Ryanair low approach at EICK
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, a go-around would make a lot more sense .. with the a/c routing west after abandoning finals. The resultant low-flight circuit, from the west, over my own place and the residents of Bishopstown would fit in with this proposition - however, how one could get into a position where a go-around was deemed necessary (under the CAVOK conditions which prevailed at EICK that day) is totally beyond me .... but that, as they say, is a completely different matter.
ps - on an unrelated matter (and I know this is going to sound like RYR-bashing), on a recent flight with them, the CC announcements were made by someone for whom English was not her first language. I can safely say that I was not alone in being unable to understand one word of her safety brief (and all subsequent announcements). Does this not pose a potential safety issue in the result of an emergency?
ps - on an unrelated matter (and I know this is going to sound like RYR-bashing), on a recent flight with them, the CC announcements were made by someone for whom English was not her first language. I can safely say that I was not alone in being unable to understand one word of her safety brief (and all subsequent announcements). Does this not pose a potential safety issue in the result of an emergency?
aidanf:
"How one could get into a position where a go-around was deemed necessary (under the CAVOK conditions which prevailed at EICK that day) is totally beyond me".
Well then, I don't think you have thought too deeply about this or perhaps you don't know Cork airport at all?
There is no parallel taxiway between runway 25 and the threshold of runway 35. This means that every aircraft that lands on runway 17 has to backtrack the runway to the intersection (unless they land very short). Therefore, if the previous aircraft takes a long time to get off the runway then a go-around is quite likely to happen.
I have almost had to do this myself on more than one occasion and I don't work for Ryanair.
It would be very nice if someone would give them a nice parallel taxiway for Christmas!
"How one could get into a position where a go-around was deemed necessary (under the CAVOK conditions which prevailed at EICK that day) is totally beyond me".
Well then, I don't think you have thought too deeply about this or perhaps you don't know Cork airport at all?
There is no parallel taxiway between runway 25 and the threshold of runway 35. This means that every aircraft that lands on runway 17 has to backtrack the runway to the intersection (unless they land very short). Therefore, if the previous aircraft takes a long time to get off the runway then a go-around is quite likely to happen.
I have almost had to do this myself on more than one occasion and I don't work for Ryanair.
It would be very nice if someone would give them a nice parallel taxiway for Christmas!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair point JW411 
I know there was one planned as part of the current development up there, but I think that went the way of the other airbridges, movement of cargo centre, etc. ..... etc.
I know there was one planned as part of the current development up there, but I think that went the way of the other airbridges, movement of cargo centre, etc. ..... etc.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UAE
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I refer to the posts regarding glide slope warnings from the EGPWS.
Glide slope warnings do not necessarily mean the aircraft was doing anything dangerous ie below the glide slope (unless the said aircraft was attempting to fly an ILS in IMC). Two scenarios spring to mind, first with the crew becoming visual with PAPI's and them being set to a slightly different angle to the glide slop (glide slopes will tend bring an aircraft in 'higher' than PAPI's). Thus an aircraft can be descending below glide slope indications (normally after DA) as the PAPI path is folllowed. Once the 2/3rd 'dot' threshold is reached one will get a 'Glide Slope' warning. I admit, not very common but does happen. Most occurances at dual military/civil airports where fast jets are based and PAPI's can be set as low as 2.5 degrees.
Second scenario, when conducting visual approaches it is always a good plan to back up the approach with all available nav aids. If performing a visual approach to a runway with no approach aids, it is sometimes possible to use the recipricle runways ILS backcourse to give guidance. This is not an approved method as it is illegal to fly back course approaches under JAR however it can aid in situational awareness. Having the ILS for the other runway tuned can give 'Glide Slope' warnings also.
Sorry, bit off the topic of the thread but I do find it interesting that any post about FR always attracts comments from peolpe who will make safety judgements with little facts.
And as a note to a previous post, I have not heard of an FR aircraft running off the end of a Runway. Please elaborate.
Glide slope warnings do not necessarily mean the aircraft was doing anything dangerous ie below the glide slope (unless the said aircraft was attempting to fly an ILS in IMC). Two scenarios spring to mind, first with the crew becoming visual with PAPI's and them being set to a slightly different angle to the glide slop (glide slopes will tend bring an aircraft in 'higher' than PAPI's). Thus an aircraft can be descending below glide slope indications (normally after DA) as the PAPI path is folllowed. Once the 2/3rd 'dot' threshold is reached one will get a 'Glide Slope' warning. I admit, not very common but does happen. Most occurances at dual military/civil airports where fast jets are based and PAPI's can be set as low as 2.5 degrees.
Second scenario, when conducting visual approaches it is always a good plan to back up the approach with all available nav aids. If performing a visual approach to a runway with no approach aids, it is sometimes possible to use the recipricle runways ILS backcourse to give guidance. This is not an approved method as it is illegal to fly back course approaches under JAR however it can aid in situational awareness. Having the ILS for the other runway tuned can give 'Glide Slope' warnings also.
Sorry, bit off the topic of the thread but I do find it interesting that any post about FR always attracts comments from peolpe who will make safety judgements with little facts.
And as a note to a previous post, I have not heard of an FR aircraft running off the end of a Runway. Please elaborate.
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was there, heard and saw everything, NO BIG DEAL.
Pilot asked tower for a right hand orbit. Have to admit that I thought the guy was a few miles away on finals. However he suddenly appeared in sight and he initiated the orbit just before passing over the threshold.
Runway was clear for him to land. Whether the cabin wasn't secure for landing or whether he was stabilised in time, or other factors, I cannot say, the pilot didn't mention anything.
After flying a bad weather circuit (yes it was a beautiful evening in cork) he landed about 3-4 minutes later.
I'd be useless as a journo
Pilot asked tower for a right hand orbit. Have to admit that I thought the guy was a few miles away on finals. However he suddenly appeared in sight and he initiated the orbit just before passing over the threshold.
Runway was clear for him to land. Whether the cabin wasn't secure for landing or whether he was stabilised in time, or other factors, I cannot say, the pilot didn't mention anything.
After flying a bad weather circuit (yes it was a beautiful evening in cork) he landed about 3-4 minutes later.
I'd be useless as a journo
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all a conspiracy. Cork ATC, Ryanair, etc etc have conspired to keep it quiet.
Or it is nothing at all.
Simplest answer is most often the right one.
Just because an approach is non-standard does not make it a story.
The Wombat
PS, I hate Ryanair
Or it is nothing at all.
Simplest answer is most often the right one.
Just because an approach is non-standard does not make it a story.
The Wombat
PS, I hate Ryanair
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Southern Turkey
Age: 82
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok so maybe he was just a tad fast on his approach and opted for an orbit to kill his speed. No big deal and better than touching down hot and risking overheated brakes or even an over-run. Visual straight-in or base joins are not the easiest things to judge if you don't regularly practice them. I don't work for Ryanair either but know Cork very well.
rts
rts
I well remember arriving at Prestwick off the Atlantic one beautiful morning from New York. I was learning to fly the DC-10 at the time. As a ball-park rule we used to start our descent at a distance equal to 3 times the first two digits of the cruising altitude PLUS 10 miles to slow down.
Guess who forgot to allow 10 miles to slow down? "Sir" in the other seat said nothing and let me get on with it. A bit later on it became obvious to me that I wasn't going to make it and suddenly the penny dropped! An orbit around Ayrshire took care of the problem and the only thing broken was my pride.
I asked "Sir" why he hadn't say anything and he responded by saying that I would never do THAT again! He was right. In my defence I only had 8,000 hours at the time.
Guess who forgot to allow 10 miles to slow down? "Sir" in the other seat said nothing and let me get on with it. A bit later on it became obvious to me that I wasn't going to make it and suddenly the penny dropped! An orbit around Ayrshire took care of the problem and the only thing broken was my pride.
I asked "Sir" why he hadn't say anything and he responded by saying that I would never do THAT again! He was right. In my defence I only had 8,000 hours at the time.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: chances are, not at home
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-8AS; I have never come across a PAPI at a major western airport which significantly differed from the glideslope. Of course the larger the aeroplane, the more the eye height will be above the antenna (by the gear) - this is probably the discrepancy you perceive.
Also, I have never seen anyone use the backcourse of an ILS on a modern a/c - there is so much else available for use (eg extend the centreline, beacon, looking out of the window!) The only caveat would be circling from an ILS appr and the briefing should include inhibiting G/S warnings on the downwind, and (re the former point) maybe your military field example, but if the PAPIs are set at 2.5 deg, then following the glideslope would be my preference, rather than duck down at DH to catch and follow the lower profile.
Not least, IMHO it is bad practice to have a GPWS warning blaring continuously without doing anything about it. You obviously think differently, but I disagree.
Also, I have never seen anyone use the backcourse of an ILS on a modern a/c - there is so much else available for use (eg extend the centreline, beacon, looking out of the window!) The only caveat would be circling from an ILS appr and the briefing should include inhibiting G/S warnings on the downwind, and (re the former point) maybe your military field example, but if the PAPIs are set at 2.5 deg, then following the glideslope would be my preference, rather than duck down at DH to catch and follow the lower profile.
Not least, IMHO it is bad practice to have a GPWS warning blaring continuously without doing anything about it. You obviously think differently, but I disagree.
Last edited by Joe le Taxi; 7th Jun 2006 at 16:21.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JW411
I asked "Sir" why he hadn't say anything and he responded by saying that I would never do THAT again! He was right. In my defence I only had 8,000 hours at the time.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that I am biased in any way but has it occurred to everyone that he was probably cleared for the visual approach, adopting standard procedure, until establishing on the glide min clearance is 500' above all ground buildings, and prob turning final at 4/3 miles.... nothing completely shocking, comp policy in VMC is to be configured at 500' thats it, so i would imagine he was prob in the slot, maybe a little tight...
