Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Accidents - Overseas
A sad day.

If the Army and the Navy
Ever look on Heaven's scenes;
They will find the streets are guarded
By United States Marines.

Link 1.

Link 2.


[Image: 38b6eb3ad11e32c1dcb20d0feddabe46]
Reply
MH17 3rd Anniversary.

Speaking of sad days... Undecided

Quote:Australia says those behind MH17 shooting down may be tried in absentia

July 17, 2017 by australianaviation.com.au Leave a Comment

[Image: B777-2H6ER_9M-MRD_YSSY_20DEC2011_DAMIEN-...b-crop.jpg]A file image of Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER 9M-MRD. (Damien Aiello)

Foreign minister Julie Bishop says those behind the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 may have to be tried in absentia as the Australian Government reaffirms its commitment to using every legal avenue to bring those responsible to justice.

On July 17 2014, a Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777-200ER, 9M-MRD, operating a scheduled flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur and carrying 283 passengers and 15 crew members – including 38 Australian citizens or permanent residents – was shot down over eastern Ukraine. There were no survivors.

Amateur video footage showed the aircraft exploding on impact with the ground, and the charred remains of recognisable aircraft components strewn across a fairly wide semi-rural area.

A report from the Dutch Safety Board published in 2015 found the Malaysia Airlines jet was shot down by a Russian-made Buk surface-to-air missile that was launched in a 320 sq km area in eastern Ukraine.

In 2014, Australia sponsored a United Nations Security Council resolution that expressed condemnation of the shooting down of the aircraft and set up an independent international investigation. It was unanimously backed by all 15 members of the Council, including Russia.

And in July 2017, it was announced the five countries jointly investigating the crash – Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, Ukraine and the Netherlands – had chosen the Dutch courts to prosecute those suspected to be responsible for the downing of the aircraft.

The move followed Russian efforts to block the establishment of an international court to bring those behind the shooting down of MH17 to justice.

Bishop told the ABC Insiders program on Sunday she was “confident that we are doing all we can to bring those responsible to account”.

“We have now confirmed that we will back a Dutch national prosecution which will be an independent and fair and transparent prosecution,” Bishop said.

“And we will work as hard as we can to support the Dutch and Ukraine because I’ve entered into a treaty with the Netherlands so that the full criminal jurisdiction of Ukraine has been transferred to the Netherlands.

“It may be that there will have be to a trial in absentia.”

Bishop urged Russia, which has consistently denied being involved in the shooting down of the aircraft, to abide by the Security Council resolution from 2014 that called on all nations to cooperate to ensure those responsible were brought to justice.

“There have been reports that some of the witnesses have been detained in Russia. Well, I certainly urge Russia to comply with the Security Council resolution and do all it can to help bring these people to account,” Bishop said.

A memorial located near Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport will be unveiled on Monday (European time) to remember the 298 people who died. Many of the victim’s relatives were expected to attend.
MTF...P2  Angel
Reply

M'lud, the Foreign Minister, does seem to be just a tad inconsistent regarding the handling of these very grave matters M'lud.

On the one hand M'lud, the Minister tells the court that those responsible for the unlawful death of 38 Australian citizens or permanent residents on MH-17 should be brought to justice ("we are doing all we can to bring those responsible to account”) but on the other hand, we hear not so much as a peep out of her M'lud, about bringing those responsible for the unlawful death of 7 Australian citizens or permanent residents on MH-370 to justice.

Passing strange M'lud.

M'lud, it beggars the mind M'lud, but quite obviouly M'lud, the Minister must logically have some "threshold" for justice in her own mind, M'lud.

It must obviously lie between 7 and 38 M'lud.  

Is it going into double figures (10), or a dozen (12), perhaps two dozen (24), perhaps at a stretch three dozen (36) ?

The threshold must be in there somewhere, in the "fog" of diplomacy perhaps, M'lud, but I am sure you will agree with me M'lud, that there is definately no threshold of any kind, other than ONE, in the "crystal clarity" of the law, M'lud.

Perhaps I may prevail upon M'lud, to direct the Minister, to specify what "her threshold for justice" is, and why, so that we may then deal with this most uncooperative of witnesses in an appropriate manner.  In this regard M'lud, I am sure that M'lud recalls, that the Nuremberg Trials, post World War Two, clearly established some relevat principles in International Law, M'lud, that may, have some significant bearing, on these, most grave of matters, M'lud.

Rumpole and the Official Secret
Quotes


   
Reply
Recent OS Jet airliner occurrences of interest & intrigue - Confused Sad Big Grin

From the Times, via the Oz... Wink :
Quote:Cricket ball-sized hail strikes plane
[Image: 76eab03eec14125aed08d3edbe74c5e0?width=650]
This AtlasGlobal-operated Airbus A320 plane safely landed after the aircraft was hit by huge hailstones, smashing the aircraft’s windscreen. Picture: Oleg Lungul/Facebook
  • HANNAH LUCINDA SMITH

  • The Times

  • 4:26PM August 1, 2017

A pilot has been decorated for landing a passenger jet safely during a storm in Istanbul despite giant hailstones having smashed the aircraft’s windscreen.

Pieces of ice the size of cricket balls cracked the cockpit windshield of Captain Alexander Akopov’s Airbus A320 jet as he brought it in to land at Ataturk airport in the city on Thursday evening, with 127 passengers and crew on board.

[Image: 8d59c9017a902ee9afe7c21a12492d07?width=650]
The badly damaged AtlasGlobal-operated Airbus A320 after landing. Picture: Oleg Lungul/Facebook

A photograph taken shortly after the aircraft landed shows its nose caved in and the windows so damaged that it would have been almost impossible to see through them. Its autopilot mechanism was also knocked out.

Voice recordings from the airport’s ground control station picked up staff’s fears that Captain Akopov, a Ukrainian, who works for the Turkish airline Atlasglobal, would not be able to land the jet safely.
A voice on the ground could be heard saying: “He won’t do it, he won’t do it.”

Applause broke out at Ataturk airport, which had been shut as the storm hit, as Captain Akopov landed the passenger jet safely.

He has been awarded the Ukrainian Order of Courage by President Poroshenko, who called the pilot personally to congratulate him.

“It was hard but the main thing is that people are alive,” Captain Akopov said.

“I have been flying for 30 years. Well, did you see the plane landing? Was it OK? The passengers are alive. It is normal. This is our professional reliability.”

[Image: e3ca66c6e88894e868abedd117a4abd7?width=1024]
[/url]Captain Alexander Akopov who safely landed the plane.

He was flying the aircraft from northern Cyprus to Istanbul but its systems had not picked up the freak storm, which came in the middle of a baking hot day.

Under blackened skies, Istanbul was battered for 20 minutes by huge gusts of wind, driving rain and the massive hailstones.

Windows across the city were smashed and at least ten people were injured. There was also severe flash-flooding, with several roads and Metro lines becoming submerged in the downpour.

[Image: rxksofPP_yeaXn7c.jpg]

The freak weather was the result of a supercell storm, an extremely rare but dangerous condition where the storm cloud rotates upwards. Supercell storms are most common in the central United States.

Images posted on social media shortly after the storm blew over show passengers on one of Istanbul’s ferrys putting on lifejackets as they are tossed about on the Bosphorus and lightning streaking horizontally across the sky.

Cranes were toppled at the Haydarpasa port on the Asian shores of the city and uprooted trees were strewn across roads.

& via the UK Daily Mail - OOPs! Blush

Quote:Pilots suspended after their aircraft nearly ran out of fuel because they'd forgotten to bring up the landing gear
  • The Airbus A320, with 99 on board, took off last Saturday from Kolkata 

  • But with the wheels affecting the aerodynamics it burned excessive fuel

  • They reportedly only realised the gear was already down when they diverted 


By Ted Thornhill for MailOnline

Two Air India pilots have been grounded after their aircraft nearly ran out of fuel - because they’d forgotten to retract the landing gear.

The Airbus A320, with 99 passengers on board, took off last Saturday from Kolkata, bound for Mumbai, but with the wheels affecting the aerodynamics it burned excessive quantities of fuel.

It wasn’t able to climb above 24,000 feet nor accelerate beyond 265mph, when it should have been able to cruise at 35,000 to 37,000 feet and reach 520mph.


[Image: 42C6935C00000578-4739838-image-a-8_1501252705524.jpg]

+

Two Air India pilots have been grounded after their aircraft nearly ran out of fuel - because they’d forgotten to retract the landing gear (file image)

The two pilots were oblivious to the landing wheels being down and diverted to Nagpur when the fuel ran low, it was reported.

It was when they tried to lower the landing gear as they prepared to land that they realised it was already down, a source told 
The Times of India.
[size=undefined]
A spokesman for Air India told the paper that the two female pilots have been suspended.

He said: ‘The pilots were de-rostered (taken off flying duty) after the incident was reported.’

A serving long-haul airline captain told MailOnline Travel that he was surprised the pilots hadn't noticed the landing gear being down, if that was indeed the issue.

He said: 'I would say it is pretty staggering that the pilots - and cabin crew - wouldn't notice the huge difference in noise levels with the gear left down.

'It is also strange that they had such a lack of performance caused by the drag but took so long to analyse what was going on.

'And "Gear...Up" is on the after take-off checklist, which should also have been done.

'I would suspect some sort of human factor involved in this incident - where the crew working well together? Were they distracted by something else? Were they fatigued?' 

Air freight pilot and aerial photographer 
[url=https://jpcvanheijst.com/]Christiaan van Heijst commented: 'It happens every now and then that pilots need a lower altitude and slower speed than usual. This can happen because of various reasons, for example turbulence, pressurisation problems or other technical issues that require the aircraft to fly lower.

[Image: 42C6A20A00000578-4739838-image-a-16_1501252927799.jpg]

+2

The Airbus A320, with 99 passengers on board, took off last Saturday from Kolkata, bound for Mumbai, but with the wheels affecting the aerodynamics it burned excessive quantities of fuel (file image)

'Air Traffic Control will always try to accommodate pilots in those requests and has no reason to ask for the reason why. When pilots need a lower altitude they have a good reason to do so.

'Why this particular aircraft flew with the gear down for a long period of time is something I don't know and dare not to speculate about since I was not there and do not know what kind of possibly complex situation these pilots were facing.

'I'm looking forward to the final investigation report to learn about any additional factors that contributed to that decision of the pilots and maybe can learn from it myself as well.'

Issues with the landing gear usually revolve around lowering them.

For example, in February 2016 a 
Boeing 727 touched down on its nose without any functioning landing gear.

The Asia Pacific Airlines plane pulled off the risky landing at Guam International Airport without injuring the three crew members who were on board during the 'training flight'.

Just 20 minutes before the plane was due to land, airport control received an alert that a developing situation could affect the aircraft's safe landing.

The plane flew an hour over schedule and released fuel to make the aircraft lighter before the landing, airport spokeswoman Rolenda Faasuamalie told the Pacific Daily News at the time. 

It then practiced a landing, technically known as a 'touch-and-go' maneuver, before successfully touching down.  
[/size]

MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
Air Canada A320 less than 60ft from disaster - Confused

From the AP, via the Oz: ‘He’s on the taxiway’

Quote:Air Canada pilots mistake taxiway for runway at San Francisco International airport
[Image: afa9fc515e450f4ded4357bfd3a30a34?width=650]
Air Canada flight 759 (ACA 759) attempts to land at the San Francisco International Airport flying just above a United Airlines flight waiting on the taxiway on July 7.
  • AP
  • 11:25AM August 3, 2017
Newly released data and photos show how shockingly low an Air Canada jet was when it pulled up to avoid crashing into planes waiting on a San Francisco International Airport taxiway last month.

The Air Canada pilots mistook the taxiway for the runway next to it and flew their jet to just 59 feet (18 meters) above ground before pulling up to attempt another landing, according to National Transportation Safety Board information released today.

That’s barely taller than the four planes that were on the taxiway when the incident occurred late at night on July 7.

Pilots in a United Airlines plane alerted air traffic controllers about the off- course jet, while the crew of a Philippine Airlines jet behind it switched on their plane’s landing lights in an apparent last-ditch danger signal to Air Canada.

[Image: ef1683e0a5924766a54076f75da5e11c?width=650]A map of the runway created from Harris Symphony OpsVue radar track data analysis. With a transmission to air traffic control from a United Airlines airplane on the taxiway below.


NTSB investigators said they have not determined probable cause for the incident that came within a few feet of becoming one of the worst disasters in aviation history.

“It was close, much too close,” said John Cox, a safety consultant and retired airline pilot.

The investigators said that as the Air Canada jet approached the taxiway just before midnight after a flight from Toronto, it was so far off course that it did not appear on a radar system used to prevent runway collisions. Those systems were not designed to spot planes that are lined up to land on a taxiway — a rare occurrence, especially for airline pilots. But the Federal Aviation Administration is working on modifications so they can, agency spokesman Ian Gregor said.

Both pilots of the Air Canada Airbus A320 jet were very experienced. The captain, who was flying the plane, had more than 20,000 hours of flying time, and the co-pilot had about 10,000 hours.

The pilots told investigators “that they did not recall seeing aircraft on taxiway but that something did not look right to them,” the NTSB said.

Investigators could not hear what the Air Canada captain and co-pilot said to each other during the aborted landing because their conversation was recorded over when the plane made other flights, starting with a San Francisco-to- Montreal trip the next morning. Recorders are required to capture only the last two hours of a plane’s flying time.


Peter Fitzpatrick, a spokesman for Air Canada, declined to comment, citing the ongoing investigation.
AP
 
MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
ScairAsia the reoccurrence Kings of Oz - Confused

Via the Oz:
Quote:AirAsia apologises after mid-air emergency from Perth to Bali

Mid-air emergency on AirAsia flight to Bali0:55
[Image: 5deadbbeb2e17768b9a40ea03d56d062]
Passengers have spoken of a terrifying mid-air emergency on an AirAsia flight between Perth and Bali.
  • October 16th 2017
  • 14 hours ago
[Image: 13c0562fe9d492817e4a13766f9027df?width=650]Stills from inside the cabin of AirAsia Flight QZ535. Pictures: Nine News
  • AAP
  • 9:04AM October 16, 2017
AirAsia has apologised after a terrifying mid-air emergency forced the pilot to turn back a flight from Perth to Bali yesterday.

Flight QZ535 reportedly plummeted 20,000 feet 25 minutes into the flight from Perth on Sunday when a technical issue caused the cabin to lose pressure.

Passengers said they didn’t know what was happening because most of the plane’s onboard announcements weren’t in English.

“The panic was escalated because of the behaviour of staff who were screaming, looked tearful and shocked,” Clare Askew told reporters at Perth airport. “Now, I get it, but we looked to them for reassurance and we didn’t get any, we were more worried because of how panicked they were.”

The flight returned safely to Perth and passengers were rescheduled. The airline issued a statement apologising.

“The safety of our guests is our utmost priority,” the airline said in a statement. “AirAsia Indonesia apologises for any inconvenience caused.”

AirAsia has had several incidents this year. In July, one of its flights was forced to make an emergency landing in Brisbane after a birdstrike.

Just a week earlier, another AirAsia plane made an emergency landing at Perth Airport after an engine malfunctioned 90 minutes into its flight to Kuala Lumpur.
AAP

[Image: 4a7a6ca9f29d218af9a49872b2e53ee5?width=650]A couple aboard the AirAsia Flight QZ535 to Bali. Picture: Nine News

& via IBTimes:

Quote:'We were saying goodbye to each other': AirAsia passengers recall terror of plane plunging 20,000ft

The plane plunged shortly after take off.
[Image: brendan-cole.jpg?w=54&h=54&l=50&t=40]
By Brendan Cole
Updated October 16, 2017 09:55 BST

[Image: airasia.jpg?w=400]The AirAsia plane plunged 20,000 ft soon after takeoffREUTERS/File image

Passengers spoke of their terror at the moment when the plane they were on plunged 20,000 feet just after take-off. The AirAsia flight was less than half an hour into its journey to Bali from Perth when it suddenly lost cabin pressure on Sunday 15 October.

Those on board Flight QZ535 adopted the brace position as the plane lost altitude, and oxygen masks dropped from the ceiling. One passenger, Leah, told Australia's Nine News how everyone started to panic and that "nobody told us what was going on".

"I actually picked up my phone and sent a text message to my family, just hoping that they would get it," she said. "We were all pretty much saying goodbye to each other. It was really upsetting."

Passenger Mark Bailey told Seven Network: "Hostesses started screaming: 'Emergency, emergency.' They just went hysterical."

"The panic was escalated because of the behaviour of staff who were screaming, looked tearful and shocked," Clare Askew told reporters at Perth airport. "Now, I get it, but we looked to them for reassurance and we didn't get any, we were more worried because of how panicked they were."

Passenger Norman Pearce told Seven the flight crew said: "Emergency. Crash positions and that was it. Nothing for about five minutes and then the oxygen fell down."

The budget Indonesian airline said in a statement the pilot turned back "following a technical issue to ensure the safety of passengers."

"We commend our pilots for landing the aircraft safely and complying with standard operating procedure," AirAsia Group head of safety Captain Ling Liong Tien said.

"We are fully committed to the safety of our guests and crew and we will continue to ensure that we adhere to the highest safety standards," he added.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau, an accident investigator, said it was investigating the airliner's depressurization at 34,000 feet (10,363 meters).

The plane rapidly descended to around 10,000 feet (3,048 meters), an altitude to which cabins are pressurized and at which oxygen masks are no longer needed.

Data from FlightRadar, a website which tracks flights globally using GPS, shows the plane descended 23,800 feet (7,250 meters) in the space of nine minutes.

Perth Airport said in a statement that emergency services were on hand when the plane landed 78 minutes after it took off.

The airline has seen a number of incidents in recent months. A Malaysia-based AirAsia X flight from Perth to Kuala Lumpur turned back in June after one of the Airbus 330's engines failed. An aircrew member was criticized for suggesting that passengers pray. A week after this incident, one of its planes had to divert to Brisbane after a suspected bird strike.

In December 2014, an AirAsia flight from the Indonesian city of Surabaya to Singapore plunged into the Java Sea, killing all 162 passengers and crew on board.
 

MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Pegasus in the lap of the Gods - Rolleyes

Via the Oz:

Quote:Plane skids off runway and stops on slope metres from sea in Turkey
[Image: 8be951063e89ba1fe4736ca49f352472?width=650]

The Pegasus Airlines Boeing 737 is seen struck in mud on an embankment, a day after skidding off the airstrip at Trabzon airport on the Black Sea. Picture: AFP

The Australian 9:27PM January 14, 2018

[Image: jacquelin_magnay.png] JACQUELIN MAGNAY

Terrified passengers remain haunted by a close call on Saturday night when Pegasus flight 8622 careered off the runway at Trabzon airport in Turkey and landed nose down a cliff face just metres from the sea.

Pictures taken in daylight have revealed the extent of significant damage to the Boeing 737, which had left Ankara and landed in Trabzon at 11.25pm in rainy conditions with 168 passengers and crew.

Passengers scrambled out the rear and over-wing emergency exits and clambered back up the cliff. Airline officials said no passengers or crew were seriously injured.

The plane failed to slow along the runway and it skidded onto the adjacent grassed areas and plummeted down the nearby muddy slope at a steep angle. Such was the impact, one of the engines was ripped from the plane and landed in the Black Sea below. Traumatised passengers described the heart-stopping event, saying it was a miracle they escaped serious injury or death.





Yuksel Gordu, a passenger, told the news agency Anadolu passengers were terrified.

“It’s a miracle we escaped,” he said. “We could have burned, exploded, flown into the sea.

“Thank God for this, I feel like I’m going crazy when I think about it.” Another passenger said the delay in opening the rear door created panic inside the plane.

“There was a smell of fuel inside so we all thought the plane might explode, but thankfully it did not happen,” he said.

Fatma Gördü, said the plane was shaking as it landed on the tarmac.

“We tilted to the side, the front was down while the plane’s rear was up. There was panic. People shouting, screaming,” she told Anadolu.

Pegasus Airlines said in a statement Flight PC 8622 “had a runway excursion incident during landing”.

Is it just me but you gotta wonder about the rationality of building a runway on the edge of cliff?? Guess it's no worse than building a DFO within the ICAO prescribed runway safety dimensions, ala Essendon Airport: http://www.auntypru.com/forum/showthread...43#pid6743

&..





+






MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
ScareAsia the normalised deficient airline of Australasia? [Image: confused.gif]

Via the ATSB website:

Quote:What happened

On the evening of 19 February 2016, an Airbus A320 aircraft, registered PK-AXY and operated by PT Indonesia AirAsia was on a scheduled passenger service from Denpasar, Indonesia to Perth, Australia. During cruise, the captain’s flight management and guidance computer (FMGC1) failed. Due to the failure, the flight crew elected to use the first officer’s duplicate systems. For the aircraft’s arrival in Perth there was moderate to severe turbulence forecast below 3,000 ft with reports of windshear. The crew commenced an instrument landing system (ILS) approach to runway 21.

During the approach, the flight crew made a number of flight mode changes and autopilot selections, normal for an ILS approach with all aircraft operating systems available. However, some of those flight modes and autopilot selections relied on data from the failed FMGC1 and the autothrust system commanded increased engine thrust. The crew did not expect this engine response and elected to conduct a go-around. With an increasing crosswind on runway 21, the crew accepted a change of runway, to conduct a non-precision instrument approach to runway 06.

With the time available, the first officer programmed the new approach into his FMGC and conducted the approach briefing. During this period, the captain hand flew the aircraft and manually controlled the thrust. During the approach to runway 06, the crew descended the aircraft earlier than normal, but believed that they were on the correct flight path profile.

While descending, both flight crew became concerned that they could not visually identify the runway, and focused their attention outside the aircraft. At about that time, the approach controller received a “below minimum safe altitude” warning for the aircraft. The controller alerted the crew of their low altitude and instructed them to conduct a go-around. The crew then conducted another approach to runway 06 and landed.

What the ATSB found

The ATSB identified that the flight crew were unsuccessful in resolving the failure of the FMGC and had a limited understanding of how the failure affected the aircraft’s automation during the ILS approach. This resulted in the unexpected increase in engine thrust, which prompted a go-around.

The flight crew had a significant increase in workload due to the unresolved system failures, the conduct of a go-around and subsequent runway change. This, combined with the crew’s unfamiliarity and preparation for the runway 06 instrument approach, meant they did not effectively manage the descent during that approach.

The flight crew’s focus of attention outside the aircraft distracted them during a critical stage of flight. The crew did not detect that they had descended the aircraft below the specified segment minimum safe altitude.

The flight crew commenced their descent for the second runway 06 instrument approach later than normal, initially necessitating an increased rate of descent and at 300 ft the engine thrust reduced briefly to idle.

Safety message

Handling of approach to land is one of the ATSB’s SafetyWatch priorities. Unexpected events during the approach and landing can substantially increase what is often a high workload period. Adherence to standard operating procedures and correctly monitoring the aircraft and approach parameters provides assurance that the instrument approach can be safely completed. A go-around should be immediately carried out if the approach becomes unstable or the landing runway cannot be identified from the minimum descent altitude or missed approach point.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/5773855/ao..._final.pdf


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSmYiuwJTS8MoCL8XVUQ97...DBe8FDtWLk]
AAI & the implications of bureaucratic O&O - Part II


And from HVH:

ATSB Chief Commissioner Greg Hood said that the approach to land is one of the most critical phases of flight, and stressed the importance of flight crews understanding their aircraft systems and adhering to cockpit control, monitoring and communication procedures to ensure a stabilised approach during the approach and landing phases of flight.

“The approach and landing phases of flight are amongst the highest of workload for flight crews, and domestically and internationally where we see the highest accident rate” Mr Hood said. “It’s a complex operation at the best of times, but when something unexpected occurs such as a failure of an aircraft system in-flight, it can add substantially to flight crews’ workload. It is critical that flight crew fully understand their aircraft systems and how they will respond in a degraded mode, and adhere to cockpit protocols and procedures to ensure a stabilised approach resulting in a safe landing. In this case, there was considerable added complexity for the flight crew as a result of adverse weather, and an air traffic control change to a runway without a precision approach.”

“The ATSB urges all flight crew to ensure that they understand their aircraft systems, and how the aircraft will respond in a degraded mode, and to adhere to cockpit protocols and procedures to ensure a safe approach and landing. If there’s any doubt or confusion, or if the stable approach criteria is not being met, communicate it, and never hesitate to conduct a go-around.”

WTD? - HVH now a Guru on Airline CRM & Human factors Dodgy

Also a summary from Annabel, via the Oz:

Perth airport told ‘distracted’ air crew to go around

[Image: 41be89ca33cdc72bc9f5a19774460e9d?width=650]
An Air Asia A320 was sent around for a second go after approaching too low.

The Australian 12:00AM January 17, 2018


[Image: annabel_hepworth.png]

ANNABEL HEPWORTH
Aviation Editor Sydney
@HepworthAnnabel

Australia’s aviation safety investigator has urged flight crews and airlines to pay extra attention to the risks of runway approaches after it said an Indonesia AirAsia flight crew was “distracted” during a critical stage of a flight into Perth.

In its report into the “serious” incident in February 2016, where the Indonesia AirAsia Airbus A320 flew too low on approach to Perth, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau found the flight crew “did not detect that they had ­descended the aircraft below the specified segment minimum safe altitude”.

The radar at air traffic control showed a “minimum safe altitude warning” and the controller told the crew: “Go round, you are low, low altitude alert, go round.” The crew then did another approach to the runway and landed safely.

In a statement, ATSB chief commissioner Greg Hood urged all flight crew “to ensure that they understand their aircraft systems, and how the aircraft will respond in a degraded mode, and to adhere to cockpit protocols and procedures”.

According to the ATSB report, as the plane was cruising from Denpasar on the holiday island of Bali and was just over an hour from Perth, it became apparent the captain’s flight management and guidance computer had failed.

The crew decided to use the first officer’s duplicate systems and started an approach to Perth’s main runway, but relied on data from the failed computer.

The crew was “unsuccessful” in resolving the failure of the computer and had a “limited understanding” of how the failure affected the aircraft’s automation during the approach, the ATSB found.

This led to an unexpected increase in engine thrust, prompting a go-around.

After this, because of an increasing crosswind, the crew was told to change runway for a non-precision instrument approach. While descending, crew members were concerned they could not see the runway and focused their attention outside the plane. About then, the controller got the altitude warning.

The ATSB found the flight crew had a “significant increase” in workload because of the unresolved system failures, go-around and runway change. Combined with the crew’s “unfamiliarity and preparation” for the instrument approach to the different runway, this “meant they did not effectively manage the descent during that approach”.

AirAsia Indonesia said in a statement yesterday that it had taken action.

This included an internal investigation and briefing of all ­pilots on its findings and the ATSB findings, and reviewing recovery procedures. As well, there were additional classroom sessions on aircraft technical review and the incident had been incorporated as a subject of the “special orientation training” in the simulator syllabus.

“AirAsia Indonesia reiterates that strict maintenance schedules and robust management systems are in place to monitor and prevent similar incidents from reoccurring,” the statement said.



Q/ Have ScairAsia managed to capture CASA?  Undecided
I guess in hindsight it was no worse than this other A320 approach incident... Huh


Distracted Jetstar pilots forgot to deploy landing gear, ATSB finds
April 20, 2012 by australianaviation.com.au
[Image: WEB-JETSTAR_A321_VH-VWW_DARWIN_31MAY09_A...00x181.jpg]A file image of A321 VH-VWW. (Andy McWatters)

A Jetstar Airbus A321 was forced to abort landing in Singapore in 2010 after both the crew forgot to extend the landing gear in time, according to an ATSB report.

The report said the captain was distracted by his mobile phone during the aircraft’s descent while the first officer was likely suffering from fatigue.

Jetstar said it had made several training changes as a result of the May 27 2010 episode, including requiring pilots to turn off their mobile phones as part of pre-flight checks. The airline also doubled to 1000ft the altitude at which pilots must finish their pre-landing checks.
Flight JQ57 landed safety on the second attempt, and Jetstar claims the incident had not posed a serious safety risk. Still, the ATSB narrative makes for some interesting reading.

According to the report, the first officer, who was the pilot flying the A321, VH-VWW,  during the aborted landing, had gotten less than six hours sleep the night before in Darwin and began feeling tired as the flight approached Singapore around 6:30pm.  The report said the first officer disengaged the autopilot during approach to Singapore’s Changi Airport “in order to hand-fly the aircraft and ‘wake [himself] up’.”

As the flight approached 2000ft, the crew heard a series of incoming text messages arrive on the captain’s mobile phone, which he’d forgotten to switch off. Around the same time, the first officer twice asked the captain to set a missed approach altitude into the flight control unit. Not receiving a response, he looked over to find the captain “preoccupied with his mobile phone” and set the missed approach altitude himself.

The captain told investigators that he was attempting to unlock and switch off his mobile phone at the time and did not hear the first officer’s requests.

As the flight descended below 1000ft the first officer reported feeling that “something was not quite right” but couldn’t identify what it was. The captain told investigators that he noticed the landing gear had not been lowered and that the flaps had not been set for landing but did not say anything.

At 720ft, a Master Warning and continuous triple chime alerted the pilots that the landing gear had not been extended. The captain told investigators that he “instinctively” lowered the landing gear and deployed the flaps after the warning chime went off, though the report said it took 4.5 seconds until the landing gear was selected down and more than 11 seconds before the flaps were selected. The first officer, meanwhile, reported that he was “confused” by the captain’s actions as he was preparing to conduct a go-around.

A few seconds later, another alarm went off warning that the aircraft had descended below 500ft with the landing gear still not secured in the down position, at which point the crew aborted the landing and commenced a go-around. Both pilots told investigators that they believed they had initiated the go-around at an altitude of just under 800ft, though the investigation found that it had in fact commenced at 392ft.

“The investigation identified several events on the flightdeck during the approach that distracted the crew to the point where their situation awareness was lost,” the ATSB concluded. “Decision making was affected and inter-crew communication degraded. In addition, it was established that the first officer’s performance was probably adversely affected by fatigue.”

But the investigation did not identify any “organisational or systemic issues” and said the crew had been given adequate rest time prior to the flight.



..."Decision making was affected and inter-crew communication degraded. In addition, it was established that the first officer’s performance was probably adversely affected by fatigue.”

But the investigation did not identify any “organisational or systemic issues” and said the crew had been given adequate rest time prior to the flight...

Q/ Wonder if fatigue was examined in the ScairAsia occurrence?

ANS/ Yes it was apparently - "...The flight crew reported feeling alert during the approaches. The ATSB reviewed their flight and duty times and 72-hour history prior to the occurrence, and found no evidence that they were likely to be affected by fatigue at the time of the incident..." 

Hmm...gotta wonder though about the veracity of that statement, especially after the systemic failures of CASA and the ATSB to properly attribute fatigue as a significant causal/contributing factor in the VH-NGA ditching?

MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Who’s on first, What’s on second,

During cruise, the captain’s flight management and guidance computer (FMGC1) failed. Due to the failure, the flight crew elected to use the first officer’s duplicate systems.

During the approach, the flight crew made a number of flight mode changes and autopilot selections, normal for an ILS approach with all aircraft operating systems available. However, some of those flight modes and autopilot selections relied on data from the failed FMGC1 and the auto-thrust system commanded increased engine thrust.

Maybe I’m just getting old and grumpy – but it seems ‘passing strange’ to me that no one dragged out the books and checklist for the approach using FMGC 2. There must be a ‘set up’ guide somewhere in the ‘manual’. Plenty of time in the cruise to have a Bo-Peep at the checklist and a discussion. Seems odd that neither crew member remembered there was a configuration set up for using #2 system and it was different. Two aborted approaches, the second needed the ATCO to warn ‘below minimum safe’.

Two major anomalies, potentially lethal, totally avoidable. You have to start wondering how well these crews are trained and question the almost total reliance on automation. Perhaps the new guru can explain that away when one of these flights ploughs through a DFO or lobs on a freeway – near you. Not good is it.

Toot toot.
Reply
[Image: 3C6EA37B00000578-4153586-Called_it_In_19...779898.jpg]

vs

[Image: star-wars-the-last-jedi-spoiler-is-yoda-...894314.jpg] P2 comment - Funny how P7 never seems to age [Image: huh.gif]


Old & grumpy; or senescent & wise - Big Grin


I don't know "K" maybe it is just our bureaucratically and politically blinkered world of aviation safety Dunceunda? - 'Cause it would seem that the international pilot fraternity is singing from the same hymn sheet.

Courtesy of Karlene Petitt [Image: wink.gif] :


Thursday, January 18, 2018

Headline from Europe:

"Plane skids off Turkish runway 

on Black Sea coast"
[size=undefined]


[Image: 2018-01%2B%2B401.jpg]
News Europe

[/size]

Nobody Died. This Time.


A captain who has a passion for aviation safety, sent me the following email related to the above incident: 


"A Pegasus Boeing 737-800 veered off the runway after landing on runway 11 at Trabzon Airport (Turkey) and became stuck in the mud on the edge of a cliff 


Many friends flew for this airline, and they make pilots pay to fly for them. Pilots buy a block of 500 hours for about $40,000 on top of the self-sponsored type rating, also at a cost of $40,000. Friends there have told me the cockpit gradient is extremely steep, there is practically no manual flight above 400 feet. Little to no SOPs (standard operating procedures) discipline and certainly zero CRM (crew resource management). 


They have been involved in many similar incidents already."


[Image: turkey%2Bpic%2B1.jpg]

Why no Manual Flight?


I'm learning many airlines worldwide do not allow manual flight. Why? Perhaps this snippet from another flight operations manual explains perceptions: 

[Image: FlightOpsStatement.png]

Statement from above: 


“There is no safety case to justify turning off the A/P and AFDS in a Boeing 737-800 Series Aircraft engaged in commercial transport operations – doing so increases the chance of an undesired aircraft state.”

This is an interesting mandate, however not isolated. It has become apparent that many airlines do not believe their pilots can manually fly the aircraft safely, therefore prohibiting it. However, there no reason manual flight in any Boeing (or Airbus) would cause an unexpected aircraft state. I have observed manual flight approaches into the most challenging airports in Alaska while sitting in the flightdeck of a Boeing 737, and observed beautiful approaches and arrivals on many A330's from altitude to landing. 

Why the Fear of Some Airlines?
What happened in this accident?

What if the pilots were not properly trained for the unexpected? What if they were not trained for manual flight? Should we always blame the pilot if they are not given the tools? What if the culture prohibits reporting safety issues? Human error happens, but how is it addressed? Safety Management Systems (SMS) are designed to identify errors and create change in order to mitigate risk, but is SMS lip service only?


What if the regulators know the problem

and don't do anything to enforce compliance?

What if Airlines know the problem 

and mandate automation usage 

to avoid training? 


What happens if the automation breaks 
or the unexpected happens?


[Image: 2018-01%2B4608.jpg]



As many of you know I am working on my PhD and collecting data to identify the relationships between safety culture, pilot training, aircraft understanding, aviation passion, and the impact on automation usage, in order to identify the root cause of performance issues, beyond pilot error. 


If we don't identify the source of the problem, 

then nothing will ever change.


I'm asking everyone to please share the link:





Tuesday January 9th survey monkey said there were 2397 completed surveys. I then wrote a post and asked everyone who took it, if they would share it with just one more qualified pilot (airline, charter or corporate) they knew. I asked people who cared about aviation to share with qualified pilots they knew. The support was incredible!

I'm utilizing snowball sampling, meaning I'm asking qualified pilots to take it and then share it with their colleagues and friends who qualify, and ask those pilots to share it with their colleagues and so on. What happened from that January 9th post, was that the snowball began gaining momentum. Pilots worldwide continued to take it, share it, and posted it on their sites. People who didn't qualify, shared it with those who did. 

This morning 
Survey Number is 3127!


What this says, is that the pilots care about their industry. They care about the future of aviation. They care about passengers' safety. It means that passengers want the best, every time they step on a plane. These numbers show the world is that we do care about the trajectory of where our aviation industry is headed. 

Everyone who participates is making a difference!


PILOTS WORLDWIDE UNITE
WITH A VOICE!

I will be gathering data until mid March,
when my B777 training is complete. 
Can we double those numbers?

Let's Keep This Going!

I cannot thank you all for your help with this. 
Thank you for helping me
 to gain as many surveys as possible!

Let's keep this snowball rolling
And double those numbers!


[Image: download%2B%25281%2529.jpeg]


What will the Numbers be Next Week?


Please send the link PetittAviationResearch 

to all the commercial pilots you know! 


Thank YOU! 


MTF...P2 [Image: tongue.gif]

Ps You can also access KP's pilot survey here: #38 or https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PetittResearch
Reply
Flight MH122 occurrence into Alice - ATSB to investigate.

Via the Oz:


Malaysian airlines flight forced to land in Alice due to technical issues


[Image: f2a5b7c1e4f060b1ae651ac034f22c5d?width=650]

Malaysia Airlines plane makes an emergency landing at Alice Springs Airport. 18 January, 2018. Picture: SUPPLIED

AAP1:03PM January 19, 2018

RHIAN DEUTROM
ReporterSydney
@Rhi_lani

UPDATE: The Australian Transport Safety Bureau has opened an investigation into an inflight engine shutdown on a Malaysia Airlines Airbus A330 after it was forced to land in Alice Springs last night.

The incident left the 224 passengers and crew on board terrified, with several describing a “loud disturbing noise” heard overhead during the flight before the plane began shaking violently.

Flight MH122, flying from Sydney to Kuala Lumpur had been in the air for several hours after taking off from Sydney International Airport about 1pm yesterday when an in-flight engine shutdown forced the aircraft to turn back and land in Alice Springs at 5.46pm.

The ATSB today announced it will be investigating the shutdown and diversion as well as crew conduct. Some passengers recalled hearing a “brace for impact” call over the loudspeakers.

“As part of its investigation, the ATSB will interview the flight crew and review available evidence,” an ATSB statement said.

“The ATSB will release a report into the occurrence once the investigation has concluded”.

“Should a critical safety issue be identified during the course of the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify relevant parties”.

Despite the safe landing, passengers took to social media to criticise the airline for the distress caused to passengers and their loved ones.

“My wife is on MH122 and it was diverted to Alice Springs. My wife briefly contacted me just now and she is scared and crying. What happened to MH122?” one man said on Twitter.

“(This) has given a scare to the passengers. Pull your act together and make flying safe”.

Sanjeev Pandey was also on MH122 and said once the aircraft began shaking, the flight attendants “all seemed nervous (and) clueless”.

“For around 15 minutes, there was no announcement. 15 minutes w(as) as long as 15 hours!” Mr Pandey said.

Quote:[Image: ULlLtAdu_normal.jpg]Sanjeev Pandey@sppandey81

#malaysian airlines #mh122. Emergency landing at Alice Springs. The scariest part was that once the engine started to make a loud disturbing noise, the flight attendants all seemed nervous n clueless. For around 15 mins, there was no announcement.15 mins were as long as 15 hours!
9:19 PM - Jan 18, 2018

Another man who had booked another Malaysia Airlines flight publicly requested a refund from the company.

“Hey @MAS, can I please get a refund on my booking. Can’t gather the courage to fly with you,” he said.

MH122 diverts to Alice

The airline earlier said the plane had been forced to land at Alice Springs Airport due to technical issues. The flight was close to the West Australian coastline when it was forced to divert to Alice Springs on Thursday afternoon.

The airline said flight MH122 was forced to land in the Northern Territory for “technical reasons” in a statement.

Passenger Maryna Delport Evetts said engine problems had been blamed for the diversion.

“So just when you think this would never happen to you or it just happens in the movies, on our flight back home, four hours into the journey we had engine failure,” Ms Evetts posted to Facebook.
Quote:[/url]

[Image: W46kDc45_normal.jpg]Malaysia Airlines
@MAS
[UPDATE] Passengers of MH122 will be transferred from Alice Springs to Kuala Lumpur on MH148/ 19 January 2018. The flight is scheduled to depart Alice Springs at 5.45pm and is expected to arrive in Kuala Lumpur at 9.50pm the same day. For more info: http://bit.ly/2DL8t3r
12:02 AM - Jan 19, 2018
Quote:

[Image: MadhuPhoto_normal.jpg]Madhu Alasyam@alasyam
#Malaysian #Airlines flight #MH122 scared the hell, kudos to Pilot for safe landing in #AliceSprings, after a Brace-for-impact call. @MAS I hope to get my flight home to #HYD soon. God speed on the replacement Smile
7:45 PM - Jan 18, 2018
Quote:

[Image: P0zskY2G_normal.jpg]Brandon@b3108
‘Flight #MH122 was travelling from Sydney to Kuala Lumpur this afternoon when one of the Airbus A330-300 plane's engines is believed to have been shut down.
Passengers have been told they will have to stay overnight in Alice Springs.’ https://twitter.com/abcnews/status/953926871351099393 …
9:15 PM - Jan 18, 2018
[url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?in_reply_to=953933830720692224]


“We turned back and we are now sitting at the Airport in Alice Springs. Not too sure when we will be leaving but hey ho, we are on terra firma. “Not a good feeling 10,000 feet up in the air.” Malaysia Airlines said safety was its number one priority, and it would provide more information on the technical issue when it was available.




MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
Pegasus runway overrun occurrence update - Confused

Via Airlive.net:

Quote:ALERT Pegasus flight #PC8622: right engine gave full thrust after landing
By
 Jakob WERT
 -

January 28, 2018

[Image: PC8622-e1517092689788.jpg]
[size=large]The right engine on flight #PC8622 gave full thrust after landing, which caused the aircraft to overrun the runway.

After the Boeing 737 touched down at Trabzon Airport, the thrust reverse on the right engine did not activate. Instead the engine was switched into go-around mode and gave full thrust, this caused the aircraft to turn left.

It is not yet known if this problem was caused by a technical fault or pilot error. The pilots first blamed an engine failure for the crash landing.

Technical issues with the thrust reverse on this particular aircraft were known to the airline before this accident.


MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
OS accidents - Bad start to 2018 Angel  

Quote:Hunt for clues to Russian crash
[Image: d44033a6d0357fa20c0dbd43353d8484]12:00am
Investigators were to examine last night numerous possible causes of one of Russia’s worst ever aviation accidents.

Investigators scoured the scene last night after a passenger jet crashed near Moscow minutes after take-off, killing all 71 people on board, in one of Russia’s worst-ever plane crashes.

The site of the crash was enveloped in heavy snow that was waist-high in places, making it difficult to access, with emergency workers forced to reach the wreckage by foot or on snow­mobiles.

Russia’s Investigative Committee said it would consider explanations including human error, technical failure and weather conditions, as the country has experienced record snowfall in recent weeks. But it did not mention the possibility of terrorism. Some reports suggested there were questions about whether the plane had been properly de-iced. Moderate snow was falling in much of Moscow at the time of the crash.

The Antonov An-148 went down in the Ramensky district 70km southeast of Moscow at 2.48pm (11.48pm AEDT) on Sunday after taking off from Domodedovo airport in the capital.

“Sixty-five passengers and six crew members were on board, and all of them died,” Russia’s Office of Transport Investigations said.

A Swiss citizen and a citizen of Azerbaijan were among the fatalities. Three children also died, including a five-year-old girl and a 12-year-old boy, Evgeny Livanov.

The flight was operated by the domestic Saratov Airlines and was headed for Orsk, a city in the Ural mountains. The governor of Orenburg, where the plane was heading, said “more than 60 people” on board were from the region.

The Investigative Committee said that the aircraft caught fire on the ground after crashing.

“At the moment of falling, the aeroplane was intact, without a fire. An explosion took place after the plane crashed,” it said.

About one hundred investigators and criminologists were working at the scene. At least one of the plane’s two black boxes had been found.

With wreckage of the plane spread over more than 30ha around the crash site, it will take a week to inspect the whole area.

More than 900 people using equipment including drones were involved in the search, which has been reclassified as looking for bodies rather than survivors.

“We plan to carry out the main stage of the search operation in seven days because the plane debris is scattered over a very large area,” Emergency Services Minister Vladimir Puchkov said at the scene, adding that “heavy snow” hampered searchers.

“We walked about 600 to 700 metres across a field, with snow in places waist-deep,” said Alexei ­Besedin, one of the first rescuers to reach the scene.

Domodedovo airport has been the focus of security concerns in the past. Security lapses came under sharp criticism in 2004, after Chechen suicide bombers destroyed two airliners that took off from the airport on the same evening, killing a total of 90 people. A 2011 bombing in the arrivals area killed 37 people.

Transport Minister Maksim Sokolov said “genetic expertise” would be needed to help identify the victims, adding that it could “take two or three months”.

“I felt a shockwave,” said Maria, a resident of a village near the crash site. “The windows shook.”

The transport investigations office said the plane disappeared from radar screens about four minutes after take-off. The Russian-made plane was reportedly seven years old and bought by Saratov Airlines from another Russian airline a year ago.

Saratov was founded in the 1930s and flies to 35 Russian cities. Its hub is Saratov Central Airport in southern Russia.

President Vladimir Putin ­offered “his profound condolences to those who lost their relatives in the crash”. Mr Putin cancelled plans to travel to Sochi to meet Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Instead, the meeting will take place in Moscow.

Orsk Mayor Andrei Odintsov said that six psychologists and four ­ambulance crews were working with the families of the victims at the city’s airport.

Shabby equipment and poor supervision plagued Russian civil aviation for years after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, with airlines often operating ageing aircraft in dangerous flying conditions, but its safety record has improved in recent years.

A light aircraft crashed in ­November in Russia’s far east, killing six people on board.

In December 2016, a military plane carrying Russia’s famed Red Army Choir crashed after taking off from the Black Sea resort of Sochi, killing all 92 people on board. The choir had been due to give a concert to Russian troops operating in Syria. Pilot error was blamed for that crash.

In March 2016, all 62 passengers died when a FlyDubai jet crashed in bad weather during an aborted landing at Rostov-on-Don airport.

AFP, AP




Iran plane crash leaves 66 dead
[Image: 43f55c0b5d53e430f0b1db70be09b491]8:19pm

A plane crash in southern Iran has killed all 66 people on board the Aseman Airlines ATR-72, a spokesman has told state TV.

A plane crash in southern Iran has killed all 66 people on board, Iran’s Aseman Airlines spokesman has told state TV.

An Aseman Airlines ATR-72, a twin-engine turboprop used for short-distance regional flying, went down near its destination of the southern Iranian city of Yasuj, some 780km south of the Iranian capital, Tehran..

Aseman spokesman Mohammad Taghi Tabatabai told state TV that all on the flight were killed — 60 passengers, including one child, and six crew members. Due to foggy condition, rescue helicopters couldn’t reach the crash site in the Zagros Mountains, state TV reported.

Tabatabai said the plane crashed into Mount Dena, which is about 440m high. Aseman Airlines is a semi-private air carrier headquartered in Tehran that specialises in flights to remote airfields across the country. It also flies internationally.

The Iranian Red Crescent said it has deployed to the area. Authorities said they would be investigating.

Under decades of international sanctions, Iran’s commercial passenger aircraft fleet has aged, with air accidents occurring regularly in recent years.

AP

MTF...P2 Cool
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)