Some nice comments on bouncing I think. I'm on a B767 not B777 and don't know too much about the TOGA switch but it looks like it's easiest just to handfly the airplane pitch/power and think about the rest on the way up. Looks like we will see a bounced landing scenario in future training events. I'm a friend of low automation close to the ground anyway as long as the Wx is ok.

As regards Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. This was subsumed long ago by the mantra, Trigger Action and Callout, Magenta Line, Automatic Flight.

Throw in a dose of FMC preoccupation during the final approach and don't bother looking out of the window, oh and don't get caught physically covering the Control Column and Thrust Levers....we don't do that any more.

Thank you Del Boy .#439....

+1

1helicopterppl said:

"This is a Pilot's rumour network so I would like to say thank you to all ppruners who have recognised the great job by the cabin crew, a completely successful evacuation".

Agree and a plus.

And about the hand-luggage, overhead bins and all the discussion about:

In THIS accident-incident, at last, no one seriously injured in spite of all the jam caused by the pretention (acceptable in humans) of saving some personal belongings...

Question for the 773 jocks..
 

I see too many comments like
I don't believe for a second that an OAT of 50C has any effect.
Off course at max TO weights and with an engine inop, performance is affected but with 2 engines operating and at typical landing weights there is so many power in a heavy twin that it is in fact more a challenge to control your aircraft then a worry to have not enough performance.. even at 50C!
I believe a single TOGA push gives you 2000FPM, whether it is -10C or +50C..
Any 773 driver cares to comment?

G Y S :}

I'll stick my neck out....I can't speak for the Roller -300 or Emirates ops/procedures but by way of illustration for the GE -300 at 50 celsius, sea level airfield, the landing climb limit weight ( for a flap 25 or 30 ldg) is just under 300 tonnes, that's vs. a normal max landing weight (for us) of around 250 'ish tonnes....

In other words as you say with all running normally, at the end of a normal sector, at normal landing weights the performance manual would have you believe the -300 GE at least would have had plenty of power available to cope with most things that could be thrown at it....

At the risk of verging into speculation I wouldn't expect the Trent engined version to be grossly different, the 300's don't have a reputation for being under powered......

Say what? Have you flown it in Arabian summer?

I have flown through several Arabian Summers and do not have a problem with wiggys statement.

At normal landing weights there is no issue (or at least none that I have experienced). The only issue performance wise is trying to take the -300 to JFK if it is delayed and the temperature starts rising!

Regards,

GBD

Yes, I do have time in the sandbox albeit in another heavy twin.
And that is exactly the reason I ask.
With both engines operating there never is a problem, certainly not at typical landing weight.
As I said, excess of performance is usually more an issue then underperformance..
But an EK 773 pilot will be most qualified to comment, I stand to be corrected.

Edit: sorry, thought all -300 were ER's, didn't know there are "straight -300's"

They certainly have that reputation where I am. ERs no — but straight -300s, yes. Landing climb limit weight at 50°C/0 PA is nowhere near 300 tonnes - or 250 for that matter.

Lonewolf I think you are missing the point. The training captains in Amsterdam and SFO both failed to spot deteriorating airspeed with the autothrottle in a mode where they obviously thought they had speed protection. Fairly obviously this was not the main cause of those accidents, but a contributory factor as perhaps misunderstanding the logics of the automatics (as suggested by others) may have been here. In this case there seems to have been a lack of thrust causing the aircraft to sink back onto the runway. Sufficient thrust was either spooled up too late or not at all. I can share your frustration that hand flying skills have deteriorated so far. But the reality is that experienced crews with many thousands of hours (or perhaps because of many thousands of hours using the automatics) do not seem capable of basic stuff. Human factors design of procedures and training needs to take account of this. So far I have not seen a lot of progress on this, with perhaps the exception of A350 conversion starting with some automatics off flying in the sim.

Note to myself ... :ugh: :ugh:

Fair cop guys, humble apologies for not reading the small print and going off at a missleading tangent.. So is somebody else going to stick their neck out and provide the relevant numbers for the aircraft in question?

Scroll down, video showing the a/c just as it comes to a complete stop.

Emirates plane crash fire: Live updates as hundreds gather for hero firefighter's funeral after jet crash-lands in Dubai - Mirror Online

Still nothing conclusive as to why the go-around in the first place.
Or when the Missed Approach was called/executed.

I assume that the execution of the Missed Approach was "complete", the gear was retracted

Golfy to answer your question on #449

B777 FCOM 4.20.17

"Pushing either TO/GA switch activates a go-around. The mode remains active even if the airplane touches down while executing the go–around."

However and this is relevant in a GA immediately after touchdown

"The TO/GA switches are inhibited when on the ground and enabled again when in the air for a go–around or touch and go."

ArchieBabe:

Where I worked the gear was retracted on a missed approach or balked landing once a stable positive rate of climb was achieve.

Pilot error
 

Whatever way you look at this, pilot error has to be a factor. (And we all know pilots are human right?)

Maybe toga was pressed but was disabled. Maybe they held the thrust leavers against the stops.

But one glaring error was putting the wheels up!

If it's nowhere near 300 or even 250, then what is the actual weight limit to achieve min Landing Climb performance at 50C/0' for the straight -300?

Is there some suggestion based on aircraft "reputation" that WAT limits were exceeded in this case? Scorching hot summer temps in Dubai/ME is predictable and operating in them routine for operations based there. Until proven otherwise I would assume that even this straight -300 was dispatched legally, including at a weight that met all T/O, Approach, and Landing Climb requirements.

Disagree, our FCOM states "POSITIVE CLIMB", definitely not rate!

Media control
 

If you guys pay attention, almost all the video links posted here have mysteriously been deleted.. EK media department working hard I guess. Lets hope they don't interfere on the investigation at least.

The Landing Climb Weight of a 777-300 with Trent 892 outside temp 50deg and QNH 997 is ~ 245tons, only corrected for pressure alt, not for density alt which would paint a more bleak picture .... (MTOW 299'370 / MLW 237'682)
The GA Climb Gradient is around 2%.

Having flown that bird many times in these conditions leaves me with some doubts about these values though .....