|
AIr India flight lands on runway under construction in Maldives
Air India flight 263 landed on a runway still under construction in the Maldives. Aircraft sustained damaged to landing gear. No casualties reported,
Air India flight carrying over 100 passengers lands at under-construction Maldives runway - ITV News |
A320 NEO stuck in wet concrete....
type this into Youtube to get a video (it is redirected to a news agency with the direct link) Air India #AI263 landed on the non-operational runway at Male Velana Airport |
No surprises here,folks...Korean scared the pants of the workers a few weeks ago,being the first to try to land on the unopened,unfinished,3400 metres... However,I guess they will have to settle for second prize now! |
When I first read this, I thought "didn't this happen some time ago." Answer is no, I was thinking of a separate event involving Vietnam Airlines.
I thought there was a PPRuNe thread about it at the time. Maybe my search skills are lacking, but in any case the effort was unfruitful. |
Originally Posted by Carbon Bootprint
(Post 10244291)
I thought there was a PPRuNe thread about it at the time. Maybe my search skills are lacking, but in any case the effort was unfruitful.
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/...-cam-ranh.html |
Originally Posted by Airbubba
(Post 10244298)
Here's the thread about the similar incident earlier this year:
https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/...-cam-ranh.html |
Years ago an a/c was the first to land at the Delhi, new airport. Still under construction.
Huge company inquirey, among others, when the crew got back to H.Q. When the F/E was interrogated, one question put to him, was along the lines of, "when were you first aware something was amiss" or words to that effect. Response, "when I saw a construction vehicale going past the window at about 70mph. 😁 |
Kind of reminds me of a military flight I did there in a B727 many years ago. We were enroute to Singapore but due to a progressively cracking windscreen diverted to Male. We must have upset their planned maintenance between scheduled services because we were advised to hold as the runway was still being cleared of equipment. We were finally cleared to land and as we applied reverse we saw what turned out to be a float level lying directly in front of the right MLG. We reported it to tower and the offending tool was recovered. It seems we had indeed run over it but fortunately it didn't fly into the flaps or worse, no 3 or else the aircraft would have been on the ground much longer than it took to ferry out a new windscreen and conduct the repair. Still, there are worse places in the world to break down right?
|
Notams not reviewed:
https://atwonline.com/safety/report-cites-airport-pilots-air-india-maldives-landing-incident?utm_rid=CPEN1000000624045&utm_campaign=21260&utm_me dium=email&elq2=a69c67fa41ea4ed4bd0d0e4149a3114d "Inadequate airfield markings, combined with insufficient preparation and coordination by pilots, led to an Air India Airbus A320neo landing on an under-construction runway at Velana International Airport (MLE), a report from the Maldives Accident Investigation Coordinating Committee (AICC) said. In the Sept. 7, 2018 incident, Air India flight 263 was en route from Trivandrum, India, to Malé, Maldives, on a mid-day flight in clear weather. Following a routine departure and cruise, the flight crew requested and was granted a VOR approach to MLE’s Runway 18—the airport’s only runway. But the crew instead touched down on a nearly parallel surface about 190 m (623 ft.) to the east that was being constructed to replace the existing runway. As the aircraft’s approach speed slowed after touchdown, it “crossed a white-color cloth and [the captain] could feel a slight bump,” the AICC report, released Sept. 4, said. “Right after [the pilots] crossed the white cloth, ATC informed them that they landed on a wrong runway.” The “cloth” formed part of a large, temporary X, one of several laid out to signal that the runway was closed. The aircraft, VT-EXL, suffered a punctured left main landing gear tire. None of the 107 passengers or seven crewmembers onboard were injured. AICC investigators determined the flight crew misidentified the under-construction runway—which was just weeks from opening—as the active runway because of a number of factors. Among them: freshly painted markings on the soon-to-be-opened runway were not obstructed, making them more visible than those on the active runway. The new runway was not numbered when the incident took place, but other markings—including those denoting a displaced threshold—were “clear,” the report stated. The now-open new runway is 10,500 ft. long, or 500 ft. longer than the old runway. It also sits farther north. At the time of the incident, “for an aircraft approaching Runway 18, the threshold markings of the runway under construction was closer than those of the runway in use,” the report noted. The captain also said none of the Xs denoting the closed surface were near the threshold. “Due attention was not given by [civil aviation authorities] to ensure compliance with the safety standards and markings of the runway under construction,” AICC said. Both Air India pilots had flown into MLE before, but the captain had only flown the Runway 36 approach. At that end, the active runway’s threshold was closer to the arriving aircraft than the under-construction runway. The first officer had flown one previous approach on Runway 18. The 30-year-old captain had 4,906 total flying hours on the day of the incident, including 4,706 hours on Airbus A320s and 846 hours as a pilot-in-command, AICC said. The 24-year-old first officer had 1,766 total hours, including 1,566 on the A320 and none as a pilot-in-command, the report said. The airfield construction was documented in a July 2017 notice to airmen (NOTAM) that was still active. Both pilots received the NOTAM as part of their pre-flight briefing packets, AICC found. The captain told investigators he was not aware of the NOTAM, while the first officer said she knew about the NOTAM and the closed runway. The crew did not discuss the issue either before or during the flight. The air traffic controller on duty in MLE’s tower said he could not determine whether the aircraft was lined up on the incorrect runway before it touched down. “He stated that there was no difficulty in controlling the traffic on the day of the incident” and “no communication difficulty with the aircraft,” AICC said. AICC made several recommendations based on its probe. It urged Air India to ensure its flight-dispatch procedures, including proper review of NOTAMS, are followed. Airport operator Maldives Airports Company Ltd. was told to review its procedures for communicating airfield maintenance is in progress and make sure runway markings are adequately maintained. AICC suggested the Maldives Civil Aviation Authority ensure that airport-status communication procedures are in place and followed. Investigators also recommended that Maldives Air Navigation Services establish “precautionary measures” during periods of airfield construction as well as to ensure “staff on duty are not distracted.” |
And let's not forget SQ006's attempt to take off on a runway under construction in Taipei.
|
We've got massive vertical electronic Xs (5 meters tall?) that flash bright white, even in the day, that are set up near the thresholds of closed runways. Can't miss them. Approaching at 3°, a cloth cross laid flat further down the runway is much harder to see.
|
|
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
(Post 10577907)
Nice :E |
Northwest in Brussels instead of Frankfurt..the list is long...failure to follow SOPs is usually a link in the chain
|
Interesting to see that GE imagery, supposedly from nearly a year after the event, still shows only a half-hearted attempt to obscure the piano keys, TDZ and aiming point on the not-in-use runway.
|
Originally Posted by AndoniP
(Post 10577918)
"However, she realised that it was not the correct runway approximately when they were about to touch down when she saw the white colour thing."
Nice :E You learn something new every day. |
Checking the notams might have helped. Apparently they(or at least the captain) did not. |
Originally Posted by ironbutt57
(Post 10577996)
Northwest in Brussels instead of Frankfurt..the list is long...failure to follow SOPs is usually a link in the chain
|
It's total failure of CRM and TEM. The FO should have brought the NOTAM to the Capt's notice. And the threat perception of misidentification of the parallel runway and the plan to trap the error should have been discussed. In the era of GPS primary the ND would have shown they are heading for the wrong runway.
|
An Abu Dhabi airline with an A380 landed on the same runway 11 days after the Air India incident, but that movement was planned. I think that's why the new runway had the full paint markings at the time. Having seen both runways it would be very easy to make the mistake given the new one is 60m wide with dark surface and with full paint markings (which have since been partly obscured) and the existing runway 45m wide, a lighter surface colour, faded paint markings and no lights. Runway lights on the existing runway are now on permanently to clearly identify the correct runway.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:02. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.