TUI "Plummet"?
 

Tui pilots 'did not notice' Boeing 737 plummeted nearly 1,500 feet in less than a minute (msn.com)

"Stellar" reporting kinda takes away the impact of the story, perhaps.

The byline "Charlotte McLaughlin For Mailonline" should tell you all you need to know, and more.

"Of the incident AAIB added: 'The crew were assigned several heading changes both before and during the aircraft descent. 'These instructions placed an additional burden on a crew that was already working hard."

It scares me if a change of direction during an approach is perceived by the AAIB as 'an additional burden' when the aircraft is working as designed. I could understand it if there had been a significant failure of some component.

C52 read the report for gods sake

I studiously ignore any Daily Mail aviation-related reports and articles. I found reading them is not good for my blood pressure.

This has been available on the AAIB site for months

I have skim-read the AAIB report (published yesterday) and find the quote by the Mail is accurate.

I'll keep out of this thread from now on because I'm not a pilot and should have respected that this area of pprune is for professional pilots.

The AAIB report can be found here:
https://assets.publishing.service.go...FDZF_09-22.pdf

High level go-arounds frequently present challenges that are unexpected and, usually, unbriefed for. In the sim it always seemed to be a g/a from minima. Fortunately some instructors had greater imagination. I distinctly remember one extremely straightforward ATC instruction to "go-around and climb straight ahead to 3000ft". Desperately simple eh??... Except that we were already at 3400ft (no a/p) - and managed to climb to 4k before we sorted it out. Lesson learnt. A proper, thorough - and varied - brief is an excellent in-flight safety strategy.

"Go-arounds" from above 1,000 ft do not need to be rushed. No need for TOGA and all the more extreme reactions that are caused by that. Take a (brief) moment and simply 'discontinue' the approach using other means. It can be done and the outcome is far more likely to be successful. The last airline that I flew for was the only one that included this in simulator recurrents. If others did so as well, then incidents like this could have been avoided.

TOGA. Alt Hold. V/S. LNAV

Gets you out of APP, stops the rapid pitch-up, continues a reduced rate descent to the lower level-off Alt and then flies the lateral profile.

What do other airlines teach for G/A from above the missed approach altitude?

Only ever had to do it once, at LEPA. Worked like a charm

Absolutely right folks. My point was that, in my case, being fully established & following the needles (no a/p) we had not actually appreciated that we were above the altitude specified by ATC for the go-around altitude (no call / x-check until the 4 mile point). The automatic reaction - because nearly all IMC go-arounds occur at or close to minima - was press TOGA and pitch up. Which is why we got ourselves in a mess whist we sorted it out.......... My message was that a) these scenarios should be practiced more in the sim (why aren't they??) and b) carry out a thorough approach brief that should include the possibility of a high level g/a. [And also that we should have maintained a better situational awareness!!]

Gizm0, did this incident happen during an approach to Paris-Orly?

In the Airbus you need to set TOGA so the FMGC changes from approach phase to go around phase, bringing the pilot the appropiate info in performance and navigation. Also, not using SRS mode and later on CLB or OPN CLB for the vertical navigation can be a bit of a problem if the airplane weight is not much. I believe the AP is trimmed to clean the airplane in either CLB or OPN CLB. Using V/S 500'ft/min, or 1000 ft/min can cause the IAS to reach the placard speed before the flap/slat is fully retracted.

I agree with what you say, but the Airbus is not as versatile as the MD80, for instance.

No. Don't think I've ever been to Orly - only CDG. From memory it was CGN - but then my memory isn't what it used to be! But all that faffing around with "button pushing" mentioned by others makes me rather glad I was flying manually........ Not sure I could cope with an Airbus - or not as well as I would like to.:)

What happens if you press one wrong in the quick succession?
Balls....

Oh have I seen it happen...:ouch:
A good PM often catches it.
I am generally not a fan of button pushing, especially not when it needs to be hurried...

Anything that keeps the plane under control. It's up to the crew.

Any complications from mis-selected modes on the Airbus is easily cured by a simple disconnect of the autopilot and flight directors. Next put the aircraft to where you want it and then re-engage as appropriate. This was the standard Airbus advice at Toulouse as long ago as 1994 when I did an early A330 course. Of course there may be fancier ways, however ...........................

I have never flown any Airbus aircraft other than their simulators at Toulouse. But Meikleour's excellent advice applies to any aircraft

All these clowns racing to push buttons and show how quick and clever they are. Just shows how dumbed down it has all become. And an indication of the generation of tech fanatics we're dealing with. No basic skills. What a shame.

When it all goes pear shaped, you turn it all off - A/P, F/D, A/T (all OFF), pitch up to 15 degrees, raw data, balls to the wall under FADEC control, clean up if you're not about to impact terrain, and sort it out when you can. Who cares if you climb to FL350 in the process. I've never heard of an airplane that climbed too high and crashed.

Practically nothing.




A G/A from a Stable Approach isn't usually described as "Pear Shaped".

You'd prefer flying a full manual G/A than pressing 4 buttons slowly?