation from those who have never been there or those who have no knowledge of commercial operations, by stating the facts about its dimensions and markers on the airfield. Strangely, it has disappeared…. Probably because it was correct.
I was well trained to operate there and I trained others well. Yes this aircraft was low, but not far from the norm here. For those outraged by the lack of a go around, please suggest how putting operating criteria for airfields such as LHR onto a CatC specialised airfield would allow you to land at all? Aircraft have been going safely there for years, operated and trained well, by pilots known for their ability.
Not been yourself? The answer to one Captain who asked a trainer, known for his direct answers. “Either nobody likes you or you are crap.”
Me
Early on in the thread I tried to stop speculation from those who have never been there or those who have no knowledge of commercial operations, by stating the facts about its dimensions and markers on the airfield. Strangely, it has disappeared…. Probably because it was correct.
I was well trained to operate there and I trained others well. Yes this aircraft was low, but not far from the norm here. For those outraged by the lack of a go around, please suggest how putting operating criteria for airfields such as LHR onto a CatC specialised airfield would allow you to land at all? Aircraft have been going safely there for years, operated and trained well, by pilots known for their ability.
Not been yourself? The answer to one Captain who asked a trainer, known for his direct answers. “Either nobody likes you or you are crap.”
Me
Firstly to be clear. Yes, I have operated into JSI on multiple occasions, on both runways, in the LHS and the RHS as a trainer.
Early on in the thread I tried to stop speculation from those who have never been there or those who have no knowledge of commercial operations, by stating the facts about its dimensions and markers on the airfield. Strangely, it has disappeared…. Probably because it was correct.
I was well trained to operate there and I trained others well. Yes this aircraft was low, but not far from the norm here. For those outraged by the lack of a go around, please suggest how putting operating criteria for airfields such as LHR onto a CatC specialised airfield would allow you to land at all? Aircraft have been going safely there for years, operated and trained well, by pilots known for their ability.
Not been yourself? The answer to one Captain who asked a trainer, known for his direct answers. “Either nobody likes you or you are crap.”
Me
Early on in the thread I tried to stop speculation from those who have never been there or those who have no knowledge of commercial operations, by stating the facts about its dimensions and markers on the airfield. Strangely, it has disappeared…. Probably because it was correct.
I was well trained to operate there and I trained others well. Yes this aircraft was low, but not far from the norm here. For those outraged by the lack of a go around, please suggest how putting operating criteria for airfields such as LHR onto a CatC specialised airfield would allow you to land at all? Aircraft have been going safely there for years, operated and trained well, by pilots known for their ability.
Not been yourself? The answer to one Captain who asked a trainer, known for his direct answers. “Either nobody likes you or you are crap.”
Me
By your own admission as an experienced trainer, this is not the norm, albeit as you say it's 'not far from' whatever that means. As a trainer you should advocate the norm.
JSI is not the only airfield in the world with challenges and pilots who have not flown there are entitled to their opinions.
Top class CRM here sir/madam trainer:
Not been yourself? The answer to one Captain who asked a trainer, known for his direct answers. “Either nobody likes you or you are crap.”
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
Early on in the thread I tried to stop speculation from those who have never been there or those who have no knowledge of commercial operations, by stating the facts about its dimensions and markers on the airfield. Strangely, it has disappeared…. Probably because it was correct.
I agree with Jonty, JSI is a special place. Short, narrow runway with a hump, sat on made up ground between two islands. It's not the place where you do an hour in a Sim and off you go. All approaches are are low and "exciting".
It would be useful if anyone commenting on this thread started their post by stating if they had trained for or operated an aircraft into JSI. These people I will happily listen to. The rest should stop criticising something they don't fully understand....
'bill
It would be useful if anyone commenting on this thread started their post by stating if they had trained for or operated an aircraft into JSI. These people I will happily listen to. The rest should stop criticising something they don't fully understand....
'bill
None of those approaches are either “low” or “exciting”. Sometimes if the weather is marginal it can be a bit challenging but for a competent pilot the main challenges are performance planning, not being able to fly a tidy three degree approach path to a sloping runway without almost knocking the heads of the spectators.
Confusious, #216, re differing views I will concede the word blame, too emotional, but not ‘training’ as being a general response to accidents or safety events.
A Safety-I mindset is prevalent in accident / incident investigation and thence regulatory intervention, and as a generalisation, in operators, knowingly or otherwise.
Your comments of ‘direct willingness’ ‘press on regardless’, assumes knowledge of the crew’s understanding at the time. This assumption reflects the human dislike for uncertainty, that we don't like not knowing.
Training ‘Additional training is one (easy) response, providing a false sense of knowing, a false belief of being able to control future activity, held by those who have higher responsibilities, but of little help to crews.
A Safety-I mindset is prevalent in accident / incident investigation and thence regulatory intervention, and as a generalisation, in operators, knowingly or otherwise.
Your comments of ‘direct willingness’ ‘press on regardless’, assumes knowledge of the crew’s understanding at the time. This assumption reflects the human dislike for uncertainty, that we don't like not knowing.
Last edited by safetypee; 23rd Aug 2022 at 07:35. Reason: Training ≈ Additional training
Safetypee
"Training is one (easy) response, providing a false sense of knowing, a false belief of being able to control future activity, held by those who have higher responsibilities, but of little help to crews."
And viewed by some as an unnecessary evil.
So, do you think that this was a 'safety event'?
"Training is one (easy) response, providing a false sense of knowing, a false belief of being able to control future activity, held by those who have higher responsibilities, but of little help to crews."
And viewed by some as an unnecessary evil.
So, do you think that this was a 'safety event'?
Learning, understanding, about what we don't know
do you think that this was a 'safety event'?
I cannot tell.
Attempting to analyse this landing based on a narrow perspective of one video without supporting information would have little value (excepting Pprune discussion), and at worst with poor assessment result in unnecessary, even detrimental intervention.
Considering the idea of a ‘safety event’ (after the fact) in ‘very-safe’ operations might also create more problems. How is an event defined, bounded, what limits, when, etc, … by who.
With increasing safety - statistically, then the risk in an event might be less than the risk discovered (imagined) by investigation - the ‘investigators’ are the higher risk - cf the discussion in this thread.
Then what is Safety ?
Something which is done, a continuous activity; or something to have, a limiting standard.
My preference is activity, self evaluation; thus all of my flying, approach and landings, were safety events, but with what risk, and who knows.
I cannot tell.
Attempting to analyse this landing based on a narrow perspective of one video without supporting information would have little value (excepting Pprune discussion), and at worst with poor assessment result in unnecessary, even detrimental intervention.
Considering the idea of a ‘safety event’ (after the fact) in ‘very-safe’ operations might also create more problems. How is an event defined, bounded, what limits, when, etc, … by who.
With increasing safety - statistically, then the risk in an event might be less than the risk discovered (imagined) by investigation - the ‘investigators’ are the higher risk - cf the discussion in this thread.
Then what is Safety ?
Something which is done, a continuous activity; or something to have, a limiting standard.
My preference is activity, self evaluation; thus all of my flying, approach and landings, were safety events, but with what risk, and who knows.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under a Rock
Age: 54
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, ‘bill, have you been trained for and operated an airliner into JSI? I’m prepared to accept your “challenge”. I was trained to fly into Skiathos in a fully modelled simulator and went there with a training captain before operating there on my own. As I said in a previous post I’ve been going there since 2010, and in the summer season it appears on my roster, on average, twice a month.
None of those approaches are either “low” or “exciting”. Sometimes if the weather is marginal it can be a bit challenging but for a competent pilot the main challenges are performance planning, not being able to fly a tidy three degree approach path to a sloping runway without almost knocking the heads of the spectators.
None of those approaches are either “low” or “exciting”. Sometimes if the weather is marginal it can be a bit challenging but for a competent pilot the main challenges are performance planning, not being able to fly a tidy three degree approach path to a sloping runway without almost knocking the heads of the spectators.
'Bill
Only half a speed-brake
I actually agree with you completely. Spotters cameras make the approach look "low and exciting" , and flying in there is more of a challenge than most. But would you agree that the Wizz flight is a bit lower than normal but not wildly different to a standard approach, a la Jonty?
'Bill
'Bill
I am not judging the crew here (Jonty's image of training pretty much mirrors in my mind) but the calls here sayin it's only a tad low, a non-event without educational value or debriefing points.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Under a Rock
Age: 54
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point is, if you are 15 ft too low over the fence at LHR or LGW nobody knows or even cares. BUT 15 ft too low over the threshold at JSI looks spectacular.
Only half a speed-brake
Surely we are not avoding the question?
A standard fence clearing height at base is about a 120 whereas this place starts with 25 if you get it right. Fifteen feet lower, hold my beer. So again, how much margin is not enough?
The point is, the people who fly this exercise have no real ' too low - discontinue' limits available to them that they could bounce off. A.k.a. 'so far it always worked', a time honoured safety concept
A standard fence clearing height at base is about a 120 whereas this place starts with 25 if you get it right. Fifteen feet lower, hold my beer. So again, how much margin is not enough?
The point is, the people who fly this exercise have no real ' too low - discontinue' limits available to them that they could bounce off. A.k.a. 'so far it always worked', a time honoured safety concept
Last edited by FlightDetent; 23rd Aug 2022 at 12:09.
Flying involves continual judgement in uncertain conditions.
Above, above ?
Categories: accident / incident; safe / unsafe.
Black and white thinking, this does not represent the real world where uncertainties have to be judged with knowledge.
Why no ‘not an issue’ category - the crew acted as might be expected.
Without clarifying information, this landing could be a non event, normal operational variability.
It might be better judged with situational intent; assuming a lower altitude than that designed by the runway geometry - did the crew understand the position, was it being corrected - good adaptation.
Understanding but no adaptation, misjudged course of action.
Understood the situation, but as required by training - procedures, as planned.
Did not understand the situation, a weakness in situation awareness, … which part, why.
We don't know, and whatever we hypothesise it is unlikely that our understanding will improve, except a hope of the acceptance of uncertainty in operations and the need for a Safety-II mindset.
Flying involves continual judgement in uncertain conditions.
Humans strive to do their best in situations as understood at that time, not as recorded by video or by armchair analysis.
Categories: accident / incident; safe / unsafe.
Black and white thinking, this does not represent the real world where uncertainties have to be judged with knowledge.
Why no ‘not an issue’ category - the crew acted as might be expected.
Without clarifying information, this landing could be a non event, normal operational variability.
It might be better judged with situational intent; assuming a lower altitude than that designed by the runway geometry - did the crew understand the position, was it being corrected - good adaptation.
Understanding but no adaptation, misjudged course of action.
Understood the situation, but as required by training - procedures, as planned.
Did not understand the situation, a weakness in situation awareness, … which part, why.
We don't know, and whatever we hypothesise it is unlikely that our understanding will improve, except a hope of the acceptance of uncertainty in operations and the need for a Safety-II mindset.
Flying involves continual judgement in uncertain conditions.
Humans strive to do their best in situations as understood at that time, not as recorded by video or by armchair analysis.
Last edited by safetypee; 23rd Aug 2022 at 21:12. Reason: above
I am surprised we have got this far without anyone discussing flight data monitoring.
The operator will have event thresholds for things like short landings and a succession of traces from approaches into Skiathos. They will have hard data and the ability to take action warranted by their policies. Wizz being Wizz, one might not have confidence it will be as non-punitive as other EASA operators but they will be able to determine how out of the ordinary if at all this was.
In god we trust, all others bring data!
The operator will have event thresholds for things like short landings and a succession of traces from approaches into Skiathos. They will have hard data and the ability to take action warranted by their policies. Wizz being Wizz, one might not have confidence it will be as non-punitive as other EASA operators but they will be able to determine how out of the ordinary if at all this was.
In god we trust, all others bring data!
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Lancashire & Florida
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only last week have yellow box junction lines been painted on the road stating at each end "Do not stand within these lines" ...but as you can see from the photo they have made little or no difference ! The boneheads are still out in force getting their intake of Jet A fumes.