|
Stunning go around at LHR today
As a terrified flyer, who will only fly with BA, I was stunned today to watch a live stream of a late go around by a BA pilot. Video is available here & the plane in question is in the frame from 1m 32s in the post called "#StormDorris PART 5".
It did 2 go arounds, successfully landing on the 3rd attempt. Very tricky conditions out there today, hats off to all pilots :ok: If anyone knows this pilot, please buy him/her a pint from me! |
I'll admit that, at first, I suspected this was another bit of clickbait - the sort that crops up on PPRune from time to time.
However, there is indeed a jaw dropping moment mentioned by the original poster, so even if it IS clickbait the video still has merit in itself. And apologies to Evey if there wasn't an intention to clickbait!! Interesting clip. |
A definite "crikey" moment right there.
|
lol no clickbait here! Filmed by 2 plane-mad nutters who I've been following for a while but no offence taken ;)
Would love it if the pilot saw this (& would love to know how he/she feels watching it back) :eek: |
Originally Posted by Ant
(Post 9685993)
I'll admit that, at first, I suspected this was another bit of clickbait - the sort that crops up on PPRune from time to time.
|
"Nutters" struck me as appropriate. Did their mum know they were out? And will someone teach them to use manual focus?
|
Originally Posted by KelvinD
(Post 9686264)
And will someone teach them to use manual focus?
http://www.avgen.com/BA869%2020170223.jpg |
Interesting that they commenced a third approach (according to the OP) after two failed due to weather. Most Ops manuals aren't keen on the idea due to 'get home-itis'.
Amazing footage though! Really shows the power the wind can have! |
Both GAs were between a preceding and following aircraft which made successful landings, so a third attempt doesn't seem unreasonable under the circumstances.
|
The few seconds those engines take to spool as you firewall the thrust levers seem like a lifetime in that situation!
Well executed go around from a nasty situation. |
PNF took a while to remember to call "positive climb" though, took aeons before the gear was raised. Must have had something else on his mind!
|
I don't know of any sensible Ops Manuals that would have a limit on the number of Go-arounds. The limit is the fuel in the tanks. What is good is that go-arounds are becoming more acceptable and long may that be the case..
|
Any OM/A i have read did have something to that effect. However, not as a hard rule, more as a guideline.
My current one says this: If, in marginal weather conditions, two go arounds have been carried out at an aerodrome, consideration should be given to diverting or holding until an improvement in weather occurs. The decision to attempt a third approach immediately should normally only be made if a significant improvement in the weather conditions has been reported or observed from the flight deck. The options of diverting or holding will be affected by fuel considerations and by forecast weather conditions at the destination and at the alternate. Go arounds, especially multiple go arounds, can be distressing to passengers. Commanders should, when workload permits, use the PA to give reassurance appropriate to the situation. Personally i was only once in that situation, and we decided to divert after the second go around, although the competitor airline landed quite happily (they used 737 classics without predictive windshear system). A nearby airport had a better terrain profile and a runway more into the wind and the approach and landing there was uneventful. The real struggle came afterwards, as the company wanted us to fly back to our planned destination regardless, and it took quite a lot of talking to change their minds. Without any change in weather conditions more go arounds would have been guaranteed, as the PWS call out "windshear ahead, go around" means a go around is mandatory. |
noflynomore...
PNF took a while to remember to call "positive climb" though, took aeons before the gear was raised. Must have had something else on his mind! |
Station Calling just beat me to it!
Raising the gear would open the gear doors, causing unwanted extra drag during the escape manoevre. A seriously good job done! |
Not sure at the time there were many other options that were boviously better, all had similar winds, and at LHR it was almost straight down the runway.
|
Any chance anyone here knows who might have been flying this plane? Would so love to hear their reaction to the video and how they handled it on the deck. I tip my hat to them :)
|
I was wondering what the effect on an approach of the Doris winds would be at LHR as they were , as Gonzo says, straight down the runway but also seriously gusty. The phrase, the plane just dropped out of the sky' is commonly used by passengers encountering turbulence but this crew faced exactly that situation didn't they -what 60-70 feet up and down goes the nose with the plane following. Are there headwind/gusting limits for approaches because this one looked seriously more scary than all of the crabbed bouncy crosswinds that always make the internet from LBA and BHX and really must have come completely out of left field for the crew even though it was very windy. I mean they cannot fly the approach at Vref plus 60 just in case the wind chooses to vanish at some point can they.
Do they get Earl Grey AND cream cakes with the chief pilot after that or is it a case of that's what you're their for laddie (or lassie these days) |
pax,
I mean they cannot fly the approach at Vref plus 60 just in case the wind chooses to vanish at some point can they. Ground speed MINI function on the Airbus in strong headwinds mean they actually speed up (in terms of ground speed) when compared to other manufacturer's aircraft. It's all about maintaining a certain energy state. Here's a basic explanation of GS-MINI from Chris Scott on PPRuNe back in 2008. Now: let's take the sea-level ISA case, where IAS=TAS; a Vapp of 130kts; and a predicted headwind of 10kts entered into the Performance page. On a conventional aeroplane stabilised at Vapp (130kts) at a height of 500ft, if the headwind is 30 kts the GS will be 100kts. But when it comes over the threshold, where the headwind is only 10kts, it will need to have accelerated to a GS of 120kts to maintain the required Vapp of 130. This will require a lot of extra energy (from the engines), which may cause problems, particularly if the loss of headwind happens suddenly (like at night). It makes sense, therefore, to ensure that the GS remains at or above 120kts throughout the approach, even though this initially results in a higher IAS (150kts at 500ft in this case). The "managed" speed (IAS) target on the ASI (used by the pilot and the autothrottle) goes up and down with the headwind, but never below Vapp. Reaching the threshold, provided the actual headwind equals the predicted figure, the speed target will be Vapp. If the wind is higher, the speed target will be above Vapp. This should not be a problem for stopping in the runway length, because the GS will be no higher than originally planned. |
That was an interesting video watching the different techniques. Size does matter, but we knew that. Listening to the ATC wind and looking at the drift angles I suspect LTN RW26 on the hill would have been horrid on that day. MAN RW24 in the lee on the terminal, as was LHR, would also have been interesting if the W/V was the same.
Does anyone have any knowledge? For the BA pilots I applaud their decision. To me that is the more difficult element of a GA than the execution. There you are, clear VMC, only a few feet left and perhaps even over the tarmac, and deciding discretion is the better part of valour. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:48. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.