Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qatar Airways B77W hit airport approach lights on departure, flight continued

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    Oh yes? Does it even tell you of a headlight out when you have your headlights turned off?
    I clearly recall Johnny Jacobs and his extension cord!
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
      Oh yes? Does it even tell you of a headlight out when you have your headlights turned off?
      not sure. but since the flight we are talking about took off at 8:37 pm, i suspect the lights were turned on, since sunset was about 7:20 pm...

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
        not sure. but since the flight we are talking about took off at 8:37 pm, i suspect the lights were turned on, since sunset was about 7:20 pm...
        Most likely no, they were not because the runway was not in use (for approaching planes in the opposite direction).

        As I said in the previous post:

        If runway say 18 is used for take off and you hit the approach lights to runway 36...

        If it is not clear, I can draw a sketch for you.

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #19
          This is a photo of the approach lighting damage. It's a lucky thing the array is so simple. On the first stage lighting, it appears that the left and right were hit but not the center, and then the second stage, a single centerline light, was hit. I wonder if the gear was damaged as well.

          The 27 threshold is right by the terminal bldg and the array can be easily seen from the perimeter road. Any halfwit could have easily driven over there and witnessed the damage. Clearly the aircraft had hit the lights. How could they have allowed it to continue across the pond?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Evan View Post
            The 27 threshold is right by the terminal bldg and the array can be easily seen from the perimeter road. Any halfwit could have easily driven over there and witnessed the damage. Clearly the aircraft had hit the lights. How could they have allowed it to continue across the pond?
            Please explain me why any halfwit would go and look in the first place.
            AFAIK so far, nobody allowed anybody to "cross the pond after hitting the lights", because nobody knew.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              Please explain me why any halfwit would go and look in the first place.
              AFAIK so far, nobody allowed anybody to "cross the pond after hitting the lights", because nobody knew.
              The light structures themselves would not be obvious to the tower but the late rotation and the VERY unusually low departure should have been plainly obvious if they were watching it. I would hope that after such an incident, the tower would send somebody out there AS A STANDARD PRECAUTION to check for any obstacle strikes on the extended centerline. I would also hope that any certified transport pilot would report the incident to the tower for the very same reason. A pilot who takes the walkaround very seriously should also have a healthy level of paranoia after just clearing the trees by the parking lot...

              But of course it's hopeless isn't it, this bravado, this blind confidence. Make all the rules you want, it still degrades to barnstormer mentality with some crews.

              If the crew had simply reported a late rotation and asked the tower to check (quickly) for damages structures, they could have entered a holding pattern for 15-30 mins before continuing with the appropriate peace of mind, or, in this case, returned with the appropriate peace of mind.

              I do hope some heads roll for this one. Pilots need to be better than this.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                The light structures themselves would not be obvious to the tower but the late rotation and the VERY unusually low departure should have been plainly obvious if they were watching it. I would hope that after such an incident, the tower would send somebody out there AS A STANDARD PRECAUTION to check for any obstacle strikes on the extended centerline. I would also hope that any certified transport pilot would report the incident to the tower for the very same reason. A pilot who takes the walkaround very seriously should also have a healthy level of paranoia after just clearing the trees by the parking lot...

                But of course it's hopeless isn't it, this bravado, this blind confidence. Make all the rules you want, it still degrades to barnstormer mentality with some crews.

                If the crew had simply reported a late rotation and asked the tower to check (quickly) for damages structures, they could have entered a holding pattern for 15-30 mins before continuing with the appropriate peace of mind, or, in this case, returned with the appropriate peace of mind.

                I do hope some heads roll for this one. Pilots need to be better than this.
                Tower desn't need to be watching every plane along every take-off roll and initial climb. Even if they were watching, they could have missed the late rotation since they were looking almost from behind (hard to tell de distance), it was night, and this was a very big plane in a very long flight that is expected to rotate much later than say the previous ERJ that went to Clearwater.

                You have a better point for the pilots, which evidently didn't communicate anything to the tower. That said, again, it was night, they expected a long take-off roll, maybe they were with the nose quite high since quite a while before hitting the lights which complicates identifying position along the runway and clearance above obstacles....

                Since likely nothing in the SOPs say ädvise the tower in case of late rotation", I would not fire them but midify my SOPs and training, using this case as an example.

                And I am more interested in knowing what went wrong in the first place anyway. SOmething very wrong must have happened for this plane to dtag the belly on the apporach lights, even if they had returned to MIA. Maybe some heads have to roll after all.

                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                  And I am more interested in knowing what went wrong in the first place anyway. SOmething very wrong must have happened for this plane to dtag the belly on the apporach lights, even if they had returned to MIA. Maybe some heads have to roll after all.
                  I am interested in both, because we have defenses and then we have defenses. We need to defend against pilot error on takeoff calculations AND we need to defend against the consequences, because IT WILL continue to happen.

                  I feel pretty convinced that the crew must have seen the threshold approaching before they rotated it out of view. Those lights are a mere 100 yards from the very short overrun. That's reason enough to request a quick ground inspection... if you are taking the job seriously.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                    Please explain me why any halfwit would go and look in the first place.
                    AFAIK so far, nobody allowed anybody to "cross the pond after hitting the lights", because nobody knew.
                    ...remember, everything can be fixed by a procedure.

                    If you cross the threshold below 50 feet, the FCOM memory checklist for B77W-236A is to automatically call the tower and request that they check the approach lights to see if they are working ok, and if lights are out, the plane should return to the airport for a precautionary landing (with equipment ready, and the pax briefed for a possible emergency exit, (called by the hosties, after they check the N1 and fuel flow gauges in the galleys), along with requests that passengers not bring their hand bags.

                    Not sure if it would be quite the same for a B777X...

                    I suppose it should also be automated, because who knows if you cross the threshold at 48 feet or 52 feet, and then what if they forget all of this while watching the VSI to know when to raise the gear?
                    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Evan View Post
                      I am interested in both
                      Me too. That I am more interested in one of the two doesn't mean that I am not interested in the other one too. And it is more related to that I KNOW that something went very wrong in the take off, while I don't know what each actor saw or didn't see, or how they perceived what they saw if anything, as to be claiming for heads by now.

                      I feel pretty convinced that the crew must have seen the threshold approaching before they rotated it out of view. Those lights are a mere 100 yards from the very short overrun. That's reason enough to request a quick ground inspection... if you are taking the job seriously.
                      Maybe. I would like to say "let's wait until the factual report".
                      But I don't hold much hope in this case.

                      The accident happened in the USA so it should be investigated by the NTSB.
                      However, the flight went all the way to Qatar, the CVR will not hold anything of what happened the first many hours of the flight, the pilots can lie in their interview, and the only hope is the FDR, which will shed light on why happened for the take-off to go so wrong but not on what the pilots perceived.

                      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                        The accident happened in the USA so it should be investigated by the NTSB.
                        However, the flight went all the way to Qatar, the CVR will not hold anything of what happened the first many hours of the flight, the pilots can lie in their interview, and the only hope is the FDR, which will shed light on why happened for the take-off to go so wrong but not on what the pilots perceived.
                        Don't major airports have video records of each takoff and landing by now, or are we still living in the dark ages?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Evan View Post
                          Don't major airports have video records of each takoff and landing by now, or are we still living in the dark ages?
                          I have no idea.

                          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            Don't major airports have video records of each takoff and landing by now, or are we still living in the dark ages?
                            When was the last time you saw a video that was an official record and not some person, dash-cam, or security cam that "just happened" to catch the incident. Besides, we have smart phones recording from inside the plane, who needs airports keeping video records?
                            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                              - Terribly executed take-off with a power setting way below the calculated one or a very late rotation well past Vr (I highly doubt this will be the case).
                              - Wrong performance calculation (wrong weight or runway length entered).
                              - Wrong intersection (they intended to take-off from another farther intersection but turned in the wrong one).
                              - Wrong take-off configuration (they had less flap/slat that assumed in the calculation).
                              - Etc???
                              Per the ATC recording, they clearly knew they were departing from the intersection and so did the tower. So it seems they used incorrect performance calculations.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Someone (else) will be disappointed.

                                On Sep 17th 2015 the FAA reported the aircraft struck approach lights on departure from Miami and continued to destination. The aircraft received substantial damage to its belly, the occurrence was rated an accident.

                                On Oct 18th 2015 the NTSB reported the occurrence was rated an incident, the investigation was delegated to the Civil Aviation Authority of Qatar, the NTSB have assigned an accredited representative to assist the investigation.
                                Aviation Herald - News, Incidents and Accidents in Aviation

                                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X