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

WIZZ AIR Skiathos vid

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

WIZZ AIR Skiathos vid

Old 11th Aug 2022, 12:28
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Doors to Automatic View Post
My view from the armchair is that given the available length, the size of the aircraft and the 200ft cliff at the end, one cannot blame the pilots for wanting to get down early.
Would that be the 200 ft cliff at the 19 end (threshold elev 54'), or at the 01 end (ditto) ?

Although 50' is still plenty enough to spoil your entire day ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 12:33
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Confusious View Post
Hands up anyone who would do this in the sim.
That is a very good point. Iíve never operated to JSI but I have used airports with similar LDA.

I can understand the reluctance to use a ďstandardĒ approach and landing technique but thatís what the figures are based on, and if you get it right you should stop with adequate runway remaining: IFLD uses LDR x 1.15 which is a reasonable margin. Maybe some sessions in the sim to give people confidence that it will do what the book says? My personal experience has been that shallow approaches and/or trying to get it down early often end in a float past the normal touchdown point or a bounce.

If you donít get it down in the right place at the right speed, then reject the landing. Just out of interest I ran the numbers on the 777 and yes, you could land a -200ER there at MLW but I think it would fail at the planning stage.
FullWings is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 12:54
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: SW1A 2AA
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FullWings View Post
That is a very good point. I’ve never operated to JSI but I have used airports with similar LDA.

I can understand the reluctance to use a “standard” approach and landing technique but that’s what the figures are based on, and if you get it right you should stop with adequate runway remaining: IFLD uses LDR x 1.15 which is a reasonable margin. Maybe some sessions in the sim to give people confidence that it will do what the book says? My personal experience has been that shallow approaches and/or trying to get it down early often end in a float past the normal touchdown point or a bounce.

If you don’t get it down in the right place at the right speed, then reject the landing. Just out of interest I ran the numbers on the 777 and yes, you could land a -200ER there at MLW but I think it would fail at the planning stage.
Before I went there (A321) we had a dedicated sim visit as it was Cat C. The most challenging part was staying on the 30M pavement with a low speed engine failure. This is where I find the whole argument about "ducking under" ridiculous. An hour after landing at JSI, pilots will refuel and calculate performance which will generate a V1 somewhere around the 130 knot mark. They will then happily take off using it. I'm guessing here, but there is probably around 900M in which to stop from V1 in a much heavier aircraft than the one they landed in just an hour before. Is it just me?
Rt Hon Jim Hacker MP is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:05
  #64 (permalink)  
I REALLY SHOULDN'T BE HERE
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: TOD
Posts: 1,742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Itís either wilful disregard of correct technique or (more likely) getting too low due to the visual illusion caused by the upsloping runway.

In either case it is unsafe in the conventional aircraft operational sense, the approach should have been discontinued before crossing the coast.

As soon as you start departing from a standardised profile you are opening the door to any number of further threats and errors.

I have not flown into Skiathos but I have flown into plenty of Greek islands and other locations with short runways in turboprops and jets including various models of Airbus. FCTM technique every time, if the performance figures donít work, you donít fly the approach. What you do not do is start making up flying technique ad hoc - trust the FCTM, trust the performance figures, fly the correct technique every time.
speedrestriction is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:06
  #65 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Not commuting home
Age: 44
Posts: 3,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The downdraft scenario is exactly why one should not fly a shallow profile. And do keep aiming for a standard 30' RA at the threshold. Be observant to err on the low side but not deliberately (much).

Tailwind won't send you over the cliff if the landing was reasonable and braking proper. That's what the 67% reserve is for.

A321 IAE with wing fence is illegal at MLW but that is no news. (1210 + 80 A/THR + 100 ISA20) *5/3 = 2316

Assuming 45 DOW + 4t landing fuel + 19 t full house charter load = LW = 68 t and that is also no dispatch. [(1210-100 Weight) + 80 + 100)]*5/3 = 2150.

Funny that, the A320 classic which I saw operate give: 41 + 4 + 11 (130 pax) = LW = 55 t which is still no dispatch with resulting RLD of 1810. (Technically we could drop the +5 for A/THR but that only is 125 m).

Anyone said 'dispensation' ?



Last edited by FlightDetent; 11th Aug 2022 at 13:19.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:09
  #66 (permalink)  
fdr
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: 3rd Rock, #29B
Posts: 1,557
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That airport like many that airlines elect to fly aircraft into is fundamentally high risk. It is not a reasonable risk to assume on behalf of the travelling public. The probability of a event and the consequence would in any reasonable analysis lead to upgrading of facilities to assure that MEHT and by association the TCH is safe. It is unreasonable to castigate the crew that are being asked to undertake an approach that is knowingly compromised.

My suggestion to the City is to void insurance on any accident involving a jet aircraft into this airport, and into our favorite scenic spot in the french side of the Caribbean. If we are not going to say no, then perhaps the insurers will step in and say what needs to be said. Perhaps then a PAPI or flight path guidance that will provide an accurate flight path for the crew to at least have a fighting chance.

ICAO puts out glossy documents such as ICAO Doc 9859, the one that says categorically what the airline and regulators and airport are supposed to do to not be a recipient of a lawsuit for wilful negligence or being on the reciving end of a wrongful death suit or proceedings.






fdr is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:23
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: At altitude surviving on bleed air.
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fdr View Post
That airport like many that airlines elect to fly aircraft into is fundamentally high risk. It is not a reasonable risk to assume on behalf of the travelling public. The probability of a event and the consequence would in any reasonable analysis lead to upgrading of facilities to assure that MEHT and by association the TCH is safe. It is unreasonable to castigate the crew that are being asked to undertake an approach that is knowingly compromised.

My suggestion to the City is to void insurance on any accident involving a jet aircraft into this airport, and into our favorite scenic spot in the french side of the Caribbean. If we are not going to say no, then perhaps the insurers will step in and say what needs to be said. Perhaps then a PAPI or flight path guidance that will provide an accurate flight path for the crew to at least have a fighting chance.

ICAO puts out glossy documents such as ICAO Doc 9859, the one that says categorically what the airline and regulators and airport are supposed to do to not be a recipient of a lawsuit for wilful negligence or being on the reciving end of a wrongful death suit or proceedings.
If insurance companies made such a move then it would no doubt set a precedent for all CATC "high risk" airfields. Net result would be that airlines would not fly to said airfields and industry wide redundancies.
Confusious is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:24
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: SW1A 2AA
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is a basic instrument approach and there are PAPI's at JSI. They are clearly visible and were working well last time I flew there. This shit show occurred on a day that was clearly CAVOK in every meaning of the word. This Condor crew seem to know their stuff. No dramatics, just a well executed approach and landing. You don't need to be an astronaut.
Rt Hon Jim Hacker MP is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:27
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: big green wheely bin
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is getting quite funny now.

I have been here with some VERY experienced pilots, trainers of all flavours, and even a CAA flight ops inspector on the jump seat. All, to a man, flew an approach fairly close to what you see in that video. And I defy anyone who says they will do something different.

Why? Because you cant. There’s no approach guidance of any use, PAPIS at 3.3, if they are turned on, which they hardly ever are. It’s short, narrow, uphill. It’s also in a valley, with the approach over the sea. Just about every visual illusion you were warned about is ticked by this place. I have yet to see anyone fly a 3.3 degree approach to touch down here.

Kid yourselves if you want to, but you’re not living in reality.
Jonty is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:31
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: At altitude surviving on bleed air.
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jonty View Post
This is getting quite funny now.

I have been here with some VERY experienced pilots, trainers of all flavours, and even a CAA flight ops inspector on the jump seat. All, to a man, flew an approach fairly close to what you see in that video. And I defy anyone who says they will do something different.

Why? Because you cant. Thereís no approach guidance of any use, PAPIS at 3.3, if they are turned on, which they hardly ever are. Itís short, narrow, uphill. Itís also in a valley, with the approach over the sea. Just about every visual illusion you were warned about is ticked by this place. I have yet to see anyone fly a 3.3 degree approach to touch down here.

Kid yourselves if you want to, but youíre not living in reality.
Well, in that case Jonty please answer my previous question; would you do this in the sim on your check?
Confusious is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:36
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,709
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rt Hon Jim Hacker MP View Post
Before I went there (A321) we had a dedicated sim visit as it was Cat C. The most challenging part was staying on the 30M pavement with a low speed engine failure. This is where I find the whole argument about "ducking under" ridiculous. An hour after landing at JSI, pilots will refuel and calculate performance which will generate a V1 somewhere around the 130 knot mark. They will then happily take off using it. I'm guessing here, but there is probably around 900M in which to stop from V1 in a much heavier aircraft than the one they landed in just an hour before. Is it just me?
No, itís not. I doubt if the guys who leave skid marks on the piano keys understand what a balanced field is. Do they roll their own V1?
FullWings is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:38
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: under the sea
Posts: 2,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Runway lighting information
The current chart shows papis at 3.0 degrees. Why would they be steeper when there are no obstructions in the approach path?

Last edited by tubby linton; 11th Aug 2022 at 13:57.
tubby linton is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:42
  #73 (permalink)  

Only half a speed-brake
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Not commuting home
Age: 44
Posts: 3,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Coachcpt View Post
So does that mean you are reliant on the PAPIS? I think there was a previous thread somewhere about being on the correct G/P but the PAPIS not indicating the expected colours. I think a few contributors explained that even the head height of the PF can distort that.
The PAPI here are located around 250 meters mark which is the normal place if a little shorter. Pending AIP reference due Greek AIS registration. But you can see them in Jonty's picture on the left side - 2 white 2 reds.

The confusion is a possibility (type dependent) where they are further down, not the case here.

FYI to my memory they used to be notamed U/S anyway.
FlightDetent is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:48
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: At altitude surviving on bleed air.
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FullWings View Post
No, itís not. I doubt if the guys who leave skid marks on the piano keys understand what a balanced field is. Do they roll their own V1?
And skid marks elsewhere.
Confusious is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 13:51
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here's a video with a larger sample of landings with a variety of aircraft that does suggest that a successful landing can be accomplished without being excessively low:

Fly-by-Wife is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 14:08
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK
Age: 67
Posts: 1,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There used to be some interesting braked wheel markings that stopped just short of the cliff.
beardy is online now  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 14:21
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by FlightDetent View Post
The PAPI here are located around 250 meters mark which is the normal place if a little shorter. Pending AIP reference due Greek AIS registration. But you can see them in Jonty's picture on the left side - 2 white 2 reds.
Runway vital statistics from a recent-ish AIP:



DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 14:29
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And a somewhat older Aerodrome Chart, showing the position of the PAPIs (N.B. predates the runway designator change to 01/19):
Attached Files
File Type: pdf
LGSK Aerodrome chart.pdf (377.5 KB, 34 views)
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 14:58
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: under the sea
Posts: 2,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The papi show from the information above a meht of 14.5m/47.6 ft. I have noticed at many Greek airfields the red lenses of the papi are often sunbleached and look a pinky white, Corfu being a classic example.
tubby linton is offline  
Old 11th Aug 2022, 15:07
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We have A320ís/ 737ís landing multiple times a day at Jersey EGJJ. Runway 26 is shorter than Skiathos by a few metres. With a sheer cliff at the end of the runway. Most of these aircraft are fully loaded with passengers and with round trip fuel for the next sector.

Yet we donít have a situation like at Skiathos where aircraft descend below the normal approach path. Have people just got used to the idea this is normal at Skiathos?

Aircraft this size operate with slightly tighter performance margins elsewhere and itís not ever flagged up. So the idea that aircraft shouldnít be flying in Skiathos or itís normal to fly a low approach is nonsense. It just needs to be done as per SOP and performance criteria.
Dct_Mopas is online now  

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.