Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

UPS cargo crash near Birmingham AL

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

UPS cargo crash near Birmingham AL

Old 23rd Aug 2013, 08:34
  #641 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,532
Received 72 Likes on 41 Posts
And if you want to put in the quoted poster's name, you put it in the opening quote code like this:

[quote_=Bloggs]quoted text in here[/quote].

Don't use the red underscore before the = sign, I had to otherwise my example quote would become a real quote like this!

Originally Posted by Bloggs
quoted text in here

Last edited by Capn Bloggs; 23rd Aug 2013 at 08:36.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 08:44
  #642 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Cyrano
Just a little public-service message from someone who is appreciating the discussion here:........

Hope that helps. It's easier to do than to explain!
Thanks Cyrano, that's even better than my method.
A Squared is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 10:49
  #643 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: South Alabama
Age: 74
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
MM43

Thanks very much. Just curious.

Regards.
Old Boeing Driver is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 12:38
  #644 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Someone was asking earlier about the Alert vs Sink Rate envelope at differing altitudes.

This is from Honeywell but I'm sure other brands are available! ;-)

Speed of Sound is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 13:52
  #645 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: huntsvegas
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
G/S angle?

@MM43

The FAA LOC18 approach plate that aterpster showed earlier had TCH of 48' and G/S angle of 3.28. Did you have a different plate, or why did you use 3.20 on your excellent profile graphic?
kenneth house is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 14:01
  #646 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by WillowRun 6-3
Questions: does NTSB have some review process by which it goes to (for example) ALPA with the results of its investigation, before preparing its report, and ask whether such a representative of pilots would add any other data or tests? Does NTSB vet an outline of its proposed analytic framework for identifying probable cause? Does it circulate a draft report to anyone outside the agency for comment before making and declaring it final?
WR,

Before a report goes final it is sent as a draft to all the parties. They have an opportunity to comment by submitting Submissions. The Board (or Staff) may ignore the comments but the Submissions are published as part of the docket when the final report is released. You have to download the entire docket to get them so if you just read the final report you may or may not see the fruits of the Submissions.
pipeliner is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 16:27
  #647 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kansas
Age: 85
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ironbutt57
the "sink rate" callout would lead one to believe the VS was in excess of 1000fpm at that point...
I don't believe it looks at VS. Radio altimeter sees acft closing on the terrain. Acft could be going down or terrain could be rising.
It's just a dumb box.
Ozlander1 is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 17:13
  #648 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I don't believe it looks at VS. Radio altimeter sees acft closing on the terrain. Acft could be going down or terrain could be rising.
It's just a dumb box.
I don't think the EGWPS is a dumb box, I believe it gets vertical speed information from the IRU's on the A306.
Airbubba is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 18:01
  #649 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by kenneth house
@MM43

The FAA LOC18 approach plate that aterpster showed earlier had TCH of 48' and G/S angle of 3.28. Did you have a different plate, or why did you use 3.20 on your excellent profile graphic?
The VDA is 3.28.

The PAPI angle is 3.2.


Last edited by Zeffy; 23rd Aug 2013 at 18:07. Reason: added A/FD information
Zeffy is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 18:23
  #650 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 73
Posts: 1,071
Received 151 Likes on 53 Posts
You are correct: V/S vs Rad Alt Logic

There is a published formula that describes the "SINK RATE" alert logic which is a function of V/S and Radio Altitude. UPS would have had a VS higher than -1000 FPM (perhaps more like -1200) for the alert to sound.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 18:46
  #651 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 814
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
mm43's chart - visuals - flying testbed (huh?)

Two (2) questions, somewhat connected.

Charts, Plates, and angles/distances of REILs, PAPIs & etc. Readers' attention is respectfully requested to be directed to mm43's chart or graph, depicted in post no. 661, above. It depicts a range of approach information, altitudes and ground elevations especially, and related data points derived therefrom. QUESTION is, do there exist depictions of visual cues at distances along a given approach to a given runway? Let me attempt, at least, to illustrate the underlying predicate for this query using the current quasi-investigatory thread. A goodly number of members have analyzed and/or commented upon, or at least provided input of just an informational variety about, the ability of the 1354 pilots to see the PAPIs, and related stuff about the visual set on approach. Stuff like was there a beacon on a hill at some point, what could the CT guy see and whether that matters, and especially the possibly emerging consensus that the approach was flown so low that the visuals blocked the pilots from knowing they were too low -- no, let me make that harsher - the visuals worked in a very nice evil and ultimately fatal conspiracy to lock the pilots into a terribly wrong sense of complacency. So, are there Jepps of the visual variety? I'm asking this even though I am willing to gamble that the Flight Safety simulator programs depict approaches (duh) but how close or or far are those depictions from what the Mark 1 eyeball sees out in front of the aircraft? In terms of very specific alignments of PAPI at given combinations of altitude and distance, and terrain or obstructions, and so on.

Question two. Has anyone tried to build (I know, you'd need funding first, I get that) a testbed aircraft that would shoot approaches which experience has shown to be troublesome, for the purpose of finding out not just what the next approach plate will depict, but a truly safe approach? Let's say a souped-up ex-Pan Am DC-10-30, loaded with instrumentation, ramped up powerplants, and pilots holding zero bs tolerance for other than precision in measurement and analysis. I note this even though I once tried to buy exactly that type of Airplane using nothing but my own name to pay for it...no of course I had not figured the cost of redoing the livery so that it would read, in bright Maize letters outlined in a Blue border with a narrow white space in between THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. (Against a Gleeming white base coat all the way down to about 10 degrees port & starboard up from the nose gear doors.) Anyway, does somebody already operate such a testbed for getting better parameters for FAA to improve approach designs?
Thanks for reading. It is a privilege and an honor to be able to communicate with all the fine pilots and others on this board who actually know about this stuff - and I am loath to overstate my welcome, and hence welcome all comments and criticisms.
I'm WillowRun 6-3, la-covet (Hebrew for, 'in honor of') the Willow Run Laboratories of the University of Michigan. Good Day.

Last edited by WillowRun 6-3; 23rd Aug 2013 at 18:52. Reason: adding THE is the reason
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 19:26
  #652 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
to mm43 RE diagram

Nice work - can you do something for us? Figure out the sight lines to the bridge on the extended centerline over which I-59 passes - it's just south of the threshold for 36. Here's a Googly from it..

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll...359.08,,2,4.34

Last edited by Jetdriver; 25th Aug 2013 at 20:12.
deSitter is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 20:41
  #653 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The FAA has 33 planes and about 200 pilots and technicians in their Flight Inspections Operations Group. Their full time job is to fly approaches and airways and make sure they are up to standards. No DC-10s, just King Airs and biz jets. Every ILS in the National Airspace System is flown every 270 days and every non precision approach is flown about half as often.
MarkerInbound is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 20:47
  #654 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ kenneth house

I got confused when I initially looked at the AL-50 plate, and Tubby Linton drew my attention to the differing G/S angles for RWY 18.

Here is a link to the up-to-date plate info for AL #:50 that was originally posted by aterpster.

@ deSitter

I'll have a look at the clearances for RWY 36 over the I-59 when I get some time in the next day or so.
mm43 is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2013, 23:21
  #655 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WillowRun 6-3:

NASA has a DC-8 airborne science laboratory that could be configured to do just that. Approach some science types, maybe through Univ of North Dakota National Suborbital Education and Research Center (NSERC). You never know what might become of it.

DC-8 | NASA Airborne Science Program

The airplane is presently flying the SEAC4RS program out of Houston (KEFD) until Oct 1, in case you're in the area.

Last edited by Desert185; 23rd Aug 2013 at 23:23.
Desert185 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2013, 00:09
  #656 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Kansas
Age: 85
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Airbubba
I don't think the EGWPS is a dumb box, I believe it gets vertical speed information from the IRU's on the A306.
Sure it's a dumb box. It can't think on it's own.
Ozlander1 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2013, 01:21
  #657 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 980
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Oz, et al, even if not intelligent, EGPWS has excellent logic and when heeded has immense capability to save lives.

If the reported EGPWS alert was ‘Sink Rate’ (which I am unable to confirm) then this should have been generated by mode 1 which uses aircraft vertical speed vs Rad Alt. The VS required would appear to be very high for the scenarios surmised so far.

However, if the alert was ‘Don’t Sink’ then this might have been generated by mode 3, but the description of this suggests a dependency on gear and flap switching to determine a difference between after take-off and go around. Although the latter function might apply in this accident, the reported gear and flap position suggests not.
PEI_3721 is online now  
Old 24th Aug 2013, 04:53
  #658 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Many accidents have happened in the past when undesired high rates of descent developed when both crewmembers were involved in attaining visual contact/references with the runway/lights/PAPI etc...etc...and nobody was minding the store.(monitoring inside).
ironbutt57 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2013, 06:45
  #659 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: In a hold
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
what about an incorrect pressure setting? Just a thought, apologies if it has already been mentioned.
Fly26 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2013, 08:14
  #660 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,788
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Just a thought, apologies if it has already been mentioned.
What was wrong with reading (or searching) the thread before posting?

Then you would know whether or not it had been discussed (it has).
DaveReidUK is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.