Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Emirates 777 crash-landed in Dubai

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

  • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
    wow, off topic a bit are we?
    Hm. Are we? Since I am here, I haven't really met a 773ER pilot/Jetphotos member. That seems to be the reason why BoBo and I are not yet banned from this topic.

    Bobo and me don't really have an open topic where we probably know a little bit more than...
    the average propeller Cessna pilot.

    So, if Seahawk does not appear to say HALT, then this topic is full of..
    Two 747 enthusiasts,
    One... MIA enthusiast,
    ...

    At least I try to come back on topic. Any news about the 773ER recorders? en.wiki still says 'under investigation'. Which, btw is not astonishing for me.
    I have in mind, and our Roissy neighbours should forgive me that I mention it again, AF447.
    [Theoretically, Bo doesn't know what we are talkin about... he joined the table three weeks later. So, is he the youngest of the triple?]

    No fast results. So we have time to fly, or for assumptions.
    Last edited by LH-B744; 2016-08-26, 21:31. Reason: Dreigestirn.
    The German long haul is alive, 65 years and still kicking.
    The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
    And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
    This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
      Hm. Are we? Since I am here, I haven't really met a 773ER pilot/Jetphotos member. That seems to be the reason why BoBo and I are not yet banned from this topic.

      Bobo and me don't really have an open topic where we probably know a little bit more than...
      the average propeller Cessna pilot.

      So, if Seahawk does not appear to say HALT, then this topic is full of..
      Two 747 enthusiasts,
      One... MIA enthusiast,
      ...

      At least I try to come back on topic. Any news about the 773ER recorders? en.wiki still says 'under investigation'. Which, btw is not astonishing for me.
      I have in mind, and our Roissy neighbours should forgive me that I mention it again, AF447.
      [Theoretically, Bo doesn't know what we are talkin about... he joined the table three weeks later. So, is he the youngest of the triple?]

      No fast results. So we have time to fly, or for assumptions.

      TeeVee, See what I mean?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
        TeeVee, See what I mean?
        ah, yup!

        Comment


        • yes. LOL.

          But as he has no hints that point to an existence before June 09, I declare him the youngest in this thread.

          What did I say the last time that we met?

          Let's continue until I become Senior member.
          The German long haul is alive, 65 years and still kicking.
          The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
          And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
          This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post
            yes. LOL.

            But as he has no hints that point to an existence before June 09, I declare him the youngest in this thread.

            What did I say the last time that we met?

            Let's continue until I become Senior member.

            I wish I was still young! Born in 1952 and had my first flying job in 1970. What year were you born?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
              I wish i was still young! Born in 1952 and had my first flying job in 1970. What year were you born?
              Sounds like some people are about to move up a number soon.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post
                Sounds like some people are about to move up a number soon.

                10 months and 12 days but who's counting?

                Comment


                • wish the emiratis would release some info so this thread could get back on track.

                  not that i know anything about this stuff, but i ass-umed that they would've been out with at least a prelim report by now, as there was likely no trouble at all finding and downloading the CVR and FDR data. unless of course they are hiding something...conspiracy theorists rejoice!

                  Comment


                  • Interim report out:



                    Basically... Evan's first guess was right. Throttles were not advanced after a GA was initiated after touchdown. No mention of whether the TOGA switch was used. The reason for the GA was a too long initial touchdown (1100 m down the runway).

                    --- 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


                    • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      ...Basically... Evan's first guess was right. Throttles were not advanced after a GA was initiated after touchdown...
                      Funny.

                      My broad, fundamental (and admittedly weak) knowledge says that a human flying an airplane would want to advance the throttles with the classic 'gentle aggression' (with attention to limits) to do a go-around. It also suggests keeping a hand on the power levers (especially during critical phases of flight) (and even if AutoOtto is "in charge").

                      Further, that broad fundamental knowledge says that one should monitor the automation and performance and adjust things, if needed.

                      But, I am just a improvisational cowboy and definitely unaware of the blessed procedure for the 777-236A to do a successful go-around.

                      So, what went wrong?
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        Funny.

                        My broad, fundamental (and admittedly weak) knowledge says that a human flying an airplane would want to advance the throttles with the classic 'gentle aggression' (with attention to limits) to do a go-around. It also suggests keeping a hand on the power levers (especially during critical phases of flight) (and even if AutoOtto is "in charge").

                        Further, that broad fundamental knowledge says that one should monitor the automation and performance and adjust things, if needed.
                        Absolutely 100% concur.

                        This really comes down to a failure to monitor (on the part of the PF, to monitor the automation with a hand on the thrust levers, on the part of the PM, to monitor the engine parameters). A failure to understand the 777 systems would have been overcome by this basic bit of airmanship.

                        Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                        But, I am just a improvisational cowboy and definitely unaware of the blessed procedure for the 777-236A to do a successful go-around.

                        So, what went wrong?
                        This is the crux of the issue. This accident exemplifies where the industry has failed to keep in step with the evolving technology and the changing role of the pilot. A deeper systems level knowledge must be required. A go-around after touchdown SHOULD be an FCOM procedure because it involves a system behavior that is different from an airborne go-around. And it should be trained for, because it is bound to happen. It isn't currently an FCOM procedure and I'll bet my last wisdom tooth it was never trained for by this crew. Adding to the confusion, the present FCOM procedure for an airborne go-around includes a note that a subsequent touchdown will not inhibit the automatic go-around mode. But that is assuming that the GA switches were hit wilst still in the air. It would also help to instruct pilots as to WHY this is the case. I assume it is to prevent an accidental selection of TO/GA power during the rollout, which could be disastrous.

                        Why is this knowledge important to a pilot with solid airmanship? Because solid airmanship WILL fall victim to human factors and one of the most basic human factors is confused situational awareness caused by a flawed understanding of the system behaviors. This is the age of automation. We need both airmanship and systems expertise up there.

                        There was pure pilot error and a fatality was involved. The PIC seems to have barely made it out himself but now he will have to live with this. Piloting a commercial passenger jet is a dreadful responsibility with little room for complacency.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                          Piloting a commercial passenger jet is a dreadful responsibility with little room for complacency.

                          Why do some of you seem to think that passengers in the back make a damn bit of difference? First of all, I am the most important person on my aircraft. I want to get home safely at the end of the day and have no accidents/incidents. Second, a 600,000 pound cargo aircraft will make just a big of a hole in the middle of your neighborhood as one filled with people in the back.

                          Yes, these guys fucked up, if you look at the post that Gabe put up they are both pretty young and with not that much time either. I do not give a rats ass if you are flying a 787 or a DC-3, you have to fly the airplane at all times. Automation is great and has been proven to reduce workload, and my good friends the flight engineers jobs. But you still, and will always have to be able to "click click" and fly the airplane.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
                            Why do some of you seem to think that passengers in the back make a damn bit of difference?
                            Piloting a flying boxcar is also a dreadful responsibility with little room for complacency.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                              Piloting a flying boxcar is also a dreadful responsibility with little room for complacency.
                              He does not really try to argue with you?! You know who is the most quoted man here at Jetphotos? Not really the angry bird at #147...

                              A few days ago, I declared him the youngest writer here in this topic. I like to correct that statement.

                              Since 2008, I have known Jetphotos Junior members who behaved more relaxed.

                              The more forum entries the less relaxed? Not really.
                              #148 is a good evidence for that.

                              PS:
                              a 600,000 pound cargo aircraft will make just a big of a hole in the middle of your neighborhood as one filled with people in the back.
                              Not really. Try to read the non survivable
                              Lockerbie accident.

                              600,000 lb are 600,000 lb. Where tf does he take those assumptions from?! A 747 passenger jet makes a hole in your garden, so that even 11 people on the ground do not survive...
                              And with 600 k lb, a LH-B744 is almost empty
                              (for my next simulator flight, I have 322 pax on the list, so I expect ... a little bit more than only 300 tons/662,000 lb gross wt)!

                              To come back on topic:
                              B773ER MTOW: 775,000 lb
                              B744 MTOW: 875,000 lb --- (744ER: 910,000 lb)

                              A few weeks ago I wrote, the 777 needs alot of space on the apron. But the pilots who serve on the really heavy super long haul passenger jets
                              sit in a...
                              B744 or B744ER.
                              [I haven't really met a 748i passenger jet pilot here on Jetphotos who exactly knew his MTOW...]

                              [He is young, so we should forgive him.]
                              Last edited by LH-B744; 2016-09-07, 03:08. Reason: Back on topic
                              The German long haul is alive, 65 years and still kicking.
                              The Gold Member in the 747 club, 50 years since the first LH 747.
                              And constantly advanced, 744 and 748 /w upper and lower EICAS.
                              This is Lohausen International airport speaking, echo delta delta lima.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by LH-B744 View Post

                                To come back on topic:
                                B773ER MTOW: 775,000 lb
                                B744 MTOW: 875,000 lb --- (744ER: 910,000 lb)
                                Let's try to pretend the topic is a B777 that crashed in Dubai and take the B747 trivia to the other forum.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X